EpiCO (epirubicin, cyclophosphamide and vincristine) as treatment for extrapulmonary high-grade neuroendocrine neoplasms

2020 ◽  
Vol 58 (02) ◽  
pp. 133-136
Author(s):  
Stefan Munker ◽  
Martin Vogelhuber ◽  
Jan Bornschein ◽  
Christian Stroszczynski ◽  
Matthias Evert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Case Series ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Neuroendocrine Neoplasms ◽  
Significant Activity ◽  
High Grade ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
First Line ◽  
Cell Lung Carcinoma

AbstractHigh-grade neuroendocrine neoplasms (NEN) comprise a rare entity. Due to the lack of randomized controlled trials, therapy recommendations were mainly extrapolated from its pulmonary analogue, small cell lung cancer and mostly validated in small retrospective case series. The multicentric Nordic NEC Study of gastro-entero-pancreatic (GEP) and cancer of unknown primary (CUP) high-grade neuroendocrine neoplasms showed a significant disease control upon treatment with etoposide and platinum-based chemotherapies 1. Such a combination with etoposide and a platinum (CE) compound is currently considered standard first-line treatment for high-grade GEP/CUP NEN. High-grade mixed-neuroendocrine-non-neuroendocrine neoplasms (MiNEN) formerly termed mixed adeno-neuroendocrine carcinomas (MANEC) also have a poor prognosis and are generally treated like other high-grade NEN. The CE protocol has significant activity in high-grade NEN and MiNEN, but the response is short-lived in most cases with response rates around 50–60 %. Second-line treatment alternatives are not established so far. The need for additional treatment options is evident.Combination chemotherapy with doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide and vincristine (CAV) showed efficacy in small cell lung carcinoma (SCLC) and was considered standard first-line therapy before the era of etoposide and platinum combinations. Due to a better toxicity profile, doxorubicin was replaced by epirubicin, resulting in the combination of epirubicin, cyclophosphamide and vincristine (abbreviated as EpiCO or CEV).In analogy to SCLC, selected patients with high-grade NEN were treated with the EpiCO regimen in second line (or in one patient first line) at our center. In this report we present the retrospective series of 5 cases with metastatic high-grade GEP/CUP NEN/MiNEN who received chemotherapy according to this protocol.

scholarly journals Treatments of Advanced Non‑Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) in an Italian Center: Drug Utilization and the Treatment Costs of Innovative Drugs

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Francovito Piantedosi ◽  
Raffaela Cerisoli ◽  
Ciro Battiloro ◽  
Francesca Andreozzi ◽  
Fabiana Vitiello ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Multivariate Analyses ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Target Therapy ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
First Line

AIM: To provide an updated picture of the therapies most commonly used in the advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) setting, together with the relevant costs.METHODS: This study considered the clinical records of patients affected by stage IIIb and IV NSCLC treated in the AORN dei Colli - Plesso Monaldi in Naples during the period January 2016-July 2017 and diagnosed since 2014, as well as the pathology lab database. Multivariate analyses were performed in order to identify the main predictors of time to next treatment and the main cost drivers.RESULTS: Data were collected on 575 patients, who were mainly affected by adenocarcinoma (62%) and squamous cell carcinoma (34%). 64% of patients were reported having been tested for molecular biomarkers (among the patients tested, 13% were EGFR+, 4% Alk t, and 1% ROS1 t). In accordance with the international guidelines, chemotherapy – as single agent or platinum-based doublets – was the prevalent first-line treatment, except among EGFR+ and ROS1 t patients, for whom the target therapy was authorized as first-line therapy. As second-line treatment, the target therapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors (nivolumab) were the most commonly used treatments. Drug expenditure per patient was remarkably higher in mutated patients (€ 29,053) versus wild-type patients, or patients with unknown mutational status (€ 11,854), who received just chemotherapy. The costs sustained in 2017 are proportionally higher than those sustained in 2016, mainlydue to the increasing eligibility to target therapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors and the wider biomarker analysis performed. From multivariate analyses, among the predictors of a longer time to next treatment (TTNT) were a better performance status and target therapy both in first and second line. The therapy for squamous cell carcinoma and other nonadeno histotypes turned out to be less expensive in patients treated just in the first line than that for adenocarcinoma and adenosquamous carcinoma. The use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in the second line results in increased costs compared to the use of chemotherapy. Also the target therapy in the first line results in an increase in the total costs with respect to chemotherapy in patients who received just a first-line therapy.CONCLUSIONS: Generally, in this study population, the treatments administered are in accordance with the international guidelines. The costs borne by the Health Systems are higher for the target therapy and the immune checkpoint inhibitors.

scholarly journals A comparative study of immunotherapy as second-line treatment and beyond in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung carcinoma

2021 ◽  
pp. LMT47
Author(s):  
Jerónimo Rafael Rodríguez-Cid ◽  
Sonia Carrasco-Cara Chards ◽  
Iván Romarico González-Espinoza ◽  
Vanessa García-Montes ◽  
Julio César Garibay-Díaz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Carcinoma ◽  
Small Cell Lung Carcinoma ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Immune Checkpoints ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Total Study Population ◽  
Cell Lung Carcinoma

Background: Immunotherapy has demonstrated an improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) as second-line treatment and subsequent lines compared with chemotherapy.  Materials and methods: This was a retrospective review among eight medical centers comprising 100 patients with a confirmed diagnosis of non-small-cell lung carcinoma, in their second-line treatment or beyond with immune checkpoints inhibitors treatment. The current study aimed to analyze effectiveness of immunotherapy in second-line treatment or further in the Mexican population, using PFS rate, OS rate and the best objective response to treatment by RECIST 1.1 as a surrogate of effectiveness. Results: In total, 100 patients met the criteria for enrollment in the current study. From the total study population, 49 patients (49.0%) were male and 51 (51.0%) were female, with an average age of 60 years and stage IV as the most prevalent clinical stage at the beginning of the study. A total of 61 patients (61.0%) had partial response; 11 (11.0%) stable disease; 2 (2.0%), complete response, 4 (4.0%), progression; and 22 (22.0%) were nonevaluable. We found a median PFS of 4 months (95% CI: 3.2–4.7 months) and an OS of 9 months (95% CI: 7.2–10.7 months). Conclusion: The response to immunotherapy is similar, with an improvement in OS and PFS, independent of which drug is used. Patients using nivolumab had a better survival, although that was not statistically significant.

scholarly journals Checkpoint inhibitors plus chemotherapy for first-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (9) ◽  
pp. FSO421 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aung Myint Tun ◽  
Kyaw Zin Thein ◽  
Wai Lin Thein ◽  
Elizabeth Guevara
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
High Grade ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Treatment

Background: We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of upfront add-on immunotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC). Methods: We performed a literature search on first-line chemotherapy ± immunotherapy in NSCLC. We utilized Revman version 5.3 to calculate the estimated pooled hazard ratio for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) and pooled risk ratio for objective response rate (ORR), all-grade and high-grade adverse events with 95% CI. Results: We analyzed 4322 patients. The pooled hazard ratios for OS, PFS and ORR were 0.74 (95% CI: 0.62–0.88; p = 0.0007), 0.62 (95% CI: 0.57–0.68; p = 0.00001) and 1.51 (95% CI: 1.3–1.74; p = 0.00001), respectively. The pooled risk ratios for all-grade and high-grade adverse events were 1.01 (95% CI: 0.99–1.03; p = 0.27) and 1.17 (95% CI: 1.07–1.28; p = 0.0006), respectively. Conclusion: Add-on immunotherapy significantly improves PFS, OS and ORR for the first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC with a reasonable safety profile.

Second-Line Chemotherapy in Relapsing or Refractory Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Review

2000 ◽  
Vol 18 (21) ◽  
pp. 3722-3730 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Huisman ◽  
E.F. Smit ◽  
G. Giaccone ◽  
P.E. Postmus
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Chemotherapy ◽  
Line Chemotherapy

PURPOSE: Since the increased use of first-line chemotherapy for non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), second-line chemotherapy may nowadays be considered for a growing group of patients. Guidelines for second-line treatment have to be developed yet. METHODS: We reviewed the published literature on second-line chemotherapy for NSCLC with emphasis on the role of factors such as pretreatment, response to first-line treatment, and length of disease-free-interval. RESULTS: Thirty-four single-agent-studies and 24 multidrug-studies on second-line treatment were identified. Docetaxel has been studied most extensively and is the only agent that has been studied in randomized phase III trials. Different definitions of sensitivity applied by different authors and conflicting results have been reported about the influence of response to prior chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: Since most patients are treated with a platinum-based regimen in the first line, platinum resistance usually is a major consideration for the use of second-line agents. We argue, however, that a more general definition of drug resistance is more appropriate than resistance to platinum only. Criteria to select NSCLC patients for second-line treatment have not been defined yet. This is also important in light of the upcoming necessity to test new drugs in pretreated instead of treated patients. Guidelines for second-line treatment of NSCLC based on clinical information on drug sensitivity to first-line therapy need to be developed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document