scholarly journals Immunotherapy in non-metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: Can the benefits of stage IV therapy be translated into earlier stages?

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 175883591877281 ◽  
Author(s):  
Griet Deslypere ◽  
Dorothée Gullentops ◽  
Els Wauters ◽  
Johan Vansteenkiste
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Advanced Nsclc ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Stage I ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Anaplastic Lymphoma

Over the last decade, several steps forward in the treatment of patients with stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NCSLC) were made. Examples are the use of pemetrexed, pemetrexed maintenance therapy, or bevacizumab for patients with nonsquamous NSCLC. A big leap forward was the use of tyrosine kinase inhibitors in patients selected on the basis of an activating oncogene, such as epidermal growth factor receptor ( EGFR) activating mutations or anaplastic lymphoma kinase ( ALK) translocations. However, all of these achievements could not be translated into survival benefits when studied in randomized controlled trials in patients with nonmetastatic NSCLC. Aside from chemotherapy and targeted therapy, immunotherapy has become the third pillar in the treatment armamentarium of advanced NSCLC. Antigen-specific immunotherapy (cancer vaccination) has been disappointing in large phase III clinical trials in stages I–III NSCLC. Based on the recent breakthroughs with immune checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy in metastatic NSCLC, much hope currently rests on the use of this approach in patients with stage I–III NSCLC as well. Here we give a brief overview of how most new therapeutic approaches for advanced NSCLC failed in other stages, and then elaborate on the role of immunotherapy in patients with stage I–III NSCLC.

scholarly journals Surgery in Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 390
Author(s):  
Nicola Martucci ◽  
Alessandro Morabito ◽  
Antonello La Rocca ◽  
Giuseppe De Luca ◽  
Rossella De Cecio ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Stage I ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Early Stage Disease ◽  
Stage Disease

Small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) is one of the most aggressive tumors, with a rapid growth and early metastases. Approximately 5% of SCLC patients present with early-stage disease (T1,2 N0M0): these patients have a better prognosis, with a 5-year survival up to 50%. Two randomized phase III studies conducted in the 1960s and the 1980s reported negative results with surgery in SCLC patients with early-stage disease and, thereafter, surgery has been largely discouraged. Instead, several subsequent prospective studies have demonstrated the feasibility of a multimodality approach including surgery before or after chemotherapy and followed in most studies by thoracic radiotherapy, with a 5-year survival probability of 36–63% for patients with completely resected stage I SCLC. These results were substantially confirmed by retrospective studies and by large, population-based studies, conducted in the last 40 years, showing the benefit of surgery, particularly lobectomy, in selected patients with early-stage SCLC. On these bases, the International Guidelines recommend a surgical approach in selected stage I SCLC patients, after adequate staging: in these cases, lobectomy with mediastinal lymphadenectomy is considered the standard approach. In all cases, surgery can be offered only as part of a multimodal treatment, which includes chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy and after a proper multidisciplinary evaluation.

scholarly journals Does Pemetrexed Work in Targetable, Nonsquamous Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer? A Narrative Review

Cancers ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (9) ◽  
pp. 2658
Author(s):  
Jin-Yuan Shih ◽  
Akira Inoue ◽  
Rebecca Cheng ◽  
Rocio Varea ◽  
Sang-We Kim
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Tyrosine Kinase ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Advanced Nsclc ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Narrative Review ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
First Line ◽  
Anaplastic Lymphoma

Pemetrexed is currently mainly considered for the treatment of advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) negative for gene mutations/rearrangements (wild-type disease (WTD)). This narrative review aimed to highlight the role of pemetrexed in the treatment of onco-driven nonsquamous advanced NSCLC by reviewing published clinical studies. For epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations, patient survival following first-line pemetrexed–platinum was longer than for WTD. Later-line pemetrexed-based treatment after tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) failure provided greater benefits than non-pemetrexed regimens. First- and later-line pemetrexed-based therapy also provided survival benefits in patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) or ROS proto-oncogene 1 (ROS1) rearrangements. In patients with rearranged during transfection (RET) proto-oncogene rearrangements, survival with pemetrexed was similar to that in ALK- and ROS1-positive patients and longer than that in patients with Kirsten rat sarcoma (KRAS) virus proto-oncogene mutations or WTD, although the available studies were limited. For Erb-b2 receptor tyrosine kinase 2 (ERRB2) mutations, first-line pemetrexed showed outcomes similar to those for EGFR and KRAS alterations. Data on pemetrexed in patients with KRAS mutations or MNNG HOS-transforming (MET) expression were limited. Pemetrexed could be an option for first- and second-line treatment for TKI failure in nonsquamous advanced NSCLC with select targetable driver mutations.

scholarly journals Lung cancer symptoms at diagnosis: results of a nationwide registry study

ESMO Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (6) ◽  
pp. e001021
Author(s):  
Alberto Ruano-Raviña ◽  
Mariano Provencio ◽  
Virginia Calvo de Juan ◽  
Enric Carcereny ◽  
Teresa Moran ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Tobacco Use ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Stage I ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Frequent Symptom ◽  
Nationwide Registry

BackgroundLung cancer is currently the leading cause of cancer death. Despite its high incidence and mortality, there are few studies describing its symptoms at diagnosis broken down by tumour stage and tobacco use. Accordingly, this study was proposed to describe the frequency of the most common symptoms of non-small cell lung cancer and small cell lung cancer (SCLC) at diagnosis, with a breakdown by stage and tobacco use.Patients and methodsCases were collected from the Spanish Thoracic Tumour Registry, a nationwide registry sponsored by the Spanish Lung Cancer Group. More than 50 hospitals recruited histologically confirmed lung cancer cases and information was gathered through personal interview plus data contained in the electronic clinical record. There were no data available on the lag between the appearance of the first symptoms and diagnosis of lung cancer.ResultsA total of 9876 patients (74% male, median age 64 years) were recruited from 2016 to 2019. Of these, 12.5% presented with SCLC. Stage IV was the most frequent stage at diagnosis (46.6%), and the most frequent symptom was cough (33.9%), followed by dyspnoea (26.7%). No symptom was present in 59% of patients diagnosed in stage I; 40% of stage I patients presented with at least one symptom, while 27.7% of patients in stage IV had no symptoms at diagnosis. Cough was the most frequent symptom in SCLC (40.6%), followed by dyspnoea (34.3%). The number of symptoms was similar across the respective smoking categories in SCLC, and differences between the symptoms analysed did not exceed 7% in any case.ConclusionThe absence of the most frequent symptoms (ie, cough, pain, dyspnoea) should not lead to a decision to rule out the presence of lung cancer. A relevant percentage of stage IV patients displayed no symptoms at diagnosis.

Randomized Phase III Study of Gemcitabine-Cisplatin Versus Etoposide-Cisplatin in the Treatment of Locally Advanced or Metastatic Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

1999 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Felipe Cardenal ◽  
M. Paz López-Cabrerizo ◽  
Antonio Antón ◽  
Vicente Alberola ◽  
Bartomeu Massuti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Advanced Nsclc ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Grade 3

PURPOSE: We conducted a randomized trial to compare gemcitabine-cisplatin with etoposide-cisplatin in the treatment of patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The primary end point of the comparison was response rate. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 135 chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced NSCLC were randomized to receive either gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m2 intravenously (IV) days 1 and 8 or etoposide 100 mg/m2 IV days 1 to 3 along with cisplatin 100 mg/m2 IV day 1. Both treatments were administered in 21-day cycles. One hundred thirty-three patients were included in the intent-to-treat analysis of response. RESULTS: The response rate (externally validated) for patients given gemcitabine-cisplatin was superior to that for patients given etoposide-cisplatin (40.6% v 21.9%; P = .02). This superior response rate was associated with a significant delay in time to disease progression (6.9 months v 4.3 months; P = .01) without an impairment in quality of life (QOL). There was no statistically significant difference in survival time between both arms (8.7 months for gemcitabine-cisplatin v 7.2 months for etoposide-cisplatin; P = .18). The overall toxicity profile for both combinations of drugs was similar. Nausea and vomiting were reported more frequently in the gemcitabine arm than in the etoposide arm. However, the difference was not significant. Gemcitabine-cisplatin produced less grade 3 alopecia (13% v 51%) and less grade 4 neutropenia (28% v 56% ) but more grade 3 and 4 thrombocytopenia (56% v 13%) than did etoposide-cisplatin. However, there were no thrombocytopenia-related complications in the gemcitabine arm. CONCLUSION: Compared with etoposide-cisplatin, gemcitabine-cisplatin provides a significantly higher response rate and a delay in disease progression without impairing QOL in patients with advanced NSCLC.

Cisplatin-gemcitabine combination in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase II study.

1997 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 297-303 ◽  
Author(s):  
L Crinò ◽  
G Scagliotti ◽  
M Marangolo ◽  
F Figoli ◽  
M Clerici ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Stage Iiib ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
One Stage

PURPOSE The nucleoside analog, gemcitabine, has shown activity as a single agent in the treatment of metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Its combination with cisplatin in preclinical models suggested synergy between the two drugs. The aim of the study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy and toxicity of the cisplatin-gemcitabine combination in advanced NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS Forty-eight consecutive previously untreated NSCLC patients entered the trial from January to June 1994. The median age was 60 years (range, 37 to 70) and performance status (PS) was 0 or 1; 22 patients had unresectable stage III disease (21 stage IIIB and one stage IIIA) and 26 had stage IV disease. Gemcitabine 1 g/m2 was administered weekly (days 1, 8, and 15) followed by a 1-week rest and cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on day 2 of each 28-day cycle. Survival and response were determined in accordance with the intention-to-treat principle in all enrolled patients. RESULTS Of 48 assessable patients, one (stage IV) had a complete response (CR) and 25 achieved a partial response (PR). The overall response rate was 54% (95% confidence interval [CI], 40% to 68%). Thrombocytopenia was the main side effect, with 52% of patients experiencing grade III to IV toxicity, which was usually short-lived and responsible for the omission of gemcitabine administration on day 15 in 50% of chemotherapy courses. The median survival time was 61.5 weeks (95% CI, 40 to 71). CONCLUSION The combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin induced a high response rate in both stage IIIB and IV NSCLC, with modest side effects. The regimen deserves further careful evaluation in a phase III prospective randomized trial.

Randomized Trial Comparing Cisplatin, Gemcitabine, and Vinorelbine With Either Cisplatin and Gemcitabine or Cisplatin and Vinorelbine in Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Interim Analysis of a Phase III Trial of the Southern Italy Cooperative Oncology Group

2000 ◽  
Vol 18 (7) ◽  
pp. 1451-1457 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pasquale Comella ◽  
Giuseppe Frasci ◽  
Nicola Panza ◽  
Luigi Manzione ◽  
Giuseppe De Cataldis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Oncology Group ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Nsclc Patients

PURPOSE: In our previous phase II study, the cisplatin, gemcitabine, and vinorelbine (PGV) regimen produced a median survival time (MST) of approximately 1 year in advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. The present study was aimed at comparing the MST of patients treated with this triplet regimen with the MSTs of patients receiving cisplatin and vinorelbine (PV) or cisplatin and gemcitabine (PG). PATIENTS AND METHODS: From April 1997, patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC, an age of ≤ 70 years, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤ 1 were randomized to receive one of the following regimens: cisplatin 50 mg/m2, gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2, and vinorelbine 25 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks (arm A); cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on day 1 and gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks (arm B); or cisplatin 120 mg/m2 on days 1 and 29 and vinorelbine 30 mg/m2/wk (arm C). According to the two-stage design for phase III trials, an interim analysis was planned when the first 60 patients per arm were assessable for survival. RESULTS: The survival data of 180 NSCLC patients (stage IIIB, 76 patients; stage IV, 104 patients) were analyzed in April 1999. Overall, 128 patients had died (PGV, n = 33; PG, n = 42; and PV, n = 53). The MST of patients in the PGV, PG, and PV arms was 51, 42, and 35 weeks, respectively, and the corresponding 1-year projected survival rates were 45%, 40%, and 34%, respectively. When only patients with stage IV disease were considered, an even stronger difference was seen between PGV (MST = 47 weeks) and both PG (34 weeks) and PV (27 weeks). At multivariate Cox analysis, the estimate hazard of death for patients receiving PGV compared with those receiving PV was 0.35 (95% confidence interval, 0.16 to 0.77; P < .01). The response rates were 47% in the PGV arm, 30% in the PG arm, 25% in the PV arm. Both hematologic and nonhematologic toxicities were not substantially worse in patients who received the PGV regimen. CONCLUSION: The PGV regimen is associated with a substantial survival gain (MST > 3 months longer) when compared with the PV combination. Because this difference in survival met one of the early stopping rules, the accrual in the PV arm has been stopped (null hypothesis rejected). Enrollment still continues in the PGV and PG arm to ascertain whether the PGV regimen can also produce a significantly longer survival than that obtained with the PG regimen.

Randomized Phase III Trial of Pemetrexed Versus Docetaxel in Patients With Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer Previously Treated With Chemotherapy

2004 ◽  
Vol 22 (9) ◽  
pp. 1589-1597 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nasser Hanna ◽  
Frances A. Shepherd ◽  
Frank V. Fossella ◽  
Jose R. Pereira ◽  
Filippo De Marinis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Advanced Nsclc ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Previously Treated

Purpose To compare the efficacy and toxicity of pemetrexed versus docetaxel in patients with advanced non—small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) previously treated with chemotherapy. Patients and Methods Eligible patients had a performance status 0 to 2, previous treatment with one prior chemotherapy regimen for advanced NSCLC, and adequate organ function. Patients received pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 intravenously (IV) day 1 with vitamin B12, folic acid, and dexamethasone or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 IV day 1 with dexamethasone every 21 days. The primary end point was overall survival. Results Five hundred seventy-one patients were randomly assigned. Overall response rates were 9.1% and 8.8% (analysis of variance P = .105) for pemetrexed and docetaxel, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 2.9 months for each arm, and median survival time was 8.3 versus 7.9 months (P = not significant) for pemetrexed and docetaxel, respectively. The 1-year survival rate for each arm was 29.7%. Patients receiving docetaxel were more likely to have grade 3 or 4 neutropenia (40.2% v 5.3%; P < .001), febrile neutropenia (12.7% v 1.9%; P < .001), neutropenia with infections (3.3% v 0.0%; P = .004), hospitalizations for neutropenic fever (13.4% v 1.5%; P < .001), hospitalizations due to other drug related adverse events (10.5% v 6.4%; P = .092), use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor support (19.2% v 2.6%, P < .001) and all grade alopecia (37.7% v 6.4%; P < .001) compared with patients receiving pemetrexed. Conclusion Treatment with pemetrexed resulted in clinically equivalent efficacy outcomes, but with significantly fewer side effects compared with docetaxel in the second-line treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC and should be considered a standard treatment option for second-line NSCLC when available.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document