Article

Phase II trial of dose-dense chemotherapy followed by dose-intense erlotinib for patients with newly diagnosed metastatic non-small cell lung cancer

Department of Medicine, Section on Hematology and Oncology, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 27157, USA.
International Journal of Oncology (Impact Factor: 3.03). 10/2013; 43(6). DOI: 10.3892/ijo.2013.2122
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT

This phase II study investigated dose-intense erlotinib maintenance after dose-dense chemotherapy for patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer and examined two cell cycle biomarkers. Patients with newly diagnosed metastatic non-small cell lung cancer received docetaxel 75 mg/m2 and cisplatin 75 mg/m2 on day 1 and pegfilgrastim on day 2 every 14 days for four cycles. Patients then received erlotinib with initial doses based on smoking status. Doses were increased in 75 mg increments every two weeks depending on toxicities until each patient's maximal tolerable dose (MTD) was achieved. Cyclin D1 and D3 biomarkers were measured by immunohistochemistry. The objectives of the study were to evaluate time to progression (TTP) and overall survival (OS) for the entire population and biomarker subgroups. Forty-five patients were enrolled. Intra-patient erlotinib MTD ranged from 0 to 525 mg. Median MTD achieved in smokers was higher than in non-smokers (300 vs. 150 mg; P=0.019). TTP for the entire cohort was not significantly improved compared to historical controls. Patients with high cyclin D1 expressing tumors demonstrated improved TTP on erlotinib (8.2 vs. 4.7 months; hazard ratio, 4.1; 95% CI, 1.6-0.6; P=0.003) and improved OS (20.5 vs. 8.0 months; hazard ratio 2.8; 95% CI, 1.2-6.3; P=0.016). Intratumoral cyclin D3 expression did not impact clinical outcomes. Current smokers but not former smokers exhibit a higher erlotinib MTD. High cyclin D1 expression was associated with favorable TTP and OS.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Kathryn E Weaver, Sep 17, 2014
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Non–small cell lung cancer is no longer viewed as a single disease, but a constellation of cancer types that benefit from different treatments. Advancements in the identification of driver mutations with specific Food and Drug Administration–regulated molecular tests have been approved for matching the right treatment to the right patient. These biomarkers, referred to as theranostic biomarkers, because of their ability to support treatment decisions and predict a clinical response are changing the way oncologists formulate non–small cell lung cancer treatment plans. Currently approved biomarker tests for lung cancer include fluorescence in situ hybridization testing for genetic rearrangements and reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction testing for genetic mutations. As the use of molecular medicine progresses, an emerging treatment challenge in thoracic oncology is using limited cytologic material to reliably measure the essential theranostic biomarkers. The majority of newly diagnosed lung cancer patients have advanced disease at the time of presentation, and often undergo the least invasive biopsy possible to ascertain a diagnosis and disease stage. As less invasive diagnostic techniques become more common, it is critical to optimize collection and minimize loss of cancer tissue during processing. The physicians performing these procedures must be knowledgeable about tissue requirements for molecular testing based on tumor type, and should develop collection strategies to optimize molecular biomarker testing. This review explores current literature recommendations to maximize the collection and processing of cytology material for biomarker evaluation and evaluate which cytology samples provide the best yields. As our ability to truly individualize lung cancer therapy evolves, it will be critical to reliably evaluate and treat based on biomarker analysis.
    No preview · Article · Jan 2015 · Clinical Pulmonary Medicine
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Tobacco use after cancer diagnosis is associated with adverse cancer outcomes, yet reliable prevalence estimates for this behavior are lacking. We conducted a systematic literature review of the prevalence of current tobacco use among individuals with a history of lung or head/neck cancer (CRD #42012002625). An extensive search of electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science) identified 7,777 potentially relevant papers published between 1980 and 2014, and 131 of these yielded pertinent information. Aggregating results across heterogeneous study designs and diverse patient samples, the overall mean prevalence rate of current tobacco use (mostly cigarette smoking) was 33.0% (median=31.0%). Among current tobacco users at cancer diagnosis, the mean prevalence rate of current tobacco use (mostly cigarette smoking) was 53.8% (median=50.3%). In many cases, an operational definition of "current" tobacco use was absent, and biochemical verification of self-reported smoking status was infrequent. These and other observed methodological limitations in the assessment and reporting of cancer patients' tobacco use underscore the necessity of uniform tobacco use assessment in future clinical research and cancer care. Copyright © 2015, American Association for Cancer Research.
    No preview · Article · Aug 2015 · Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention