[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Abstract
Large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (LCNEC) accounts for approximately 3% of lung cancers. Pathologic classification and optimal therapies are debated. We report the clinicopathologic features, treatment and survival of a series of patients with stage IV LCNEC.
Materials and Methods
Cases of pathologically-confirmed stage IV LCNEC evaluated at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center from 2006-2013 were identified. We collected demographic, treatment, and survival data. Available radiology was evaluated by RECIST 1.1 criteria.
Forty-nine patients with stage IV LCNEC were identified. The median age was 64 years, 63% of patients were male and 88% were smokers. Twenty-three patients (n=23/49, 47%) had brain metastases, 17 at diagnosis and 6 during the disease course. Seventeen LCNEC patients (35%) had diagnostic molecular testing, of which 24% had KRAS mutations (n=4/17). Treatment data for first-line metastatic disease was available on 37 patients: 70% (n=26) received platinum/etoposide and 30% (n=11) received other regimens. RECIST was completed on 23 patients with available imaging; objective response rate was 37% (95% CI: 16-62%) with platinum/etoposide, while those treated with other first-line regimens did not achieve a response. Median overall survival (OS) was 10.2 months (95% CI: 8.6-16.4 months) for the entire cohort.
Patients with stage IV LCNEC have a high incidence of brain metastases. KRAS mutations are common. Patients with stage IV LCNEC do not respond as well to platinum/etoposide compared with historic data for extensive stage small-cell lung cancer, however the prognosis is similar. Prospective studies are needed to define optimum therapy for stage IV LCNEC.
Full-text · Article · Jan 2016 · Clinical Lung Cancer
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: To examine the correlations between uni-dimensional RECIST and volumetric measurements in patients with lung adenocarcinoma and to assess their association with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS).
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Background:
Clinicians can miss up to half of patients' symptomatic toxicities in cancer clinical trials and routine practice. Although patient-reported outcome questionnaires have been developed to capture this information, it is unclear whether clinicians will make use of patient-reported outcomes to inform their own toxicity documentation, or to prompt symptom management activities.
44 lung cancer patients that participated in a phase 2 treatment trial self-reported 13 symptomatic toxicities derived from the National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events and Karnofsky Performance Status via tablet computers in waiting areas immediately preceding scheduled visits. During visits, clinicians viewed patients' self-reported toxicity and performance status ratings on a computer interface and could agree or disagree/reassign grades ("shared" reporting). Agreement of clinicians with patient-reported grades was tabulated, and compared using weighted kappa statistics. Clinical actions in response to patient-reported severe (grade 3/4) toxicities were measured (e.g. treatment discontinuation, dose reduction, supportive medications). For comparison, 45 non-trial patients with lung cancer being treated in the same clinic by the same physicians were simultaneously enrolled in a parallel cohort study in which patients also self-reported toxicity grades but reports were not shared with clinicians ("non-shared" reporting).
Toxicities and performance status were reported by patients and reviewed by clinicians at (780/782) 99.7% of study visits in the phase 2 trial which used "shared" reporting. Clinicians agreed with patients 93% of the time with kappas 0.82-0.92. Clinical actions were taken in response to 67% of severe patient-reported toxicities. In the "non-shared" reporting comparison group, clinicians agreed with patients 56% of the time with kappas 0.04-0.48 (significantly worse than shared reporting for all symptoms), and clinical actions were taken in response to 44% of severe patient-reported toxicities.
Clinicians will frequently agree with patient-reported symptoms and performance status, and will use this information to guide documentation and symptom management. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00807573).
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Purpose:
The American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) produced an evidence-based guideline on treatment of patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). Because of the relevance of this guideline to American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) membership, ASCO reviewed the guideline, applying a set of procedures and policies used to critically examine guidelines developed by other organizations.
The ACCP guideline on the treatment of SCLC was reviewed for developmental rigor by methodologists. An ASCO Endorsement Panel updated the literature search, reviewed the content, and considered additional recommendations.
The ASCO Endorsement Panel determined that the recommendations from the ACCP guideline, published in 2013, are clear, thorough, and based on current scientific evidence. ASCO endorses the ACCP guideline on the treatment of SCLC, with the addition of qualifying statements.
Surgery is indicated for selected stage I SCLC. Limited-stage disease should be treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with good performance status. Thoracic radiotherapy should be administered early in the course of treatment, preferably beginning with cycle one or two of chemotherapy. Chemotherapy should consist of four cycles of a platinum agent and etoposide. Extensive-stage disease should be treated primarily with chemotherapy consisting of a platinum agent plus etoposide or irinotecan. Prophylactic cranial irradiation prolongs survival in patients with limited-stage disease who achieve a complete or partial response to initial therapy and may do so in similarly responding patients with extensive-stage disease as well. Additional information is available at http://www.asco.org/endorsements/sclc and http://www.asco.org/guidelineswiki.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Objectives
Small cell lung cancers (SCLCs) are characterized by aberrantly-methylated O6-methyl-guanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT). Epigenetic silencing of MGMT is associated with loss of MGMT activity and improved sensitivity to alkylating agents in glioblastomas. We have reported the activity of temozolomide, a non-classical alkylating agent, in patients with relapsed sensitive or refractory SCLCs, given at 75 mg/m2/day for 21 of 28 days. However, prolonged myelosuppression was noted. We therefore evaluated a 5-day dosing schedule of temozolomide and examined MGMT as a predictive biomarker for temozolomide treatment in SCLC.
Materials and Methods
Patients with sensitive or refractory SCLCs and progression after one or two prior chemotherapy regimens received temozolomide 200 mg/m2/day for 5 consecutive days in 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was tolerability. We also assessed MGMT promoter methylation status by PCR and MGMT expression by immunohistochemistry in tumor specimens.
Of 25 patients enrolled, 5 experienced grade 3 or 4 toxicity (anemia, thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, and constipation). The partial response rate was 12% [95% CI: 3-31%], with partial responses in 2 refractory patients. We were able to obtain tumor samples for more than half of patients for MGMT testing.
Temozolomide 200 mg/m2/day for 5 days in 28-day cycles is tolerable and active in patients with relapsed SCLCs. No treatment-limiting prolonged cytopenias were observed, making this our preferred schedule for further studies. Acquisition of archived biospecimens is feasible and necessary in order to continue evaluating the role of MGMT as a predictive biomarker in SCLCs.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: We describe clinical, pathologic, and molecular characteristics of never-smoker patients with small-cell lung cancers (SCLCs).
We identified cases of SCLCs evaluated at our institution from 2005 to 2012. We collected smoking history, demographic, treatment, and survival data. EGFR, KRAS, PIK3CA, ALK testing, RB protein expression, and next generation sequencing were performed on available samples.
Two percent (23 of 1040) of patients with SCLCs were never-smokers. Eighty-three percent (19 of 23) had de novo SCLCs, whereas 17% had SCLC transformation as acquired resistance to erlotinib after treatment for EGFR-mutant lung carcinomas. Median survival from SCLC diagnosis was 23 months. Of de novo SCLCs, ALK rearrangement, KRAS mutations, EGFR mutations, and RB loss were identified in zero of five, zero of eight, two of eight, and six of seven, respectively. Two de novo samples underwent next generation sequencing. One had mutations in p53 and RB1 with amplification in TERT, and a second had mutations in CBL and GNAS with amplification in MYCL1.
Two percent of patients with SCLCs are never-smokers. Although transformation to SCLC can rarely occur in acquired resistance to erlotinib, 83% of never-smokers with SCLCs had de novo SCLC. RB loss was noted in 86% of cases. Multiplexed genotyping can be performed on tissues to identify potentially actionable oncogenic drivers.
Full-text · Article · Jun 2014 · Journal of thoracic oncology: official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Physicians are often asked about complementary therapies by patients with cancer, and data show that the interest in and use of these therapies among patients with cancer is common. Therefore, it is important to assess the current evidence base on the benefits and risks of complementary therapies (modalities not historically used in modern Western medicine).
A systematic literature review was carried out and recommendations were made according to the American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines development methodology.
A large number of randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses, as well as a number of prospective cohort studies, met the predetermined inclusion criteria. These trials addressed many different issues pertaining to patients with lung cancer, such as symptoms of anxiety, mood disturbance, pain, quality of life, and treatment-related side effects. The available data cover a variety of interventions, including acupuncture, nutrition, mind-body therapies, exercise, and massage. The body of evidence supports a series of recommendations. An evidenced-based approach to modern cancer care should integrate complementary therapies with standard cancer therapies such as surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, and best supportive care measures.
Several complementary therapy modalities can be helpful in improving the overall care of patients with lung cancer.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: PURPOSEIn clinical trials, traditional monitoring methods, paper documentation, and outdated collection systems lead to inaccuracies of study information and inefficiencies in the process. Integrated electronic systems offer an opportunity to collect data in real time. PATIENTS AND METHODS
We created a computer software system to collect 13 patient-reported symptomatic adverse events and patient-reported Karnofsky performance status, semi-automated RECIST measurements, and laboratory data, and we made this information available to investigators in real time at the point of care during a phase II lung cancer trial. We assessed data completeness within 48 hours of each visit. Clinician satisfaction was measured.ResultsForty-four patients were enrolled, for 721 total visits. At each visit, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) reflecting toxicity and disease-related symptoms were completed using a dedicated wireless laptop. All PROs were distributed in batch throughout the system within 24 hours of the visit, and abnormal laboratory data were available for review within a median of 6 hours from the time of sample collection. Manual attribution of laboratory toxicities took a median of 1 day from the time they were accessible online. Semi-automated RECIST measurements were available to clinicians online within a median of 2 days from the time of imaging. All clinicians and 88% of data managers felt there was greater accuracy using this system. CONCLUSION
Existing data management systems can be harnessed to enable real-time collection and review of clinical information during trials. This approach facilitates reporting of information closer to the time of events, and improves efficiency, and the ability to make earlier clinical decisions.