-
Mayo Clinic Proceedings Aug 2019Small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) is an aggressive disease with distinct pathological, clinical, and molecular characteristics from non-small-cell lung cancer. SCLC has high... (Review)
Review
Small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) is an aggressive disease with distinct pathological, clinical, and molecular characteristics from non-small-cell lung cancer. SCLC has high metastatic potential, resulting in a clinically poor prognosis. Early concurrent chemo-radiation is the standard of care for limited-stage SCLC (LS-SCLC). Prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) is recommended for patients with LS-SCLC without progression of disease after initial therapy. A combination of etoposide and cisplatin or carboplatin remains the mainstay of first-line treatment for ES-SCLC, with the addition of atezolizumab, now becoming standard. Most SCLCs initially respond to therapy but almost invariably recur. Topotecan and amrubicin (in Japan) remain the primary chemotherapy options for relapsed SCLC. Immunotherapy, including nivolumab with or without ipilimumab, is now available for refractory disease. In general, the poor prognosis of SCLC has not improved significantly for more than 3 decades. Recently, next-generation molecular profiling studies have identified new therapeutic targets for SCLC. A variety of proapoptotic agents, compounds capitalizing on DNA-repair defects, immunotherapy agents, and antibody-drug conjugates are being evaluated in SCLC, with a number of them showing early promise.
Topics: Aged; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Biological Products; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Chemoradiotherapy; Disease Management; Disease-Free Survival; Female; Humans; Immunotherapy; Japan; Lung Neoplasms; Male; Middle Aged; Neoplasm Invasiveness; Neoplasm Staging; Prognosis; Risk Assessment; Survival Analysis
PubMed: 31378235
DOI: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2019.01.034 -
Annals of Oncology : Official Journal... May 2021Patients with relapsed small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) have few treatment options and dismal survival. Phase I/II data show activity of nivolumab in previously treated... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
Patients with relapsed small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) have few treatment options and dismal survival. Phase I/II data show activity of nivolumab in previously treated SCLC.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
CheckMate 331 is a randomized, open-label, phase III trial of nivolumab versus standard chemotherapy in relapsed SCLC. Patients with relapse after first-line, platinum-based chemotherapy were randomized 1 : 1 to nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks or chemotherapy (topotecan or amrubicin) until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS).
RESULTS
Overall, 284 patients were randomized to nivolumab and 285 to chemotherapy. Minimum follow-up was 15.8 months. No significant improvement in OS was seen with nivolumab versus chemotherapy [median OS, 7.5 versus 8.4 months; hazard ratio (HR), 0.86; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.72-1.04; P = 0.11]. A survival benefit with nivolumab was suggested in patients with baseline lactate dehydrogenase ≤ upper limit of normal and in those without baseline liver metastases. OS (nivolumab versus chemotherapy) was similar in patients with programmed death-ligand 1 combined positive score ≥1% versus <1%. Median progression-free survival was 1.4 versus 3.8 months (HR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.18-1.69). Objective response rate was 13.7% versus 16.5% (odds ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.50-1.27); median duration of response was 8.3 versus 4.5 months. Rates of grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events were 13.8% versus 73.2%.
CONCLUSION
Nivolumab did not improve survival versus chemotherapy in relapsed SCLC. No new safety signals were seen. In exploratory analyses, select baseline characteristics were associated with improved OS for nivolumab.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Nivolumab; Progression-Free Survival; Small Cell Lung Carcinoma
PubMed: 33539946
DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2021.01.071 -
Cancers Oct 2021Thymic carcinoma is a rare neoplasm, and it is difficult to achieve complete remission with systemic chemotherapy. In advanced or recurrent thymic carcinoma,... (Review)
Review
Thymic carcinoma is a rare neoplasm, and it is difficult to achieve complete remission with systemic chemotherapy. In advanced or recurrent thymic carcinoma, platinum-based chemotherapy is chosen as the first-line setting; however, it remains unclear which regimen is better to improve its outcome. It remains unknown whether salvage chemotherapy should be administered to patients with platinum-based chemotherapy-refractory thymic carcinoma. Currently, several clinical studies have investigated the efficacy of second-line settings for advanced thymic carcinoma. As cytotoxic agents, S-1, amrubicin, pemetrexed, docetaxel, paclitaxel, and gemcitabine have been reported as prospective phase II studies or retrospective studies. The overall response rates (ORRs) of S-1, amrubicin, and pemetrexed were 25-50%, 11-44.4%, and 9-10%, respectively. Molecular targeting drugs, such as sunitinib, everolimus, and lenvatinib, also provide clinical effectiveness with tolerability after the failure of platinum-based regimens. Based on the results of the prospective phase II study, the ORR, median progression-free survival, and median overall survival were 16.6% and 5.6 months, respectively, in everolimus, 26% and 7.2 months, respectively, in sunitinib, and 38% and 9.3 months, respectively, in lenvatinib. Although it is difficult to compare each study, lenvatinib appears to be better in increasing efficacy as a second-line setting. However, each study had a small sample size, which may have biased the results of their studies. Further investigation is warranted to elucidate the therapeutic significance of salvage chemotherapy in advanced thymic carcinoma in a large-scale study.
PubMed: 34771601
DOI: 10.3390/cancers13215441 -
Journal of Thoracic Disease Oct 2020Nearly all patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) relapse following first-line etoposide plus platinum (EP) with or without immune checkpoint... (Review)
Review
Nearly all patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) relapse following first-line etoposide plus platinum (EP) with or without immune checkpoint inhibition. Topotecan and amrubicin are chemotherapies approved for these patients. The toxicities of these chemotherapies are significant and survival when treated with these regimens is minimal. The programmed death-1 (PD-1) inhibitors nivolumab and pembrolizumab are unlikely to be effective for patients who develop progressive disease on first-line chemoimmunotherapy. Newer systemic therapies (e.g., lurbinectedin and temozolomide plus poly-ADP ribose polymerase inhibition) have demonstrated greater response rates than topotecan, amrubicin or PD-1 inhibitors. The data on these newer systemic therapies and other agents that may soon enter clinic are reviewed in this manuscript. Additionally, some of the key questions arising following clinical trials of these newer agents are highlighted.
PubMed: 33209465
DOI: 10.21037/jtd.2020.03.67 -
Investigational New Drugs Oct 2022This study examined the activity and safety of amrubicin monotherapy among relapsed small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients who had previously been treated with...
This study examined the activity and safety of amrubicin monotherapy among relapsed small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients who had previously been treated with atezolizumab plus carboplatin and etoposide (AteCE). This retrospective study evaluated patients with relapsed SCLC who were treated with previously AteCE combination therapy followed by amrubicin monotherapy between August 2019 and May 2021. Clinical efficacy and toxicity were analyzed. Overall, 40 patients were included: 12 and 28 patients had sensitive and refractory relapse, respectively. The response rate was 32.5% (25.0% in the sensitive group and 35.7% in the refractory group). The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) from the first amrubicin treatment was 3.4 months (95% CI: 1.9-4.9 months) and 9.9 months (95% CI: 4.5-11.5 months), respectively. There was no significant between-group difference in median PFS (3.6 months vs. 3.2 months, p = 0.42) or median OS (11.2 months vs. 7.3 months, p = 0.78). Grade ≥ 3 hematological adverse events occurred as follows: decreased white blood cells in 52.5% of patients; decreased neutrophil count in 57.5%; and febrile neutropenia in 10.0%. Grade 3 pneumonitis was observed in one patient. There were no treatment-related deaths. Amrubicin is feasible and effective for relapsed SCLC patients previously treated with AteCE therapy. Although immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment (ICI) does not improve the effect of amrubicin, the toxicity is not increased, suggesting that amrubicin remains effective even after ICI administration. Thus, amrubicin after AteCE could be the preferred standard chemotherapeutic choice in patients with relapsed SCLC.
Topics: Anthracyclines; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Carboplatin; Etoposide; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Retrospective Studies; Small Cell Lung Carcinoma
PubMed: 35749041
DOI: 10.1007/s10637-022-01269-9 -
Anticancer Research Sep 2023Neuroendocrine prostate cancer (NEPC) is generally an aggressive form of prostate cancer that can arise de novo or develop as a castration-resistant mechanism. While... (Review)
Review
Neuroendocrine prostate cancer (NEPC) is generally an aggressive form of prostate cancer that can arise de novo or develop as a castration-resistant mechanism. While first-line platinum-based chemotherapy is effective against NEPC, its limited response duration and subsequent treatments pose significant clinical challenges. Standard second-line treatments have not been established due to the limited data available. The aim of this review was to reveal the current status of second-line therapy for NEPC. A literature search was conducted using PubMed and Web of Science and a total of 13 articles were included in this review. Prospective and retrospective studies demonstrated that treatment outcome of second-line therapy using platinum with etoposide or docetaxel was unfavorable and progression-free survival was 3 months or shorter. Amrubicin and irinotecan were also frequently used as second-line therapy, however, efficacy of these agents was modest and response duration was less than 6 months. NEPC patients with homologous recombination repair gene alterations may benefit from treatment with poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors. Ongoing clinical studies investigate various agents, including immune checkpoint inhibitors, molecularly targeted agents, and PARP inhibitors. With the increasing recognition and active biopsy of NEPC lesions, the number of NEPC patients is anticipated to rise. Accumulating more knowledge and experience is crucial in developing novel treatment strategies to combat this disease.
Topics: Male; Humans; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Prostatic Neoplasms; Prostate; Docetaxel
PubMed: 37648316
DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.16571 -
Journal of Thoracic Disease Oct 2020Systemic treatment in small cell lung carcinoma has been a challenge for oncologists for decades. The high propensity for recurrence is usually due to distant... (Review)
Review
Systemic treatment in small cell lung carcinoma has been a challenge for oncologists for decades. The high propensity for recurrence is usually due to distant metastasis, which makes systemic treatment an essential component of treatment in small cell lung carcinoma. The regimen of cisplatin and etoposide (established in the mid-1980's) concurrently with thoracic radiotherapy followed by prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) remains the standard of care in limited stage disease. Despite numerous trials, this regimen has not been improved upon. The standard combination regimen of cisplatin and etoposide has been compared to alternative platinum-containing regimens with drugs like epirubicin, irinotecan, paclitaxel, topotecan, pemetrexed, amrubicin and belotecan. Non-platinum containing regimens like ifosfamide and etoposide have also been tested. Attempts to intensify therapy have included the addition of a third drug like paclitaxel, ifosfamide, tirapazamine, tamoxifen, and thalidomide. Maintenance therapy following induction with chemotherapy, vandetanib and interferon-alpha have also been attempted. Molecularly directed targeted therapies and immunotherapeutic agents are areas of active research. In this review, we discuss the various systemic therapy options in limited stage small cell lung carcinoma, from the historical regimens to the modern-day therapy and promising areas of research. We also discuss the role of growth factors, the optimal number of chemotherapy cycles, the use of prognostic and predictive factors, the optimal timing of chemotherapy and the treatment of special populations of patients including older patients, and patients with comorbidities.
PubMed: 33209466
DOI: 10.21037/jtd-2019-sclc-11 -
Scientific Reports Jan 2016Currently, amrubicin is permitted for relapsed small-cell lung carcinoma (SCLC) only in Japan. The efficacy and adverse effects of amrubicin as reported by previous... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Currently, amrubicin is permitted for relapsed small-cell lung carcinoma (SCLC) only in Japan. The efficacy and adverse effects of amrubicin as reported by previous studies varied greatly. The inclusion criterion was a prospective study that was able to provide data for efficacy and safety by the AMR single agent regimen as second-line chemotherapy for a patient with SCLC. Binary data were meta-analyzed with the random-model generic inverse variance method. We included nine articles consisted of 803 patients. The pooled three-, six-, and nine-month progression-free survival were 63% (95% CI 57-69%, I(2) = 53%), 28% (95% CI 21-35%, I(2) = 71%), and 10% (95% CI 6-14%, I(2) = 41%), respectively. The pooled six-, 12-, and 18-month overall survival were 69% (95% CI 61-78%, I(2) = 83%), 36% (95% CI 28-44%, I(2) = 80%), and 15% (95% CI 8-21%, I(2) = 81%), respectively. Amrubicin seemed much more beneficial for Japanese patients. However, compared to the efficacy of topotecan presented in a previous meta-analysis, amrubicin may be a better treatment option than topotecan for both Japanese and Euro-American. Adverse effects by amrubicin were almost exclusively observed to be hematological. Notably, grade III/IV neutropenia incidence was 70% and febrile neutropenia incidence was 12%.
Topics: Anthracyclines; Antineoplastic Agents; Asian People; Humans; Japan; Lung Neoplasms; Neutropenia; Recurrence; Small Cell Lung Carcinoma; Survival Analysis; Topotecan; Treatment Outcome; White People
PubMed: 26750506
DOI: 10.1038/srep18999 -
Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) Apr 2022The problems with anticancer therapy are resistance and toxicity. From 3000 Cisplatin derivatives tested as antitumor agents, most of them have been rejected, due to... (Review)
Review
The problems with anticancer therapy are resistance and toxicity. From 3000 Cisplatin derivatives tested as antitumor agents, most of them have been rejected, due to toxicity. The aim of current study is the comparison of therapeutic combinations of the currently applied in clinical practice: Cisplatin, Carboplatin, Oxaliplatin, Nedaplatin, Lobaplatin, Heptaplatin, and Satraplatin. The literature data show that the strategies for the development of platinum anticancer agents and bypassing of resistance to Cisplatin derivatives and their toxicity are: combination therapy, Pt IV prodrugs, the targeted nanocarriers. The very important strategy for the improvement of the antitumor effect against different cancers is synergistic combination of Cisplatin derivatives with: (1) anticancer agents-Fluorouracil, Gemcitabine, Cytarabine, Fludarabine, Pemetrexed, Ifosfamide, Irinotecan, Topotecan, Etoposide, Amrubicin, Doxorubicin, Epirubicin, Vinorelbine, Docetaxel, Paclitaxel, Nab-Paclitaxel; (2) modulators of resistant mechanisms; (3) signaling protein inhibitors-Erlotinib; Bortezomib; Everolimus; (4) and immunotherapeutic drugs-Atezolizumab, Avelumab, Bevacizumab, Cemiplimab, Cetuximab, Durvalumab, Erlotinib, Imatinib, Necitumumab, Nimotuzumab, Nivolumab, Onartuzumab, Panitumumab, Pembrolizumab, Rilotumumab, Trastuzumab, Tremelimumab, and Sintilimab. An important approach for overcoming the drug resistance and reduction of toxicity of Cisplatin derivatives is the application of nanocarriers (polymers and liposomes), which provide improved targeted delivery, increased intracellular penetration, selective accumulation in tumor tissue, and enhanced therapeutic efficacy. The advantages of combination therapy are maximum removal of tumor cells in different phases; prevention of resistance; inhibition of the adaptation of tumor cells and their mutations; and reduction of toxicity.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Carboplatin; Cisplatin; Erlotinib Hydrochloride; Humans; Neoplasms
PubMed: 35458666
DOI: 10.3390/molecules27082466 -
Cureus Jul 2021Mixed adeno-neuroendocrine carcinomas (MANEC) is a rare pathological diagnosis characterized by the presence of both adeno-carcinomatous and neuroendocrine... (Review)
Review
Mixed adeno-neuroendocrine carcinomas (MANEC) is a rare pathological diagnosis characterized by the presence of both adeno-carcinomatous and neuroendocrine differentiation with each component comprising 30% of the tumor. This literature review is aimed at the extraction of all existing clinical studies and reviews on colorectal MANEC so as to ensure that a suitable chemotherapeutic regimen is chosen to improve survival outcomes and prognosis of the disease. Parallel search strategies were employed to extract past 10 years articles from PubMed, PubMed Central and Google Scholar databases. A total of 30 records consisting of one clinical trial, five retrospective cohort studies, one case control study, one case series, 16 case reports and six review papers were shortlisted. Chemotherapeutic regimens that were administered as an adjuvant and a neoadjuvant therapy were analyzed with their survival outcomes. The overall survival rate of those administered with neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy can be as high as 57.4% and 69%, respectively. Multiple chemotherapeutic regimens were employed in colorectal MANEC and superiority of one regimen over the other can't be established. Any drug or combination of drugs that is responsive against either of the MANEC components is found to be effective against the tumor. However, excellent responsiveness has been found with 5-fluorouracil regimens as a neoadjuvant therapy and platinum-based combinations as an adjuvant therapy. XELOX, streptozocin and S1 regimens also prove to be drugs of choice in aggressive and metastasized disease conditions. Our analysis allows for improved chemotherapeutic management of individuals with colorectal MANEC and establishes an increased potential for use of streptozocin therapy in the clinical setting. However, newer drugs like amrubicin require further research prior to describing its efficacy in colorectal MANEC.
PubMed: 34458045
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.16645