Search

Background: To undertake a systematic review of the available data for oral and intravenous topotecan in adults with relapsed small cell lung cancer (SCLC) for whom re-treatment with the first line regimen is not considered appropriate. Methods: We searched six databases from 1980 up to March 2009 for relevant trials regardless of language or publication status. Relevant studies included any randomised trial of any chemotherapeutic treatment against any comparator in this licensed indication. Where possible we used apposite quantitative methods. Where metaanalysis was considered unsuitable for some or all of the data, we employed a narrative synthesis method. For indirect comparisons we used the method of Bucher et al., where available data allowed it, otherwise we used narrative descriptions. Results: Seven unique studies met the inclusion criteria, four of which could be used in our analyses. These included one study comparing oral topotecan plus best supportive care (BSC) to BSC alone, one study comparing intravenous topotecan to cyclophosphamide, adriamycin and vincristine (CAV), and two studies comparing oral topotecan with intravenous topotecan. All four studies appear to be well conducted and with low risk of bias. Oral topotecan plus BSC has advantages over BSC alone in terms of survival (hazard ratio = 0.61; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.87) and quality of life (EQ-5 D difference: 0.15; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.25). Intravenous topotecan was at least as effective as CAV in the treatment of patients with recurrent small-cell lung cancer and resulted in improved quality-oflife with respect to several symptoms. CAV was associated with significantly less grade 4 thrombocytopenia compared with IV topotecan (risk ratio = 5.83; 95% CI, 2.35 to 14.42). Survival (hazard ratio = 0.98; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.25) and response (pooled risk ratio = 1.04; 95% CI, 0.58 to 1.85) data were similar for the oral and IV topotecan groups. Symptom control was also very similar between the trials and between the oral and IV groups. Toxicity data showed a significant difference in favour of oral topotecan for neutropenia (pooled risk ratio = 0.65; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.89). Indirect evidence showed that oral topotecan was at least as good as or better than CAV on all outcomes (survival, response rates, toxicities, and symptoms) that allowed indirect comparisons, with the only exception being grade four thrombocytopenia which occurred less often on CAV treatment. Conclusions: Concerning topotecan both the oral and intravenous options have similar efficacy, and patient preference may be a decisive factor if the choice would be between the two formulations. The best trial evidence for decision making, because it was tested versus best supportive care, exists for oral topotecan. Indirectly, because we have two head-to-head comparisons of oral versus intravenous topotecan, and one comparison of intravenous topotecan versus CAV in similar patients as in the trial against best supportive care, one might infer that IV topotecan and CAV could also be superior to best supportive care, and that oral topotecan has similar effects to CAV with possibly better symptom control. From the evidence discussed above, it is evident that oral topotecan has similar efficacy to IV topotecan (direct comparison) and CAV (indirect comparison). There is no further evidence base of direct or possible indirect comparisons for other comparators than CAV of either oral or IV topotecan. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To evaluate the results of selective nodal irradiation on basis of 18F-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography (PET) scans in patients with limited-disease small-cell lung cancer (LD-SCLC) on isolated nodal failure. Methods and Materials: A prospective study was performed of 60 patients with LD-SCLC. Radiotherapy was given to a dose of 45 Gy in twice-daily fractions of 1.5 Gy, concurrent with carboplatin and etoposide chemotherapy. Only the primary tumor and the mediastinal lymph nodes involved on the pretreatment PET scan were irradiated. A chest computed tomography (CT) scan was performed 3 months after radiotherapy completion and every 6 months thereafter. Results: A difference was seen in the involved nodal stations between the pretreatment 18F-deoxyglucose PET scans and computed tomography scans in 30% of patients (95% confidence interval, 20–43%). Of the 60 patients, 39 (65%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 52–76%) developed a recurrence; 2 patients (3%, 95% CI, 1–11%) experienced isolated regional failure. The median actuarial overall survival was 19 months (95% CI, 17–21). The median actuarial progression-free survival was 14 months (95% CI, 12–16). 12% (95% CI, 6–22%) of patients experienced acute Grade 3 (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 3.0) esophagitis. Conclusion: PET-based selective nodal irradiation for LD-SCLC resulted in a low rate of isolated nodal failures (3%), with a low percentage of acute esophagitis. These findings are in contrast to those from our prospective study of CT-based selective nodal irradiation, which resulted in an unexpectedly high percentage of isolated nodal failures (11%). Because of the low rate of isolated nodal failures and toxicity, we believe that our data support the use of PET-based SNI for LD-SCLC. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Purpose: Local recurrence is a major problem after (chemo-)radiation for non–small-cell lung cancer. We hypothesized that for each individual patient, the highest therapeutic ratio could be achieved by increasing total tumor dose (TTD) to the limits of normal tissues, delivered within 5 weeks. We report first results of a prospective feasibility trial. Methods and Materials: Twenty-eight patients with medically inoperable or locally advanced non–small-cell lung cancer, World Health Organization performance score of 0–1, and reasonable lung function (forced expiratory volume in 1 second > 50%) were analyzed. All patients underwent irradiation using an individualized prescribed TTD based on normal tissue dose constraints (mean lung dose, 19 Gy; maximal spinal cord dose, 54 Gy) up to a maximal TTD of 79.2 Gy in 1.8-Gy fractions twice daily. No concurrent chemoradiation was administered. Toxicity was scored using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events criteria. An 18F-fluoro-2-deoxy-glucose–positron emission tomography–computed tomography scan was performed to evaluate (metabolic) response 3 months after treatment. Results: Mean delivered dose was 63.0 ± 9.8 Gy. The TTD was most often limited by the mean lung dose (32.1%) or spinal cord (28.6%). Acute toxicity generally was mild; only 1 patient experienced Grade 3 cough and 1 patient experienced Grade 3 dysphagia. One patient (3.6%) died of pneumonitis. For late toxicity, 2 patients (7.7%) had Grade 3 cough or dyspnea; none had severe dysphagia. Complete metabolic response was obtained in 44% (11 of 26 patients). With a median follow-up of 13 months, median overall survival was 19.6 months, with a 1-year survival rate of 57.1%. Conclusions: Individualized maximal tolerable dose irradiation based on normal tissue dose constraints is feasible, and initial results are promising. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]