Search

We conducted a large, multicenter, retrospective survey aimed to explore the impact of tumor bone involvement in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.Data on clinical-pathology, skeletal outcomes and bone-directed therapies for 661 deceased patients with evidence of bone metastasis were collected and statistically analyzed. Bone metastases were evident at diagnosis in 57.5% of patients. In the remaining cases median time to bone metastases appearance was 9 months. Biphosphonates were administered in 59.6% of patients. Skeletal-related events were experienced by 57.7% of patients; the most common was the need for radiotherapy. Median time to first skeletal-related event was 6 months. Median survival after bone metastases diagnosis was 9.5 months and after the first skeletal-related event was 7 months. We created a score based on four factors used to predict the overall survival from the diagnosis of bone metastases: age >65 years, non-adenocarcinoma histology, ECOG Performance Status >2, concomitant presence of visceral metastases at the bone metastases diagnosis. The presence of more than two of these factors is associated with a worse prognosis.This study demonstrates that patients affected by Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer with bone metastases represent a heterogeneous population in terms of risk of skeletal events and survival.

Introduction: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of vandetanib plus gemcitabine (V/G) compared with gemcitabine alone in elderly patients with untreated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer., Methods: This was a phase II, randomized, double-blind study. A total of 124 elderly patients (mean age, 75 yr; age range, 70-84 yr; 73% men) received V/G (n = 61) or placebo plus gemcitabine (n = 63). Progression-free survival (PFS) was the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints were overall survival, objective response rate, duration of response, disease control rate, time to deterioration of performance status, and safety outcomes., Results: PFS was significantly prolonged with V/G (median, 183 days; 95% confidence interval, 116-214) compared with placebo plus gemcitabine (median, 169 days; 95% confidence interval, 95-194; p = 0.047). No statistically significant differences between arms were observed in all secondary endpoints, including overall survival. The addition of vandetanib to gemcitabine was well tolerated. The rate of patients with ≥1 treatment-related adverse event was comparable in the two arms, pyrexia, dyspnea, and neutropenia being the most common adverse events., Conclusions: V/G combination was associated with a statistically significant prolongation of PFS compared with gemcitabine alone in untreated elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer, with an acceptable safety profile.

Background: Mitomycin and irinotecan are widely used in the treatment of colorectal cancer, furthermore both of these drugs are active agents against nonsmall cell lung cancer and their combination has shown synergism in preclinical studies. The aim of the study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of mitomycin- and irinotecan-based chemotherapy combination in patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer progressing after previous antineoplastic therapies., Methods: Thirty-one consecutive patients suffering from nonsmall cell lung cancer, who underwent mitomycin- plus irinotecan-based chemotherapy as salvage treatment after failure of at least two previous systemic treatments, were retrospectively identified in our database. Between September 2003 and March 2011, 31 patients with histologically proven stage IIIB or IV nonsmall cell lung cancer, received mitomycin 5 mg/m(2) on day 1 followed by irinotecan 150 mg/m(2) on day 2. Cycles were repeated at 2-week interval., Results: A total of 164 cycles of treatment were given with a median of five per patient (range 1-10). The objective responses included partial response in 6 patients (19.3%), stable disease in 4 (13%), and progressive disease in 21 (67.7%). Median time to disease progression was 4 months, and median survival was 9+ months. Twelve patients (38%) reached 1-year survival. Grade 3-4 toxicities occurred in seven patients (22.5%), mainly myelosuppression (neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia), mucositis, and diarrhea. No treatment-related death was recorded., Conclusion: The mitomycin- and irinotecan-based combination chemotherapy seems to be tolerated and active in this subset of heavily pretreated patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer. However, evaluation or recruitment of a larger number of patients would be needed to provide more adequate data on safety and activity of the described combination.

Background: Adherence to erlotinib could be a determinant for clinical outcome and treatment toxicity in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (A-NSCLC)., Patients and Methods: In an observational study, the Basel Assessment of Adherence Scale (BAAS), a visual analogue scale (VAS), pill counting, and missed appointment rate were used to evaluate adherence in a first cohort of patients who was prescribed erlotinib without a specifically designed management strategy and in a second cohort of patients followed by an oral treatment monitoring program., Results: Adherence > 95% by BAAS at 2 months of treatment in the first and second cohorts was 72% and 84%, respectively (P = .042). Adherence by pill counting was 78% and 87% in the first and second cohorts, respectively (P = .0021). Disease control rate (DCR) (complete response [CR] + partial response [PR] + stable disease [SD]) was significantly higher in all patients whose adherence by BAAS at 2 months was ≥ 95% (P = .0266). DCR was higher in the second cohort compared with the first, being 63% (95% confidence interval [CI], 53%-72%) and 44% (95% CI, 30%-58%) in the second and the first cohort, respectively (P = .0368). A significant correlation between the number of adverse events and patient-reported adherence was observed (r = 0.105; P = .0001)., Conclusion: Nonadherence may be related to poorer rates of response to erlotinib. Effective interventions to reduce nonadherence need to be implemented., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The aim of this study was to determine the activity and toxicity of two sequential chemotherapy regimens in the first-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Methods: Eighty-eight chemonaive patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC were randomised to receive either three cycles of 75 mg/m(2) cisplatin plus 75 mg/m(2) docetaxel, both administered on day 1 every 21 days, followed by three cycles of 1,200 mg/m(2) gemcitabine on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks (arm A), or three cycles of 25 mg/m(2) cisplatin plus 25 mg/m(2) docetaxel on days 1, 8 and 15 every 28 days, followed by three cycles of 1,200 mg/m(2) gemcitabine on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks (arm B)., Results: Of the evaluable patients, 61% in arm A (n = 41) and 36% (n = 44) in arm B completed treatment as per the protocol. The best tumour response rates were as follows (arm A and arm B): complete response: 2.4 and 2.3%; partial response: 39 and 20.4%; stable disease: 26.8 and 13.6%; and progressive disease: 31.8 and 45.4%. The median progression-free and overall survival were 3.9 and 12.3 months in arm A, respectively, 3.1 and 7.7 months in arm B. Grade 3-4 adverse events were more common in arm A. Grade 3-4 neutropenia was the main toxicity observed (56.1% in arm A and 11.4% in arm B)., Conclusions: Our data demonstrate the feasibility of a sequential approach of cisplatin plus docetaxel followed by single-agent gemcitabine. Weekly administration of platinum-docetaxel is associated with an improved safety profile but lower efficacy than the conventional three-weekly schedule (registration ID 2004-001044-72).

Background: A recent pooled analysis of randomized trials indicated significant improvement in overall survival from cisplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), depending on disease stage (only in stages II and III) and PS (≤ 1). Post-operative radiotherapy (RT) is optional for pN2 tumours., Patients and Methods: To evaluate opinions and daily clinical practice of Italian Oncologists about adjuvant treatment of NSCLC, a 46-item questionnaire was delivered via e-mail., Results: Seventy-eight physicians from 68 Centers (out of 98 contacted) returned their questionnaire. Seventy-four, 86, 94, and 78% of them give the indication for adjuvant chemotherapy for stage IIA, IIB, IIIA, and IIIB disease, respectively and 14% in stage IB disease. Stage, PS, and age are taken into consideration evaluating adjuvant approach by 97, 95 and 73%, respectively. Cisplatin-vinorelbine (64%) and cisplatin-gemcitabine (33%), for 4 cycles (81%), are the preferred regimens, while 32% use different regimens. Ninety-two percent indicate RT in pN2 disease and/or positive resection margins. Real Number of patients Needed to Treat (NNT) is probably not completely known/understood and/or used by physicians., Conclusions: A substantial adherence between clinical daily practice in Italy and scientific progresses is described in this paper, even with some discordances regarding the most appropriate adjuvant chemotherapy regimen., (Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: More than 50% of brain metastases (BMs) occur in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Untreated patients with BMs have a poor prognosis with a median survival of 2 months. In most cases BMs are multiple and their optimal therapy is whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT). The role of systemic therapies for these patients is still a matter for investigation due to concerns about the ability of these drugs to cross the blood-brain barrier (BBB). Cisplatin (CDDP) remains the backbone for medical treatment of NSCLC and fotemustine (FTM) is a nitrosurea able to cross the BBB., Methods: Patients with advanced NSCLC, ECOG performance status (PS) 0-1 and multiple BMs not amenable to surgery or stereotactic radiotherapy were treated with 2 cycles of FTM 80 mg/m(2) days 1, 8 and CDDP 80 mg/m(2) day 1, every 3 weeks followed by WBRT 30 Gy (3 Gy daily in 10 fractions). Radiological restaging was performed before WBRT to assess the role of chemotherapy both for cranial and extracranial disease. Patients with disease control (DC: complete response plus partial response) received 4 more cycles. To assess the basic activities of daily living (ADL), the Barthel ADL Index was used to score patients' performance every 2 cycles. The trial design provides a two-step evaluation according to the optimal two-stage design of Simon. In the first phase 29 patients were enrolled in order to verify if this schedule showed more than 25% response rate both for cranial and extracranial disease. If so, enrollment added up to a total of 81 patients., Results: After the first evaluation 4 out of 29 patients were excluded from the study (3 untreated/1 not included for administrative reasons). At the time of the planned interim analysis patient's characteristics were the following: median age 61 years (range 44-70), M/F = 16/9, adenocarcinoma 11, squamous 5, large cell 2, undefined NSCLC 7; PS 0/1 in 11/14 cases, median Barthel Index score was 20 [13-20]. Three (12%) partial responses were observed, 9 subjects (36%) with stable disease and 13 (52%) showing disease progression. These data did not satisfy the pre-planned hypothesis and the study was stopped. At the time of the first evaluation before WBRT 12/25 (48%) patients had a systemic DC in contrast with 15/25 (60%) patients with BMs DC. Chemotherapy was relatively well tolerated with a prevalence of asthenia as the most relevant specific toxicity while the haematological toxicity was mild., Conclusion: CDDP and FTM combined with WBRT do not represent a therapeutic option for patients with NSCLC. Therefore further studies to evaluate the combination of systemic treatments with WBRT are warranted., (Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Quality of life (QoL) has gained greater importance in the management of metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer due to the palliative nature of treatment. Docetaxel (DCT) and cisplatin (CDDP) doublet has been reported to be associated to a better QoL than the weekly vinorelbine (VNR) and CDDP regimen. Recently a newer more tolerated schedule of the VNR/CDDP regimen has been published and is widely employed in medical practice. The impact of these regimens on patients' QoL as well as symptoms control and type and grading chemo-related side-effects has been compared prospectically., Methods: Patients received CDDP 75 mg/m(2) plus DCT 75 mg/m(2) on day 1 every weeks (arm A) or CDDP 80 mg/m(2) on day 1 plus VNR 30 mg/m(2) day 1 and 8 every 3 weeks (arm B). G-CSF and/or EPO were employed as needed. Health-related QoL was assessed at entry and after every cycle by the EORTC-QLQ-C30 and LC13 questionnaires, toxicity by the NCI-NCCN CTC vs 2, and intent-to-treat objective response by the Recist criteria., Results: The QoL questionnaires were completed by 37 pts (88%) in the DCT/CDDP arm and 39 pts (87%) in the VNR/CDDP one. Baseline mean scores and rates at which pts failed to complete QoL assessment were similar in the two arms. Global health status of the EORTC QLQ-C30 scale and specific symptoms control (LC13 module) improved during treatment without any statistically significant difference between the two arms. Emotional functioning remained stable in both groups during treatment, whereas physical and role improved slightly. In the DCT/CDDP arm 14 pts (33%; 95%CL 24-40%) had PR, and 10 (24%) SD for a 57% TGCR. In the VNR/CDDP arm 12 pts (27%) achieved PR, 18 (41%) SD a 68% TGCR. Differences were not statistically significant. Median time-to-progression was 4.2 months in the DCT/CDDP arm and 4.5 months in the VNR/CDDP one, and median overall survival was 12.1 (range 1-26+ months) and 12.5 months (range 1-28+ months) for DCT/CDDP and VNR/CDDP arms, respectively. Febrile neutropenia rate was higher in the VNR/CDDP arm (p=0.02) as well as G3-4 anemia (p=0.005) and G-CSF/EPO use (p=0.019)., Conclusions: Global and specific health-related QoL data similar in both treatment groups with no statistically significant difference. Efficacy measures, overall response rate, time-to-progression and overall survival were equivalent in both arms. However, severe anemia and febrile neutropenia are statistically more frequent in the VNR/CDDP arm than in the DCT/CDDP one. These data should be considered in treatment decision-making for pts with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer and for the design of future trials with chemotherapy plus biologics., (Copyright 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To study the prognostic value for overall survival of baseline assessment of functional status, comorbidity, and quality of life (QoL) in elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer treated with chemotherapy., Patients and Methods: Data from 566 patients enrolled onto the phase III randomized Multicenter Italian Lung Cancer in the Elderly Study (MILES) study were analyzed. Functional status was measured as activities of daily living (ADL) and instrumental ADL (IADL). The presence of comorbidity was assessed with a checklist of 33 items; items 29 and 30 of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) core questionnaire QLQ-C30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) were used to estimate QoL. ADL was dichotomized as none versus one or more dependency. For IADL and QoL, three categories were defined using first and third quartiles as cut points. Comorbidity was summarized using the Charlson scale. Analysis was performed by Cox model, and stratified by treatment arm., Results: Better values of baseline QoL (P = .0003) and IADL (P = .04) were significantly associated with better prognosis, whereas ADL (P = .44) and Charlson score (P = .66) had no prognostic value. Performance status 2 (P = .006) and a higher number of metastatic sites (P = .02) also predicted shorter overall survival., Conclusions: Pretreatment global QoL and IADL scores, but not ADL and comorbidity, have significant prognostic value for survival of elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer who were treated with chemotherapy. Using these scores in clinical practice might improve prognostic prediction for treatment planning.

Pain is a highly distressing symptom for patients with advanced cancer. WHO analgesic ladder is widely accepted as a guideline for its treatment. Our aim was to describe pain prevalence among patients diagnosed with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), impact of pain on quality of life (QoL) and adequacy of pain management. Data of 1021 Italian patients enrolled in three randomised trials of chemotherapy for NSCLC were pooled. QoL was assessed by EORTC QLQ-C30 and LC-13. Analgesic consumption during the 3 weeks following QoL assessment was recorded. Adequacy of pain management was evaluated by the Pain Management Index (PMI). Some pain was reported by 74% of patients (42% mild, 24% moderate and 7% severe); 50% stated pain was affecting daily activities (30% a little, 16% quite a bit, 3% very much). Bone metastases strongly affected presence of pain. Mean global QoL linearly decreased from 64.9 to 36.4 from patients without pain to those with severe pain (P<0.001). According to PMI, 616 out of 752 patients reporting pain (82%) received inadequate analgesic treatment. Bone metastases were associated with improved adequacy and worst pain with reduced adequacy at multivariate analysis. In conclusion, pain is common in patients with advanced NSCLC, significantly affects QoL, and is frequently undertreated. We recommend that: (i). pain self-assessment should be part of oncological clinical practice; (ii). pain control should be a primary goal in clinical practice and in clinical trials; (iii). physicians should receive more training in pain management; (iv). analgesic treatment deserves greater attention in protocols of anticancer treatment.

The present study describes supportive care (SC) in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), evaluating whether it is affected by concomitant chemotherapy, patient's performance status (PS) and age. Data of patients enrolled in three randomised trials of first-line chemotherapy, conducted between 1996 and 2001, were pooled. The analysis was limited to the first three cycles of treatment. Supportive care data were available for 1185 out of 1312 (90%) enrolled patients. Gastrointestinal drugs (45.7%), corticosteroids (33.4%) and analgesics (23.8%) were the most frequently observed categories. The mean number of drugs per patient was 2.43; 538 patients (45.4%) assumed three or more supportive drugs. Vinorelbine does not produce substantial variations in the SC pattern, while cisplatin-based treatment requires an overall higher number of supportive drugs, with higher use of antiemetics (41 vs 27%) and antianaemics (10 vs 4%). Patients with worse PS are more exposed to corticosteroids (42 vs 30%). Elderly patients require drugs against concomitant diseases significantly more than adults (20 vs 7%) and are less frequently exposed to antiemetics (12 vs 27%). In conclusion, polypharmacotherapy is a relevant issue in patients with advanced NSCLC. Chemotherapy does not remarkably affect the pattern of SC, except for some drugs against side effects. Elderly patients assume more drugs for concomitant diseases and receive less antiemetics than adults.

Background: Vinorelbine prolongs survival and improves quality of life in elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Some studies have also suggested that gemcitabine is well tolerated and effective in such patients. We compared the effectiveness and toxicity of the combination of vinorelbine plus gemcitabine with those of each drug given alone in an open-label, randomized phase III trial in elderly patients with advanced NSCLC., Methods: Patients aged 70 years and older, enrolled between December 1997 and November 2000, were randomly assigned to receive intravenous vinorelbine (30 mg/m(2) of body surface area), gemcitabine (1200 mg/m(2)), or vinorelbine (25 mg/m(2)) plus gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2)). All treatments were delivered on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks for a maximum of six cycles. The primary endpoint was survival. Survival curves were drawn using the Kaplan-Meier method and analyzed by the Mantel-Haenszel test. Secondary endpoints were quality of life and toxicity., Results: Of 698 patients available for intention-to-treat analysis, 233 were assigned to receive vinorelbine, 233 to gemcitabine, and 232 to vinorelbine plus gemcitabine. Compared with each single drug, the combination treatment did not improve survival. The hazard ratio of death for patients receiving the combination treatment was 1.17 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.95 to 1.44) that of patients receiving vinorelbine and 1.06 (95% CI = 0.86 to 1.29) that of patients receiving gemcitabine. Although quality of life was similar across the three treatment arms, the combination treatment was more toxic than the two drugs given singly., Conclusion: The combination of vinorelbine plus gemcitabine is not more effective than single-agent vinorelbine or gemcitabine in the treatment of elderly patients with advanced NSCLC.

A phase II study in patients with stage IIIB/IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) was carried out to evaluate the clinical activity and toxicity of the chemotherapeutic combination of gemcitabine+vinorelbine (GEM/VNR). Forty-five patients (40 male, 5 female) with a median age of 67 years (range 37-73) and a median ECOG performance status of 1 (range 0-2) were enrolled into the trial. Twenty patients had stage IIIB (two positive supraclavicular nodes and 20 cytologically positive pleural effusion), and 25 had stage IV NSCLC. GEM 1000 mg/m(2) diluted in 250 cc(3) of normal saline was administered iv on days 1, 8, and 15, while VNR was given 30 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 every 4 weeks. The median number of courses/patient was 4 (range 3-7). According to an intent-to-treat analysis 2 (4%) patients had a complete response and 16 (36%; 95% CL 22-52%) had a partial response for an overall response rate of 40% (95% CL 26-56%). Twelve (27%) patients had stable disease and 15 (33%) were considered as treatment failures. Median overall survival of the whole series was 8+ months with 33% of patients alive at 1 year. Toxicity was generally mild. WHO grade 3-4 neutropenia was recorded in 22% of cases, grade 1-3 liver toxicity in 6% of patients and neutropenia-unrelated fever in 9%. This multicentre phase II study suggests that the GEM/VNR combination regimen is an active and well tolerated regimen in patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC. Larger studies comparing cisplatin-based regimens to new schedules without cisplatin are warranted.

Background: Following the demonstration that vinorelbine improves survival and quality of life compared with best supportive care in elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), we started the three-arm prospective Multicenter Italian Lung Cancer in the Elderly Study (MILES) trial of vinorelbine, gemcitabine and gemcitabine + vinorelbine., Design: Within the randomized phase 3 trial, pilot single-stage phase 2 studies were planned for gemcitabine and for gemcitabine + vinorelbine. Eligible patients are aged 70 or more, with stage IV or IIIb (with metastatic supraclavear nodes or malignant pleural effusion) NSCLC. Single-agent gemcitabine is given at 1200 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8; in the combination, gemcitabine is given at 1000 mg/m(2) and vinorelbine at 25 mg/m(2), both on days 1 and 8, every 3 weeks., Results: As planned 49 patients were enrolled in each group. Median age was 74 in both groups. Two-thirds of patients had stage IV disease. The response rate was 18.4% (95% exact CI 8.8-32.0) with both treatments. With single-agent gemcitabine main toxicities were grade 4 thrombocytopenia and grade 2 hepatic toxicity, in one patient each, and grade 2 pulmonary toxicity in two patients. With gemcitabine + vinorelbine combination there were grade 4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia (one patient each), grade 3 anemia requiring red blood cell transfusion (two patients), and grade 4 fever in two patients. Four patients, with severe cardiac comorbidities, suffered grade 3 heart toxicity with atrial flutter or fibrillation, followed by congestive heart failure responsive to treatment., Conclusion: Both single-agent gemcitabine and the gemcitabine + vinorelbine combination are sufficiently active and tolerable to allow continuation of the MILES study.