Search

Alain Vergnenègre1, Joshua A Ray2, Christos Chouaid3, Francesco Grossi4, Helge G Bischoff5, David F Heigener6, Stefan Walzer21Department of Pneumology, Hôpital du Cluzeau, Limoges, France; 2Global Health Economics and Strategic Pricing, F Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland; 3Respiratory Service, Hôpital Saint Antoine, Paris, France; 4Lung Cancer Unit, National Institute for Cancer Research, Genoa, Italy; 5Thoracic Oncology, Onkologie Thoraxklinik Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; 6Department of Thoracic Oncology, Krankenhaus Großhansdorf, Großhansdorf, GermanyBackground: Platinum-doublet, first-line treatment of locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is limited to 4–6 cycles. An alternative strategy used to prolong the duration of first-line treatment and extend survival in metastatic NSCLC is first-line maintenance therapy. Erlotinib was approved for first-line maintenance in a stable disease population following results from a randomized, controlled Phase III trial comparing erlotinib with best supportive care. We aimed to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness of erlotinib 150 mg/day versus best supportive care when used as first-line maintenance therapy for patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC and stable disease.Methods: An economic decision model was developed using patient-level data for progression-free survival and overall survival from the SATURN (SequentiAl Tarceva in UnResectable NSCLC) study. An area under the curve model was developed; all patients entered the model in the progression-free survival health state and, after each month, moved to progression or death. A time horizon of 5 years was used. The model was conducted from the perspective of national health care payers in France, Germany, and Italy. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.Results: Treatment with erlotinib in first-line maintenance resulted in a mean life expectancy of 1.39 years in all countries, compared with a mean 1.11 years with best supportive care, which represents 0.28 life-years (3.4 life-months) gained with erlotinib versus best supportive care. In the base-case analysis, the cost per life-year gained was €39,783, €46,931, and €27,885 in France, Germany, and Italy, respectively.Conclusion: Erlotinib is a cost-effective treatment option when used as first-line maintenance therapy for locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC.Keywords: non-small cell lung cancer, cost-effectiveness, first-line maintenance, erlotinib, lung cancer

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically on the based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported. We present 5-year outcomes from the phase 3 KEYNOTE-189 study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02578680). Eligible patients with previously untreated metastatic nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer without EGFR/ALK alterations were randomly assigned 2:1 to pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo once every 3 weeks for up to 35 cycles with pemetrexed and investigator's choice of carboplatin/cisplatin for four cycles, followed by maintenance pemetrexed until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary end points were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Among 616 randomly assigned patients (n = 410, pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum; n = 206, placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum), median time from random assignment to data cutoff (March 8, 2022) was 64.6 (range, 60.1-72.4) months. Hazard ratio (95% CI) for OS was 0.60 (0.50 to 0.72) and PFS was 0.50 (0.42 to 0.60) for pembrolizumab plus platinum-pemetrexed versus placebo plus platinum-pemetrexed. 5-year OS rates were 19.4% versus 11.3%. Toxicity was manageable. Among 57 patients who completed 35 cycles of pembrolizumab, objective response rate was 86.0% and 3-year OS rate after completing 35 cycles (approximately 5 years after random assignment) was 71.9%. Pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum maintained OS and PFS benefits versus placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum, regardless of programmed cell death ligand-1 expression. These data continue to support pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum as a standard of care in previously untreated metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer without EGFR/ALK alterations.

Background: In the phase III KEYNOTE-189 study (NCT02578680), pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed and platinum-based chemotherapy (pemetrexed-platinum) significantly improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with previously untreated metastatic nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) versus placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum. We report updated efficacy outcomes from the protocol-specified final analysis, including outcomes in patients who crossed over to pembrolizumab from pemetrexed-platinum and in patients who completed 35 cycles (∼2 years) of pembrolizumab., Patients and Methods: Eligible patients were randomized 2 : 1 to receive pembrolizumab 200 mg (n = 410) or placebo (n = 206) every 3 weeks (for up to 35 cycles, ∼2 years) plus four cycles of pemetrexed (500 mg/m 2 ) and investigators' choice of cisplatin (75 mg/m 2 ) or carboplatin (area under the curve 5 mg·min/ml) every 3 weeks, followed by pemetrexed until progression. Patients assigned to placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum could cross over to pembrolizumab upon progression if eligibility criteria were met. The primary endpoints were OS and PFS., Results: After a median follow-up of 31.0 months, pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum continued to improve OS [hazard ratio (HR), 0.56; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.46-0.69] and PFS (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.41-0.59) over placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum regardless of programmed death-ligand 1 expression. Objective response rate (ORR) (48.3% versus 19.9%) and time to second/subsequent tumor progression on next-line treatment (PFS2; HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.41-0.61) were improved in patients who received pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum. Eighty-four patients (40.8%) from the placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum group crossed over to pembrolizumab on-study. Grade 3-5 adverse events occurred in 72.1% of patients receiving pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum and 66.8% of patients receiving placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum. Fifty-six patients completed 35 cycles (∼2 years) of pembrolizumab; ORR was 85.7% and 53 (94.6%) were alive at data cut-off., Conclusions: Pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum continued to show improved efficacy outcomes compared with placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum, with manageable toxicity. These findings support first-line pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum in patients with previously untreated metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC., Competing Interests: Disclosure DR-A: Honoraria for lectures and consulting from BMS, MSD, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Roche, Novartis, and Pfizer. Study funding to institution from MSD. SFP: Study funding to institution from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genentech, Incyte, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pfizer, Novartis, Seattle Genetics, Actuate, and Vyriad. Consulting support to the institution from Bristol-Myers Squibb. MJH: Study funding to institution from MSD. SG: Received personal fees from Merck, AstraZeneca, Genentech/Roche, Takeda/Ariad, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novocure, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AbbVie, Xcovery, Janssen, Pfizer, and Jazz Pharmaceuticals. Study funding to institution from MSD. Research funding from Merck. EE: Study funding to institution from MSD. EF: Received personal fees as an advisor, consultant, and/or speaker from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Blueprint Medicines, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Guardant Health, Janssen, Medscape, Merck KGaA, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Takeda, Touchtime, BerGenBio, and Samsung; and is an independent member of the Board for Grífols. Study funding to institution from MSD. GS: Study funding to institution from MSD. FdA: Study funding to institution from MSD. MD: Received personal fees as an advisor and/or lecturer from AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, MSD, Pfizer, and Roche. Study funding to institution from MSD. SYC: Study funding to institution from MSD. HGB: Study funding to institution from MSD. NP: Received grants, personal fees, and/or honoraria as an advisor from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, NovellusDx, Foundation Medicine, and Guardant360. Study funding to institution from MSD. MR: Received personal fees/honoraria for consultancy and lectures from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Merck, MSD, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, AbbVie, Roche, and Novartis. Study funding to institution from MSD. RH: Received personal fees for advisory boards from MSD, AstraZeneca, BMS, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Oncosec, Pfizer, Roche, and Seagen; and speaker honoraria from MSD, Novartis, and Roche. Study funding to institution from MSD. EBG: Received grants and research support to the institution during the conduct of this study from Merck; has received grants from AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Genentech, Merck, Novartis, Dynavax, Mirati Therapeutics, and Iovance Biotherapeutics; and payment for advisory boards/steering committees from Dracen Pharmaceuticals, EMD Serono, and Novartis. Study funding to institution from MSD. MB: Received grants and non-financial support from Merck Sharp & Dohme during the conduct of this study; has received grants and non-financial support from AstraZeneca and Genentech/Roche; and grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Amgen, Pfizer, and Novartis. Study funding to institution from MSD. TK: Received lecture fees, honoraria, or other fees from MSD, Ono, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Boehringer Ingelheim; and research funds from MSD, AstraZeneca, Takeda, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Novartis. Study funding to institution from MSD. JY: Employee of Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA. MCP: Employee of Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA. FS: Employee of Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA. MCG: Received grants and personal fees during the conduct of this study from MSD; has received grants and personal fees for clinical trials from AstraZeneca, Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roche, Pfizer, Celgene, Bayer, and MSD; grants from Tiziana Life Sciences, Clovis, Merck Serono, GlaxoSmithKline, and Spectrum Pharmaceuticals; and personal fees from Eli Lilly, Boehringer Ingelheim, Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Incyte, Inivata, Takeda, and Sanofi-Aventis. Study funding to institution from MSD., (Copyright © 2021 European Society for Medical Oncology. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose The primary objective was to determine the recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) of checkpoint kinase 1 inhibitor, prexasertib, in combination with the p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase inhibitor, ralimetinib, which may be safely administered to patients with advanced cancer. Methods This Phase 1, nonrandomized, open-label, dose-escalation study of prexasertib+ralimetinib included patients with advanced and/or metastatic cancer, followed by a planned cohort expansion in patients with colorectal or non-small-cell lung cancer with KRAS and/or BRAF mutations. Intravenous prexasertib was administered at 60 mg/m 2 (days 1 and 15 of a 28-day cycle), together with oral ralimetinib every 12 h (days 1 to 14 at 100 mg [Cohort 1, n = 3] or 200 mg [Cohort 2, n = 6]). Dose escalations for each agent were planned using a model-based 3 + 3 escalation paradigm. Safety was assessed using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v4.0X. Tumor response was determined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1. Results Nine patients were treated; 3 experienced dose-limiting toxicities, all in Cohort 2, prohibiting further dose escalation. The most common ≥Grade 3 adverse event was neutrophil count decreased; other reported ≥Grade 3 hematological toxicities included febrile neutropenia and anemia. The pharmacokinetics of prexasertib+ralimetinib was comparable to the monotherapy population profile for each agent. One patient achieved a best overall response of stable disease (for 2 cycles); there were no complete/partial responses. Conclusions This study did not achieve its primary objective of establishing an RP2D of combination prexasertib + ralimetinib that could be safely administered to patients with advanced cancer.

Purpose: In KEYNOTE-189, first-line pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum significantly improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) compared with placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum in patients with metastatic nonsquamous non‒small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), irrespective of tumor programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. We report an updated analysis from KEYNOTE-189 (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02578680)., Methods: Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive pemetrexed and platinum plus pembrolizumab (n = 410) or placebo (n = 206) every 3 weeks for 4 cycles, then pemetrexed maintenance plus pembrolizumab or placebo for up to a total of 35 cycles. Eligible patients with disease progression in the placebo-combination group could cross over to pembrolizumab monotherapy. Response was assessed per RECIST (version 1.1) by central review. No alpha was assigned to this updated analysis., Results: As of September 21, 2018 (median follow-up, 23.1 months), the updated median (95% CI) OS was 22.0 (19.5 to 25.2) months in the pembrolizumab-combination group versus 10.7 (8.7 to 13.6) months in the placebo-combination group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.56; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.70]). Median (95% CI) PFS was 9.0 (8.1 to 9.9) months and 4.9 (4.7 to 5.5) months, respectively (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.58). Median (95% CI) time from randomization to objective tumor progression on next-line treatment or death from any cause, whichever occurred first (progression-free-survival-2; PFS-2) was 17.0 (15.1 to 19.4) months and 9.0 (7.6 to 10.4) months, respectively (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.59). OS and PFS benefits with pembrolizumab were observed regardless of PD-L1 expression or presence of liver/brain metastases. Incidence of grade 3-5 adverse events was similar in the pembrolizumab-combination (71.9%) and placebo-combination (66.8%) groups., Conclusion: First-line pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum continued to demonstrate substantially improved OS and PFS in metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC, regardless of PD-L1 expression or liver/brain metastases, with manageable safety and tolerability.

Background: Pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum led to superior overall survival and progression-free survival, and a higher proportion of patients with a confirmed complete or partial response over placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum in the KEYNOTE-189 study. We aimed to evaluate prespecified exploratory patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients in KEYNOTE-189., Methods: In the multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 KEYNOTE-189 study done at 126 cancer centres in 16 countries, eligible patients aged 18 years or older with histologically or cytologically confirmed metastatic non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer without sensitising EGFR or ALK alterations, measurable disease as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (version 1.1), and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive intravenous pembrolizumab (200 mg) or saline placebo every 3 weeks for up to 2 years (35 cycles); all patients received four cycles of intravenous pemetrexed (500 mg/m 2 ) with carboplatin (5 mg/mL per min) or cisplatin (75 mg/m 2 ; investigator's choice) every 3 weeks for four cycles, followed by pemetrexed maintenance therapy every 3 weeks. Permuted block randomisation (block size six) was done with an interactive voice-response system and stratified by PD-L1 expression, choice of platinum, and smoking status. Patients, investigators, and other study personnel were unaware of treatment assignment. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and Lung Cancer 13 (QLQ-LC13) were administered at cycles 1-5, every three cycles thereafter during year 1, and every four cycles during years 2-3. The primary endpoints (overall survival and progression-free survival) have been published previously. Key PRO endpoints were change from baseline to week 12 (during chemotherapy) and week 21 (following chemotherapy) in QLQ-C30 global health status/quality of life (GHS/QOL) score, and time to deterioration in cough, chest pain, or dyspnoea. PROs were analysed in all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study medication and who completed at least one PRO assessment, and the results are provided with two-sided, nominal p values. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02578680., Findings: Between Feb 26, 2016, and March 6, 2017, 616 patients were enrolled; median follow-up was 10·5 months (range 0·2-20·4) as of data cutoff on Nov 8, 2017. 402 (99%) of 405 patients in the pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum group and 200 (99%) of 202 patients in the placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum-treated group completed at least one PRO assessment. At baseline, 359 (89%) of 402 patients in the pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum group and 180 (90%) of 200 in the placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum group were compliant with QLQ-C30; at week 12, 319 (90%) of 354 and 149 (89%) of 167 patients were compliant, respectively; and at week 21, 249 (76%) of 326 and 91 (64%) of 143 patients were compliant, respectively. From baseline to week 12, GHS/QOL scores were maintained with both pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum (least-squares mean change: 1·0 point [95% CI -1·3 to 3·2] increase) and placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum (-2·6 points [-5·8 to 0·5] decrease; between-group difference: 3·6 points [-0·1 to 7·2]; p=0·053). From baseline to week 21, GHS/QOL scores were better maintained with pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum (least-squares mean change: 1·3 points [95% CI -1·2 to 3·6] increase) than with placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum (-4·0 points [-7·7 to -0·3] decrease; between-group difference: 5·3 points [1·1 to 9·5]; p=0·014). Median time to deterioration in cough, chest pain, or dyspnoea was not reached (95% CI 10·2 months to not reached) with pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum, and was 7·0 months (4·8 months to not reached) with placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum (hazard ratio 0·81 [95% CI 0·60-1·09], p=0·16)., Interpretation: The addition of pembrolizumab to standard chemotherapy maintained GHS/QOL, with improved GHS/QOL scores at week 21 in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy group compared with the placebo plus chemotherapy group. These data further support use of pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum as first-line therapy for patients with metastatic non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer., Funding: Merck Sharp & Dohme., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: First-line therapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that lacks targetable mutations is platinum-based chemotherapy. Among patients with a tumor proportion score for programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) of 50% or greater, pembrolizumab has replaced cytotoxic chemotherapy as the first-line treatment of choice. The addition of pembrolizumab to chemotherapy resulted in significantly higher rates of response and longer progression-free survival than chemotherapy alone in a phase 2 trial., Methods: In this double-blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned (in a 2:1 ratio) 616 patients with metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC without sensitizing EGFR or ALK mutations who had received no previous treatment for metastatic disease to receive pemetrexed and a platinum-based drug plus either 200 mg of pembrolizumab or placebo every 3 weeks for 4 cycles, followed by pembrolizumab or placebo for up to a total of 35 cycles plus pemetrexed maintenance therapy. Crossover to pembrolizumab monotherapy was permitted among the patients in the placebo-combination group who had verified disease progression. The primary end points were overall survival and progression-free survival, as assessed by blinded, independent central radiologic review., Results: After a median follow-up of 10.5 months, the estimated rate of overall survival at 12 months was 69.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 64.1 to 73.8) in the pembrolizumab-combination group versus 49.4% (95% CI, 42.1 to 56.2) in the placebo-combination group (hazard ratio for death, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.64; P<0.001). Improvement in overall survival was seen across all PD-L1 categories that were evaluated. Median progression-free survival was 8.8 months (95% CI, 7.6 to 9.2) in the pembrolizumab-combination group and 4.9 months (95% CI, 4.7 to 5.5) in the placebo-combination group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.64; P<0.001). Adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 67.2% of the patients in the pembrolizumab-combination group and in 65.8% of those in the placebo-combination group., Conclusions: In patients with previously untreated metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC without EGFR or ALK mutations, the addition of pembrolizumab to standard chemotherapy of pemetrexed and a platinum-based drug resulted in significantly longer overall survival and progression-free survival than chemotherapy alone. (Funded by Merck; KEYNOTE-189 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02578680 .).

Background: In selected patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) the EGFR (epidermal growth factor receptor) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) gefitinib (IRESSA) shows response rates of ≥ 70% and a significant prolongation of progression free survival (PFS). However, cogent biomarkers predicting long-term response to EGFR-TKIs are yet lacking. Cancer stem-like cells (CSC) are thought to play a pivotal role in tumor regeneration and appear to be influenced by the EGFR-pathway. This makes them a promising candidate for predicting long-term response to EGFR-TKIs., Materials and Methods: We analyzed pre-therapeutic tissue specimens of a rare and specific subset of previously treated German patients with advanced NSCLC who experienced ≥ 3 year response to gefitinib within the International IRESSA EAP. 11/20 identified long-term responders (LTRs) had appropriate tissue specimens available. Those were analyzed for EGFR and k-ras (Kirsten rat sarcoma) mutations, EGFR and c-met (met proto-oncogene) amplifications and protein expression of EGFR, E-cadherin/vimentin and the CSC antigens CD133 and BCRP1 (breast cancer resistance protein 1). The results were compared to primary resistant patients (RPs) and intermediate responders (IRs) showing a median response of 8.6 months., Results: Each group consisted of 6 women and 5 men, with 1 squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and 10 adenocarcinoma (AC). Along the LTRs, all but the SCC had EGFR mutations, whereas the RPs had no EGFR, but k-ras mutations in 5/11 cases. 8/11 IRs had EGFR and 3/11 k-ras mutations, of which 2 occurred concomitantly. One patient of each group had an EGFR and/or c-met amplification. EGFR and E-cadherin/vimentin expression was not different between the groups, whereas CD133 was expressed only in 4/10 LTRs and BCRP1 predominantly in responders. The LTRs showed a substantially longer mean PFS to previous therapies, a substantially lower number of metastatic sites and almost exclusively pulmonary or pleural metastasis., Conclusion: LTRs display established properties of EGFR-TKI responders. Antigens characterizing CSC might identify a fraction of LTRs and matter of interest for further evaluation., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Bevacizumab in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy is associated with increased survival outcomes compared to chemotherapy alone in patients with non-squamous metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC). The objective of this study was to estimate potential economic benefits from a societal perspective in patients returning to work when treated with bevacizumab-based combination therapy. These economic benefits were assessed with respect to reduced productivity losses and described in terms of per patient cost savings. The analysis was conducted for France, Germany, Italy and Spain. Clinical outcomes in terms of progression-free survival (PFS) were based on two phase III clinical trials (E4599 and AVAiL) comparing bevacizumab + chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy alone. Potential cost savings due to reduction in productivity losses were assessed in progression-free patients who return back to work (human capital approach). It was assumed that 20% of all progression-free patients with performance status 0 or 1 and below 55 years of age would return back to work after the induction therapy maintaining their prior employment status (60% part-time, 40% full-time). Savings were calculated over 1 and 1.5 year time horizons. Mean savings, per progression-free patient ranged from 12,401 euro in Spain at year 1 to 39,001 euro in France at year 1.5. Respective findings proved to be fairly sensitive to the change of employment patterns and labour costs. This analysis shows that bevacizumab-based treatment can result in substantial cost savings in progression-free patients with mNSCLC., (Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The new targeted agent bevacizumab in combination with cisplatin and gemcitabine, and a third-generation chemotherapy pemetrexed in combination with cisplatin, have been approved as first-line treatment for patients with advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). An indirect comparison between bevacizumab plus cisplatin and gemcitabine and pemetrexed plus cisplatin showed that bevacizumab (plus cisplatin and gemcitabine) achieved a favourable hazard ratio in terms of progression-free survival among patients with advanced NSCLC. This analysis aimed to compare the monthly cost of these treatments for advanced non-squamous NSCLC in Italy and Germany. The comparison used country specific cost data and adopted the payer perspective in Italy and Germany. The monthly cost of bevacizumab, including administration cost, as a single agent was 1,509 euro and 2,564 euro less than pemetrexed in Italy and Germany, respectively. The monthly treatment cost of bevacizumab plus cisplatin and gemcitabine was 1,001 euro and 446 euro less than pemetrexed plus gemcitabine in Italy and Germany, respectively. Results indicate that clinical benefits with bevacizumab plus cisplatin and gemcitabine therapy are achieved at a lower monthly cost than pemetrexed plus gemcitabine doublet therapy. Therefore, from a budget perspective, bevacizumab should be considered as a preferred targeted treatment of choice for advanced non-squamous NSCLC., (Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The new targeted agent bevacizumab in combination with cisplatin and gemcitabine, and a third generation chemotherapy, pemetrexed, combined with cisplatin, are approved as first-line treatment for patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). As no head-to-head comparison of these treatments exists, this study aimed to compare the effectiveness of the two treatments using an indirect treatment comparison approach. An indirect comparison on progression-free survival (PFS) was performed for two relevant randomised controlled trials using a well-accepted adjusted indirect comparison method. The results were used in a statistical disease model (Markov model) to extrapolate the long-term effectiveness of the two treatments. A hazard ratio of 0.83 for PFS for bevacizumab plus cisplatin and gemcitabine, was calculated suggesting that this treatment is associated with a 17% lower risk of disease progression and death compared with pemetrexed plus cisplatin treatment. The Markov model predicted that bevacizumab plus cisplatin and gemcitabine resulted in 2.5 months additional PFS and overall survival compared with pemetrexed plus cisplatin. Based on this analysis bevacizumab plus cisplatin and gemcitabine is more effective than pemetrexed plus cisplatin for patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC and should be considered as one of the preferred targeted treatments of choice for these patients., (Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The ACTION (Assessment of Cost and ouTcomes of chemotherapy In an Observational setting) study investigated associations between chemotherapy, patient/disease characteristics and outcomes in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients in clinical practice., Research Design and Methods: Chemonaïve NSCLC patients from five European countries were observed for 18 months from initiation of first-line chemotherapy; care was at the physician's discretion., Main Outcome Measures: Survival and associated prognostic factors were estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods and a Cox proportional hazards model, respectively. Cluster analyses of baseline patient characteristics were also performed. Toxicity data were not considered in these analyses., Results: A total of 975 eligible patients with NSCLC (Stage IIIb/IV) were enrolled and provided baseline and response data; cluster analysis was performed on 829 patients and survival data were available from 906 patients. In first-line treatment, a 39.8% response rate, a 39.5% 1-year survival rate and unadjusted median survival of 9.3 months were observed. Prognostic factors for survival included performance status (PS), number of metastatic organs, gender and age. Five patient clusters were identified, highlighting patient heterogeneity in terms of baseline condition and age. PS was maintained or improved throughout first-line and second-line chemotherapy in half the patients receiving these treatments., Conclusions: ACTION provides valuable information about patient population, disease characteristics, treatment choices, prescribing patterns and outcomes in routine clinical practice in advanced NSCLC in Europe. Our findings suggest that maintenance of PS after first and subsequent lines of chemotherapy, and survival rates may both be higher than previously anticipated. Our results also showed an association between age and survival, which suggests that age should not exclude patients from receiving chemotherapy if they meet all other eligibility criteria.

Purpose: This trial of the German High-Grade Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma Study Group compares the use of high-dose therapy (HDT) as part of primary treatment with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) plus etoposide followed by involved-field (IF) radiotherapy in a randomized, multicenter, phase III study., Patients and Methods: Three hundred twelve patients with "aggressive" non-Hodgkin's lymphoma aged

Positron emission tomography (PET) with fluor-18-labeled deoxyglucose (FDG) enables metabolically oriented imaging of intrapulmonary lesions. PET is currently not used for the detection of lung metastases, but for further diagnostic differentiation of nodules that have already been detected. The diagnostic accuracy of FDG-PET is currently dependent on the size of the metastatic lesions and the uptake intensity. Significantly increased FDG uptake is strongly suggestive of malignant disease whatever the size of lesion concerned. Differentiation of a solitary metastasis from a primary lung tumor is not possible. Slightly elevated FDG uptake can also be found in tuberculosis, sarcoidosis and other granulomatous or inflammatory processes. Exclusion of metastatic disease with PET is currently only reliably possible for lesions larger than 2.0 cm in diameter, owing to respiratory motion and effects of partial volume.

Rapid gradient echo sequences enable MR imaging (MRI) of pulmonary metastases with acquisition times of less than 1 s per slice. By optimization of this technique, density, T1- and T2-weighted images can be obtained (FLASH: TR 6.5 ms, TE2 = 3 ms, alpha = 10 degrees; T1w-Turbo-FLASH: TI 200 ms, TR 6.5 ms, TE2 = 3 ms, alpha = 10 degrees; T2w-Turbo-FLASH: TE1 = 50 ms, TR = 6.5 ms, TE2 = 3.5 ms; alpha = 10 degrees). In a prospective study 25 patients in whom pulmonary metastases were suspected were examined with three techniques in all three anatomical planes prior to surgery. All lung metastases revealed a high signal intensity on the FLASH as well as the T2w-Turbo-FLASH images, whereas vascular structures revealed a low signal intensity on the T2-weighted Turbo-FLASH images. Analysis regarding detection and correct number of lung metastases per patient with MRI compared with the histology revealed (n = 25): sensitivity of 82%, specificity 67%, positive predictive value of 95% and negative predictive value of 33%. While MRI does not currently have any diagnostic advantages over CT, the excellent differentiation of parenchymal lesions and vascular structures without the use of contrast medium and the variability of imaging planes are significant methodological advantages.

We report on a 27-year-old female developing acute thoracic inlet obstruction by bilateral pulmonary cysts which arose from pulmonary lymphangioleiomyomatosis and increased with respiratory treatment. Bilateral synchronous bullectomy via median sternotomy was necessary to resolve the life-threatening condition. The most frequent differential diagnoses are tension pneumothorax and pericardial tamponade. Although this case of thoracic inlet obstruction was caused by a rare disease it may serve to recall the therapeutic problems encountered in bullous pulmonary lesions under tension, especially regarding acute volume expansion due to one-way valve mechanism during respiratory treatment or general anaesthesia.