Search

PURPOSE The irreversible ErbB family tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) afatinib plus the EGFR monoclonal antibody cetuximab was previously shown to overcome resistance to EGFR TKIs. We studied whether the combination of afatinib plus cetuximab compared with afatinib alone would improve progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with treatment-naive EGFR-mutant non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) by preventing or delaying resistance. METHODS Patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC without prior treatment of advanced disease were enrolled in this phase II, multicenter trial and randomly assigned to receive afatinib 40 mg orally daily plus cetuximab 500 mg/m2 intravenously every 2 weeks or afatinib alone. The primary end point was PFS. RESULTS Between March 25, 2015 and April 23, 2018, 174 patients were randomly assigned, and 168 (83 on afatinib + cetuximab and 85 on afatinib) were eligible. There was no improvement in PFS in patients receiving afatinib plus cetuximab compared with afatinib alone (hazard ratio [HR], 1.01; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.43; P = .94; median, 11.9 months v 13.4 months). Similarly, there was no difference in response rate (67% v 74%; P = .38) or overall survival (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.50 to 1.36; P = .44). Toxicity was greater with the combination: grade ≥ 3 adverse events related to treatment occurred in 72% of patients receiving afatinib plus cetuximab compared with 40% of those receiving afatinib alone, most commonly rash and diarrhea. Dose reductions were more common in patients receiving the combination, and 30% of patients in this arm discontinued cetuximab due to toxicity. At interim analysis, there was insufficient evidence to support continued accrual, and the trial was closed. CONCLUSIONS The addition of cetuximab to afatinib did not improve outcomes in previously untreated EGFR-mutant NSCLC, despite recognized activity in the acquired resistance setting.

PURPOSE: The irreversible ErbB family tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) afatinib plus the EGFR monoclonal antibody cetuximab was previously shown to overcome resistance to EGFR TKIs. We studied whether the combination of afatinib plus cetuximab compared with afatinib alone would improve progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with treatment-naive EGFR-mutant non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) by preventing or delaying resistance. METHODS: Patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC without prior treatment of advanced disease were enrolled in this phase II, multicenter trial and randomly assigned to receive afatinib 40 mg orally daily plus cetuximab 500 mg/m(2) intravenously every 2 weeks or afatinib alone. The primary end point was PFS. RESULTS: Between March 25, 2015 and April 23, 2018, 174 patients were randomly assigned, and 168 (83 on afatinib + cetuximab and 85 on afatinib) were eligible. There was no improvement in PFS in patients receiving afatinib plus cetuximab compared with afatinib alone (hazard ratio [HR], 1.01; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.43; P = .94; median, 11.9 months v 13.4 months). Similarly, there was no difference in response rate (67% v 74%; P = .38) or overall survival (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.50 to 1.36; P = .44). Toxicity was greater with the combination: grade ≥ 3 adverse events related to treatment occurred in 72% of patients receiving afatinib plus cetuximab compared with 40% of those receiving afatinib alone, most commonly rash and diarrhea. Dose reductions were more common in patients receiving the combination, and 30% of patients in this arm discontinued cetuximab due to toxicity. At interim analysis, there was insufficient evidence to support continued accrual, and the trial was closed. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of cetuximab to afatinib did not improve outcomes in previously untreated EGFR-mutant NSCLC, despite recognized activity in the acquired resistance setting.

Summary Background We did a phase 2 trial of pembrolizumab in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) or melanoma with untreated brain metastases to determine the activity of PD-1 blockade in the CNS. Interim results were previously published, and we now report an updated analysis of the full NSCLC cohort. Methods This was an open-label, phase 2 study of patients from the Yale Cancer Center (CT, USA). Eligible patients were at least 18 years of age with stage IV NSCLC with at least one brain metastasis 5–20 mm in size, not previously treated or progressing after previous radiotherapy, no neurological symptoms or corticosteroid requirement, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status less than two. Modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST) criteria was used to evaluate CNS disease; systemic disease was not required for participation. Patients were treated with pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks. Patients were in two cohorts: cohort 1 was for those with PD-L1 expression of at least 1% and cohort 2 was patients with PD-L1 less than 1% or unevaluable. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving a brain metastasis response (partial response or complete response, according to mRECIST). All treated patients were analysed for response and safety endpoints. This study is closed to accrual and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02085070 . Findings Between March 31, 2014, and May 21, 2018, 42 patients were treated. Median follow-up was 8·3 months (IQR 4·5–26·2). 11 (29·7% [95% CI 15·9–47·0]) of 37 patients in cohort 1 had a brain metastasis response. There were no responses in cohort 2. Grade 3–4 adverse events related to treatment included two patients with pneumonitis, and one each with constitutional symptoms, colitis, adrenal insufficiency, hyperglycaemia, and hypokalaemia. Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in six (14%) of 42 patients and were pneumonitis (n=2), acute kidney injury, colitis, hypokalaemia, and adrenal insufficiency (n=1 each). There were no treatment-related deaths. Interpretation Pembrolizumab has activity in brain metastases from NSCLC with PD-L1 expression at least 1% and is safe in selected patients with untreated brain metastases. Further investigation of immunotherapy in patients with CNS disease from NSCLC is warranted. Funding Merck and the Yale Cancer Center.

This study sought to define the role of first-line platinum-based doublet chemotherapy in older patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).We analyzed three first-line NSCLC trials: CALGB 9730, CALGB 30203, and CALGB 30801, which tested carboplatin and paclitaxel; carboplatin and gemcitabine; and carboplatin with either pemetrexed or gemcitabine, respectively. Overall survival was the primary endpoint. Age-based comparisons with a cutpoint of 65 years were performed with Cox proportional hazards models with adjustments for sex, tumor histology, cancer stage, chemotherapy, and smoking history and after stratifying by performance score. Secondary endpoints were grade 3-5 adverse events, chemotherapy cycles completed, and whether toxicity prompted chemotherapy discontinuation.730 patients were included; 337 (46%) were 65+ years of age. No statistically significant difference in survival was observed for older (≥65) versus younger patients (HR = 1.096; 95% CI = (0.94, 1.28); p = 0.25). A trend emerged with increased odds of a grade 3-5 adverse event for patients ≥65 years versus65 years (OR = 1.52; 95% CI = (0.99, 2.31); p = 0.05). The proportion of completed chemotherapy cycles was marginally lower in older patients (difference = -5%; 95% CI = (-9, 0.2); p = 0.06) for those ≥65 years versus65 years, but no statistically significant difference occurred in the rate of chemotherapy discontinuation for toxicity (OR = 1.4; 95% CI = (0.85, 2.19); p = 0.21) for patients ≥65 years versus65 years. A cutpoint of 70 years yielded similar results.These findings support carboplatin doublet-based chemotherapy in select older patients with advanced NSCLC.

The NCCN Guidelines for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) address all aspects of management for NSCLC. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on recent updates to the targeted therapy and immunotherapy sections in the NCCN Guidelines. For the 2018 update, a new section on biomarkers was added.

BACKGROUND: KRAS mutations are identified in approximately 25% of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cases and are associated with resistance to currently available targeted therapies. The MET oncogene may be implicated in malignant progression of KRAS-mutant tumors. In a pre-specified subset analysis of KRAS mutant cancers in an earlier phase 2 study of erlotinib plus the oral MET inhibitor tivantinib, combination therapy was associated with substantial clinical benefit compared to erlotinib alone (progression-free survival [PFS] HR 0.18; P

This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) focuses on targeted therapies and immunotherapies for metastatic NSCLC, because therapeutic recommendations are rapidly changing for metastatic disease. For example, new recommendations were added for atezolizumab, ceritinib, osimertinib, and pembrolizumab for the 2017 updates.

Purpose: Many US academic centers have acquired community practices to expand their clinical care and research footprint. The objective of this assessment was to determine whether the acquisition and integration of community oncology practices by Yale/Smilow Cancer Hospital improved outcomes in quality of care, disease team integration, clinical trial accrual, and patient satisfaction at network practice sites. Methods: We evaluated quality of care by testing the hypothesis that core Quality Oncology Practice Initiative measures at network sites that were acquired in 2012 were significantly different after their 2016 integration into the network. Clinical and research integration were measured using the number of tumor board case presentations and total accruals in clinical trials. We used Press-Ganey scores to measure patient satisfaction pre- and postintegration. Results: Mean Quality Oncology Practice Initiative scores at Smilow Care Centers were significantly higher in 2016 than in 2012 for core measures related to improvement in tumor staging ( z = 1.33; P < .05), signed consent and documentation plans for antineoplastic treatment ( z = 2.69; P < .01; and z = 2.36; P < .05, respectively), and appropriately quantifying and addressing pain during office visits ( z = 2.95; P < .05; and z = 3.1; P < .01, respectively). A total of 493 cases were presented by care center physicians at the tumor board in 2017 compared with 45 presented in 2013. Compared with 2012, Smilow Care Center clinical trial accrual increased from 25 to 170 patients in 2017. Last, patient satisfaction has remained at greater than the 90th percentile pre- and postintegration. Conclusion: The process of integration facilitates the ability to standardize cancer practice and provides a platform for quality improvement.

Most cancer centers are ill-equipped to pursue value-based payment (VBP) because of limited information on their population’s cost of care. Herein, we outline the stepwise approach used by Smilow Cancer Hospital at Yale-New Haven in our pursuit of better value care. First, we addressed institutional barriers. A move toward value required demonstration to Yale-New Haven Health System leadership that OCM would improve patient care, fund new infrastructure, and provide the opportunity to gain experience with VBP without a major threat to the financial stability of the health system. We evaluated patterns of care and found that of patients presenting to the emergency department (ED), 88% were admitted, 62% arrived during the workday, and 50% could have been stabilized with urgent care services. Within 30 days of death, 27% were admitted to the intensive care unit, 38% presented to the ED, and 52% were admitted. To quantify total cost of care, we accessed the 5% Medicare Limited Data Set to map out total cost of care for patients receiving chemotherapy at Smilow Cancer Hospital. Costs increased as patients moved through 6-month episodes, used the ED (patients with two or more visits were twice as expensive as those with one or fewer), or died during an episode (costs were twice as high as episodes in which the patient lived). To determine strategic interventions to improve value, we targeted investments in urgent care to reduce ED utilization, care management to prevent hospital admissions, and referral to palliative care for clarification of goals of care and avoidance of costly futile treatment. Developing internal metrics to evaluate success will require monitoring our interventions by having utilization measures for each site of care and individual provider.

The Oncology Grand Rounds series is designed to place original reports published in the Journal into clinical context. A case presentation is followed by a description of diagnostic and management challenges, a review of the relevant literature, and a summary of the authors’ suggested management approaches. The goal of this series is to help readers better understand how to apply the results of key studies, including those published in Journal of Clinical Oncology, to patients seen in their own clinical practice. A 78-year-old woman with a 40-pack-year smoking history has been referred for treatment of advanced non–small-cell lung cancer. She presented with a persistent cough and worsening dyspnea on exertion. A chest x-ray followed by a chest computed tomography scan revealed a 3-cm right upper lobe mass along with a moderate-size pleural effusion. Pleural fluid cytology was positive for adenocarcinoma. A brain magnetic resonance imaging scan was negative. A reflex molecular profile, including KRAS, EGFR, ALK, BRAF, HER2, RET, MET, and ROS, did not reveal an actionable abnormality. Her past medical history includes diabetes, hypertension, and osteopenia. Her medications include a β-blocker, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, oral antidiabetic agent, calcium, and vitamin D. The laboratory evaluation is notable for a hemoglobin of 10.8 g/dL and a creatinine clearance of 36 mL/min. The other laboratories are within normal limits. She is somewhat limited by the shortness of breath but maintains an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1. She is independent in all of her instrumental and basic activities of daily living and denies falls. She has been referred to discuss treatment options.

These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on recent updates in the 2016 NCCN Guidelines for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC; Versions 1-4). These NCCN Guidelines Insights will discuss new immunotherapeutic agents, such as nivolumab and pembrolizumab, for patients with metastatic NSCLC. For the 2016 update, the NCCN panel recommends immune checkpoint inhibitors as preferred agents (in the absence of contraindications) for second-line and beyond (subsequent) therapy in patients with metastatic NSCLC (both squamous and nonsquamous histologies). Nivolumab and pembrolizumab are preferred based on improved overall survival rates, higher response rates, longer duration of response, and fewer adverse events when compared with docetaxel therapy.

Purpose To investigate outcomes for elderly patients treated with chemotherapy (CT) alone versus chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in the modern era by using a large national database. Patients and Methods Elderly patients (age ≥ 70 years) with limited-stage small-cell lung cancer clinical stage I to III who received CT or CRT were identified in the National Cancer Data Base between 2003 and 2011. Hierarchical mixed-effects logistic regression with clustering by reporting facility was performed to identify factors associated with treatment selection. Overall survival (OS) of patients receiving CT versus CRT was compared by using the log-rank test, Cox proportional hazards regression, and propensity score matching. Results A total of 8,637 patients were identified, among whom 3,775 (43.7%) received CT and 4,862 (56.3%) received CRT. The odds of receiving CRT decreased with increasing age, clinical stage III disease, female sex, and the presence of medical comorbidities (all P < .01). Use of CRT was associated with increased OS compared with CT on univariable and multivariable analysis (median OS, 15.6 v 9.3 months; 3-year OS, 22.0% v 6.3%; log-rank P < .001; Cox P < .001). Propensity score matching identified a matched cohort of 6,856 patients and confirmed a survival benefit associated with CRT (hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.55; P < .001). Subset analysis of CRT treatment sequence showed that patients alive 4 months after diagnosis derived a survival benefit with concurrent CRT over sequential CRT (median OS, 17.0 v 15.4 months; log-rank P = .01). Conclusion In elderly patients with limited-stage small-cell lung cancer, modern CRT appears to confer an additional OS advantage beyond that achieved with CT alone in a large population-based cohort. Our findings suggest that CRT should be the preferred strategy in elderly patients who are expected to tolerate the toxicities of the combined approach.

Introduction Time-to-treatment-failure (TTF) is the interval from chemotherapy initiation to premature discontinuation. We evaluated TTF based on age. Methods Pooled analyses were conducted with first-line chemotherapy trials for advanced NSCLC (CALGB 9730, 30203, and 30801). Comparisons among patients who were 65 years and older and 70 years and older were performed for TTF (primary endpoint), reasons for early chemotherapy cessation, grade 3+ adverse events, and overall survival. Results Among 1006 patients, 460 (46%) were older than 65 years of age. One hundred forty-five older patients (32% of this age cohort) completed all six planned chemotherapy cycles as did 170 (32%) younger patients. Median TTF was 2.9 months (95% confidence interval: 2.7– 3.2) in older patients and 3 months (95% confidence interval: 2.9–3.5) in younger patients; adjustment for performance status and stratification by chemotherapy by trial yielded no statistically significant age-based difference in TTF. However, reasons for early chemotherapy cessation differed between age groups (multivariate p = 0.004). Older patients were less likely to discontinue from cancer progression (41% versus 55%) and more likely from toxicity or patient choice (16% and 15%, respectively) compared to younger patients (13% and 6%, respectively). Older patients were more likely to experience grade 3+ adverse events (86% versus 79%) with no statistically significant difference in survival. An age cutpoint of 70+ years showed no difference in TTF, a lower trend of early cessation due to cancer progression, and somewhat shorter older patient survival. Conclusions TTF was comparable between older and younger patients; but different, age-based, and potentially modifiable reasons account for it.

Introduction With expanding indications for programmed death 1 (PD-1) axis inhibitors in non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), acquired resistance (AR) to these therapies is increasingly being encountered. We sought to characterize clinical patterns of AR to PD-1 axis inhibitors in patients with advanced NSCLC, and evaluate subsequent outcome and management strategies for such patients. Methods Patients with NSCLC who developed AR to PD-1 axis inhibitor therapy initiated between December 2009 and February 2016 at one institution were identified and examined by clinical and radiographic features. AR was defined as progressive disease after initial response by either Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1 or immune-related response criteria. Results Twenty-six patients with AR to PD-1 axis inhibitor therapy were identified and evaluated. Median time to AR was 313 days; the 2-year survival rate from AR was 70% (95% confidence interval: 0.53–0.92). Twenty patients (77%) experienced AR in lymph nodes (LNs), including 11 patients with LN-only progression. Twenty-three (88%) patients had recurrence limited to one (54%) or two (35%) sites of disease. Fourteen patients (54%) continued PD-1 axis inhibitor therapy beyond progression. Three patients were re-challenged with the same PD-1 axis inhibitor after holiday from and progression off therapy, 2 again responded. Fifteen patients (58%) received local therapy to site(s) of AR, 11 continued respective PD-1 axis inhibitor after local therapy. The 2-year survival rate from AR among these 15 patients was 92% (95% confidence interval: 0.77–1). Conclusions Acquired resistance to PD-1 axis inhibitors is often limited to one or two sites when local therapy and continuation of PD-1 axis inhibitor therapy can result in prolonged benefit. LN metastases appear to be particularly susceptible sites to AR. When progression of disease following response occurs after holiday from PD-1 axis inhibitor, re-challenge can again lead to tumor regression.

Purpose: End-of-life care for patients with advanced cancer is aggressive and costly. Oncologists inconsistently estimate life expectancy and address goals of care. Currently available prognostication tools are based on subjective clinical assessment. An objective prognostic tool could help oncologists and patients decide on a realistic plan for end-of-life care. We developed a predictive model (Imminent Mortality Predictor in Advanced Cancer [IMPAC]) for short-term mortality in hospitalized patients with advanced cancer. Methods: Electronic health record data from 669 patients with advanced cancer who were discharged from Yale Cancer Center/Smilow Cancer Hospital were extracted. Statistical learning techniques were used to develop a tool to estimate survival probabilities. Patients were randomly split into training (70%) and validation (30%) sets 20 times. We tested the predictive properties of IMPAC for mortality at 30, 60, 90, and 180 days past the day of admission. Results: For mortality within 90 days at a 40% sensitivity level, IMPAC has close to 60% positive predictive value. Patients estimated to have a greater than 50% chance of death within 90 days had a median survival time of 47 days. Patients estimated to have a less than 50% chance of death had a median survival of 290 days. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for IMPAC averaged greater than .70 for all time horizons tested. Estimated potential cost savings per patient was $15,413 (95% CI, $9,162 to $21,665) in 2014 constant dollars. Conclusion: IMPAC, a novel prognostic tool, can generate life expectancy probabilities in real time and support oncologists in counseling patients about end-of-life care. Potentially avoidable costs are significant.

The US lung cancer population is aging, the majority of which receive a diagnosis of incurable advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In US clinical oncology practice, elderly is defined as patients older than 70 years. Treatment of elderly patients with advanced NSCLC is complex. Choosing appropriate chemotherapy in this setting is complicated by multiple chronic conditions in addition to geriatric syndromes, challenging the traditional oncology practice. Although promising new options are on the horizon, the standard of care remains either platinum-based doublet or single-agent chemotherapy. Clinical trials have determined doublet therapy is appropriate for elderly patients; however, out of concern for excessive toxicity, many elderly patients do not receive appropriate treatment. Determining which patients are most likely to benefit from doublet chemotherapy versus monotherapy is a difficult challenge. Researchers have started to implement geriatric assessment and predictive chemotherapy toxicity tools in prospective clinical trials; however, knowledge gaps remain on how to appropriately select and treat elderly patients with advanced NSCLC in efforts to improve disease management and symptoms, maintain functional status, and minimize toxicity.

Neuroendocrine neoplasms are diverse in terms of sites of origin, functional status, and degrees of aggressiveness. This review will introduce some of the common features of neuroendocrine neoplasms and will explore the differences in pathology, classification, biology, and clinical management between tumors of different anatomic sites, specifically, the lung, pancreas, and prostate. Despite sharing neuroendocrine differentiation and histologic evidence of the neuroendocrine phenotype in most organs, well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (WD-NETs) and poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas (PD-NECs) are two very different families of neoplasms. WD-NETs (grade 1 and 2) are relatively indolent (with a natural history that can evolve over many years or decades), closely resemble non-neoplastic neuroendocrine cells, and demonstrate production of neurosecretory proteins, such as chromogranin A. They arise in the lungs and throughout the gastrointestinal tract and pancreas, but WD-NETs of the prostate gland are uncommon. Surgical resection is the mainstay of therapy, but treatment of unresectable disease depends on the site of origin. In contrast, PD-NECs (grade 3, small cell or large cell) of all sites often demonstrate alterations in P53 and Rb, exhibit an aggressive clinical course, and are treated with platinum-based chemotherapy. Only WD-NETs arise in patients with inherited neuroendocrine neoplasia syndromes (e.g., multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1), and some common genetic alterations are site-specific (e.g., TMPRSS2-ERG gene rearrangement in PD-NECs arising in the prostate gland). Advances in our understanding of the molecular basis of NETs should lead to new diagnostic and therapeutic strategies and is an area of active investigation.

Introduction Patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer and poor performance status and/or weight loss do not seem to benefit from standard therapy. Based on the preclinical interaction between epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors and radiation, we designed a trial of induction chemotherapy followed by thoracic radiotherapy and concurrent erlotinib. Methods Patients with poor-risk unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer received two cycles of carboplatin at an AUC of 5 and nab-paclitaxel at 100 mg/m on days 1 and 8 every 21 days, followed by erlotinib administered concurrently with thoracic radiotherapy. Maintenance was not permitted. Molecular analysis was performed in available specimens. Seventy-two eligible patients were required to test whether the 1-year survival rate was less than 50% or greater than or equal to 65% with approximately 90% power at a significance level of 0.10. Results From March 2008 to October 2011, 78 patients were enrolled, three of whom were ineligible. The median age was 68 (range, 39-88) and 32% were aged greater than or equal to 75 years. Patients were evenly distributed between stages IIIA and IIIB and the majority had performance status 2. The overall response rate was 67% and the disease control rate was 93%. Treatment was well tolerated. The median PFS and OS were 11 and 17 months, respectively. The overall 12-month OS was 57%, which narrowly missed the prespecified target for significance. Conclusions Patients with poor-risk stage III non-small-cell lung cancer had better than expected outcomes with a regimen of induction carboplatin/nab-paclitaxel followed by thoracic radiotherapy and erlotinib. However, as per the statistical design, the 12-month OS was not sufficiently high to warrant further studies.

This selection from the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) focuses on the principles of radiation therapy (RT), which include the following: (1) general principles for early-stage, locally advanced, and advanced/metastatic NSCLC; (2) target volumes, prescription doses, and normal tissue dose constraints for early-stage, locally advanced, and advanced/palliative RT; and (3) RT simulation, planning, and delivery. Treatment recommendations should be made by a multidisciplinary team, including board-certified radiation oncologists who perform lung cancer RT as a prominent part of their practice.

ASCO's Community Research Forum is a solution-oriented venue for community research sites to overcome barriers to conducting clinical trials. The key objectives of the Forum are to (1) convene community-based researchers to identify challenges to conducting research that ASCO can address, (2) develop solution-oriented projects to address these challenges to facilitate clinical trial participation in community research settings, and (3) shape ASCO programs and policies to support members engaged in community research. The Community Research Forum holds an annual in-person meeting that convenes physician investigators, research administrators, research nurses, and clinical research associates from community-based research programs and practices. To meet identified needs, the Community Research Forum has developed the ASCO Clinical Trial Workload Assessment Tool and the ASCO Research Program Quality Assessment Tool. Both of these tools will be available to the public in 2014. The Forum is currently exploring the concept and potential metrics of a research certification program to formally assess community-based research programs, and to identify gaps and areas to improve the program in order to meet quality standards. The Community Research Forum's website aims to serve as a go-to resource for community-based physician investigators and research staff. The Community Research Forum will continue to provide a forum for community-based researchers to network, share challenges, and develop initiatives that provide solutions and facilitate the conduct of clinical trials.

299 Background: In 2011, ASCO launched a forum for the oncology research community to facilitate and promote the implementation of quality clinical research. The ASCO Research Community Forum (RCF) was created to provide a solution-oriented venue for research sites to address common challenges with conducting clinical trials. It offers in-person and virtual forums and resources to learn and share best practices with peers on a variety of topics, including site quality assessment and improvement, research site operations, and clinical trial access and accrual. Methods: An assessment was performed to measure the ASCO RCF output and to gather information on its potential impact on the cancer community. Results: The ASCO RCF has provided an in-person venue for physicians and research administrators with a steady increase in attendance, from 52 attendees in 2012 to 159 in 2018. Multi-stakeholder meetings and manuscripts have promoted best practices and solutions to address challenges with implementing quality clinical trials. Tools and resources to facilitate best practices and quality improvement at trial sites have been accessed by a range of types of research sites from across the U.S. and internationally. Its web-based library of resources was accessed over 27,000 times in 2018, alone. An online forum was launched in 2019 to provide a new opportunity to connect and impact the research community. Conclusions: The ASCO RCF is a productive and esteemed resource for the cancer research community. In-person and virtual forums, along with practical tools, promote access and accrual to clinical trials by facilitating networking, developing solutions, and providing education and resources. The ASCO RCF impact has extended from community-based oncology practices to larger research networks and academic centers across the U.S. and internationally. Its efforts to promote and facilitate access to quality clinical trials align with the vision and mission of ASCO to conquer cancer through research, education, and promotion of the highest quality patient care.

Purpose Survival of patients with completely resected non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is unsatisfactory, and in 2002, the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy was not established. This phase III study assessed the impact of postoperative adjuvant gefitinib on overall survival (OS). Patients and Methods Patients with completely resected (stage IB, II, or IIIA) NSCLC stratified by stage, histology, sex, postoperative radiotherapy, and chemotherapy were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive gefitinib 250 mg per day or placebo for 2 years. Study end points were OS, disease-free survival (DFS), and toxicity. Results As a result of early closure, 503 of 1,242 planned patients were randomly assigned (251 to gefitinib and 252 to placebo). Baseline factors were balanced between the arms. With a median of 4.7 years of follow-up (range, 0.1 to 6.3 years), there was no difference in OS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.24; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.64; P = .14) or DFS (HR, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.61; P = .15) between the arms. Exploratory analyses demonstrated no DFS (HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.76; P = .14) or OS benefit (HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.71; P = .18) from gefitinib for 344 patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) wild-type tumors. Similarly, there was no DFS (HR, 1.84; 95% CI, 0.44 to 7.73; P = .395) or OS benefit (HR, 3.16; 95% CI, 0.61 to 16.45; P = .15) from gefitinib for the 15 patients with EGFR mutation-positive tumors. Adverse events were those expected with an EGFR inhibitor. Serious adverse events occurred in ≤ 5% of patients, except infection, fatigue, and pain. One patient in each arm had fatal pneumonitis. Conclusion Although the trial closed prematurely and definitive statements regarding the efficacy of adjuvant gefitinib cannot be made, these results indicate that it is unlikely to be of benefit.

Purpose To compare single-agent pemetrexed (P) versus the combination of carboplatin and pemetrexed (CP) in first-line therapy for patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) of 2. Patients and Methods In a multicenter phase III randomized trial, patients with advanced NSCLC, ECOG PS of 2, any histology at first and later amended to nonsquamous only, no prior chemotherapy, and adequate organ function were randomly assigned to P alone (500 mg/m2) or CP (area under the curve of 5 and 500 mg/m2, respectively) administered every 3 weeks for a total of four cycles. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Results A total of 205 eligible patients were enrolled from eight centers in Brazil and one in the United States from April 2008 to July 2011. The response rates were 10.3% for P and 23.8% for CP (P = .032). In the intent-to-treat population, the median PFS was 2.8 months for P and 5.8 months for CP (hazard ratio [HR], 0.46; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.63; P < .001), and the median OS was 5.3 months for P and 9.3 months for CP (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.83; P = .001). One-year survival rates were 21.9% and 40.1%, respectively. Similar results were seen when patients with squamous disease were excluded from the analysis. Anemia (grade 3, 3.9%; grade 4, 11.7%) and neutropenia (grade 3, 1%; grade 4, 6.8%) were more frequent with CP. There were four treatment-related deaths in the CP arm. Conclusion Combination chemotherapy with CP significantly improves survival in patients with advanced NSCLC and ECOG PS of 2.

Background This study was a retrospective analysis of elderly patients treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in the setting of a multi-institutional consortium. Patients and Methods Three institutions pooled data on patients aged ≥ 75 years who received SBRT for stage I non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Forty-seven tumors in 46 patients were analyzed in patients aged 75 to 92 years (median, 82 years). Treatment was delivered during 2007 to 2009, with a median follow-up of 12.4 months. All patients underwent staging positron emission tomography–computed tomography (PET-CT), and 87% of tumors were confirmed by biopsy results. Total doses were 35 to 60 Gy, mainly in 3 to 5 fractions. All tumors were treated using a linear accelerator, with 96% of patients receiving 3-dimensional (3D) conformal RT and 4% undergoing intensity modulated RT (IMRT). Results At the time of analysis, the local failure rate was 2% (1 of 47). The regional failure rate was 9% (4 of 47). The distant failure rate was 6% (3 of 47). The combined failure rate was 15% (7 of 47) because 1 patient experienced both regional and distant failure. Among 20 tumors with any acute toxicity, there were no ≥ grade 3 toxicities. Pneumonitis (n = 10) grades 1 (n = 3) and 2 (n = 2) was seen in 15% and 10% of patients, respectively; these data were missing for 25% of patients. Conclusion SBRT in patients aged ≥ 75 years with stage I NSCLC proved tolerable, with toxicity rates comparable to those in younger patients. Excellent rates of local, regional, and distant control were achieved at a median follow-up of 12.4 months. This patient population represents a rapidly growing segment of the early lung cancer population, and SBRT appears to be a safe and effective treatment option for patients who are not optimal candidates for surgery.

Purpose: Clinical research program managers are regularly faced with the quandary of determining how much of a workload research staff members can manage while they balance clinical practice and still achieve clinical trial accrual goals, maintain data quality and protocol compliance, and stay within budget. A tool was developed to measure clinical trial–associated workload, to apply objective metrics toward documentation of work, and to provide clearer insight to better meet clinical research program challenges and aid in balancing staff workloads. A project was conducted to assess the feasibility and utility of using this tool in diverse research settings. Methods: Community-based research programs were recruited to collect and enter clinical trial–associated monthly workload data into a web-based tool for 6 consecutive months. Descriptive statistics were computed for self-reported program characteristics and workload data, including staff acuity scores and number of patient encounters. Results: Fifty-one research programs that represented 30 states participated. Median staff acuity scores were highest for staff with patients enrolled in studies and receiving treatment, relative to staff with patients in follow-up status. Treatment trials typically resulted in higher median staff acuity, relative to cancer control, observational/registry, and prevention trials. Industry trials exhibited higher median staff acuity scores than trials sponsored by the National Institutes of Health/National Cancer Institute, academic institutions, or others. Conclusion: The results from this project demonstrate that trial-specific acuity measurement is a better measure of workload than simply counting the number of patients. The tool was shown to be feasible and useable in diverse community-based research settings.

The use of EGF receptor inhibitors has recently been incorporated into the armamentarium of agents available to treat patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. Their use in combination with chemotherapy and radiotherapy has been investigated in Phase II and III trials. The use of EGF receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors in combination with chemotherapy has been somewhat disappointing, whereas the use of anti-EGF receptor monoclonal cetuximab in combination with chemotherapy has provided mixed results. The use of cetuximab in combination with chemotherapy and radiotherapy in patients with locally advanced disease has generated encouraging results in Phase II trials, and Phase III trials are currently ongoing. The identification of molecular biomarkers to predict benefit is a work in progress.

Purpose IPI-504 is a novel, water-soluble, potent inhibitor of heat-shock protein 90 (Hsp90). Its potential anticancer activity has been validated in preclinical in vitro and in vivo models. We studied the activity of IPI-504 after epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy in patients with advanced, molecularly defined non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and Methods Patients with advanced NSCLC, prior treatment with EGFR TKIs, and tumor tissue available for molecular genotyping were enrolled in this prospective, nonrandomized, multicenter, phase II study of IPI-504 monotherapy. The primary outcome was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary aims included safety, progression-free survival (PFS), and analysis of activity by molecular subtypes. Results Seventy-six patients were enrolled between December 2007 and May 2009 from 10 United States cancer centers. An ORR of 7% (five of 76) was observed in the overall study population, 10% (four of 40) in patients who were EGFR wild-type, and 4% (one of 28) in those with EGFR mutations. Although both EGFR groups were below the target ORR of 20%, among the three patients with an ALK gene rearrangement, two had partial responses and the third had prolonged stable disease (7.2 months, 24% reduction in tumor size). The most common adverse events included grades 1 and 2 fatigue, nausea, and diarrhea. Grade 3 or higher liver function abnormalities were observed in nine patients (11.8%). Conclusion IPI-504 has clinical activity in patients with NSCLC, particularly among patients with ALK rearrangements.

181 Background: Early palliative care referral has proven useful in reducing chemotherapy given to cancer patients in the last 30 days of life. We designed a program to help train primary oncologists in having goals of care (GOC) conversations with patients. We conducted this initiative across the Yale Cancer Center/Smilow Cancer Hospital Care Centers (SCHCCs). The aim was to determine whether simple tools could be used by general oncologists to improve patient care, as measured by chemotherapy utilization at the end of life. Methods: A multidisciplinary team completed process mapping and cause-and-effect barrier analysis regarding GOC discussion with patients. Five interventions (PDSA cycles) were chosen to improve physician skills with GOC conversations. SCHCC physicians (n = 21) utilized each tool on 5 patients per month from July to December 2017. Interventions included asking patients simple questions regarding GOC, using the phrase “allow natural death”, giving patients a “serious conversation starter kit”, and identifying patients with poor prognosis. A GOC survey was administered to physicians at baseline and after completion of the initiative. Data on chemotherapy and immunotherapy given during the last 30 days of life for SCHCC patients were measured. Results: SCHCC physicians who completed the baseline survey (n = 17) were 27% likely to discuss GOC repeatedly during the course of illness, compared to 70% post intervention (n = 10), while 88% felt comfortable discussing GOC at baseline compared to 100% after intervention. Chemotherapy within 30 days of death was administered to 30.3% patients (n = 109) in Q1 2017 and 23.3% in Q3 (n = 103) in the Care Centers. Of note, immunotherapy administered within 30 days of death was 6.4% in Q1 and 6.7% in Q3. Conclusions: A quality initiative focused on providing oncologists with simple tools to improve GOC conversations led to decrease from 30.3% to 23.3% of patients receiving chemotherapy within the last 30 days of life. Survey respondents felt more comfortable in discussing GOC and were more likely to do this throughout the course of illness. This pilot suggests that palliative care training of primary oncologists is feasible and may help to decrease unnecessary treatment at the end of life.

9099Background: We report final Phase I results of a Phase I/II prospective trial assessing safety and tolerability of SBRT and concurrent pembrolizumab. Methods: Eligible patients had metastatic N...

6590Background: Accurate, reproducible, transparent and continuous healthcare utilization measures derived from structured EHR data may facilitate higher value cancer care at the end of life in bot...

2009Background: Pembrolizumab can have significant and durable activity in patients (pts) with advanced NSCLC, however the activity in the central nervous system (CNS) and the long-term benefit in ...

Purpose During the last 25 years, National Cancer Institute (NCI) cooperative trial groups have extended trial networks from academic centers to include certain community and Veterans Health Administration (VHA) centers. We compared trial patients' attributes and outcomes by these enrollment settings. Patients and Methods Studying 2,708 patients on one of 10 cooperative group, randomized lung trials at 272 institutions, we compared patient attributes by enrollment setting (ie, academic, community, and VHA affiliates). We used adjusted Cox regression to evaluate for survival differences by setting. Results Main member institutions enrolled 44% of patients; community affiliates enrolled 44%; and VHAs enrolled 12%. Patient attributes (ie, case-mix) of age, ethnicity, sex, and performance status varied by enrollment setting. After analysis was adjusted for patient case-mix, no mortality differences by enrollment setting were noted. Conclusion Although trial patients with primarily advanced-stage lung cancer from nonacademic centers were older and had worse performance statuses than those from academic centers, survival did not differ by enrollment setting after analysis accounted for patient heterogeneity. An answer for whether long-term outcomes for patients at community and VHA centers affiliated with cooperative trial groups are equivalent to those at academic centers when care is delivered through NCI trials requires additional research among patients with longer survival horizons.

Purpose A randomized phase II trial of two novel treatment strategies in the first-line management of advanced non–small-cell lung cancer patients with performance status (PS) 2. Patients and Methods Patients were assigned to docetaxel 30 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days in combination with either cetuximab 400 mg/m2 loading dose followed by 250 mg/m2 weekly (D + C) or bortezomib 1.6 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days (D + B) for up to 4 cycles. Patients with responding or stable disease continued cetuximab or bortezomib until progression. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 6 months. Results Sixty-four patients were enrolled and 59 were included in this analysis. Complete or partial response rates were 13.3% and 10.3% for D + C and D + B, respectively. Median PFS was 3.4 months in the D + C arm and 1.9 months in the D + B arm. Corresponding figures for 6-month PFS were 27.8% and 13.8% and 5.0 and 3.9 months for median survival, respectively. Grade 3/4 hematologic toxicity was 16% for D + C and 21% for D + B, whereas nonhematologic toxicities were observed in 63% and 44% of patients, respectively. There was one treatment-related death in each arm. Conclusion These results confirm the poor prognosis associated with a PS of 2 and the difficulty in translating recent advances in targeted therapy to this subset of patients. While the results in the D + C arm are numerically superior, neither combination met the prespecified PFS end point to justify further research in this setting.

Even with the introduction of targeted agents and the establishment of multiple lines of therapy, the median survival for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) does not considerably extend beyond 1 year. Emerging research suggests that clinical characteristics alone are insufficient for selecting patients for therapies that may confer significant survival benefit. The discovery of predictive and prognostic molecular markers such as gene mutations in EGFR and KRAS as well as high tumor expression levels of DNA repair pathway components ribonucleotide reductase subunit 1 and excision repair cross-complementing group 1 has sparked an interest in the development of individualized therapy as a strategy for increasing survival in patients with NSCLC. Techniques to analyze molecular biomarkers, such as immunohistochemistry, fluorescence in situ hybridization, polymerase chain reaction, and, more recently, gene microarray techniques, are being investigated for their potential to accurately predict an individual patient's response to therapy. Many prospective trials are still needed to clarify and confirm the utility of molecular biomarkers for guiding treatment selection, and continued participation in clinical trials is critical for the development of tools to provide customized treatment plans for patients with NSCLC.

Purpose:Data from two randomized phase III trials were analyzed to evaluate prognostic factors and treatment selection in the first-line management of advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients with performance status (PS) 2.Patients and Methods:Patients randomized to combination chemotherapy (carboplatin and paclitaxel) in one trial and single-agent therapy (gemcitabine or vinorelbine) in the second were included in these analyses. Both studies had identical eligibility criteria and were conducted simultaneously. Comparison of efficacy and safety was performed between the two cohorts. A regression analysis identified prognostic factors and subgroups of patients that may benefit from combination or single-agent therapy.Results:Two hundred one patients were treated with combination and 190 with single-agent therapy. Objective responses were 37 and 15%, respectively. Median time to progression was 4.6 months in the combination arm and 3.5 months in the single-agent arm (p < 0.001). Median survival times were 8.0 and 6.6 months, and 1-year survival rates were 31 and 26%, respectively. Albumin

Patients with performance status (PS) 2 represent approximately 30%-40% of all patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) seen in clinical practice. Although these patients have been historically excluded from randomized clinical trials, recent studies have suggested a benefit from systemic chemotherapy. The development of biologic agents offers a new promise for the treatment of PS 2 patients as a result of the perceived improved therapeutic index of these agents. However, many of the recent advances in NSCLC have been limited to good PS patients and have not translated into an improvement in the management of the PS 2 population because the studies have excluded this patient population or have failed to demonstrate a survival benefit.

The treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer has evolved substantially during the last decade. Chemotherapy with a platinum-based doublet prolongs survival and improves quality of life in patients with good performance status. Recently, the addition of bevacizumab and the use of epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors in appropriately selected patients have further improved the outcome of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Newer targeted agents are being developed and tested in the clinical arena at a rapid pace. In addition, the identification by clinical or molecular criteria of patient populations that benefit the most from these agents is under active investigation. In contrast, the development of newer cytotoxic agents, with innovative mechanisms of action, has been comparatively disappointing. Whether standard cytotoxic drugs are required as newer biologic agents are more frequently used or whether a more active and safer chemotherapy can be used as a template for combinations with biologic agents remains an important research topic.

The promise of effective targeted therapy for lung cancer requires rigorous identification of potential targets combined with intensive discovery and development efforts aimed at developing effective “drugs” for these targets. We now recognize that getting the right drug to the right target in the right patient is more complicated than one could have imagined a decade ago. As knowledge of targets and development of agents have proliferated and advanced, so too have data demonstrating the biologic heterogeneity of tumors. The finding that lung cancers are genetically diverse and can exhibit several pathways of resistance in response to targeted agents makes the prospect for curative therapy more daunting. It is becoming increasingly clear that single-agent treatment will be the exception rather than the rule. This information raises important new questions about the development and assessment of novel agents in lung cancer treatment: (1) How do we identify the most important drug targets for tumor initiation and maintenance? (2) What is the best way to assess drug candidates that may only be relevant in a small fraction of patients? (3) What models do we use to predict clinical response and identify effective combinations? And (4) how do we bring combination regimens to the clinic, particularly when the agents are not yet approved individually and may be under development from different companies? The Fifth Cambridge Conference on Novel Agents in the Treatment of Lung Cancer was held in Cambridge, Massachusetts, on October 1–2, 2007, to discuss these questions by reviewing recent progress in the field and advancing recommendations for research and patient care. New information, conclusions, and recommendations considered significant for the field by the program faculty are summarized here and presented at greater length in the individual articles and accompanying discussions that comprise the full conference proceedings. A CME activity based on this summary is also available at www.informedicalcme.com/cme.

Introduction We conducted a multicenter phase II study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of oxaliplatin and gemcitabine with bevacizumab in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods Patients with chemotherapy-naive, nonsquamous, stage IIIB or IV NSCLC received gemcitabine 1000 mg/m 2 on days 1 and 8, oxaliplatin 130 mg/m 2 on day 1, and bevacizumab 15 mg/kg on day 1 every 21 days for 4 cycles. Patients with stable disease or response received maintenance bevacizumab every 3 weeks until progression. Primary end point was median time to progression (TTP). Results Nineteen of 44 eligible patients had partial response in the intent-to-treat analysis for an objective response rate of 43% (95% confidence interval [CI], 26.3–60.1%); 16 patients had stable disease for a disease control rate of 80% (95% CI, 72.0–87.0%). Median TTP was 5.5 months (95% CI, 3.8–6.9 months), which approached that seen in phase III studies. Median survival was 13.7 months (95% CI, 7.3–21.8 months). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were hypertension (11%), neutropenia (9%), diarrhea (7%), dyspnea (7%), and thromboembolic events (7%). Pulmonary hemorrhage was not observed. Conclusions The results of this phase II study suggest that oxaliplatin and gemcitabine with bevacizumab was active and reasonably well tolerated. Median TTP approached that in phase III studies. This combination represents another treatment option for advanced NSCLC.

Background: Because the elderly are underrepresented on clinical trials, physicians have few sources of information to estimate the risks (ie, toxicities) and benefits of chemotherapy administration to the elderly. Objective: Our goal was to determine whether the standard measures of toxicity used in clinical trials could be captured from observational Medicare claims data. Methods: We identified 175 elderly clinical trial patients treated on 2 Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) trials (9344, adjuvant breast study and 9730, advanced lung cancer study) and merged participants’ CALGB data with their Medicare data. From CALGB data, we identified the most frequent Extended Clinical Toxicity Critieria grade III/IV toxicities. We reviewed diagnostic and procedure codes from Medicare manuals, developed algorithms to measure the toxicities, and then finalized the algorithms after empiric review of patients’ codes. We compared results of Medicare algorithms to gold standard CALGB toxicity information to calculate test characteristics. Results: CALGB data documented that 15 grade III/IV chemotherapy-related toxicities occurred in 3% of the 175 patients: white blood cell, hemoglobin, platelets, anorexia, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, stomatitis, sensory neuropathy, motor neuropathy, motor or sensory neuropathy, dyspnea, hyperglycemia, infection, and malaise. Vomiting was the only toxicity identified by the Medicarebased algorithm with a sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operator curve of 80%. Conclusions: The results of this preliminary study suggest that Medicare diagnostic and procedure codes may be of only limited value in measuring clinically significant chemotherapy-related toxicities in elderly Medicare beneficiaries. Future research includes confirming these findings in a larger and more diverse sample.

Purpose A multicenter randomized phase II trial to evaluate two treatment strategies in the first-line management of advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with a performance status (PS) of 2. Patients and Methods Patients were assigned to erlotinib 150 mg orally daily until progression or to carboplatin (area under the curve [AUC] 6) and paclitaxel (200 mg/m2 day 1 every 3 weeks) for up to four cycles. Patients who experienced progression or did not tolerate or refused further chemotherapy were allowed to cross over to erlotinib. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points were response, survival, quality of life (QOL), and a retrospective molecular correlation. Results Fifty-two patients were randomly assigned to erlotinib and 51 to chemotherapy. Partial responses were 2% and 12%, respectively. Median PFS was 1.9 months in the erlotinib arm and 3.5 months in the chemotherapy arm (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.45; 95% CI, 0.98 to 2.15; P = .06). Median survival times were 6.5 and 9.7 months, respectively (HR = 1.73; 95% CI, 1.09 to 2.73; P = .018). Patients who crossed over to erlotinib had a median survival of 14.9 months. Sex, histology, skin rash, and smoking history predicted outcome with erlotinib. Rash and diarrhea were more common with erlotinib; emesis, alopecia, peripheral neuropathy, and fatigue were more common with chemotherapy. QOL was similar between the two arms. Molecular correlation was limited by available samples. Conclusion Unselected patients with advanced NSCLC and PS 2 are best treated with combination chemotherapy as first-line therapy. Erlotinib may be considered in patients selected by clinical or molecular markers.

There are several advantages to including comprehensive health-related quality of life (HRQL) in symptom trials in oncology. The most obvious is to test the hypothesis that HRQL will be improved in addition to the symptom benefit. We should not "require," however, that a successful symptom intervention also improve other dimensions of HRQL. On the other hand, we should expect that it will not make other dimensions worse through side effects or exacerbation of disease, even if it improves the symptom. HRQL assessment in the trial helps evaluate the competing risks of any therapy. Furthermore, assessment of HRQL is now accomplished with very brief assessment (usually 30 questions or less), and the knowledge gained is valuable. With HRQL, one can compare cancer patients with those with other conditions and can determine the contribution of symptoms and side effects to the more broadly defined HRQL. Examples using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy measurement system will demonstrate how HRQL assessment has contributed to our understanding of common cancer symptoms and their place in the conceptualization of HRQL. The prevalence of clinically significant symptoms is greatest in poor performance status (PS) patients compared with patients with good PS. Symptom improvement trials specifically designed for these patients should be encouraged, particularly with interventions that can provide symptomatic relief and improve multidimensional HRQL.

Background Stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains a treatable but incurable disease. Methods A MEDLINE search was performed to identify pertinent peer-reviewed articles that addressed the questions posed for this section. The writing committee developed and graded recommendations, which were subsequently approved by the American College of Chest Physicians. Results Platinum-based doublets remain the standard of care in patients with good performance status (PS); there is no evidence that the addition of a third cytotoxic agent improves survival. Likewise, with only one exception, the addition of a new targeted or biological agent to platinum-based doublets does not improve survival. The one exception is the addition of bevacizumab, an antiangiogenic agent, to carboplatin/paclitaxel in patients with stage IV disease and good PS. Patients for whom bevacizumab is recommended must also be selected on the basis of histology (nonsquamous), absence of brain metastases and hemoptysis, and no indication for therapeutic anticoagulation. In patients with stage IV NSCLC and PS of 2, chemotherapy is recommended, but the optimal approach has not been defined. Elderly patients, defined as ≥ 70 years old, also derive benefit from chemotherapy. Most elderly patients should receive single-agent chemotherapy, but elderly patients with good PS and without significant comorbidities seem to derive a similar benefit from platinum-based doublets compared with their younger counterparts without a prohibitive difference in treatment toxicities. Because stage IV NSCLC is incurable, quality-of-life issues are important, and tools exist to monitor a patient's quality of life during therapy. Last, patients need to be informed of the implication of the diagnosis of stage IV NSCLC and be educated about treatment options that are available to them. Conclusions Advances have been made in stage IV NSCLC, and the appropriate use of chemotherapy continues to evolve on the basis of well-designed clinical trials that address critical issues in this population.

Background:We conducted a multicenter randomized phase II trial to evaluate two schedules of single-agent docetaxel in the first-line treatment of elderly and performance status (PS) 2 patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).Methods:Patients 70 years of age and older with a PS 0–1 or patients of any age and PS 2 were randomly assigned to docetaxel 75 mg/m2 on day 1 every 3 weeks or 30 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days. The primary end point was frequency of grade 3/4 toxicities. Health-related quality of life, response, and survival were secondary end points.Results:Fifty-five patients were randomized to received docetaxel every 3 weeks and 56 to receive docetaxel weekly. Hematologic toxicity, primarily grade 3/4 neutropenia, was significantly lower in the weekly schedule (0% versus 44%; p < 0.001). Health-related quality of life was similar between the two arms. Efficacy parameters were not significantly different, with a trend toward better survival in the weekly schedule group (6.7 versus 3.5 months). Patients with PS 0–1 had a significantly longer survival compared with PS 2 patients (7.8 versus 2.9 months; p < 0.001). A subset analysis of 30 octogenarian patients revealed similar outcomes as in 70- to 79-year-old patients.Conclusion:Weekly docetaxel is associated with less neutropenia and a trend toward improved survival in elderly or PS 2 patients. PS rather than age is the primary determinant of outcome in this population. Octogenarians benefited from weekly docetaxel. Future studies should separate elderly patients from PS 2 patients.

One of the main challenges oncologists face in the care of patients with lung cancer is the decision to incorporate new clinical trial data into routine clinical practice. Beyond the question of statistical significance, which is a more objective metric, are the results meaningful and applicable to a broader population? Furthermore, in an era of value care, do the results justify a potential increase in costs? This article discusses the main points that clinicians consider in their decision-making process and illustrates the arguments with real-life examples.