J. Van Meerbeeck

Chemotherapy in addition to supportive care improves survival in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data from 16 randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE Since our individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis (MA) of supportive care and chemotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), published in 1995, many trials have been completed. An updated, IPD MA has been carried out to assess newer regimens and determine conclusively the effect of chemotherapy. METHODS Systematic searches for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were undertaken, followed by central collection, checking, and reanalysis of updated IPD. Results from RCTs were combined to calculate individual and pooled hazard ratios (HRs). RESULTS Data were obtained from 2,714 patients from 16 RCTs. There were 1,293 deaths among 1,399 patients assigned supportive care and chemotherapy and 1,240 among 1,315 assigned supportive care alone. Results showed a significant benefit of chemotherapy (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.83; P <or= .0001), equivalent to a relative increase in survival of 23% or an absolute improvement in survival of 9% at 12 months, increasing survival from 20% to 29%. There was no clear evidence that this effect was influenced by the drugs used (P = .63) or whether they were used as single agents or in combination (P = .40). Despite changes in patient demographics, the effect of chemotherapy in recent trials did not differ from those included previously (P = .77). There was no clear evidence of a difference or trend in the relative effect of chemotherapy across patient subgroups. CONCLUSION This MA of chemotherapy in the supportive care setting demonstrates conclusively that chemotherapy improves overall survival in all patients with advanced NSCLC. Therefore, all patients who are fit enough and wish to receive chemotherapy should do so.

Guidelines of the European Respiratory Society and the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons for the management of malignant pleural mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare tumour but with increasing incidence and a poor prognosis. In 2008, the European Respiratory Society/European Society of Thoracic Surgeons Task Force brought together experts to propose practical and up-to-dated guidelines on the management of MPM. To obtain an earlier and reliable diagnosis of MPM, the experts recommend performing thoracoscopy, except in cases of pre-operative contraindication or pleural symphysis. The standard staining procedures are insufficient in ∼10% of cases. Therefore, we propose using specific immunohistochemistry markers on pleural biopsies. In the absence of a uniform, robust and validated staging system, we advice use of the most recent TNM based classification, and propose a three step pre-treatment assessment. Patients performance status and histological subtype are currently the only prognostic factors of clinical importance in the management of MPM. Other potential parameters should be recorded at baseline and reported in clinical trials. MPM exhibits a high resistance to chemotherapy and only a few patients are candidates for radical surgery. New therapies and strategies have been reviewed. Because of limited data on the best combination treatment, we emphasise that patients who are considered candidates for a multimodal approach should be included in a prospective trial at a specialised centre.

Prognostic factors in patients with pleural mesothelioma: the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer experience.

PURPOSE Identification of prognostic factors in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma based on prospectively collected international data. PATIENTS AND METHODS From October 1984 to October 1993, 204 eligible adult patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma were entered into five consecutive prospective European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) phase II clinical trials designed to assess the efficacy of various anticancer drugs (mitoxantrone, epidoxorubicin, etoposide, and paclitaxel). The Cox model was used to assess 13 factors related to biology and disease history with respect to survival. RESULTS The median survival duration was 12.6 months from diagnosis and 8.4 months from trial entry. In the multivariate analysis, poor prognosis was associated with a poor performance status, a high WBC count, a probable/possible histologic diagnosis of mesothelioma, male gender, and having sarcomatous tissue as the histologic subtype. Taking these five factors into consideration, patients were classified into two groups: a good-prognosis group (1-year survival rate, 40%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 30% to 50%) and a poor-prognosis group (1-year survival, 12%; 95% CI, 4% to 20%). CONCLUSION These results may help to design new clinical trials in pleural mesothelioma by selecting more homogenous groups of patients.

Early stage and locally advanced (non-metastatic) non-small-cell lung cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up

Lung cancer represents the leading cause of cancer mortality worldwide, accounting for ∼1.2 million deaths each year. Improving survival in lung cancer is a major challenge for modern oncology considering that 5-year survival remains <15%, across all stages of disease and with <7% of patients alive 10 years after diagnosis. Because of the difficulties in significantly improving survival in locally advanced and metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), diagnosis and treatment of early stages theoretically represent the most consistent possibility of modifying the outcome of NSCLC in terms of disease-free and overall survival.

Adjuvant chemotherapy, with or without postoperative radiotherapy, in operable non-small-cell lung cancer: two meta-analyses of individual patient data

Summary Background Many randomised controlled trials have investigated the effect of adjuvant chemotherapy in operable non-small-cell lung cancer. We undertook two comprehensive systematic reviews and meta-analyses to establish the effects of adding adjuvant chemotherapy to surgery, or to surgery plus radiotherapy. Methods We included randomised trials, not confounded by additional therapeutic differences between the two groups and that started randomisation on or after Jan 1, 1965, which compared surgery plus adjuvant chemotherapy versus surgery alone, or surgery plus adjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy versus surgery plus adjuvant radiotherapy. Updated individual patient data were collected, checked, and included in meta-analyses stratified by trial. The primary endpoint was overall survival, defined as time from randomisation until death by any cause. All analyses were by intention to treat. Findings The first meta-analysis of surgery plus chemotherapy versus surgery alone was based on 34 trial comparisons and 8447 patients (3323 deaths). We recorded a benefit of adding chemotherapy after surgery (hazard ratio [HR] 0·86, 95% CI 0·81–0·92, p<0·0001), with an absolute increase in survival of 4% (95% CI 3–6) at 5 years (from 60% to 64%). The second meta-analysis of surgery plus radiotherapy and chemotherapy versus surgery plus radiotherapy was based on 13 trial comparisons and 2660 patients (1909 deaths). We recorded a benefit of adding chemotherapy to surgery plus radiotherapy (HR 0·88, 95% CI 0·81–0·97, p=0·009), representing an absolute improvement in survival of 4% (95% CI 1–8) at 5 years (from 29% to 33%). In both meta-analyses we noted little variation in effect according to the type of chemotherapy, other trial characteristics, or patient subgroup. Interpretation The addition of adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery for patients with operable non-small-cell lung cancer improves survival, irrespective of whether chemotherapy was adjuvant to surgery alone or adjuvant to surgery plus radiotherapy. Funding UK Medical Research Council, Institut Gustave-Roussy, Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique (AOM 05 209), Ligue Nationale Contre le Cancer, and Sanofi-Aventis.

Randomized study of paclitaxel-cisplatin versus cisplatin-teniposide in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Lung Cancer Cooperative Group.

PURPOSE To compare two cisplatin based chemotherapy schedules in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 332 patients with advanced NSCLC were randomized to receive cisplatin 80 mg/m2 on day 1 either in combination with teniposide 100 mg/m2 on days 1, 3, and 5 (arm A) or paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 by 3-hour infusion on day 1 (arm B); cycles were repeated every 3 weeks. RESULTS Fifteen patients were ineligible; patient characteristics were well balanced between the two arms: 71% were male, 71% had less than 5% weight loss, 89% had a World Health Organization (WHO) performance status of 0 to 1, 51% had adenocarcinoma, and 61% had stage IV disease. Hematologic toxicity was significantly more severe in arm A (leukopenia, neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia grade 3 or 4: 66% v 19%, 83% v 55%, 36% v 2% in arms A and B, respectively), which resulted in more febrile neutropenia (27% v 3% in arms A and B, respectively), dose reductions, and treatment delays. There were a total of nine toxic deaths, six due to neutropenic sepsis: five in arm A and one in arm B. In contrast, arthralgia/myalgia (grade 2 or 3, 4% v 17%), peripheral neurotoxicity (grade 2 or 3, 6% v 29%), and hypersensitivity reactions (1% v 7%, all grades) were significantly more frequent in arm B. The frequency and severity of other toxicities were comparable between the two arms. Responses were one complete and 44 partial on arm A (28%) and two complete and 61 partial (41%) on arm B (P = .018). There was no significant difference in survival, with median and 1-year survivals 9.9 versus 9.7 months and 41% versus 43%, respectively in arm A and B. Progression-free survival was 4.9 and 5.4 months in arm A and B, respectively. Selected centers participated in a quality-of-life (QoL) assessment, which was performed by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 and LC-13 administered at baseline and every 6 weeks thereafter. Arm B achieved a better score at week 6 for emotional, cognitive and social functioning, global health status, fatigue, and appetite loss, which was lost at 12 weeks. In conclusion, arm B appears superior to arm A with regard to response rate, side effects, and QoL. CONCLUSION Although survival was not improved, arm B offers a better palliation for advanced NSCLC patients than arm A.

Validation of the Charlson comorbidity index in patients with operated primary non-small cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVE To validate the influence of the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) in patients with operated primary non-small cell lung cancer. METHODS From January 1996 to December 2001, 205 consecutive resections for non-small cell lung cancer were performed at the Erasmus Medical Center Rotterdam. The patients ranged in age from 29 to 82 years, with a mean age of 64 years. In a retrospective study, each patient was scaled according to the CCI and the complications of surgery were determined. RESULTS The hospital mortality was 2.4% (5/205). Of the 205 patients 167 (32.7%) experienced minor complications and 32 (15.6%) major complications. In univariate analysis, gender, grades 3-4 of the CCI, any prior tumor treated in the last 5 years and chronic pulmonary disease were significant predictors of adverse outcome. Multivariate analysis showed that only grades 3-4 of the CCI was predictive (odds ratio=9.8; 95% confidence interval=2.1-45.9). Although only comorbidity grades 3-4 was a significant predictor, for every increase of the comorbidity grade the relative risk of adverse outcome showed a slight increase. CONCLUSION The CCI is strongly correlated with higher risk of surgery in primary non-small cell lung cancer patients and is a better predictor than individual risk factors.

Prospective evaluation of computed tomography and mediastinoscopy in mediastinal lymph node staging

Precise mediastinal lymph node (LN) staging is imperative in otherwise operable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), as it determines subsequent treatment and possible inclusion in a neoadjuvant trial. The roles of mediastinoscopy and computed tomography (CT) remain controversial. To determine the accuracy of current CT scanners, a prospective study was performed. From April 1993 until September 1995, 100 consecutive patients with NSCLC without distant metastases underwent staging by CT and cervical mediastinoscopy. Narukes map was used for classification, and LNs larger than 1 cm were considered CT positive. There were 91 males and 9 females, with a mean age of 64 (range 45-82) yrs. Fifty nine tumours were central and 41 peripheral, 64 right-sided and 36 left-sided. Thoracotomy with mediastinal LN sampling was performed in 74 patients, nonoperated patients having multilevel stage IIIA or stage IIIB disease. Twenty five (25%) mediastinoscopies were positive and three were false-negative (3%). There were 29 false-positive CT scans and 12 false-negative. Overall sensitivity and specificity of CT were 63 and 57%, respectively, and of mediastinoscopy 89 and 100%, respectively. Positive and negative predictive values of CT were 41 and 77%, respectively, and of mediastinoscopy 100 and 96%, respectively. Accuracy of CT was 59% and of mediastinoscopy 97%. Accuracy of CT was lowest for left-sided and centrally located tumours, and for LN station 7. Even with current computed tomography scanners, sensitivity and specificity remain low. Although overall cost may increase, routine cervical mediastinoscopy is necessary for precise staging of non-small cell lung cancer, and subcarinal lymph nodes should be routinely sampled.

Trimodality therapy for malignant pleural mesothelioma: results from an EORTC phase II multicentre trial

The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC; protocol 08031) phase II trial investigated the feasibility of trimodality therapy consisting of induction chemotherapy followed by extrapleural pneumonectomy and post-operative radiotherapy in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (with a severity of cT3N1M0 or less). Induction chemotherapy consisted of three courses of cisplatin 75 mg·m−2 and pemetrexed 500 mg·m−2. Nonprogressing patients underwent extrapleural pneumonectomy followed by post-operative radiotherapy (54 Gy, 30 fractions). Our primary end-point was “success of treatment” and our secondary end-points were toxicity, and overall and progression-free survival. 59 patients were registered, one of whom was ineligible. Subjects’ median age was 57 yrs. The subjects’ TNM scores were as follows: cT1, T2 and T3, 36, 16 and six patients, respectively; cN0 and N1, 57 and one patient, respectively. 55 (93%) patients received three cycles of chemotherapy with only mild toxicity. 46 (79%) patients received surgery and 42 (74%) had extrapleural pneumonectomy with a 90-day mortality of 6.5%. Post-operative radiotherapy was completed in 37 (65%) patients. Grade 3–4 toxicity persisted after 90 days in three (5.3%) patients. Median overall survival time was 18.4 months (95% CI 15.6–32.9) and median progression-free survival was 13.9 months (95% CI 10.9–17.2). Only 24 (42%) patients met the definition of success (one-sided 90% CI 0.36–1.00). Although feasible, trimodality therapy in patients with mesothelioma was not completed within the strictly defined timelines of this protocol and adjustments are necessary.

Multicentre phase II study of gemcitabine and cisplatin in malignant pleural mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma is a notoriously chemoresistant tumour. However, a recent single institution study showed an impressive activity of gemcitabine and cisplatin. Our aim is to investigate the efficacy and toxicity of a gemcitabine and cisplatin combination in selected and chemo-naive patients with histologically proven malignant pleural mesothelioma. Method: Gemcitabine 1250 mg m−2 was administered on day 1 and day 8 and cisplatin 80 mg m−2 was administered on day 1 in a 3-week cycle with a maximum of six cycles. Response and toxicity evaluations were performed according to WHO and NCIC-CTC criteria. Pathology and radiology were centrally reviewed. Results show that in 25 evaluable patients, four PR were observed (ORR 16%, 95% CI 1–31%). Responses of seven patients were unevaluable. No unexpected toxicity occurred. Time to progression was 6 months (5–7 months) with a median survival from registration of 9.6 months (95% CI 8–12 months). In conclusion this trial excludes with 90% power a response rate of greater than 30% in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma using a combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin at the proposed dose and schedule.