Prognostic factor analysis of elderly patients with small-cell lung cancer / 中华老年医学杂志

Objective@#To retrospectively analyze clinical data of elderly patients with small-cell lung cancer(SCLC)in order to investigate their prognostic factors.@*Methods@#Clinical data of SCLC patients aged 65 years and over in our hospital from January 2006 to February 2017 were analyzed.Survival data were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier method.Univariate analysis of prognosis was conducted by Log rank test.Multivariate analysis was performed by Cox regression.@*Results@#A total of 143 patients were enrolled, the median overall survival(OS)was 17.9 months, with 21.3 months for limit stage(LD)and 9.6 months for extensive stage(ED). For LD patients, age(HR=18.688, 95%CI: 3.237-107.889), smoking index(HR=2.783, 95%CI: 1.196-6.475), thoracic irradiation(HR=0.305, 95%CI: 0.120-0.779), chemotherapy efficacy(HR=0.210, 95%CI: 0.065-0.685)were the independent risk factors for the prognosis.For ED patients, chemotherapy cycles(HR=0.461, 95%CI: 0.229-0.927)and performance status(HR=0.422, 95%CI: 0.218-0.818)were the independent risk factors for prognosis.@*Conclusions@#Smoking index, tumor stage and treatment mode can influence the survival of SCLC patients.The LD patients, who were aged less than 75 years, with smoking index less than 1000, receiving thoracic irradiation and achieving remission with chemotherapy, show a longer OS.For ED patients, a good performance status and sufficient chemotherapy can predict an improved OS.

Prognostic factor analysis of elderly patients with small-cell lung cancer / 中华老年医学杂志

Objective To retrospectively analyze clinical data of elderly patients with small-cell lung cancer(SCLC)in order to investigate their prognostic factors.Methods Clinical data of SCLC patients aged 65 years and over in our hospital from January 2006 to February 2017 were analyzed.Survival data were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier method.Univariate analysis of prognosis was conducted by Log rank test.Multivariate analysis was performed by Cox regression.Results A total of 143 patients were enrolled,the median overall survival(OS)was 17.9 months,with 21.3 months for limit stage(LD)and 9.6 months for extensive stage(ED).For LD patients,age(HR =18.688,95 ％CI:3.237-107.889),smoking index (HR =2.783,95％ CI:1.196-6.475),thoracic irradiation (HR =0.305,95 ％ CI:0.120-0.779),chemotherapy efficacy (HR =0.210,95 ％ CI:0.065-0.685) were the independent risk factors for the prognosis.For ED patients,chemotherapy cycles (HR =0.461,95 ％ CI:0.229 0.927)and performance status (HR =0.422,95 ％ CI:0.218-0.818) were the independent risk factors for prognosis.Conclusions Smoking index,tumor stage and treatment mode can influence the survival of SCLC patients.The LD patients,who were aged less than 75 years,with smoking index less than 1000,receiving thoracic irradiation and achieving remission with chemotherapy,show a longer OS.For ED patients,a good performance status and sufficient chemotherapy can predict an improved OS.

Efficacy of S-1 in Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Patients Treated with More Than Two Lines of Chemotherapy / 中国肺癌杂志

BACKGROUND@#There is no standard treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after the failure of two lines of chemotherapy, S-1 as the third generation of fluorouracil derivate with well safety and low toxicity, presented some efficacy in lung cancer treatment. The aim of this study is to explore the efficacy of S-1 for advanced NSCLC patients treated with two or more prior chemotherapy regimens.@*METHODS@#We performed a retrospective analysis of 105 NSCLC patients treated with S-1 monotherapy or S-1 contained chemotherapy as the third or more line of treatment in our hospital from January 2014 to April 2017. S-1 was administrated orally twice daily for 2 weeks, followed by one week of rest, the dose of drug was determined by body surface area (<1.25 m2, 80 mg/d; 1.25 m2-1.5 m2, 100 mg/d; ≥1.5 m2, 120 mg/d), platinum or the third-generation chemotherapy drugs could be combinedly used. Clinical response was assigned every cycle according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1, Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate progression-free survival (PFS).@*RESULTS@#42 patients received S-1 monotherapy, the other 63 patients received combined regimens, the median treatment line was 4 (3-11) and the median treatment cycle was 2 (1-14). No complete response (CR) were observed, there were 4 patients with partial response (PR), 34 patients with stable disease (SD) and 67 patients with progressive disease (PD), the objective response rate (ORR) was 3.81%, disease control rate (DCR) was 36.19%. The median PFS was 1.90 months (0.67 months-10.83 months), no difference between monotherapy and combined group (DCR: 28.56% vs 41.27%, P=0.185), the liver metastasis showed poorer PFS (1.40 months vs 1.93 months , P=0.042).@*CONCLUSIONS@#S-1 presented some activity in advanced NSCLC treated with more than two lines of treatment. The addition of other drugs cannot improve efficacy. S-1 monotherapy can be used as a choice for heavily-treated patients.

Erlotinib versus vinorelbine therapy in chemotherapy-naive elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer and EGFR mutation: a randomized, controlled trial / 中华老年医学杂志

Objective To compare the efficacy and adverse effects of erlotinib versus vinorelbine naive patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation.Methods Totally 46 elderly patients with histologically confirmed advanced NSCLC and EGFR mutations (exon 19 dclction or L858R point mutation) were enrolled.Patients were randomly divided into two groups:erlotinib group (43 cases,150mg per day until disease progression or unacceptable toxicities) and control group (21 cases,vinorelbine-based chemotherapy,single vinorelbine chemotherapy or vinorelbine-based double chemotherapy).Results Response rates and disease control rates were significantly improved with erlotinib compared with vinorelbine (78.6％ and 88.1％ vs.38.1％ and 61.9％,respectively,P＜ 0.05).There was a significant difference in median progression-free survival (11.6 months vs.5.6 months,P＜0.05),while no statistical difference in median overall survival with erlotinib compared with vinorelbine (19.0months vs.16.5 months,P=0.193).The most frequent adverse effects were grade Ⅰ or Ⅱ and no patients stopped treatment due to adverse effects and no drug-relatcd death.The primary adverse effects were skin rash (71.4％),diarrhea (31.0％)and liver dysfunction (23.8％) in the erlotinib group and neutropenia (66.7％),nausea or vomit (47.6％),anemia (42.9％),platelet decline (33.3％),constipation (33.3％) and peripheral neuritis (23.8％) in the vinorelbine group.Vinorelbine group versus erlotinib group have more 3-4 level adverse reactions (15/21 vs.7/42)(x2=1.69,P=0.193).Conclusions Erlotinib treatment has advances in PFS,ORR and DCR and tolerability compared with vinorelbine-based chemotherapy in elderly patients with advanced NSCLC and EGFR mutation,while overall survival is in no difference.Erlotinib may be a reasonable first-line treatment option for elderly patients with advanced NSCLC and sensitive EGFR mutation.