Treatment of Small-Cell Lung Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Endorsement of the American College of Chest Physicians Guideline.

PURPOSE: The American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) produced an evidence-based guideline on treatment of patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). Because of the relevance of this guideline to American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) membership, ASCO reviewed the guideline, applying a set of procedures and policies used to critically examine guidelines developed by other organizations. METHODS: The ACCP guideline on the treatment of SCLC was reviewed for developmental rigor by methodologists. An ASCO Endorsement Panel updated the literature search, reviewed the content, and considered additional recommendations. RESULTS: The ASCO Endorsement Panel determined that the recommendations from the ACCP guideline, published in 2013, are clear, thorough, and based on current scientific evidence. ASCO endorses the ACCP guideline on the treatment of SCLC, with the addition of qualifying statements. RECOMMENDATIONS: Surgery is indicated for selected stage I SCLC. Limited-stage disease should be treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with good performance status. Thoracic radiotherapy should be administered early in the course of treatment, preferably beginning with cycle one or two of chemotherapy. Chemotherapy should consist of four cycles of a platinum agent and etoposide. Extensive-stage disease should be treated primarily with chemotherapy consisting of a platinum agent plus etoposide or irinotecan. Prophylactic cranial irradiation prolongs survival in patients with limited-stage disease who achieve a complete or partial response to initial therapy and may do so in similarly responding patients with extensive-stage disease as well. Additional information is available at http://www.asco.org/endorsements/sclc and http://www.asco.org/guidelineswiki.

Hyperfractionated or accelerated radiotherapy in lung cancer: an individual patient data meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: In lung cancer, randomized trials assessing hyperfractionated or accelerated radiotherapy seem to yield conflicting results regarding the effects on overall (OS) or progression-free survival (PFS). The Meta-Analysis of Radiotherapy in Lung Cancer Collaborative Group decided to address the role of modified radiotherapy fractionation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed an individual patient data meta-analysis in patients with nonmetastatic lung cancer, which included trials comparing modified radiotherapy with conventional radiotherapy. RESULTS: In non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC; 10 trials, 2,000 patients), modified fractionation improved OS as compared with conventional schedules (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.88, 95% CI, 0.80 to 0.97; P = .009), resulting in an absolute benefit of 2.5% (8.3% to 10.8%) at 5 years. No evidence of heterogeneity between trials was found. There was no evidence of a benefit on PFS (HR = 0.94; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.03; P = .19). Modified radiotherapy reduced deaths resulting from lung cancer (HR = 0.89; 95% CI, 0.81 to 0.98; P = .02), and there was a nonsignificant reduction of non-lung cancer deaths (HR = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.66 to 1.15; P = .33). In small-cell lung cancer (SCLC; two trials, 685 patients), similar results were found: OS, HR = 0.87, 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.02, P = .08; PFS, HR = 0.88, 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.03, P = .11. In both NSCLC and SCLC, the use of modified radiotherapy increased the risk of acute esophageal toxicity (odds ratio [OR] = 2.44 in NSCLC and OR = 2.41 in SCLC; P < .001) but did not have an impact on the risk of other acute toxicities. CONCLUSION: Patients with nonmetastatic NSCLC derived a significant OS benefit from accelerated or hyperfractionated radiotherapy; a similar but nonsignificant trend was observed for SCLC. As expected, there was increased acute esophageal toxicity.

Once-daily radiotherapy to > or =59.4 Gy versus twice-daily radiotherapy to > or =45.0 Gy with concurrent chemotherapy for limited-stage small-cell lung cancer: a comparative analysis of toxicities and outcomes.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare toxicities, disease control, survival outcomes, and patterns of failure between groups of limited-stage small-cell lung cancer patients treated with once-daily versus twice-daily radiotherapy and concurrent chemotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This single-institution retrospective analysis included a comparison of two of radiotherapy regimens to planned doses of (1) > or =59.4 Gy at 1.8-2.0 Gy per once-daily fraction or (2) > or =45 Gy at 1.5 Gy per twice-daily fractions with concurrent platinum-based chemotherapy. Comparative analyses of toxicities and disease control were performed. RESULTS: A total of 71 patients were included in the present study (17 once-daily, 54 twice-daily). Patient, tumor, staging, and treatment factors were similar between the two treatment groups. Median planned radiotherapy doses were 60 Gy (range 59.4-70.0 Gy) and 45 Gy (range 45-51 Gy) for the once-daily and twice-daily groups, respectively. Acute toxicities were similar between the groups ( approximately 20% grade 3 esophagitis). At a median survival follow-up of 26.2 months (range 3.4-85.5 months), 42 patients had died. The 2-year overall survival estimates were similar at 43% and 49% for the once-daily versus twice-daily groups, respectively. Isolated in-field failures were similar between the two groups ( approximately 17%). CONCLUSION: The present analysis did not detect a statistically significant difference in acute toxicities, disease control, or survival outcomes in limited-stage small-cell lung cancer patients treated with concurrent chemotherapy and once-daily versus twice-daily radiotherapy.

Phase I study of accelerated conformal radiotherapy for stage I non-small-cell lung cancer in patients with pulmonary dysfunction: CALGB 39904.

PURPOSE: The optimal treatment for medically inoperable stage I non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has not been defined. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Cancer and Leukemia Group B trial 39904 prospectively assessed accelerated, once-daily, three-dimensional radiotherapy for early-stage NSCLC. The primary objectives were to define the maximally accelerated course of conformal radiotherapy and to describe the short-term and long-term toxicity of therapy. Entry was limited to patients with clinical stage T1N0 or T2N0 NSCLC (< 4 cm) and pulmonary dysfunction. The nominal total radiotherapy dose remained at 70 Gy, while the number of daily fractions in each successive cohort was reduced. RESULTS: Thirty-nine eligible patients were accrued (eight patients each on cohorts 1 to 4 and seven patients on cohort 5) between January 2001 and July 2005. One grade 3 nonhematologic toxicity was observed in both cohort 3 (dyspnea) and cohort 4 (pain). The major response rate was 77%. After a median follow-up time of 53 months, the actuarial median survival time of all eligible patients was 38.5 months. Local relapse was observed in three patients. CONCLUSION: Accelerated conformal radiotherapy was well tolerated in a high-risk population with clinical stage I NSCLC. Outcomes are comparable to prospective reports of alternative therapies, including stereotactic body radiation therapy and limited resection, with less apparent severe toxicity. Further investigation of this approach is warranted.

Radiotherapy plus chemotherapy with or without surgical resection for stage III non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase III randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Results from phase II studies in patients with stage IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer with ipsilateral mediastinal nodal metastases (N2) have shown the feasibility of resection after concurrent chemotherapy and radiotherapy with promising rates of survival. We therefore did this phase III trial to compare concurrent chemotherapy and radiotherapy followed by resection with standard concurrent chemotherapy and definitive radiotherapy without resection. METHODS: Patients with stage T1-3pN2M0 non-small-cell lung cancer were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to concurrent induction chemotherapy (two cycles of cisplatin [50 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, 29, and 36] and etoposide [50 mg/m(2) on days 1-5 and 29-33]) plus radiotherapy (45 Gy) in multiple academic and community hospitals. If no progression, patients in group 1 underwent resection and those in group 2 continued radiotherapy uninterrupted up to 61 Gy. Two additional cycles of cisplatin and etoposide were given in both groups. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00002550. FINDINGS: 202 patients (median age 59 years, range 31-77) were assigned to group 1 and 194 (61 years, 32-78) to group 2. Median OS was 23.6 months (IQR 9.0-not reached) in group 1 versus 22.2 months (9.4-52.7) in group 2 (hazard ratio [HR] 0.87 [0.70-1.10]; p=0.24). Number of patients alive at 5 years was 37 (point estimate 27%) in group 1 and 24 (point estimate 20%) in group 2 (odds ratio 0.63 [0.36-1.10]; p=0.10). With N0 status at thoracotomy, the median OS was 34.4 months (IQR 15.7-not reached; 19 [point estimate 41%] patients alive at 5 years). Progression-free survival (PFS) was better in group 1 than in group 2, median 12.8 months (5.3-42.2) vs 10.5 months (4.8-20.6), HR 0.77 [0.62-0.96]; p=0.017); the number of patients without disease progression at 5 years was 32 (point estimate 22%) versus 13 (point estimate 11%), respectively. Neutropenia and oesophagitis were the main grade 3 or 4 toxicities associated with chemotherapy plus radiotherapy in group 1 (77 [38%] and 20 [10%], respectively) and group 2 (80 [41%] and 44 [23%], respectively). In group 1, 16 (8%) deaths were treatment related versus four (2%) in group 2. In an exploratory analysis, OS was improved for patients who underwent lobectomy, but not pneumonectomy, versus chemotherapy plus radiotherapy. INTERPRETATION: Chemotherapy plus radiotherapy with or without resection (preferably lobectomy) are options for patients with stage IIIA(N2) non-small-cell lung cancer. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute, Canadian Cancer Society, and National Cancer Institute of Canada.

Evidence for management of small cell lung cancer: ACCP evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (2nd edition).

PURPOSES: This systematic review addressed the following key questions on managing small cell lung cancer (SCLC): the sequence, timing, and dosing characteristics of primary thoracic radiotherapy (TRTx) for limited-stage disease; primary TRTx for extensive-stage disease; effect of prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI); positron emission tomography (PET) for staging; treatment of mixed histology tumors; surgery; and second-line and subsequent-line treatment for relapsed/progressive disease. METHODS: The review methods were defined prospectively in a written protocol. We primarily sought randomized controlled trials that compared the interventions of interest. RESULTS: Robust evidence was lacking for all questions except PCI, for which a patient-level metaanalysis showed that PCI improves survival of SCLC patients who achieved complete response after primary therapy from 15.3 to 20.7% (p = 0.01). The case for concurrent over sequential radiation delivery rests largely on a single multicenter trial. Support for early concurrent therapy comes from one multicenter trial, but two other multicenter trials found no advantage. Metaanalysis did not find significant reductions in 2-year and 3-year mortality rates for early TRTx. Favorable results from a single-center trial on TRTx for extensive stage disease need replication in a multicenter setting. Relevant comparative studies were nonexistent for management of mixed histology disease and surgery for early limited SCLC. PET may be more sensitive in detecting extracranial disease than conventional staging modalities, but studies were of poor quality. CONCLUSIONS: PCI improves survival among those with a complete remission to primary therapy. A research agenda is needed to optimize the effectiveness of TRTx and its components.

Conformal high dose external radiation therapy, 80.5 Gy, alone for medically inoperable non-small cell lung cancer: a retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: Retrospective analysis of patients with medically inoperable non-small cell lung cancer treated with continuous high-dose external beam radiation therapy at the Medical University of South Carolina. METHODS: We identified 35 patients with non-small cell lung cancer treated 1998-2002. None were candidates for resection for reasons including: pulmonary function (n = 23), previous cancer (n = 9), other co-morbidities (n = 2), and refusal of surgery (n = 1). Median percent predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second was 41.5%. Median age was 71 years. Five patients had more than one primary tumor: three were concurrently treated, two were sequentially treated. Lesion sizes were <3 cm (n = 24); 3-5 cm (n = 12), and >5 cm (n = 5). Nodal stage was as follows: N0 (n = 33) and N1 (n = 2). Radiation therapy was administered once daily: median dose was 80.5 Gy/35 fx/2.3 Gy/fx. The clinical target volume was tumor plus nodes > or =1.0 cm. V20 data were available for 12 patients, with a mean value of 15.7%. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients completed treatment. Median follow-up was 23.0 months. There were 26 deaths: 19 died from non-small cell lung (73%) and seven died from co-morbid illness (27%). Median survival was 24 months (95% CI, 18.0-31.9 months). Four patients were alive with disease, and five were alive disease-free at 10- and 68-month follow-ups. Of 41 lesions, local failure occurred in 15 lesions (37%) of which 3 local failure patients (9%) failed concomitantly in untreated regional lymph nodes. There were no isolated nodal recurrences. Distant progression: 10 patients (29%) of which 6 distant progression without local failure. Two patients who both had prior lobectomies experienced grade 5 toxicities. CONCLUSION: Continuous high-dose external beam radiation therapy 80.5 Gy administered in 35 fractions was tolerated. Treatment-related death was rare (6%) and isolated to patients with prior lobectomies in an extremely high-risk population. Most mortality was lung cancer-related. The dose of 80.5 Gy in 7 weeks is supported for patients with single lesions and no prior lobectomy. Local failure dominates and higher effective doses should be explored.

A review of first-line treatment for small-cell lung cancer.

Although small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) makes up a smaller proportion of all lung cancers than it did 25 years ago, it remains a common cause of cancer mortality that requires more clinical and basic research than is currently underway. Trials of newer chemotherapy variations have failed to produce a regimen that is clearly superior to the two-drug combination of etoposide and cisplatin, which remains the standard of care for both limited and extensive stage SCLC. Paradoxically, advances in this systemic disease have come from radiotherapy innovations for limited SCLC, including addition of thoracic irradiation to systemic chemotherapy, more intense thoracic irradiation, early integration of thoracic irradiation with systemic chemotherapy, and prophylactic cranial irradiation.

A case against surgery for most IIIa non-small cell lung cancer.

Stage IIIa non-small cell lung cancer remains categorically a heterogeneous hodgepodge without clear prospective mandates for clinical care. Poor outcome ensues for patients with mediastinal node-positive cancer when treated with surgery alone, but we are unclear how to define subsets that might benefit from surgery. This article reviews significant trials of surgery and chemoradiotherapy, including those using induction chemotherapy for stage III patients. While many continue to believe that chemotherapy without RT may provide equivalent pathologic complete response and survival rates, there is very little apparent difference in survival between patients managed with surgery or those managed to a higher dose of radiotherapy with concurrent chemotherapy (using an established chemotherapy regimen, 2-dimensional radiotherapy treatment planning, and a dose of only 61 Gy). If there is any benefit to surgery in the IIIa as currently staged, the benefit is very small and is counterbalanced by operative risk.

Southwest Oncology Group: two decades of experience in non-small cell lung cancer.

Over the past two decades, studies of the Southwest Oncology Group have consistently reported stable esophagitis rates despite changing scales with concurrent chest radiotherapy and cisplatin/etoposide regimens. Patient selection has perhaps contributed to increased survival over this period. The Southwest Oncology Group has incorporated surgical questions and advanced the field with a steady use of consistent therapies (ie, cisplatin/etoposide plus radiotherapy of 45 Gy [induction therapy] and cisplatin/etoposide plus at least 61 Gy) in potentially operable or unresectable disease. Further studies examining the addition of either docetaxel or novel agents to such regimens are underway.

Outcome of radiation therapy for renal transplant rejection refractory to chemical immunosuppression.

Twenty consecutive patients with kidney graft rejection refractory to chemical immunosuppression were treated with local irradiation to the transplanted renal graft (3 x 1.5 Gy). Ten patients were complete responders (median follow-up: 47 months). Six patients were partial responders and failed after 1-4 months. Four patients did not respond.

National Institutes of Health State-of-the-Science Conference Statement: Symptom management in cancer: pain, depression, and fatigue, July 15-17, 2002.

BACKGROUND: Despite advances in early detection and effective treatment, cancer remains one of the most feared diseases. Among the most common side effects of cancer and treatments for cancer are pain, depression, and fatigue. Although research is producing increasingly hopeful insights into the causes and cures for cancer, efforts to manage the side effects of the disease and its treatments have not kept pace. The challenge that faces us is how to increase awareness of the importance of recognizing and actively addressing cancer-related distress. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) convened a State-of-the-Science Conference on Symptom Management in Cancer: Pain, Depression, and Fatigue to examine the current state of knowledge regarding the management of pain, depression, and fatigue in individuals with cancer and to identify directions for future research. Specifically, the conference examined how to identify individuals who are at risk for cancer-related pain, depression, and/or fatigue; what treatments work best to address these symptoms when they occur; and what is the best way to deliver interventions across the continuum of care. STATE-OF-THE-SCIENCE PROCESS: A non-advocate, non-Federal, 14-member panel of experts representing the fields of oncology, radiology, psychology, nursing, public health, social work, and epidemiology prepared the statement. In addition, 24 experts in medical oncology, geriatrics, pharmacology, psychology, and neurology presented data to the panel and to the conference audience during the first 1.5 days of the conference. The panel then prepared its statement, addressing the five predetermined questions and drawing on submitted literature, the speakers' presentations, and discussions held at the conference. The statement was presented to the conference audience, followed by a press conference to allow the panel to respond to questions from the media. After its release at the conference, the draft statement was made available on the Internet. The panel's final statement is available at http://consensus.nih.gov. CONCLUSIONS: The panel concluded that the available evidence supports a variety of interventions for treating cancer patients' pain, depression, and fatigue. Clinicians should routinely use brief assessment tools to ask patients about pain, depression, and fatigue and to initiate evidence-based treatments. Assessment should include discussion about common symptoms experienced by cancer patients, and these discussions should continue over the duration of the illness. Impediments to effective symptom management in cancer patients can arise from different sources and interactions among providers, patients and their families, and the health care system. Numerous factors could interfere with adequate symptom management. Among these factors are incomplete effectiveness of some treatments, a lack of sufficient knowledge regarding effective treatment strategies, patient reluctance to report symptoms to caregivers, a belief that such symptoms are simply a part of the cancer experience that must be tolerated, and inadequate coverage and reimbursement for some treatments. Additional research is needed on the definition, occurrence, the treatment of pain, depression, and fatigue, alone and in combination, in adequately funded prospective studies. The panel also concluded that the state of the science in cancer symptom management should be reassessed periodically.

Small cell lung cancer: state of the art and future perspectives.

Small cell lung cancer accounts for less than 20% of all lung cancer. The management of this distinct tumor entity differs from the more common non-small cell lung cancer. Primary prevention of smoking exposure remains the most important public health measure. Although small cell lung is an exquisitely chemosensitive disease it remains ultimately fatal for the great majority of patients. Combination chemotherapy regimens have improved response rate and survival of the last three decades. The combination of cisplatin and etoposide has been considered the standard therapy for over a decade. More intensive triplet combination chemotherapy and high-dose chemotherapy have shown improved response rates and survival. Early concomitant and accelerated radiotherapy improves survival in limited stage disease. This review summarizes the current state of the art and future perspectives in detection, staging and standard therapy of small cell lung cancer. Particular emphasis is given to the importance of concomitant and accelerated radiotherapy and consideration of dose-intensive combination chemotherapy regimens.

70 Gy thoracic radiotherapy is feasible concurrent with chemotherapy for limited-stage small-cell lung cancer: analysis of Cancer and Leukemia Group B study 39808.

PURPOSE: To prospectively evaluate the feasibility of delivering 70 Gy once-daily thoracic radiotherapy (TRT), concurrent with chemotherapy, in the treatment of limited-stage small-cell lung cancer (L-SCLC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eligible patients received two cycles of induction paclitaxel (175 mg/m(2) on Day 1) and topotecan (1 mg/m(2) on Days 1-5) with granulocyte colony stimulating factor support, followed by three cycles of carboplatin (area under the curve = 5 on Day 1) and etoposide (100 mg/m(2) on Days 1-3). TRT (70 Gy, 2 Gy/fx/7 weeks) was initiated with the first cycle of carboplatin and etoposide. Prophylactic cranial irradiation was offered to patients achieving a complete response or good partial response. RESULTS: Ninety percent of patients (57 of 63) proceeded to protocol TRT. There was one treatment-related fatality. Nonhematologic Grade 3/4 toxicities affecting more than 10% of patients, during or after TRT, were dysphagia (16%/5%) and febrile neutropenia (12%/4%). The response rate to all therapy was 92% and the median overall survival is 22.4 months (95% confidence interval 16.1, infinity ). Twenty-eight patients remain alive with a median follow-up of 24.7 months. CONCLUSION: 70 Gy once-daily TRT can be delivered safely in the cooperative group setting for patients with L-SCLC. Initial efficacy data are encouraging. The hypothesis that high-dose once-daily TRT results in comparable or improved survival compared with twice-daily accelerated TRT warrants testing in a Phase III trial.