Second-line therapy for small-cell lung cancer

Small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) recurs in the majority of patients, even though most patients respond to first-line therapy. Therefore second-line therapy is considered in almost all patients with SCLC in the course of disease. Efficacy of second-line chemotherapy is much lower than that of first-line treatment, but it can provide significant palliation and prolongation of survival for many patients. Patients receiving second-line therapy are divided into relapsed and refractory patients. Relapsed disease is defined as relapse or progression at least 3 months after the end of first-line therapy. All other situations, including a treatment-free interval <3 months or no response to first-line therapy, are termed refractory disease. The benefit from second-line chemotherapy is highest in patients with relapsed disease. Topotecan monotherapy improves survival and quality of life, as well as cancer-related symptoms in the second-line setting. Alternatively, doxorubicin-based combination therapy can be administered with a similar outcome but a slightly lower rate of symptom control. In refractory patients no standard therapy exists. Amrubicin, a novel anthracyline, showed promising activity in refractory and relapsed patients. Phase III trials are ongoing. Other agents with activity include irinotecan, paclitaxel, docetaxel, gemcitabine, bendamustine and vinorelbine.     

Rechallenge treatment with a platinum-based regimen in patients with sensitive relapsed small-cell lung cancer

Among patients with relapsed small-cell lung cancer (SCLC), those who relapse?>?90 days after first-line chemotherapy are classified sensitive relapse. Rechallenge with a first-line platinum-based regimen has been used in sensitive relapsed SCLC patients, but its importance is not known. We evaluated the outcome of rechallenge with platinum-based chemotherapy for sensitive relapse patients. We reviewed consecutive patients with sensitive relapsed SCLC who received second-line chemotherapy between January 1999 and December 2016. We evaluated the treatment outcomes of platinum-based rechallenge and non-rechallenge regimens for second-line chemotherapy in sensitive relapse patients. Of 245 patients, 81 sensitive relapse patients received second-line chemotherapy. Sixty-seven patients (82.7%) were treated with rechallenging platinum-based regimens (“rechallenge group”) and 14 patients (17.3%) were treated with other regimens (“non-rechallenge group”) as second-line chemotherapy. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.1 months in the rechallenge group and 3.5 months in the non-rechallenge group, and median survival time was 10.8 and 8.2 months, respectively. There were no significant differences in PFS or overall survival (OS) between the two groups. Sub-analyses of patients who received chemotherapy alone as first-line treatment showed that the rechallenge group had longer PFS than that of the non-rechallenge group (median 5.4 vs. 3.6 months, p?=?0.0038), and the rechallenge group had a tendency to have longer OS than non-rechallenge group. These data suggest that rechallenge treatment with a platinum-based regimen could be second-line chemotherapy in patients with sensitive relapsed SCLC, especially those treated with chemotherapy alone as first-line therapy.     

足叶乙甙联合铂类一线化疗后复发的小细胞肺癌二线化疗的临床研究

目的：本研究旨在分析敏感性复发及难治性复发的小细胞肺癌的二线化疗效果。方法：2003年1月-2006年3月经足叶乙甙联合铂类一线化疗后复发的小细胞肺癌（SCLC）共64例，其中敏感性患者复发31例，难治性患者复发33例。对难治性复发或敏感性复发时间少于6月者，采用紫杉类或伊立替康单药化疗；对敏感性复发时间大于6月者仍采用原一线方案或更改为紫杉类或伊立替康单药化疗。结果：64例患者进行了二线化疗，有57例患者可评价疗效，二线治疗总有效率22．8％，中位疾病进展时间（mTTP）15．1周，中位生存期（MST）7．2月。敏感性复发组及难治性复发组的有效率（CR＋PR）分别为37．9％和7．1％（P〈0．01），mTTP分别为15．9周和10．4周（P〈0．05），MST分别为9．0月和6．0月（P〈0．05）。骨髓抑制为二线化疗的主要不良反应，敏感性复发组及难治性复发组G3／4级白细胞减少发生率分别为41．9％和42．4％，G3／4级血小板减少发生率分别为22．6％和30．3％，两组不良反应无明显差异（P〉0．05）。结论：足叶乙甙联合铂类一线化疗后复发的小细胞肺癌采用二线化疗有部分病例仍有效，特别是对于敏感性复发的患者。     

First-line chemotherapy rechallenge after relapse in small cell lung cancer

Summary Response to second-line therapy in relapsing patients with small cell lung carcinoma (SCLC) is often claimed to be evidence in favour of non-cross resistance. Fifteen patients with SCLC who had relapsed off treatment after responding to initial first-line chemotherapy were retreated with the same regiment at relapse. Ten (67%) achieved a further partial response. Median response duration was only 3 months (range 2–4 months), but similar poor results have been reported for most studies using second-line chemotherapy. Relapse in SCLC does not necessarily imply complete clinical resistance to first-line chemotherapy, and strict clinical criteria are required to demonstrate true non-cross resistance     

Efficacy and safety of amurubicin for the elderly patients with refractory relapsed small cell lung cancer as third-line chemotherapy

Background: While more elderly patients are being diagnosed with lung cancer every year, no anti-lung cancer therapy designed specifically for the elderly has been established yet. This is the first retrospective study to examine the efficacy and safety of amurubicin (AMR) for elderly patients with refractory relapsed small cell lung cancer (SCLC) as second or third-line chemotherapy. Materials and Methods: Thirty-six patients were eligible for analyzing the frequency of hematologic and non-hematologic toxicities and effectiveness of AMR for refractory relapsed SCLC in both elderly (≥70 years) and non-elderly (<70 years) groups. Results: Among these patients as third-line chemotherapy, the response rate and the disease control rate of refractory relapsed cases were 44.4 and 55.6%, respectively. The median of progression-free survival time was 3.0 months and the median of overall survival time was 5.1 months. There were no significant differences in the frequency of the grade 3-5 hematologic or non-hematologic toxicity between the elderly (≥70 years) and non-elderly (<70 years) patients or second and third-line chemotherapies. Conclusions: AMR could be one of the effective tools in the treatment of elderly patients with refractory relapsed SCLC as third-line chemotherapy, and the recommended dose is 30 mg/m 2 for three consecutive days.     

Bortezomib in combination with rituximab, dexamethasone, ifosfamide, cisplatin and etoposide chemoimmunotherapy in patients with relapsed and primary refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

Patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma may experience extended survival with second-line chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). Since a major determinant of outcome after ASCT is responsiveness to second-line therapy, the development of more effective second-line treatments is desirable. We investigated the addition of bortezomib to rituximab, dexamethasone, ifosfamide, cisplatin and etoposide (VIPER). Fifteen patients were enrolled, of whom seven were refractory to first-line chemotherapy and only three had maintained first response for 1 year. Nine (60%) patients achieved objective responses, of which three (20%) were IWC-PET (International Workshop Criteria positron emission tomography) complete responses. Median progression-free survival was 3 months, and median overall survival was 10 months. At a median follow-up of 26 months, five patients (33%) remained alive. Treatment was well tolerated with no unexpected toxicity. Although response rates did not meet predefined criteria, activity was at least comparable to other second-line approaches despite a poor-prognosis patient population.     

Recent advances with topotecan in the treatment of lung cancer

Topotecan is a semisynthetic derivative of camptothecin that specifically targets topoisomerase I. It has well-established antineoplastic properties and has been successfully combined with other antineoplastic agents with activity dependent on DNA disruption, such as cisplatin and etoposide. Topotecan is indicated for the treatment of small cell lung cancer (SCLC) sensitive disease after failure of first-line chemotherapy and metastatic ovarian carcinoma after failure of initial or subsequent chemotherapy. Since the approval of topotecan for the second-line treatment of SCLC, studies have been conducted in the first-line setting. Recent studies demonstrate the utility of i.v. topotecan in combination with cisplatin for untreated SCLC. Further, an oral formulation of topotecan is currently under investigation and may provide added convenience for patients. Oral topotecan has been studied in the first- and second-line settings for both SCLC and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Three recent phase III trials have demonstrated the activity of oral topotecan. In the first study of chemotherapy-na?ve patients with extensive-disease SCLC, oral topotecan plus cisplatin provided efficacy and safety similar to those of etoposide plus cisplatin. In a second study of patients with relapsed SCLC, treatment with oral topotecan showed a statistically significant and clinically meaningful longer overall survival time and improvement in dyspnea and quality of life compared with best supportive care alone in all prognostic groups. Finally, in previously treated patients with NSCLC, single-agent oral topotecan was shown to be noninferior in 1-year survival rate relative to the current standard of i.v. docetaxel. In future studies, oral topotecan will represent a good candidate for combination therapy with other i.v. or oral chemotherapy agents, monoclonal antibodies, and small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors.     

Phase II study of second-line gemcitabine in sensitive or refractory small cell lung cancer

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is highly sensitive to chemotherapy. Despite a dramatic initial response, however, most patients relapse. Given the activity of gemcitabine in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and early clinical trials suggesting activity of gemcitabine in chemo-naive SCLC patients, we conducted a phase II study to determine the efficacy and toxicities of gemcitabine in SCLC patients who have failed first-line chemotherapy. Gemcitabine 1250 mg/m(2) was given intravenously on days 1 and 8, every 3 weeks. Eligibility criteria included prior treatment with only one chemotherapy regimen and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2. Patients with brain metastases were eligible. RESULTS: Between April 1998 and October 2001, 27 patients were enrolled: 15 patients with sensitive (S) disease (recurred>3 months after first-line chemotherapy) and 12 patients with refractory (R) disease (failed<3 months after first-line chemotherapy). Median age was 61 (range 45-74). All patients had received prior platinum-based therapy involving etoposide and either cisplatin or carboplatin. There were one early death and two early withdrawals because of toxicity. No responses were observed. Of 24 patients who received at least two cycles of gemcitabine, only three achieved stable disease after six cycles while 21 progressed. The median time to progression (TTP) was 6 weeks in S group, 5.6 weeks in R group, and 6 weeks overall. After a minimum potential follow-up of almost 1 year for all patients, the median survival was 8.8 months in S group, 4.2 months in R group, and 6.4 months for the whole group. One-year survival rate was 33.3% in S group, 16.7% in R group, and 25.4% for all patients. Myelosuppression was the most commonly observed adverse effect, with grade 3/4 neutropenia in 30%, and grade 3 thrombocytopenia in 30%. One patient (3.7%) developed neutropenic fever. Respiratory failure and death, possibly related to pulmonary toxicity, was observed in one patient (3.7%). CONCLUSION: monotherapy gemcitabine as second-line agent has limited activity in previously treated SCLC.     

Retrospective analysis of Japanese patients with relapse or refractory small-cell lung cancer treated with amrubicin hydrochloride

Amrubicin (AMR) is one of the most active chemotherapeutic agents for small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). Previous phase II studies reported on its effectiveness and severe hematological toxicities. However, AMR has yet to be approved outside Japan. Subsequently, no extensive evidence of its effects exist. Between January 2004 and October 2009, 69 patients received AMR for relapsed SCLC at our hospital. We reviewed these patients, and analyzed the efficacy and hematological toxicities of AMR. There were 27 sensitive relapses (S) and 42 refractory relapses (R). Patients received platinum agents, and 43 and 71% of the patients received etoposide and irinotecan, respectively. The median number of treatment cycles was 3 (range 1-14), and the response rate was 51% (70% in the S and 38% in the R cases, respectively). In patients administered with AMR as second-line therapy, the response rate was 55% and as third-line therapy, 39%. Median progression-free survival time was 3.2 months in the S and 1.9 months in the R patients (p=0.1071). Median survival time from the start of AMR was 6.2 months in the S and 4.8 months in the R cases (p=0.0045). The frequency of grade ≥3 hematological toxicities was leukopenia (41%), neutropenia (51%), anemia (14%), thrombocytopenia (17%) and febrile neutropenia (12%). No treatment-related death was observed. Although hematological toxicities, particularly neutropenia, were severe, AMR showed excellent anti-tumor activity, not only in the S, but also in the R cases, as shown in previous phase II studies. These results warrant further evaluation of AMR in the second-line setting, and also in the first-line setting in both limited- and extensive-stage disease. We conducted a phase II study to assess the efficacy of consolidation chemotherapy with AMR after standard chemoradiation in limited-stage SCLC.     

Prognostic value of the age-adjusted International Prognostic Index in chemosensitive recurrent or refractory non-Hodgkin's lymphomas treated with high-dose BEAM therapy and autologous stem cell transplantation.

High-dose therapy (HDT) is now recommended for patients under 60 years of age with chemosensitive relapsed aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. However, approximately half of these patients will be cured by HDT. Prognostic factors are needed to predict which patients with chemosensitive lymphoma to second-line therapy could benefit from HDT. We retrospectively investigated the prognostic value of the widely used age-adjusted International Prognostic Index (AA-IPI) calculated at the time of relapse (35 patients) or just before second-line salvage therapy for primary refractory disease (5 patients). The median age was 51 years (range 18-64 years). Thirty-six patients had diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Salvage cytoreductive therapy before HDT was DHAP/ESHAP (cytarabine, cysplatin, etoposide, steroids) in 17 patients, VIM3-Ara-c/MAMI (high-dose cytarabine, ifosfamide, methyl-gag, amsacrine) in 17 patients, CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone) or reinforced CHOP in 4 patients, high-dose cyclophosphamide and etoposide in 2 patients. The HDT regimen consisted of BEAM (carmusine, cytarabine, etoposide, melphalan) in all cases. Eleven patients were in partial remission and 29 in complete remission at the time of HDT. Ten patients had an IPI >1, 16 had relapsed early (<6 months after first-line therapy) or disease was refractory to first-line therapy (5 of the 16 patients). The median follow-up was 6.07 years (range 1.24-9.74 years). Overall survival was not statistically different in patients with refractory disease or in those who relapsed early compared with late failures (>6 months after first-line chemotherapy) (P=1), but the AA-IPI >1 was associated with a poor outcome (P=0.03). In conclusion, the AA-IPI could have a prognostic value in patients with chemosensitive recurrent lymphoma treated with BEAM HDT.     

Combination chemotherapy with gemcitabine and vinorelbine in the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory small cell lung cancer: a phase II trial of the Minnie Pearl Cancer Research Network

The purpose of the study was to evaluate the combination of gemcitabine and vinorelbine in the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory small cell lung cancer.

Between March 1998 and February 1999, 30 patients with relapsed or refractory small cell lung cancer who had received treatment with one previous combination chemotherapy regimen entered this multicenter, community-based clinical trial. All patients had received previous platinum/etoposide combination chemotherapy; in addition, 12 patients had received paclitaxel as part of their first-line therapy. All patients received gemcitabine 1000 mg/m² and vinorelbine 20 mg/m² on days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle. Patients were reevaluated for response after two cycles of therapy; those with objective response or stable disease continued treatment for six courses or until disease progression.

Three of 28 evaluable patients (10%) had partial responses to treatment. None of the 17 patients with refractory disease responded, while 3 of 12 patients (25%) with relapsed disease had partial responses. Median survival was 5 months. Treatment was generally well tolerated; myelosuppression was the major toxicity, but only two patients developed febrile neutropenia, and there were no treatment-related deaths. Non-hematologic toxicity was uncommon; alopecia did not occur with this regimen.

The activity of gemcitabine and vinorelbine in patients with previously treated small cell lung cancer is modest and is limited to patients with relapsed (versus refractory) disease. In patients with relapsed small cell lung cancer, this regimen provides an additional treatment option, with decreased toxicity when compared to other second-line options. However, novel treatment approaches are necessary before substantial improvements in treating this patient population will be realized.     

Comparison of Amrubicin and Weekly Cisplatin/Etoposide/Irinotecan in Patients With Relapsed Small-cell Lung Cancer

Background

Although several agents have been introduced for the treatment of relapsed small-cell lung cancer (SCLC), there is still only limited evidence regarding second- and later-line chemotherapies for these patients.

Phase II trial of irinotecan/gemcitabine as second-line therapy for relapsed and refractory small-cell lung cancer: Cancer and Leukemia Group B Study 39902.

BACKGROUND: This phase II study evaluated the efficacy and safety of the irinotecan/gemcitabine combination in patients with relapsed/refractory small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with measurable tumor who had received one previous chemotherapy or chemotherapy/radiation regimen were eligible. Gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) was administered i.v. over 30 min followed immediately by irinotecan 100 mg/m(2) i.v. over 90 min, both on days 1 and 8 every 21 days. Patients were stratified based on response to initial treatment [i.e. primary sensitive disease with progression >or=3 months (group A), or refractory disease (group B)]. RESULTS: Seventy-three patients were enrolled but one never received treatment and one ineligible patient did not have SCLC. Median patient ages of the remaining patients were 61 and 63 years in groups A (n = 35) and B (n = 36), respectively, with performance status of 0 or 1 in 85% of 71 patients. Primary grade 3/4 toxic effects in groups A versus B were neutropenia (36% versus 43%), thrombocytopenia (36% versus 26%), nausea (12% versus 11%), vomiting (0 versus 11%), diarrhea (12% versus 9%), and pulmonary (12% versus 12%). Two patients had fatal events including pneumonitis (n = 1) and acute respiratory distress syndrome (n = 1). Responses occurred in 11 group A [two complete responses and nine partial responses (PRs)] and four group B (all PRs) patients, for response rates of 31% [95% confidence interval (CI) 17%, 49%) and 11% (95% CI 3%, 26%), respectively. Median survival and progression-free survival times were 7.1 (95% CI 6, 10.5) versus 3.5 (95% CI 3.1, 5.7) months, and 3.1 (95% CI 1.6, 5.3) versus 1.6 (95% CI 1.4, 2.8) months for group A versus B. CONCLUSION: The irinotecan/gemcitabine combination is active and well tolerated as second-line therapy in SCLC patients. Additional studies are warranted as second-line therapy in patients who progressed 90 days or more after first-line therapy. However, the observed efficacy results in refractory SCLC patients indicate that this regimen should not be further explored in this population.     

Outcomes of Transplant-Eligible Patients With Relapsed or Refractory Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma After Second-Line Salvage Chemotherapy: The Gustave Roussy Experience

IntroductionAfter failure of frontline therapy, patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (RR-DLBCL) that does not respond to first-line salvage chemotherapy can be recommended second-line salvage chemotherapy. The available literature in this regard is weak, although many centers routinely offer this type of second-line salvage chemotherapy to their patients.Patients and MethodsThis retrospective study included transplant-eligible patients with RR-DLBCL treated at Gustave Roussy between January 2008 and April 2020. Eligible patients were those who received second-line salvage chemotherapy using R-DHAP or R-ICE in patients who experienced an insufficient partial response, stable disease, or progressive disease in response to first-line salvage chemoimmunotherapy using an alternative regimen.ResultsForty-six RR-DLBCL patients received second-line salvage regimen, which yielded an objective response rate of 33%, median progression-free survival of 2.1 months, and overall survival of 11.4 months. Twelve patients proceeded to autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT), of whom 70% remained alive 1 year after ASCT. To explore the impact of transplantation, a multivariate analysis (excluding response to the first-line salvage regimen because this covariate was totally embedded within the transplantation covariate), ASCT was associated with progression-free survival (hazard ratio = 0.16; 95% confidence interval, 0.06-0.42) and overall survival (hazard ratio = 0.27; 95% confidence interval, 0.08-0.88).ConclusionSecond-line salvage chemotherapy with R-DHAP or R-ICE followed by ASCT leads to a favorable outcome in almost one third of patients with RR-DLBCL and offers a median overall survival of approximately 1 year. These data support the administration of second-line salvage chemotherapy followed by ASCT.     

Treatment of relapsed small-cell lung cancer--a focus on the evolving role of topotecan

Despite the high response rates to chemotherapy, small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) is among the most lethal malignancies. Long-term survival is anecdotal for patients with extensive disease; 5-years survival is ≤5% for those with limited disease. All patients with extensive disease and most patients with limited disease will experience disease progression and become candidates for second-line therapy. Although a number of agents have demonstrated antitumor activity in relapsed SCLC, including paclitaxel, docetaxel, etoposide, cisplatin, and carboplatin, topotecan is the only single agent currently approved in the United States for the treatment of recurrent disease. Topotecan is a novel topoisomerase I inhibitor with established antitumor activity in recurrent SCLC and has a predictable, noncumulative toxicity profile. Furthermore, topotecan has been shown to provide symptom improvement in this predominantly palliative setting. Evidence also suggests that topotecan readily penetrates the blood–brain barrier and might be active in the relatively large subset of SCLC patients who experience brain metastases. This article reviews the clinical utility of topotecan in recurrent SCLC, including its efficacy, tolerability, and quality-of-life effect, when used as monotherapy and in novel combination regimens.     

Secondary treatment and predictive factors for second-line chemotherapy after first-line oxaliplatin-based therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer

Two consecutive studies have evaluated the efficacy of oxaliplatin combined with the Nordic bolus schedule of 5-fluorouracil and folinic acid as first-line treatment in metastatic non-resectable colorectal cancer. One hundred and twelve patients were followed after end of first-line treatment and any secondary therapy registered. Fifty-three patients (47%) did not receive second-line irinotecan-based chemotherapy. The main reason was too poor performance status (59%). These patients had a median survival of only 1.7 months after progression of first-line therapy. The best predictive factors at start of first-line chemotherapy for receiving later second-line chemotherapy were performance status and alkaline phosphatase level. Fifty-nine patients (53%) received irinotecan-based second-line therapy. Four (7%) patients had a partial response, and 28 (52%) had stable disease. Median progression-free survival after second-line chemotherapy was 4.1 months and median survival 9.5 months. Median survival after first-line chemotherapy and secondary liver surgery was 34 months and five-year disease-free survival 8%. Survival among patients receiving both first- and second-line chemotherapy was 20.8 months, but only 8.9 months in patients not receiving second-line irinotecan-based chemotherapy. Poor performance status or elevated alkaline phosphatase level at start of first-line chemotherapy predicts whether second-line chemotherapy will be given or not.     

The Role of Autologous Transplantation in Hodgkin Lymphoma

Between 80% and 90% of Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) patients can be cured with up-to-date combined-modality treatments, but patients with disease refractory to first-line therapy and those who relapse after first-line therapy still have a relatively poor prognosis. Dose intensification with stem cell support has been evaluated both to avoid relapses and to cure patients with refractory or relapsed disease. In this review, we focus on the use of high-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in first-line, second-line, and third-line therapy for HL patients. The relevance of salvage therapy before high-dose chemotherapy is discussed, as well as the role of sequential high dose chemotherapy. We also review current evidence for tandem transplantation in high-risk HL patients and ASCT in elderly patients. Finally, we discuss current concepts of ASCT for HL patients and the use of functional imaging and consolidation therapy.     

Second-line chemotherapy in gastric cancer following S-1 with CPT-11 chemotherapy performed as clinical trial

We previously conducted a phase I/II study of irinotecan (CPT-11) combined with S-1 as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic advanced gastric cancer. In the present study,second-line chemotherapy was given to 32 of 44 patients whose disease became refractory to this first-line treatment. Overall survival time of the patients given second-line chemotherapy was significantly longer than that of patients not given such therapy (444 days vs. 230 days, p = 0.013). The response rate to second-line chemotherapy was 13% (4/32). Survival time of patients who responded to second-line chemotherapy was significantly longer than that of non-responders. Second-line chemotherapy may produce a better clinical response in patients who have progressive disease during first-line chemotherapy. Overall survival time and time to progression after second-line chemotherapy did not significantly differ between patients who received second-line chemotherapy regimens including S-1 and those who received regimens not including S-1.     

晚期胃癌不同一线及后线治疗方案的疗效对比分析北大核心

目的:分析晚期胃癌(advanced gastric cancer, AGC)一线及后线治疗方案的疗效及生存情况,为指导AGC的系统治疗及全程管理提供依据。方法:收集我院肿瘤科2015年01月至2019年12月收治的AGC患者的临床特征、辅助检查资料、治疗相关资料、疗效评估、疾病转归等相关临床资料,建立数据库,分析不同一线及后线治疗方案的疗效,以及不同人群、进行不同线数化疗的患者总生存期(overall survival, OS)的差异。结果:一线治疗总体客观缓解率(objective response rate, ORR)为37.6%,疾病控制率(disease control rate, DCR)为83.9%;二线治疗ORR为9.5%,DCR为44.6%;三线及以上治疗ORR为0%,DCR为15.2%。总体人群一线治疗中位无进展生存(median progression-free survival, mPFS)时间为7.0个月,中位总生存(medianoverall survival,mOS)时间为15.6个月;二线治疗mPFS时间为3.0个月,mOS时间为7.2个月。一线化疗采取含铂方案与含紫杉方案对比,mPFS分别为7.0个月、4.5个月(P=0.041),mOS分别为16.0个月、9.0个月(P=0.061);二线含紫杉方案与含伊立替康方案对比,mPFS分别为2.6个月、4.0个月(P=0.531),mOS分别为7.0个月、6.5个月(P=0.822)。仅进行一线治疗、一线+二线治疗、一线+二线+三线及以上治疗的AGC患者mOS分别为14.0个月、14.0个月及20.0个月,进行三线及以上治疗的患者mOS优于进行一线+二线治疗的患者(P=0.001)。一线方案中采用两药或三药及以上、有无免疫治疗对患者的mPFS及mOS无影响,且二线治疗中有无联合免疫治疗对患者的mPFS及mOS也无影响。结论:含铂双药方案疗效较佳,应作为AGC患者一线治疗的优选方案;二线及后线化疗有效率较低,二线化疗方案紫杉类与伊立替康疗效无差异;在非选择AGC人群中,一线及二线治疗中联合免疫治疗未见改善生存,化疗仍然是基石。     

Phase II trial of gemcitabine/irinotecan in refractory or relapsed small-cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND: Gemcitabine and irinotecan have shown a broad range of activity in solid tumors, including small-cell lung cancer (SCLC), with a synergistic effect on SCLC cell lines. The objective of this phase II trial was to evaluate the activity of gemcitabine/irinotecan in patients with relapsed SCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-five patients (15 with refractory disease and 20 with sensitive disease) who had experienced treatment failure with 1 previous chemotherapy regimen were recruited. Treatment consisted of gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) and irinotecan 100 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle for a maximum of 6 cycles. Eligibility criteria included an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, adequate organ function, and signed informed consent. RESULTS: All 35 patients were assessable for response, survival, and toxicity. Best objective responses exhibited were as follows: complete response in 2 patients (6%), partial response in 4 (11%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 21%-61%), stable disease in 7 (20%; 95% CI, 9%-45%), and progressive disease in 22 (63%; 95% CI, 17%-57%). Median time to disease progression was 3.4 months and median survival was 5.8 months. The 1-year survival rate was 34%. Toxicity was mainly hematologic. Grade 3/4 nausea and vomiting occurred in 9% of patients, neuropathy occurred in 2.8%, and diarrhea occurred in 14.3%. Survival was not significantly different for patients with refractory versus sensitive disease. CONCLUSION: The combination of gemcitabine/irinotecan was shown to be active as second-line chemotherapy, especially in patients with refractory disease.