European Lung Cancer Working Party. Clinical Practice Guidelines. Small Cell Lung Cancer: V. Extensive disease

The present guidelines on the management of extensive disease small cell lung cancer (SCLC) were formulated by the ELCWP in October 2007. They are designed to answer the following nine questions: 1) What is the definition of extensive disease? 2)What are the active drugs? 3) What is the best induction regimen? 4) Is there a role for maintenance chemotherapy? 5) Is there a role for dose-intensive chemotherapy? 6) Is there a role for the use of haemopoietic growth factors and stem cells support? 7) Is there a role for alternating or sequential chemotherapy? 8) Is there a role for biological treatments? 9) Is there a place for second-line chemotherapy

European Lung Cancer Working Party Clinical Practice Guidelines Non-small Cell Lung Cancer: II. Unresectable Non-metastatic Stages

The present guidelines on the management of unresectable non-metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were formulated by the ELCWP in October 2005. They are designed to answer the following eight questions: 1) Is chest irradiation curative for NSCLC? 2) What are the contra-indications (anatomical or functional) to chest irradiation? 3) Does the addition of chemotherapy add an advantage to radiotherapy? 4) Does the addition of radiotherapy add an advantage to chemotherapy? 5) Is irradiation as effective as surgery for marginally resectable stage III? 6) How to best combine chemotherapy with radiotherapy: sequentially, concomitantly, as consolidation, as induction, as radiosensitiser? 7) In case of too advanced locoregional disease, is there a role for consolidation (salvage) local treatment (surgery or radiotherapy) after induction chemotherapy? 8) In 2005, what are the technical characteristics of an adequate radiotherapy

European Lung Cancer Working Party Clinical Practice Guidelines. Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: III. Metastatic disease

The present guidelines on the management of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NS CLC) were formulated by the ELCWP in October 2006. They are designed to answer the following twelve questions: 1) What benefits can be expected from chemotherapy and what are the treatment objectives? 2) What are the active chemotherapeutic drugs for which efficacy has been shown? 3) Which are the most effective platinum-based regimens? 4) Which is the indicated dosage of cisplatin? 5) Can carboplatin be substituted for cisplatin? 6) Which is the optimal number of cycles to be administered? 7) Can non-platinum based regimens be substituted for platinum based chemotherapy as first-line treatment? 8) Is there an indication for sequential chemotherapy? 9) What is the efficacy of salvage chemotherapy and which drugs should be used in that indication? 10) What is the place of targeted therapies? 11) What is the place of chemotherapy in the management of a patient with brain metastases? 12) Which specific drugs can be used for the patient with bone metastases

A literature-based qualitative and quantitative overview of chemotherapy for malignant mesothelioma

5th Central European Lung Cancer Conference, Prague, Czech Republic, September 1998info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedsuppl 1 :S2

Methodological quality evaluation and quantitative review of chemotherapy for malignant mesothelioma

for the European Lung Cancer Working Party (ELCWP)info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublishe

European Lung Cancer Working Party Clinical Practice Guidelines. Non-small cell lung cancer: I. Early stages

The present guidelines on the management of resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were formulated by the (ELCWP) in April 2005. They aim in answering the following eleven questions: 1) Is surgery the best therapy for a potentially resectable cancer? 2) How is complete resection defined? 3) Is systematic lymph node dissection necessary during surgery? 4) What is the role of radiotherapy after complete resec tion? 5) Should adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy be administered in clinical stages I or II? 6) Should adjuvant chemotherapy be administered in pathological stages I or II? 7) Is adjuvant therapy advisable after complete resection for pathologi cal stage IIIA N2? If yes, of what type: chemotherapy, radiotherapy or chemotradio herapy? 8) What are the indications for surgery after induction treatment, in clinical stages IIIA or IIIB? 9) In clinical stages IIIA or IIIB, is preoperative therapy required and of what type? 10) What type of treatment is indicated after an incomplete surgical resection? 11) What is the best regimen for (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy

Randomized Phase II Study of Cabazitaxel Versus Methotrexate in Patients With Recurrent and/or Metastatic Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck Previously Treated With Platinum-Based Therapy.

LESSONS LEARNED: Cabazitaxel has activity in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) and taxane-resistant cell lines. For the first time, cabazitaxel was investigated in incurable patients with recurrent SCCHN. Patients were randomly assigned to cabazitaxel every 3 weeks or weekly methotrexate.This phase II study did not meet its primary endpoint.Cabazitaxel has low activity in SCCHN.The toxicity profile in this population also was not favorable owing to the high rate of febrile neutropenia observed (17%). BACKGROUND: Cabazitaxel is a second-generation taxane that improves the survival of patients with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer following docetaxel therapy. Cabazitaxel has activity in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) and taxane-resistant cell lines. In this randomized phase II trial, we investigated cabazitaxel in patients with recurrent SCCHN. METHODS: Patients with incurable SCCHN with progression after platinum-based therapy were randomly assigned to cabazitaxel every 3 weeks (cycle 1, 20 mg/m2, increased to 25 mg/m2 for subsequent cycles in the absence of nonhematological adverse events [AEs] greater than grade 2 and hematological AEs greater than grade 3) or methotrexate (40 mg/m2/week). The patients were stratified according to their performance status and previous platinum-based chemotherapy for palliation versus curative intent. The primary endpoint was the progression-free survival rate (PFSR) at 18 weeks. RESULTS: Of the 101 patients, 53 and 48, with a median age of 58.0 years (range, 41-80), were randomly assigned to cabazitaxel or methotrexate, respectively. The PFSR at 18 weeks was 13.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 5%-25%) for cabazitaxel and 8.3% (95% CI, 2%-20%) for methotrexate. The median progression-free survival was 1.9 months in both arms. The median overall survival was 5.0 and 3.6 months for cabazitaxel and methotrexate, respectively. More patients experienced serious adverse events with cabazitaxel than with methotrexate (54% vs. 36%). The most common drug-related grade 3-4 AE in the cabazitaxel arm was febrile neutropenia (17.3%). CONCLUSION: This study did not meet its primary endpoint. Cabazitaxel has low activity in recurrent SCCHN

Small cell lung Cancer: IV. Extensive diseases.

info:eu-repo/semantics/publishe