Third CECOG consensus on the systemic treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer

The current third consensus on the systemic treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) builds upon and updates similar publications on the subject by the Central European Cooperative Oncology Group (CECOG), which has published such consensus statements in the years 2002 and 2005 (Zielinski CC, Beinert T, Crawford J et al. Consensus on medical treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer—update 2004. Lung Cancer 2005; 50: 129-137). The principle of all CECOG consensus is such that evidence-based recommendations for state-of-the-art treatment are given upon which all participants and authors of the manuscript have to agree (Beslija S, Bonneterre J, Burstein HJ et al. Third consensus on medical treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Ann Oncol 2009; 20 (11): 1771-1785). This is of particular importance in diseases in which treatment options depend on very particular clinical and biologic variables (Zielinski CC, Beinert T, Crawford J et al. Consensus on medical treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer—update 2004. Lung Cancer 2005; 50: 129-137; Beslija S, Bonneterre J, Burstein HJ et al. Third consensus on medical treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Ann Oncol 2009; 20 (11): 1771-1785). Since the publication of the last CECOG consensus on the medical treatment of NSCLC, a series of diagnostic tools for the characterization of biomarkers for personalized therapy for NSCLC as well as therapeutic options including adjuvant treatment, targeted therapy, and maintenance treatment have emerged and strongly influenced the field. Thus, the present third consensus was generated that not only readdresses previous disease-related issues but also expands toward recent developments in the management of NSCLC. It is the aim of the present consensus to summarize minimal quality-oriented requirements for individual patients with NSCLC in its various stages based upon levels of evidence in the light of a rapidly expanding array of individual therapeutic option

STELLAR: Final updated results of a phase II trial of TTFields with chemotherapy for unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma

Background: Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields), an anti-mitotic, regional treatment approved for glioblastoma utilizes low intensity, alternating electric fields delivered non-invasively to the tumor using a portable medical device. In-vitro, human mesothelioma cells were highly susceptible to TTFields. Methods: The trial accrued 80 patients with unresectable, previously untreated mesothelioma. Patients were treated with continuous 150 kHz TTFields (>18h/day) in combination with pemetrexed and cisplatin or carboplatin. Inclusion criteria included ECOG PS of 0-1 and pathologically proven mesothelioma. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). A visual analog scale was used to assess EOCG performance status and cancer-related pain assessed until disease progression. The sample size provided 80% power with two-sided alpha of 0.05 to detect an increase in median OS of 5.5 months compared to historical controls (Vogelzang, JCO 2003). Results: All 80 patients had a minimum follow up of 12 months. Median age was 67 (range 27-78), 84% were male and 44% (35 patients) had an ECOG PS of 1. 66% (53 patients) had epithelioid histology, similar to the Vogelzang study. Median OS was 18.2 months (95% CI 12.1-25.8) versus 12.1 months in the historical control. Median OS for epithelioid patients was 21.2 months (95% CI 13.2-25.8). ECOG score was stable during the first year of follow up. Median time to deterioration in performance status was 13.1 months. Average score of pain was lower compared to baseline during the first 7 months of the treatment and was higher later on the study, with a median time to a clinical significant 33% increase in pain of 8.4 months. No device-related serious adverse events (AEs) were reported. Expected TTFields-related dermatitis was reported in 46% (37 patients). Four patients (5%) had grade 3 dermatitis. Conclusions: The study met primary endpoint of significant extension of overall survival in previously untreated mesothelioma patients. TTFields was not associated with a decrease in performance status or an increase in pain for the duration of TTFields use. TTFields in combinati