Immunotherapy in small cell lung cancer:One step at a time: A narrative review

Chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy has been the standard of care for many years for patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC). Despite exceptionally high responses (up to 80%) with chemotherapy, the majority of patients relapse rapidly within weeks to months after treatment completion. Therefore, new and better treatment options are necessary. Recently, synergistic activity has been reported for the addition of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) to standard platinum-based chemotherapy in the therapeutic strategy of advanced SCLC. For the first time after several decades, a significant survival improvement was achieved for this population. However, the overwhelming majority of patients do not respond to ICI, or relapse rapidly. There is need for better knowledge about the biology, histopathologic features, and molecular pathways of SCLC. This can probably help to identify the optimal predictive biomarkers, which are warranted to develop an individual therapeutic strategy including the rational use of a combination of immunotherapeutic agents. Here, we provide an overview of the rationale for and clinical results of the completed and ongoing trials using different strategies of immunotherapy in SCLC. In addition, opportunities for further improvement of therapies will be discussed, including the addition of radiotherapy, co-stimulatory antibodies, and other immune modifying agents.</p

Cost Effectiveness of Modified Fractionation Radiotherapy versus Conventional Radiotherapy for Unresected Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer Patients

IntroductionModified fractionation radiotherapy (RT), delivering multiple fractions per day or shortening the overall treatment time, improves overall survival for non -small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients compared with conventional fractionation RT (CRT). However, its cost effectiveness is unknown. Therefore, we aimed to examine and compare the cost effectiveness of different modified RT schemes and CRT in the curative treatment of unresected NSCLC patients.MethodsA probabilistic Markov model was developed based on individual patient data from the meta-analysis of radiotherapy in lung cancer (N = 2000). Dutch health care costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and net monetary benefits (NMBs) were compared between two accelerated schemes (very accelerated RT [VART] and moderately accelerated RT [MART]), two hyperfractionated schemes (using an identical (HRTI) or higher (HRTH) total treatment dose than CRT) and CRT.ResultsAll modified fractionations were more effective and costlier than CRT (1.12 QALYs, €24,360). VART and MART were most effective (1.30 and 1.32 QALYs) and cost €25,746 and €26,208, respectively. HRTI and HRTH yielded less QALYs than the accelerated schemes (1.27 and 1.14 QALYs), and cost €26,199 and €29,683, respectively. MART had the highest NMB (€79,322; 95% confidence interval [CI], €35,478-€133,648) and was the most cost-effective treatment followed by VART (€78,347; 95% CI, €64,635-€92,526). CRT had an NMB of €65,125 (95% CI, €54,663-€75,537). MART had the highest probability of being cost effective (43%), followed by VART (31%), HRTI (24%), HRTH (2%), and CRT (0%).ConclusionImplementing accelerated RT is almost certainly more efficient than current practice CRT and should be recommended as standard RT for the curative treatment of unresected NSCLC patients not receiving concurrent chemo-radiotherapy

Migration von /sw vom AFS ins DCE/DFS

/sw ist eine verteilte Softwarebereitstellung mit dem Ziel, jedem Benutzer Software zentral zur Verfügung zu stellen, ohne daß er sich darum kümmern muß, woher er seine Software bekommt. Für eine Außenstehenden ergibt sich somit das Bild eines großen Softwarepools, aus dem er sich fertig installierte Software für seine Plattform herunterladen kann. Voraussetzung dafür ist, daß ein Benuzter an seiner Workstation über AFS (Andrew File System), DFS (Distributed File System) oder ftp verfügt. Zur Zeit werden vom /sw für 18 verschiedenen Unix-Plattformen 594 Programme in 1024 verschiedenen Installationen angeboten. Die meisten Architekturen vom /sw liegen im AFS, bis auf die Architekturen DEC ALPHA, IRIX 4.0 und Linux, die im NFS liegen. In Zukunft wird es für die gesamte /sw Software nur noch eine Quelle geben, das DFS. Mit der Migration von /sw aus dem AFS ins DFS entfällt dann die Trennung von /sw in einen AFS-Teil und einem NFS-Teil und damit auch der AFS/NFS-Translators, der recht unstabil läuft. Die gesamte Software von /sw wurde aus dem AFS bzw. NFS ins DFS migriert, so daß für alle vom /sw unterstützten Architekturen nur noch eine Quelle zur Verfügung steht, die Stuttgarter DCE-Zelle. Jeder AFS-Klient hat über den AFS/DFS-Translator Zugriff auf /sw und für die NFS-Klienten wird das /sw-Fi-lesystem exportiert, so daß jeder NFS-Klient die Möglichkeit hat das DFS-Filesystem /sw zu mounten. Eine Workstation kann sowohl AFS- als auch DCE/DFS-Klient sein

Radiotherapy for small cell lung cancer in current clinical practice guidelines

Several guidelines including radiotherapy recommendations exist worldwide for the treatment of small cell lung cancer (SCLC). To evaluate the differences in radiotherapy recommendations we conducted a systematic review. PubMed and the sites of medical societies were searched for SCLC guidelines published in either English, Chinese, or Dutch. This was limited to January 2018 till February 2021 to only include up-to-date recommendations. Data was extracted and compared regarding the guideline's development method and radiotherapy recommendations. Eleven guidelines were identified (PubMed n=4, societies n=7) from Spain (n=1), Canada (n=1), America (n=3), United Kingdom (n=1), the Netherlands (n=1), and China (n=3), respectively. Nine guidelines assessed the strength of evidence (SOE) and specified the strength of recommendation (SOR), although methods were different. The major radiotherapy recommendations are similar although differences exist in thoracic radiotherapy (TRT) dose, time, and volume. Controversial areas are TRT in resected stage I-IIA (pN1), prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) in resected as well as unresected stage I-IIA, stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in unresected stage I-IIA, PCI time, and PCI versus magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) surveillance in stage IV. The existence of several overlapping guidelines for SCLC treatment indicates that guideline development is (unnecessarily) repeated by different organizations or societies. Improvement could be made by better international collaboration to avoid duplicating unnecessary work, which would spare a lot of time and resources. Efforts should be made to work together on controversial or unknown fields

Self-Reported Cognitive Function and Quality of Life in Patients With SCLC in the Hippocampal Avoidance Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation Versus Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation Randomized Phase 3 Trial (NCT01780675)

Introduction: In the randomized controlled trial in patients with SCLC comparing standard prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) with hippocampal avoidance PCI (HA-PCI), we did not observe beneficial effects of HA-PCI on tested cognition. Here, we report findings on self-reported cognitive functioning (SRCF) and quality of life (QoL). Methods: Patients with SCLC were randomized to receive PCI with or without HA (NCT01780675) and assessed at baseline (82 HA-PCI and 79 PCI patients) and at 4, 8, 12, 18, and 24 months of follow-up, using the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) and EORTC QLQ—brain cancer module (BN20). SRCF was assessed with the cognitive functioning scale of the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the Medical Outcomes Study questionnaire. A change of 10 points was used for minimal clinically important differences. Percentages of patients classified with having improved, stable, or deteriorated SRCF were compared between groups using chi-square tests. Changes in mean scores were analyzed using linear mixed models. Results: There was no significant difference in the percentage of patients with deteriorated, stable, or improved SRCF between the treatment arms. Depending on the evaluated time point, 31% to 46% and 29% to 43% of patients in the HA-PCI and PCI arm, respectively, reported a deteriorated SRCF on the basis of the EORTC QLQ-C30 and Medical Outcomes Study. QoL outcomes were not significantly different between the study arms, except for physical functioning at 12 months (p = 0.019) and motor dysfunction at 24 months (p = 0.020). Conclusions: Our trial did not find beneficial effects of HA-PCI over PCI on SRCF and QoL. The cognitive benefit of sparing the hippocampus in the context of PCI is still a subject of debate

Dynamics of eligibility criteria for central nervous system metastases in non-small cell lung cancer randomized clinical trials over time

Although central nervous system (CNS) metastases frequently occur in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), historically these patient

Survival of patients with <i>KRAS </i>G12C mutated stage IV non-small cell lung cancer with and without brain metastases treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors

Introduction: Few data is available on whether brain metastases (BM) influence survival in patients with stage IV KRAS G12C mutated (KRAS G12C+ ) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with first-line immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) +/- chemotherapy ([chemo]-ICI). Methods: Data was retrospectively collected from the population-based Netherlands Cancer Registry. The cumulative incidence of intracranial progression, overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) was determined for patients with KRAS G12C+ stage IV NSCLC diagnosed January 1 – June 30, 2019, treated with first-line (chemo)-ICI. OS and PFS were estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods and BM+ and BM− groups were compared using log-rank tests. Results: Of 2489 patients with stage IV NSCLC, 153 patients had KRAS G12C+ and received first-line (chemo)-ICI. Of those patients, 35% (54/153) underwent brain imaging (CT and/or MRI), of which 85% (46/54) MRI. Half of the patients with brain imaging (56%; 30/54) had BM, concerning one-fifth (20%; 30/153) of all patients, of which 67% was symptomatic. Compared to BM−, patients with BM+ were younger and had more organs affected with metastasis. Around one-third (30%) of patients with BM+ had ≥5 BM at diagnosis. Three quarters of patients with BM+ received cranial radiotherapy prior to start of (chemo)-ICI. The 1-year cumulative incidence of intracranial progression was 33% for patients with known baseline BM and 7% for those without (p = 0.0001). Median PFS was 6.6 (95% CI 3.0–15.9) and 6.7 (95% CI 5.1–8.5) months for BM+ and BM− (p = 0.80), respectively. Median OS was 15.7 (95% CI 6.2–27.3) and 17.8 (95% CI 13.4–22.0) months for BM+ and BM− (p = 0.77), respectively. Conclusion: Baseline BM are common in patients with metastatic KRAS G12C+ NSCLC. During (chemo)-ICI treatment, intracranial progression was more frequent in patients with known baseline BM, justifying regular imaging during treatment. In our study, presence of known baseline BM did not influence OS or PFS.</p

Risk factors for cognitive impairment in radically treated stage III NSCLC: Secondary findings of the NVALT-11 study

Aim: To identify risk factors for self-reported cognitive impairment in radically treated stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: Cognitive functioning was assessed using the EORTC-QLQ-C30 at seven pre-specified time points in the phase III NVALT-11 trial (observation versus prophylactic cranial irradiation [PCI] in stage III NSCLC treated with chemo-radiotherapy ± surgery). Cognition was analyzed as binary (impairment or not) and continuous outcome, respectively, using generalized estimating equation (GEE) before and after multiple imputation. A score -10, p < 0.05). Cognitive functioning declined over time (β = -0.26, p = 0.001) except for patients with cognitive impairment at baseline (β = 0.141, p = 0.33). Conclusion: Cognitive impairment is dynamic over time with four types. Baseline cognitive impairment (score < 75) is the most important risk factor for subsequent cognitive impairment in stage III NSCLC. Note: This work has been partly reported as an oral presentation at the ESTRO 2021 meeting (OC-0176)

Self-Reported Cognitive Function and Quality of Life in Patients With SCLC in the Hippocampal Avoidance Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation Versus Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation Randomized Phase 3 Trial (NCT01780675)

Introduction: In the randomized controlled trial in patients with SCLC comparing standard prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) with hippocampal avoidance PCI (HA-PCI), we did not observe beneficial effects of HA-PCI on tested cognition. Here, we report findings on self-reported cognitive functioning (SRCF) and quality of life (QoL). Methods: Patients with SCLC were randomized to receive PCI with or without HA (NCT01780675) and assessed at baseline (82 HA-PCI and 79 PCI patients) and at 4, 8, 12, 18, and 24 months of follow-up, using the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) and EORTC QLQ—brain cancer module (BN20). SRCF was assessed with the cognitive functioning scale of the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the Medical Outcomes Study questionnaire. A change of 10 points was used for minimal clinically important differences. Percentages of patients classified with having improved, stable, or deteriorated SRCF were compared between groups using chi-square tests. Changes in mean scores were analyzed using linear mixed models. Results: There was no significant difference in the percentage of patients with deteriorated, stable, or improved SRCF between the treatment arms. Depending on the evaluated time point, 31% to 46% and 29% to 43% of patients in the HA-PCI and PCI arm, respectively, reported a deteriorated SRCF on the basis of the EORTC QLQ-C30 and Medical Outcomes Study. QoL outcomes were not significantly different between the study arms, except for physical functioning at 12 months (p = 0.019) and motor dysfunction at 24 months (p = 0.020). Conclusions: Our trial did not find beneficial effects of HA-PCI over PCI on SRCF and QoL. The cognitive benefit of sparing the hippocampus in the context of PCI is still a subject of debate