Anlotinib in patients with relapsed or refractory thymic epithelial tumors: a study of 50 cases.

The optimal pharmaceutical regimen for advanced thymic epithelial tumors (TETs) remains controversial when first-line chemotherapy fails. This retrospective study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of anlotinib treatment for patients with relapsed and refractory TETs. Patients with progressive disease after failure of platinum-based chemotherapy were enrolled in this study. Anlotinib was orally taken once a day at an initial dose of 12 mg (10 mg when body weight <60 kg). The cycle was repeated every 3 weeks (2 weeks of treatment followed by 1-week rest). Objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS) were recorded as primary endpoints. There were 50 patients enrolled in this study from October 2018 to June 2021 at a median age of 50 (range 23-79) years old. Patients with thymoma and thymic carcinoma were 33 (66%) and 17 (34%), respectively. The ORR in thymoma and thymic carcinoma patients were 33% (11/33) and 41% (7/17), respectively. The median PFS (mPFS) was 7 (95% CI, 5.9-10.2) months in thymoma patients and 6 (95% CI, 4.6-9.3) months in the thymic carcinoma group. Eleven patients experienced dose reduction due to toxicities, among whom, eight patients discontinued treatment even after dose reduction. Six patients with thymoma showed myasthenia gravis deterioration during treatment, and two of them died of myasthenia gravis crisis. Anlotinib is active in patients with advanced TETs refractory to routine chemotherapy. Prescription of anlotinib to patients with myasthenia gravis should be made cautiously.

[A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled safety study to evaluate the clinical effects and quality of life of paclitaxel-carboplatin (PC) alone or combined with endostar for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)].

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the efficacy and quality of life and safety for paclitaxel and carboplatin (TC) and TC combined with endostar in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: This is a prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical study. A total of 126 cases of untreated advanced NSCLC were enrolled in this study. There were 63 patients in the TC control arm and TC combined endostar arm, respectively. All enrolled patients were continuously followed-up for disease progression and death. RESULTS: The objective response rate (ORR) of TC combined with endostar arm was 39.3%, and that of TC control arm was 23.0%, P = 0.078. The progression-free survival rates for TC combined with endostar arm and TC control arm were 78.3% and 58.8%, respectively, in 24 weeks (P = 0.017). The hazard ratio for the risk of disease progression was 0.35 (95%CI 0.13 to 0.90, P = 0.030). The median time to progression (TTP) of the TC combined with endostar arm was 7.1 months and TC arm 6.3 months (P > 0.05). The follow-up results showed that the median survival time (mOS) of the TC + Endostar arm was 17.6 months; (95%CI 13.4 to 21.7 months), and the TC + placebo arm 15.8 months (95%CI 9.4 to 22.9 months) (P > 0.05). The quality of life scores (LCSS patient scale) after treatment of the TC combined with endostar arm was improved, and that of the TC group was improved after completion of two cycles and three cycles of treatment. The quality of life scores compared with baseline after the completion of one cycle treatment was significantly improved for both the TC combined with endostar arm (P = 0.028 and), and TC arm (P = 0.036). It Indicated that TC combined with endostar treatment improved the patient's quality of life in the early treatment. The difference of adverse and serious adverse event rates between the two groups was not significant (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with TC alone treatmrnt, TC combined with endostar treatment can reduce the risk of disease progression at early time (24 weeks), increase the ORR, and can be used as first-line treatment for advanced NSCLC. The TC combined with endostar treatment has good safety and tolerability, improves the quality of life, and not increases serious adverse effects and toxicity for patients with advanced NSCLC.

The evaluation of efficacy and safety of sunitinib on EGFR-TKI pretreated advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients in China.

BACKGROUND: Sunitinib is an oral multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) exhibiting antiagiogenic and antitumor effects. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and potential toxicity of sunitinib therapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients in China. METHODS: From January 2009 to August 2011, 30 patients with stage IV NSCLC, who were pretreated with the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-TKIs and then received sunitinib, were retrospectively reviewed. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was performed to determine the potential prognostic risk factors influencing NSCLC survival. RESULTS: The median progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS) of all 30 treated patients was 1.25 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.90-1.9 months] and 3.40 months (95% CI: 3.00-6.80 months), respectively. Cox regression analysis suggested that Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) is predictive of both PFS (P=0.001) and OS (P<0.001). Common adverse events (AEs) included hand-foot syndrome (53.3%), mucositis (40.0%), rash (36.7%) and diarrhea (33.3%). CONCLUSION: No sign of overall clinical benefits of sunitinib was detected in patients with pretreated EGFR-TKIs. Most patients suffered AEs from mild to moderate severity. ECOG PS is highly associated with PFS and OS rate. Further studies in NSCLC are required to determine whether sunitinib is beneficial nor not.

Endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration for staging of lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: Recently, less invasive methods have emerged as potential alternatives for staging with tissue confirmation of suspected metastatic mediastinal lymph nodes in lung cancer. The objective of this review was to assess the overall diagnostic accuracy of EBUS-TBNA in detecting metastatic mediastinal lymph node in lung cancer with a meta-analysis. METHODS: The MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cancerlit and Cochrane Library database, from January 1995 to September 2008, were searched for studies evaluating EBUS-TBNA accuracy. Meta-analysis methods were used to pool sensitivity and specificity and to construct summary receiver-operating characteristic. RESULTS: A total of 11 studies with 1299 patients, who fulfilled all of the inclusion criteria, were considered for the analysis. No publication bias was found. EBUS-TBNA had a pooled sensitivity of 0.93 (95% CI, 0.91-0.94) and a pooled specificity of 1.00 (95% CI, 0.99-1.00). The subgroup of patients who were selected on the basis of CT or PET positive results had higher pooled sensitivity (0.94, 95% CI 0.93-0.96) than the subgroup of patients without any selection of CT or PET (0.76, 95% CI 0.65-0.85) (p<0.05). Study sensitivity was not correlated with the prevalence of lymph node metastasis. Only two complications occurred (0.15%). CONCLUSION: EBUS-TBNA was an accurate, safe and cost-effective tool in lung cancer staging. The selection of patients who had positive results of suspected lymph node metastasis in CT or PET may improve the sensitivity of EBUS-TBNA. High-quality prospective studies regarding EBUS-TBNA in lung cancer staging are still needed to be conducted.