Role of surgery in high-grade neuroendocrine tumors of the lung.

Background: This study aims to evaluate the surgical results for high-grade neuroendocrine carcinomas and to identify factors that influence prognosis. Methods: Between January 2009 and December 2017, a total of 71 patients (58 males, 13 females; mean age: 62±9.6 years; range, 38 to 78 years) with a high-grade neuroendocrine carcinoma of the lung were retrospectively analyzed. Overall survival and five-year overall survival rates were evaluated. Results: The mean overall survival was 60.7±6.9 months with a five-year survival rate of 44.3%. The mean overall survival and five-year overall survival rates according to disease stage were as follows: Stage 1, 67±10.8 months (46%); Stage 2, 61.4±10.8 months (45%); and Stage 3, 33.2±8.6 months (32%) (p=0.02). The mean overall survival and five-year overall survival rate according to histological types were as follows: in large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma, 59.4±9.2 months (45%); in small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma, 68.6±12.2 months (43%); and in combined-type neuroendocrine carcinoma, 40.9±10.1 months (35%) (p=0.34). Conclusion: Thoracic surgeons should be very selective in performing pulmonary resection in patients with Stage 3 high-grade neuroendocrine carcinomas and combined cell subtype tumors.

Economic burden of lung cancer in Turkey: a cost of illness study from payer perspective.

BACKGROUND: This study was designed to estimate economic burden of lung cancer in Turkey from payer perspective based on expert panel opinion on practice patterns in clinical practice. METHODS: In this cost of illness study, direct medical cost was calculated based on cost items related to outpatient visits, laboratory and radiological tests, hospitalizations/interventions, drug treatment, adverse events and metastasis. Indirect cost was calculated based on lost productivity due to early retirement, morbidity and premature death resulting from the illness, the value of lost productivity due to time spent by family caregivers and cost of formal caregivers. RESULTS: Cost analysis revealed the total per patient annual direct medical cost for small cell lung cancer to be €8772), for non-small-cell lung cancer to be €10,167. Total annual direct medical cost was €497.9 million, total annual indirect medical cost was €1.1 billion and total economic burden of lung cancer was €1.6 billion. Hospitalization/interventions (41%) and indirect costs (68.6%) were the major cost drivers for total direct costs and the overall economic burden of lung cancer, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate per patient direct medical costs of small cell lung cancer and non-small-cell lung cancer to be substantial and comparable, indicating the substantial economic burden of lung cancer in terms of both direct and indirect costs. Our findings indicate that hospitalization/interventions cost item and indirect costs were the major cost drivers for total direct costs and the overall economic burden of lung cancer, respectively. Our findings emphasize the potential role of improved cancer prevention and early diagnosis strategies, by enabling cost savings related to drug treatment and metastasis management cost items, in sustainability of cancer treatments.

The comparison of favipiravir and lopinavir/ritonavir combination in COVID-19 treatment

Background/aim: SARS-CoV-2, a ribonucleic acid coronavirus, rapidly spread worldwide within a short timeframe. Although different antiviral, antiinflammatory, and immunomodulatory drugs are used, current evidence is insufficient as to which drug is more efficient. Our study compared favipiravir and lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/RTV) therapies in inpatient care for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia. Materials and methods: Demographic data, test results, treatments, and latest status of patients receiving inpatient COVID-19 pneumonia therapy were recorded. The initial favipiravir and LPV/RTV receiving groups were compared regarding the need for intensive care units (ICU) and mortality. Logistic regression analysis was performed by including variables showing significant differences as a result of paired comparisons into the model. Results: Of the 204 patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, 59 (28.9%), 131 (64.2%), and 14 were administered LPV/RTV, favipiravir, and favipiravir with LPV/RTV, respectively. No difference was found in age, sex, presence of comorbidity, and tocilizumab, systemic corticosteroid, and plasma therapy use between patients administered with these three different treatment regimens. The mean mortality age of the patients was 71 ± 14.3 years, which was substantially greater than that of the survivors (54.2 ± 15.5 years). Compared with patients administered with LPV/RTV, ICU admission and mortality rates were lower in patients administered with favipiravir. CK-MB, AST, CRP, LDH, and creatinine levels were higher, whereas lymphocyte counts were lower in patients who died. Age, AST, CRP, LDH, and neutrophil counts were higher in patients needing ICU, and eosinophil and lymphocyte counts were significantly lower. Logistic regression analysis showed that favipiravir use independently decreased mortality (p = 0.006). Conclusion: The use of favipiravir was more effective than LPV/RTV in reducing mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

An Open-Label, Multicenter, Randomized, Phase II Study of Cisplatin and Pemetrexed With or Without Cixutumumab (IMC-A12) as a First-Line Therapy in Patients With Advanced Nonsquamous Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Type 1 insulin-like growth factor receptor is deregulated in solid tumors. Cixutumumab, a monoclonal antibody that inhibits the activity of type 1 insulin-like growth factor receptor, was investigated in combination with pemetrexed/cisplatin in the frontline setting. METHODS: In this open-label, phase II study, patients with stage IV nonsquamous NSCLC and a performance status of 0 to 1 were randomized (1:1) to receive 20 mg/kg cixutumumab, 500 mg/m2 pemetrexed, and 75 mg/m2 cisplatin (cixutumumab [n = 87]) or pemetrexed and cisplatin (control [n = 85]). Eligible patients received pemetrexed-based maintenance therapy with cixutumumab (cixutumumab arm) or without it (control arm). The primary end point was progression-free survival. Secondary end points assessed overall survival, objective response rate, and safety. Survival was analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazard model. Exploratory correlative analyses were also performed. RESULTS: The mean age of the intent-to-treat population (n = 172) was 59 years (range 32-83). Median progression-free survival was 5.45 months with cixutumumab versus 5.22 months in the control (hazard ratio = 1.15, 95% confidence interval: 0.81-1.61; p = 0.44). Median overall survival was 11.33 months with cixutumumab versus 10.38 months in the control (hazard ratio = 0.93, 95% confidence interval: 0.64-1.36). Objective response rate did not differ between treatments (p = 0.338). Grade 3 or 4 hyperglycemia occurred at a higher rate with cixutumumab than in the control (9.4% versus 1.2%). One death possibly related to cixutumumab occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Efficacy was not improved in patients with nonsquamous NSCLC when cixutumumab was added to pemetrexed/cisplatin. Combination therapy was well tolerated and no new safety concerns were reported.

Gemcitabine and cisplatin as neo-adjuvant chemotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer: a phase II study.

The combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin is one of the most active chemotherapy regimens against non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine combined with cisplatin in a 3-week cycle regimen for patients with operable, early stage NSCLC. Gemcitabine at a dose of 1000 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 of each 21-day cycle for 3 cycles, followed by cisplatin at a dose of 75 mg/m(2) on day 1 was administered to patients with previously untreated, operable, early stage (IB-IIIA) NSCLC. A total of 47 patients (46 male, mean age 56.0+/-8.0 years) who met the eligibility criteria were enrolled. The pathological complete response rate was 5.3% of operated patients and 4.3% of total patients. At visit 4, 57.1% of the patients had partial response, 38.1%, stable disease and 4.8%, progressive disease. The main toxicities - leukopenia, neutropenia and thrombocytopenia - were usually clinically asymptomatic and did not require hospitalization. Non-hematological toxicities were minimal and manageable. Disease free and 12-month overall survival rates were over 70% and 80%, respectively. This study demonstrates that the administration of gemcitabine and cisplatin combination for 3 cycles is effective and tolerable for patients with operable, early stage NSCLC. Low toxicity profile and promising survival outcome suggest that this regimen has an encouraging activity in this subset of patients.

A prospective, multicentre clinical trial comparing cisplatin plus gemcitabine with cisplatin plus etoposide in patients with locally advanced and metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Cisplatin-gemcitabine (PG) and cisplatin-etoposide (PE) combinations are active regimens for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The present study aimed to compare PG with PE in the treatment of patients with stage IIIB and IV NSCLC. METHODOLOGY: We conducted a prospective, multicentre trial. A total of 166 patients were enrolled into the study and received either gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m(2)) on days 1, 8 and 15 plus cisplatin (80 mg/m(2)) on day 2 every 4 weeks, or etoposide (100 mg/m(2)) on days 1, 2 and 3 plus cisplatin (80 mg/m(2)) on day 1 every 3 weeks. RESULTS: The overall response rate was superior in the PG group (54.8%vs 39.0%, P=0.045). There was no significant difference in survival between the two groups, with respective median and 1-year survival of 38 weeks and 33.3% for the PG group, and 34 weeks and 23.2% for the PE group. There was also no statistical difference for time to progression between the two groups. Neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were seen more frequently in the PG group (grade 3 neutropenia, 33.3%vs 15.9%, P=0.012; grade 3 thrombocytopenia, 27.4%vs 3.7%, P<0.001 and grade 4 thrombocytopenia, 10.7%vs 1.2%, P=0.018). CONCLUSION: PG is an active chemotherapy regimen and has a better response rate than PE in advanced NSCLC, although there was no difference in time to progression and overall survival. A higher incidence of haematological toxicity was seen with PG than with PE.