Tumor Treating Fields therapy with standard systemic therapy versus standard systemic therapy alone in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer following progression on or after platinum-based therapy (LUNAR): a randomised, open-label, pivotal phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) are electric fields that disrupt processes critical for cancer cell survival, leading to immunogenic cell death and enhanced antitumour immune response. In preclinical models of non-small-cell lung cancer, TTFields amplified the effects of chemotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors. We report primary results from a pivotal study of TTFields therapy in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. METHODS: This randomised, open-label, pivotal phase 3 study recruited patients at 130 sites in 19 countries. Participants were aged 22 years or older with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer progressing on or after platinum-based therapy, with squamous or non-squamous histology and ECOG performance status of 2 or less. Previous platinum-based therapy was required, but no restriction was placed on the number or type of previous lines of systemic therapy. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to TTFields therapy and standard systemic therapy (investigator's choice of immune checkpoint inhibitor [nivolumab, pembrolizumab, or atezolizumab] or docetaxel) or standard therapy alone. Randomisation was performed centrally using variable blocked randomisation and an interactive voice-web response system, and was stratified by tumour histology, treatment, and region. Systemic therapies were dosed according to local practice guidelines. TTFields therapy (150 kHz) was delivered continuously to the thoracic region with the recommendation to achieve an average of at least 18 h/day device usage. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. The safety population included all patients who received any study therapy and were analysed according to the actual treatment received. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02973789. FINDINGS: Between Feb 13, 2017, and Nov 19, 2021, 276 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive TTFields therapy with standard therapy (n=137) or standard therapy alone (n=139). The median age was 64 years (IQR 59-70), 178 (64%) were male and 98 (36%) were female, 156 (57%) had non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer, and 87 (32%) had received a previous immune checkpoint inhibitor. Median follow-up was 10·6 months (IQR 6·1-33·7) for patients receiving TTFields therapy with standard therapy, and 9·5 months (0·1-32·1) for patients receiving standard therapy. Overall survival was significantly longer with TTFields therapy and standard therapy than with standard therapy alone (median 13·2 months [95% CI 10·3-15·5] vs 9·9 months [8·1-11·5]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·74 [95% CI 0·56-0·98]; p=0·035). In the safety population (n=267), serious adverse events of any cause were reported in 70 (53%) of 133 patients receiving TTFields therapy plus standard therapy and 51 (38%) of 134 patients receiving standard therapy alone. The most frequent grade 3-4 adverse events were leukopenia (37 [14%] of 267), pneumonia (28 [10%]), and anaemia (21 [8%]). TTFields therapy-related adverse events were reported in 95 (71%) of 133 patients; these were mostly (81 [85%]) grade 1-2 skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders. There were three deaths related to standard therapy (two due to infections and one due to pulmonary haemorrhage) and no deaths related to TTFields therapy. INTERPRETATION: TTFields therapy added to standard therapy significantly improved overall survival compared with standard therapy alone in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer after progression on platinum-based therapy without exacerbating systemic toxicities. These data suggest that TTFields therapy is efficacious in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer and should be considered as a treatment option to manage the disease in this setting. FUNDING: Novocure.

European Respiratory Society guideline on various aspects of quality in lung cancer care.

This European Respiratory Society guideline is dedicated to the provision of good quality recommendations in lung cancer care. All the clinical recommendations contained were based on a comprehensive systematic review and evidence syntheses based on eight PICO (Patients, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes) questions. The evidence was appraised in compliance with the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. Evidence profiles and the GRADE Evidence to Decision frameworks were used to summarise results and to make the decision-making process transparent. A multidisciplinary Task Force panel of lung cancer experts formulated and consented the clinical recommendations following thorough discussions of the systematic review results. In particular, we have made recommendations relating to the following quality improvement measures deemed applicable to routine lung cancer care: 1) avoidance of delay in the diagnostic and therapeutic period, 2) integration of multidisciplinary teams and multidisciplinary consultations, 3) implementation of and adherence to lung cancer guidelines, 4) benefit of higher institutional/individual volume and advanced specialisation in lung cancer surgery and other procedures, 5) need for pathological confirmation of lesions in patients with pulmonary lesions and suspected lung cancer, and histological subtyping and molecular characterisation for actionable targets or response to treatment of confirmed lung cancers, 6) added value of early integration of palliative care teams or specialists, 7) advantage of integrating specific quality improvement measures, and 8) benefit of using patient decision tools. These recommendations should be reconsidered and updated, as appropriate, as new evidence becomes available.

ERS/ESTS/EACTS/ESTRO guidelines for the management of malignant pleural mesothelioma.

The European Respiratory Society (ERS)/European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS)/European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)/European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) task force brought together experts to update previous 2009 ERS/ESTS guidelines on management of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM), a rare cancer with globally poor outcome, after a systematic review of the 2009-2018 literature. The evidence was appraised using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. The evidence syntheses were discussed and recommendations formulated by this multidisciplinary group of experts. Diagnosis: pleural biopsies remain the gold standard to confirm the diagnosis, usually obtained by thoracoscopy but occasionally via image-guided percutaneous needle biopsy in cases of pleural symphysis or poor performance status. Pathology: standard staining procedures are insufficient in ∼10% of cases, justifying the use of specific markers, including BAP-1 and CDKN2A (p16) for the separation of atypical mesothelial proliferation from MPM. Staging: in the absence of a uniform, robust and validated staging system, we advise using the most recent 2016 8th TNM (tumour, node, metastasis) classification, with an algorithm for pre-therapeutic assessment. Monitoring: patient's performance status, histological subtype and tumour volume are the main prognostic factors of clinical importance in routine MPM management. Other potential parameters should be recorded at baseline and reported in clinical trials. Treatment: (chemo)therapy has limited efficacy in MPM patients and only selected patients are candidates for radical surgery. New promising targeted therapies, immunotherapies and strategies have been reviewed. Because of limited data on the best combination treatment, we emphasise that patients who are considered candidates for a multimodal approach, including radical surgery, should be treated as part of clinical trials in MPM-dedicated centres.

SMAD4 Mutation in Small Cell Transformation of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Mutated Lung Adenocarcinoma.

The large screening of exons 18 to 21 of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene may lead to the discovery of rare, atypical molecular alterations for which the sensitivity to tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) remains uncertain. We are reporting a rare exon 18 EGFR mutation (p.E709_710 > D) that confers sensitivity to second-generation EGFR TKI (afatinib), lasting for 1 year. Tumor progression biopsy showed small cell lung cancer transformation, associated with a SMAD4 mutation. KEY POINTS: A rare exon 18 epidermal growth factor receptor mutation with sensitivity to afatinib is reported.Small cell transformation was observed at tumor progression.Acquisition of a SMAD4 mutation was observed at tumor progression.

Immunotherapy: a new standard of care in thoracic malignancies? A summary of the European Respiratory Society research seminar of the Thoracic Oncology Assembly.

In May 2017, the second European Respiratory Society research seminar of the Thoracic Oncology Assembly entitled "Immunotherapy, a new standard of care in thoracic malignancies?" was held in Paris, France. This seminar provided an opportunity to review the basis of antitumour immunity and to explain how immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) work. The main therapeutic trials that have resulted in marketing authorisations for use of ICIs in lung cancer were reported. A particular focus was on the toxicity of these new molecules in relation to their immune-related adverse events. The need for biological selection, currently based on immunohistochemistry testing to identify the tumour expression of programmed death ligand (PD-L)1, was stressed, as well as the need to harmonise PD-L1 testing and techniques. Finally, sessions were dedicated to the combination of ICIs and radiotherapy and the place of ICIs in nonsmall cell lung cancer with oncogenic addictions. Finally, an important presentation was dedicated to the future of antitumour vaccination and of all ongoing trials in thoracic oncology.

ERS statement on harmonised standards for lung cancer registration and lung cancer services in Europe.

The European Respiratory Society (ERS) task force for harmonised standards for lung cancer registration and lung cancer services in Europe recognised the need to create a single dataset for use in pan-European data collection and a manual of standards for European lung cancer services.The multidisciplinary task force considered evidence from two different sources, reviewing existing national and international datasets alongside the results of a survey of clinical data collection on lung cancer in 35 European countries. A similar process was followed for the manual of lung cancer services, with the task force using existing guidelines and national or international recommendations for lung cancer services to develop a manual of standards for services in Europe.The task force developed essential and minimum datasets for lung cancer registration to enable all countries to collect the same essential data and some to collect data with greater detail. The task force also developed a manual specifying standards for lung cancer services in Europe.Despite the wide variation in the sociopolitical landscape across Europe, the ERS is determined to encourage the delivery of high-quality lung cancer care. Both the manual of lung cancer services and the minimum dataset for lung cancer registration will support this aspiration.

Achieving Thoracic Oncology data collection in Europe: a precursor study in 35 Countries.

BACKGROUND: A minority of European countries have participated in international comparisons with high level data on lung cancer. However, the nature and extent of data collection across the continent is simply unknown, and without accurate data collection it is not possible to compare practice and set benchmarks to which lung cancer services can aspire. METHODS: Using an established network of lung cancer specialists in 37 European countries, a survey was distributed in December 2014. The results relate to current practice in each country at the time, early 2015. The results were compiled and then verified with co-authors over the following months. RESULTS: Thirty-five completed surveys were received which describe a range of current practice for lung cancer data collection. Thirty countries have data collection at the national level, but this is not so in Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Italy, Spain and Switzerland. Data collection varied from paper records with no survival analysis, to well-established electronic databases with links to census data and survival analyses. CONCLUSION: Using a network of committed clinicians, we have gathered validated comparative data reporting an observed difference in data collection mechanisms across Europe. We have identified the need to develop a well-designed dataset, whilst acknowledging what is feasible within each country, and aspiring to collect high quality data for clinical research.

Intensive care in thoracic oncology.

The admission of lung cancer patients to intensive care is related to postprocedural/postoperative care and medical complications due to cancer or its treatment, but is also related to acute organ failure not directly related to cancer.Despite careful preoperative risk management and the use of modern surgical and anaesthetic techniques, thoracic surgery remains associated with high morbidity, related to the extent of resection and specific comorbidities. Fast-tracking processes with timely recognition and treatment of complications favourably influence patient outcome. Postoperative preventive and therapeutic management has to be carefully planned in order to reduce postoperative morbidity and mortality.For patients with severe complications, intensive care unit (ICU) mortality rate ranges from 13% to 47%, and hospital mortality ranges from 24% to 65%. Common predictors of in-hospital mortality are severity scores, number of failing organs, general condition, respiratory distress and the need for mechanical ventilation or vasopressors. When considering long-term survival after discharge, cancer-related parameters retain their prognostic value.Thoracic surgeons, anesthesiologists, pneumologists, intensivists and oncologists need to develop close and confident partnerships aimed at implementing evidence-based patient care, securing clinical pathways for patient management while promoting education, research and innovation. The final decision on admitting a patient with lung to the ICU should be taken in close partnership between this medical team and the patient and his or her relatives.

Management of EGFR mutated nonsmall cell lung carcinoma patients.

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) are common in the therapeutic armentarium of lung cancer today. Initially tested in an unselected population, they have been of limited usefulness until the identification EGFR gene mutations. Activating mutations generate conformational changes that result in a shift toward an active state of the catalytic domain and are associated with sensitivity to first generation EGFR TKI. Other mutations have been associated with resistance to these drugs, but for rare mutations there is limited data concerning their role in predicting response to EGFR TKI. To date, four molecules have been approved for the treatment of EGFR mutated lung cancer. Gefitinib and/or erlotinib are available in almost all countries. Afatinib has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration and by the European Medicines Agency, and icotinib has been approved only in China. Other, more active, third generation agents with a higher binding affinity for the receptor, or that are directed against specific mutations, are under development. EGFR TKIs have a favourable impact on progression-free survival when given as first line treatment in mutated patients, but may also have a moderate effect as a salvage therapy and in maintenance in an unselected population.

Systematic qualitative review of randomised trials conducted in nonsmall cell lung cancer with a noninferiority or equivalence design.

The use of noninferiority randomised trials for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer has emerged during the past 10-15 years but has raised some issues related to their justification and methodology. The present systematic review aimed to assess trial characteristics and methodological aspects. All randomised clinical trials with a hypothesis of noninferiority/equivalence, published in English, were identified. Several readers extracted a priori defined methodological information. A qualitative analysis was then performed. We identified 20 randomised clinical trials (three phase II and 17 phase III), 11 of them being conducted in strong collaboration with industry. We highlighted some deficiencies in the reports like the lack of justification for both the noninferiority assumption and the definition of the noninferiority margin, as well as inconsistencies between the results and the authors' conclusions. CONSORT guidelines were better followed for general items than for specific items (p<0.001). Improvement in the reporting of the meth"odology of noninferiority/equivalence trials is needed to avoid misleading interpretation and to allow readers to be fully aware of the assumptions underlying the trial designs. They should be restricted to limited specific situations with a strong justification why a noninferiority hypothesis is acceptable.

Primary tumour standardised uptake value is prognostic in nonsmall cell lung cancer: a multivariate pooled analysis of individual data.

(18)F-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography (PET) complements conventional imaging for diagnosing and staging lung cancer. Two literature-based meta-analyses suggest that maximum standardised uptake value (SUVmax) on PET has univariate prognostic value in nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We analysed individual data pooled from 12 studies to assess the independent prognostic value of binary SUVmax for overall survival.After searching the published literature and identifying unpublished data, study coordinators were contacted and requested to provide data on individual patients. Cox regression models stratified for study were used.Data were collected for 1526 patients (median age 64 years, 60% male, 34% squamous cell carcinoma, 47% adenocarcinoma, 58% stage I-II). The combined univariate hazard ratio for SUVmax was 1.43 (95% CI 1.22-1.66) and nearly identical if the SUV threshold was calculated stratifying for histology. Multivariate analysis of patients with stage I-III disease identified age, stage, tumour size and receipt of surgery as independent prognostic factors; adding SUV (HR 1.58, 95% CI 1.27-1.96) improved the model significantly. The only detected interaction was between SUV and stage IV disease.SUV seems to have independent prognostic value in stage I-III NSCLC, for squamous cell carcinoma and for adenocarcinoma.

Phase I trial of volasertib, a Polo-like kinase inhibitor, plus platinum agents in solid tumors: safety, pharmacokinetics and activity.

BACKGROUND: This trial evaluated the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, pharmacokinetics, and activity of volasertib, a selective Polo-like kinase 1 inhibitor that induces mitotic arrest and apoptosis, combined with cisplatin or carboplatin in patients with advanced/metastatic solid tumors (NCT00969761; 1230.6). METHODS: Sequential patient cohorts (3 + 3 dose-escalation design) received a single infusion of volasertib (100-350 mg) with cisplatin (60-100 mg/m(2)) or carboplatin (area under the concentration versus time curve [AUC]4-AUC6) on day 1 every 3 weeks for up to six cycles. Sixty-one patients received volasertib/cisplatin (n = 30) or volasertib/carboplatin (n = 31) for a median of 3.5 (range, 1-6) and 2.0 (range, 1-6) treatment cycles, respectively. RESULTS: The most common cycle 1 dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were thrombocytopenia, neutropenia and fatigue. MTDs (based on cycle 1 DLTs) were determined to be volasertib 300 mg plus cisplatin 100 mg/m(2) and volasertib 300 mg plus carboplatin AUC6. Co-administration did not affect the pharmacokinetics of each drug. Partial responses were observed in two patients in each arm. Stable disease was achieved in 11 and six patients treated with volasertib/cisplatin and volasertib/carboplatin, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Volasertib plus cisplatin or carboplatin at full single-agent doses was generally manageable and demonstrated activity in heavily pretreated patients with advanced solid tumors.

Stage IV nonsmall cell lung cancer treatment: oligometastatic disease and disease progression, untangling the knot.

Stage IV nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a heterogeneous group of patients for whom systemic therapy is decided based on tumour-biological cancer features (histology, PD-L1 expression, genomic alteration, metastatic sites) and patient characteristics (performance status, comorbidities). In most instances, some kind of systemic treatment is proposed, for which immunotherapy-based or targeted therapies are considered the standards of care in 2024. Oligometastatic NSCLC represents a specific concept during the biological spectrum from localised to metastatic disease in which only a limited number of metastatic sites can be documented. Based on this assumption, prospective and a few randomised phase II studies have been performed, which suggested that adding a local ablative treatment to the systemic one can be a new option for selected stage IV NSCLC. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) and the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) supported efforts to define oligometastatic NSCLC to unify the semantics within the thoracic oncology community. This article summarises the currently available data and emphasises the questions and perspectives in oligometastatic disease NSCLC in European patient cohorts.

What Does N2 Lymph Node Involvement Mean for Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC)?-A Review of Implications for Diagnosis and Treatment.

Patients with stage III NSCLC with N2 lymph node involvement carry a complex and diverse disease entity. Challenges persist in the areas of diagnosis, staging, multimodal management, and the determination of surgical indications and resectability criteria. Therefore, this review focuses on the latest updates in N2 disease staging and its prognostic and treatment implications. Emphasis is placed on the importance of accurate staging using imaging modalities such as [18F]FDG-PET/CT as well as minimally invasive mediastinal staging endoscopic techniques. The evolving role of surgery in the management of N2 disease is also explored. The benefits of neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatments have been demonstrated, along with the efficacy of a combined multimodal approach with chemo-immunotherapy in the perioperative setting, reigniting the debate of N2 disease subsets and optimal treatment options. Furthermore, this review addresses the controversies surrounding surgical approaches in upfront "borderline" resectable stage III NSCLC as well as the benefits of combined chemoradiotherapy with consolidation immunotherapy for patients with unresectable tumors. In conclusion, personalized diagnostic and treatment approaches tailored to individual patient characteristics, resource availability, and institutional expertise are essential for optimizing outcomes in patients with stage III-N2 NSCLC.

Slow-growing lung cancer as an emerging entity: from screening to clinical management.

The current paradigm is that untreated lung cancer is invariably and rapidly fatal, therefore the medical community normally dismisses the idea that a patient could live with such a disease for years without any therapy. Yet evidence from lung cancer screening research and from recent clinical series suggests that, although rarely recognised in routine practice, slow-growing lung cancers do exist and are more common than previously thought. Here, current evidence is reviewed and clinical cases are illustrated to show that slow-growing lung cancer is a real clinical entity, and the reasons why management protocols developed in the screening setting may also be useful in clinical practice are discussed. Features suggesting that a lung cancer may be slow-growing are described and appraised, areas of uncertainty are examined, modern management options for early-stage disease are evaluated and the influence that all this knowledge might have on our clinical decision-making is weighed. Further research directed at developing appropriate guidelines for these peculiar but increasingly common patients is warranted.

Histology as a potential clinical predictor of outcome in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer treated with vinorelbine and mitomycin combination chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: The importance of clinical predictors in the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has increased during the last decade. This retrospective study analyzed the combined patient-level data from two phase II trials that investigated the efficacy and safety of combination chemotherapy with vinorelbine and mitomycin in patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC. The aim of this analysis was to determine if patients' baseline and disease characteristics, including histology, gender, smoking history, and expression of TTF-1, might be potential predictors of outcome. METHODS: Response rates, unadjusted survival times, and Cox covariate-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated. Results were reported separately for each subgroup in each individual trial and in the pooled data set. RESULTS: A total of 175 patients were included in this analysis. Adjusted HRs for both overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) favored the nonadenocarcinoma histology subgroup, achieving a statistical significance for OS in the pooled data (n = 175; HR 0.68; 95 % CI 0.49-0.94; p = 0.019). TTF-1-negative immunohistochemistry was associated with a significantly higher response rate (25 vs. 0 %; p = 0.04) and with a nonsignificant advantage in OS (n = 33; HR 1.23; 95 % CI 0.56-2.73; p = 0.608). Gender and smoking history were not strongly related to outcome. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this analysis indicate that patients with nonadenocarcinoma histology might get superior benefit from combination chemotherapy with vinorelbine and mitomycin. These results should be confirmed in a prospective study.

Immunotherapy and Targeted Therapies Efficacy in Thymic Epithelial Tumors: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Thymic epithelial tumors (TET) are rare neoplasms of the anterior mediastinum. Surgery is the mainstay treatment for resectable TET, whereas systemic treatments are reserved for unresectable and metastatic tumors. The development of new treatments, such as immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and targeted therapies, with promising results in other types of solid tumors, has led to the investigation of their potential efficacy in TET. The study of tumor microenvironments (TME) is another field of investigation that has gained the interest of researchers. Taking into account the complex structure of the thymus and its function in the development of immunity, researchers have focused on TME elements that could predict ICI efficacy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The primary objective of this systematic review was to investigate the efficacy of ICI in TET. Secondary objectives included the toxicity of ICI, the efficacy of targeted therapies in TET, and the evaluation of the elements of TME that may be predictive factors of ICI efficacy. A literature search was conducted in February 2023 using the Ovid Medline and SciVerse Scopus databases. RESULTS: 2944 abstracts were retrieved, of which 31 were retained for the systematic review. Five phase II and one retrospective study assessed ICI efficacy. The overall response rate (ORR) varied from 0% to 34%. Median progression-free survival (PFS) ranged from 3.8 to 8.6 months, being lower in thymic carcinoma (TC) (3.8-4.2 months). Median overall survival (OS) ranged from 14.1 to 35.4 months. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 6.6% to 27.3% of patients. Sixteen studies assessed targeted therapies. The most active molecule was lenvatinib, with 38% ORR in patients with TC while no activity was detected for imatinib, erlotinib plus bevacizumab, and saracatinib. Ten studies assessed TME elements that could predict ICI efficacy. Four studies focused on the tumor-infiltrating immune cells suggesting improved outcomes in patients with TC and high tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte densities. Another study showed that CD8+, CD20+, and CD204+ tumor-infiltrating immune cells in cancer stroma might be prognostic biomarkers in TC. Another study identified the immune-related long non-coding RNAs as a predictor of response to ICI. Tumor mutational burden was identified as a predictive factor of ICI efficacy in one study. CONCLUSIONS: Despite study heterogeneity, this review shows that ICI could be a therapeutic option for selected patients with TET that are not amenable to curative radical treatment after first-line chemotherapy.

Systemic treatment for neuroendocrine non-small cell lung carcinoma: A cases series and a systematic review of the literature.

INTRODUCTION: Neuroendocrine lung cancer constitutes a continuum from carcinoid tumours (CT) to large cell neuroendocrine (LCNEC) and small-cell carcinomas (SCLC). Except for SCLC, there is no consensual agreement on systemic therapy. The aim of this study is to review our clinical experience among patients with CT and LCNEC in the light of a systematic review of the literature. METHODS: A retrospective study of all patients with CT and LCNEC receiving a systemic therapy at Institut Jules Bordet and Erasme Hospital between 01/01/2000-31/12/2020. A systematic review of the literature was performed in Ovid Medline. RESULTS: 53 patients (21 CT and 32 LCNEC) were included. Despite limited response rates, patients with CT receiving a "carcinoid-like" 1st-line regimen (somatostatin analogues (SSA), everolimus, peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT)) had a numerically longer survival compared to those receiving other type of regimens (median 51.4 vs 18.6 months, respectively; p = 0.17). We observed a similar survival between 1st line "SCLC-like" vs "non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)-like" schemes in LCNEC (median 11.2 vs 12.6 months, respectively; p = 0.46). The systematic review identified 23 studies (12 prospective, 15 and 8 for CT and LCNEC respectively). For CT, everolimus and SSA led to prolonged disease control with an acceptable toxicity profile, while higher response rates but lower tolerance were associated with PRRT and chemotherapy regimens including oxaliplatine and dacarbazine. For LCNEC, no difference emerged when comparing "SCLC-like" and "NSCLC-like" regimens considering response rate, progression-free or overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: SSA, everolimus and PRRT present a good therapeutic index for CT, while the role of chemotherapy remains limited to aggressive and rapidly evolving CT. The best type of chemotherapy regimen remains an open question in LCNEC.