Assessment of efficacy and safety of MET tyrosine kinase inhibitors in non-small-cell lung cancer patients with MET alterations.

Background: While targeted therapy has become the standard treatment for certain non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with gene mutation positivity, there remains a lack of enough reports of the efficacy of mesenchymal-epithelial transition (MET) alterations in the real world. Objectives: We aimed to explore the efficacy and toxicity of targeted therapy in NSCLC patients with different types of MET alterations and hope to provide more clinical medication guidance. Design: Designed different subgroups to compare the efficacy and safety of targeted therapy in NSCLC patients with MET alterations. Methods: We conducted analyses on the efficacy and safety of mesenchymal-epithelial transition factor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (MET-TKI) therapy in NSCLC patients with MET alterations. Tumor response was evaluated based on the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 criteria, and both progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were determined using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Our study encompassed 116 NSCLC patients with MET alterations, including MET ex14 skipping mutation (n = 50), MET primary amplification (amp) (n = 25), and secondary amp (n = 41). Among treated patients, 34 achieved a partial response, while 52 exhibited stable disease. The overall response rate for the entire cohort was 29.31%, with a disease control rate of 74.14%. A significant difference was observed in the median PFS among patients with MET ex14 skipping mutation, MET primary amplification (amp), and secondary amp (10.4 versus 6.6 versus 4.5 months, p = 0.002). In all, 69 patients experienced drug-related adverse effects, with the most common being peripheral edema (35.34%), nausea and vomiting (21.55%), and fatigue (10.34%). In total, 29 patients (25%) encountered drug-related adverse reactions of grade 3 or higher. Conclusion: MET-TKI therapy works better for MET ex14 skipping mutation than other types of MET gene alteration. In the two MET amplified groups, the secondary amp was less effective. This study may provide more research support for the treatment of these patients.

The Clinical Efficacy and Economic Benefits of Recombinant Human Thrombopoietin for the Treatment of Chemotherapy or Chemoradiotherapy-Induced Thrombocytopenia.

Even though cytopenia caused by either chemotherapy or radiotherapy is a common complication in cancer patients, chemoradiotherapy remains an essential treatment for the majority of patients. The purpose of this study was to look into the clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of recombinant human thrombopoietin (rhTPO) in treating chemo- or chemoradiotherapy-induced grade II, III, and IV thrombocytopenia. From December 2019 to November 2020, 233 lung cancer patients admitted to our hospital with chemotherapy- or chemoradiotherapy-induced thrombocytopenia were enrolled and treated with rhTPO. The study's findings revealed a significant disparity in the use of concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with grade II, III, and IV thrombocytopenia. All costs, including rhTPO treatment costs, platelet costs, drug costs, and nondrug costs, tended to rise as the severity of thrombocytopenia increased. In the treatment of chemotherapy or radiotherapy-induced thrombocytopenia, rhTPO has shown good clinical efficacy. In the treatment of grade II thrombocytopenia, rhTPO has a favorable economic evaluation. As a result, early intervention and thrombocytopenia treatment should be provided, which warrants further clinical investigation.

Disparity in clinical outcomes between pure and combined pulmonary large-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma: A multi-center retrospective study.

OBJECTIVES: The 2015 World Health Organization classification defines pulmonary large-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (LCNEC) as a high-grade neuroendocrine carcinoma. However, the clinical characteristics and prognostic factors of pure LCNEC and combined LCNEC remain unclear. Hence, we performed a multi-center retrospective study to compare the clinical outcomes of pure versus combined LCNEC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from 381 patients with pulmonary LCNEC admitted to 17 Chinese institutes between 2009 and 2016 were collected retrospectively. Clinical characteristics and prognosis were analyzed among patients receiving adjuvant (adjuvant group; n = 56) and first-line (first-line group; n = 146) chemotherapy, as well as among patients receiving small cell lung cancer (SCLC) and non-SCLC (NSCLC) chemotherapy regimens. The Kaplan-Meier method and multivariable Cox regression were used to identify clinicopathological variables that might influence patient outcomes. RESULTS: Expression levels of neuroendocrine markers (synaptophysin, chromogranin-A, CD56) were associated with patients' prognosis in the total study cohort. In the adjuvant group, median disease-free survival was non-significantly longer for SCLC-based regimens than for NSCLC-based regimens (P = 0.112). In the first-line group, median progression-free survival was significantly longer for SCLC-based regimens than for NSCLC-based regimens (11.5 vs. 7.2 months, P = 0.003). Among patients with combined LCNEC, adenocarcinoma was the most common combined component, accounting for 70.0 % of cases. Additionally, median overall survival was non-significantly shorter for combined LCNEC than for pure LCNEC (P = 0.083). CONCLUSION: The SCLC regimen is a more effective choice, as either first-line or adjuvant chemotherapy, when compared to the NSCLC regimen for LCNEC treatment. Further studies are needed to clarify the survival differences between patients with pure-, and combined LCNEC.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of docetaxel versus pemetrexed in second-line chemotherapy for stage IIIb or IV non-small cell lung cancer in China.

BACKGROUND: To study the cost-efficacy of docetaxel and pemetrexed as single agents versus platinum-based combination agents in second-line treatment of stage IIIb or IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients by evaluating chemotherapeutic indexes and medical costs. METHODS: Treatment responses were evaluated by progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), hematological and gastrointestinal toxicities. RESULTS: Two hundred and seven stage IIIb or IV NSCLC patients were recruited to this clinical observation retrospective study. Thirty-four subjects were treated with docetaxel (group A), 98 with platinum-based doublet chemotherapy with docetaxel (group B), 42 with pemetrexed (group C), and 33 patients with platinum-based doublet combination therapy with pemetrexed (group D). The average PFS of groups A and B was 3.28 and 4.58 months, respectively (p = 0.042). The mean PFS of groups C and D was 3.1 and 4.98 months, respectively (p = 0.017). The mean OS of these groups was 12.88, 13.17, 12.40 and 13.04 months, respectively, without significant differences. The total medical costs in these four groups amounted to USD 5,533, 7,745, 8,569 and 15,291, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Platinum-based doublet chemotherapy with docetaxel or pemetrexed could significantly increase PFS, however, without significant OS improvement in comparison with using them as single agents. The medical expenses associated with doublet therapy were much higher than those associated with single therapy with a significant portion of the medical expenses spent on treating hematological and gastrointestinal toxicity.

[Safety analysis of ambulatory chemotherapy in lung cancer].

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Ambulatory chemotherapy has now been a popular way of treatment in developed countries, for its less medical costs and incidence of adverse events. The aim of this study is to estimate the feasibility and safety of ambulatory chemotherapy in lung cancer in Shanghai chest hospital. METHODS: Medical data including performance status, cycles of chemotherapy, pathologic type, adverse events in hospital and adverse events after discharge from hospital. RESULTS: We estimated a total of 1 573 lung cancer patients admitted in Shanghai chest hospital, during October 2008 to April 2009, including 416 patients treated in the way of ambulatory chemotherapy, 1 157 patients treated in the routine way. Rate of grade III/IV gastrointestinal toxicity was fewer in the ambulatory chemotherapy group (21.88%) than routine chemotherapy group (P < 0.01); meanwhile, rate of leukopenia was higher in the ambulatory chemotherapy group (49.28%) than routine chemotherapy group (35.0%)(P < 0.01). Days of hospitalization and medical costs were less in the ambulatory chemotherapy group (4.48 d vs 14.04 d, 6 911.32 vs 14 623.59, all P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Ambulatory chemotherapy is a favorable way to promote.