Trends in imaging utilization for small cell lung cancer: a decision tree analysis of the NCCN guidelines.

PURPOSE: To investigate the differences in small cell lung cancer (SCLC) diagnostic imaging utilization relative to National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed SCLC records at our institution between January 1, 2003 and August 1, 2019 (n = 529). Patients were grouped by extensive-stage versus limited-stage and diagnosis date. Clinical, CT, MRI, and nuclear imaging data was collected. Imaging utilization was compared using Student's t-test or Kruskal-Wallis-test/Wilcoxon-Rank-Sums test. Survival was compared using Log-rank-test and Kaplan-Meier-curves. RESULTS: SCLC patients had a median survival of 290 days. Extensive-stage patients with SCLC demonstrated an increase in emergency imaging utilization when diagnosed in 2011-2019 compared to 2003-2010 (CT abdomen/pelvis p < 0.001, CTA chest for pulmonary embolism p < 0.01, CT head p < 0.003). Limited-stage patients with SCLC demonstrated an increase in inpatient imaging utilization (CT abdomen/pelvis p < 0.04) and decreased total/outpatient imaging utilization (CT chest-abdomen-pelvis p < 0.05, CT head p < 0.003) when diagnosed in 2011-2019 compared to 2003-2010. All patients with SCLC had decreased average number of bone-scan studies when diagnosed in 2011-2019 compared to 2003-2010 (Extensive-stage p < 0.006, Limited-stage p < 0.0006). CONCLUSION: Imaging utilization trends in the management of patients with SCLC at our institution differed between 2003 and 2010 and 2011-2019 reflecting the changes in the NCCN guidelines.

Relationship between phase I study duration and symptom burden.

PURPOSE: Phase I clinical trials are critical to development of cancer therapeutics. Adverse events (AEs) and symptom burden contribute to early treatment withdrawal, and it is often difficult to ascertain whether these events are disease- or treatment-related. Regardless, early withdrawal may delay determination of the effectiveness of potential new therapies. We sought to characterize the reasons for early treatment termination to identify potential modifiable events. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted on solid tumor patients enrolled in institutional phase I clinical trials from 2003 to 2013 through the Case Comprehensive Cancer Center. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-five patients were included in the analysis. The mean duration on study was 78.4 days (SD 63.4 days), and 23% of the patients were on study ≤ 30 days. Patients experienced an average of 25.1 AEs, of which 46.9% were non-laboratory. Constitutional symptoms (29.3%), gastrointestinal symptoms (24%), and pain (12.8%) were the most common non-laboratory AEs. Disease progression (57.6%) was the most common reason for study discontinuation, followed by adverse events (16.5%). Approximately 13% of the patients discontinued treatment for other reasons, of which 41.7% were identified as related to symptom burden on further review. Increased rates of AEs negatively correlated with duration on study (r = - 0.331; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: AEs may lead to early termination of trial participation and confound clinical assessment of investigational treatments. Designing interventions to reduce AE burden may extend duration on trial, affect the recommended phase II dose, and benefit the quality of life of participants on phase I trials.

Randomized phase II trial of sorafenib alone or in combination with carboplatin/paclitaxel in women with recurrent platinum sensitive epithelial ovarian, peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: This study was designed to evaluate the response and toxicity of sorafenib alone or when combined with carboplatin and paclitaxel in patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer, fallopian tube cancer, or primary peritoneal cancer (EOC). METHODS: Patients with recurrent platinum-sensitive EOC with no more than 2 prior courses of chemotherapy were randomized to single-agent sorafenib 400 mg twice daily or combination sorafenib 400 mg bid (days 2-19) with IV carboplatin (AUC 6) and IV paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) (S+C/T) every 3 weeks. Single agent sorafenib could cross over to combination upon progression. RESULTS: Patients were initially randomized to either arm, however, due to poor accrual, sorafenib arm was prematurely closed. A total of 13 patients were evaluable for response to sorafenib and 23 patients were evaluable for response to S+C/T. Objective response rate (RR) was 15 % for patients on sorafenib vs. 61 % for patients on S+C/T (p = 0.014); stable disease was seen in 62 % and 35 %, respectively. Clinical benefit rate (CBR) at 4 months (mos.) was 69 % for S and 65 % for S+C/T. The median progression free survival was 5.6 months on sorafenib vs. 16.8 months on S+C/T (p = 0.012) and there was no significant difference of overall survival between two arms (p = 0.974) with median overall survival 25.6 months under sorafenib vs. 25.9 months on S+C/T. Patients remained on trial for a median of 7.8 cycles on sorafenib and 5.4 cycles on S+C/T. CONCLUSION: Sorafenib, alone or in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel, has activity in patients with platinum-sensitive EOC. Sorafenib in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel improved RR and PFS; however, there were increased grade and frequencies of toxicities.

Phase II trial of sorafenib in conjunction with chemotherapy and as maintenance therapy in extensive-stage small cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Sorafenib is a multi-tyrosine kinase inhibitor of Raf kinase, VEGFR, and PDGFR. Angiogenesis is important for growth and progression of SCLC. This trial was conducted to evaluate whether the combination of cisplatin and etoposide plus concurrent and sequential sorafenib could prolong survival in patients with previously untreated SCLC. METHODS: Previously untreated patients with extensive stage SCLC were treated with cisplatin and etoposide days 1, 2, 3 for four cycles, concurrent with sorafenib 200 mg orally bid starting day 1 cycle 1. Patients with no disease progression after four cycles continued sorafenib 400 mg orally bid as maintenance for maximum of 12 months. The primary endpoint was 1 year survival with response rate and safety as secondary endpoints. RESULTS: A total of 18 patients were enrolled with 17 evaluable patients. One patient had a complete response, seven patients had a partial response (overall response rate of 47 %) and one patient had stable disease. Overall median survival was 7.4 months and 1 year survival was 25 %. The most common treatment-related adverse events included fatigue, anorexia, rash, diarrhea, neutropenia and weight loss. Grade 5 GI bleeding, pulmonary hemorrhage and neutropenia occurred in one pt (6 %) each. Accrual was halted on the basis of safety profile as well as preliminary efficacy data. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of platinum based chemotherapy and sorafenib has significant toxicity at current dose levels and is associated with disappointing efficacy data.

Phase II trial of sorafenib in patients with advanced anaplastic carcinoma of the thyroid.

BACKGROUND: Anaplastic thyroid cancer (ATC) is a rare but highly aggressive malignancy with a median survival of 3-5 months. The BRAF oncogene is mutated to its active form in up to 24% of ATC cases. Sorafenib is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor that acts on the RAF-1 serine/threonine kinase. In preclinical mouse models, sorafenib inhibits the growth of ATC xenografts and improves survival. No study of sorafenib in ATC has been conducted. We conducted a multi-institutional phase II trial of sorafenib in patients with ATC who had failed up to two previous therapies. METHODS: The primary endpoint of the trial was the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST)-defined imaging response rate. Twenty patients with ATC were treated with sorafenib 400 mg twice daily. RESULTS: Two of the 20 patients had a partial response (10%) and an additional 5 of 20 (25%) had stable disease. The duration of response in the two responders was 10 and 27 months, respectively. For the patients with stable disease, the median duration was 4 months (range 3-11 months). The overall median progression-free survival was 1.9 months with a median and a 1-year survival of 3.9 months and 20%, respectively. Toxicity was manageable and as previously described for sorafenib, including hypertension and skin rash. CONCLUSION: Sorafenib has activity in ATC, but at a low frequency and similar to our previous experience with fosbretabulin. One patient with a response had previously progressed on fosbretabulin. Toxicities were both predictable and manageable.

A multi-center phase II study of oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and capecitabine in advanced gastric/gastroesophageal junction carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: There is no standard first-line therapy for advanced gastric and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma and the prognosis remains poor. Our institution conducted a phase I study of oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and capecitabine given in a novel, weekly schedule. The regimen was tolerated; pharmacodynamic studies revealed no drug interactions, and there was one confirmed response in a gastric cancer patient. We performed a phase II trial in advanced gastric and GEJ adenocarcinoma to determine response rate and response duration. METHODS: This was a multi-center single treatment arm study involving six sites. Only prior adjuvant therapy was allowed. Patients had ECOG performance status of 0-2, adequate organ function, and were able to tolerate oral medications. All patients received oxaliplatin 60 mg/m(2) intravenously (IV) and irinotecan 50 mg/m(2) IV weekly times 4 weeks with a 2-week rest period. Capecitabine 450 mg bid orally was received on days 1 through 5 every week for 4 weeks, followed by a 2-week rest. Patients were assessed for response after the first two cycles; response duration, overall survival, and adverse events were also recorded. We estimated an improvement in historical response rate by 30% would have clinical meaning. RESULTS: A total of 39 patients were accrued and all were assessed for toxicity; 30 patients were evaluable for response. The median age was 57.8 years (31-79 years) and 74% were male. Two patients had a complete response, with nine patients achieving a partial response. The total response rate was 28%, with nine patients not evaluable for response. The median response duration was noted at 5.97 months and median overall survival was 8.98 months. There were no grade 5 treatment related events, with all deaths secondary to disease progression. Only five grade 4 events occurred (neutropenia, hyperkalemia, hypokalemia (2), thrombosis/embolism) without grade 4 diarrhea or sensory neuropathy. CONCLUSIONS: Oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and capecitabine given in a novel, weekly schedule does induce responses in advanced gastric and GEJ adenocarcinoma. However, the total response rate is modest and not an improvement over other regimens.

Pemetrexed plus gemcitabine as first-line chemotherapy for patients with peritoneal mesothelioma: final report of a phase II trial.

PURPOSE: Pemetrexed in combination with cisplatin is approved for the treatment of pleural mesothelioma and is active in malignant peritoneal mesothelioma (MPeM). Pemetrexed and gemcitabine are synergistic in preclinical models, but the activity of this combination in MPeM is unknown. This clinical study assessed safety and efficacy of pemetrexed plus gemcitabine in chemotherapy-naïve patients with MPeM. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Treatment consisted of gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8, and pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) on day 8, administered immediately before gemcitabine. Treatment was repeated every 21 days for six cycles or until disease progression. All patients received folic acid, vitamin B(12), and dexamethasone supplementation. End points included tumor response, toxicity, time to disease progression (TTPD), and overall survival (OS). Disease control rate (DCR) was also calculated. RESULTS: Twenty patients were enrolled between December 2002 and May 2004. The confirmed response rate was 15% (95% CI, 3.2% to 37.9%), with three patients experiencing a partial response. The DCR was 50% (95% CI, 27.2% to 72.8%). The most common grade 3 to 4 nonhematologic toxicities included fatigue (20%), constipation (10%), vomiting (10%), and dehydration (10%). Hematologic toxicities included grade 3 to 4 neutropenia (60%) and febrile neutropenia (10%). One patient death was attributed to treatment. Median TTPD and OS times were 10.4 months and 26.8 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: The combination of pemetrexed plus gemcitabine was active in patients with MPeM with a notably high incidence of neutropenia. Median TTPD and OS seem promising. This regimen may provide an alternative to standard therapies, especially for patients who cannot tolerate a platinum-based regimen.

Phase II trial of pemetrexed and gemcitabine in chemotherapy-naive malignant pleural mesothelioma.

PURPOSE: Pemetrexed and gemcitabine have single-agent activity in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). The combination of pemetrexed/gemcitabine has not previously been studied in MPM to our knowledge. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with histologic or cytologic diagnosis of MPM were included. Cohort 1 received gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8, with pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) on day 8, and cohort 2 received gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8, with pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) on day 1. Cycles were repeated every 21 days; all patients were supplemented with folic acid and vitamin B(12) and received dexamethasone. RESULTS: One hundred eight patients (cohort 1, n = 56; cohort 2, n = 52) with pleural mesothelioma were enrolled. Among assessable patients, response rate was 26.0% in cohort 1 and 17.1% in cohort 2. Median time to disease progression was 4.34 months for cohort 1 and 7.43 months for cohort 2. Median survival was 8.08 months for cohort 1 (1-year survival = 31.14%) and 10.12 months for cohort 2 (1-year survival = 45.80%). In cohorts 1 and 2, incidence of grade 4 neutropenia was 25.0% and 29.4%, grade 4 thrombocytopenia was 14.3% and 3.9%, grade 3 or 4 anemia was 5.4% and 5.9%, and grade 3 or 4 fatigue was 23.2% and 15.7%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The combination of pemetrexed and gemcitabine resulted in moderate clinical activity in MPM. However, the median survival times are similar to those with single-agent pemetrexed and inferior to outcomes observed with cisplatin in combination with an antifolate.