Early Incorporation to Palliative Care (EPC) in Patients With Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: The PACO Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) experience a considerable disease burden, evident in symptomatic and psychological spheres. Advanced cancer represents a complex scenario for patients and the healthcare team. Early palliative care (EPC) has been proven as a clinically meaningful strategy in this context by several randomized trials but not in a resource-limited setting. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of EPC compared with standard oncological care (SOC) in patients with metastatic NSCLC in Mexico. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective, randomized clinical trial was conducted at Instituto Nacional de Cancerologia in Mexico. All patients had histologically confirmed metastatic NSCLC without previous treatment. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive SOC or SOC + EPC. The EPC group was introduced to the palliative care team at baseline after randomization, which was integrated by psychologists, bachelor's in nutrition, specialized nurses, and physicians. Patients randomized to this arm had programmed visits to meet with the team at baseline and through the 2nd, 4th-, and 6th cycles thereafter. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS); secondary outcomes included quality of life (QoL), anxiety and depression, and symptom intensity. They were assessed using the instruments EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire, Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS), and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) (clinicaltrials.gov [NCT01631565]). Questionnaires were completed at baseline, at 2nd, 4th, and 6th cycles of treatment. RESULTS: Between March 2012 and June 2015, 201 patients were assessed for eligibility and 146 were enrolled and allocated to receive EPC (73) or SOC (73). Median OS for patients in the EPC vs SOC arm was 18.1 months (95% CI, 7.9-28.4) and 10.5 months (95% CI, 4.7-16.2) (P = .029). Having a poor performance status (HR 1.7 [1.2-2.5]; P = .004) and allocation to the control group (HR 1.5 [1.03-2.3]; P = .034) were independently associated with a worse OS. Those patients with a global QoL > 70 at baseline had a better OS if they were In the EPC arm (38.7 months (95% CI, 9.9-67.6) vs SOC 21.4 months (95% CI, 12.4-30.3)). Mean QoL had a numerical improvement in patients allocated to EPC after 6 cycles of follow-up, nonetheless this difference was not statistically significant (55.1 ±â€…23.7 vs 56.9 ±â€…25.3; P = .753). There were no significant differences in anxiety and depression at all study points. CONCLUSIONS: EPC is associated with a significant improvement in OS, although, we observed that the greatest benefit of providing EPC was observed in those with a global QoL > 70 at baseline. This study did not identify significant changes in terms of QoL or symptom burden between the study groups after follow-up. Evidence robustly suggests that EPC should be considered part of the multidisciplinary treatment of metastatic NSCLC patients since diagnosis. According to our study, EPC can be implemented in low- or middle-income countries (LMIC).

Survival of Patients with Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Enrolled in Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: Up-to-date oncological therapy has been accomplished through the results of clinical trials (CTs). We analyzed the overall survival (OS) of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and its relation to CT enrollment. METHODS: The study included 1,042 patients with advanced NSCLC treated at the Instituto Nacional de Cancerología. All patients received treatment according to the national and international guidelines. Data were collected from medical records. Patients were subgrouped on the basis of their CT enrollment as follows: participants in any CT (ACT), exclusively intervention CTs (ICT) or exclusively pharmaceutical-sponsored CTs (PCT). RESULTS: The CT enrollment effect was assessed through a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model. Thirty percent of the patients were in ACT, 28.3% in ICT and 13.7% in PCT. Female gender (p = 0.001), adenocarcinoma histology (p = 0.018), positive EGFR mutation (p = 0.006), and better ECOG performance status (<2) (p ≤ 0.0001) were more frequent in patients enrolled in CT; further, tobacco smoking (p ≤ 0.0001) and KRAS mutation (p = 0.001) were more frequent in patients who were not enrolled in a CT. CONCLUSION: Enrollment in ACT was associated with a better OS (hazard ratio: 0.47-0.74). NSCLC patients enrolled in a CT have an improved survival in an independent manner to other prognostic factors.

Reduction in Hepatocyte Growth Factor Serum Levels is Associated with Improved Prognosis in Advanced Lung Adenocarcinoma Patients Treated with Afatinib: a Phase II Trial.

BACKGROUND: C-met and its ligand, hepatocyte growth factor (HGF) have been associated with the resistance mechanism of EGFR-TKIs. HGF was evaluated as a clinical-marker of response in NSCLC patients treated with afatinib. METHODS: Sixty-six patients with stage IIIB/IV lung adenocarcinoma and progression to any-line chemotherapy received afatinib 40 mg/day. Mutational EGFR and HER2 status were assessed by RT-PCR. HER2 amplification was evaluated by FISH. Serum HGF content was measured by ELISA before and 2 months after the start of treatment. HGF levels were assessed with the objective response rate (ORR), progression-free-survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). This trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01542437. RESULTS: Fifty patients (75 %) were EGFR mutation positive. Response was achieved in 59 % of all patients and 78 % of EGFR mutated patients. Median PFS was 10 [95 % CI 6.8-13.1] and 14.5 months [10.9-18.9] for all and EGFR mutated patients, respectively. Median OS was 22.8 [17.5-28.1] and 32.4 months [18.3-46.6] for all and EGFR mutated patients, respectively. Patients with reduced serum HGF levels had improved ORR (75 % vs 44 %; p = 0.011), PFS (15.1 [2.9-27.3] vs 6.5 months [3.9-9.1]; p = 0.005) and OS (NR vs 14.5 months [7.8 - 21.3] p = 0.007). A reduction in serum HGF levels was an independent factor associated with longer PFS (HR 0.40; p = 0.021) and OS (HR 0.31; p = 0.006) in all and EGFR mutated patients. CONCLUSIONS: A reduction in serum HGF levels was associated with improved outcomes in patients treated with afatinib. These results suggest HGF might have a role as a mechanism of resistance to EGFR-TKIs. HGF could represent a potential therapeutic target to prevent or reverse resistance particularly in EGFR mutated patients.

Randomized, open-label trial evaluating the preventive effect of tetracycline on afatinib induced-skin toxicities in non-small cell lung cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Afatinib has shown long progression free survival and improvement in quality of life in advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) patients. Although afatinib causes acneiform rash, it can be manageable. Tetracyclines are usually used to treat it; nonetheless, there is no trial that evaluates their prophylactic efficacy on afatinib induced-skin toxicities (AIST). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This open-label, randomized, controlled trial assessed the preventive effect of tetracycline for reducing afatinib-skin toxicities in NSCLC patients receiving afatinib 40 mg/day. Patients were randomly assigned to receive pre-emptive treatment with tetracycline 250 mg every 12h for 4 weeks or not. Reactive treatment in both groups included general dermatological recommendations such as use of skin moisturizers, sunscreen and topical steroids, according to toxicity severity. All patients were blindly monitored for skin toxicities by an expert dermatologist at the start of treatment with afatinib (day 0), weeks 2 and 4 of treatment. The protocol is registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01880515). RESULTS: We included 90 patients, no differences were found in clinical and dermatological baseline characteristics. Rash incidence of any grade, and grade ≥2 was less frequent in the pre-emptive arm vs. the control arm (44.5 vs. 75.6%, RR 0.4 [95% CI 0.17-0.99], p=0.046 and 15.6 vs. 35.6%, RR 0.35 [95% CI, 0.12-0.91], p=0.030, respectively). No difference was found in paronychia, xerosis, mucositis, folliculitis, and skin fissure. No adverse event was associated with tetracycline. Neither rash nor pre-emptive tetracycline impacted on response rate, progression-free or overall survivals. CONCLUSION: Pre-emptive tetracycline was well tolerated and reduced the rash incidence and severity associated with afatinib in more than 60%.