Virtual Library

Background
Current management of lung cancer (LC) (chemotherapy - CHT, radiotherapy – RT, and biological therapies) occurs predominantly in the ambulatory care (AC) setting. Post-surgery hospital admission is becoming progressively shorter due to advances in technique and greater reliance on home recovery.[1,2]As such, LC management occurs outside the scope of current thromboprophylaxis (TP) guidelines.[2-8] Recommendations for TP strategies in these high thromboembolism (TE) risk patients are lacking.[9] The aim of this study was to profile TE incidence in LC patients receiving anti-cancer therapy, exploring patient-, disease- and treatment-related risk factors associated with higher thrombotic rates. This could identify high-risk populations, disease features and/or treatment periods that warrant strong recommendations for targeted preventative strategies to reduce LC-associated TE, and in particular consideration of pharmacological-TP (P-TP).

Methods
Retrospective review of LC patients referred to Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, a tertiary dedicated cancer centre, between 01/07/11 - 30/06/12 for anti-cancer therapy. Data were collected from medical, pharmacy, pathology and diagnostic imaging electronic records. Follow up was defined as time from study entry (referral date) to first occurring event; TE, death, loss to follow-up or study end. Hazard ratios were calculated using Cox proportional hazards model.

Results
222 patients were followed for a median 10 months from time of first hospital registration. The cohort was predominantly newly diagnosed (77%), with advanced disease (71%), NSCLC (92%). Among NSCLC adenocarcinoma was the predominant histological subtype (77%). 30% of patients received multiple lines of therapy within the study period; 49% received CHT (alone or combination chemoradiotherapy, CRT), 73% RT (alone or CRT), 19% biologic therapy and 19% surgical intervention. 10.8% of patients had radiologically confirmed TE, giving an incidence rate of 131 events per 1000 person-years (95%CI 87-195). 83% (20/24) of events occurred in the AC setting; 71% symptomatic, 29% asymptomatic. 16 events were pulmonary embolism (PE) (5 fatal), 4 deep vein thrombosis (DVT), 1 combination DVT/PE, 1 atrial and 2 arterial thrombosis. TE occurred frequently in both NSCLC and SCLC (10.8% and 10.5% respectively), and more frequently among patients with adenocarcinoma compared to squamous cell histology (14.7% and 5.3% respectively). Presence of more advanced or metastatic disease, prior history of TE and comorbidity score>2 were associated with higher rates of TE. More than a third (38%) of TE events occurred during the CHT period, 13% post-surgery, 8% during RT and biologic therapy respectively. CHT demonstrated more than five-fold increased TE risk compared to no CHT (HR 5.7 95% CI 2.2-14.8) with a similar finding for RT (HR 5.2 95%CI 2.0-13.2). Importantly, P-TP was not routinely or systematically prescribed for ambulant LC patients during any treatment phase, at this institution.

Conclusion
LC patients are at high risk of preventable and potentially life-threatening thrombotic events. TE events occur frequently in the AC setting and consideration of P-TP is warranted, but not used routinely due to a lack of high quality data. There is a demand for appropriate risk-stratification and directed preventative strategies. Prospective data and the development of dynamic risk profiles which can direct clinical practice are needed.

Background
Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is common in lung cancer patients and the incidence is increased by treatments including radiotherapy, surgery and chemotherapy. Research suggests a survival benefit in cancer patients receiving long term low moecular weight heparin (LMWH). LMWH may also have antimetastatic effects through the inhibition of P-selectin. This trial was developed to investigate whether or not adding LMWH to standard treatment increases overall survival. The study is funded by a research grant from Cancer Research UK (C13275/A5323) and free drug and an educational grant from Pfizer. The trial is sponsored by Velindre NHS Trust, and coordinated by the Wales Cancer Trials Unit, Cardiff, UK.

Methods
An open label, multi-centre, Phase III randomised controlled trial in patients with lung cancer comparing anticancer treatment according to local practice plus dalteparin (Fragmin®), with anticancer treatment alone. Eligible patients had a histopathological or cytological diagnosis of primary bronchial carcinoma (SCLC or NSCLC) within the previous 7 weeks, performance status 0, 1, 2 or 3 and were willing and able to inject daily subcutaneous injection. The dalteparin was given as a daily 5,000 IU subcutaneous injection for 24 weeks. The primary outcome measure is overall survival and the secondary outcome measures include toxicity, VTE-free survival, metastasis-free survival, quality of life, and cost utility. To detect an advantage of 5% in overall survival at 1 year (to 30%) a total of 2200 patients were required (1100 in each arm).

Results
2202 patients were enrolled and randomised in 4 years. The two groups were well balanced for key variables. 60% were men; the median age was 65 years; 82% had NSCLC (5% Stages I and II, 38% Stage III, 57% Stage IV) and 18% SCLC (63% Extensive Disease); 85% had WHO PS 0 or 1; 95% received chemotherapy as first treatment. 56% of those in the dalteparin arm received at least 90 of the 168 planned injections. By 1/8/2013 there had been 1891 deaths recorded and, on advice from the Independent Data Monitoring Committee, the primary results have been released. There was no significant difference in overall survival (HR 0.97; 95% CI 0.89-1.06) nor in metastasis-free survival. Exploratory subgroup analyses do not suggest a significant survival advantage in any subgroup. Dalteparin use was not associated with a significant increase in major bleeding complications. There were 78 (7.1%) confirmed VTEs in the control group and 47 (4.1%) in the treatment group.

Conclusion
This large RCT which recruited mainly good PS lung cancer patients having chemotherapy, has confirmed that prophylactic dalteparin reduces the risk of VTE events without a significant increase in major bleeding. The baseline VTE risk of 7% and relative risk reduction of 40% are consistent with previous studies. There was no significant difference in overall survival. These results do not support a policy of routine prophylactic anticoagulation of all lung cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy.

Background
Improving overall survival (OS) in locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains a goal for clinicians. OS is often the primary endpoint in Phase III clinical trials, however with the increased use of multiple lines of treatment and crossover/rescue therapy in NSCLC trials, overall survival differences are frequently confounded. Other clinically meaningful endpoints such as progression-free survival (PFS) are becoming increasingly important. A systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken to investigate whether the treatment effect on PFS, or objective response rate (ORR), was predictive of the treatment effect on OS in locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC.

Methods
Embase, MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library databases were searched to identify relevant published randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Included RCTs compared pharmacological treatments in two or more groups in patients with locally advanced or metastatic (Stage IIIb or IV) NSCLC. The reported outcomes had to include median PFS and median OS. Data were analyzed with locally weighted least squares regression (LOWESS) to validate the linear relationship. Unweighted linear regression and weighted linear regression were used to estimate the relationship between OS treatment difference and PFS treatment difference. A similar analysis was also done to compare ORR difference and OS difference. The analysis also considered whether potential baseline prognostic factors could also change OS difference. Univariate weighted linear regression was used to assess the relationship of each prognostic factor with OS difference, followed by multivariate weighted linear regression.

Results
A total of 124 RCTs (N=40,568 patients) were included in the analysis. Of the 124 trials, 98 (79%) were published since 2005. The age of patients ranged from middle aged cohorts to the elderly. There were 87 studies (70%) with first-line therapy and therapy type was predominantly chemotherapy (71 studies, 57%). The LOWESS of OS difference versus PFS difference was a relatively straight line, therefore a linear relationship appeared to be justified. Weighted linear regression showed a highly significant relationship between OS treatment difference and PFS treatment difference [slope 1.317 months (95%CI 1.000, 1.634) p<0.001 R[2] = 36.6%]. Diagnostic plots revealed several statistical outliers. A weighted linear regression of OS difference versus PFS difference with six outlier studies removed also showed a highly significant linear relationship [slope 0.994 months (95%CI 0.749, 1.240) p<0.001 R[2] = 36.7%]. The relationship between ORR difference and OS difference was also significant [slope 12.503 (95%CI 7.042, 17.963) p<0.001 R[2] = 16.0%]. Univariate weighted linear regressions showed that the only baseline prognostic factor with a significant linear relationship with OS difference was the proportion of patients with non-squamous histology. Multivariate weighted linear regression showed none of the baseline prognostic factors was significant when PFS difference or ORR difference was included in the model.

Conclusion
The treatment effect on PFS was predictive of the treatment effect on OS. For a 1 month increase in PFS treatment difference, OS treatment difference increases by approximately 1.3 months. A 10% increase in ORR treatment difference was also associated with an increase in OS of 1.25 months. PFS is an important outcome for healthcare decision-making.

Abstract not provided

Background
[18]F-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography complements conventional imaging for staging lung cancer although its ability to predict outcome is less well established. Two literature-based meta-analyses suggest a prognostic value in univariate analysis. To assess FDG-PET value in predicting survival adjusted for some known prognostic factors, we carried out a meta-analysis based on individual patients data from multiple independent studies.

Methods
Following literature search, and after writing of a protocol for the meta-analysis, we contacted the authors of identified studies and requested individual patients data; we also tried to collect some unpublished data. Data analysis used Cox regression models stratified for the study with overall survival as primary outcome. SUV max was used as a binary covariate (median value for each study).

Results
Data were collected for 1526 patients (57% of the identified patients) from 11 publications and 1 unpublished series (median age : 64 years, 60% male patients, squamous cell in 34%, adenocarcinoma in 47%, stages I-II in 58%). Combined univariate hazard ratio (HR) was 1.43 (95% CI : 1.22-1.66); no statistically significant interaction between SUV and one of six additional freatures (age, gender, histology,stage, tumors size –in stages I-III patients- and surgical treatment), was found except for stage (p=0.05) with a decreased prognostic value of SUV for stage IV patients. Without considering SUV, multivariate analysis identified, in stage I-III patients, age, stage, tumor size and surgical treatment as independent prognostic factors. The addition of SUV improved that model : HR estimate for SUV effect was 1.58, statistically significant (95% CI : 1.27-1.96), p<0.0001. No interaction was found with SUV. When tumor size was not included in the tested covariates, we found SUV of additional value (adjustment for age, stage, surgical treatment) with a HR of 1.35 (95% CI : 1.15-158). Interaction between SUV and stage was detected, restricting the significant impact of SUV on survival to stage I-III patients.

Conclusion
Conclusions : Although suffering from selection bias and lack of homogeneous SUV assessment, these data suggest that SUV at the time of diagnosis is an independent prognostic marker for patients with stage I-III NSCLC. The utility of SUV in predicting survival in stage IV patients requires further studies.

Background
There is a lack of data on the effect of conventional resistance training (CRT) on exercise capacity, muscle strenght and quality of life (QoL) in patients with lung cancer. Whole body vibration (WBV) is proposed as an alternative to CRT. We investigated the effect of a radical treatment and of two post-treatment resistance training programmes on the 6-minutes walking distance (6MWD).

Methods
Selected patients with clinical stage I-IIIB (non-) small cell lung cancer or I-II mesothelioma were evaluated before (M1) and at completion (M2) of their radical treatment, and thereafter randomised to either control (CON), CRT or WBV. 6MWD was measured at M1, M2 and at least 12 weeks (w) after randomisation (M3) considering a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of 54 m. Assuming that this MCID would occur in 10% of the CON-group and aiming for an increase to at least 50% in the combined intervention groups (CRT and WBV), a sample size of 25 participants in each arm was required for a power of 90%. Secondary endpoints were estimated by appropriate MCID's for maximal exercise capacity (Wmax), muscle strenght (Quadriceps Force (QF)) and QoL (physical functioning (PF), fatigue (F), pain (P) and dyspnea D)). Multiple imputation was used to correct for patients not finishing the intervention.

Results
Of the 86 patients completing radical treatment, 70 were randomised: 24 to CON, 24 to CRT and 22 to WBV. Characteristics at M1 were well balanced. Radical treatment significantly decreased 6MWD, Wmax, QF, PF and increased P, F and D at M2. At M3, 20 of 37 (54%) patients in the combined CRT-WBV-group reached the MCID for 6MWD vs. 5 of 21 CON (24%) patients (p=0·031). 6MWD increased with 95 m (58–132) in CRT (p<0·0001), 37 m (-1–76) in WBV (p=0·06) and 1 m (-33–36) in CON (CRT vs. CON p=0·0006 and WBV vs. CON p=0·16). CRT and WBV patients recovered and exceeded their M16MWD, albeit not significantly. A significant mean increase in Wmax occurred in both CRT and WBV but not in CON, while QF increased only significantly in CRT. The mean score for PF at M3 improved in CON and WBV but only significantly with WBV. The mean score for P and F at M3 did not change significantly, however the MCID for F was reached in 37% of CRT, 44% of WBV and 30% of CON-patients. The mean score for D at M3 decreased significantly after WBV only. Multivariate analysis showed that there was no significant interaction between rehabilitation and surgery with regard to the MCID in 6MWD (p=0.96).

Conclusion
Radical treatment significantly impairs exercise capacity, muscle strength and QoL. CRT significantly improves and restores functional exercise capacity, whilst WBV does not fully substitute for CRT. Resistance training by CRT should be offered to radically treated lung cancer and mesothelioma patients. Supported by research grant 070708 of the Belgian Government Agency of Innovation by Science and Technology for applied Biomedical Research (NCT: 00752700)

Background
Molecular analysis (MoA) of non-small cell lung cancer has led to definition of many subgroups that require dedicated treatments, strategy and trials. We created a monthly MMTB dedicated to lung cancer patients (pts) with potential driving molecular abnormalitie(s). MMTB includes physicians from the lung tumor board and the phase I unit, pathologists and biologists. A medical report summarizes the findings and treatment recommendations. We report 2 years of activity of MMTB.

Methods
All consecutive files discussed in MMTB in Gustave Roussy were reviewed. Tumor and pts characteristics were collected as well as treatment. Pts outcome was calculated from the MMTB.

Results
245 pt files were discussed between February 2010 and March 2012. 53% were male, 27% never-smokers, 89% had PS 0 or 1, median age was 59. Clinical initial stage was III-IV in 17 pts (7%) and 78%/11%/11% were adenocarcinoma/squamous cell carcinomas/others NSCLC. Time from diagnosis to MMTB was 7 months (m) (1-222), 102 (42%) of pts received more than 1 line of treatment before MMTB. Biopsy for MoA mostly came from CT guided biopsies (61%), surgery (22%) or endoscopy (15%). Biopsy was repeated in 20% of pts to get enough material for MoA. The MoA results were ALK rearrangement in 10%, exon 18/19/21 EGFR mutation (mut) in 2/14/8%, KRAS mut in 30%, PI3KCA mut in 0.4%, BRAF mut in 3%, HER2 mut in 1%, FGFR1 amplification in 3%, other rare mutations in 14%. MMTB recommendations were: a clinical trial in 75 pts (31%), receive an EMA-approved drug in 49 pts (20%), an off-label commercial drug in 18 pts (7%), an expanded access program in 18 pts (7%), none in 85 pts (35%). Out of the 160 MMTB pts with treatment recommendations, 63 (42%) received the proposed targeted therapy and 16 (11%) might receive it at the time of disease progression. After MMTB, 84 pts (34%) received 1 line, 66 pts (27%) 2 lines or more, 56 pts (23%) no treatment (unknown in 39 pts). Median follow-up is 20.6 m. Progression-free (in 224 pts) and overall survivals (OS, in 221 pts) from MMTB are 3.5 and 13.4 m. In univariate analysis for OS, the pts who received the recommended treatment from the MMTB had a better prognosis (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.56, p=0.002), confirmed in multivariate analysis (HR=0.61 [95% confidence interval: 0.42-0.88], p=0.009) after taking into account histology, previous platinum-based treatment and the number of previous treatment lines.

Conclusion
MMTB leads to treatment recommendations in a majority of the pts, fosters inclusion in clinical trials or expanded access programs, and limits the use of off labelled drugs. Updated data will be presented

Abstract not provided