RESUMEN
PURPOSE: Concurrent chemoradiotherapy (cCRT) is the standard treatment for locally advanced and unresectable non-small-cell lung cancer. Population is aging, and Geriatric assessment (GA) has demonstrated its paper to select fit patients for active treatment and vulnerable, frail patients for interventions and/or palliative care in many histologies. Its role in locally advanced, unresectable non-small-cell lung cancer has been less explored. METHODS: To assess the capability of GA to detect frail patients not suitable for active treatment, we developed this exploratory non-interventional prospective study. All patients ≥ 70 years diagnosed with stage locally advanced and unresectable non-small-cell lung cancer were invited to undergo geriatric assessment. Secondary aims were description of population, exploring GA as prognostic factor, determination of toxicity profile and look for a frailty biomarker. RESULTS: From June 2017 to June 2020, 51 patients were included, of whom 35% (n:18) were classified as frail. Frail patients had less overall survival and more grade 3-4 toxicity. Exploratory results for frailty phenotype are described in the text. CONCLUSIONS: With the results of our study, we confirm that GA can detect frail patients unsuitable for treatment, with a higher risk of toxicity and less overall survival. A trend toward blood-test results for phenotype frailty can be hypothesis generation.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) accounts for the vast majority of all diagnosed lung cancers. According to their histology, most NSCLCs are considered non-squamous cell carcinoma (NSCC), and up to 85% of the latter may lack either one of the two main actionable oncogenic drivers (i.e., EGFR mutations and ALK rearrangements). OBJECTIVE: Our analysis aimed to describe the clinical and epidemiological characteristics of Spanish patients suffering from NSCC with no actionable oncogenic driver in daily clinical practice. DESIGN: A retrospective, cross-sectional, descriptive analysis. METHODS: We analyzed the records of all Spanish patients with advanced NSCC diagnosed between January 2011 and January 2020 and included in the Spanish Thoracic Tumor Registry database. We evaluated the presence of metastasis and molecular profiling at the time of diagnosis and treatments received. We also assessed overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) according to first-line treatment. RESULTS: One thousand seven hundred ninety-seven Spanish patients with NSCC were included. They were mainly men (73.2%), smokers (current [44.4%] and former [44.4%]) and presented adenocarcinoma histology (97.6%). Most patients had at least one comorbidity (80.4%) and one metastatic site (96.8%), and a non-negligible number of those tested were PD-L1 positive (35.2%). Notably, the presence of liver metastasis indicated a shorter median OS and PFS than metastasis in other locations (p < 0.001). Chemotherapy was more often prescribed than immunotherapy as first-, second-, and third-line treatment in that period. In first-line, the OS rates were similar in patients receiving either regimen, but PFS rates significantly better in patients treated with immunotherapy (p = 0.026). Also, a high number of patients did not reach second- and third-line treatment, suggesting the failure of current early diagnostic measures and therapies. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis of the most lethal tumor in Spain could highlight the strengths and the weaknesses of its clinical management and set the ground for further advances and research.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Due to the importance of lung cancer early treatment because of its severity and extent worldwide a systematic literature review was conducted about the impact of delays in waiting times on the disease prognosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of observational studies (2010-2020) including adult patients diagnosed with lung cancer and reporting healthcare timelines and their clinical consequences. RESULTS: We included 38 articles containing data on waiting times and prognosis; only 31 articles linked this forecast to a specific waiting time. We identified 41 healthcare time intervals and found medians of 6-121 days from diagnosis to treatment and 4-19.5 days from primary care to specialist visit: 37.5% of the intervals indicated better prognosis with longer waiting times. CONCLUSIONS: All articles emphasized that waiting times must be reduced to achieve good management and prognosis of lung cancer. Further prospective studies are needed on the relationship between waiting times and prognosis of lung cancer.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Pulmonares , Tiempo de Tratamiento , Adulto , Humanos , Neoplasias Pulmonares/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Pulmonares/terapia , Pronóstico , Estudios ProspectivosRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Circulating endothelial cells (CEC) play an important role in tumor neovascularization and may have prognostic value in cancer patients. This study was designed to investigate the role of CEC as a marker for predicting platinum plus pemetrexed first-line chemotherapy efficacy in advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: A prospective study was performed whose main objective was to study whether the numbers of CEC at baseline and prior to the second and third cycle of chemotherapy were response predictors. Sixty-nine patients received cisplatin plus pemetrexed, and peripheral blood samples were performed at baseline and after second and third cycle. Separation and CEC count were performed using inmunomagnetic separation (CellSearch). RESULTS: The CEC count in 4 mL of peripheral blood was obtained prior to the first, second, and third cycle of treatment. Baseline levels and evolution of CEC were correlated with response to treatment according to RECIST criteria after three cycles of treatment. Sixty-nine patients were included: 43 (64.2 %) received cisplatin/pemetrexed and 24 (35.8 %) carboplatin/pemetrexed. Range of baseline CEC: 8-965 (mean of 153 cel/4 mL). The results after 3 cycles were: 25 partial responses (36.2 %), 17 cases of stabilization of disease (24.6 %), 16 of progressive disease (23.2 %) and 11 non-evaluables (16 %). No significant relationship between the baseline CEC count and response was found (p value = 0.831). Increase >50 % between the first and second cycle was correlated significantly with progression disease (p = 0.008). Patients who had a baseline CEC count greater than the mean (>153 cells/4 mL) showed longer progression-free survival and global survival without statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: In this homogeneous group of patients with NSCLC, there is no correlation between response to treatment and CEC baseline levels. The increase in CEC numbers after the first cycle could be a negative predictive factor.