Dataset Information

A systematic literature review of real-world treatment outcomes of small cell lung cancer.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Robust evidence from real-world studies is needed to aid decision-makers and other stakeholders in choosing the best treatment options for patients. The objective of this work was to assess real-world outcomes of treatment strategies for limited- and extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (SCLC) prior to the global introduction of immunotherapies for this disease.

Methods

Searches were conducted in MEDLINE and Embase to identify articles published in English from October 1, 2015, through May 20, 2020. Searches were designed using a combination of Medical Subject Heading (Medline), Emtree (Embase subject headings), and free-text terms such as SCLC. Observational studies reporting data on outcomes of initial treatment strategies in patients with limited- and extensive-stage SCLC were included. Studies with limited sample sizes (<100 patients), enrolled all patients prior to 2010, or did not report outcomes for limited- and extensive-stage SCLC separately were excluded. Data were extracted into a predesigned template by a single researcher. All extractions were validated by a second researcher, with disagreements resolved via consensus.

Results

Forty articles were included in this review. Most enrolled patients from the United States (n = 18 articles) or China (n = 12 articles). Most examined limited-stage (n = 27 articles) SCLC. All studies examined overall survival as the primary outcome. Articles investigating limited-stage SCLC reported outcomes for surgery, chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy, and adjuvant prophylactic cranial irradiation. In studies examining multiple treatment strategies, chemoradiotherapy was the most commonly utilized therapy (56%-82%), with chemotherapy used in 18% to 44% of patients. Across studies, median overall survival was generally higher for chemoradiotherapy (15-45 months) compared with chemotherapy alone (6.0-15.6 months). Studies of extensive-stage SCLC primarily reported on chemotherapy alone, consolidative thoracic radiotherapy, and radiotherapy for patients presenting with brain metastases. Overall survival was generally lower for patients receiving chemotherapy alone (median: 6.4-16.5 months; 3 years, 5%-14.9%) compared with chemotherapy in combination with consolidative thoracic radiotherapy (median: 12.1-18.0 months; 3 years, 15.0%-18.1%). Studies examining whole-brain radiotherapy for brain metastases reported lower median overall survival (5.6-8.7 months) compared with stereotactic radiosurgery (10.0-14.5 months).

Conclusions

Under current standard of care, which has remained relatively unchanged over the past few decades, prognosis remains poor for patients with SCLC.

SUBMITTER: Stokes M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9239604 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSmall-cell lung cancer (SCLC) accounts for 12-15% of lung cancers and is associated with poor survival outcomes and high symptom burden. This study employed a broad, systematic search strategy and timeframe to identify evidence on real-world treatment patterns and outcomes for SCLC outside the USA, including understanding sub-populations such as extensive-stage (ES) or limited-stage (LS) disease.MethodsDatabases (MEDLINE, Embase, and EBM reviews) were searched for journal articles published in the English language between 1 January 2000-1 March 2020 and supplemented by hand searching of conference abstracts and posters presented at conferences between 1 January 2016-1 March 2020 reporting real-world treatment outcomes in patients with SCLC. A targeted clinical guideline review was also completed.ResultsOne-hundred studies provided quantitative data; 57 were available as full-text articles, whilst the remaining 43 were presented as abstracts or posters. The majority (80 studies, 80%) of included studies reported treatment in the first-line setting, where platinum-based chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy was the most commonly used treatment strategy, in line with current treatment guidelines in SCLC. First-line treatments were found to have a high response rate; however, most patients relapsed early. No studies reported treatment or outcomes with immune-oncology therapies. Second-line treatment options were very limited, and primarily consisted of either re-treatment with first-line regimen or topotecan, but the prognosis for these patients remained poor. Outcomes were particularly poor amongst those with ES or relapsed disease vs. LS disease.ConclusionsSCLC treatment patterns and short survival outcomes have remained constant over the previous 20 years. Due to the search timeframe, none of the studies identified reported on the impact of recently approved immune-oncology therapies in SCLC. Further data is needed on the impact of immunotherapies on treatment patterns and real-world outcomes in SCLC.

Project description:ObjectivesSCLC makes up approximately 15% of all lung carcinomas and is characterized by relatively aggressive spread and poorer prognosis compared to other lung cancers. Treatment options are limited, and their efficacy in randomized trials is poor, whilst outcomes in clinical practice remain unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the real-world effectiveness and tolerability of SCLC treatments.MethodsAn SLR was conducted across nine databases accessed through OVID, capturing observational, non-randomized studies published between 01/2006-11/2018. In total, 554 abstracts were retrieved and systematically screened for eligibility. The eligible publications included effectiveness and tolerability data from adult SCLC patients (at any line of therapy). Additional grey literature searches were conducted.ResultsForty-three publications were included in this review-data from first-line therapies were captured most often (n = 32), while data from second (n = 14) and third line (n = 7) and beyond (n = 7) were less frequent. The publications reported primarily on chemotherapy/radiotherapy. The majority of publications lacked robustness and only 14/43 conducted statistical analyses or controlled for bias. Median OS for the largest SCLC populations were 9.6 months at first line (n = 23,535) and 4.9 months at second line (n = 254) for treatment with chemotherapy, and 4.7 months at third line (n = 120) for predominantly platinum-based chemotherapy or cyclophosphamide/adriamycin/vincristine. Hematologic toxicities (such as neutropenia, thrombocytopenia and anemia) were the most frequently reported TRAEs (n = 9).ConclusionsReal-world treatment effectiveness and tolerability data were fragmented and inconsistently reported, and available publications were primarily of poor quality and lacked statistical analyses. This SLR showed limited treatment options and poor OS in SCLC, with no treatment option being clearly superior. TRAEs additionally increased the burden of this already challenging disease. Recent data suggest real-world outcomes are even poorer that those reported in clinical trials, and that novel therapies are needed to offer new treatment options for patients.

Project description:BackgroundThe application of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) represents a breakthrough in the current landscape for the treatment of extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC), but the real-world outcome is limited. This study aimed to investigate the treatment options and efficacy evaluation of first-line, second-line, and subsequent-line immunotherapy in routine practice.MethodsA retrospective analysis of ES-SCLC patients treated with ICIs was conducted between May 2016 and September 2021. Objective response rate, disease control rate, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were assessed between groups to explore the value of ICIs at different treatment time periods. PFS1 and PFS2 were defined as the duration from initial therapy to disease progression or death in first-line or second-line treatment.ResultsNinety-six patients with ES-SCLC were included. PFS1 was prolonged in patients treated with first-line ICIs-combined therapy (median PFS1 7.20 months vs. 5.30 months, hazard ratio [HR] 0.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.36-087, p = 0.0085). For patients who progressed after first-line ICIs treatment (N = 22), PFS1 + PFS2 was longer in the second-line ICIs continuation group with no significant difference (median PFS1 + PFS2 11.27 months vs. 7.20 months, HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.14-1.51, p = 0.19). For patients who experienced a progression event after first-line chemotherapy (N = 50), PFS2 and PFS1 + PFS2 were prolonged in patients who accepted second-line ICIs-combined therapy without significant difference (median PFS2 4.00 months vs. 2.43 months, HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.33-1.05, p = 0.070; median PFS1 + PFS2 11.30 months vs. 8.70 months, HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.29-0.98, p = 0.056).ConclusionFirst-line ICIs plus chemotherapy should be applied in the clinical practice of ES-SCLC. If patients did not receive ICIs plus chemotherapy in first-line treatment, therapies that include ICIs in second-line treatment should be considered.

Project description:BackgroundAntibacterial-resistant gram-negative infections are a serious risk to global public health. Resistant Enterobacterales and Pseudomonas aeruginosa are highly prevalent, particularly in healthcare settings, and there are limited effective treatment options. Patients with infections caused by resistant pathogens have considerably worse outcomes, and incur significantly higher costs, relative to patients with susceptible infections. Ceftolozane/tazobactam (C/T) has established efficacy in clinical trials. This review aimed to collate data on C/T use in clinical practice.MethodsThis systematic literature review searched online biomedical databases for real-world studies of C/T for gram-negative infections up to June 2020. Relevant study, patient, and treatment characteristics, microbiology, and efficacy outcomes were captured.ResultsThere were 83 studies comprising 3,701 patients were identified. The most common infections were respiratory infections (52.9% of reported infections), urinary tract infections (UTIs; 14.9%), and intra-abdominal infections (IAIs; 10.1%). Most patients included were seriously ill and had multiple comorbidities. The majority of patients had infections caused by P. aeruginosa (90.7%), of which 86.0% were antimicrobial-resistant. C/T was used as both a 1.5 g q8h and 3 g q8h dose, for a median duration of 7-56 days (varying between studies). Outcome rates were comparable between studies: clinical success rates ranged from 45.7 to 100.0%, with 27 studies (69%) reporting clinical success rates of > 70%; microbiological success rates ranged from 31 to 100%, with 14 studies (74%) reporting microbiological success rates of > 70%. Mortality rates ranged from 0 to 50%, with 31 studies (69%) reporting mortality rates of ≤ 20%. In comparative studies, C/T was as effective as aminoglycoside- or polymyxin-based regimens, and in some instances, significantly more effective.ConclusionsThe studies identified in this review demonstrate that C/T is effective in clinical practice, despite the diverse group of seriously ill patients, different levels of resistance of the pathogens treated, and varying dosing regimens used. Furthermore, comparative studies suggest that C/T offers a successful alternative to standard of care (SoC).

Project description:IntroductionGram-negative nosocomial pneumonia (NP), including hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia (HABP), ventilated HABP (vHABP), and ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (VABP), is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. Common pathogens, including Enterobacterales and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, are prevalent in healthcare settings and have few effective treatment options due to high rates of antibacterial resistance. Resistant pathogens are associated with significantly worse outcomes, relative to patients with susceptible infections. Ceftolozane/tazobactam (C/T) has established efficacy in clinical trials of patients with NP. This review aims to collate data on C/T use for HABP/vHABP/VABP infections in real-world clinical practice.MethodsThis systematic literature review searched online biomedical databases for real-world studies of C/T used to treat Gram-negative respiratory tract infections (RTIs) between January 2009 and June 2020.ResultsThirty-three studies comprising 658 patients were identified. Pneumonia was the most common infection treated with C/T (85%), with a smaller number of unspecified RTIs (9%) and tracheobronchitis (5%) reported. The majority of patients had respiratory infections caused by P. aeruginosa (92.8%), of which 88.1% were multidrug-resistant. Examination of these studies demonstrated an increase in the percentage of patients receiving the recommended dose of C/T for respiratory infections (3 g q8h or renal impairment-adjusted) over time (36.8% of patients in 2017 to 71.5% in 2020). Clinical success rates ranged from 51.4 to 100%, with 10 studies (55.6% of studies reporting clinical success) reporting clinical success rates of > 70%; microbiological success rates ranged from 57.0 to 100.0%, with three studies (60.0% of studies reporting microbiological success) reporting microbiological success rates of > 70%. Thirty-day mortality ranged from 0.0 to 33.0%, with nine studies (90% of studies reporting mortality) reporting 30-day mortality of < 30%.ConclusionsThe studies identified in this review demonstrate that C/T shows similar outcomes as those seen in clinical trials, despite the higher frequency of multidrug-resistant pathogens, and comorbidities that may have been excluded from the trials.