Efficacy analysis and multi-factor retrospective study of third-line chemotherapy in 82 Chinese patients with small cell lung cancer

Objective As there is currently no clear recommendation for third-line chemotherapy for small cell lung cancer (SCLC), its efficacy is unknown. To date, there have rarely been reports of Chinese patients with SCLC who received third-line chemotherapy. Therefore, we investigated the efficacy, safety,...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Oncology and translational medicine 2015-02, Vol.1 (1), p.26-31
Hauptverfasser: Liu, Jingjing, Zhang, Shuang, Ma, Lixia, Wu, Chunjiao, Yang, Changliang, Zuo, Xuerong, Cheng, Ying
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Objective As there is currently no clear recommendation for third-line chemotherapy for small cell lung cancer (SCLC), its efficacy is unknown. To date, there have rarely been reports of Chinese patients with SCLC who received third-line chemotherapy. Therefore, we investigated the efficacy, safety, and prognostic factors of Chinese patients with SCLC treated with third-line chemotherapy. Methods A retrospective analysis of patients with SCLC who received third-line chemotherapy was performed. Results Between 2007 and 2013, 62 patients [62 men (75.6%), 20 women (24.4%); median age at the time of diagnosis, 55 years] received third-line chemotherapy at our center. Of these patients, 44 had limited-stage disease and 38 had extensive-stage disease. On third-line chemotherapy, 55 (67.1%) patients had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) of 0-1, objective response rate of 15.9%, and median overall survival after third-line chemotherapy (OS-3) and median progres- sion-free survival after third-line chemotherapy (PFS-3) of 5.6 months and 3.0 months, respectively. On univariate analysis, PFS-3 was significantly related with ECOG PS (P = 0.005), response to second-line chemotherapy (P = 0.002), response to third-line chemotherapy (P 〈 0.001), and PFS after second-line chemotherapy (P = 0.026). OS-3 was significantly related with ECOG PS (P 〈 0.001), response to third-line chemotherapy (P = 0.033), PFS after first-line therapy (P = 0.044), and PFS after second-line therapy (PFS-2) (P = 0.007). On multivariate analysis, ECOG PS (P = 0.008) and response to third-line chemotherapy (P = 0.046) were independent prognostic factors for PFS-3, while ECOG PS (P = 0.007) and PFS-2 (P 〈 0.001) were independent prognostic factors for OS-3. Conclusion Few patients with SCLC receive third-line chemotherapy. Our findings suggest that patients with an ECOG PS 0-1 and PFS-2 for 〉3 months will be benefit from third-line chemotherapy, which should be actively offered to them.
ISSN:1610-1979
2095-9621
1613-9089
DOI:10.1007/s10330-014-0049-5