Background Patients with metastatic non–small-cell lung cancer have a substantial symptom burden and may receive aggressive care at the end of life. We examined the effect of introducing palliative care early after diagnosis on patient-reported outcomes and end-of-life care among ambulatory patients with newly diagnosed disease. Methods We randomly assigned patients with newly diagnosed metastatic non–small-cell lung cancer to receive either early palliative care integrated with standard oncologic care or standard oncologic care alone. Quality of life and mood were assessed at baseline and at 12 weeks with the use of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Lung (FACT-L) scale and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, respectively. The primary outcome was the change in the quality of life at 12 weeks. Data on end-of-life care were collected from electronic medical records. Results Of the 151 patients who underwent randomization, 27 died by 12 weeks and 107 (86% of the remaining patients) completed assessments. Patients assigned to early palliative care had a better quality of life than did patients assigned to standard care (mean score on the FACT-L scale [in which scores range from 0 to 136, with higher scores indicating better quality of life], 98.0 vs. 91.5; P = 0.03). In addition, fewer patients in the palliative care group than in the standard care group had depressive symptoms (16% vs. 38%, P = 0.01). Despite the fact that fewer patients in the early palliative care group than in the standard care group received aggressive end-of-life care (33% vs. 54%, P = 0.05), median survival was longer among patients receiving early palliative care (11.6 months vs. 8.9 months, P = 0.02). Conclusions Among patients with metastatic non–small-cell lung cancer, early palliative care led to significant improvements in both quality of life and mood. As compared with patients receiving standard care, patients receiving early palliative care had less aggressive care at the end of life but longer survival. (Funded by an American Society of Clinical Oncology Career Development Award and philanthropic gifts; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01038271.)

/pdf/early-palliative-care-for-patients-with-metastatic-non-small-4lkij1uqzw.pdf

Early Palliative Care for Patients with Metastatic Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Background We conducted a randomized study to determine whether any of three chemotherapy regimens was superior to cisplatin and paclitaxel in patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer. Methods A total of 1207 patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer were randomly assigned to a reference regimen of cisplatin and paclitaxel or to one of three experimental regimens: cisplatin and gemcitabine, cisplatin and docetaxel, or carboplatin and paclitaxel. Results The response rate for all 1155 eligible patients was 19 percent, with a median survival of 7.9 months (95 percent confidence interval, 7.3 to 8.5), a 1-year survival rate of 33 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 30 to 36 percent), and a 2-year survival rate of 11 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 8 to 12 percent). The response rate and survival did not differ significantly between patients assigned to receive cisplatin and paclitaxel and those assigned to receive any of the three experimental regimens. Treatment with cisplatin...

https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa011954

Comparison of four chemotherapy regimens for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

The response rate for all 1155 eligible pa-tients was 19 percent, with a median survival of 79months (95 percent confidence interval, 73 to 85), a1-year survival rate of 33 percent (95 percent confi-dence interval, 30 to 36 percent), and a 2-year surviv-al rate of 11 percent (95 percent confidence interval,8 to 12 percent) The response rate and survival didnot differ significantly between patients assigned toreceive cisplatin and paclitaxel and those assigned toreceive any of the three experimental regimens Treat-ment with cisplatin and gemcitabine was associatedwith a significantly longer time to the progression ofdisease than was treatment with cisplatin and pacli-taxel but was more likely to cause grade 3, 4, or 5 re-nal toxicity (in 9 percent of patients, vs 3 percent ofthose treated with cisplatin plus paclitaxel) Patientswith a performance status of 2 had a significantlylower rate of survival than did those with a perform-ance status of 0 or 1

/pdf/comparison-of-four-chemotherapy-regimens-for-advanced-non-1hqyri1i1e.pdf

Comparison of four chemotherapy regimens for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

background We undertook to determine whether adjuvant vinorelbine plus cisplatin prolongs overall survival among patients with completely resected early-stage non–small-cell lung cancer. methods We randomly assigned patients with completely resected stage IB or stage II non–smallcell lung cancer to vinorelbine plus cisplatin or to observation. The primary end point was overall survival; principal secondary end points were recurrence-free survival and the toxicity and safety of the regimen. results A total of 482 patients underwent randomization to vinorelbine plus cisplatin (242 patients) or observation (240); 45 percent of the patients had pathological stage IB disease and 55 percent had stage II, and all had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1. In both groups, the median age was 61 years, 65 percent were men, and 53 percent had adenocarcinomas. Chemotherapy caused neutropenia in 88 percent of patients (including grade 3 febrile neutropenia in 7 percent) and death from toxic effects in two patients (0.8 percent). Nonhematologic toxic effects of chemotherapy were fatigue (81 percent of patients), nausea (80 percent), anorexia (55 percent), vomiting (48 percent), neuropathy (48 percent), and constipation (47 percent), but severe (grade 3 or greater) toxic effects were uncommon (<10 percent). Overall survival was significantly prolonged in the chemotherapy group as compared with the observation group (94 vs. 73 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.69; P=0.04), as was relapse-free survival (not reached vs. 46.7 months; hazard ratio for recurrence, 0.60; P<0.001). Five-year survival rates were 69 percent and 54 percent, respectively (P=0.03). conclusions Adjuvant vinorelbine plus cisplatin has an acceptable level of toxicity and prolongs disease-free and overall survival among patients with completely resected early-stage non–small-cell lung cancer.

/pdf/vinorelbine-plus-cisplatin-vs-observation-in-resected-non-2igqmcr349.pdf

Vinorelbine plus Cisplatin vs. Observation in Resected Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) previously published evidencebased guidelines for the treatment of unresectable non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) [1]. ASCO guidelines are updated periodically by the responsible Expert Panel (Appendix) [2]. For the 2003 update, a methodology similar to that applied in the original ASCO practice guidelines for treatment of unresectable NSCLC was used. Pertinent information published from 1996 through March 2003 was reviewed. The MEDLINE database (1996 through October 2002; National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, MD) was searched to identify relevant information from the published literature for this update. A series of searches was conducted using the medical subject headings, “carcinoma, non–small-cell lung,” “diagnostic imaging,” “neoplasm staging,” “mediastinoscopy,” “bone neoplasms,” “brain neoplasms,” “liver neoplasms,” “adrenal gland neoplasms,” “non–small-cell lung cancer,” “radionuclide imaging,” “bisphosphonates,” “radiotherapy,” “smoking,” “chemoprevention,” and the text words “chemotherapy,” “bone scan,” “PET,” and “zoledronic acid.” These terms were combined with the study design–related subject headings or text words “meta-analysis” and “randomized controlled trial.” Search results were limited to human studies and English-language articles. The Cochrane Library was searched in October 2002 using the phrase “lung cancer.” Directed searches based on the bibliographies of primary articles were also performed. Randomized trials published in the literature since October 2002, as well as data presented at ASCO Annual Meetings, were added to the evidence for these guidelines at the discretion of members of the Expert Panel. The entire update committee met once to discuss strategy and assign responsibilities for the update. A writing committee subsequently met to further review the literature searches, collate different sections of the update, and refine the manuscript. A draft update was circulated to the full Expert Panel for review and approval. The final document was also reviewed by ASCO’s Health Services Research Committee and the ASCO Board of Directors. Each recommendation from the 1997 guideline is listed below, and is followed by an updated (2003) recommendation, if applicable. “No change” is indicated if a particular recommendation has not been revised. A summary of the evidence follows thereafter. In order to preserve the framework of the 1997 guideline, information and recommendations regarding major topics, such as fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDGPET), have been divided and distributed to the appropriate section of the text. ASCO considers adherence to these guidelines to be voluntary. The ultimate determination regarding their application is to be made by the physician in light of each From the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Alexandria, VA.

https://ascopubs.org/doi/pdf/10.1200/JCO.2004.09.053

American Society of Clinical Oncology Treatment of Unresectable Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer Guideline: Update 2003

Purpose. This survey was designed to confirm the prevalence and duration of fatigue in the cancer population and to assess its physical, mental, social, and economic impacts on the lives of patients and caregivers. Patients and Methods. A 25-minute telephone interview was completed with 379 cancer patients having a prior history of chemotherapy. Patients were recruited from a sample of 6,125 households in the United States identified as having a member with cancer. The median patient age was 62 years, and 79% of respondents were women. Patients reporting fatigue at least a few times a month were asked a series of questions to better describe their fatigue and its impact on quality of life. Results. Seventy-six percent of patients experienced fatigue at least a few days each month during their most recent chemotherapy; 30% experienced fatigue on a daily basis. Ninety-one percent of those who experienced fatigue reported that it prevented a “normal” life, and 88% indicated that fatigue caused an alteration in their daily routine. Fatigue made it more difficult to participate in social activities and perform typical cognitive tasks. Of the 177 patients who were employed, 75% changed their employment status as a result of fatigue. Furthermore, 65% of patients indicated that their fatigue resulted in their caregivers taking at least one day (mean, 4.5 days) off work in a typical month. Physicians were the health care professionals most commonly consulted (79%) to discuss fatigue. Bed rest/ relaxation was the most common treatment recommendation (37%); 40% of patients were not offered any recommendations. Conclusions. Cancer-related fatigue is common among cancer patients who have received chemotherapy and results in substantial adverse physical, psychosocial, and economic consequences for both patients and caregivers. Given the impact of fatigue, treatment options should be routinely considered in the care of patients with cancer. The Oncologist 2000;5:353-360

https://theoncologist.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1634/theoncologist.5-5-353

Impact of Cancer-Related Fatigue on the Lives of Patients: New Findings From the Fatigue Coalition

PURPOSE: Treatment with cisplatin-based chemotherapy provides a modest survival advantage over supportive care alone in advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). To determine whether a new agent, paclitaxel, would further improve survival in NSCLC, the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group conducted a randomized trial comparing paclitaxel plus cisplatin to a standard chemotherapy regimen consisting of cisplatin and etoposide. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study was carried out by a multi-institutional cooperative group in chemotherapy-naive stage IIIB to IV NSCLC patients randomized to receive paclitaxel plus cisplatin or etoposide plus cisplatin. Paclitaxel was administered at two different dose levels (135 mg/m2 and 250 mg/m2), and etoposide was given at a dose of 100 mg/m2 daily on days 1 to 3. Each regimen was repeated every 21 days and each included cisplatin (75 mg/m2). RESULTS: The characteristics of the 599 patients were well-balanced across the three treatment groups. Superior survival was observed w...

Comparison of Survival and Quality of Life in Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer Patients Treated With Two Dose Levels of Paclitaxel Combined With Cisplatin Versus Etoposide With Cisplatin: Results of an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Trial

Purpose: To determine the ability of longitudinal patientreported health (PRH) scores to enhance prediction of clinical outcomes beyond baseline scores. Patients and Methods: In 573 advanced non–small-cell lung cancer patients enrolled in a phase III clinical trial, we used baseline and 6-week follow-up PRH scores to predict best response to treatment, disease progression, and survival. Using regression analyses, we tested the predictive ability of the five subscales of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Lung (physical, functional, social/family, emotional well-being, and the lung cancer subscale) as well as the trial outcome index (TOI) aggregate score. Results: After clinical factors were controlled for, baseline physical well-being (PWB) and TOI scores predicted all three clinical outcomes. A higher baseline PWB score was associated with a better response to treatment (odds ratio, 1.09; P < .001) and lower risk of death (risk ratio, 0.95; P < .001). Higher baseline TOI score was associated with a lower risk of disease progression (risk ratio, 0.98; P < .001). These two baseline predictors (PWB and TOI) were then used along with 6-week change scores to classify patients into four groups: low baseline-declined, low baseline-improved, high baseline-declined, and high baselineimproved. Patients with low baseline-declined PWB scores showed the worst responses to treatment and survived the shortest duration. Patients with low baseline-declined TOI scores had the shortest time to progression. Conclusion: The physical aspects of baseline PRH and PRH change during chemotherapy are significant predictors of clinical outcomes in lung cancer. This has implications for patient stratification in clinical trials and may aid decisionmaking in clinical practice. J Clin Oncol 21:1536-1543. © 2003 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Early C hange i n P atient-Reported H ealth D uring L ung C ancer Chemotherapy P redicts C linical O utcomes B eyond T hose Predicted b y B aseline R eport: R esults F rom E astern Cooperative O ncology G roup S tudy 5 592

Purpose: Treatment with cisplatin-based chemotherapy provides a modest survival advantage over supportive care alone in advanced non‐small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). To determine whether a new agent, paclitaxel, would further improve survival in NSCLC, the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group conducted a randomized trial comparing paclitaxel plus cisplatin to a standard chemotherapy regimen consisting of cisplatin and etoposide. Patients and Methods: The study was carried out by a multi-institutional cooperative group in chemotherapy-naive stage IIIB to IV NSCLC patients randomized to receive paclitaxel plus cisplatin or etoposide plus cisplatin. Paclitaxel was administered at two different dose levels (135 mg/m 2 and 250 mg/m 2 ), and etoposide was given at a dose of 100 mg/m 2 daily on days 1 to 3. Each regimen was repeated every 21 days and each included cisplatin (75 mg/m 2 ). Results: The characteristics of the 599 patients were well-balanced across the three treatment groups. Superior survival was observed with the combined paclitaxel regimens (median survival time, 9.9 months; 1-year survival rate, 38.9%) compared with etoposide plus cisplatin (median survival time, 7.6 months; 1-year survival rate, 31.8%; P 5 .048). Comparing survival for the two dose levels of paclitaxel revealed no significant difference. The median survival duration for the stage IIIB subgroup was 7.9 months for etoposide plus cisplatin patients versus 13.1 months for all paclitaxel patients (P 5 .152). For the stage IV subgroup, the median survival time for etoposide plus cisplatin was 7.6 months compared with 8.9 months for paclitaxel (P 5 .246). With the exceptions of increased granulocytopenia on the low-dose paclitaxel regimen and increased myalgias, neurotoxicity, and, possibly, increased treatment-related cardiac events with high-dose paclitaxel, toxicity was similar across all three arms. Quality of life (QOL) declined significantly over the 6 months. However, QOL scores were not significantly different among the regimens. Conclusion: As a result of these observations, paclitaxel (135 mg/m 2 ) combined with cisplatin has replaced etoposide plus cisplatin as the reference regimen in our recently completed phase III trial. J Clin Oncol 18:623-631. © 2000 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Comparison o f S urvival a nd Q uality o f L ife i n A dvanced Non-Small-Cell L ung C ancer P atients T reated W ith T wo Dose L evels o f P aclitaxel C ombined W ith C isplatin V ersus Etoposide W ith C isplatin: R esults o f a n E astern Cooperative O ncology G roup T rial

David H. Johnson

Papers

Impact of Cancer-Related Fatigue on the Lives of Patients: New Findings From the Fatigue Coalition

Comparison of Survival and Quality of Life in Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer Patients Treated With Two Dose Levels of Paclitaxel Combined With Cisplatin Versus Etoposide With Cisplatin: Results of an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Trial

Early C hange i n P atient-Reported H ealth D uring L ung C ancer Chemotherapy P redicts C linical O utcomes B eyond T hose Predicted b y B aseline R eport: R esults F rom E astern Cooperative O ncology G roup S tudy 5 592

Comparison o f S urvival a nd Q uality o f L ife i n A dvanced Non-Small-Cell L ung C ancer P atients T reated W ith T wo Dose L evels o f P aclitaxel C ombined W ith C isplatin V ersus Etoposide W ith C isplatin: R esults o f a n E astern Cooperative O ncology G roup T rial