Second-line treatment in patients with advanced extra-pulmonary poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
AuthorsMcNamara, Mairead G
Hubner, Richard A
Valle, Juan W
AffiliationDepartment of Medical Oncology, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust/Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Wilmslow Road, Manchester M20 4BX, UK.
MetadataShow full item record
AbstractBackground: There is no standard second-line treatment for patients with advanced extra-pulmonary poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma (EP-PD-NEC). This study explored data evaluating second-line treatment in these patients. Methods: A search of MEDLINE and EMBASE identified studies reporting survival and/or response data for patients with EP-PD-NEC receiving second-line therapy. Association between various factors (age, gender, ECOG performance status, primary tumour location, morphology, Ki-67, treatment and grade 3/4 haematological toxicity) and response rate (RR), progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed with a mixed effects meta-regression weighted by individual study sample size. Due to a small sample size, associations were reported quantitatively, based on magnitude of beta coefficient rather than statistical significance. Results: Of 83 identified studies, 19 were eligible, including 4 prospective and 15 retrospective studies. Analysis comprised 582 patients, with a median number of 19 patients in each study (range 5-100). Median age was 59 years (range 53-66). Median RR was 18% (range 0-50; 0% for single-agent everolimus, temozolomide, topotecan; 50% with amrubicin), median PFS was 2.5 months (range 1.15-6.0) and median OS was 7.64 months (range 3.2-22.0). Studies with a higher proportion of patients with a Ki-6755% had lower RR (beta = -0.73) and shorter OS (beta = -0.82). Conclusion: Second-line therapy for patients with advanced EP-PD-NEC has limited efficacy and the variety of regimens used is diverse. Ki-67"55% is associated with worse outcomes. Prospective randomised studies are warranted to enable exploration of new treatment strategies."
CitationM. G. McNamara, M. Frizziero, T. Jacobs et al. Second-line treatment in patients with advanced extra-pulmonary poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ther Adv Med Oncol. 2020;12:1758835920915299.
JournalTherapeutic Advances in Medical Oncology
- Carboplatin in Combination with Oral or Intravenous Etoposide for Extra-Pulmonary, Poorly-Differentiated Neuroendocrine Carcinomas.
- Authors: Frizziero M, Spada F, Lamarca A, Kordatou Z, Barriuso J, Nuttall C, McNamara MG, Hubner RA, Mansoor W, Manoharan P, Fazio N, Valle JW
- Issue date: 2019
- Etoposide and cisplatin versus irinotecan and cisplatin as the first-line therapy for patients with advanced, poorly differentiated gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma: A randomized phase 2 study.
- Authors: Zhang P, Li J, Li J, Zhang X, Zhou J, Wang X, Peng Z, Shen L, Lu M
- Issue date: 2020 May 1
- Combination versus mono-therapy as salvage treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer: A comprehensive meta-analysis of published data.
- Authors: Ying J, Chen J
- Issue date: 2019 Jul
- Comparison of first-line chemotherapy including escalated BEACOPP versus chemotherapy including ABVD for people with early unfavourable or advanced stage Hodgkin lymphoma.
- Authors: Skoetz N, Will A, Monsef I, Brillant C, Engert A, von Tresckow B
- Issue date: 2017 May 25
- Post-first-line FOLFOX chemotherapy for grade 3 neuroendocrine carcinoma.
- Authors: Hadoux J, Malka D, Planchard D, Scoazec JY, Caramella C, Guigay J, Boige V, Leboulleux S, Burtin P, Berdelou A, Loriot Y, Duvillard P, Chougnet CN, Déandréis D, Schlumberger M, Borget I, Ducreux M, Baudin E
- Issue date: 2015 Jun