Treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) might take into account comorbidities as an important variable. The aim of this study was to generate a new simplified comorbidity score (SCS) and to determine whether or not it improves the possibility of predicting prognosis of NSCLC patients. A two-step methodology was used. Step 1: An SCS was developed and its prognostic value was compared with classical prognostic determinants in the outcome of 735 previously untreated NSCLC patients. Step 2: the SCS reliability as a prognostic determinant was tested in a different population of 136 prospectively accrued NSCLC patients with a formal comparison between SCS and the classical Charlson comorbidity index (CCI). Prognosis was analysed using both univariate and multivariate (Cox model) statistics. The SCS summarised the following variables: tobacco consumption, diabetes mellitus and renal insufficiency (respective weightings 7, 5 and 4), respiratory, neoplastic and cardiovascular comorbidities and alcoholism (weighting=1 for each item). In step 1, aside from classical variables such as age, stage of the disease and performance status, SCS was a statistically significant prognostic variable in univariate analyses. In the Cox model weight loss, stage grouping, performance status and SCS were independent determinants of a poor outcome. There was a trend towards statistical significance for age (P=0.08) and leucocytes count (P=0.06). In Step 2, both SCS and well-known prognostic variables were found as significant determinants in univariate analyses. There was a trend towards a negative prognostic effect for CCI. In multivariate analysis, stage grouping, performance status, histology, leucocytes, lymphocytes, lactate dehydrogenase, CYFRA 21-1 and SCS were independent determinants of a poor prognosis. CCI was removed from the Cox model. In conclusion, the SCS, constructed as an independent prognostic factor in a large NSCLC patient population, is validated in another prospective population and appears more informative than the CCI in predicting NSCLC patient outcome.

Purpose: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III study aimed to determine whether thalidomide prolongs survival of patients with extensive-disease small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). Patients and Methods: One hundred nineteen patients received two courses of etoposide, cisplatin, cyclophosphamide, and 4′-epidoxorubicin (PCDE). Responder patients who had recovered from chemotherapy toxicity were randomly assigned to receive four additional PCDE cycles plus thalidomide (400 mg daily) or placebo. Results: After the first two PCDE cycles, objective response rate was 81.5%, and 92 patients were randomly assigned to placebo (n = 43) or thalidomide (n = 49). Median exposure duration to placebo was 4.5 months, and median exposure to thalidomide was 4.9 months. Patients treated with thalidomide had a longer survival compared with patients who received placebo, although the difference was not statistically significant (minimal follow-up, 3 years; median survival time, 11.7 v 8.7 months, respectively; log-rank test: hazard ratio [HR] = 0.74; 95% CI, 0.49 to 1.12; P = .16). Patients with a performance status (PS) of 1 or 2 who received thalidomide had a significantly longer survival (HR = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.92; P = .02). The disease also progressed slower in patients with PS of 1 or 2 receiving thalidomide (HR = 0.54; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.87; P = .02), whereas the difference did not reach statistical significance for the whole population (HR = 0.74; 95% CI, 0.49 to 1.12; P = .15). Neuropathy occurred more frequently in the thalidomide group compared with the placebo group (33% v 12%, respectively). Conclusion: Treatment with thalidomide was not associated with a significant improvement in survival of SCLC patients. There was pronounced heterogeneity in survival outcomes between groups of patients. Some benefit was observed among patients with a PS of 1 or 2 (exploratory analyses), deserving further studies targeting angiogenesis in this disease.

This randomized phase II–III trial sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of adding bevacizumab (Bev) following induction chemotherapy (CT) in extensive small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). Enrolled SCLC patients received two induction cycles of CT. Responders were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive four additional cycles of CT alone or CT plus Bev (7.5 mg/kg), followed by single-agent Bev until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was the percentage of patients for whom disease remained controlled (still in response) at the fourth cycle. In total, 147 patients were enrolled. Partial response was observed in 103 patients, 74 of whom were eligible for Bev and randomly assigned to the CT alone group (n = 37) or the CT plus Bev group (n = 37). Response assessment at the end of the fourth cycle showed that disease control did not differ between the two groups (89.2% versus 91.9% of patients remaining responders in CT alone versus CT plus Bev, respectively; Fisher's exact test: P = 1.00). Progression-free survival (PFS) since randomization did not significantly differ, with a median PFS of 5.5 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 4.9% to 6.0%] versus 5.3 months (95% CI 4.8% to 5.8%) in the CT alone and CT plus Bev groups, respectively [hazard ratio (HR) for CT alone: 1.1; 95% CI 0.7% to 1.7%; unadjusted P = 0.82]. Grade ≥2 hypertension and grade ≥3 thrombotic events were observed in 40% and 11% of patients, respectively, in the CT plus Bev group. Serum vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and soluble VEGF receptor titrations failed to identify predictive biomarkers. Administering 7.5 mg/kg Bev after induction did not improve outcome in extensive SCLC patients.

Background: Both quality of life (QoL) and comorbidity influence therapy and prognosis of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We previously developed a lung cancer disease-specific simplified comorbidity score (SCS) and demonstrated the prognostic impact of this disease-specific instrument. This study aimed at validating the SCS in a prospective bicentric NSCLC population by measuring its relative prognostic determinant impact taking into account well-established variables such as QoL, performance status (PS), Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) and disease stage. Patients and methods: Prognostic values of different pretherapeutic features were tested in univariate and multivariate analyses in a population of 301 NSCLC. Results: Median survival was 17 months. One-third of patients reporting difficulties in their normal daily activities and an overall poor QoL. The following pretreament variables were independent determinants of a shorter overall survival: advanced disease, SCS, Lung Cancer Symptoms Scale global symptoms score, anaemia, hyponatremia, serum alkaline phosphatases level, serum CYFRA 21-1 and serum neuron-specific enolase. Conclusion: In this extended validation population, the SCS is more informative than the CCI in predicting NSCLC patient outcome as the former is also more disease specific. Combination of both SCS comorbidity score and LSCC QoL yields a more accurate information that conventional analysis of PS.