After several weeks of posts on other aspects of lung cancer, I am long overdue to write on small cell lung cancer (SCLC). Although it is good to see the number of SCLC cases decreasing over time, and becoming a smaller and smaller percentage of lung cancer cases overall (only about 13% in the US and steadily falling), this has translated into fewer clinical trials and less of a focus on SCLC in the lung cancer community. However, there are some promising developments that may lead to some long overdue progress in the field.
First, this post will start with some general concepts and an introduction to SCLC, and this will be followed in the next few weeks by posts describing current and emerging ideas for the basic stages of small cell lung cancer, and also a discussion of prophylactic cranial irradiation for small cell, where it has been most extensively studied.
SCLC is one of the two major types of lung cancer, and although it used to be taught as comprising 25% of lung cancer cases, in the last 15 years that has dropped to 20%, then 15%, and now below that. This is probably because it is the type of lung cancer most closely associated with smoking, often more than a pack per day for many years. It is so commonly associated with smoking that some experts say that if SCLC is diagnosed in a never-smoker, you need to re-examine the pathology or question the patient about smoking when his or her spouse (or child, or whoever) is outside of the room, just to confirm that they are really a non-smoker. It’s fair to say that cases of SCLC in never-smokers are exceptionally rare.
SCLC develops in “neuroendocrine” cells toward the center of the chest. These can release hormones in the bloodstream, so SCLC is the kind of tumor most likely to be associated with “paraneoplastic syndromes”, or problems indirectly from the cancer. It can cause strange neurologic syndromes by creating antibodies against nerve cells in the brain or connecting to muscles, and it can alter the salt balance in the body from proteins released by cancer cells. Although these can sometimes have special treatments to deal with those separate syndromes, treating the underlying cancer is one of the more effective ways to deal with these problems.
Most SCLC tends to grow quickly, developing bulky masses in the middle of the chest, can worsen over days or weeks at a time (NSCLC tends to grow more slowly). The most common symptoms are a cough, fatigue, decreased appetite, non-exertional chest pain (unlike angina, which is primarily chest pain associated with exertion), and coughing up blood, also known as hemoptysis (hee-MOP-ta-sis). It also has a great tendency to spread early, which is the main reason we don’t routinely consider surgery for the treatment of SCLC. It has such a high risk of spreading that whole body treatment with chemotherapy is the cornerstone of treatment for all cases, both limited stage and extensive stage. 90% of cases have spread to lymph nodes in the middle of the chest, about 2/3 of cases have spread to distant organs, and about in some studies 70% of SCLC tumors to the brain within two years. The brain is VERY fertile soil for SCLC, which is the major reason brain radiation is so strongly considered even for patients who don’t have evidence of cancer there on scans, as a prophylactic treatment.
While there is a more detailed staging system for SCLC, almost nobody uses one more complicated than a basic breakdown into two categories, known as limited stage vs. extensive stage. There is a little play in the exact definitions of what can be considered as limited or extensive even among experts. Basically, the definitions are functional, based on the limits of how much radiation you can safely give to a patient. If you can fit all of the SCLC into a radiation “port”, or the target for treatment, it can be considered limited stage, vs. extensive disease if you can’t. See figure:
In truth, however, cancer that spread throughout the bloodstream to another area has the ability to travel to other parts of the body, so even if you had a cancer in the liver near a main lung lesion and could do radiation to everything you can see, you generally wouldn’t because the liver spot got there by spreading through the bloodstream, so it’s an extensive stage cancer. Overall, about 1/3 of SCLC is limited stage (or LD-SCLC), and the other 2/3 are extensive stage SCLC (or ED-SCLC). It is possible to cure LD-SCLC, although it’s challenging and not as frequent as we would like. Despite our best efforts, it isn’t possible to cure ED-SCLC.
As a rule, SCLC is very responsive to initial treatment, with chemotherapy or radiation or both. In fact, sometimes chemotherapy and/or radiation can kill tumor cells so quickly the kidneys can have a problem processing all of the breakdown products in those dying cells, a problem called tumor lysis syndrome. That’s still uncommon. But you can see terrific improvements in SCLC within just days after starting treatment, so we consider the vast majority of patients, including older and frail patients, to be candidates for treatment for SCLC, because they can often dramatically improve with treatment.
I’ll discuss the historical and emerging treatments for SCLC soon.
Posted in: Chemotherapy, Core Concepts, Extensive Disease Small Cell Lung Cancer (ED-SCLC), Limited Disease Small Cell Lung Cancer (LD-SCLC), Lung Cancer, Pathology/Lung Cancer Subtypes, Radiation therapy, SCLC, Extensive Disease and Recurrent, SCLC, Limited Disease, Small Cell Lung Cancer (SCLC), Treatment
email to a friend
printer friendly
Dr West,
That was wonderful reading. Although most of it is known to those of us who read everything they can about sclc, it is so encouraging that someone is showing us current information on the web. Keep is up.
lban
[…] While progress in small cell lung cancer (SCLC) has been slow, over the past few years there have been leads in management of extensive disease that have introduced a potential change in the standard of care based on better results. Extensive disease SCLC, or ED-SCLC, is defined by having cancer that has spread outside of the region that can safely be covered by a radiation port (more details and relevant figure in SCLC 101 post), and this accounts for approximately two thirds of SCLC cases. Patients can often show very rapid cancer progression and clinical deterioration, but fortunately initial treatment very often leads to rapid and dramatic improvement, although we are not able to cure ED-SCLC. […]
Dear Dr. West,
Your SCLC 101 Introduction is such a great informative article. Thanks so much for the much needed info. I cannot begin to tell you how valuable your words ” it is possible to cure LD-SCLC” are to me. I so need to hear words like that. You are absolutely right about some long overdue progress being needed in this field. I know Tarceva is used in NSCLC but is there anything out there for SCLC as a prophylactic besides PCI?
Also, thanks for your article I read on PCI.
_Take Care, Bonnie
Sorry, not an “article” on PCI, I meant the info you gave me on the LCA Community. Thanks again, Bonnie
[…] As I described in a post describing the general principles of SCLC, it is typically responsive to treatment initially, but upon recurrence it is much less likely to respond. Given that pattern, the value of maintenance therapy has been tested in ED-SCLC, where treatment with initial standard doublet chemo was followed immediately by single-agent “maintenance chemotherapy”, in hopes of delaying progression to a point where a resistant, progressive SCLC emerges. […]
Thank you so much. I did just read your post on Maintenance Chemo for ED-SCLC. I have a much better understanding now. I feel such comfort just knowing you’re here. I believe God sent you to us just at the exact time we needed you. I thank you and I thank Him for you.
Bonnie
Dr. West,
I have a few questions for you if you don’t mind. First, is it true that once SCLC tumors are killed by chemo and radiation that they return to the bloodstream and then later come back in different places? An oncologist told my mother that when she asked him what happens to the tumor. Please correct me if I am wrong but seems to me those cells do die from the treatment, so if released back into the bloodstream, how is that so? If a recurrence occurs, does it start again in the lung(s)?
Second, how long does chemo stay in your system and does it have a cummulative effect? (My mother is so much sicker (major major nausea and fatigue) this last chemo round, although it wasn’t her regular oncologist who ordered the chemo and he didn’t hydrate her prior to chemo as her regular onc. usually does)
And third, (and fourth), how long has PCI been used and does it indeed cause permanent hair loss?
Thanks in advance.
Bonnie
Bonnie,
Cancer cells that die break down and are excreted through the bloodstream, with various chemicals metabolized through the kidneys and liver. In rare cases with very large tumor burdens and a very sensitive tumor, there can be so many cancer cells breaking down quickly and releasing their chemical contents into the bloodstream that it can be a metabolic challenge for the body. This is called tumor lysis syndrome and rarely but occasionally does occur with SCLC, because it can be very bulky and also very sensitive to treatment at initial presentation.
Cancer cells that don’t die can travel in the bloodstream and settle in as a metastasis anywhere. Recurrences can be in the lungs, but they can also be in the liver, bones, adrenal glands just over the kidneys, in the brain, or sometimes other places as well.
Chemo effects can last for a few weeks to months. It is broken down usually within days, but chemo kills cells in the marrow that lead to low blood counts that can last weeks to months. In fact, it is definitely possible for patients to have long term lower blood counts than normal, even for years after treatment. Fatigue can definitely be cumulative, but nausea less so. Perhaps it does have to do with the hydration or other medicines (such as anti-nausea medicines given before chemo) that might have been different between this time and a previous time.
PCI has been used and studied for a couple of decades, increasingly in the past 10 years as the evidence has converged supporting a survival advantage in LD-SCLC. It can cause permanent hair loss, but not most of the time. You’d need to talk with a radiation oncologist to get an idea of the numbers they quote about the frequency of the longer-term side effects.
I hope she has an easier time with subsequent rounds of treatment.
-Dr. West
Dear Dr. West,
Thank you for responding so quickly.
I’m glad I can answer my mother’s questions more accurately now. Your information is so helpful. It helps to be a nurse but this is a whole new field for me.
Thank God this week was my mother’s 6th and final round of chemo.
God Bless You,
Bonnie
I have begun research on SCLC and this article has been helpful - thank you. My mother had symptoms in Nov.06 with a bone scan ordered for today to help determine if it is limited or extensive. MRI was performed and is clear. They recommend medium RAD treatments 1.8 grey/day * 30 days for 54 grey and 6 cylces of high dose VP16/carboplatin once every 3 weeks for a total 18 weeks. What are the differences betwees Cisplatin and Carboplatin?
My Mom has low BC both red and white and has Thalassemia anemia - I am concerned with the quality of life issues more specifically because I believe her blood counts will be completely compromised causing infections - We can’t weigh the risk/rewards. Any advice?
Carboplatin is overall easier for most patients to take, with fewer side effects that patients feel, compared with cisplatin. Carboplatin primarily drops blood counts, and because of that can cause anemia with fatigue, and increased risk of infections, and possibly bleeding. Infections and bleeing are still pretty unlikely. Cisplatin generally causes fewer problems with decreased blood counts (but definitely still some), but causes more risk of kidney damage, hearing loss, neuropathy (nerve damage leading to numbness/tingling), and nausea/vomiting. All of those things can also be seen with carboplatin, but usually to a much lesser degree.
In many cancer settings, carbo replaces cisplatin if it has pretty much the same efficacy/activity, because it tends to be considerably better tolerated. In some settings cisplatin and carboplatin have been shown to be pretty much superimposable in terms of how well they work, but in other settings in oncology carboplatin has been slightly inferior. Overall, if treatment is not in a curative setting, carboplatin tends do be an especially appealing option, because it has pretty comparable efficacy and better tolerability, and if there is a slight decrease in activity, it doesn’t compromise survival. However, in settings where cisplatin has been better tested and the treatment is being given to achieve a cure, I am less likely to recommend substituting carboplatin for cisplatin, because I don’t want to short change anyone’s opportunity to do well. That said, because of the risk of kidney damage, neuropathy, hearing loss, and generally hard time getting through it, carboplatin is still sometimes a more appropriate choice for an individual patient.
In addition to transfusions as needed, anemia and low white blood cell counts (neutropenia) can also be improved by adding growth factor support, injections of medicines like erythropoietin (EPO) or neupogen (G-CSF) that can help boost the red cell and white cell counts, respectively, during chemo treatment. These agents have certain guidelines for use but are routinely used to reduce the problems from low blood counts with chemo.
-Dr. West
Dr. West
Thanks - I really appreciate this. The Doctor held back beginning Chemo treatments today and now wants a bone marrow biopsy. It has been frustrating for mom and I am headed down to Florida to see what is happening with her course of treatment. We have been waiting awhile for her to get started and based on what I have been reading - this is an aggressive cancer. Thanks for being there. It matters to people.
Elaine
P.S.: the bone scan came out clean. Does this mean she is in a more “curable” state? Is Cisplatin in an aggressive mode be a viable option? What woudl you consider an aggressive treatment regimine? the intial regimine was 6 cylces of high dose VP16/carboplatin once every 3 weeks for a total 18 weeks. Is this considered aggressive? Thanks - Elaine
Elaine,
If there is no evidence of disease outside of region of the tumor (usually the tumor plus lymph nodes on the same side of the chest), the SCLC may be considered limited disease. You might want to check out the figure on staging in the post. Bone involvement on the scan would mean it’s extensive, so while having a negative bone scan isn’t a guarantee that it’s limited, the negative scan means that limited disease is still possible. Bone marrow biopsies are sometimes done to thoroughly stage SCLC.
In general, cisplatin has more of a track record in SCLC, particularly in limited disease. The limited available evidence suggests carboplatin is in the ballpark of the same activity, and it’s usually far easier on patients in terms of side effects. Depending on the age and health of a patient, cisplatin may just not be a good idea. Although I would consider cisplatin to be a little more “aggressive”, that may not necessarily be a good thing if the side effects of treatment are serious and potentially permanent (patients can even rarely die from treatment). Cisplatin can cause irreversible kidney damage, hearing loss, and nerve damage (neuropathy), as well as some pretty fierce nausea and vomiting. It may or may not be the right choice for your mother’s situation. I would just say that more is not always better, and it’s worth talking carefully with the oncologist about whether the risk exceeds the possible incremental benefit of cisplatin vs. carboplatin.
The current general principles for “aggressive” treatment are outlined in my posts in the SCLC section. Up to 6 cycles of chemo, usually with chest radiation added for limited disease, often followed by prophylactic cranial irradiation (radiation to the brain to prevent metastases there). Chemo alone for extensive disease. Cisplatin has been more commonly used historically, and I think it is slightly more active, but in extensive disease, many people (including myself) often favor carboplatin because it often has a better side effect vs. efficacy balance, especially important if the cancer is not at a stage where we can treat with curative intent.
-Dr. West
Dr. West I have a question? My mom was diagnosed with limited sclc last March. She went through 6 rounds of chemo and 30 treatments of radiation. In Sept. she had a ct scan that looked clear and in October had a pet scan, which also looked good. 2 weeks ago she went in for chest x-rays and they noticed a spot in the same lung, close to the original spot the cancer was in before. She went in last week for the ct scan and it confirmed a 3-4 cm irregular pleural based mass. There are also some infiltrates anteriorly in the same lung. No discrete nodules are identified in other lung, no pleural effusions are seen bilaterally. No enlarged hilar or mediastinal lymph nodes are demonstrated. Every thing else looks normal. I am very curious as to treatment options. Most everything I have read seems to indicated that when it comes back it is in another area, not the same area. Does it make the prognosis any better, than if it had spread? Thanks for any help you can offer.
Jessica
Jessica,
It’s certainly possible to have SCLC recur in the same place. In general, if it is convincing as a recurrent SCLC, the general treatment is still the approaches I outlined in my post on chemo for recurrent SCLC, with topotecan (Hycamtin) as an FDA-approved option, and some people choose another approach. If it appears to be very localized, then I might just check to see if a local therapy like additional radiation or possibly surgery (which would also provide a definitive answer that it is recurrent, viable SCLC and not something else). I wouldn’t say that I’m campaigning for that, but it might be something to discuss with her oncologist. The infiltrates anteriorly are potentially important — if that is cancer, a local therapy like radiation or surgery would likely be of less advantage as an option, and would leave chemo-based therapy the leading consideration in most cases. While the infiltrates could be residual effects from her radiation, I wouldn’t expect that to happen so late after ending treatment.
-Dr. West
Dr. West thanks so much. Well we met with the oncologist today and he was kind of skeptical about it being sclc. The area they are concerned with is in the plueral on the outside of her lung. The original mass was located on on the bottom and extending up towards the middle and slightly into the upper part. They could only get the biopsy from a bronchoscopy because it was so close to her pulmonary artery. He seemed pleased that the suspicious spot wasn’t in that same area, in any of her organs, and her blood work is OK. She cannot have any more radiation so chemo is or will be her option. They are going to drop her ct scan off with the radiologist and have him do a needle biopsy.
Does it sound like it is typical sclc or a possible new cancer? Thanks again for all of your help..
Jessica
Dr. West well we got good news today. The radiologist said mom has pneumonia, not cancer. They are putting her on med’s and she will need to get another ct scan next month.
So next month will be her 6 month mark since chemo, is that a good sign?
Thanks Jessica
That’s great. I hope her next scan clarifies that this was just a highly treatable pneumonia.
-Dr. West
Hi Dr. West,
You are familiar with my mother - SCLC dx in Sept, completed 33 rad. txs and just completed 6 rounds of chemo about 3 weeks ago. Excellent response. The CT just prior to her last chemo showed “the area of adenopathy essentially resolved”. This was the hilar mass found on orig CT and the area from which the bx was taken.. Now, a couple days ago was another CT of the head and chest, now we have a “questionable area” or “fluid” in the right lung. She has a PET scan tomorrow. I am shocked by this, surely this wouldn’t/couldn’t be a recurrence this soon. I am praying it is just scar tissue/inflammation or something, anything other than a recurrence! Considering the ongoing cough she has had since before Thanksgiving despite having taken a Z-pak (stopped the cough for a very short period), then a round of Levaquin, neb treatments, no relief from this cough called “inflammation”. I am just so taken back. I just knew the CT would show NED. I guess we will see what the PET shows. — Bonnie
Bonnie,
After chemo and radiation, and especially just three weeks after completing chemo that was just recently associated with a great response, there’s plenty of room for explanations other than recurrent cancers. That’s obviously why she’s doing the PET scan. But post-treatment inflammation or scarring can lead to this kind of appearance, and infection could also lead to similar findings.
I’m going to have to do a post on radiation pneumonitis, the inflammation that classically sets in a few weeks after radiation is completed and can last for months at a time. These kind of symptoms, as well as ambiguous CT findings, are very, very common after chemo and RT. Sometimes we just can’t get a good explanation other than watching for changes over time.
I hope the PET provides answers, but since inflammation can also light up on PET (generally not as brightly as rapidly-growing cancer), low to moderate-level PET activity could be either residual cancer or inflammation or infection.
Good luck to both of you. I doubt that anything I say would keep you from worrying (I don’t think it would work for me if I were in your shoes — I’m a control freak and don’t like ambiguity), but it may be hard to know exactly what is happening for a while. If it’s any reassurance, this kind of situation is incredibly common after multimodality treatment, and it’s frustrating for patients, families, and doctors alike (the “misery loves company” argument to comfort you). People all over the discussion/Q&A boards are expressing similar angst.
-Dr. West
Thanks so much for always responding so quickly. (do you ever sleep?)
Also, my mother has always had “scar tissue” in that right lung from prior pneumonias. I’m thinking it isn’t a recurrence.
I will keep you updated on the PET findings.
Have a great day,
Bonnie
Dr. West,
My mother told me part of her prep for the PET was to avoid starches, sugars, etc. Then she said she had a severe HA this AM and took Excedrin Tension HA. She said she avoided taking Tylenol because the bottle says it contains starches. Well what she didn’t know Excedrin contains Acetaminophen. Then she said they injected her with “a sugar substance” prior to the PET.
Do you think the Excedrin will have an adverse effect or false positive on her PET result and what is injected prior to a PET??? I don’t understand.
Bonnie
The injection that PET scans use is a labelled sugar molecule, so taking any significant amount of sugar or staches before the test could interfere with the sugar injected. I would not imagine that the tiny amount of starch that may possibly be included in an excedrin tablet or two would be remotely close to a level that would have any effect on a PET scan. I would consider it to have almost no chance of having any effect at all on the test.
-Dr. West
Thanks so much, I will relay that message to her
.
Have a great weekend!
Bonnie
Dr. West,
Based on the SUV 5.3 measurement on the nodule on my mother’s PET (and as I said, these numbers mean nothing to me), could this in fact be a granuloma? Or do granulomas light up less or more or not at all? I am just grasping.
Thanks,
Bonnie
A granuloma really shouldn’t be PET-avid. I think that’s quite unlikely.
27 Comments
Login (Must Be Logged In To Comment)