The standard of care for at least stage I and II NSCLC is surgery, sometimes followed by chemotherapy. We know, however, that not every patient who presents with early stage NSCLC is healthy enough to pursue surgery, whether due to general age-related or other illnesses, or due specifically to a low pulmonary reserves, usually from years of smoking.

I wrote about the drug amrubicin in a prior post, after it demonstrated provocative activity in clinical trials out of Japan that were presented at ASCO 2007. Additional result on amrubicin in previously treated ED-SCLC were presented at a NYC meeting last week, and it's continued to look very encouraging in a clinical setting in which we could really use more options.

We've always been tempted to see if we can add more to standard approaches to improve our outcomes. In SCLC, people have attempted to add taxol to cisplatin and etoposide as part of the PET regimen (platinum + etoposide + taxol). Although heavily tested, it clarified that triplet therapy with standard chemo for SCLC appears to be associated with no improvement in outcomes but with a very significant improvement in side effects, including risk of dying from treatment.

There's a general concept out there that chemo is ineffective in treating brain metastases, and in fact, I've mentioned it in some comments here in the past. The reasoning behind this is that we know there's a blood-brain barrier, and we've presumed that chemo is blocked from crossing it.

Throughout multiple discussions of adjuvant chemotherapy, I've focused on the traditional approach used in the US and Europe of 3-4 cycles of platinum-based chemo, treating for up to about three months with a rather intensive approach. However, in Japan, they've studied the value of a different form of adjuvant treatment, with a drug called UFT that is generally well-tolerated, mild, and taken for 1-2 years by mouth.

In a very recent post I provided an introduction to the special case in NSCLC known as a Pancoast tumor, including a historical perspective of how it has evolved from being perceived initially as an untreatable, uniformly fatal diagnosis to a cancer that could be cured with radiation and then surgery in a significant minority of patients (35% in one large series).

I still need to add a post on the more recent history of managing Pancoast tumors, but I wanted to add an important and potentially relevant bit of information I learned today. I'm attending a small meeting in New York and had the opportunity to talk with some folks from the company that makes Tarceva, OSI Pharmaceuticals, who relayed some potentially relevant news people here should know.

One subtype of lung cancer that we haven’t specifically talked about is called a Pancoast tumor, named for the doctor who first described them. A Pancoast tumor is a NSCLC that is located in a groove called the superior sulcus (Pancoast tumors are also sometimes referred to as superior sulcus tumors), at the top (or apex) of each of the lungs. Here's the appearance of one on a chest x-ray:

Several trials have recently opened up for never-smokers with any lung adenocarcinoma or those with BAC (or adeno/BAC mix, invasive adenocarcinoma with BAC features) with any smoking status. Both of these groups have only recently gained recognition as likely being a distinct clinical entity with a different natural history (clinical behavior outside of treatment) and pattern of responsiveness to treatments that is different from other types of lung cancer.

Among the many variables that can potentially be helpful in predicting outcomes after surgery are some imaging results. One of these is cavitation, or hollowing out of the inside of some part of the tumor. Although most clinicians think of this as a feature of squamous cancers, it can also be seen with adenocarcinomas and other histologies less frequently.