Interview by medical oncologist Dr. Howard (Jack) West with fellow medical oncologist and lung cancer expert Dr. Janessa Laskin from the British Columbia Cancer Agency in Vancouver, BC, Canada on current standards and controversial topics in post-operative (adjuvant) chemotherapy for early stage, resected NSCLC.

[powerpress]

Transcript here: Transcript Laskin on Adjuvant Chemo

A quick point on the importance of biology over treatment. Years ago, I highlighted the results in the TRIBUTE trial of chemo with placebo or combined with erlotinib (tarceva) at the same time (biomarker study abstract here), which showed that patients with EGFR mutations had a much better survival whether they received an EGFR inhibitor or not:

Erbitux (cetuximab) is a monoclonal antibody to EGFR, and it's actually made from a protein that is part mouse and part human (called a chimeric protein, named for the mythologic creature chimera that was composed of multiple parts from different animals). It's uncommon but not rare for patients to have an allergic reaction to this protein, and in most large national and international studies show rates of hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) in the 1-3% range.

The improvement in median survival of 1.2 months with the monoclonal antibody to EGFR erbitux (cetuximab) in the FLEX trial that I've previously described was statistically significant, but there's plenty of room to debate whether it's really clinically significant (see prior post). What If we could add some way to refine our predictions of who will benefit from the addition of erbitux?

This pilot video slide presentation covers the development of our current standards for first line chemotherapy to treat advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

[powerpress]

These series will be called GRACEcasts (love it?), and we're in the process of developing a bunch of audio interviews with experts for an audio channel, and multiple video presentations, which are going to be about 10 minutes each, just little chapters at one time.

In my last post I outlined the typical clinical scenario for pneumonic bronchioloalveolar carcinoma (BAC), which is typically the mucinous subtype of this unusual disease. In fact, we are still actively learning a great deal about BAC, enough for the lung cancer experts to begin to develop a more sophisticated view that the mucinous and non-mucinous subtypes have different behaviors and respond differently to treatments.

Let's return to what happened with Anne S., who I introduced in the last post. The highlights are that I met this woman in September of 2005, when she was 79, slowing down from many medical issues unrelated to cancer, wary about chemo, and with a cancer that was metastatic but that had progressed only minimally in the months between the initial detection of her cancer and when I first saw her. We agreed that attentive follow-up made sense.

In addition to the presentations about the evidence, I thought it might be helpful to highlight some of my own clinic cases that can illustrate how I use the principles in practice. These cases should highlight that many if not most people don't exactly follow the "classic" example, and that if we were to open the case files from most oncologists, we'd find that it's very common (and appropriate) to bend the guidelines, to individualize based on the particular issues of a specific person. And I think it may also be helpful to see the range of what's possible.

We've covered the modest activity of a few mTOR inhibitors in NSCLC (see prior post), so now we'll turn to SCLC.

In a recent post I described a class of novel targeted treatments being studied in lung cancer as well as other treatment settings. These drugs inhibit mTOR, or the mammalian target of rapamycin, an immunosuppressant used to prevent rejection of organ transplants, but other drugs that inhibit this intracellular protein also have some anticancer effects.