Systemic treatment for neuroendocrine non-small cell lung carcinoma: A cases series and a systematic review of the literature

• Published in: Lung cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands) Netherlands), 2023-07, Vol.181, p.107232-107232, Article 107232
• Main Authors: Jelli, Blandine, Brandão, Mariana, Mekinda, Zita, Durieux, Valérie, Berghmans, Thierry
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Carcinoid; Carcinoid Tumor; Carcinoma, Large Cell - pathology; Carcinoma, Neuroendocrine - pathology; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung - drug therapy; Carcinoma, Small Cell - pathology; Drug therapy; Everolimus; Everolimus - therapeutic use; Humans; Large cell neuroendocrine; Lung Neoplasms - drug therapy; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Somatostatin
• ISSN: 0169-5002; 1872-8332
• DOI: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2023.107232

•Systemic therapy for large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (LCNEC) and carcinoid tumours remains controversial.•For carcinoid tumours, despite low response rates, everolimus and SSA led to prolonged disease control, while higher response rates were associated with PRRT and oxaliplatin and dacarbazine.•For LCNEC, no difference emerged comparing “SCLC-like” and “NSCLC-like” regimens whatever the considered endpoint. Neuroendocrine lung cancer constitutes a continuum from carcinoid tumours (CT) to large cell neuroendocrine (LCNEC) and small-cell carcinomas (SCLC). Except for SCLC, there is no consensual agreement on systemic therapy. The aim of this study is to review our clinical experience among patients with CT and LCNEC in the light of a systematic review of the literature. A retrospective study of all patients with CT and LCNEC receiving a systemic therapy at Institut Jules Bordet and Erasme Hospital between 01/01/2000–31/12/2020. A systematic review of the literature was performed in Ovid Medline. 53 patients (21 CT and 32 LCNEC) were included. Despite limited response rates, patients with CT receiving a “carcinoid-like” 1st-line regimen (somatostatin analogues (SSA), everolimus, peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT)) had a numerically longer survival compared to those receiving other type of regimens (median 51.4 vs 18.6 months, respectively; p = 0.17). We observed a similar survival between 1st line “SCLC-like” vs “non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)-like” schemes in LCNEC (median 11.2 vs 12.6 months, respectively; p = 0.46). The systematic review identified 23 studies (12 prospective, 15 and 8 for CT and LCNEC respectively). For CT, everolimus and SSA led to prolonged disease control with an acceptable toxicity profile, while higher response rates but lower tolerance were associated with PRRT and chemotherapy regimens including oxaliplatine and dacarbazine. For LCNEC, no difference emerged when comparing “SCLC-like” and “NSCLC-like” regimens considering response rate, progression-free or overall survival. SSA, everolimus and PRRT present a good therapeutic index for CT, while the role of chemotherapy remains limited to aggressive and rapidly evolving CT. The best type of chemotherapy regimen remains an open question in LCNEC.