INTRODUCTION: Lung cancer accounts for 20 % of cancer deaths in Spain. The most frequent subtype (87 %) is non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Pemetrexed is a recently marketed drug added to NSCLC therapeutic arsenal. It seems to have become one of the most used options for the treatment of this condition over the last 3 years. AIM OF THE REVIEW: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of pemetrexed in NSCLC, in the different therapy lines. Method A systematic search of published literature was conducted using the main databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and the Center for Reviews and Dissemination) and subsequently a search of referenced literature was performed. We included clinical trials, meta-analyses and systematic reviews. The evaluation of the quality of the articles was performed by pairs using specific assessment scales, Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) adapted for CASP Spain. Then we extracted data on efficacy and safety according to the treatment line assessed. RESULTS: We identified 277 references. Finally, nine clinical trials and a meta-analysis complied with inclusion criteria. In first-line induction, treatment with pemetrexed associated with a platinum was similar in terms of efficacy to other alternative chemotherapy regimens, except in patients with non-squamous histology, in whom survival was higher in the experimental group. In maintenance treatment, greater efficacy was seen with pemetrexed in patients with non-squamous histology. In second-line treatment, there were no significant differences in terms of efficacy and safety for pemetrexed treatment versus other chemotherapy options. The most frequent adverse reactions were: hematological, gastrointestinal and neurological. All were significantly less frequent with pemetrexed versus other alternative therapies, except for liver toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Due to the high degree of uncertainty as to its efficacy in certain subgroups of patients, including conflicting data; to its recent incorporation, and therefore lack of safety data in the medium and long term, and the high budgetary impact of its incorporation into health systems, it seems reasonable to optimize its use, identifying those patients who may benefit most.
INTRODUCTION: Lung cancer accounts for 20 % of cancer deaths in Spain. The most frequent subtype (87 %) is non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Pemetrexed is a recently marketed drug added to NSCLC therapeutic arsenal. It seems to have become one of the most used options for the treatment of this condition over the last 3 years. AIM OF THE REVIEW: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of pemetrexed in NSCLC, in the different therapy lines. Method A systematic search of published literature was conducted using the main databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and the Center for Reviews and Dissemination) and subsequently a search of referenced literature was performed. We included clinical trials, meta-analyses and systematic reviews. The evaluation of the quality of the articles was performed by pairs using specific assessment scales, Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) adapted for CASP Spain. Then we extracted data on efficacy and safety according to the treatment line assessed. RESULTS: We identified 277 references. Finally, nine clinical trials and a meta-analysis complied with inclusion criteria. In first-line induction, treatment with pemetrexed associated with a platinum was similar in terms of efficacy to other alternative chemotherapy regimens, except in patients with non-squamous histology, in whom survival was higher in the experimental group. In maintenance treatment, greater efficacy was seen with pemetrexed in patients with non-squamous histology. In second-line treatment, there were no significant differences in terms of efficacy and safety for pemetrexed treatment versus other chemotherapy options. The most frequent adverse reactions were: hematological, gastrointestinal and neurological. All were significantly less frequent with pemetrexed versus other alternative therapies, except for liver toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Due to the high degree of uncertainty as to its efficacy in certain subgroups of patients, including conflicting data; to its recent incorporation, and therefore lack of safety data in the medium and long term, and the high budgetary impact of its incorporation into health systems, it seems reasonable to optimize its use, identifying those patients who may benefit most.
Authors: Silvia Novello; Francisco Luis Pimentel; Jean-Yves Douillard; Mary O'Brien; Joachim von Pawel; John Eckardt; Astra M Liepa; Lorinda Simms; Carla Visseren-Grul; Luis Paz-Ares Journal: J Thorac Oncol Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 15.609
Authors: Josh J Carlson; Carolina Reyes; Nina Oestreicher; Deborah Lubeck; Scott D Ramsey; David L Veenstra Journal: Lung Cancer Date: 2008-03-04 Impact factor: 5.705
Authors: Sara De Matteis; Dario Consonni; Jay H Lubin; Margaret Tucker; Susan Peters; Roel Ch Vermeulen; Hans Kromhout; Pier Alberto Bertazzi; Neil E Caporaso; Angela C Pesatori; Sholom Wacholder; Maria Teresa Landi Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2012-03-31 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: Chandra P Belani; Thomas Brodowicz; Tudor E Ciuleanu; Maciej Krzakowski; Sung Hyun Yang; Fábio Franke; Branka Cucevic; Jayaprakash Madhavan; Armando Santoro; Rodryg Ramlau; Astra M Liepa; Carla Visseren-Grul; Patrick Peterson; William J John; Christoph C Zielinski Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2012-02-14 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Mark A Socinski; Robert N Raju; Thomas Stinchcombe; Darren M Kocs; Linda S Couch; David Barrera; Steven R Rousey; Janak K Choksi; Robert Jotte; Debra A Patt; Phillip O Periman; Howard R Schlossberg; Charles H Weissman; Yunfei Wang; Lina Asmar; Sharon Pritchard; Jane Bromund; Guangbin Peng; Joseph Treat; Coleman K Obasaju Journal: J Thorac Oncol Date: 2010-12 Impact factor: 15.609
Authors: Nasser Hanna; Frances A Shepherd; Frank V Fossella; Jose R Pereira; Filippo De Marinis; Joachim von Pawel; Ulrich Gatzemeier; Thomas Chang Yao Tsao; Miklos Pless; Thomas Muller; Hong-Liang Lim; Christopher Desch; Klara Szondy; Radj Gervais; Christian Manegold; Sofia Paul; Paolo Paoletti; Lawrence Einhorn; Paul A Bunn Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2004-05-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Giorgio Vittorio Scagliotti; Purvish Parikh; Joachim von Pawel; Bonne Biesma; Johan Vansteenkiste; Christian Manegold; Piotr Serwatowski; Ulrich Gatzemeier; Raghunadharao Digumarti; Mauro Zukin; Jin S Lee; Anders Mellemgaard; Keunchil Park; Shehkar Patil; Janusz Rolski; Tuncay Goksel; Filippo de Marinis; Lorinda Simms; Katherine P Sugarman; David Gandara Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-05-27 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Ming Li; Qian Zhang; Peifang Fu; Ping Li; Aimei Peng; Guoliang Zhang; Xiaolian Song; Min Tan; Xuan Li; Yang Liu; Yueping Wu; Suyun Fan; Changhui Wang Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-05-17 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Anika L Dzierlenga; John D Clarke; David M Klein; Tarun Anumol; Shane A Snyder; HongYu Li; Nathan J Cherrington Journal: J Pharmacol Exp Ther Date: 2016-05-27 Impact factor: 4.030