OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to systematically analyze the efficacy and toxicity of lurbinectedin as a second-line or subsequent treatment for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). METHODS: Candidate studies were identified in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, CNKI, and Wanfang databases up to 1 May 2024. Objective remission rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events (AEs) were extracted, respectively. The efficacy and toxicity of lurbinectedin in ES-SCLC were analyzed by meta-analysis. RESULTS: Six eligible prospective studies were included in this meta-analysis, including 536 patients with ES-SCLC who received second-line or subsequent treatment. In pooled analysis, the ORR of lurbinectedin was 35% (95% confidence interval [CI] 29-41), DCR was 67% (95%CI 58-76), DOR was 5.33 months (95%CI 4.51-6.16), PFS was 3.38 months (95%CI 2.59-4.17), and OS was 7.49 months (95%CI 5.11-9.87). The incidence of AEs and severe adverse events (SAEs) was 92% (95%CI 78-100) and 37% (95%CI 19-57), respectively. The most common AEs were leukopenia, neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia, with incidences of 81% (68-91), 74% (57-88), 73% (35-98) and 57% (46-68), respectively. CONCLUSION: As a promising alternative for second-line treatment for ES-SCLC, lurbinectedin has a certain level of efficacy and a favorable safety profile. The integration of lurbinectedin with other therapeutic modalities presents an emerging area warranting further investigation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tang et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: