Scientific Reports (Apr 2024)

Efficacy of second-line chemotherapy in patients with pulmonary large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma

  • Yuko Iida,
  • Kazushige Wakuda,
  • Hirotsugu Kenmotsu,
  • Kosei Doshita,
  • Hiroaki Kodama,
  • Naoya Nishioka,
  • Eriko Miyawaki,
  • Taichi Miyawaki,
  • Nobuaki Mamesaya,
  • Haruki Kobayashi,
  • Shota Omori,
  • Ryo Ko,
  • Akira Ono,
  • Tateaki Naito,
  • Haruyasu Murakami,
  • Takashi Sugino,
  • Yasuhiro Gon,
  • Toshiaki Takahashi

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-58327-w
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 14, no. 1
pp. 1 – 10

Abstract

Read online

Abstract The efficacy of second-line chemotherapy in patients with pulmonary large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (LCNEC) is unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of second-line chemotherapy in patients with pulmonary LCNEC. We retrospectively reviewed patients with pulmonary LCNEC or possible LCNEC (pLCNEC) who received platinum-based chemotherapy as the first-line treatment. Among these patients, we evaluated the efficacy of second-line treatment by comparing patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC group). Of the 61 patients with LCNEC or pLCNEC (LCNEC group) who received first-line chemotherapy, 39 patients were treated with second-line chemotherapy. Among the 39 patients, 61.5% received amrubicin monotherapy. The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in the LCNEC groups were 3.3 and 8.3 months, respectively. No significant differences in the PFS (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.924, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.647–1.320; P = 0.664) and OS (HR: 0.926; 95% CI 0.648–1.321; P = 0.670) were observed between the LCNEC and SCLC groups. In patients treated with amrubicin, the PFS (P = 0.964) and OS (P = 0.544) were not different between both the groups. Second-line chemotherapy, including amrubicin, may be considered as a treatment option for patients with pulmonary LCNEC.