Research Article - Biomedical Research (2017) Volume 28, Issue 18

Clinical outcomes in intracranial and extracranial lesions with fist-line systemic therapies in patients with brain metastases from lung cancer

¹Department of Oncology, Dongguan People’s Hospital, Southern Medical University, Dongguan City, Guangdong Province, P.R. China

²Clinical Pharmacy Department, Dongguan People’s Hospital, Southern Medical University, Dongguan City, Guangdong Province, P.R. China

³Medical Department, Dongguan People’s Hospital, Southern Medical University, Dongguan City, Guangdong Province, P.R. China

⁴Clinical Research Center, Dongguan People’s Hospital, Southern Medical University, Dongguan City, Guangdong Province, P.R. China

^#These authors contributed equally to this study.

*Corresponding Authors:

Jun Jia
Department of Oncology, Dongguan People’s Hospital
Southern Medical University, Dongguan City
Guangdong Province, P.R. China

 

Shunhuan Lin
Department of Oncology, Dongguan People’s Hospital
Southern Medical University, Dongguan City
Guangdong Province, P.R. China

Accepted date: August 28, 2017

Abstract

Background: Lung cancer is the most common type of cancer to develop the Brain Metastases (BM), along with poor prognosis. This study evaluated the responses of different courses of fist-line systemic therapies including single chemotherapy and targeted agents or their combination for intracranial and extracranial lesions in patients with BM from lung cancer.

Patients and Methods: Twenty patients, diagnosed with lung cancer with BM and received fist-line chemotherapies, targeted agents or their combination, were retrospectively analyzed between 2010 and 2016. Treatment responses of intracranial and extracranial lesions after 2, 4 cycles of systemic therapies were assessed respectively.

Results: Twenty patients were evaluated for treatment responses. After 2 cycles of therapies, fourteen patients had simultaneously assessable intracranial and extracranial lesions. No significant difference was observed between intracranial and extracranial lesions (Z=1.000, P=0.317). The results revealed similar efficacy (Z=0.000, P=1.000) of intracranial and extracranial lesions after 4 cycles of therapy, but there were only nine patients remaining evaluated. Besides, there were consistency efficacy (Z=0.905, P=0.366) of intracranial and extracranial lesions after 2-4 cycles of therapy.

Conclusion: Fist-line systemic therapies seem to achieve similar efficacy and responses between intracranial and extracranial lesions in lung cancer patients with BM. Further studies will be needed to confirm the treatment responses between intracranial and extracranial lesions and their underlying mechanisms.

Keywords

Lung cancer, Brain metastases (BM), Fist-line chemotherapies, Targeted agents, Intracranial and extracranial lesions.

Introduction

Lung cancer, the leading cause of cancer-related death around the world, is characterized by a high incidence of solid tumorrelated Brain Metastases (BM), with approximately 40% patients developing BM at some point during their disease course [1-3]. The rising incidence of BM is related to the better treatment of systemic disease, the consequent prolonged survival and the improvement in neuroimaging in detecting smaller lesions. BM is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality, with 4 to 5 months of median survival time [4]. Whole Brain Radiotherapy (WBRT) is the standard care for patients presented with BM, but the prognosis is poor [5]. Compared with WBRT, surgery combined with WBRT and stereotactic radiosurgery have been demonstrated to ameliorate survival. Nevertheless, this approach is only available for a small and selected subgroup of patients with solitary lesions and inactive extracranial disease. Thus, more effective treatments are urgently needed.

There are controversies in the role of systemic chemotherapy because of the weak penetration of most potential agents beyond the Blood Brain Barrier (BBB), which may not have efficacy against the tumor that metastasized to the brain. However, clinical studies revealed comparable responses on intracranial lesions and extracranial lesions in breast cancer and germ cell tumor [6,7]. In the meantime, several studies have demonstrated that some chemotherapeutic agents seems to be candidates for treating BM in small-cell lung cancer, and can cause the recovery of intracranial lesions [8-10]. Concerning NSCLC occupied the majority of lung cancer, only a few clinical trials have reported the activity of cisplatin in BM [11]. Cortes et al. reported the efficacy of vinorelbine or gemcitabine combination with intracranial response rate in 38% of patients [12]. Moreover, a series of case reports suggest that gefitinib, the Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs), has clinical activity on brain metastases of NSCLC [13-16]. In fact, these activities are considered to be attributed to partial disruption of the BBB in BM [17,18].

Although the activities of some systemic therapies against BM from lung cancer have been documented, the knowledge about the effectiveness or response of BM with fist-line systemic therapies aiming at primary lung tumor is still insufficient. On the basis of the available clinical date, we carried out a retrospective study to assess the anti-tumor efficacy and responses on intracranial and extracranial lesions of primary lung tumor in lung cancer patients with BM during different courses with fist-line systemic medicine therapies.

Patients and Methods

Patients

In this study, we retrospectively analyzed lung cancer patients with BM who received fist-line chemotherapies, targeted agents, or chemotherapies plus targeted agents between 2010 and 2016 at Dongguan People Hospital (Dongguan, People’s Republic of China). The diagnosis of lung cancer was confirmed pathologically, and brain metastases were documented by Computed Tomography (CT) or Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI). 20 patients who met the above criteria were identified.

Clinicopathological data, including sex, age, histology, metastatic sites, therapies, and treatment responses by radiographic assessment were retrieved from patient’s medical records.

Treatment and response assessment

All patients enrolled were either given alone fist-line chemotherapies, targeted agents, or chemotherapies plus targeted agents until disease progression, death, or unacceptable toxicity. Clinical outcomes in intracranial and extracranial were assessed by radiologic images from 2 to 4 cycles of systemic therapies until disease progression.

Tumor response was evaluated in accordance with the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, including Partial Remission (PR), Stable Disease (SD) and Progression Disease (PD) of the intracranial and extracranial lesions [19]. Tumor responses for intracranial and extracranial diseases were evaluated separately. The disease control rate for intracranial lesions and extracranial lesions were compared separately.

Statistical analysis

All tests and Confidence Intervals (CIs) were two-sided and the significance level of statistical analysis was defined as P<0.05. All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS software, version 20.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA).

Results

Patient characteristics

From January 2010 to December 2016, 20 lung cancer patients with BM were analyzed, of whom received fist-line chemotherapies, targeted agents, or chemotherapies plus targeted agents. The baseline characteristics of these 20 patients are summarized in Table 1. The median age of these patients was 63 y (ranged from 39 to 82 y). 9 patients were male and 11 were female. The lung cancer cases included 12 adenocarcinoma, 6 poorly differentiated carcinoma and 1 small cell carcinoma. RPA showed that 9 patients were in RPA class I, 4 in class II, and 7 in class III. Of the 20 patients, 4 patients only had intracranial lesion, while 16 had concurrent other metastases. 12 patients were treated with fist-line chemotherapy, 4 with fist-line targeted agents, and 4 had concomitant use of first-line chemotherapies and targeted agents.

Table 1: Patient characteristics (n=20).

Evaluation of treatment responses

Clinical outcomes in intracranial and extracranial lesions after 2 cycles of first-line systemic therapies: Fourteen patients had simultaneously assessable intracranial and extracranial lesions after 2 cycles of therapy. The clinical outcomes were documented in Table 2. Lesions Partial Response (PR) was presented in 4 patients (30%), stable disease (SD) in 1 patient (10%) for both of intracranial and extracranial diseases. The disease control rate for intracranial lesions was 90% and 80% for extracranial lesions. No significant difference was observed between intracranial and extracranial lesions (Z=1.000, P=0.317).

Table 2: Comparison of tumor response of intracranial and extracranial lesions after 2 cycles of treatment.

Clinical outcomes in intracranial and extracranial lesions after 4 cycles of first-line systemic therapies: With respect to 4 cycles of therapies, nine patients had simultaneously assessable intracranial and extracranial lesions. The clinical outcomes were listed in Table 3. Four patients (30%) both had PR. 1 achieved PR on intracranial lesions, but SD extracranial lesions. While 2 achieved PR on extracranial lesions, but SD intracranial lesions the disease control rate for intracranial lesions was 88.8% and 77.7% for extracranial lesions. The results showed similar efficacy (Z=0.905, P=0.366) of intracranial and extracranial lesions after 4 cycles of therapies.

Table 3: Comparison of tumor response of intracranial and extracranial lesions after 4 cycles of treatment.

Clinical outcomes in intracranial and extracranial lesions after 2-4 cycles of first-line systemic therapies: Restaging imaging examination was performed after 2-4 systemic treatment. 14 patients had imaging scans available for assessment of response. The response rates were summarized in Table 4. According to RECIST criteria, 14 patients showed comparable tumor response: 4 both PRs, 1 both SDs and 1 both PDs. The disease control rate for intracranial lesions was 85.7%, and 64.3% for extracranial lesions. The outcomes indicated there was no significant difference of efficacy (Z=0.905, P=0.366) between intracranial and extracranial lesions with combination systemic therapy.

Table 4: Comparison of tumor response of intracranial and extracranial lesions after 2-4 cycles of first-line systemic therapies.

Discussion

Globally, Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) accounts for 80%-90% of all lung cancer cases [20]. Approximately 50% of brain metastases originate from NSCLC and their presence considerably worsens the prognosis of these patients [21]. To date, treatment of patients with advanced stages of lung cancer with BM remains a significant therapeutic challenge. Most of these patients present multiple, unresectable brain lesions, often combined with active systemic disease [11]. Whole Brain Radiotherapy (WBRT) is a standard treatment for BM when surgery or radiosurgery is not possible, but it may not be the optimal choice since it induces cognitive dysfunction and fails to improve cerebral progression-free survival [22,23]. As an alternative to WBRT, other therapeutic approaches may be available to treat BM. Recently research hotspots have been focused on whether the use of fist-line systemic therapy initially responsible for primary lung tumor is also effective for BM.

It is well known that WBRT may accelerate the opening of the BBB and thereby improve penetration of chemotherapeutic agents or molecular targeted drugs into the brain [24]. Whereas in our retrospective study, none of patients had undergone WBRT prior to the drug administration. To our knowledge, this study firstly compared the changes of intracranial and extracranial lesions in lung cancer patients with BM after different course of therapy, who were received fist-line systemic therapies initially aimed at primary lung tumor. Our data showed interesting results that fist-line systemic therapies with 2 or 4 cycles of therapies aimed at primary lung tumor also provide activity against BM. Moreover, fist-line chemotherapies plus concomitant targeted therapy could effectively control intracranial lesions in lung cancer. In the results, there were no significant differences in our study between intracranial or extracranial response rates, no matter during 2 (Z=1.000, P=0.317) or 4 (Z=0.905, P=0.366) or 2-4 (Z=0.905, P=0.366) cycles of therapies.

Fist-line medicine therapy regimens in this study included platinum-based chemotherapy and targeted agents. For lung cancer patients with BM, platinum-based chemotherapy is often used as the first-line treatment [25]. Pemetrexed is currently approved as a first-line treatment for NSCLC, in association with platinum-based chemotherapy [21]. Interestingly, pemetrexed-based regimen can be effective against BM reported by a recent trial [26]. In our study, all patients received fist-line chemotherapies were platinum-based regimens, 4 of them were administrated pemetrexed in combination with platinum regimen. On the other hand, the other fist-line medicine therapy regimen EGFR-TKIs, the drugs with a small molecular weight targeting mutated EGFR genes, have been shown to be highly effective when administered systemically, as they are reported to be able to partly cross the BBB with improving penetration into the Central Nervous System (CNS) [27]. Moreover, a relatively high concentration of erlotinib was detected in the cerebrospinal fluid of patients with BM from NSCLC and the standard dose of erlotinib may be regarded as a treatment option for this patient population [28,29]. Several reports demonstrated that gefitinib, Erlotinib and icotinib are linked with a favourable response in lung adenocarcinoma with BM, particularly in cases harbouring EGFR mutations [30-34].

Few studies have assessed the effect of chemotherapy as fistline treatment for BM from NSCLC, but several prospective trials in NSCLC patients have investigated the activity of firstline chemotherapy for BM from NSCLC, which has the response rates ranging from 23% to 50% for cisplatin containing combinations [11,12,35,36]. Compared with above reports of response rates, the response rates for BM in our study were relatively higher. Additionally, in our result, the response rates in intracranial diseases were higher than extracranial diseases after 2 (90% vs. 80%) and 4 (88.8% vs. 77.7%) cycles of systemic therapies respectively. The responses seem to be less impressive in the lung than in the brain, possibly because of the larger extra-cerebral lesions, and correlation with lymphangitis carcinomatosis, bone metastases, or pleural lesions. Whereas, there is another reason should be taken into account. Of note, patients in our study were selected for targeted therapy based on the likely phenotype associated with EGFR mutation. 4 patients received gefitinib, 2 received erlotinib and 1 received icotinib either mono-therapy or combination with fist-line chemotherapy. Zimmermann et al. reviewed that response rate of BM to EGFR-TKI in patients with NSCLC harbouring EGFR mutations reaches 60-100%, with a rate of complete response as high as 40%. Besides, 1 patient received bevacizumab, the recombinant monoclonal antibody targeting VEGF, with concomitant chemotherapy. The activity of fist-line platinum-based chemotherapy might also be improved by the addition of bevacizumab in NSCLC patients with BM and encouraging efficacy and acceptable safety results have been reported with this combination [37]. There was another possibility that tumor regression in the brain could be partially induced by concomitant steroids administration, which could not be excluded. Together with these, it may contribute to the results that response rates for BM were higher than other reports, and intra-cerebral response rates were higher than systemic rates. So far, less information has been available in some case reports about whether there is any correlation between the efficacy of fist-line medicine therapy for brain metastases and extracranial diseases. Particularly, the patients whose intracranial lesions showed partial remission were highly likely to remain PR in extracranial lesions with fist-line medicine therapy. The reason that why the intracranial response to fist-line therapy was similar with extracranial response is currently unexplained and further studies is recommended.

The BBB is consisted of microvascular endothelial cells, pericytes and perivascular astrocytic end-feet. Prevailing belief consider that systemic therapy for brain metastases has been hampered, while BBB prevents drugs from entering the cerebrospinal fluid through blood circulation and only permits small lipid-soluble molecules can permeate it [38]. Consequently, most chemotherapeutic agents do not cross the intact barrier, and the temozolomide, methotrexate and topotecan, whose relevant liquor permeability was known were also excluded in our study, because there were only a few regimens based on lipid soluble agents practically. It is reported that when brain parenchymal metastases reached at a given tumor size, accompanied by the required neovessels, the structure and function of the BBB would be disrupted, which might induce the drugs to pass through the brain parenchyma [39,40]. Similarly, animal experiment has revealed that BBB is partly damaged with a reduction of hampering drugs [41]. In general, the activities of fist-line systemic treatments against intracranial lesions are probably benefit from the disruption of BBB in the presence of BM.

Despite the classical concept of the BBB, in our study, 2-4 cycles fist-line therapies including chemotherapy and targeted therapy appeared to produce a 85.7% response rate in the brain, while this was not statistically significant compared with 64.3% response rate obtained by extracranial lesions. Our data supported the notion that fist-line systemic therapies retain their effectiveness in the treatment of BM, which also demonstrated that the BBB did not impede the effectiveness of systemic therapy to some extent. In this regard, it has been speculated that fist-line systemic therapies initially aimed at primary lung tumor may also exert clinical benefits for intracranial lesions in these patient population, which was in consistent with recent evidence that the chemosensitivity of the primary tumour characterize the response to systemic treatment of brain metastases [42]. Furthermore, a major protein constituent in the BBB is P-glycoprotein (P-gp), which pumps natural product chemotherapy drugs and toxins out of the CNS. Whereas in tumors with low intrinsic P-gp expression, such as SCLC, NSCLC, chemotherapy that is effective against the primary may also be effective against the brain metastasis [43]. In contrast, temozolomide, a lipophilic methylating drug penetrating the BBB to 30-40% of its plasma concentration, has only minor efficacy as a single agent in NSCLC, SCLC, and breast cancers [43]. Consequently, a good activity against the systemic disease, rather than the lipid solubility, of the therapeutic agents may play a more crucial role for determining the treatment efficacy of brain lesions.

Despite clinically significant findings, our current study did have some limitations. With limited statistical power due to small numbers, there were no significant difference in the response rates, and further analysis for subgroup could not be performed and the efficacy and response analysis in this study were of a descriptive nature only. Furthermore, our study did not report any toxicities or survival related with fist-line systemic therapy for lung cancer patients with BM which raise concern. Finally, this is a retrospective study. Further prospective study with lager number of patients is needed to confirm the results.

In conclusion, fist-line systemic therapies seem to achieve similar efficacy and responses between intracranial and extracranial lesions in lung cancer patients with BM. However, the clinical benefits of fist-line systemic therapies in lung cancer patients with BM require confirmation by further investigations.

Acknowledgement

We greatly appreciate Jun Jia and Shunhuan Lin for research design. We also appreciate Ruinian Zheng, Baofang Liang and Huaqing Wu for clinical research. We finally appreciate Ling Guan for the article writing.

Conflict of interest

None.

References

1. Torre LA, Siegel RL, Jemal A. Lung cancer statistics. Adv Exp Med Biol 2016; 893: 1-19.
2. Tian J, Luo Y, Xiang J, Tang J. Combined treatment for non-small cell lung cancer and breast cancer patients with brain metastases with whole brain radiotherapy and temozolomide: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Neurooncol 2017; 19.
3. Rancoule C, Vallard A, Guy JB, Espenel S, Diao P, Chargari C, Magné N. Brain metastases from non-small cell lung carcinoma: Changing concepts for improving patient’s outcome. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2017; 116: 32-37.
4. Meert AP, Paesmans M, Berghmans T, Martin B, Mascaux C, Vallot F, Verdebout JM, Lafitte JJ, Sculier JP. Prophylactic cranial irradiation in small cell lung cancer: a systematic review of the literature with meta-analysis. BMC Cancer 2001; 1: 5.
5. Loganadane G, Hendriks L, Le Péchoux C, Levy A. The current role of whole brain radiation therapy in non-small cell lung cancer patients. J Thorac Oncol 2017; 19: 30585.
6. Rosner D, Nemoto T, Lane WW. Chemotherapy induces regression of brain metastases in breast carcinoma. Cancer 1986; 58: 832-839.
7. Rustin GJ, Newlands ES, Bagshawe KD, Begent RH, Crawford SM. Successful management of metastatic and primary germ cell tumors in the brain. Cancer 1986; 57: 2108-2113.
8. Twelves CJ, Souhami RL, Harper PG, Ash CM, Spiro SG, Earl HM, Tobias JS, Quinn H, Geddes DM. The response of cerebral metastases in small-cell lung cancer to systemic chemotherapy. Br J Cancer 1990; 61: 147-150.
9. Knstensen CA, Knstjansen P, Hansen HH. Systemic chemotherapy of brain metastases from small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 1992; 10: 1498-1502.
10. Postmus PE, Smit EF, Haaxma-Reiche H, van Zandwijk N, Ardizzoni A, Quoix E, Kirkpatrick A, Sahmoud T, Giaccone G. Teniposide for brain metastases of small-cell lung cancer: a phase II study: European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Lung Cancer Cooperative Group. J Clin Oncol 1995; 13: 660-665.
11. Bernardo G, Cuzzoni Q, Strada MR, Bernardo A, Brunetti G, Jedrychowska I, Pozzi U, Palumbo R. First-line chemotherapy with vinorelbine, gemcitabine, and carboplatin in the treatment of brain metastases from non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase II study. Cancer Invest 2002; 20: 293-302.
12. Cortes J, Rodriguez J, Aramendia JM, Salgado E, Gurpide A, Garcia-Foncillas J, Aristu JJ, Claver A, Bosch A, Lopez-Picazo JM, Martin-Algarra S, Brugarolas A, Calvo E. Front-line paclitaxel/cisplatin-based chemotherapy in brain metastases from non-small cell lung cancer. Oncol 2003; 64: 28-35.
13. Cappuzzo F, Calandri C, Bartolini S, Crino L. ZD 1839 in patients with brain metastases from non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): report of four cases. Br J Cancer 2003; 89: 246-247.
14. Cappuzzo F, Ardizzoni A, Soto-Parra H, Gridelli C, Maione P, Tiseo M, Calandri C, Bartolini S, Santoro A, Crino L. Epidermal growth factor receptor targeted therapy by ZD 1839 (Iressa) in patients with brain metastases from non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Lung Cancer 2003; 41: 227-231.
15. Fujiwara K, Kiura K, Ueoka H, Tabata M, Hamasaki S, Tanimoto M. Dramatic effect of ZD1839 (‘Iressa’) in a patient with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer and poor performance status. Lung Cancer 2003; 40: 73-76.
16. Stemmler HJ, Weigert O, Krych M, Schoenberg SO, Ostermann H, Hiddemann W. Brain metastases in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer responding to single-agent gefitinib: a case report. Anticancer Drugs 2005; 16: 747-749.
17. Lesser GJ. Chemotherapy of cerebral metastases from solid tumors. Neurosurg Clin North Am 1996; 7: 527-536.
18. Robinet G, Thomas P, Breton JL, Lena H, Gouva S, Dabouis G, Bennouna J, Souquet PJ, Balmes P, Thiberville L, Fournel P, Quoix E, Riou R, Rebattu P, Perol M, Paillotin D, Mornex F. Results of a phase III study of early versus delayed whole brain radiotherapy withconcurrent cisplatin and vinorelbine combination in inoperable brain metastasis of non-small-cell lung cancer: Groupe Français de Pneumo-Cancerologie (GFPC) Protocol 95-1. Ann Oncol 2001; 12: 59-67.
19. Suh JH, Stea B, Nabid A, Kresl JJ, Fortin A, Mercier JP, Senzer N, Chang EL, Boyd AP, Cagnoni PJ, Shaw E. Phase III study of efaproxiral as an adjunct to whole-brain radiation therapy for brain metastases. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24: 106-114.
20. Yamanashi K, Marumo S, Miura K, Kawashima M. Long-term survival in a case of pleomorphic carcinoma with a brain metastasis. Case Rep Oncol 2014; 7: 799-803.
21. Rades D, Nadrowitz R, Buchmann I, Hunold P, Noack F, Schild SE, Meller B. Radiolabeled cetuximab plus whole-brain irradiation (WBI) for the treatment of brain metastases from non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Strahlenther Onkol 2010; 186: 458-462.
22. Mehta MP, Rodrigus P, Terhaard CH, Rao A, Suh J, Roa W, Souhami L, Bezjak A, Leibenhaut M, Komaki R, Schultz C, Timmerman R, Curran W, Smith J, Phan SC, Miller RA, Renschler MF. Survival and neurologic outcomes in a randomized trial of motexafin gadolinium and whole-brain radiation therapy in brain metastases. J Clin Oncol 2003; 21: 2529-2536.
23. Stea B, Suh JH, Boyd AP, Cagnoni PJ, Shaw E. Reach Study Group. Whole-brain radiotherapy with or without efaproxiral for the treatment of brain metastases: Determinants of response and its prognostic value for subsequent survival. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006; 64: 1023-1030.
24. Fang L, Sun X, Song Y, Zhang Y, Li F, Xu Y, Ma S, Lin N. Whole-brain radiation fails to boost intra-cerebral gefitinib concentration in patients with brain metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: a self-controlled, pilot study. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 2015; 76: 873-877.
25. Lu Y, Fan Y. Combined action of EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors and whole-brain radiotherapy on EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer patients with brain metastasis. Onco Targets Ther 2016; 9: 1135-1143.
26. Barlesi F, Gervais R, Lena H, Hureaux J, Berard H, Paillotin D, Bota S, Monnet I, Chajara A, Robinet G. Pemetrexed and cisplatin as first-line chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with asymptomatic inoperable brain metastases: a multi-center phase II trial (GFPC 07-01). Ann Oncol 2011; 22: 2466-2470.
27. Ettinger DS, Akerley W, Borghaei H, Chang AC, Cheney RT, Chirieac LR, D'Amico TA, Demmy TL, Govindan R, Grannis FW Jr, Grant SC, Horn L, Jahan TM, Komaki R, Kong FM, Kris MG, Krug LM, Lackner RP, Lennes IT, Loo BW Jr, Martins R, Otterson GA, Patel JD, Pinder-Schenck MC, Pisters KM, Reckamp K, Riely GJ, Rohren E, Shapiro TA, Swanson SJ, Tauer K, Wood DE, Yang SC, Gregory K, Hughes M. National Comprehensive Cancer Network: Non-small cell lung cancer. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2013; 11: 645-653.
28. Togashi Y, Masago K, Fukudo M, Terada T, Fujita S, Irisa K, Sakamori Y, Hak Kim Y, Mio T, Inui K. Cerebrospinal fluid concentration of erlotinib and its active metabolite OSI-420 in patients with central nervous system metastases of non-small cell lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol 2010; 5: 950-955.
29. Deng Y, Feng W, Wu J, Chen Z, Tang Y, Zhang H, Liang J, Xian H, Zhang S. The concentration of erlotinib in the cerebro spinal fluid of patients with brain metastasis from non-small-cell lung cancer. Mol Clin Oncol 2014; 2: 116-120.
30. Ceresoli GL, Cappuzzo F, Gregorc V, Bartolini S, Crino L, Villa E. Gefitinib in patients with brain metastases from non-small-cell lung cancer: a prospective trial. Ann Oncol 2004; 15: 1042-1047.
31. Park SJ, Kim HT, Lee DH, Kim KP, Kim SW, Suh C, Lee JS. Efficacy of epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors for brain metastasis in non-small cell lung cancer patients harboring either exon 19 or 21 mutation . Lung Cancer 2012; 77: 556-560.
32. Jung YH, Han CW, Jung YD, Cho YY, Han DJ. Complete remission of brain metastases in non-small cell lung cancer patients harboring an EGFR mutation treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitor without radiotherapy: A report of 3 cases. Case Rep Oncol 2014; 7: 149-154.
33. Bai H, Han B. The effectiveness of erlotinib against brain metastases in non-small cell lung cancer patients. Am J Clin Oncol 2013; 36: 110-115.
34. Sun X, Zheng Y. Retreatment with icotinib in a patient with metastatic lung adenocarcinoma. Tumori 2013; 99: 124-126.
35. Fujita A, Fukuoka S, Takabatake H, Tagaki S, Sekine K. Combination chemotherapy of cisplatin, ifosfamide and irinotecan with rhG-CSF support in patients with brain metastases from non-small cell lung cancer. Oncology 2000; 59: 291-295.
36. Bailon O, Chouahnia K, Augier A, Bouillet T, Billot S, Coman I, Ursu R, Belin C, Zelek L, Des Guetz G, Levy C, Carpentier AF, Morere JF. Upfront association of carboplatin plus pemetrexed in patients with brain metastases of lung adenocarcinoma. Neuro Oncol 2012; 14: 491-495.
37. Besse B, Le Moulec S, Mazieres J, Senellart H, Barlesi F, Chouaid C, Dansin E, Berard H, Falchero L, Gervais R, Robinet G, Ruppert AM, Schott R, Lena H, Clement-Duchene C, Quantin X, Souquet PJ, Tredaniel J, Moro-Sibilot D, Perol M, Madroszyk AC, Soria JC. Bevacizumab in patients with non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer and asymptomatic, untreated brain metastases (BRAIN): A non-randomized, phase II study . Clin Cancer Res 2015; 21: 1896-1903.
38. Abbott NJ, Rönnbäck L, Hansson E. Astrocyte-endothelial interactions at the blood-brain barrier. Nat Rev Neurosci 2006; 7: 41-53.
39. Deeken JF, Löscher W. The blood-brain barrier and cancer: transporters, treatment, and Trojan horses. Clin Cancer Res 2007; 13: 1663-1674.
40. Zimmermann S, Dziadziuszko R, Peters S. Indications and limitation of chemotherapy and targeted agents in non-small cell lung cancer brain metastases. Cancer Treat Rev 2014; 40: 716-722.
41. AdamoV, FranchinaT, Adamo B, Scandurra G, Scimone A. Brain metastases in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: focus on the role of chemotherapy. Ann Oncol 2006; 17: 73-75.
42. Katz A, Zalewski P. Quality-of-life benefits and evidence of anti-tumours activity for patients with brain metastases treated with gefitinib. Br J Cancer 2003; 89: 15-18.
43. Gerstner ER, Fine RL. Increased permeability of the blood-brain barrier to chemotherapy in metastatic brain tumors: establishing a treatment paradigm. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 2306-2312.