Comparative efficacy and safety of anlotinib and topotecan as second-line treatment in small cell lung cancer: a retrospective cohort study.

Abstract

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) presents considerable challenges regarding the availability of second-line treatment options, which remain limited. The paucity of effective therapeutic choices at this setting emphasizes the urgent requirement for rigorous research and investigation into novel treatment strategies. To address this clinical gap, the current study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of anlotinib with the standard second-line treatment, topotecan, in patients with relapsed SCLC. This retrospective collected data from SCLC patients who received either anlotinib or topotecan as second-line treatment. The primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), while the secondary endpoints included the overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and safety assessment. The study included 46 SCLC patients, with 20 receiving anlotinib and 26 receiving topotecan as second-line treatment. The anlotinib group showed a significantly longer median PFS compared to the topotecan group [5.6 vs. 2.2 months; hazard ratio (HR) =0.50; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.27-0.92; P=0.02]. However, there was no statistically significant difference in OS between the two groups (9.1 vs. 7.7 months; HR =0.88; 95% CI: 0.46-1.70; P=0.71). The ORRs were 20.0% and 7.7% (P=0.48), and the DCRs were 70.0% and 23.1% (P=0.007) for the anlotinib and topotecan groups, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 13 patients (65.0%) in the anlotinib group and 20 (76.9%) in the topotecan group (P=0.49). Anlotinib shows the potential to extend PFS and manageable adverse events (AEs) compared to topotecan in the second-line setting for relapsed SCLC.