Background: Targeted radioligand therapy (TRT) is an emerging theranostic modality in oncology. While well established in neuroendocrine and prostate cancers, its role in small cell lung cancer (SCLC) and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains investigational. This systematic review summarizes current evidence evaluating TRT in lung cancer. Methods: A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)-guided systematic review of PubMed, Embase, and Scopus (2000–November 2025) was conducted. Original studies evaluating TRT in SCLC or NSCLC were included. Primary outcomes were tumor response, disease-control rate, and treatment-related toxicity. Secondary outcomes included progression-free survival, overall survival, and dosimetry. Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies—of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool. Results: From 2,453 records, 15 studies were included, reporting 358 lung cancer patients, of whom 105 received TRT. Disease-control rates reached up to 78% in mixed NSCLC/SCLC cohorts. In SCLC, somatostatin receptor-targeted peptide receptor radionuclide therapy demonstrated heterogeneous disease control (0–50%), with 177LuLu-labeled agents showing more favorable outcomes than 90YY-based therapy. The most favorable outcomes were a median progression-free survival of 11.9 months and an overall survival of 16 months in responders. In NSCLC, fibroblast activation protein (FAP)-targeted agents such as 177LuLu-FAP-2286 demonstrated partial metabolic responses, including a 44.4% response rate and 78% disease control in a mixed cohort. Severe toxicities were infrequent. Discussion: TRT is a promising but experimental option for advanced lung cancer. Early efficacy signals exist for strong somatostatin receptor (SSTR)-targeted therapy in SCLC and FAP-targeted therapy in NSCLC, but evidence remains limited. Prospective trials with standardized protocols and dosimetry are needed to define TRT’s role in lung cancer treatment.
Moghrabi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: