Long term survival with stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) versus thoracoscopic sublobar lung resection in elderly people: national population based study with propensity matched comparative analysis

Percutaneous coronary intervention versus optimal medical therapy for patients with chronic total occlusion: a meta-analysis and systematic review

Background

It was under debate whether chronic total occlusion (CTO) patients could benefit from percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We sought to compare clinical outcomes of PCI and optimal medical therapy (OMT) in these patients.

Methods

PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched for studies enrolling patients with CTO who accepted PCI or OMT. The meta-analysis was performed by using a random-effect model. In addition, subgroup analyses were performed, including patients after propensity-matching and patients with CTO in infarct-related artery (IRA), respectively.

Results

We identified 5 studies enrolling 4,761 participants in this meta-analysis. In the main analysis, when compared with OMT, PCI was associated with significant improvement in all-cause death [risk ratio (RR) 0.41, 95% CI: 0.35-0.48], cardiac death (RR 0.44, 95% CI: 0.35-0.55) and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (RR 0.64, 95% CI: 0.43-0.97). But there were no differences in myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke. The results of the propensity-matched subgroup were somewhat consistent with those of the main analysis (all-cause death: RR 0.57, 95% CI: 0.26-0.89; MI: RR 0.54, 95% CI: 0.32-0.77; and MACE: RR 0.76, 95% CI: 0.33-1.18). In IRA subgroup, PCI reduced risks of mortality (all-cause death: RR 0.41, 95% CI: 0.34-0.49; cardiac death: RR 0.44, 95% CI: 0.35-0.56) and MACE (RR 0.71, 95% CI: 0.46-1.10). But no difference was observed in MI.

Conclusions

PCI was associated with improved survival and reduced MACE relative to OMT.

Recent advances in the management of lung cancer

Historically, the prognosis for individuals diagnosed with lung cancer has been bleak. However, the past 10 years have seen important advances in treatment and diagnosis which have translated into the first improvements seen in lung cancer survival. This review highlights the major advances in treatments with curative intent, systemic targeted therapies, palliative care and early diagnosis in lung cancer. We discuss the pivotal research that underpins these new technologies/strategies and their current position in clinical practice.

Recent advances in the management of lung cancer

Historically, the prognosis for individuals diagnosed with lung cancer has been bleak. However, the past 10 years have seen important advances in treatment and diagnosis which have translated into the first improvements seen in lung cancer survival. This review highlights the major advances in treatments with curative intent, systemic targeted therapies, palliative care and early diagnosis in lung cancer. We discuss the pivotal research that underpins these new technologies/strategies and their current position in clinical practice.

Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Early-Stage Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Endorsement of the American Society for Radiation Oncology Evidence-Based Guideline

Purpose The American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) produced an evidence-based guideline on treatment with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for patients with early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer. ASCO has a policy and set of procedures for endorsing and/or adapting clinical practice guidelines that have been developed by other professional organizations. Methods The ASTRO Evidence-Based Guideline for Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Early-Stage Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer was reviewed for developmental rigor by methodologists. An ASCO Expert Panel updated the literature search and reviewed the guideline content and recommendations. Results The ASCO Expert Panel determined that the recommendations from the ASTRO guideline, published in 2017, are clear, thorough, and based on the most relevant scientific evidence. ASCO statements and minor modifications were added to enhance the applicability of the ASTRO guideline for the broader ASCO audience. Recommendations For standard operative risk patients with stage I NSCLC, SBRT is not recommended outside of a clinical trial. Lobectomy with systematic lymph node evaluation remains the recommended treatment, although a sublobar resection may be considered in select clinical scenarios. Recommendations are provided regarding the use of SBRT in high operative risk patients and for inoperative patients, including in challenging scenarios where tumors are: centrally located, > 5 cm in diameter, lacking tissue diagnosis, synchronous primary or multifocal, second primary after pneumonectomy, proximal to or involved with mediastinal structures, abutting the chest wall, or recurring after previous treatment. Qualifying statements are included to provide further guidance for implementation, and the importance of a discussion of treatment options among members of the multidisciplinary cancer care team is emphasized. Additional information is available at: www.asco.org/thoracic-cancer-guidelines and www.asco.org/guidelineswiki .

Sublobar resection is associated with improved outcomes over radiotherapy in the management of high-risk elderly patients with Stage I non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and Aim

A matched-pair comparison was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of sublobar resection versus radiotherapy for high-risk elderly patients with Stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Patients and Methods

We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE and manual searches. The meta-analysis was performed to compare overall survival, pattern of failure, and toxicity among the homogeneous studies. Subdivided analyses were also performed.

Results

Sixteen studies containing 11540 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Among these studies, 9 were propensity-score matched (PSM) cohort studies, and 7 were cohort studies. Sublobar resection, compared with radiotherapy (either conventional fraction radiation therapy or stereotactic body radiation therapy), significantly improved the overall survival regardless in both PSM and non-PSM analyses (all p < 0.05). However, the difference in the pattern of failure and toxicity were not significant (all p > 0.05).

Conclusions

Sublobar resection was associated with improved outcomes in high-risk elderly patients with Stage I NSCLC, which supports the need to compare both treatments in large prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trials.

Survival Rates After Lobectomy, Segmentectomy, and Wedge Resection for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to compare the survival rates after lobectomy, segmentectomy, and wedge resection for the eighth edition of the tumor, node, metastasis classification for stage IA non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

Patients who underwent lobectomy, segmentectomy, or wedge resection for stage IA NSCLC were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. A Cox regression model and propensity-matched analysis were used. The overall survival (OS) rates and lung cancer-specific survival (LCSS) rates among the three groups were compared by tumor size.

RESULTS

A total of 16,819 patients met our criteria. Although the OS rate was better for lobectomy than for wedge resection, no statistical differences in the LCSS rate were identified among the three treatment groups of patients with tumors that were 1.0 cm or smaller. For tumors from 1.1 to 2.0 cm, lobectomy and segmentectomy showed no statistical differences in the LCSS rate, but both conferred better OS and LCSS rates than wedge resection. For tumors from 2.1 to 3.0 cm, the OS and LCSS rates were better for lobectomy than for segmentectomy or wedge resection, but similar for segmentectomy and wedge resection.

CONCLUSIONS

Lobectomy, segmentectomy, and wedge resection are comparable oncologic procedures for patients with stage IA NSCLC that is 1.0 cm or smaller. For tumors from 1.1 to 2.0 cm, lobectomy and segmentectomy could lead to equivalent survival rates but showed better survival rates than that observed with wedge resection. For tumors from 2.1 to 3.0 cm, lobectomy is still the standard surgical procedure; for patients who are unsuitable candidates for lobectomy, segmentectomy and wedge resection show similar survival rates.

Clinical results of proton beam therapy for elderly patients with non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

The purpose of the present study was to evaluate retrospectively the efficacy and safety of proton beam therapy for elderly patients (≥80 years of age) with non-small cell lung cancer.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with T1-4 N0 M0 non-small cell lung cancer and treated with proton beam therapy between January 2009 and 2015 were recruited from our database retrospectively. Toxicity was evaluated using The Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0.

RESULTS

Thirty-five patients, including 25 (71%) with clinically inoperable lung cancer, were administered proton beam therapy. The median age was 82 years (range: 80-87 years), and the median follow-up time was 34 months (range: 10-72 months). The median dose of proton beam therapy was 80.0 Gy relative biological effectiveness (RBE) (range: 60.0-80.0 Gy [RBE]), and all patients completed the treatments. All patients were followed for at least 23 months or until their death. The 3-year overall survival rate was 67.2% (90.0% in patients with operable lung cancer, and 58.2% in those with inoperable lung cancer). The 3-year local control rate was 86.5%. Two patients presented with grade 2 pneumonitis. The occurrence rate of grade 2 pneumonitis was significantly correlated with a high lung V20 (p = 0.030), and a high mean lung dose (p = 0.030), and a low ratio of lung volume spared from 0.05 Gy (RBE) dose (total lung volume minus lung volume irradiated at least 0.05 Gy [RBE]) (p = 0.030). However, there were no cases of grade 3 or higher radiation pneumonitis.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that the proton beam therapy was feasible for elderly patients with non-small cell lung cancer and can be considered as one of the treatment choices for elderly patients with lung cancer.

Stereotactic Ablative Radiation Therapy Versus Surgery in Early Lung Cancer: A Meta-analysis of Propensity Score Studies

PURPOSE

As no completed randomized trials of surgery versus stereotactic ablative radiation therapy (SABR) in patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer are available, numerous propensity score studies have attempted to mimic the setting of clinical trials using nonrandomized data. We performed a meta-analysis of propensity score studies comparing SABR and surgery.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The MEDLINE and Embase databases were queried up to December 2016. Two authors independently reviewed the records for inclusion and extracted outcome measures. The study was conducted according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and MOOSE (Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) guidelines. The primary meta-analysis and secondary analyses were carried out using R (version 3.3.2) at a significance level of .05.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies were included in the meta-analysis. Overall survival favored surgery (hazard ratio for SABR vs surgery, 1.48 [95% confidence interval, 1.26-1.72]; I² = 80.5%). Lung cancer-specific survival was not significantly different between SABR and surgery (hazard ratio, 1.17 [95% confidence interval, 0.92-1.50]; I² = 18.6%). On stratification, overall survival favored both lobectomy and sublobar resection over SABR, although lung cancer-specific survival was again not significantly different. On secondary analysis, the lymph node upstaging rate was 15.6% following surgery, with 11.4% of patients receiving chemotherapy. The propensity score-matching caliper distance and first-author specialty were found to be associated with survival endpoints on regression.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer who are eligible for either treatment, better overall survival was seen after surgery compared with SABR. However, lung cancer-specific survival was similar for both treatments. Prospective clinical trials are preferred to propensity analyses in evaluating the nature of non-cancer-related death after SABR.

Lung Cancer in the Older Patient

Cancers of the lung and bronchus are the leading cause of cancer deaths in men and women in the United States, and two-thirds of new lung cancer cases are diagnosed in patients over age 65. There are few dedicated clinical trials in the elderly, leading to both undertreatment and overtreatment biases. Even fit older adults experience age-related decline in physiologic reserve, and additional issues of polypharmacy, geriatric syndromes, and inadequate social support are not uncommon, leading to disparities in treatment and survival. This review discusses the challenges in balancing benefits and harms in management of lung cancer in elderly patients.

High Dose Hypofractionated Proton Beam Therapy is a Safe and Feasible Treatment for Central Lung Cancer

Background

There have been few reports about high total dose hypofractionated proton beam therapy for central lung cancer. The aim of this study was to examine retrospectively the safety and efficacy of high total dose hypofractionated proton beam therapy for central lung cancer.

Patients and methods

Patients treated by proton beam therapy for central lung cancer located less than 2 cm from the trachea, mainstem bronchus, or lobe bronchus were included in this study. All patients received 80 Gy of relative biological dose effectiveness (RBE) in 25 fractions with proton beam therapy over 5 weeks between January 2009 and February 2015. The toxicities were evaluated using the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer criteria.

Results

Twenty patients, including 14 clinically inoperable patients (70%), received proton beam therapy for central lung cancer. The median patient age was 75 years (range: 63–90 years), the median follow up time was 27.5 months (range: 12–72 months), and the median tumor diameter was 39.5 mm (range: 24–81 mm). All patients were followed for at least 20 months or until death. The 2-year overall survival rate was 73.8% (100% in operable patients, and 62.5% in inoperable patients), and the 2-year local control rate was 78.5%. There was no Grade 3 or higher toxicities, including bronchial stricture, obstruction, and fistula.

Conclusions

The present study suggests that a high total dose hypofractionated proton beam therapy for central lung cancer was safe and feasible.

Management of Patients With Stage I Lung Cancer

The treatment of stage I non–small-cell lung cancer has advanced markedly over the past century. The transition from therapeutic nihilism with ensured mortality to radical surgery with pneumonectomy to rational oncologic-based resection has resulted in dramatically improved outcomes and reduced morbidity. The superiority of anatomic resection with lobectomy over sublobar resection for fit patients with stage I disease, where more than one half of all patients should expect to be cured, is backed by level 1 evidence. Minimally invasive approaches have further decreased morbidity and mortality, and prospective trials continue to assess whether sublobar resection is appropriate in more select circumstances for tumors < 2 cm. Interest in studying the patient at high risk for complications after lobectomy has been spurred by recent advances in surgical, radiotherapy, and ablative treatment options. In particular, provocative results with stereotactic body radiotherapy have led to rapid adoption in clinical practice with a resultant decrease in the number of untreated patients. A comparison of outcomes across studies of competing modalities remains challenging given the potential impact of selection bias in single-arm trials, and attempts to conduct randomized studies have been largely unsuccessful. Given the uncertainty in defining optimal therapy, patients are best served by a multidisciplinary team of thoracic surgeons, radiation oncologists, pulmonologists, and chest and interventional radiologists to ensure that they receive the evaluation and treatment best suited not only to their tumor and medical challenges but also to their concerns, fears, and values.

Stereotactic Ablative Radiation Therapy is Highly Safe and Effective for Elderly Patients With Early-stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE

To discern the effectiveness and toxicity of stereotactic ablative radiation therapy (SABR) in the elderly population (aged ≥75 years) and to consider how SABR outcomes compare with surgical outcomes historically reported in the elderly.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A total of 772 patients with clinical early-stage I-II non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC; stage T1-T3N0M0) underwent SABR (50 Gy in 4 fractions or 70 Gy in 10 fractions) from 2004 to 2014 at our center (n=442, aged <75 years; n=330, aged ≥75 years). The primary endpoints included overall survival (OS), time-to-progression, and grade ≥3 toxicity. The median follow-up time was approximately 55 months.

RESULTS

Compared with patients aged <75 years, those aged ≥75 years had no difference in the time-to-progression (P=.419), lung cancer-specific survival (P=.275), or toxicity (P=.536). OS was the same between both age groups at 2 years of follow-up but diverged thereafter, with patients aged <75 years when treatment began having greater OS rates at 5 years. The median OS rates for patients aged ≥75 years were 86% at 1 year, 57.5% at 3 years, and 39.5% at 5 years. The median OS rates for patients aged <75 years were 87.3% at 1 year, 67.6% at 3 years, and 51.5% at 5 years. No patient aged ≥75 years experienced any grade 4 or 5 toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

The effectiveness of SABR was the same for the elderly as for the average-age population according to lung cancer-specific survival and time-to-progression. It also poses no increased toxicity. Compared with the historical outcomes with surgery in the elderly, SABR outcomes can be considered comparable for stage I-II disease but with less morbidity.