1
|
Araújo A, Barroso A, Parente B, Travancinha C, Teixeira E, Martelo F, Fernandes G, Paupério G, Queiroga H, Duarte I, da Costa JD, Soares M, Borralho P, Costa P, Chinita P, Almodôvar T, Barata F. Unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer: Insights from a Portuguese expert panel. Pulmonology 2024; 30:159-169. [PMID: 36717296 DOI: 10.1016/j.pulmoe.2022.11.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/08/2021] [Revised: 10/29/2022] [Accepted: 11/29/2022] [Indexed: 01/30/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The management of unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is clinically challenging and there is no current consensus on optimal strategies. Herein, a panel of Portuguese experts aims to present practical recommendations for the global management of unresectable stage III NSCLC patients. METHODS A group of Portuguese lung cancer experts debated aspects related to the diagnosis, staging and treatment of unresectable stage III NSCLC in light of current evidence. Recent breakthroughs in immunotherapy as part of a standard therapeutic approach were also discussed. This review exposes the major conclusions obtained. RESULTS Practical recommendations for the management of unresectable stage III NSCLC were proposed, aiming to improve the pathways of diagnosis and treatment in the Portuguese healthcare system. Clinical heterogeneity of patients with stage III NSCLC hinders the development of single standardised algorithm where all fit. CONCLUSIONS A timely diagnosis and a proper staging contribute to the best management of each patient, optimizing treatment tolerance and effectiveness. The expert panel considered chemoradiotherapy as the preferable approach when surgery is not possible. Management of adverse events and immunotherapy as a consolidation therapy are also essential steps for a successful strategy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Araújo
- Medical Oncology Department, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto, Largo Prof. Abel Salazar, 4099-001 Porto, Portugal
| | - A Barroso
- Pulmonology Department, Centro Hospitalar Vila Nova de Gaia/Espinho, Rua Conceição Fernandes, 4434-502 Vila Nova de Gaia, Portugal
| | - B Parente
- Hospital CUF Porto, Estrada da Circunvalação 14341, 4100-180 Porto, Portugal
| | - C Travancinha
- Instituto Português de Oncologia Lisboa Francisco Gentil, Rua Prof. Lima Basto, 1099-023 Lisboa, Portugal
| | - E Teixeira
- Centro Hospitalar Lisboa Norte - Hospital Pulido Valente, Alameda das Linhas de Torres, 117 1769-001 Lisboa, Portugal; Hospital CUF Descobertas, Rua Mário Botas, 1998-018 Lisboa, Portugal; Hospital CUF Tejo, Avenida 24 de Julho 171A, 1350-352 Lisboa, Portugal
| | - F Martelo
- Hospital da Luz Lisboa, Avenida Lusíada 100, 1500-650 Lisboa, Portugal
| | - G Fernandes
- Centro Hospitalar Universitário de São João, Porto, Largo Prof. Abel Salazar, 4099-001 Porto, Portugal
| | - G Paupério
- Instituto Português de Oncologia Porto Francisco Gentil, Rua Dr. António Bernardino de Almeida 62, 4200-072 Porto, Portugal
| | - H Queiroga
- Centro Hospitalar Universitário de São João, Porto, Largo Prof. Abel Salazar, 4099-001 Porto, Portugal
| | - I Duarte
- Instituto Português de Oncologia Lisboa Francisco Gentil, Rua Prof. Lima Basto, 1099-023 Lisboa, Portugal
| | - J D da Costa
- Instituto Português de Oncologia Lisboa Francisco Gentil, Rua Prof. Lima Basto, 1099-023 Lisboa, Portugal
| | - M Soares
- Instituto Português de Oncologia Porto Francisco Gentil, Rua Dr. António Bernardino de Almeida 62, 4200-072 Porto, Portugal
| | - P Borralho
- Hospital CUF Descobertas, Rua Mário Botas, 1998-018 Lisboa, Portugal
| | - P Costa
- Instituto CUF Porto, Rua Fonte das Sete Bicas 170, 4460-188 Senhora da Hora, Porto, Portugal
| | - P Chinita
- Hospital do Espírito Santo de Évora, Largo do Sr. da Pobreza, 7000-811 Évora, Portugal
| | - T Almodôvar
- Instituto Português de Oncologia Lisboa Francisco Gentil, Rua Prof. Lima Basto, 1099-023 Lisboa, Portugal
| | - F Barata
- Centro Hospitalar e Universitário de Coimbra, Praceta Professor Mota Pinto, 3004-561 Coimbra, Portugal.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Fournier L, de Geus-Oei LF, Regge D, Oprea-Lager DE, D’Anastasi M, Bidaut L, Bäuerle T, Lopci E, Cappello G, Lecouvet F, Mayerhoefer M, Kunz WG, Verhoeff JJC, Caruso D, Smits M, Hoffmann RT, Gourtsoyianni S, Beets-Tan R, Neri E, deSouza NM, Deroose CM, Caramella C. Twenty Years On: RECIST as a Biomarker of Response in Solid Tumours an EORTC Imaging Group - ESOI Joint Paper. Front Oncol 2022; 11:800547. [PMID: 35083155 PMCID: PMC8784734 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.800547] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/23/2021] [Accepted: 11/30/2021] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Response evaluation criteria in solid tumours (RECIST) v1.1 are currently the reference standard for evaluating efficacy of therapies in patients with solid tumours who are included in clinical trials, and they are widely used and accepted by regulatory agencies. This expert statement discusses the principles underlying RECIST, as well as their reproducibility and limitations. While the RECIST framework may not be perfect, the scientific bases for the anticancer drugs that have been approved using a RECIST-based surrogate endpoint remain valid. Importantly, changes in measurement have to meet thresholds defined by RECIST for response classification within thus partly circumventing the problems of measurement variability. The RECIST framework also applies to clinical patients in individual settings even though the relationship between tumour size changes and outcome from cohort studies is not necessarily translatable to individual cases. As reproducibility of RECIST measurements is impacted by reader experience, choice of target lesions and detection/interpretation of new lesions, it can result in patients changing response categories when measurements are near threshold values or if new lesions are missed or incorrectly interpreted. There are several situations where RECIST will fail to evaluate treatment-induced changes correctly; knowledge and understanding of these is crucial for correct interpretation. Also, some patterns of response/progression cannot be correctly documented by RECIST, particularly in relation to organ-site (e.g. bone without associated soft-tissue lesion) and treatment type (e.g. focal therapies). These require specialist reader experience and communication with oncologists to determine the actual impact of the therapy and best evaluation strategy. In such situations, alternative imaging markers for tumour response may be used but the sources of variability of individual imaging techniques need to be known and accounted for. Communication between imaging experts and oncologists regarding the level of confidence in a biomarker is essential for the correct interpretation of a biomarker and its application to clinical decision-making. Though measurement automation is desirable and potentially reduces the variability of results, associated technical difficulties must be overcome, and human adjudications may be required.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laure Fournier
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- European Society of Oncologic Imaging (ESOI), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Université de Paris, Assistance Publique–Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Hopital europeen Georges Pompidou, Department of Radiology, Paris Cardiovascular Research Center (PARCC) Unité Mixte de Recherche (UMRS) 970, Institut national de la santé et de la recherche médicale (INSERM), Paris, France
| | - Lioe-Fee de Geus-Oei
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
- Biomedical Photonic Imaging Group, University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands
| | - Daniele Regge
- European Society of Oncologic Imaging (ESOI), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Turin, Turin, Italy
- Radiology Unit, Candiolo Cancer Institute, Fondazione del Piemonte per l’Oncologia-Istituto Di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (FPO-IRCCS), Turin, Italy
| | - Daniela-Elena Oprea-Lager
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Centers [Vrije Universiteit (VU) University], Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Melvin D’Anastasi
- European Society of Oncologic Imaging (ESOI), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Medical Imaging Department, Mater Dei Hospital, University of Malta, Msida, Malta
| | - Luc Bidaut
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- College of Science, University of Lincoln, Lincoln, United Kingdom
| | - Tobias Bäuerle
- European Society of Oncologic Imaging (ESOI), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Institute of Radiology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany
| | - Egesta Lopci
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Nuclear Medicine Unit, Istituto Di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS) – Humanitas Research Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - Giovanni Cappello
- Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Turin, Turin, Italy
- Radiology Unit, Candiolo Cancer Institute, Fondazione del Piemonte per l’Oncologia-Istituto Di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (FPO-IRCCS), Turin, Italy
| | - Frederic Lecouvet
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Department of Radiology, Institut de Recherche Expérimentale et Clinique (IREC), Cliniques Universitaires Saint Luc, Université Catholique de Louvain (UCLouvain), Brussels, Belgium
| | - Marius Mayerhoefer
- European Society of Oncologic Imaging (ESOI), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Wolfgang G. Kunz
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- European Society of Oncologic Imaging (ESOI), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital, Ludwig Maximilian University (LMU) Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Joost J. C. Verhoeff
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Department of Radiotherapy, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Damiano Caruso
- European Society of Oncologic Imaging (ESOI), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Medical-Surgical Sciences and Translational Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Marion Smits
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands
- Brain Tumour Centre, Erasmus Medical Centre (MC) Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Ralf-Thorsten Hoffmann
- European Society of Oncologic Imaging (ESOI), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Institute and Policlinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital, Carl-Gustav-Carus Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Sofia Gourtsoyianni
- European Society of Oncologic Imaging (ESOI), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Radiology, School of Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Areteion Hospital, Athens, Greece
| | - Regina Beets-Tan
- European Society of Oncologic Imaging (ESOI), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands
- School For Oncology and Developmental Biology (GROW) School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands
| | - Emanuele Neri
- European Society of Oncologic Imaging (ESOI), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Department of Translational Research and of New Surgical and Medical Technologies, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Nandita M. deSouza
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
- European Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (EIBALL), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers Alliance, Radiological Society of North America, Oak Brook, IL, United States
| | - Christophe M. Deroose
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Nuclear Medicine, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
- Nuclear Medicine & Molecular Imaging, Department of Imaging and Pathology, Katholieke Universiteit (KU) Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Caroline Caramella
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Radiology Department, Hôpital Marie Lannelongue, Groupe Hospitalier Paris Saint Joseph Centre International des Cancers Thoraciques, Université Paris-Saclay, Le Plessis-Robinson, France
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Rami-Porta R, Call S, Dooms C, Obiols C, Sánchez M, Travis WD, Vollmer I. Lung cancer staging: a concise update. Eur Respir J 2018; 51:13993003.00190-2018. [PMID: 29700105 DOI: 10.1183/13993003.00190-2018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 71] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/29/2018] [Accepted: 04/04/2018] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
Diagnosis and clinical staging of lung cancer are fundamental to planning therapy. The techniques for clinical staging, i.e anatomic and metabolic imaging, endoscopies and minimally invasive surgical procedures, should be performed sequentially and with an increasing degree of invasiveness. Intraoperative staging, assessing the magnitude of the primary tumour, the involved structures, and the loco-regional lymphatic spread by means of systematic nodal dissection, is essential in order to achieve a complete resection. In resected tumours, pathological staging, with the systematic study of the resected specimens, is the strongest prognostic indicator and is essential to make further decisions on therapy. In the present decade, the guidelines on lung cancer staging of the American College of Chest Physicians and the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons are based on the best available evidence and are widely followed. Recent advances in the classification of the adenocarcinoma of the lung, with the definition of adenocarcinoma in situ, minimally invasive adenocarcinoma and lepidic predominant adenocarcinoma, and the publication of the eighth edition of the tumour, node and metastasis classification of lung cancer, have to be integrated into the staging process. The present review complements the latest guidelines on lung cancer staging by providing an update of all these issues.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ramón Rami-Porta
- Dept of Thoracic Surgery, Hospital Universitari Mutua Terrassa, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.,Network of Centres for Biomedical Research in Respiratory Diseases (CIBERES) Lung Cancer Group, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Sergi Call
- Dept of Thoracic Surgery, Hospital Universitari Mutua Terrassa, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.,Dept of Morphological Sciences, School of Medicine, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Christophe Dooms
- Dept of Respiratory Diseases, University Hospitals, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Carme Obiols
- Dept of Thoracic Surgery, Hospital Universitari Mutua Terrassa, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Marcelo Sánchez
- Centre of Imaging Diagnosis, Radiology Dept, Hospital Clínic, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - William D Travis
- Dept of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Ivan Vollmer
- Centre of Imaging Diagnosis, Radiology Dept, Hospital Clínic, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Gridelli C, Camerini A, Pappagallo G, Pennella A, Anzidei M, Bellomi M, Buosi R, Grasso RF. Clinical and radiological features driving patient selection for antiangiogenic therapy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Cancer Imaging 2016; 16:44. [PMID: 28031049 PMCID: PMC5192596 DOI: 10.1186/s40644-016-0102-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/21/2016] [Accepted: 12/01/2016] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The use of antiangiogenic therapy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) requires thorough evaluation of patient characteristics in order to avoid potential safety issues, particularly pulmonary haemorrhage (PH). The aim of this consensus by a panel of experts was to identify important criteria for the selection of patients with NSCLC who would benefit from antiangiogenic therapy. METHODS Radiologists and oncologists were selected for the expert panel. The nominal group technique (NGT) and the Delphi questionnaire were used for consensus generation. The NGT consisted of four steps, the result of which was used to set the Delphi questionnaire. A final report was generated based on the opinions of the experts from the panel. RESULTS An extremely important prerequisite for the evaluation of an antiangiogenic therapeutic approach in patients with NSCLC was thorough clinical and radiological analysis of the relationships between tumour and vascular or anatomical structures (performed in close co-operation by oncologists and radiologists). The panel identified major parameters to be considered before the use of antiangiogenic treatment, collectively agreeing on the relevance of tumour cavitation, vascular infiltration, endobronchial growth and thromboembolism for chest tumour sites, and of the presence of aneurysms, extra-thoracic bleeding, brain metastases or thrombi for extra-thoracic sites. Moreover, a structured report containing information not only on the tumour but also on the general vascular status is essential to guide the treatment choice The experts agreed that tumour localization in the absence of vessel infiltration, cavitation, and the use of antiplatelet therapy are relevant parameters to be assessed, but their presence should not necessarily exclude a patient from receiving antiangiogenic therapy. CONCLUSION Close co-operation between oncologists and radiologists in the diagnosis, treatment selection, and assessment of response is essential for ensuring therapeutic appropriateness in the NSCLC setting. It should be noted that neither the use of antiplatelet therapy nor tumour localisation are to be considered as contraindications to antiangiogenic treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cesare Gridelli
- Division of Medical Oncology, S. G. Moscati Hospital, Contrada Amoretta 8, 83100, Avellino, Italy.
| | - Andrea Camerini
- Medical Oncology, Versilia Hospital and Istituto Toscano Tumori, Lido di Camaiore (LU), Italy
| | | | - Angelo Pennella
- Psychologist, Psychotherapist, Lecturer at the School of Specialization in Health Psychology, "Sapienza" University, Rome, Italy
| | | | - Massimo Bellomi
- Division of Radiology, Istituto Europeo di Oncologia, Milan, Italy.,Department of Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Roberta Buosi
- Medical Oncology, East Piedmont University, Maggiore della Carità Hospital, Novara, Italy
| | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Monteiro IDP, Califano R, Mountzios G, de Mello RA. Immunotherapy with checkpoint inhibitors for lung cancer: novel agents, biomarkers and paradigms. Future Oncol 2016; 12:551-64. [PMID: 26776915 DOI: 10.2217/fon.15.309] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/21/2023] Open
Abstract
Despite recent advances, prognosis of patients with advanced lung cancer remains dismal. Owing to a better understanding of the interactions between immune system and tumor cells, immunotherapy has emerged as a promising therapeutic strategy. After the recent approval of nivolumab and the promising results with other immune checkpoint inhibitors, combination strategies are now subject of intensive research. Notwithstanding these successes, immunotherapy still holds significant drawbacks. As the target shifts from tumor cells to the tumor microenvironment, treatment paradigms are changing and several improvements are needed for optimal use in clinical practice. Robust biomarkers for patient selection and a reliable way of evaluating treatment response are high priorities. Herein we review current data on immune checkpoint inhibitors for lung cancer treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Raffaele Califano
- Cancer Research UK Department of Medical Oncology, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, M20 4BX, UK.,Department of Medical Oncology, University Hospital of South Manchester NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, M23 9LT, UK
| | - Giannis Mountzios
- Department of Medical Oncology, University of Athens Medical School, Athens, Greece
| | - Ramon Andrade de Mello
- Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.,Department of Biomedical Sciences & Medicine, Division of Oncology, University of Algarve, Faro, Portugal.,Division of Clinical Research & Medical Oncology, Centro Oncológico São Mateus, Ceará Cancer Institute, Rua Papi Junior, 1222, Rodolfo Teófilo, CEP 60430-235, Fortaleza, Brazil
| |
Collapse
|