Absence of Pathological Proof of Cancer Associated with Improved Outcomes in Early-Stage Lung Cancer

Predicting Regional Recurrence and Prognosis in Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy-Treated Clinical Stage I Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Using a Radiomics Model Constructed With Surgical Data

PURPOSE

Risk stratification of regional recurrence (RR) is clinically important in the design of adjuvant treatment and surveillance strategies in patients with clinical stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). This study aimed to develop a radiomics model predicting occult lymph node metastasis (OLNM) using surgical data and apply it to the prediction of RR in SBRT-treated early-stage NSCLC patients.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients with clinical stage I NSCLC who underwent curative surgery with systematic lymph node dissection from January 2013 to December 2018 (the training cohort) and from January 2019 to December 2020 (the validation cohort) were included. A preoperative computed tomography-based radiomics model, a clinical feature model, and a fusion model predicting OLNM were constructed. The performance of the 3 models was quantified and compared in the training and validation cohorts. Subsequently, the radiomics model was used to predict RR in a cohort of consecutive SBRT-treated early-stage NSCLC patients from 2 academic medical centers.

RESULTS

A total of 769 patients were included. Eight computed tomography features were identified in the radiomics model, achieving areas under the curves of 0.85 (95% CI, 0.81-0.89) and 0.83 (95% CI, 0.80-0.88) in the training and validation cohorts, respectively. Nevertheless, adding clinical features did not improve the performance of the radiomics model. With a median follow-up of 40.0 (95% CI, 35.2-44.8) months, 32 of the 213 patients in the SBRT cohort developed RR and those in the high-risk group based on the radiomics model had a higher cumulative incidence of RR (P < .001) and shorter regional recurrence-free survival (P = .02), progression-free survival (P = .004) and overall survival (P = .006) than those in the low-risk group.

CONCLUSIONS

The radiomics model based on pathologically confirmed data effectively identified patients with OLNM, which may be useful in the risk stratification among SBRT-treated patients with clinical stage I NSCLC.

The causal association between serum metabolites and lung cancer based on multivariate Mendelian randomization

This study seeks to understand the causal association between serum metabolites and different lung cancer types, an area yet to be extensively studied. We Used a two-sample Mendelian randomization (TSMR) approach, utilizing 486 blood metabolites as exposures and 3 distinct lung cancer types genome-wide association studies datasets as outcomes. We employed inverse variance weighting, MR-Egger, weighted median, simple mode, and weighted mode to estimate causal effects. We performed sensitivity analyses using Cochran Q test, MR-Egger intercept test, and MR-pleiotropy residual sum and outlier (MR-PRESSO). Linkage disequilibrium score (LDSC) analysis was conducted on the selected metabolites, and common confounding single nucleotide polymorphisms were eliminated using the human genotype-phenotype association Database. Metabolic pathway analysis was performed with MetaboAnalyst 5.0 software. Subsequently, a multivariate Mendelian randomization analysis was conducted to ascertain independent risk exposures. Our findings suggest independent risk factors for specific types of lung cancer: 7-methylxanthine and isoleucine for lung adenocarcinoma, cysteine and 1-arachidonoylglycerophosphocholine are identified as independent protective and risk factors for squamous lung cancer. Undecanoate (11:0) with Linoleate (18:2n6) showed a protective effect for small cell lung cancer. Additionally, 11 metabolic pathways were associated with lung cancer. This novel perspective offers a multidimensional understanding of lung cancer phenotypes, providing valuable guidance for identifying and screening of diverse lung cancer phenotypes.

Comparison of long-term outcomes of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) via Helical tomotherapy for early-stage lung cancer with or without pathological proof

BACKGROUND

Stereotactic body radio therapy (SBRT) has emerged as a standard treatment option for nonsurgical candidates with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Pathological proof is sometimes difficult to obtain in patients with solitary pulmonary nodules (SPNs). We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of stereotactic body radiotherapy via helical tomotherapy (HT-SBRT) for early-stage lung cancer patients with or without a pathological diagnosis.

METHODS

Between June 2011 and December 2016, we treated 119 lung cancer patients with HT-SBRT, including 55 with a clinical diagnosis and 64 with a pathological diagnosis. Survival outcomes, including local control (LC), progression-free survival (PFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS), were compared between two cohorts with and without a pathological diagnosis.

RESULTS

The median follow-up for the whole group was 69 months. Patients with a clinical diagnosis were significantly older (p = 0.002). No significant differences were observed between the clinical and pathological diagnosis cohorts in terms of the long-term outcome, with 5-year LC, PFS, CSS, and OS of 87% versus 83% (p = 0.58), 48% versus 45% (p = 0.82), 87% versus 84% (p = 0.65), and 60% versus 63% (p = 0.79), respectively. Recurrence patterns and toxicity were also similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Empiric SBRT appears to be a safe and effective treatment option in a multidisciplinary setting when patients with SPNs highly suggestive of malignancy are unable/refuse to obtain a definitive pathological diagnosis.

Effects of Expert-Determined Reference Standards in Evaluating the Diagnostic Performance of a Deep Learning Model: A Malignant Lung Nodule Detection Task on Chest Radiographs

OBJECTIVE

Little is known about the effects of using different expert-determined reference standards when evaluating the performance of deep learning-based automatic detection (DLAD) models and their added value to radiologists. We assessed the concordance of expert-determined standards with a clinical gold standard (herein, pathological confirmation) and the effects of different expert-determined reference standards on the estimates of radiologists' diagnostic performance to detect malignant pulmonary nodules on chest radiographs with and without the assistance of a DLAD model.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study included chest radiographs from 50 patients with pathologically proven lung cancer and 50 controls. Five expert-determined standards were constructed using the interpretations of 10 experts: individual judgment by the most experienced expert, majority vote, consensus judgments of two and three experts, and a latent class analysis (LCA) model. In separate reader tests, additional 10 radiologists independently interpreted the radiographs and then assisted with the DLAD model. Their diagnostic performance was estimated using the clinical gold standard and various expert-determined standards as the reference standard, and the results were compared using the t test with Bonferroni correction.

RESULTS

The LCA model (sensitivity, 72.6%; specificity, 100%) was most similar to the clinical gold standard. When expert-determined standards were used, the sensitivities of radiologists and DLAD model alone were overestimated, and their specificities were underestimated (all p-values < 0.05). DLAD assistance diminished the overestimation of sensitivity but exaggerated the underestimation of specificity (all p-values < 0.001). The DLAD model improved sensitivity and specificity to a greater extent when using the clinical gold standard than when using the expert-determined standards (all p-values < 0.001), except for sensitivity with the LCA model (p = 0.094).

CONCLUSION

The LCA model was most similar to the clinical gold standard for malignant pulmonary nodule detection on chest radiographs. Expert-determined standards caused bias in measuring the diagnostic performance of the artificial intelligence model.

Use and Outcomes of SBRT for Early Stage NSCLC Without Pathologic Confirmation in the Veterans Health Care Administration

Purpose

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) use has increased among patients without pathologic confirmation (PC) of lung cancer. Empirical SBRT without PC raises concerns about variation in workup and patient selection, but national trends have not been well described. In this study, we assessed patterns of empirical SBRT use, workup, and causes of death among a large national non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cohort.

Methods and Materials

We identified 2221 patients treated with SBRT for cT1-T2aN0M0 NSCLC in the Veterans Affairs health care system from 2008 to 2015. We reviewed their pretreatment workup and assessed associations between absence of PC and clinical and demographic factors. We compared causes of death between PC and non-PC groups and used Cox proportional hazards modeling to compare overall survival and lung cancer specific survival (LCSS) between these groups.

Results

Treatment without PC varied from 0% to 61% among Veterans Affairs medical centers, with at least 5 cases of stage I NSCLC. Overall, 14.9% of patients were treated without PC and 8.8% did not have a biopsy attempt. Ten percent of facilities were responsible for almost two-thirds (62%) of cases of treatment without PC. Of non-PC patients, 95.5% had positron emission tomography scans, 40.6% had biopsy procedures attempted, and 12.7% underwent endobronchial ultrasound. Non-PC patients were more likely to have cT1 tumors and live outside the histoplasmosis belt. Age, sex, smoking status, and Charlson comorbidity index were similar between groups. Lung cancer was the most common cause of death in both groups. Overall survival was similar between groups, whereas non-PC patients had better LCSS (hazard ratio = 0.77, P = .031).

Conclusions

Empirical SBRT use varied widely among institutions and appropriate radiographic workup was consistently used in this national cohort. Future studies should investigate determinants of variation and reasons for higher LCSS among non-PC patients.

Trends and variations in treatment of stage I-III non-small cell lung cancer from 2008 to 2018: A nationwide population-based study from the Netherlands

INTRODUCTION

This Dutch population-based study describes nationwide treatment patterns and its variations for stage I-III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients diagnosed with clinical stage I-III NSCLC in the period 2008-2018 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Treatment trends were studied over time and age groups. Use of radiotherapy versus surgery (stage I-II), and concurrent versus sequential chemoradiotherapy (stage III) were analyzed by logistic regression.

RESULTS

In stage I, the rate of surgery decreased from 58 % (2008) to 40 % (2018) while radiotherapy use increased over time (from 31 % to 52 %), which mostly concerned stereotactic body radiotherapy (74 %). In stage II, 54 % of patients received surgery, and use of radiotherapy alone increased from 18 % to 25 %. The strongest factors favoring radiotherapy over surgery were WHO performance status (OR ≥ 2 vs 0: 23.39 (95% CI: 18.93-28.90)), increasing age (OR ≥ 80 vs <60 years: 14.52 (95% CI: 13.02-16.18)) and stage (OR stage II vs I: 0.61 (95% CI: 0.57-0.65)). In stage III, the combined use of chemotherapy and radiotherapy increased from 35 % (2008) to 39 % (2018). In all years, 23 % received concurrent chemoradiotherapy, 9 % sequential chemoradiotherapy, 23 % radiotherapy or chemotherapy alone, and 25 % best supportive care. The strongest factors favoring concurrent over sequential chemoradiotherapy were age (OR ≥ 80 vs <60 years: 0.14 (95% CI: 0.10-0.19)), WHO Performance status (OR ≥ 2 vs 0: 0.33 (95% CI: 0.24-0.47)) and region (OR east vs north: 0.39 (95% CI: 0.30-0.50)).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of radiotherapy became more prominent over time in stage I NSCLC. Combined use of chemotherapy and radiotherapy marginally increased in stage III: only one third of patients received chemoradiotherapy, mainly concurrently. Treatment variation seen between patient groups suggests tailored treatment decision, while variation between hospitals and regions indicate differences in clinical practice.

Oncologic Outcomes of Surgery Versus SBRT for Non-Small-Cell Lung Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The optimal treatment of stage I non-small-cell lung carcinoma is subject to debate. The aim of this study was to compare overall survival and oncologic outcomes of lobar resection (LR), sublobar resection (SR), and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT).

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of oncologic outcomes of propensity matched comparative and noncomparative cohort studies was performed. Outcomes of interest were overall survival and disease-free survival. The inverse variance method and the random-effects method for meta-analysis were utilized to assess the pooled estimates.

RESULTS

A total of 100 studies with patients treated for clinical stage I non-small-cell lung carcinoma were included. Long-term overall and disease-free survival after LR was superior over SBRT in all comparisons, and for most comparisons, SR was superior to SBRT. Noncomparative studies showed superior long-term overall and disease-free survival for both LR and SR over SBRT. Although the papers were heterogeneous and of low quality, results remained essentially the same throughout a large number of stratifications and sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSION

Results of this systematic review and meta-analysis showed that LR has superior outcomes compared to SBRT for cI non-small-cell lung carcinoma. New trials are underway evaluating long-term results of SBRT in potentially operable patients.

Pathology-confirmed versus non pathology-confirmed cancer diagnoses: incidence, participant characteristics, and survival

Cancer diagnoses which are not confirmed by pathology are often under-registered in cancer registries compared to pathology-confirmed diagnoses. It is unknown how many patients have a non pathology-confirmed cancer diagnosis, and whether their characteristics and survival differ from patients with a pathology-confirmed diagnosis. Participants from the prospective population-based Rotterdam Study were followed between 1989 and 2013 for the diagnosis of cancer. Cancer diagnoses were classified into pathology-confirmed versus non pathology-confirmed (i.e., based on imaging or tumour markers). We compared participant characteristics and the distribution of cancers at different sites. Furthermore, we investigated differences in overall survival using survival curves adjusted for age and sex. During a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 10.7 (6.3–15.9) years, 2698 out of 14,024 participants were diagnosed with cancer, of which 316 diagnoses (11.7%) were non pathology-confirmed. Participants with non pathology-confirmed diagnoses were older, more often women, and had a lower education. Most frequently non pathology-confirmed cancer sites included central nervous system (66.7%), hepato-pancreato-biliary (44.5%), and unknown primary origin (31.2%). Survival of participants with non pathology-confirmed diagnoses after 1 year was lower compared to survival of participants with pathology-confirmed diagnoses (32.6% vs. 63.4%; risk difference of 30.8% [95% CI 25.2%; 36.2%]). Pathological confirmation of cancer is related to participant characteristics and cancer site. Furthermore, participants with non pathology-confirmed diagnoses have worse survival than participants with pathology-confirmed diagnoses. Missing data on non pathology-confirmed diagnoses may result in underestimation of cancer incidence and in an overestimation of survival in cancer registries, and may introduce bias in aetiological research.

Survival After Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Clinically Diagnosed or Biopsy-Proven Early-Stage NSCLC: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is a promising curative treatment for early-stage NSCLC. It is unclear if survival outcomes for SBRT are influenced by a lack of pathological confirmation of malignancy and staging of disease in these patients. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we assess survival outcomes after SBRT in studies with patients with clinically diagnosed versus biopsy-proven early-stage NSCLC.

METHODS

The main databases were searched for trials and cohort studies without restrictions to publication status or language. Two independent researchers performed the screening and selection of eligible studies. Outcomes were overall survival, cancer-specific survival, and disease-free survival. The inverse variance method and the random effects method for meta-analysis were used to assess pooled survival estimates.

RESULTS

A total of 11,195 nonduplicate records were identified by the original search strategy. After screening by title and abstract, 1051 potentially eligible records were identified. A total of 43 articles were included. The comparative studies showed lower 3-year overall survival and lower 2-year and 5-year cancer-specific survival for biopsy-proven disease compared to clinical disease. However, 5-year overall survival was the same for both groups. For the pooled estimates, 3-year disease-free survival and 2-year cancer-specific survival were lower for biopsied disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Results of this systematic review and meta-analysis show a discrepancy in oncological outcomes for patients undergoing SBRT for suspected early-stage NSCLC in whom there is pathologic conformation of malignancy and those who there is only a clinical diagnose of NSCLC. These results emphasize the importance of obtaining pathologic proof of malignancy.

Survival in early lung cancer patients treated with high dose radiotherapy is independent of pathological confirmation

BACKGROUND

Approximately 15% of lung cancer patients are diagnosed in early stages. Microscopic proof of disease cannot always be obtained because of comorbidity or reluctance to undergo invasive diagnostic procedures. In the current study, survival data of patients with and without pathology are compared.

METHODS

One hundred and sixty three patients with NSCLC I-IIb (T3 N0) treated between 2002 and 2016 were eligible: 123 (75%) had pathological confirmation of disease, whereas 40 (25%) did not. In accordance with international guidelines, both groups received radiotherapy. Comorbidity was assessed with the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI).

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 28.6 months (range: 0.3-162): 66 (40%) patients are still alive, while 97 (59%) patients died: 48 (29%) cancer-related deaths and 49 (30%) from causes other than cancer. Median overall survival (OS) in patients without pathological confirmation was 58.6 months (range: 0.5-162), which did not differ from those with microscopic proof of disease (39.4 months, range: 0.3-147.5; logrank P = 0.481). Median cancer-specific survival (CSS) also did not differ at 113.4 months (range: 0.5-162) in the non-confirmation group (logrank P = 0.763) versus 51.5 months (range: 3.7-129.5) in patients with pathology. In Cox regression, a CCI of ≥ 3 was associated with poor OS (hazard ratio 2.0; range 1.2-3.4; P = 0.010) and CSS (hazard ratio 2.0; 1.0-4.0; P = 0.043).

CONCLUSION

OS and CSS in early lung cancer patients depend on comorbidity rather than on pathological confirmation of disease.

Precision Medicine in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Current Standards in Pathology and Biomarker Interpretation

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has become a prominent example of precision medicine among solid tumor malignancies. Clinical management of NSCLC now depends on surgical, chemotherapeutic, and radiation treatment regimens based on pathologic findings and clinical staging as well as targeted therapies based on molecular profiling. As molecular testing becomes increasingly important, preserving tissue for this purpose while rendering an accurate histologic diagnosis becomes a key consideration, particularly in advanced-stage NSCLC, in which small biopsy samples or aspirates are often the only specimen available. Next-generation sequencing panels are a powerful method of providing information relevant for both standard-of-care and investigational treatment options. However, taking advantage of the abundance of information gleaned from these panels requires careful annotation, prioritization, and reporting of molecular findings and their clinical significance. Although molecular profiling has traditionally relied on direct sampling of neoplastic tissue, blood-based diagnostics now offer the potential to provide some clinically useful information noninvasively.