The role of postoperative thoracic radiotherapy and prophylactic cranial irradiation in early stage small cell lung cancer: Patient selection among ESTRO experts

Effect of pleural invasion on survival of patients with small cell lung cancer: Propensity score analysis and nomogram establishment based on the SEER database

Objectives

Pleural invasion (PI) is identified as an adverse prognostic factor for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but its value in small cell lung cancer (SCLC) remains unclear. We aimed to evaluate the survival effect of PI on overall survival (OS) in SCLC, meanwhile, we established a predictive nomogram based on related risk factors for OS in SCLC patients with PI.

Methods

We extracted the data of patients diagnosed with primary SCLC between 2010 and 2018 from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. The propensity score matching (PSM) method was used to minimize the baseline difference between the non-PI and PI groups. Kaplan-Meier curves and the log-rank test were used for survival analysis. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were applied to identify the independent prognostic factors. Randomly divided the patients with PI into training (70%) and validation (30%) cohorts. A prognostic nomogram was established based on the training cohort and was evaluated in the validation cohort. The C-index, receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC), calibration curves, and decision curve analysis (DCA) were applied to assess the performance of the nomogram.

Results

A total of 1,770 primary SCLC patients were enrolled, including1321patients with non-PI and 449 patients with PI. After PSM, the 387 patients in the PI group matched the 387 patients in the non-PI group. By Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, we observed the exact beneficial effect of non-PI on OS in both original and matched cohorts. Multivariate Cox analysis showed similar results to demonstrate a statistically significant benefit for patients with non-PI in both original and matched cohorts. Age, N stage, M stage, surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy were independent prognostic factors for SCLC patients with PI. The C-index of the nomogram in the training and validation cohort was 0.714 and 0.746, respectively. The ROC curves, calibration curves, and DCA curves also demonstrated good predictive performance in the training and validation cohorts of the prognostic nomogram.

Conclusion

Our study shows that PI is an independent poor prognostic factor for SCLC patients. The nomogram is a useful and reliable tool to predict the OS in SCLC patients with PI. The nomogram can provide strong references to clinicians to facilitate clinic decisions.

Role of Brachytherapy in the Postoperative Management of Endometrial Cancer: Decision-Making Analysis among Experienced European Radiation Oncologists

Simple Summary

There are various society-specific guidelines addressing adjuvant brachytherapy (BT) after surgery for endometrial cancer (EC). However, these recommendations are not uniform. Against this background, clinicians need to make decisions despite gaps between best scientific evidence and clinical practice. We analysed decision criteria influencing the selection for adjuvant radiotherapy among European radiation oncology experts. For this, GEC-ESTRO provided 19 European radiation oncology experts on gynaecological brachytherapy for decision-making analyses. The manuscript presents patterns in decision-making among these experts and demonstrates areas of consensus/discrepancies. We also analysed dose prescription and techniques of brachytherapy. This analysis is of special value as the objective approach enabled us to obtain an unbiased description of decision-making among the specialists (the study was not aimed to create or enforce a consensus). The manuscript provides valuable insight into clinical decision-making with a high impact on treatment selection, as expected differences between experts were observed. With this manuscript we are able to visualize and quantify these. This information is relevant for interdisciplinary discussions.

Abstract

Background: There are various society-specific guidelines addressing adjuvant brachytherapy (BT) after surgery for endometrial cancer (EC). However, these recommendations are not uniform. Against this background, clinicians need to make decisions despite gaps between best scientific evidence and clinical practice. We explored factors influencing decision-making for adjuvant BT in clinical routine among experienced European radiation oncologists in the field of gynaecological radiotherapy (RT). We also investigated the dose and technique of BT. Methods: Nineteen European experts for gynaecological BT selected by the Groupe Européen de Curiethérapie and the European Society for Radiotherapy & Oncology provided their decision criteria and technique for postoperative RT in EC. The decision criteria were captured and converted into decision trees, and consensus and dissent were evaluated based on the objective consensus methodology. Results: The decision criteria used by the experts were tumour extension, grading, nodal status, lymphovascular invasion, and cervical stroma/vaginal invasion (yes/no). No expert recommended adjuvant BT for pT1a G1-2 EC without substantial LVSI. Eighty-four percent of experts recommended BT for pT1a G3 EC without substantial LVSI. Up to 74% of experts used adjuvant BT for pT1b LVSI-negative and pT2 G1–2 LVSI-negative disease. For 74–84% of experts, EBRT + BT was the treatment of choice for nodal-positive pT2 disease and for pT3 EC with cervical/vaginal invasion. For all other tumour stages, there was no clear consensus for adjuvant treatment. Four experts already used molecular markers for decision-making. Sixty-five percent of experts recommended fractionation regimens of 3 × 7 Gy or 4 × 5 Gy for BT as monotherapy and 2 × 5 Gy for combination with EBRT. The most commonly used applicator for BT was a vaginal cylinder; 82% recommended image-guided BT. Conclusions: There was a clear trend towards adjuvant BT for stage IA G3, stage IB, and stage II G1–2 LVSI-negative EC. Likewise, there was a non-uniform pattern for BT dose prescription but a clear trend towards 3D image-based BT. Finally, molecular characteristics were already used in daily decision-making by some experts under the pretext that upcoming trials will bring more clarity to this topic.

Prophylactic cranial irradiation in SCLC

Prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) has well established place in therapy for patients with limited-disease small cell lung cancer who responded to treatment. The data from randomized trials document that PCI reduces brain metastases rate from approximately 60% to 30%, and increases 3-year overall survival by approximately 5%. Currently, the dose of 25 Gy in 10 fractions is considered as standard. In attempt to reduce neuropsychological sequelae attributable to PCI hippocampal sparing techniques are employed. The existing studies suggest the benefit of hippocampal sparing in limiting memory and higher neurocognitive function losses, but with a risk of failures in the spared region. Ongoing studies will further validate the role of hippocampal sparing, both in terms of toxicity reduction and metastases prevention. PCI for patients who have undergone resection for stage I small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is not recommended, PCI may be, however, associated with a favourable outcome in SCLC patients who have undergone complete surgery in stages II−III. The role of PCI in extensive-disease (ED) SCLC has been evolving. Most recent evidence indicate that PCI is controversial in ED patients with response to initial chemotherapy and absence of brain metastases confirmed by contrast-enhanced MRI. The patients who do not receive PCI, must, however, receive periodic MRI examination during follow-up, i.e., remain under active surveillance with access to radiotherapy at brain relapse. The assessment of safety and effectiveness of hippocampal-sparing PCI, with or without drug neuroprotection in consideration of diverse combinations of radiotherapy, chemotherapy and immunotherapy create a background for future directions of research.

Thoracic radiotherapy in small cell lung cancer-a narrative review

Small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) represents 10–15% of all lung cancers and has a poor prognosis. Thoracic radiotherapy plays a central role in current SCLC management. Concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CTRT) is the standard of care for localised disease (stage I−III, limited-stage, LS). Definitive thoracic radiotherapy may be offered in metastatic patients (stage IV, extensive stage, ES-SCLC) after chemotherapy. For LS-SCLC, the gold standard is early accelerated hyperfractionated twice-daily CTRT (4 cycles of cisplatin etoposide, starting with the first or second chemotherapy cycle). Modern radiation techniques should be used with involved-field radiotherapy based on baseline CT and PET/CT scans. In ES-SCLC, thoracic radiotherapy should be discussed in cases of initial bulky mediastinal disease/residual thoracic disease not progressing after induction chemotherapy. This strategy was however not assessed in recent trials establishing chemo-immunotherapy as the standard first line treatment in ES-SCLC. Future developments include technical radiotherapy advances and the incorporation of new drugs. Thoracic irradiation is delivered more precisely given technical developments (IMRT, image-guided radiotherapy, stereotactic radiotherapy), reducing the risks of severe adverse events. Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy may be discussed in rare early stage (T1 to 2, N0) inoperable patients. A number of current clinical trials are investigating immunoradiotherapy. In this review, we highlight the current role of thoracic radiotherapy and describe ongoing research in the integration of biological surrogate markers, advanced radiotherapy technologies and novel drugs in SCLC patients.

Once daily versus twice-daily radiotherapy in the management of limited disease small cell lung cancer - Decision criteria in routine practise

BACKGROUND

In limited disease small cell lung cancer (LD-SCLC), the CONVERT trial has not demonstrated superiority of once-daily (QD) radiotherapy (66 Gy) over twice-daily (BID) radiotherapy (45 Gy). We explored the factors influencing the selection between QD and BID regimens.

METHODS

Thirteen experienced European thoracic radiation oncologists as selected by the European Society for Therapeutic Radiation Oncology (ESTRO) were asked to describe their strategies in the management of LD-SCLC. Treatment strategies were subsequently converted into decision trees and analysed for agreement and discrepancies.

RESULTS

Logistic reasons, patients' performance status and radiotherapy dose constraints were the three major decision criteria used by most experts in decision making. The use of QD and BID regimens was balanced among European experts, but there was a trend towards the BID regimen for fit patients able to travel twice a day to the radiotherapy site.

CONCLUSION

BID and QD radiotherapy are both accepted regimens among experts and the decision is influenced by pragmatic factors such as availability of transportation.