Phase III study comparing chemotherapy and radiotherapy with preoperative chemotherapy and surgical resection in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer with spread to mediastinal lymph nodes (N2); final report of RTOG 89-01

What Is the Accuracy of Clinical Staging for Stage III-Single-station N2 NSCLC? A Multi-Centre UK Study

Introduction

Single-station N2 (ssN2) versus multi-station N2 has been used as a selection criterion for treatment recommendations between surgical versus non-surgical multimodality treatment in stage III-N2 NSCLC. We hypothesized that clinical staging would be susceptible to upstaging on pathologic staging and, therefore, challenge this practice.

Methods

A retrospective study of prospectively collected routine clinical data for patients with stage III-N2 NSCLC that had completed computed tomography (CT), positron emission tomography (PET), and staging endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS) and had been confirmed clinical stage III-ssN2 at multidisciplinary team discussion and went on to complete surgical resection as the first treatment to provide pathologic staging. The study was completed in two cohorts (A) across a single cancer alliance in England (Greater Manchester) January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2018 and (B) across five United Kingdom centers to validate the findings in part A January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2020.

Results

A total of 115 patients met the inclusion criteria across cohort A (56 patients) and cohort B (59 patients) across 15 United Kingdom hospitals. The proportion of cases in which clinical stage III-ssN2 was upstaged to pathologic stage III-multi-station N2 was 34% (19 of 56) in cohort A, 32% in cohort B (19 of 59), and 33% across the combined study cohort (38 of 115). Most patients had a single radiologically abnormal lymph node on CT and PET (88%, 105 of 115). In the majority, the reasons for missed N2 disease on staging EBUS were due to inaccessible (stations 5, 6, 8, 9) N2 nodes at EBUS (34%, 13 of 38) and accessible lymph nodes not sampled during staging EBUS as not meeting sampling threshold (40%, 15 of 38) rather than false-negative sampling during EBUS (26%, 10 of 38).

Conclusions

During multidisciplinary team discussions, clinicians must be aware that one-third of patients with stage III-ssN2 on the basis of CT, PET, and staging EBUS do not truly have ssN2 and this questions the use of this criterion to define treatment recommendations.

Chemoradiotherapy versus surgery after neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy in patients with stage III NSCLC: a real-world multicenter retrospective study

PURPOSE

The optimal treatment after neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy for patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is unclear. This study aimed at comparing the efficacy and safety of chemoradiotherapy and surgery after neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy in stage III NSCLC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a real-world multicenter retrospective study on patients with stage III NSCLC who received surgery or chemoradiotherapy after neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy between October 2018 and December 2022. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed from the initiation of neoadjuvant treatment and estimated by the Kaplan‒Meier method. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression models were used to examine potential prognostic factors. One-to-one propensity score matching (PSM) was used to further minimize confounding.

RESULTS

A total of 239 eligible patients were enrolled, with 104 (43.5%) receiving surgery and 135 (56.5%) receiving CRT. After 1:1 PSM, 1- and 2-year PFS rates in patients receiving radical surgery (rSurgery group) vs. patients receiving definitive cCRT (dCCRT group) were 80.0% vs. 79.2% and 67.2% vs. 53.1%, respectively (P = 0.774). One- and 2-year OS rates were 97.5% vs. 97.4% and 87.3% vs. 89.9%, respectively (P = 0.558). Patients in the dCCRT group had a numerically lower incidence of distant metastases compared to those in the rSurgery group (42.9% vs. 70.6%, P = 0.119). The incidence of treatment-related adverse events was similar in both groups, except that the incidence of grade 3/4 hematological toxicity was significantly higher in the dCCRT group (30.0% vs. 10.0%, P = 0.025).

CONCLUSION

Following neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy, definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy may achieve noninferior outcomes to radical surgery in stage III NSCLC.

Stage 3 N2 Lung Cancer: A Multidisciplinary Therapeutic Conundrum

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The treatment of stage III N2 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains debated. There is an absence of a universally agreed definition of resectability for this heterogeneous group and a lack of trial data.

RECENT FINDINGS

We reviewed and compared current international guidelines and evidence surrounding management of stage III N2 NSCLC. The Irish and Australian guidelines advise subcategorising N2 disease into N2a (may be resectable) and N2b (never resectable). On the contrary, American and British guidelines avoid subcategorising N2 disease, emphasising importance of local MDT decisions. It is suggested that evidence for resection of stage III tumours is relatively weak, but that stage IIIA should generally be considered for resection, and stage IIIB is not recommended for resection. For resectable disease, surgery may be combined with neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy, or adjuvant chemotherapy followed by immunotherapy and radiotherapy in selected patients. There is some evidence that technically resectable disease can be treated solely with radiotherapy with similar outcomes to resection. In the event of unresectable disease, chemoradiotherapy has been the traditional management option. However, recent studies with chemoradiotherapy alongside immunotherapy appear promising. There are many factors that influence the treatment pathway offered to patients with stage III N2 NSCLC, including patient factors, team expertise, and local resources. Therefore, the role of MDTs in defining resectability and formulating an individualised treatment plan is crucial.

Therapeutic Strategies for Resectable Stage-IIIA N2 Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients: A Network Meta-Analysis

Background:

The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines did not give an explicit comparison of the efficacy between surgery and radiotherapy in treating Stage-III N2 non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, leaving a paucity for clinical reference. Through this study, we try to locate the optimum treatment strategy including surgical type for these patients.

Methods:

A systematic literature search was performed from PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Google Scholars. The endpoints were overall survival (OS), mean OS, and progression-free survival (PFS). The treatments comprised radiotherapy, lobectomy, and pneumonectomy. Network meta-analysis was carried out for calculating the odds ratio (OR) for binary variants. All the analyses implemented Stata 17.0 MP.

Results:

Eight clinical trials reporting 1756 patients met the inclusion criteria. Radiotherapy and surgery were equivalent in improving patients’ OS (OR = 0.842, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.645, 1.099]). The mean OS of patients were similar in terms of radiotherapy, lobectomy, and pneumonectomy. Besides, radiotherapy and surgery had equivalent effects in improving PFS (OR = 0.896, 95% CI: [0.718, 1.117]).

Conclusions:

Since lobectomy and pneumonectomy following neoadjuvant treatments had equivalent efficacy in prolonging OS for patients with stage-IIIA N2 NSCLC compared with definitive radiotherapy, young patients with favorable performance status (0) should try surgery to pursue better prognosis while elderly patients with unfavorable PS or radiosensitive pathology types should accept definitive radiotherapy. More high-quality clinical trials are needed to support our findings.

Unmet needs in the management of unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer: a review after the 'Radio Talk' webinars

INTRODUCTION

Stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a variable entity, encompassing bulky primary tumors, nodal involvement or both. Multidisciplinary evaluation is essential to discuss multiple treatment options, to outline optimal management and to examine the main debated topics and critical issues not addressed by current trials and guidelines that influence daily clinical practice.

AREAS COVERED

From March to May 2021, 5 meetings were scheduled in a webinar format titled 'Radio Talk' due to the COVID-19 pandemic; the faculty was composed of 6 radiation oncologists from 6 different Institutions of Italy, all of them were the referring radiation oncologist for lung cancer treatment at their respective departments and were or had been members of AIRO (Italian Association of Radiation Oncology) Thoracic Oncology Study Group. The topics covered included: pulmonary toxicity, cardiac toxicity, radiotherapy dose, fractionation and volumes, unfit/elderly patients, multidisciplinary management.

EXPERT OPINION

The debate was focused on the unmet needs triggered by case reports, personal experiences and questions; the answers were often not univocal, however, the exchange of opinion and the contribution of different centers confirmed the role of multidisciplinary management and the necessity that the most critical issues should be investigated in clinical trials.

Long-term outcomes of operable stage III NSCLC in the pre-immunotherapy era: results from a pooled analysis of the SAKK 16/96, SAKK 16/00, SAKK 16/01, and SAKK 16/08 trials

Background

Chemoradiotherapy with durvalumab consolidation has yielded excellent results in stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Therefore, it is essential to identify patients who might benefit from a surgical approach.

Material and methods

Data from 437 patients with operable stage III NSCLC enrolled in four consecutive Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK) trials (16/96, 16/00, 16/01, 16/08) were pooled and outcomes were analyzed in 431 eligible patients. All patients were treated with three cycles of induction chemotherapy (cisplatin/docetaxel), followed in some patients by neoadjuvant radiotherapy (44 Gy, 22 fractions) (16/00, 16/01, 16/08) and cetuximab (16/08).

Results

With a median follow-up time of 9.3 years (range 8.5-10.3 years), 5- and 10-year overall survival (OS) rates were 37% and 25%, respectively. Overall, 342 patients (79%) underwent tumor resection, with a complete resection (R0) rate of 80%. Patients (n = 272, 63%) with R0 had significantly longer OS compared to patients who had surgery but incomplete resection (64.8 versus 19.2 months, P < 0.001). OS for patients who achieved pathological complete remission (pCR) (n = 66, 15%) was significantly better compared to resected patients without pCR (86.5 versus 37.0 months, P = 0.003). For patients with pCR, the 5- and 10-year event-free survival and OS rates were 45.7% [95% confidence interval (CI) 32.8% to 57.7%] and 28.1% (95% CI 15.2% to 42.6%), and 58.2% (95% CI 45.2% to 69.2%) and 45.0% (95% CI 31.5% to 57.6%), respectively.

Conclusion

We report favorable long-term outcomes in patients with operable stage III NSCLC treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy with cisplatin and docetaxel ± neoadjuvant sequential radiotherapy from four prospective SAKK trials. Almost two-third of the patients underwent complete resection after neoadjuvant therapy. We confirm R0 resection and pCR as important predictors of outcome.

•

Combined modality treatment in operable stage III NSCLC results in 5- and 10-year survival rates of 37% and 25%.

•

Long-term survival for patients with incomplete resection is poor.

•

Complete resection and pCR are important predictors for outcome.

Outcomes with durvalumab after chemoradiotherapy in stage IIIA-N2 non-small-cell lung cancer: an exploratory analysis from the PACIFIC trial

Background

The phase III PACIFIC trial (NCT02125461) established consolidation durvalumab as standard of care for patients with unresectable, stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and no disease progression following chemoradiotherapy (CRT). In some cases, patients with stage IIIA-N2 NSCLC are considered operable, but the relative benefit of surgery is unclear. We report a post hoc, exploratory analysis of clinical outcomes in the PACIFIC trial, in patients with or without stage IIIA-N2 NSCLC.

Materials and methods

Patients with unresectable, stage III NSCLC and no disease progression after ≥2 cycles of platinum-based, concurrent CRT were randomized 2 : 1 to receive durvalumab (10 mg/kg intravenously; once every 2 weeks for up to 12 months) or placebo, 1-42 days after CRT. The primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS; assessed by blinded independent central review according to RECIST version 1.1) and overall survival (OS). Treatment effects within subgroups were estimated by hazard ratios (HRs) from unstratified Cox proportional hazards models.

Results

Of 713 randomized patients, 287 (40%) had stage IIIA-N2 disease. Baseline characteristics were similar between patients with and without stage IIIA-N2 NSCLC. With a median follow-up of 14.5 months (range: 0.2-29.9 months), PFS was improved with durvalumab versus placebo in both patients with [HR = 0.46; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.33-0.65] and without (HR = 0.62; 95% CI 0.48-0.80) stage IIIA-N2 disease. Similarly, with a median follow-up of 25.2 months (range: 0.2-43.1 months), OS was improved with durvalumab versus placebo in patients with (HR = 0.56; 95% CI 0.39-0.79) or without (HR = 0.78; 95% CI 0.57-1.06) stage IIIA-N2 disease. Durvalumab had a manageable safety profile irrespective of stage IIIA-N2 status.

Conclusions

Consistent with the intent-to-treat population, treatment benefits with durvalumab were confirmed in patients with stage IIIA-N2, unresectable NSCLC. Prospective studies are needed to determine the optimal treatment approach for patients who are deemed operable.

•

The PACIFIC trial established durvalumab after CRT as standard of care for unresectable, stage III NSCLC.

•

The optimum multimodal treatment strategy for patients with potentially resectable, stage IIIA-N2 NSCLC is unknown.

•

Survival benefit with durvalumab was observed in patients with stage IIIA-N2, unresectable NSCLC in this post hoc analysis.

•

Durvalumab after CRT also exhibited a manageable safety profile in this subpopulation from PACIFIC.

•

Studies of surgical vs. non-surgical strategies are needed to establish the best approach for potentially operable patients.

An Observational Study on Treatment Outcomes in Patients With Stage III NSCLC in Taiwan: The KINDLE Study

INTRODUCTION

Patients with stage III NSCLC represent a very heterogenous group that requires different treatment strategies, especially in patients with N2 (2 nearby lymph nodes having cancer)-positive NSCLC and unresectable EGFR-mutant NSCLC. This real-world study may provide more insights into treatment decisions.

METHODS

The KINDLE study is a large, multinational real-world observational study that assessed different treatment strategies in patients with stage III NSCLC. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated and compared using Kaplan-Meier and log-rank testing. Patients were classified on the basis of disease stage, resectability, and treatment modalities.

RESULTS

The Taiwan subgroup enrolled 200 patients. The median PFS and OS values were similar among patients with stage IIIA and stage IIIB disease, but were significantly better in patients who were deemed as a resectable disease than in those who were deemed as an unresectable disease. In patients with N2-positive NSCLC, patients who underwent surgery had better PFS, but not OS, than patients administered with chemoradiotherapy (CRT) (PFS 13.4 vs. 7.3 mo, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.18, p < 0.001; OS 32.4 vs. 22.0 mo, HR = 0.64, p = 0.215). Among patients with unresectable EGFR-mutant NSCLC, OS was significantly poorer after upfront EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) than after upfront CRT with sequential EGFR-TKI (27.4 vs. 49.0 mo, HR = 3.09, p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that surgery could be added as part of therapy for patients with stage III N2-positive NSCLC. Moreover, upfront CRT with sequential EGFR-TKI seems to be appropriate for stage III unresectable EGFR-mutant NSCLC. Further randomized studies are needed to validate these results.

Lobectomy Versus Sublobectomy in Stage IIIA/N2 Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Population-Based Study

Background

The role lobectomy plays in stage IIIA/N2 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is controversial for a long time. What’s more, no previous study concentrates on whether sublobectomy can improve survival outcome for these patients, so we performed this population-based study to investigate whether stage IIIA/N2 NSCLC can benefit from these two surgery types and compare survival outcomes after lobectomy and sublobectomy.

Methods

A total of 21,638 patients diagnosed with stage IIIA/N2 NSCLC between 2004 and 2015 from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database matched our selection criteria. The study cohort included patients who received no surgery (n = 15,951), sublobectomy (n = 628) and lobectomy (n = 5,059). Kaplan–Meier method, Cox regression analyses, and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW)-adjusted Cox regression were used to illustrate the influence of sublobectomy and lobectomy on overall survival (OS) rates in the study cohort and compare these two surgery types.

Results

Multivariable Cox regression analysis showed sublobectomy [HR: 0.584 (95%CI: 0.531–0.644), P-value <0.001; IPTW-adjusted HR: 0.619 (95%CI: 0.605–0.633), P-value <0.001] and lobectomy [HR: 0.439 (95%CI: 0.420–0.459), P-value <0.001; IPTW-adjusted HR: 0.441 (95%CI: 0.431–0.451), P-value <0.001] were both related to better OS rates compared with no surgery, and lobectomy exhibited better survival than sublobectomy [HR: 0.751 (95%CI: 0.680–0.830), P-value <0.001; IPTW-adjusted HR: 0.713 (95%CI: 0.696–0.731), P-value <0.001]. Moreover, the results in subgroup analyses based on age, tumor size and radiotherapy and chemotherapy strategy in all study cohort were consistent.

Conclusion

Stage IIIA/N2 NSCLC patients could benefit from sublobectomy or lobectomy, and lobectomy provided better OS rates than sublobectomy.

Management of Stage III Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: ASCO Guideline

PURPOSE

To provide evidence-based recommendations to practicing clinicians on management of patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

An Expert Panel of medical oncology, thoracic surgery, radiation oncology, pulmonary oncology, community oncology, research methodology, and advocacy experts was convened to conduct a literature search, which included systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials published from 1990 through 2021. Outcomes of interest included survival, disease-free or recurrence-free survival, and quality of life. Expert Panel members used available evidence and informal consensus to develop evidence-based guideline recommendations.

RESULTS

The literature search identified 127 relevant studies to inform the evidence base for this guideline.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Evidence-based recommendations were developed to address evaluation and staging workup of patients with suspected stage III NSCLC, surgical management, neoadjuvant and adjuvant approaches, and management of patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/thoracic-cancer-guidelines.

Surgical challenges in multimodal treatment of N2-stage IIIA non-small cell lung cancer

Locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer, especially mediastinal lymph node metastasis-positive stage IIIA-N2 cancer, is a heterogeneous disease state characterized by anatomically locally advanced disease with latent micrometastases. Thus, surgical resection or radiotherapy alone has historically failed to cure this disease. During the last three decades, persistent efforts have been made to develop a suitable treatment modality to overcome these problems using chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy with surgical resection. However, the role of surgical resection remains unclear, and the standard treatment for stage IIIA-N2 disease is concurrent chemoradiotherapy. In general, adjuvant chemotherapy is indicated for completely resected pathological stage IB disease or lymph node metastasis-positive pathological stage II or IIIA disease. Platinum-based doublet cytotoxic chemotherapy is currently the standard regimen. Additionally, post-operative radiotherapy might be indicated for post-operatively proven mediastinal lymph node metastasis; i.e. clinical N0-1 and pathological N2 disease. With the remarkable progression that has recently been made in the field of chemotherapy, such as advances in molecular targeting agents and immune checkpoint inhibitors, the basic policy of chemotherapy has been shifting to personalized treatment based on the individual patient's oncogene driver mutation status, immune status and other parameters. The same trend is being seen in the treatment of stage IIIA-N2 disease. We should consider the past and upcoming results of several clinical trials to optimize the coming era of personalized treatment.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of treatment-related toxicities of curative and palliative radiation therapy in non-small cell lung cancer

Treatment-related toxicity is an important component in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) management decision-making. Our aim was to evaluate and compare the toxicity rates of curative and palliative radiotherapy with and without chemotherapy. This meta-analysis provides better quantitative estimates of the toxicities compared to individual trials. A systematic review of randomised trials with > 50 unresectable NSCLC patients, treated with curative or palliative conventional radiotherapy (RT) with or without chemotherapy. Data was extracted for oesophagitis, pneumonitis, cardiac events, pulmonary fibrosis, myelopathy and neutropenia by any grade, grade ≥ 3 and treatment-related deaths. Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect method was used to obtain pooled risk ratio. Forty-nine trials with 8609 evaluable patients were included. There was significantly less grade ≥ 3 acute oesophagitis (6.4 vs 22.2%, p < 0.0001) and any grade oesophagitis (70.4 vs 79.0%, p = 0.04) for sequential CRT compared to concurrent CRT, with no difference in pneumonitis (grade ≥ 3 or any grade), neutropenia (grade ≥ 3), cardiac events (grade ≥ 3) or treatment-related deaths. Although the rate of toxicity increased with intensification of treatment with RT, the only significant difference between treatment regimens was the rate of oesophagitis between the use of concurrent and sequential CRT. This can aid clinicians in radiotherapy decision making for NSCLC.

Advances in the Treatment of Stage III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Treatment of stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) traditionally has involved combinations of chemotherapy, radiation, and surgical resection. Although the multimodality approach remains standard, only a fraction of patients with stage III lung cancer can undergo complete resection, and long-term prognosis remains poor. The PACIFIC trial generated significant enthusiasm when it demonstrated that the programmed death ligand-1 inhibitor, durvalumab, improved survival in patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC after completion of definitive concurrent chemoradiation. This article reviews the indications for traditional therapies in stage III NSCLC and highlights ongoing advances that have led to the incorporation of novel therapeutic agents.

Reflection on modern methods: trial emulation in the presence of immortal-time bias. Assessing the benefit of major surgery for elderly lung cancer patients using observational data

Acquiring real-world evidence is crucial to support health policy, but observational studies are prone to serious biases. An approach was recently proposed to overcome confounding and immortal-time biases within the emulated trial framework. This tutorial provides a step-by-step description of the design and analysis of emulated trials, as well as R and Stata code, to facilitate its use in practice. The steps consist in: (i) specifying the target trial and inclusion criteria; (ii) cloning patients; (iii) defining censoring and survival times; (iv) estimating the weights to account for informative censoring introduced by design; and (v) analysing these data. These steps are illustrated with observational data to assess the benefit of surgery among 70-89-year-old patients diagnosed with early-stage lung cancer. Because of the severe unbalance of the patient characteristics between treatment arms (surgery yes/no), a naïve Kaplan-Meier survival analysis of the initial cohort severely overestimated the benefit of surgery on 1-year survival (22% difference), as did a survival analysis of the cloned dataset when informative censoring was ignored (17% difference). By contrast, the estimated weights adequately removed the covariate imbalance. The weighted analysis still showed evidence of a benefit, though smaller (11% difference), of surgery among older lung cancer patients on 1-year survival. Complementing the CERBOT tool, this tutorial explains how to proceed to conduct emulated trials using observational data in the presence of immortal-time bias. The strength of this approach is its transparency and its principles that are easily understandable by non-specialists.

The impact of order with radiation therapy in stage IIIA pathologic N2 NSCLC patients: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to investigate the optimal order of radiation therapy in patients affected by stage IIIA pathologic N2 (IIIA/N2) non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and to identify its potential risk factors.

METHODS

17,654 (8786 men and 8868 women) diagnosed with NSCLC stage IIIA-N2 from 2004 to 2015 patients were identified in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Among the relevant clinical parameters, we evaluated overall survival (OS), lung cancer-specific survival (LCSS) and other variables such as age, sex and tumor size in patients who were treated with different combinations of surgery and radiotherapy strategies.

RESULTS

We discovered that surgery benefit in younger IIIA/N2 NSCLC patients (age ≤ 75), and compared with surgery only, preoperative radiotherapy significantly improved the survival rate most (p < 0.001). When we performed the OS and LCSS analysis in the subgroup of patients' age > 75 years old, who underwent postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) had the highest survival rate (p < 0.001). Multivariate analyses showed that the following parameters had a negative impact on survival: female sex, older age, no chemotherapy, large tumor size, high tumor grade, no surgery or radiotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

In IIIA/N2 NSCLC patients, surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy were associated with improved OS and LCSS. Younger patients underwent surgical resection and chemotherapy, the main population we studied, benefited most from preoperative radiotherapy in all orders with radiation therapy (p < 0.001). In patients more than 75 years old, there was no clear benefit from only surgery, and PORT was recommended in case of having surgery.

Resectable IIIA-N2 Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC): In Search for the Proper Treatment

Locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer accounts for one third of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) at the time of initial diagnosis and presents with a wide range of clinical and pathological heterogeneity. To date, the combined multimodality approach involving both local and systemic control is the gold standard for these patients, since occult distant micrometastatic disease should always be suspected. With the rapid increase in treatment options, the need for an interdisciplinary discussion involving oncologists, surgeons, radiation oncologists and radiologists has become essential. Surgery should be recommended to patients with non-bulky, discrete, or single-level N2 involvement and be included in the multimodality treatment. Resectable stage IIIA patients have been the subject of a number of clinical trials and retrospective analysis, discussing the efficiency and survival benefits on patients treated with the available therapeutic approaches. However, most of them have some limitations due to their retrospective nature, lack of exact pretreatment staging, and the involvement of heterogeneous populations leading to the awareness that each patient should undergo a tailored therapy in light of the nature of his tumor, its extension and his performance status.

Interdisciplinary multimodality management of stage III nonsmall cell lung cancer

Stage III nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) comprises about one-third of NSCLC patients and is very heterogeneous with varying and mostly poor prognosis. It is also called "locoregionally or locally advanced disease". Due to its heterogeneity a general schematic management approach is not appropriate. Usually a combination of local therapy (surgery or radiotherapy, depending on functional, technical and oncological operability) with systemic platinum-based doublet chemotherapy and, recently, followed by immune therapy is used. A more aggressive approach of triple agent chemotherapy or two local therapies (surgery and radiotherapy, except for specific indications) has no benefit for overall survival. Until now tumour stage and the general condition of the patient are the most relevant prognostic factors. Characterising the tumour molecularly and immunologically may lead to a more personalised and effective approach. At the moment, after an exact staging and functional evaluation, an interdisciplinary discussion amongst the tumour board is warranted and offers the best management strategy.

Induction Therapies Plus Surgery Versus Exclusive Radiochemotherapy in Stage IIIA/N2 Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC)

In spite of the growing body of data from prospective randomized clinical trials (PRCTs) and meta-analyses, the optimal treatment approach in patients with stage IIIA non-small cell lung cancer remains unknown. This review focuses on the available data directly confronting induction chemotherapy or induction radiochemotherapy (RT-CHT) when followed by surgery with exclusive RT-CHT. Seven PRCTs and 4 meta-analyses investigated this issue. In addition, numerous retrospective studies attempted to identify potential predictors and/or prognosticators that may have influenced the decision to offer surgery in a particular patient subgroup. Several retrospective studies also evaluated exclusive RT-CHT in this setting. There is not a single piece of the highest level of evidence (PRCT or MA) showing any advantage of induction therapies followed by surgery over exclusive RT-CHT with the former treatment option leading to significantly more morbidity and mortality. Although several studies attempted to identify patient subgroups favoring induction therapies followed by surgery, they have invariably been retrospective in nature, and their results have never been reproduced even in other retrospective setting. Furthermore, no PRCT investigated potential pretreatment patient and/or tumor-related predictors of surgical multimodality success. Exclusive RT-CHT achieves similar results to induction therapies followed by surgery but with less morbidity and mortality. This is accompanied with the finding that no pretreatment predictor exists to enable identification of even a subgroup of stage IIIA/pN2 patients benefiting from any surgical approach.

The Optimal Treatment for Stage IIIA-N2 Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Network Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The optimal treatment for stage IIIA-N2 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is controversial. We aimed to address this important issue through a Bayesian network meta-analysis.

METHODS

We performed a search of electronic databases for randomized controlled trials comparing the following treatments: surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and their multiple combinations before March 25, 2018. Pooled data on overall survival and treatment-related deaths were analyzed within the Bayesian framework.

RESULTS

Eighteen eligible trials reporting 13 treatments were included. In terms of overall survival, neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy or radiotherapy, which tended to be consistent (hazard ratio [HR] 1.14, 95% credible interval [CrI] 0.21 to 5.93), ranked superior to other treatments. Notably, neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery and adjuvant radiotherapy was significantly more effective in prolonging survival than surgery alone (HR 0.38, 95% CrI 0.18 to 0.81), surgery plus adjuvant radiotherapy (HR 0.51, 95% CrI 0.29 to 0.92) and potentially surgery plus adjuvant chemotherapy (HR 0.49, 95% CrI 0.23 to 1.05). Overall, with 29% as the highest possibility of causing the fewest treatment-related deaths, neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy or radiotherapy was the safest treatment option.

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy or radiotherapy has the greatest possibility to be the optimal treatment with the best overall survival and fewest treatment-related deaths for stage IIIA-N2 NSCLC.

Role of pneumonectomy for lung cancer in current scenario: An Indian perspective

BACKGROUND

Surgical treatment for lung cancer has evolved from pneumonectomy to lobectomy/sleeve resection around the world. Although condemned for poor outcomes, pneumonectomy may still be required in a select group of patients in developing countries. With the better patient selection, optimization of medical comorbidities, better perioperative care; pneumonectomy may show better results. Thus, there is a need to reconsider the role of pneumonectomy in patients with locally advanced lung cancer in the current scenario.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The aim of this study was to analyze the demographic and clinicopathologic profile of lung cancer patients and the role of pneumonectomy at a tertiary cancer center in India. The records of patients, who underwent surgery for lung cancer at our institute from January 2011 to April 2014, were analyzed retrospectively, and various parameters in pneumonectomy were compared to lobectomy patients.

RESULTS

Out of 48 patients undergoing major lung resections, nearly 80% patients were symptomatic at presentation and were mostly in advanced stages, thus requiring neoadjuvant chemotherapy in 45.8% cases and pneumonectomy in 41.6% patients. There was no difference in morbidity and mortality in pneumonectomy (25%, 5%) versus lobectomy (21.2%, 3.5%). Disease-free survival at 1, 2, and 3 years after pneumonectomy (71.8%, 51.4%, and 42.8%) was comparable to lobectomy (73.3%, 66.1%, and 55.6%). After neoadjuvant therapy, survival was not affected by the type of surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

In the Indian scenario, as the majority of lung cancer patients present at an advanced stage, pneumonectomy still plays a major role, and the acceptable postoperative outcome can be achieved with aggressive perioperative management.

Definitive radiochemotherapy versus surgery within multimodality treatment in stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) - a cumulative meta-analysis of the randomized evidence

Randomized trials were analyzed comparing surgery with definitive radiotherapy as local curative treatment options within the framework of different multimodality treatments for patients with locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Endpoints for comparison of treatment results were overall survival, progression-free survival, and toxicity.

Hazard ratios (HR) were taken to measure treatment effects and pooled using a random effects model.

Overall survival was not significantly different between surgical and definitive radiotherapy arms (HR=0.92 [95%CI 0.82-1.04], p=0.19, χ²-test). There was heterogeneity with respect to survival at 2 years (p<0.0001, Cochran Mantel Haenszel (CMH)-test). Latter trials using concurrent radiochemotherapy (ccRT/CT) showed better survival at 2 years (risk ratio of death=0.80 [95%CI 0.73-0.88], p<0.0001, CMH-test). In the ccRT/CT trials, survival in the surgical arms tended to have an excess early mortality before 6 months of follow-up and a lesser hazard rate in comparison to definitive ccRT/CT thereafter (HR=0.78 [95%CI 0.63-0.98]). Over all trials, treatment associated mortality was higher in the surgical arms (risk ratio=3.56 [95% CI: 1.65-7.72], p=0.0005, CMH test). With respect to progression-free survival, no significant differences were found (HR=0.91 [95%CI: 0.73 - 1.13]), although the largest conducted trial found an advantage for the surgical arm (HR=0.77 [95%CI: 0.62-0.96]).

Induction therapy followed by resection or definitive radiochemotherapy represent valuable curative treatment options for patients with stage III NSCLC, the individual treatment choice deserves careful interdisciplinary evaluation and counseling. Based on the broad heterogeneity of patient groups in these stages further research on predictive factors supporting individual therapy selection is necessary.

Clinical characteristics and prognoses of patients treated surgically for metastatic lung tumors

The clinical characteristics of metastatic lung tumors are not well understood. To explore the surgical indications, surgical modes, and factors that influence postoperative outcomes, we analyzed clinical data from 42 patients with metastatic lung tumors who received surgical treatment at Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital between January 2000 and January 2014. Gender, age, nature of resections, surgical mode, smoking index, disease-free intervals (DFIs), number of metastatic lesions, and lymph node metastases were analyzed. Patients were followed for 6 to 98 months. We found that surgical treatment is feasible for resectable metastatic lung tumors, though postoperative radiochemotherapy had no significant effect on postoperative survival rates among patients with metastatic lung tumors. No patients died perioperatively. The 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year survival rates after surgical resection of metastatic lung tumors were 88.1%, 45.7%, and 34.6%, respectively. Univariate analysis indicated that DFIs and lymph node metastasis correlated with patient prognoses, while multivariate analysis indicated these two variables were independent prognostic factors. Thus surgical treatment may be indicated, depending on patients' specific condition, to lengthen DFIs in patients with metastatic lung tumors with or without evident lymph node metastasis.

Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Stage III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

The local management of stage III non-small cell lung cancer is controversial. Although definitive chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is considered a standard-of-care in the curative management of the disease, inadequate local control outcomes have led to various treatment strategies that incorporate surgical resection. Surgery alone has long been recognized as insufficient for this stage, and thus neoadjuvant strategies have been developed to treat micrometastatic disease and increase the probability of a complete resection. The optimal induction strategy has not yet been defined, however, with arguments favoring either preoperative chemotherapy or CRT. In this article, the data supporting the use of neoadjuvant CRT and the randomized literature comparing the two approaches will be reviewed. The article will conclude with summary comparisons of these induction paradigms.

Upfront surgery as first-line therapy in selected patients with stage IIIA non-small cell lung cancer

OBJECTIVE

Surgery plays an important role in the multidisciplinary treatment strategy for patients with stage IIIA non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Besides induction therapy, patients could benefit from surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy. This study analyzed a subset of patients with pIIIA NSCLC who underwent upfront surgery as first-line therapy.

METHODS

Selected patients with pIIIA NSCLC who received upfront surgery were retrospectively analyzed. Clinicopathologic characteristics and survival outcomes including progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 668 patients were identified. Five hundred sixty-five patients received adjuvant chemotherapy, and 157 patients received adjuvant radiotherapy after surgery. The median PFS and OS were 17.0 and 44.0 months, respectively. The 3-year and 5-year PFS rates were 31.6% and 21.0%, and the 3-year and 5-year OS rates were 54.7% and 43.0%. Patients with adenocarcinoma (AD) had better OS than those with squamous cell carcinoma (5-year OS: P = .026). Patients with low-grade AD (acinar and papillar) had a similar PFS and OS compared with patients with high-grade AD (solid, micropapillary, and mucinous) (5-year PFS: P = .894; 5-year OS: P = .439). Patients with mutated epidermal growth factor receptor had a similar OS to patients with wild-type epidermal growth factor receptor (5-year OS: P = .121). Patients with clinical N0 status (P = .004) and patients with single-station of pathologic N2 (P < .001) had better OS.

CONCLUSIONS

Upfront surgery followed by adjuvant therapy may provide favorable survival outcomes for selected patients with pIIIA NSCLC, especially for patients with AD or patients with clinical N0 and pathologic single-station N2 diseases.

Optimal managements of stage IIIA (N2) non-small cell lung cancer patients: a population-based survival analysis

Background

This study aimed to investigate the optimal management of stage IIIA (cN2) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients and determine potential predictive factors.

Methods

We extracted patients diagnosed as NSCLC stage IIIA (cN2) between 2004 and 2011 from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Overall survival (OS) and lung cancer-specific survival (LCSS) were compared among patients given different clinical managements by Kaplan-Meier method. Other variables such as age, sex and tumor size were analyzed to explore the factors associated with outcomes.

Results

A total of 98,700 IIIA-cN2 NSCLC patients were identified from SEER database. Survival of patients treated with surgery was better than that of patients treated by radiotherapy alone (P<0.001). Radiation prior to surgery significantly improved the survival in comparison with surgery alone (P<0.001). In the subgroups of OS analysis, age >65 (P=0.902), adenocarcinoma (P=0.279), tumor size ≤3 cm (P=0.170), well differentiated (P=0.360) patients, preoperative radiotherapy improved survival insignificantly compared with surgery alone.

Conclusions

Preoperative radiation with surgery had the most encouraging survival outcomes in stage IIIA-cN2 NSCLC patients compared with radiation or surgery alone. No significant outcome improvement was shown between postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) and surgery alone.

Resectable Clinical N2 Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer; What Is the Optimal Treatment Strategy? An Update by the British Thoracic Society Lung Cancer Specialist Advisory Group

Patients and clinicians are faced with uncertainty as to the optimal treatment strategy for potentially resectable NSCLC in which there is clinical evidence of involvement of the ipsilateral mediastinum. Randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses have failed to demonstrate superiority of one bimodality strategy over another (chemotherapy plus surgery versus chemotherapy plus radiotherapy). One trial of trimodality treatment with chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgery demonstrated an improvement in progression-free, but not overall, survival versus chemotherapy and radiotherapy. There are a number of limitations to the data in this complex and heterogenous patient group. No randomized controlled trial has specifically studied patients with single-station N2 disease versus multistation N2 disease. When discussing treatment for fit patients with potentially resectable cN2 NSCLC, lung cancer teams should consider trimodality treatment with chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgery or bimodality treatment with chemotherapy and either surgery or radiotherapy. We advocate that all patients see both a thoracic surgeon and the oncology team to discuss these different approaches.

Surgically Managed Clinical Stage IIIA-Clinical N2 Lung Cancer in The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Database

BACKGROUND

The role of surgical resection in patients with clinical stage IIIA-N2 positive (cIIIA-N2) lung cancer is controversial, partly because of the variability in short- and long-term outcomes. The objective of this study was to characterize the management of cIIIA-N2 lung cancer in The Society of Thoracic Surgeons General Thoracic Surgery Database (STS-GTSD).

METHODS

The STS-GTSD was queried for patients who underwent operations for cIIIA-N2 lung cancer between 2002 and 2012. A subset of patients aged older than 65 years was linked to Medicare data.

RESULTS

Identified were 3,319 surgically managed, cIIIA-N2 patients, including 1,784 (54%) treated with upfront resection (treatment naïve upfront surgery group, and 1,535 (46%) with induction therapy. A positron emission tomography scan was documented in 93% of patients, and 51% of patients were coded in STS-GTSD as having undergone invasive mediastinal staging. Nodal overstaging (cN2→pN0/N1) was observed in 43% of upfront surgery patients. Lobectomy was performed in 69% of patients and pneumonectomy in 11%. Operative mortality was similar between patients treated with upfront surgery (1.9%) and induction therapy (2.5%, p = .2583). The unadjusted Kaplan-Meier estimate of 5-year survival of cIII-N2 patients treated with induction therapy then resection was 35%.

CONCLUSIONS

STS surgeons achieve excellent short- and long-term results treating predominantly lobectomy-amenable cIIIA-N2 lung cancer. However, prevalent overstaging and abstention from induction therapy suggest "overcoding" of false positives on imaging or variable compliance with current guidelines for cIIIA-N2 lung cancer. Efforts are needed to improve clinical stage determination and guideline compliance in the GTSD for this cohort.

Combined modality therapy in Stage IIIA non-small cell lung cancer: clarity or confusion despite the highest level of evidence?

Recent years have witnessed a number of clinical trials in Stage IIIA non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) comparing (A) induction chemotherapy (CHT) with induction CHT and radiotherapy (RT), each followed by surgery; (B) either induction CHT or induction RT-CHT, each followed by surgery, with definitive RT-CHT (no surgery). Due to the heterogeneity of patient, tumor and treatment characteristics across these trials, various meta-analyses (MAs) have been performed to define the optimal treatment approach in this setting for this clinical presentation. Six such MAs exist. In spite of the differences between MAs, it appears that RT does not add extra benefit to induction CHT administered before surgery, and that a trimodality (i.e. including surgery) regimen is not superior to definitive concurrent RT-CHT. While one can consider both induction CHT followed by surgery and exclusive concurrent RT-CHT as feasible in this setting, lack of pre-treatment predictive factors identifying patients who might preferentially benefit from a surgical approach limits its use to well-planned clinical trials.

Optimum treatment for mediastinal lymph node positive (N2) resectable non-small cell lung cancer: what is the role for surgery?

INTRODUCTION

A third of patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) present with Stage III disease with mediastinal (N2) nodal involvement representing an extremely heterogeneous population with a generally poor prognosis. Areas covered: This article describes the complexity of Stage III-N2 patients reviewing the outcomes of key clinical trials while highlighting the trial designs and subtleties that have created controversy in management. Both bimodality approaches combining chemotherapy with either surgery or radiation and trimodality approaches combining chemotherapy with both local therapies are reviewed. Finally, prognostic factors and future directions are explored for the management of this population. Expert commentary: Upfront surgery is not recommended for patients with Stage III-N2 NSCLC. Neoadjuvant approaches with both chemotherapy and chemoradiation are acceptable in a multidisciplinary setting if appropriate surgery is performed by a dedicated thoracic surgeon. Non-operative candidates should receive definitive concurrent chemoradiation. Innovative approaches are necessary to improve outcomes in this population.

Role of surgery in N2 NSCLC: pros

The optimal management of clinical N2 Stage IIIA non-small cell lung cancer is still controversial. For a cure of locally advanced IIIA/N2 non-small cell lung cancer, the control of both local regions and possible distant micrometastases is crucial. Chemotherapy is generally expected to prevent distant recurrence. For local tumor control, radiotherapy or surgery has been adopted singly or in combination. If a complete resection can be safely performed, surgery remains the strongest modality for 'eradicating' local disease. Many retrospective studies have reported a possible survival benefit of induction treatment followed by surgery in selected patients with IIIA/N2 non-small cell lung cancer; however, randomized Phase III trials have failed to demonstrate the superiority of induction treatment followed by surgery over chemoradiotherapy, mainly because of the heterogeneity of the N2 status. IIIA/N2 non-small cell lung cancer consists of a heterogeneous group of disease ranging from microscopically single station to radiologically bulky ipsilateral multi-station mediastinal lymph node involvement. A recent definition proposed by the American College of Chest Physicians classified non-small cell lung cancer based on the N2 status, such as discrete or infiltrative type, and recommendations were made according to this N2 status, with definitive chemoradiotherapy recommended for infiltrative clinical N2 and definitive chemoradiotherapy or induction treatment followed by surgery recommended for other cases. Thus, the introduction of a multimodality treatment strategy seems to be necessary for the improved prognosis of non-small cell lung cancer patients with IIIA/N2 disease. In this review, we discuss the role of surgery and the optimal surgical management for patients with IIIA/N2 non-small cell lung cancer.

Five-Year Survival Among Stage IIIA Lung Cancer Patients Receiving Two Different Treatment Modalities

Background

Five-year survival rates among stage IIIA lung cancer patients range between 2% and 15%, and there is currently no consensus regarding optimal treatment approaches for these patients. The current investigation evaluated survival outcomes among stage IIIA lung cancer patients receiving 2 different treatment modalities, neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by resection versus chemoradiation alone.

Material/Methods

This retrospective study is based on 127 patients attending the Lung Cancer Evaluation Center at Stony Brook Cancer Center between 2002 and 2014. Patients were treated either with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by resection or a regimen of chemoradiation alone. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to compare survival outcomes between groups and Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate treatment effects on survival, while adjusting for possible confounders.

Results

Approximately one-fourth (n=33) of patients received neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery, whereas 94 patients received definitive chemoradiation. Patients in the surgical group were found to be significantly younger than those receiving chemoradiation alone (60.1 vs. 67.9 years, respectively; p=0.001). Five-year survival among patients receiving preoperative chemotherapy followed by resection was significantly higher than that among patients receiving chemoradiation alone (63% vs. 19%, respectively; p<0.001), whereas the hazard ratio (HR) was 3–4 times greater in the latter group (HR=3.77, 95% confidence interval=1.87, 7.61).

Conclusions

Findings from this study indicate that preoperative chemotherapy followed by resection can improve survival outcomes for stage IIIA lung cancer patients compared with chemoradiation alone. The results reflect a select surgical group of patients; thus, the data highlight the need to develop new therapies that may result in more patients being viable surgical candidates.

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or chemotherapy followed by surgery is superior to that followed by definitive chemoradiation or radiotherapy in stage IIIA (N2) nonsmall-cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis and system review

BACKGROUND

Approximately 30% of all cases of nonsmall-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are of a locally advanced (IIIA or IIIB) stage. However, surgical therapy for patients with stage IIIA (N2) NSCLC is associated with a disappointing 5-year survival rate. The optimal treatment for stage IIIA (N2) NSCLC is still in dispute.

METHODS

A literature search was performed in the PubMed, Embase, and MEDLINE databases (last search updated in March 2015), and a meta-analysis of the available data was conducted. Two authors independently extracted data from each eligible study.

RESULTS

A total of nine studies, including five randomized controlled trials and four retrospective studies, were enrolled in this meta-analysis. Significant homogeneity (χ (2)=49.62, P=0.000, I (2)=81.9%) was detected between four of the studies, including a total of 11,948 selected cases. Among the nine studies that investigated overall survival, the pooled hazard ratio (HR) was 0.70 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.56-0.87; P=0.000). Subgroup analyses were performed according to the study design and the extent of resection. We observed a statistically significant better outcome after lobectomy (pooled HR: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.47-0.58; P=0.000) than after pneumonectomy (pooled HR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.69-0.98; P=0.028). Unfortunately, there was no significant difference between the randomized controlled studies, as the pooled HR was 0.94 (95% CI: 0.81-1.09; P=0.440).

CONCLUSION

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or chemotherapy followed by surgery (particularly lobectomy) is superior to following these therapies with definitive chemoradiation or radiotherapy, particularly in patients undergoing lobectomy.

The Complementary Nature of Patient-Reported Outcomes and Adverse Event Reporting in Cooperative Group Oncology Clinical Trials: A Pooled Analysis (NCCTG N0591)

CONTEXT

Clinical trials use clinician-graded adverse events (AEs) and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) to describe symptoms.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to examine the agreement between PROs and AEs in the clinical trial setting.

METHODS

Patient-level data were pooled from seven North Central Cancer Treatment Group, two Southwest Oncology Group, and three Radiation Therapy Oncology Group lung studies that included both PROs and AE data. Ten-point changes (on a 0-100 scale) in PRO scores were considered clinically significant differences (CSDs). PRO score changes were compared to AE grade (Gr) categories (2+ yes vs. no and 3+ yes vs. no) using Wilcoxon rank-sum or two-sample t-tests between Gr categories. Incidence rates and concordance of CSD in PRO scores and AE Gr categories were compiled. Spearman correlations were computed between PRO scores and AE severity.

RESULTS

PROs completed by patients (n = 1013) were the Uniscale, Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung (FACT-L), Symptom Distress Scale, and/or Functional Living Index-Cancer. Significantly worse PRO score changes were found for the FACT-L in patients with Gr 2+ AEs. Worse scores were seen for the Uniscale for patients with Gr 2+ AEs (P = 0.07) and LCSS for patients with Gr 3+ AEs (P = 0.09). Agreement between incidence of any Gr 2+ (Gr 3+) AE and a CSD in PROs ranged from 27% to 67% (36%-61%). Correlations between PRO scores and AE severity were low: -0.06 Uniscale, -0.03 LCSS, 0.10 FACT-L, -0.11 Symptom Distress Scale, and -0.51 Functional Living Index-Cancer.

CONCLUSION

These results support previous work and an a priori hypothesis that AEs and PROs measure differing aspects of the disease experience and are complementary.

Randomized controlled trials of induction treatment and surgery versus combined chemotherapy and radiotherapy in stages IIIA-N2 NSCLC: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of induction treatment plus surgery for improving postoperative survival in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in stages IIIA-N2 is controversial, especially compared with the combined chemotherapy and radiotherapy. We therefore performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the published phase III randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to quantitatively evaluate the survival benefit of preoperative induction treatment vs. combined chemoradiotherapy.

METHODS

We systematically searched for trials that started after January, 1980. We excluded relevant studies using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) standards. Our primary endpoint, overall survival (OS), was defined as the time from randomisation until death (any cause). Secondary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS). PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane library were used for the study search. All analyses were by intention to treat.

RESULTS

Three studies (1,084 patients) were centrally selected and analyzed for the present meta-analysis. Combination of the three randomized controlled trials showed that there was no significant benefit of induction treatment plus surgery compared to combined chemoradiotherapy on 2-year OS [risk ratio (RR) =1.00; 95% CI, 0.85-1.17; P=0.98] and 4-year OS (RR =1.13; 95% CI, 0.85-1.51; P=0.39). However, from the subgroup analysis, it showed a significant PFS benefit (RR =1.78; 95% CI, 1.08-2.92; P=0.02) regarded chemoradiotherapy as preoperative induction treatment, compared with chemotherapy alone for induction treatment (PFS) (RR =1.05; 95% CI, 0.61-1.81; P=0.86).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant OS benefit of induction treatment plus surgery compared with combined chemoradiotherapy in patients with NSCLC (stages IIIA-pN2) at 2 and 4 years. However, we could conclude PFS could be improved when radiation therapy was added into preoperative induction treatment. Given the potential advantages of adding radiation preoperatively, clinicians should consider using this treatment strategy in the stage IIIA-N2 disease after fully assessment of the patients.

The Role of Surgical Resection in Stage IIIA Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Decision and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of combination chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgical intervention (CRS) vs definitive chemotherapy and radiotherapy (CR) in clinical stage IIIA non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients at academic and nonacademic centers.

METHODS

Patients with clinical stage IIIA NSCLC receiving CR or CRS from 1998 to 2010 were identified in the National Cancer Data Base. Propensity score matching on patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics was performed. Medicare allowable charges were used for treatment costs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was based on probabilistic 5-year survival and calculated as cost per life-year gained.

RESULTS

We identified 5,265 CR and CRS matched patient pairs. Surgical resection imparted an increased effectiveness of 0.83 life-years, with an ICER of $17,618. Among nonacademic centers, 1,634 matched CR and CRS patients demonstrated a benefit with surgical resection of 0.86 life-years gained, for an ICER of $17,124. At academic centers, 3,201 matched CR and CRS patients had increased survival of 0.81 life-years with surgical resection, for an ICER of $18,144. Finally, 3,713 CRS patients were matched between academic and nonacademic centers. Academic center surgical patients had an increased effectiveness of 1.5 months gained and dominated the model with lower surgical cost estimates associated with lower 30-day mortality rates.

CONCLUSIONS

In stage IIIA NSCLC, the selective addition of surgical resection to CR is cost-effective compared with definitive chemoradiation therapy at nonacademic and academic centers. These conclusions are valid over a range of clinically meaningful variations in cost and treatment outcomes.

Adding radiation to induction chemotherapy does not improve survival of patients with operable clinical N2 non-small cell lung cancer

OBJECTIVE

Radiotherapy is commonly used in induction regimens for patients with non-small cell lung cancer with operable mediastinal nodal disease, although evidence has not shown a benefit over induction chemotherapy alone. We compared outcomes between induction chemotherapy and induction chemoradiation using the National Cancer Data Base.

METHODS

Induction radiation use and survival of patients who underwent lobectomy or pneumonectomy after induction chemotherapy for clinical T1-3N2M0 non-small cell lung cancer in the National Cancer Data Base from 2003 to 2006 were assessed using logistic regression, general linear regression, Kaplan-Meier, and Cox proportional hazard analysis.

RESULTS

Of 1362 patients who met study criteria, 834 (61%) underwent induction chemoradiation and 528 (39%) underwent induction chemotherapy. Lobectomy was performed in 82% of patients (n = 1111), and pneumonectomy was performed in 18% of patients (n = 251). Pneumonectomy was performed more often after induction chemoradiation than after induction chemotherapy (20% vs 16%, P = .04). Downstaging from N2 to N0/N1 was more common with induction chemoradiation compared with induction chemotherapy (58% vs 46%, P < .01), but 5-year survival of patients receiving induction chemoradiation and patients receiving induction chemotherapy was similar in unadjusted analysis (41% vs 41%, P = .41). In multivariable analysis, the addition of radiation to induction chemotherapy also was not associated with a survival benefit (hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% confidence interval, 0.89-1.18; P = .73).

CONCLUSIONS

Induction chemoradiation is used in the majority of patients with non-small cell lung cancer with N2 disease who undergo induction therapy before surgical resection, but it is not associated with improved survival compared with induction chemotherapy.

Is There a Survival Benefit in Patients With Stage IIIA (N2) Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Receiving Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and/or Radiotherapy Prior to Surgical Resection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Optimal management of clinical stage IIIA (N2) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is controversial. This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis of published randomized control trials of multimodality management strategies for NSCLC. We conducted a comprehensive literature search of the Pubmed, Embase, Medline, and CENTRAL databases for relevant studies comparing patients with stage IIIA (N2) NSCLC undergoing surgery alone, chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy alone, or surgical resection after neoadjuvant treatment with chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy. We estimated hazard ratios, odds ratios (ORs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for survival data. Seven trials involving 1049 patients were included in this study. There was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) or progression-free survival (PFS) in stage IIIA (N2) NSCLC patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy prior to surgical resection compared to those who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy prior to radical radiotherapy. There was a significant increase in pathological complete remission in the mediastinal lymph nodes in stage IIIA (N2) NSCLC patients who received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy prior to surgical resection compared to those who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (OR 3.61; 95% CI 1.07-12.15; P = 0.04), but no difference in tumor downstaging, OS, or PFS. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy prior to surgical resection do not appear to be clinically superior to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy prior to definitive radiotherapy in IIIA (N2) NSCLC patients. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy does not improve survival compared to neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone.

Outcome of surgery versus radiotherapy after induction treatment in patients with N2 disease: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials

Objective

Chemoradiotherapy is often considered the ‘standard of care’ for patients with N2 disease. The aim was to evaluate survival outcomes of patients with N2 disease in multimodality trials of chemotherapy, radiotherapy and surgery.

Methods

Systematic review and meta-analyses (random and fixed effects) were performed. Searches of Medline and Embase (1980–2013) were conducted. Abstracts from thoracic scientific meetings were searched. Reference lists of all relevant studies were reviewed. All studies of patients with N2 disease who received induction chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy and randomised to surgery or radiotherapy were included. No language restrictions were imposed. The main outcome was overall survival.

Results

805 publications were identified. 519 and 281 were excluded because they were not primary results from randomised trials (or did not include N2 disease) or did not compare surgery with radiotherapy, respectively. The final six trials consisted of 868 patients. In four trials, patients received induction chemotherapy and in two trials patients received induction chemoradiotherapy. The HR comparing patients randomised to surgery after chemotherapy was 1.01 (95% CI 0.82 to 1.23; p=0.954) whereas for patients randomised to surgery after chemoradiotherapy was 0.87 (0.74 to 1.02; p=0.078). The overall HR of all pooled trials was 0.92 (0.81 to 1.04; p=0.179).

Conclusions

In trials where patients received surgery as part of bimodality (with chemotherapy) or trimodality (with chemoradiotherapy) treatment, overall survival was not significantly better than radiotherapy (with chemotherapy) or combination chemoradiotherapy alone.

National patterns of care and outcomes after combined modality therapy for stage IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer

INTRODUCTION

The role of surgery in addition to chemotherapy and radiation for stage IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains controversial. Because there are limited data on the benefit from surgery in this setting, we evaluated the use of combined modality therapy nationally and explored the outcomes with and without the addition of surgery.

METHODS

Patient variables and treatment-related outcomes were abstracted for patients with clinical stage IIIA NSCLC from the National Cancer Database. Patients receiving chemotherapy and radiation were compared with those undergoing chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery (CRS) in any sequence.

RESULTS

Between 1998 and 2010, 61,339 patients underwent combined modality treatment for clinical stage IIIA NSCLC. Of these, 51,979 (84.7%) received chemotherapy and radiation while 9360 (15.3%) underwent CRS. Patients in the CRS group were younger, more likely female patients and Caucasians, and had smaller tumors and lower Charlson comorbidity scores. The 30-day surgical mortality was 200 of 8993 (2.2%). The median overall survival favored the CRS group in both unmatched (32.4 months versus 15.7 months, p < 0.001) and matched analysis based on patient characteristics (34.3 versus 18.4 months, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

There is significant heterogeneity in the treatment of stage IIIA NSCLC in the United States. Patients selected for surgery in addition to chemoradiation therapy seem to have better long-term survival.

Standard treatment option in stage III non-small-cell lung cancer: case against trimodal therapy and consolidation drug therapy

Prospective randomized trials and meta-analyses established concurrent radiochemotherapy (RT-CHT) as standard treatment approach in patients with inoperable, locally advanced (stage IIIA and B) non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In patients with either clinically (c) or pathologically (p) staged disease (stage IIIA), including those with pN2 disease, trimodal therapy was also frequently practiced in the past and is currently still advocated by large cooperative groups and organizations. Similarly, consolidation CHT provided after concurrent RT-CHT was suggested to be feasible and effective in inoperable stage III NSCLC. Contrasting these practices and suggestions, there is no evidence that trimodal therapy in stage IIIA (clinically or pathologically staged) or consolidation CHT in inoperable stage III NSCLC plays any role in its treatment. In both cases, evidence clearly demonstrates that concurrent RT-CHT is of similar efficacy and less toxic, and it should be considered a standard treatment option for all patients with stage III NSCLC.

Multimodality treatment with surgery for locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with n2 disease: a review article

Stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is composed of a heterogeneous population of lesions (ie, T4N0-3, T3N1-3, and T1a-2aN2-3), which makes it difficult to establish a definitive treatment strategy. Although several retrospective and prospective studies have been conducted to investigate the significance of multimodality treatments with surgery for patients with resectable stage III NSCLC, the role of surgery still remains controversial. In this article, we review the results of retrospective and prospective studies that have investigated the significance of multimodality treatment with surgery for patients with stage III NSCLC, particularly those with mediastinal lymph node metastasis, and the implications for the treatment of this controversial subset of patients.

Current status of induction treatment for N2-Stage III non-small cell lung cancer

Locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), particularly clinical Stage IIIA NSCLC with mediastinal lymph node metastasis, is known to be quite heterogeneous, comprising approximately one-fourth of cases of NSCLC. In this subset, patients with a minor tumor load in the mediastinal lymph nodes, such as microscopically or pathologically proven N2 in the resected specimens, are treated with surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy. Meanwhile, the current standard of care for patients with bulky or infiltrative N2 disease is concurrent chemoradiotherapy. The potential role of surgery in multi-modality treatment for clinical N2-Stage IIIA remains controversial. Several prospective clinical trials of this subset have been conducted; however, the heterogeneity of the N2 status and differences in chemotherapy regimens and/or radiation modalities between clinical trials make the results difficult to compare. No optimal chemotherapy regimen has been established to control possible micrometastasis, and radiotherapy is often used to achieve maximum local disease control and minimize post-surgical complications. This review summarizes the findings of prospective clinical trials that assessed the role of surgery in treating clinical N2-Stage IIIA patients within the last two decades and discusses the present status of induction treatment followed by surgery for clinical N2-Stage IIIA NSCLC.

Classifications of n2 non-small-cell lung cancer based on the number and rate of metastatic mediastinal lymph nodes

BACKGROUND

Subdivisions of N2 non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cases based on metastatic status of mediastinal and non-mediastinal lymph nodes have been proposed. This study aimed to evaluate N2 disease classification by mediastinal lymph nodes alone.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We reviewed 187 patients with NSCLC pN1-N2 who were surgically treated to evaluate the proposed classifications: number, rate, nodal zone of metastatic lymph nodes. We evaluated N2 disease classification based on mediastinal lymph nodes alone in 136 pN2 cases.

RESULTS

The number (1-2, 3-5, and 6 ≤) or rate (15%≥, 15%< to 40%>, and 40%≤) classification based on all metastatic lymph nodes was validated by the log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards model. After reclassification by number or rate of metastatic mediastinal lymph nodes alone, a significant difference was maintained among all groups except between the 3-5 and 6 ≤ groups. The 5-year survival rates of the 1-2, 3-5, and 6 ≤ groups were 63.4%, 32.4%, and 18.2%, respectively (1-2 vs. 3-5, P = .015; 3-5 vs. 6 ≤, P = .134). With rate classification, the 5-year survival rates of the 15%≥, 15%-40% (15%< to 40%>), and 40%≤ groups were 56.0%, 27.3%, and 5.04%, respectively (15%≥ vs. 15%-40%, P = .011; 15-40% vs. 40%≤, P = .011). The Spearman's rank correlation coefficient showed a highly significant correlation of metastatic status between mediastinal lymph nodes and all lymph nodes (both P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Classification by number and rate of mediastinal lymph nodes alone enabled subdivision of N2 NSCLC cases. Metastatic status of mediastinal lymph nodes reflects that of all lymph nodes and is prognostic indicators.