Definitive Treatment of Poor-Risk Patients with Stage I Lung Cancer: A Single Institution Experience

Special Considerations and Techniques of Interventions in Lung Transplant Recipients

Lung transplant remains an important treatment option for patients with end-stage lung diseases providing improvement in survival rates and quality of life. Specialized considerations should be applied with interventions of lung transplant recipients as they host specific anatomic variations and high risk towards certain complications. In this article, we highlight the role of interventional radiology for lung transplant recipients along with discussion of interventional techniques. Specific emphasis is placed on describing and explaining the techniques pertained to the points of anastomosis, diagnosis and treatment of malignancies, and management of complications in lung transplant recipients.

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.

Radiofrequency ablation for lung squamous cell carcinoma in a single-lung patient: A case report and literature review

RATIONALE

High morbidity and high mortality are the main features of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Radiofrequency ablation, which produces a large amount of heat to kill tumor cells, is one effective way to treat this disease.

PATIENT CONCERNS

We report the case of a 74-year-old man who presented with a 1-month history of right chest pain. His left lung was removed 12 years prior. Chest computed tomography (CT) revealed a mass in the right lower lobe.

DIAGNOSES

An excision biopsy of the mass showed lung squamous cell carcinoma.

INTERVENTIONS

We performed radiofrequency ablation.

OUTCOMES

The patient underwent 3.5 and 10 months of follow-up, with a partial response and complete remission, respectively.

LESSONS

CT-guided radiofrequency ablation is a safe and an effective minimally invasive treatment option. Radiofrequency appears to be a valuable alternative to surgery for inoperable patients presenting with a single-lung NSCLC.

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

Background and Aim

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

Patients and Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Thermal ablation of stage I non-small cell lung carcinoma

Ablation options for the treatment of localized non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) include radiofrequency ablation, microwave ablation, and cryotherapy. Irreversible electroporation is a novel ablation method with the potential of application to lung tumors in risky locations. This review article describes the established and novel ablation techniques used in the treatment of localized NSCLC, including mechanism of action, indications, potential complications, clinical outcomes, postablation surveillance, and use in combination with other therapies.

Treatment of stage I and II non-small cell lung cancer: Diagnosis and management of lung cancer, 3rd ed: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines

BACKGROUND

The treatment of stage I and II non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in patients with good or low surgical risk is primarily surgical resection. However, this area is undergoing many changes. With a greater prevalence of CT imaging, many lung cancers are being found that are small or constitute primarily ground-glass opacities. Treatment such as sublobar resection and nonsurgical approaches such as stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) are being explored. With the advent of minimally invasive resections, the criteria to classify a patient as too ill to undergo an anatomic lung resection are being redefined.

METHODS

The writing panel selected topics for review based on clinical relevance to treatment of early-stage lung cancer and the amount and quality of data available for analysis and relative controversy on best approaches in stage I and II NSCLC: general surgical care vs specialist care; sublobar vs lobar surgical approaches to stage I lung cancer; video-assisted thoracic surgery vs open resection; mediastinal lymph node sampling vs lymphadenectomy at the time of surgical resection; the use of radiation therapy, with a focus on SBRT, for primary treatment of early-stage NSCLC in high-risk or medically inoperable patients as well as adjuvant radiation therapy in the sublobar and lobar resection settings; adjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage NSCLC; and the impact of ethnicity, geography, and socioeconomic status on lung cancer survival. Recommendations by the writing committee were based on an evidence-based review of the literature and in accordance with the approach described by the Guidelines Oversight Committee of the American College of Chest Physicians.

RESULTS

Surgical resection remains the primary and preferred approach to the treatment of stage I and II NSCLC. Lobectomy or greater resection remains the preferred approach to T1b and larger tumors. The use of sublobar resection for T1a tumors and the application of adjuvant radiation therapy in this group are being actively studied in large clinical trials. Every patient should have systematic mediastinal lymph node sampling at the time of curative intent surgical resection, and mediastinal lymphadenectomy can be performed without increased morbidity. Perioperative morbidity and mortality are reduced and long-term survival is improved when surgical resection is performed by a board-certified thoracic surgeon. The use of adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II NSCLC is recommended and has shown benefit. The use of adjuvant radiation or chemotherapy for stage I NSCLC is of unproven benefit. Primary radiation therapy remains the primary curative intent approach for patients who refuse surgical resection or are determined by a multidisciplinary team to be inoperable. There is growing evidence that SBRT provides greater local control than standard radiation therapy for high-risk and medically inoperable patients with NSCLC. The role of ablative therapies in the treatment of high-risk patients with stage I NSCLC is evolving. Radiofrequency ablation, the most studied of the ablative modalities, has been used effectively in medically inoperable patients with small (&lt; 3 cm) peripheral NSCLC that are clinical stage I.

American College of Chest Physicians and Society of Thoracic Surgeons consensus statement for evaluation and management for high-risk patients with stage I non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

The standard treatment of stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is lobectomy with systematic mediastinal lymph node evaluation. Unfortunately, up to 25% of patients with stage I NSCLC are not candidates for lobectomy because of severe medical comorbidity.

METHODS

A panel of experts was convened through the Thoracic Oncology Network of the American College of Chest Physicians and the Workforce on Evidence-Based Surgery of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Following a literature review, the panel developed 13 suggestions for evaluation and treatment through iterative discussion and debate until unanimous agreement was achieved.

RESULTS

Pretreatment evaluation should focus primarily on measures of cardiopulmonary physiology, as respiratory failure represents the greatest interventional risk. Alternative treatment options to lobectomy for high-risk patients include sublobar resection with or without brachytherapy, stereotactic body radiation therapy, and radiofrequency ablation. Each is associated with decreased procedural morbidity and mortality but increased risk for involved lobe and regional recurrence compared with lobectomy, but direct comparisons between modalities are lacking.

CONCLUSIONS

Therapeutic options for the treatment of high-risk patients are evolving quickly. Improved radiographic staging and the diagnosis of smaller and more indolent tumors push the risk-benefit decision toward parenchymal-sparing or nonoperative therapies in high-risk patients. Unbiased assessment of treatment options requires uniform reporting of treatment populations and outcomes in clinical series, which has been lacking to date.

A comparison of surgical intervention and stereotactic body radiation therapy for stage I lung cancer in high-risk patients: a decision analysis

OBJECTIVE

We sought to compare the relative cost-effectiveness of surgical intervention and stereotactic body radiation therapy in high risk patients with clinical stage I lung cancer (non-small cell lung cancer).

METHODS

We compared patients chosen for surgical intervention or SBRT for clinical stage I non-small cell lung cancer. Propensity score matching was used to adjust estimated treatment hazard ratios for the confounding effects of age, comorbidity index, and clinical stage. We assumed that Medicare-allowable charges were $15,034 for surgical intervention and $13,964 for stereotactic body radiation therapy. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was estimated as the cost per life year gained over the patient's remaining lifetime by using a decision model.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven patients in each arm were selected by means of propensity score matching. Median survival with surgical intervention was 4.1 years, and 4-year survival was 51.4%. With stereotactic body radiation therapy, median survival was 2.9 years, and 4-year survival was 30.1%. Cause-specific survival was identical between the 2 groups, and the difference in overall survival was not statistically significant. For decision modeling, stereotactic body radiation therapy was estimated to have a mean expected survival of 2.94 years at a cost of $14,153 and mean expected survival with surgical intervention was 3.39 years at a cost of $17,629, for an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $7753.

CONCLUSIONS

In our analysis stereotactic body radiation therapy appears to be less costly than surgical intervention in high-risk patients with early stage non-small cell lung cancer. However, surgical intervention appears to meet the standards for cost-effectiveness because of a longer expected overall survival. Should this advantage not be confirmed in other studies, the cost-effectiveness decision would be likely to change. Prospective randomized studies are necessary to strengthen confidence in these results.

Management of early stage non-small cell lung cancer in high-risk patients

The preferred treatment of stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is anatomic resection with systematic mediastinal lymph node evaluation. However, 20% of patients with operable lung cancer are not candidates for this type of resection. Recent advancements in radiology-guided technologies have expanded the treatment options for high-risk patients with early-stage NSCLC. There has simultaneously been resurgence in interest and refinement of indications and techniques for sublobar resection in this population. While these treatments appear to have decreased peri-procedural morbidity and mortality, their oncologic efficacy compared to that of lobectomy remains to be determined.

[Surgery for stage 1 lung cancer]

Surgery is the present reference treatment for stage I non-small cell lung cancer. Lymph node dissection is required for mediastinal staging and discussion of postoperative treatments. In case of limited respiratory function, sub-lobar resection can be considered, either segmentectomy or atypical resection according to the tumour size. For radiological lesions with more than 50% of ground glass opacity, a wedge resection is acceptable if the resection margin is larger than 2 cm of healthy lung.

Outcome of limited resection for lung cancer

Background

Up to now, lobectomy, bilobectomy and pneumonectomy combined with extensive lymph node dissection have been regarded as the standard procedures for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In high-risk patients, however, limited resection (LR) has been attempted as a salvage procedure, and, recently, indication for LR has been extended to selected cases with early-stage NSCLC.

Material and Methods

Among the 773 patients who underwent surgical procedures for NSCLC in Seoul National University Bundang Hospital from May 2003 to December 2008, 43 patients received LR. Medical records of these patients were retrospectively reviewed.

Results

Mean age at operation was 66.0±12.4 years, and there were 30 males. Twenty-five patients underwent conservative limited resection (CLR) and 18 underwent intentional limited resection (ILR). Indications for CLR were multiple primary lung cancer in 9 (9/25, 36%) and severe concomitant diseases in 5 (5/25, 20%). Of these, 6 patients underwent segmentectomy and 19 received wedge resection. During the follow-up period of 28.0±17.8 months, 15 patient developed recurrent lung cancer. ILR was selectively performed in lesions almost purely composed of ground glass opacity (≥95%), or in small solid lesions (≤2 cm). Of these, 11 patients underwent segmentectomy and 7 underwent wedge resection. During the follow-up period of 31.7±11.6 months, no patient developed recurrence.

Conclusion

Intermediate-term outcome of LR for early-stage lung cancer is comparable to that of standard operation. For the delineation of the indications and appropriate surgical techniques for LR, prospective randomized multi-institutional study may be expedient.