What is the role of surgery in potentially resectable N2 non-small cell lung cancer?

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.

An Updated Review of Management of Resectable Stage III NSCLC in the Era of Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy

Immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have an established role in the treatment of locally advanced and metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). ICIs have now entered the paradigm of early-stage NSCLC. The recent evidence shows that the addition of ICI to neoadjuvant chemotherapy improves the pathological complete response (pCR) rate and survival rate in early-stage resectable NSCLC and is now a standard of care option in this setting. In this regard, stage III NSCLC merits special consideration, as it is heterogenous and requires a multidisciplinary approach to management. As the neoadjuvant approach is being adopted widely, new challenges have emerged and the boundaries for resectability are being re-examined. Consequently, it is ever more important to carefully individualize the treatment strategy for each patient with resectable stage III NSCLC. In this review, we discuss the recent literature in this field with particular focus on evolving definitions of resectability, T4 disease, N2 disease (single and multi-station), and nodal downstaging. We also highlight the controversy around adjuvant treatment in this setting and discuss the selection of patients for adjuvant treatment, options of salvage, and next line treatment in cases of progression on/after neoadjuvant treatment or after R2 resection. We will conclude with a brief discussion of predictive biomarkers, predictive models, ongoing studies, and directions for future research in this space.

Reaching multidisciplinary consensus on the management of non-bulky/non-infiltrative stage IIIA N2 non-small cell lung cancer

INTRODUCTION

The optimal management of patients with non-bulky/non-infiltrative stage IIIA N2 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains controversial. In this modified Delphi study from France, we aimed to generate agreement through multidisciplinary decision-making on the clinical management of patients with non-bulky/non-infiltrative N2 NSCLC.

METHODS

An expert panel of 30 physicians from different specialities completed two Delphi rounds of a 76-item questionnaire, pertaining to: pathological confirmation of N2 disease; initial treatment approach; treatment approach in case of disease progression/stability following neoadjuvant chemotherapy; treatment approach taking into account various patient and tumour characteristics. Each questionnaire item was scored using a 9-point Likert scale. Consensus in agreement was achieved if ≥ 80 % of responses to a questionnaire item were scored between 7 and 9 and if the median value of the score to the item was ≥ 7.

RESULTS

Regarding the pathologic confirmation of N2 disease, agreement (up to 100 %) was reached on endobronchial ultrasound/endoscopic ultrasound as the preferred method of initial mediastinal staging for paratracheal lymph nodes. There was also panellist agreement (up to 93 %) on the adoption as first-line treatment of surgery and (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with single-station disease, and of concurrent chemoradiotherapy followed by adjuvant immunotherapy in those with multi-station N2 disease. Panellists further agreed on the use of a non-surgical strategy, i.e., concurrent chemoradiotherapy with adjuvant immunotherapy, in patients with single-station N2 disease in case of: involvement of ≥ 2 mediastinal lymph nodes; disease progression following neoadjuvant chemotherapy; compromised cardiopulmonary function if compatible with radiotherapy; anticipated right pneumonectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

This Delphi study reinforces the importance of multidisciplinary discussions leading to the best individual approach to the clinical management of patients with non-bulky/non-infiltrative N2 NSCLC, a challenging heterogeneous population.

What is the optimal management of potentially resectable stage III-N2 NSCLC? Results of a fixed-effects network meta-analysis and economic modelling

Introduction

There is a critical need to understand the optimal treatment regimen in patients with potentially resectable stage III-N2 nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Methods

A systematic review of randomised controlled trials was carried out using a literature search including the CDSR, CENTRAL, DARE, HTA, EMBASE and MEDLINE bibliographic databases. Selected trials were used to perform a Bayesian fixed-effects network meta-analysis and economic modelling of treatment regimens relevant to current-day treatment options: chemotherapy plus surgery (CS), chemotherapy plus radiotherapy (CR) and chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery (CRS).

Findings

Six trials were prioritised for evidence synthesis. The fixed-effects network meta-analyses demonstrated an improvement in disease-free survival (DFS) for CRS versus CS and CRS versus CR of 0.34 years (95% CI 0.02-0.65) and 0.32 years (95% CI 0.05-0.58) respectively, over a 5-year period. No evidence of effect was observed in overall survival although point estimates favoured CRS. The probabilities that CRS had a greater mean survival time and greater probability of being alive than the reference treatment of CR at 5 years were 89% and 86% respectively. Survival outcomes for CR and CS were essentially equivalent. The economic model calculated that CRS and CS had incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of £19 000/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and £78 000/QALY compared to CR. The probability that CRS generated more QALYs than CR and CS was 94%.

Interpretation

CRS provides an extended time in a disease-free state leading to improved cost-effectiveness over CR and CS in potentially resectable stage III-N2 NSCLC.

Impact on quality of life from multimodality treatment for lung cancer: a randomised controlled feasibility trial of surgery versus no surgery as part of multimodality treatment in potentially resectable stage III-N2 NSCLC (the PIONEER trial)

Introduction

Optimal treatment for ‘potentially resectable’ stage III-N2 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) requires multimodality treatment: local treatment (surgery or radiotherapy) and systemic anticancer therapy. There is no clear evidence of superiority for survival between the two approaches and little research has explored quality of life (QOL). This study will inform the design of a phase III randomised trial of surgery versus no surgery as part of multimodality treatment for stage III-N2 NSCLC with QOL as a primary outcome.

Methods and analysis

Patient participants will be randomised to receive multimodality treatment (1) with surgery OR (2) without surgery. The Quintet Recruitment Intervention will be used to maximise recruitment. Eligible patients will have ‘potentially resectable’ N2 NSCLC and have received a multidisciplinary team recommendation for multimodality treatment. Sixty-six patients and their carers will be recruited from 8 UK centres. Patient/carer QOL questionnaires will be administered at baseline, weeks 6, 9, 12 and month 6. Semistructured interviews will be conducted. Quantitative data will be analysed descriptively and qualitative data will be analysed using framework analysis.

Ethics and dissemination

Ethical approval has been obtained. Results will be disseminated via publications, national bodies and networks, and patient and public involvement groups.

Trial registration

NCT04540757

The current treatment landscape in the UK for stage III NSCLC

For stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), approximately a third of patients survive up to 5 years, with decreasing 5-year survival rates for stage IIIB and stage IIIC disease. Although curable, stage III NSCLC encompasses a diverse range of disease presentation, with an equally complex range of multi-modal treatment options, including systemic and local therapies for distant and local disease control, respectively. This complexity results in a number of challenges for the multi-disciplinary team (MDT) in achieving optimal treatment outcomes for patients. As multi-modality treatment is the preferred treatment strategy for all stage III disease, the focus of this article is the key surgical, chemotherapy and radiotherapy clinical trials as well as guidelines that currently outline radical therapy options for patients with both potentially resectable and unresectable stage III NSCLC.

Adverse events reporting in stage III NSCLC trials investigating surgery and radiotherapy

Background

Current treatment options for stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) consist of different combinations of chemotherapy, surgery, radiotherapy and immunotherapy. Treatment choices are highly individual decisions, in which adverse events (AEs) are relevant for decision-making. This study aims to analyse reporting of AEs in prospective stage III NSCLC trials, focussing on trials including radiotherapy and/or surgery.

Methods

PubMed was searched for prospective studies dealing with stage III NSCLC from January 1987 to April 2019. Meta-analyses were screened as a positive control. Pearson's Chi-squared test and smooth kernel distribution were used to estimate distributions. Data was resampled using bootstrapping.

Results

Out of 1193 initially identified studies, 119 met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 31 had a surgical procedure in any study arm. Grade 3 and 4 AEs were reported in 94.12% and 92.44% of the included studies, respectively. Reporting of grade 5 AEs was provided in 87.39% of cases. Grade 1 and 2 AEs were less commonly reported at 53.78% and 63.03%, respectively. One study did not mention any AEs. Of the 31 treatment arms including any form of surgery, AEs were not reported in 10. Overall, 231 different AE items were reported, only 18 of them were included in at least 20% of the analysed studies.

Conclusion

Overall, AE reporting in stage III NSCLC was inconsistent and inhomogeneous. Studies including surgical study arms often reported only treatment-related deaths in regards of surgical AEs. Underreporting of AEs prohibits the extraction of patient-relevant information for decision-making and represents a suboptimal use of invested resources.

Adverse event reporting for stage III NSCLC is inconsistent and inhomogeneous. Surgical studies tend to underreport lower grade adverse effects. Patient-relevant information for decision-making is lost and invested resources are used suboptimally.https://bit.ly/3gLNIYy

Stage III Non-small Cell Lung Cancer: A UK National Survey of Practice

AIMS

The optimal management of stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is widely debated and is a rapidly evolving area. However, less than one in five stage III patients in England receive optimal multimodality treatment. The aim of this study was to map commonalities and differences in clinician judgement as well as infrastructure and resources for managing stage III NSCLC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We carried out a national survey of practice in stage III NSCLC management in the UK using a 30-min web-based survey. Invitations were sent via e-mail to the British Thoracic Oncology Group and the Society of Cardiothoracic Surgery membership and a healthcare professional market research panel.

RESULTS

In total, 160 respondents completed the survey. Although opinion was variable, there was a preference for surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy in stage III N2 (single station) NSCLC that could be treated with lobectomy, but this preference switched to chemoradiotherapy in single-station N2 requiring a pneumonectomy or multi-station N2. The PD-L1 status influenced the treatment decision in 'potentially resectable' N2 for a number of clinicians who opted for concurrent chemoradiotherapy with adjuvant durvalumab when PD-L1 ≥ 1%. A joint clinic with surgeons and oncologists was considered the most important factor for shared decision making with patients. There are barriers to recommending trimodality treatment, e.g. concerns over the negative impact on quality of life. A proportion of clinicians favoured palliative treatment in certain clinical scenarios, including supraclavicular fossa lymph node metastases, patients with borderline fitness or high PD-L1 expressors >50%.

DISCUSSION

This survey has highlighted the need for infrastructure development, such as reflex PD-L1 testing and joint surgical and oncology clinics. Further research into the impact of multimodality treatment on quality of life and education to improve confidence in multimodality treatment could all drive improvements in stage III NSCLC management.

International guidelines on stage III N2 nonsmall cell lung cancer: surgery or radiotherapy?

Stage III N2 nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a complex disease with poor treatment outcomes. For patients in whom the disease is considered technically resectable, the main treatment options include surgery (with neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy/neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT)) or CRT followed by adjuvant immunotherapy (dependent on programmed death ligand 1 status). As there is no clear evidence demonstrating a survival benefit between these options, patient preference plays an important role. A lack of a consensus definition of resectability of N2 disease adds to the complexity of the decision-making process. We compared 10 international guidelines on the treatment of NSCLC to investigate the recommendations on preoperatively diagnosed stage III N2 NSCLC. This comparison simplified the treatment paths to multimodal therapy based on surgery or radiotherapy (RT). We analysed factors relevant to decision-making within these guidelines. Overall, for nonbulky mediastinal lymph node involvement there was no clear preference between surgery and CRT. With increasing extent of mediastinal nodal disease, a tendency towards multimodal treatment based on RT was identified. In multiple scenarios, surgery or RT-based treatments are feasible and patient involvement in decision-making is critical.

For many patients with stage III N2 NSCLC, radiotherapy or surgery are options and should be discussed with the patienthttp://bit.ly/2Z39MW5