Robotic-assisted thoracic surgery following neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy in patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer: A real-world prospective cohort study

Quality of lymph node dissection and early recurrence in robotic versus thoracoscopic lobectomy for stage N1-2 non-small cell lung cancer: Eleven-year real-world data from a high-volume center

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of lymph node dissection (LND) and oncological outcomes of robot-assisted (RL) versus video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy (VL) for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with nodal involvement remains controversial. This study aims to compare LND quality and early recurrence (ER) rate between RL and VL for stage N1-2 NSCLC patients based on eleven-year real-world data from a high-volume center.

METHODS

Pathologic stage IIB-IIIB (T1-3N1-2) NSCLC patients undergoing RL or VL in Shanghai Chest Hospital from 2010 to 2021 were retrospectively reviewed from a prospectively maintained database. Propensity-score matching (PSM, 1:4 RL versus VL) was performed to mitigate baseline differences. LND quality was evaluated by adequate (≥16) LND and nodal upstaging rates. ER was defined as recurrence occurring within 24 months post-surgery.

RESULTS

Out of 1578 cases reviewed, PSM yielded 200 RL and 800 VL cases. Without compromising perioperative outcomes, RL assessed more N1 and N2 LNs and N1 stations, and led to higher incidences of adequate LND (58.5 % vs. 42.0 %, p < 0.001) and nodal upstaging (p = 0.026), compared to VL. Notably, RL improved perioperative outcomes for patients undergoing adequate LND than VL. Finally, RL notably reduced ER rate (22.0 % vs. 29.6 %, p = 0.032), especially LN ER rate (15.0 % vs. 21.5 %, p = 0.041), and prolonged disease-free survival (DFS; hazard ratio = 0.837, p = 0.040) compared with VL. Further subgroup analysis of ER and DFS within the cN1-2-stage cohort verified this survival benefit.

CONCLUSIONS

RL surpasses VL in enhancing LND quality, reducing ER rates, and improving perioperative outcomes when adequate LND is performed for stage N1-2 NSCLC patients.

Chest wall resections for sulcus superior tumors

Chemoradiotherapy followed by surgical resection (trimodality therapy) is a guideline recommended treatment for sulcus superior tumors (SST). By definition, SSTs invade the chest wall and therefore require en-bloc chest wall resection with the upper lung lobe or segments. The addition of a chest wall resection, potentially results in higher morbidity and mortality rates when compared to standard anatomical pulmonary resection. This, together with their anatomical location in the thoracic outlet, and varying grades of fibrosis and adhesions resulting from induction chemoradiotherapy in the operation field, make surgery challenging. Depending on the exact location of the tumor and extent to which it invades the surrounding structures, the preferred surgical approach may vary, e.g., anterior, posterolateral, hemi-clamshell, or combined approach; all with their own potential advantages and morbidities. Careful patient selection, adequate staging and discussion in a multidisciplinary tumor board in a center experienced in complex thoracic oncology leads to the best long-term survival outcomes with the least morbidity and mortality. Enhanced recovery guidelines are now available for thoracic surgery, promoting faster recovery and helping to minimize complications and morbidity, including infections and thoracotomy pain. Although minimally invasive surgery can enhance recovery and reduce chest wall morbidity, and is in widespread use in thoracic oncology, its use for SST has been limited. However, this is an evolving area and hybrid surgical approaches (including use of the robot) are being reported. Chest wall reconstruction is rarely necessary, but if so, the prosthetic materials are preferably radiolucent/non-scattering, rigid enough while still being somewhat flexible, and inert, providing structural support, allowing chest wall movement, and closing defects, while inciting a limited inflammatory response. New techniques such as 3D image reconstructions/volume rendering, 3D-printing, and virtual reality modules may help pre-operative planning and informed patient consent.

Efficacy, safety, and survival of neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy in operable non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy may benefit patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but its impact requires further investigation.

Methods

A meta-analysis was conducted. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched. The study was registered in PROSPERO (registration no. CRD42022360893).

Results

60 studies of 3,632 patients were included. Comparing with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy showed higher pCR (RR: 4.71, 95% CI: 3.69, 6.02), MPR (RR, 3.20, 95% CI: 2.75, 3.74), and ORR (RR, 1.46, 95% CI: 1.21, 1.77), fewer surgical complications (RR: 0.67, 95%CI: 0.48, 0.94), higher R0 resection rate (RR: 1.06, 95%CI: 1.03, 1.10, I2 = 52%), and longer 1-year and 2-year OS, without affecting TRAEs. For neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy in NSCLC, the pooled pCR rate was 0.35 (95% CI: 0.31, 0.39), MPR was 0.59 (95% CI: 0.54, 0.63), and ORR was 0.71 (95% CI: 0.66, 0.76). The pooled incidence of all grade TRAEs was 0.70 (95% CI: 0.60, 0.81), and that of >= grade 3 TRAEs was 0.24 (95% CI: 0.16, 0.32). The surgical complications rate was 0.13 (95% CI: 0.07, 0.18) and R0 resection rate was 0.98 (95% CI: 0.96, 0.99). The pooled 1-year OS was 0.97 (95%CI: 0.96, 0.99), and 2-year OS was 0.89 (95%CI: 0.83, 0.94). Patients with squamous cell carcinoma, stage III or higher PD-L1 performed better. Notably, no significant differences were observed in pCR, MPR, and ORR between 2 or more treatment cycles. Pembrolizumab-, or toripalimab-based neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy demonstrated superior efficacy and tolerable toxicity.

Conclusion

According to our analysis, reliable efficacy, safety, and survival of neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy for operable NSCLC were demonstrated.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022360893, identifier CRD42022360893.

Does major pathological response after neoadjuvant Immunotherapy in resectable nonsmall-cell lung cancers predict prognosis? A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Overall survival is the gold-standard outcome measure for phase 3 trials, but the need for a long follow-up period can delay the translation of potentially effective treatment to clinical practice. The validity of major pathological response (MPR) as a surrogate of survival for non small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after neoadjuvant immunotherapy remains unclear.

METHODS

Eligibility was resectable stage I-III NSCLC and delivery of PD-1/PD-L1/CTLA-4 inhibitors prior to resection; other forms/modalities of neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant therapies were allowed. Statistics utilized the Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect or random-effect model depending on the heterogeneity ( I2 ).

RESULTS

Fifty-three trials (seven randomized, 29 prospective nonrandomized, 17 retrospective) were identified. The pooled rate of MPR was 53.8%. Compared to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, neoadjuvant chemo-immunotherapy achieved higher MPR (OR 6.19, 4.39-8.74, P <0.00001). MPR was associated with improved disease-free survival/progression-free survival/event-free survival (HR 0.28, 0.10-0.79, P =0.02) and overall survival (HR 0.80, 0.72-0.88, P <0.0001). Patients with stage III (vs I/II) and PD-L1 ≥1% (vs <1%) more likely achieved MPR (OR 1.66,1.02-2.70, P =0.04; OR 2.21,1.28-3.82, P =0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this meta-analysis suggest that neoadjuvant chemo-immunotherapy achieved higher MPR in NSCLC patients, and increased MPR might be associated with survival benefits treated with neoadjuvant immunotherapy. It appears that the MPR may serve as a surrogate endpoint of survival to evaluate neoadjuvant immunotherapy.

Minimally Invasive Surgery in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Where Do We Stand?

In the last two decades, robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) has gained popularity as a minimally invasive surgical (MIS) alternative to multi- and uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS). With this approach, the surgeon obviates the known drawbacks of conventional MIS, such as the reduced in-depth perception, hand-eye coordination, and freedom of motion of the instruments. Previous studies have shown that a robotic approach for operable lung cancer has treatment outcomes comparable to other MIS techniques such as multi-and uniportal VATS, but with less blood loss, a lower conversion rate to open surgery, better lymph node dissection rates, and improved ergonomics for the surgeon. The thoracic surgeon of the future is expected to perform more complex procedures. More patients will enter a multimodal treatment scheme making surgery more difficult due to severe inflammation. Furthermore, due to lung cancer screening programs, the number of patients presenting with operable smaller lung nodules in the periphery of the lung will increase. This, combined with the fact that segmentectomy is becoming an increasingly popular treatment for small peripheral lung lesions, indicates that the future thoracic surgeons need to have profound knowledge of segmental resections. New imaging techniques will help them to locate these lesions and to achieve a complete oncologic resection. Current robotic techniques exist to help the thoracic surgeon overcome these challenges. In this review, an update of the latest MIS approaches and nodule detection techniques will be given.

Short-term outcomes of robot-assisted versus video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for non-small cell lung cancer patients with neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy: a single-center retrospective study

Background

Neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy has been increasingly applied to treat non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the comparison between robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) in the feasibility and oncological efficacy following neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy is scarce. This study aims to assess the superiorities of RATS over (VATS) concerning short-term outcomes in treating NSCLC patients with neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy.

Methods

NSCLC patients receiving RATS or VATS lobectomy following neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy at Shanghai Chest Hospital from 2019 to 2022 were retrospectively identified. Baseline clinical characteristics, perioperative outcomes, and survival profiles were analyzed.

Results

Forty-six NSCLC patients with neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy were included and divided into the RATS (n=15) and VATS (n=31) groups. The baseline clinical characteristics and induction-related adverse events were comparable between the two groups (all p>0.050). The 30-day mortality in the RATS and VATS groups were 0% and 3.23%, respectively (p=1.000). Patients undergoing RATS were associated with reduced surgical-related intensive unit care (ICU) stay than those receiving VATS (0.0 [0.0-0.0] vs. 0.0 [0.0-1.0] days, p=0.026). Moreover, RATS assessed more N1 LNs (6.27 ± 1.94 vs 4.90 ± 1.92, p=0.042) and LN stations (3.07 ± 1.03 vs 2.52 ± 0.57, p=0.038) compared with VATS. By comparison, no difference was found in surgical outcomes, pathological results, and postoperative complications between the RATS and VATS groups (all p>0.050). Finally, RATS and VATS achieved comparable one-year recurrence-free survival (82.96% vs. 85.23%, p=0.821) and the timing of central nervous system, LN, and bone recurrences (all p>0.050).

Conclusion

RATS is safe and feasible for NSCLC patients with neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy, reducing surgical-related ICU stay, assessing increased N1 LNs and stations, and achieving similar survival profiles to VATS.

Neoadjuvant immunotherapy for advanced, resectable non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant immunotherapy (nIT) is a rapidly emerging paradigm for advanced resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The objectives of this PRISMA/MOOSE/PICOD-guided systematic review and meta-analysis were (1) to assess the safety and efficacy of nIT, (2) to compare the safety and efficacy of neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy (nCIT) versus chemotherapy alone (nCT), and (3) to explore predictors of pathologic response with nIT and their association with outcomes.

METHODS

Eligibility was resectable stage I-III NSCLC and the receipt of programmed death-1/programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1)/cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 inhibitors before resection; other forms and modalities of neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant therapies were allowed. For statistical analysis, the Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect or random-effect model was used, depending on the heterogeneity (I2 ).

RESULTS

Sixty-six articles met the criteria (eight randomized studies, 39 prospective nonrandomized studies, and 19 retrospective studies). The pooled pathologic complete response (pCR) rate was 28.1%. The estimated grade ≥3 toxicity rate was 18.0%. Compared with nCT, nCIT achieved higher rates of pCR (odds ratio [OR], 7.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.49-12.97; p < .001), progression-free survival (PFS) (hazard ratio [HR] 0.51; 95% CI, 0.38-0.67; p < .001), and overall survival (OS) (HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.36-0.74; p = .0003) but yielded similar toxicity rates (OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.67-1.52; p = .97). The results remained robust on sensitivity analysis when all retrospective publications were removed. pCR was associated with improved PFS (HR, 0.25; 0.15-0.43; p < .001) and OS (HR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.10-0.67; p = .005). PD-L1 expressors (≥1%) were more likely to achieve a pCR (OR, 2.93; 95% CI, 1.22-7.03; p = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with advanced resectable NSCLC, neoadjuvant immunotherapy was safe and efficacious. nCIT improved pathologic response rates and PFS/OS over nCT, particularly in patients who had tumors that expressed PD-L1, without increasing toxicities.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

This meta-analysis of 66 studies showed that neoadjuvant immunotherapy for advanced resectable non-small cell lung cancer is safe and efficacious. Compared with chemotherapy alone, chemoimmunotherapy improved pathologic response rates and survival, particularly for patients who had tumors that expressed programmed cell death ligand-1, without increasing toxicities.

The Uncomfortable Truth: Open Thoracotomy versus Minimally Invasive Surgery in Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

For decades, lung surgery in thoracic cancer has evolved in two ways: saving more parenchyma and being minimally invasive. Saving parenchyma is a fundamental principle of surgery. However, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is a matter of approach, so it has to do with advances in surgical techniques and tools. For example, MIS has become possible with the introduction of VATS (video-assisted thoracic surgery), and the development of tools has extended the indication of MIS. Especially, RATS (robot-assisted thoracic surgery) improved the quality of life for patients and the ergonomics of doctors. However, the dichotomous idea that the MIS is new and right but the open thoracotomy is old and useless may be inappropriate. In fact, MIS is exactly the same as a classic thoracotomy in that it removes the mass/parenchyma containing cancer and mediastinal lymph nodes. Therefore, in this study, we compare randomized-controlled trials about open thoracotomy and MIS to find out which surgical method is more helpful.

Oligo-Metastatic Cancers: Putative Biomarkers, Emerging Challenges and New Perspectives

Some cancer patients display a less aggressive form of metastatic disease, characterized by a low tumor burden and involving a smaller number of sites, which is referred to as "oligometastatic disease" (OMD). This review discusses new biomarkers, as well as methodological challenges and perspectives characterizing OMD. Recent studies have revealed that specific microRNA profiles, chromosome patterns, driver gene mutations (ERBB2, PBRM1, SETD2, KRAS, PIK3CA, SMAD4), polymorphisms (TCF7L2), and levels of immune cell infiltration into metastases, depending on the tumor type, are associated with an oligometastatic behavior. This suggests that OMD could be a distinct disease with specific biological and molecular characteristics. Therefore, the heterogeneity of initial tumor burden and inclusion of OMD patients in clinical trials pose a crucial methodological question that requires responses in the near future. Additionally, a solid understanding of the molecular and biological features of OMD will be necessary to support and complete the clinical staging systems, enabling a better distinction of metastatic behavior and tailored treatments.

Safety and feasibility of robotic-assisted thoracic surgery after neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer

Objectives

This study aimed to evaluate the safety and feasibility of robotic-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) after neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy in NSCLC.

Methods

We retrospectively collected data for NSCLC patients who received thoracic surgery after neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy from May 2020 to August 2022. Surgery details, pathological response, and perioperative outcome were compared between video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) group and RATS group. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to equal the baseline characteristics.

Results

A total of 220 patients were divided into 78 VATS patients and 142 RATS patients. There was no 90-day mortality in either group. RATS patients demonstrated better results in conversion rate to thoracotomy (VATS vs. RATS: 28.2% vs. 7.5%, P < 0.001), number of lymph node stations harvested (5.63 ± 1.75 vs. 8.09 ± 5.73, P < 0.001), number of lymph nodes harvested (13.49 ± 9.325 vs. 20.35 ± 10.322, P < 0.001), yield pathologic-N (yp-N) assessment (yp-N0, 88.5% vs. 67.6%; yp-N1, 7.6% vs. 12.6%; yp-N2, 3.8% vs. 19.7%; P < 0.001), and visual analog scale pain score after surgery (4.41 ± 0.93 vs. 3.77 ± 1.21, P=0.002). However, there were no significant differences in pathological response evaluation for neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy (P = 0.493) and complication rate (P = 0.803). After IPTW-adjustment, these results remained constant.

Conclusions

RATS reduced the risk of conversion to thoracotomy, provided a better yp-N stage evaluation, and improved pain score; this suggests that RATS is safe and feasible for NSCLC patients after neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy.

Perioperative and Oncological Outcomes of Robotic-Assisted, Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic and Open Lobectomy for Patients with N1-Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Study

(1) Background: Despite the fact that robotic-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy (RATL) has been prevalently applied for early stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), its superiorities are still to be fully revealed for patients with metastatic N1 lymph nodes (LNs). We aim to evaluate the advantages of RATL for N1 NSCLC. (2) Methods: This retrospective study identified consecutive pathological N1 NSCLC patients undergoing RATL, video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy (VATL), or open lobectomy (OL) in Shanghai Chest Hospital between 2014 and 2020. Further, perioperative and oncological outcomes were investigated. (3) Results: A total of 855 cases (70 RATL, 435 VATL, and 350 OL) were included. Propensity score matching resulted in 70, 140, and 140 cases in the RATL, VATL, and OL groups, respectively. RATL led to (1) the shortest surgical time (p = 0.005) and lowest intraoperative blood loss (p < 0.001); (2) the shortest ICU (p < 0.001) and postsurgical hospital (p < 0.001) stays as well as chest tube duration (p < 0.001); and (3) the lowest morbidities of postsurgical complications (p = 0.016). Moreover, RATL dissected more N1 (p = 0.027), more N1 + N2 (p = 0.027) LNs, and led to a higher upstaging incidence rate (p < 0.050) than VATL. Finally, RATL achieved a comparable 5-year disease-free and overall survival in relation to VATL and OL. (4) Conclusions: RATL led to the most optimal perioperative outcomes among the three surgical approaches and showed superiority in assessing N1 and total LNs over VATL, though it did achieve comparable oncological outcomes in relation to VATL and OL for N1 NSCLC patients.