Outcomes after stereotactic lung radiotherapy or wedge resection for stage I non-small-cell lung cancer.
ABSTRACT PURPOSE To compare outcomes between lung stereotactic radiotherapy (SBRT) and wedge resection for stage I non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS One hundred twenty-four patients with T1-2N0 NSCLC underwent wedge resection (n = 69) or image-guided lung SBRT (n = 58) from February 2003 through August 2008. All were ineligible for anatomic lobectomy; of those receiving SBRT, 95% were medically inoperable, with 5% refusing surgery. Mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second and diffusing capacity of lung for carbon monoxide were 1.39 L and 12.0 mL/min/mmHg for wedge versus 1.31 L and 10.14 mL/min/mmHg for SBRT (P = not significant). Mean Charlson comorbidity index and median age were 3 and 74 years for wedge versus 4 and 78 years for SBRT (P < .01, P = .04). SBRT was volumetrically prescribed as 48 (T1) or 60 (T2) Gy in four to five fractions. Results Median potential follow-up is 2.5 years. At 30 months, no significant differences were identified in regional recurrence (RR), locoregional recurrence (LRR), distant metastasis (DM), or freedom from any failure (FFF) between the two groups (P > .16). SBRT reduced the risk of local recurrence (LR), 4% versus 20% for wedge (P = .07). Overall survival (OS) was higher with wedge but cause-specific survival (CSS) was identical. Results excluding synchronous primaries, nonbiopsied tumors, or pathologic T4 disease (wedge satellite lesion) showed reduced LR (5% v 24%, P = .05), RR (0% v 18%, P = .07), and LRR (5% v 29%, P = .03) with SBRT. There were no differences in DM, FFF, or CSS, but OS was higher with wedge. CONCLUSION Both lung SBRT and wedge resection are reasonable treatment options for stage I NSCLC patients ineligible for anatomic lobectomy. SBRT reduced LR, RR, and LRR. In this nonrandomized population of patients selected for surgery versus SBRT (medically inoperable) at physician discretion, OS was higher in surgical patients. SBRT and surgery, however, had identical CSS.
- SourceAvailable from: Alexander Louie[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The use of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer is growing rapidly, particularly since it has become the recommended therapy for unfit patients in current European and North American guidelines. As three randomized trials comparing surgery and SABR closed prematurely because of poor accrual, clinicians are faced with a dilemma in individual patient decision-making. Radiation oncologists, in particular, should be aware of the data from comparative effectiveness studies that suggest similar survival outcomes irrespective of local treatment modality. The necessity of obtaining a pathological diagnosis, particularly in frail patients prior to treatment remains a challenge, and this topic was addressed in recent European recommendations. Awareness of the high incidence of a second primary lung cancer in survivors, as well as other competing causes of mortality, is needed. The challenges in distinguishing focal scarring from recurrence after SABR also need to be appreciated by multidisciplinary tumor boards. With a shift in focus toward patient-centered decision-making, clinicians will need to be aware of these new developments and communicate effectively with patients, to ensure that treatment decisions are reflective of patient preferences. Priorities for additional research in the area are proposed. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.Radiotherapy and Oncology 12/2014; · 4.86 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background The aim of this study was to perform a survival comparison between stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and sublobar resection (SLR) in patients with stage I non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) at high risk for lobectomy. Methods All patients who underwent SBRT or SLR because of medical comorbidities for clinical stage I NSCLC were reviewed retrospectively. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to reduce selection bias between SLR and SBRT patients based on age, gender, performance status, tumour diameter, forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and Charlson comorbidity index (CCI). Results One hundred and fifteen patients who underwent SBRT and 65 SLR were enrolled. The median potential follow-up periods for SBRT and SLR were 6.7 and 5.3 years, respectively. No treatment-related deaths were observed. Before PSM, the 5-year overall survival (OS) was 40.3% and 60.5% for SBRT and SLR, respectively (P = 0.008). PSM identified 53 patients from each treatment group with similar characteristics: a median age of 76 years, a performance status of 0–1, a median tumour diameter of ∼20 mm, a median FEV1 of ∼1.8 L and a median CCI of 1. The difference in OS became insignificant between the matched pairs (40.4% and 55.6% at 5 years with SBRT and SLR; P = 0.124). The cumulative incidence of cause-specific death was comparable between groups (35.3% and 30.3% at 5 years, P = 0.427). Conclusion SBRT can be an alternative treatment option to SLR for patients who cannot tolerate lobectomy because of medical comorbidities.European Journal of Cancer 09/2014; · 4.82 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has a local control rate of 95% at 2 years for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and should improve the prognosis of inoperable patients, elderly patients, and patients with significant comorbidities who have early-stage NSCLC. The safety of SBRT is being confirmed in international, multi-institutional Phase II trials for peripheral lung cancer in both inoperable and operable patients, but reports so far have found that SBRT is a safe and effective treatment for early-stage NSCLC and early metastatic lung cancer. Radiation pneumonitis (RP) is one of the most common toxicities of SBRT. Although most post-treatment RP is Grade 1 or 2 and either asymptomatic or manageable, a few cases are severe, symptomatic, and there is a risk for mortality. The reported rates of symptomatic RP after SBRT range from 9% to 28%. Being able to predict the risk of RP after SBRT is extremely useful in treatment planning. A dose-effect relationship has been demonstrated, but suggested dose-volume factors like mean lung dose, lung V20, and/or lung V2.5 differed among the reports. We found that patients who present with an interstitial pneumonitis shadow on computed tomography scan and high levels of serum Krebs von den Lungen-6 and surfactant protein D have a high rate of severe radiation pneumonitis after SBRT. At our institution, lung cancer patients with these risk factors have not received SBRT since 2006, and our rate of severe RP after SBRT has decreased significantly since then.World journal of radiology. 09/2014; 6(9):708-715.