Dataset Information

Virtual randomized study comparing lobectomy and particle beam therapy for clinical stage IA non-small cell lung cancer in operable patients.

ABSTRACT: To the best of our knowledge there have been no randomized controlled trials comparing lobectomy-a standard treatment for patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)-and particle beam therapy (PBT), the best performing existing radiotherapy. We conducted a virtual randomized trial in medically operable patients with stage IA NSCLC to compare lobectomy and PBT effectiveness. A Markov model was developed to predict life expectancy after lobectomy and PBT in a cohort of patients with stage IA NSCLC. Ten thousand virtual patients were randomly assigned to each group. Sensitivity analyses were performed as model variables and scenarios changed to determine which treatment strategy was best for improving life expectancy. All estimated model parameters were determined using variables extracted from a systematic literature review of previously published articles. The preferred strategy differed depending on patient age. In young patients, lobectomy showed better life expectancy than that of PBT. The difference in life expectancy between lobectomy and PBT was statistically insignificant in older patients. Our model predicted lobectomy as the preferred strategy when operative mortality was under 5%. However, the preferred strategy changed to PBT if operative mortality post lobectomy was over 5%. For medically operable patients with stage IA NSCLC, our Markov model revealed the preferred strategy of lobectomy or PBT regarding operative mortality changed with varying age and comorbidity. Until randomized controlled trial results become available, we hope the current results will provide a rationale background for clinicians to decide treatment modalities for patients with stage IA NSCLC.

SUBMITTER: Seo YS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8438263 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe standard of care for operable, stage I, non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is lobectomy with mediastinal lymph node dissection or sampling. Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) for inoperable stage I NSCLC has shown promising results, but two independent, randomised, phase 3 trials of SABR in patients with operable stage I NSCLC (STARS and ROSEL) closed early due to slow accrual. We aimed to assess overall survival for SABR versus surgery by pooling data from these trials.MethodsEligible patients in the STARS and ROSEL studies were those with clinical T1-2a (<4 cm), N0M0, operable NSCLC. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to SABR or lobectomy with mediastinal lymph node dissection or sampling. We did a pooled analysis in the intention-to-treat population using overall survival as the primary endpoint. Both trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (STARS: NCT00840749; ROSEL: NCT00687986).Findings58 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned (31 to SABR and 27 to surgery). Median follow-up was 40·2 months (IQR 23·0-47·3) for the SABR group and 35·4 months (18·9-40·7) for the surgery group. Six patients in the surgery group died compared with one patient in the SABR group. Estimated overall survival at 3 years was 95% (95% CI 85-100) in the SABR group compared with 79% (64-97) in the surgery group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·14 [95% CI 0·017-1·190], log-rank p=0·037). Recurrence-free survival at 3 years was 86% (95% CI 74-100) in the SABR group and 80% (65-97) in the surgery group (HR 0·69 [95% CI 0·21-2·29], log-rank p=0·54). In the surgery group, one patient had regional nodal recurrence and two had distant metastases; in the SABR group, one patient had local recurrence, four had regional nodal recurrence, and one had distant metastases. Three (10%) patients in the SABR group had grade 3 treatment-related adverse events (three [10%] chest wall pain, two [6%] dyspnoea or cough, and one [3%] fatigue and rib fracture). No patients given SABR had grade 4 events or treatment-related death. In the surgery group, one (4%) patient died of surgical complications and 12 (44%) patients had grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events. Grade 3 events occurring in more than one patient in the surgery group were dyspnoea (four [15%] patients), chest pain (four [15%] patients), and lung infections (two [7%]).InterpretationSABR could be an option for treating operable stage I NSCLC. Because of the small patient sample size and short follow-up, additional randomised studies comparing SABR with surgery in operable patients are warranted.FundingAccuray Inc, Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development, NCI Cancer Center Support, NCI Clinical and Translational Science Award.

Project description:BackgroundThe increased detection of small-sized peripheral non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has renewed interest in sublobar resection in lieu of lobectomy.MethodsWe conducted a multicenter, noninferiority, phase 3 trial in which patients with NSCLC clinically staged as T1aN0 (tumor size, ≤2 cm) were randomly assigned to undergo sublobar resection or lobar resection after intraoperative confirmation of node-negative disease. The primary end point was disease-free survival, defined as the time between randomization and disease recurrence or death from any cause. Secondary end points were overall survival, locoregional and systemic recurrence, and pulmonary functions.ResultsFrom June 2007 through March 2017, a total of 697 patients were assigned to undergo sublobar resection (340 patients) or lobar resection (357 patients). After a median follow-up of 7 years, sublobar resection was noninferior to lobar resection for disease-free survival (hazard ratio for disease recurrence or death, 1.01; 90% confidence interval [CI], 0.83 to 1.24). In addition, overall survival after sublobar resection was similar to that after lobar resection (hazard ratio for death, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.26). The 5-year disease-free survival was 63.6% (95% CI, 57.9 to 68.8) after sublobar resection and 64.1% (95% CI, 58.5 to 69.0) after lobar resection. The 5-year overall survival was 80.3% (95% CI, 75.5 to 84.3) after sublobar resection and 78.9% (95% CI, 74.1 to 82.9) after lobar resection. No substantial difference was seen between the two groups in the incidence of locoregional or distant recurrence. At 6 months postoperatively, a between-group difference of 2 percentage points was measured in the median percentage of predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second, favoring the sublobar-resection group.ConclusionsIn patients with peripheral NSCLC with a tumor size of 2 cm or less and pathologically confirmed node-negative disease in the hilar and mediastinal lymph nodes, sublobar resection was not inferior to lobectomy with respect to disease-free survival. Overall survival was similar with the two procedures. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others; CALGB 140503 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00499330.).

Dataset Information

Virtual randomized study comparing lobectomy and particle beam therapy for clinical stage IA non-small cell lung cancer in operable patients.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets