Schild, Steven E.

AbstractThis analysis was performed to create a scoring system to estimate the survival of patients with non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Data from 1274NSCLCpatients were analyzed to create and validate a scoring system. Univariate (UV) and multivariate (MV) Cox models were used to evaluate the prognostic importance of each baseline factor. Prognostic factors that were significant on bothUVandMVanalyses were used to develop the score. These included quality of life, age, performance status, primary tumor diameter, nodal status, distant metastases, and smoking cessation. The score for each factor was determined by dividing the 5‐year survival rate (%) by 10 and summing these scores to form a total score.MVmodels and the score were validated using bootstrapping with 1000 iterations from the original samples. The score for each prognostic factor ranged from 1 to 7 points with higher scores reflective of better survival. Total scores (sum of the scores from each independent prognostic factor) of 32–37 correlated with a 5‐year survival of 8.3% (95%CI = 0–17.1%), 38–43 correlated with a 5‐year survival of 20% (95%CI = 13–27%), 44–47 correlated with a 5‐year survival of 48.3% (95%CI = 41.5–55.2%), 48–49 correlated to a 5‐year survival of 72.1% (95%CI = 65.6–78.6%), and 50–52 correlated to a 5‐year survival of 84.7% (95%CI = 79.6–89.8%). The bootstrap method confirmed the reliability of the score. Prognostic factors significantly associated with survival on bothUVandMVanalyses were used to construct a valid scoring system that can be used to predict survival ofNSCLCpatients. Optimally, this score could be used when counseling patients, and designing future trials.

AbstractThis study aimed to identify clinical factors associated with survival and to develop a prognostic tool in patients receiving radiosurgery alone for very few cerebral metastases from melanoma. Ten characteristics of 69 patients treated with radiosurgery alone for 1–3 cerebral metastases from melanoma were retrospectively analyzed for survival. Serum lactate dehydrogenase levels before radiosurgery, Karnofsky performance score, maximum diameter of all irradiated cerebral lesions, and extracranial lesions were significantly associated with survival and included in the tool. Twelve‐month survival rate (in %) divided by 10 was calculated for each of these four factors. The four scores were summed resulting in total scores ranging 9–22 points. Based on the 12‐month survival rates, three groups were formed: less than 15 points (group I, n = 25); 15–20 points (group II, n = 34); and more than 20 points (group III, n = 10). Corresponding 12‐month survival rates were 10 ± 6%, 51 ± 9% and 90 ± 9%, respectively (P < 0.001). In group I, death within 12 months following radiosurgery occurred mostly due to extracranial progression, whereas cerebral progression was the major cause of death in group II. In group III, only one of 10 patients died within 1 year. This new prognostic tool helps predict the survival time following radiosurgery of very few cerebral metastases from melanoma. An individual treatment approach should consider a patient's survival time and the most likely cause of death (cerebral or extracranial progression).

Purpose In lung cancer, randomized trials assessing hyperfractionated or accelerated radiotherapy seem to yield conflicting results regarding the effects on overall (OS) or progression-free survival (PFS). The Meta-Analysis of Radiotherapy in Lung Cancer Collaborative Group decided to address the role of modified radiotherapy fractionation. Material and Methods We performed an individual patient data meta-analysis in patients with nonmetastatic lung cancer, which included trials comparing modified radiotherapy with conventional radiotherapy. Results In non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC; 10 trials, 2,000 patients), modified fractionation improved OS as compared with conventional schedules (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.88, 95% CI, 0.80 to 0.97; P = .009), resulting in an absolute benefit of 2.5% (8.3% to 10.8%) at 5 years. No evidence of heterogeneity between trials was found. There was no evidence of a benefit on PFS (HR = 0.94; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.03; P = .19). Modified radiotherapy reduced deaths resulting from lung cancer (HR = 0.89; 95% CI, 0.81 to 0.98; P = .02), and there was a nonsignificant reduction of non–lung cancer deaths (HR = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.66 to 1.15; P = .33). In small-cell lung cancer (SCLC; two trials, 685 patients), similar results were found: OS, HR = 0.87, 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.02, P = .08; PFS, HR = 0.88, 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.03, P = .11. In both NSCLC and SCLC, the use of modified radiotherapy increased the risk of acute esophageal toxicity (odds ratio [OR] = 2.44 in NSCLC and OR = 2.41 in SCLC; P < .001) but did not have an impact on the risk of other acute toxicities. Conclusion Patients with nonmetastatic NSCLC derived a significant OS benefit from accelerated or hyperfractionated radiotherapy; a similar but nonsignificant trend was observed for SCLC. As expected, there was increased acute esophageal toxicity.

Purpose There are scant data regarding the effects of prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) on neurocognitive function (NCF) and quality of life (QOL). Radiation Therapy Oncology Group trial 0214 showed no overall survival (OS) benefit for PCI in stage III non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) at 1 year. However, there was a significant decrease in brain metastases (BM). This analysis focuses on the impact of PCI on NCF and QOL. Patients and Methods Patients with stage III NSCLC who completed definitive therapy without progression were randomly assigned to PCI or observation. NCF was assessed with Mini-Mental Status Examination (MMSE), Activities of Daily Living Scale (ADLS), and Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT). QOL was assessed with the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) core tool (QOL Questionnaire-QLQC30) and brain module (QLQBN20). Results There were no statistically significant differences at 1 year between the two arms in any component of the EORTC-QLQC30 or QLQBN20 (P > .05), although a trend for greater decline in patient-reported cognitive functioning with PCI was noted. There were no significant differences in MMSE (P = .60) or ADLS (P = .88). However, for HVLT, there was greater decline in immediate recall (P = .03) and delayed recall (P = .008) in the PCI arm at 1 year. Conclusion PCI in stage III NSCLC significantly decreases the risk of BM without improving 1-year OS. There were no significant differences in global cognitive function (MMSE) or QOL after PCI, but there was a significant decline in memory (HVLT) at 1 year. This study provides prospective data regarding the relative risks and benefits of PCI in this setting and the need to use sensitive cognitive assessments.

PurposeThis study was conducted to determine if prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) improves survival in locally advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC).Patients and MethodsPatients with stage III NSCLC without disease progression after treatment with surgery and/or radiation therapy (RT) with or without chemotherapy were eligible. Participants were stratified by stage (IIIA v IIIB), histology (nonsquamous v squamous), and therapy (surgery v none) and were randomly assigned to PCI or observation. PCI was delivered to 30 Gy in 15 fractions. The primary end point of the study was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points were disease-free survival (DFS), neurocognitive function (NCF), and quality of life. Kaplan-Meier and log-rank analyses were used for OS and DFS. The incidence of brain metastasis (BM) was evaluated with the logistic regression model.ResultsOverall, 356 patients were accrued of the targeted 1,058. The study was closed early because of slow accrual; 340 of the 356 patients were eligible. The 1-year OS (P = .86; 75.6% v 76.9% for PCI v observation) and 1-year DFS (P = .11; 56.4% v 51.2% for PCI v observation) were not significantly different. The hazard ratio for observation versus PCI was 1.03 (95% CI, 0.77 to 1.36). The 1-year rates of BM were significantly different (P = .004; 7.7% v 18.0% for PCI v observation). Patients in the observation arm were 2.52 times more likely to develop BM than those in the PCI arm (unadjusted odds ratio, 2.52; 95% CI, 1.32 to 4.80).ConclusionIn patients with stage III disease without progression of disease after therapy, PCI decreased the rate of BM but did not improve OS or DFS.

Purpose The appropriate treatment for MSCC is controversial. A small randomized trial showed that decompressive surgery followed by radiotherapy was superior to radiotherapy alone. That study was limited to highly selected patients. Additional studies comparing surgery plus radiotherapy to radiotherapy could better clarify the role of surgery. Methods Data from 108 patients receiving surgery plus radiotherapy were matched to 216 patients (1:2) receiving radiotherapy alone. Groups were matched for 11 potential prognostic factors and compared for post-treatment motor function, ambulatory status, regaining ambulatory status, local control, and survival. Subgroup analyses were performed for patients receiving adequate surgery (direct decompressive surgery plus stabilization of involved vertebrae), patients receiving laminectomy, patients with solid tumors, patients with solid tumors receiving adequate surgery, and patients with solid tumors receiving laminectomy. Results Improvement of motor function occurred in 27% of patients after surgery plus radiotherapy and 26% after radiotherapy alone (P = .92). Post-treatment ambulatory rates were 69% after surgery plus radiotherapy and 68% after radiotherapy alone (P = .99). Of the nonambulatory patients, 30% and 26%, respectively, (P = .86) regained ambulatory status after treatment. One-year local control rates were 90% after surgery plus radiotherapy and 91% after radiotherapy alone (P = .48). One-year overall survival rates were 47% and 40%, respectively (P = .50). The subgroup analyses did not show significant differences between both groups. Surgery-related complications occurred in 11% of patients. Conclusion In this study, the outcomes of the end points evaluated after radiotherapy alone appeared similar to those of surgery plus radiotherapy. A new randomized trial comparing both treatments is justified.