Ganti, Apar K

AbstractBackgroundCALGB 30610 trial demonstrated that once daily thoracic radiotherapy (TRT) was not superior compared to standard twice daily TRT, in patients with limited stage small cell lung cancer. Quality of life outcomes may help oncologists decide the best treatment approach.MethodsA total of 417 patients on CALGB 30610 participated in the quality‐of‐life substudy (CALGB 70702), which included the FACT Trial Outcome Index‐Lung Cancer (FACT‐L TOI), FACT‐Esophageal Cancer (FACT‐E) Eating and Swallowing Indices, ECOG Acute Esophagitis Scale, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), difficulty swallowing, EQ‐5D, and treatment convenience assessment at baseline, 3, 5, 7, 12, 26, and 52 weeks after starting TRT. Primary end points included FACT‐L TOI and FACT‐E at 12 weeks. Mean changes from baseline were compared between arms using general linear mixed models.ResultsFACT‐L worsening was more in the twice daily arm at week 3 (–1.0 vs. –7.0). FACT‐L TOI worsening was less at week 3 (–2.9 vs. –7.6) and greater at week 12 (–7.6 vs. –2.8) in the once daily arm. The once daily arm had a lower EQ‐5D index worsening at 3 weeks (0.01 vs. –0.02). Increase in acute esophagitis score (1.06 vs. 2.89; p < .001) and difficulty swallowing (0.39 vs. 1.14) were greater in the twice daily arm at week 3. A total of 74.5% of patients on the once daily arm felt that treatment was convenient, compared to 67% of patients in the twice daily arm (p = .03).ConclusionsThe once daily arm had better quality‐of‐life scores earlier during treatment and was perceived to be more convenient.

ObjectiveWe aimed to evaluate lung cancer risk in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and RA‐interstitial lung disease (ILD).MethodsWe performed a retrospective, matched cohort study of RA and RA‐ILD within the Veterans Health Administration (VA) between 2000 and 2019. Patients with RA and RA‐ILD were identified with validated administrative‐based algorithms, then matched (up to 1:10) on age, gender, and VA enrollment year to individuals without RA. Lung cancers were identified from a VA oncology database and the National Death Index. Conditional Cox regression models assessed lung cancer risk adjusting for race, ethnicity, smoking status, Agent Orange exposure, and comorbidity burden among matched individuals. Several sensitivity analyses were performed.ResultsWe matched 72,795 patients with RA with 633,937 patients without RA (mean age 63 years; 88% male). Over 4,481,323 patient‐years, 17,099 incident lung cancers occurred. RA was independently associated with an increased lung cancer risk (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.58 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.52–1.64]), which persisted in never smokers (aHR 1.65 [95% CI 1.22–2.24]) and in those with incident RA (aHR 1.54 [95% CI 1.44–1.65]). Compared to non‐RA controls, prevalent RA‐ILD (n = 757) was more strongly associated with lung cancer risk (aHR 3.25 [95% CI 2.13–4.95]) than RA without ILD (aHR 1.57 [95% CI 1.51–1.64]). Analyses of both prevalent and incident RA‐ILD produced similar results (RA‐ILD vs non‐RA aHR 2.88 [95% CI 2.45–3.40]).ConclusionRA was associated with a >50% increased risk of lung cancer, and those with RA‐ILD represented a particularly high‐risk group with an approximate three‐fold increased risk. Increased lung cancer surveillance in RA, and especially RA‐ILD, may be a useful strategy for reducing the burden posed by the leading cause of cancer death.

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Small Cell Lung Cancer (SCLC) provide recommended management for patients with SCLC, including diagnosis, primary treatment, surveillance for relapse, and subsequent treatment. This selection for the journal focuses on metastatic (known as extensive-stage) SCLC, which is more common than limited-stage SCLC. Systemic therapy alone can palliate symptoms and prolong survival in most patients with extensive-stage disease. Smoking cessation counseling and intervention should be strongly promoted in patients with SCLC and other high-grade neuroendocrine carcinomas. The “Summary of the Guidelines Updates” section in the SCLC algorithm outlines the most recent revisions for the 2022 update, which are described in greater detail in this revised Discussion text.

Background Platinum and etoposide with thoracic radiation followed by prophylactic cranial irradiation constitute the standard treatment for limited‐stage small cell lung cancer (LS‐SCLC). Many patients with LS‐SCLC are elderly with comorbidities. Methods Individual patient data were collected from 11 phase 2 or 3 trials for LS‐SCLC conducted by the National Clinical Trials Network and activated from 1990 to 2010. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS); the secondary endpoints were progression‐free survival (PFS), the rate of severe adverse events, and off‐treatment reasons. The outcomes were compared for patients 70 years old or older (elderly patients) and patients younger than 70 years (younger patients). Results Individual patient data from 1049 younger patients (81%) and 254 elderly patients (19%) were analyzed. In the multivariate model, elderly patients, in comparison with younger patients, had worse OS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.18‐1.63; median OS for elderly patients, 17.8 months; OS for younger patients, 23.5 months) and worse PFS (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.03‐1.39; median PFS for elderly patients, 10.6 months; median PFS for younger patients, 12.3 months). Elderly patients, in comparison with younger patients, experienced more grade 5 adverse events (8% vs 3%; P < .01) and more grade 3 or higher dyspnea (11% vs 7%; P = .03) but less grade 3 or higher esophagitis/dysphagia (14% vs 19%; P = .04) and less grade 3 or higher vomiting (11% vs 17%; P = .01). Elderly patients completed treatment less often, discontinued treatment because of adverse events and patient refusal more frequently, and died during treatment more frequently. Conclusions Elderly patients with LS‐SCLC have worse PFS and OS and more difficulty in tolerating therapy. Future trials should incorporate assessments of elderly patients, novel monitoring of adverse events, and more tolerable radiation and systemic therapies.

Abstract Purpose The aim of this study was to investigate whether progression-free survival (PFS) can be considered a surrogate endpoint for overall survival (OS) in malignant mesothelioma. Materials and Methods Individual data were collected from 15 Cancer and Leukemia Group B (615 patients) and 2 North Central Cancer Treatment Group (101 patients) phase II trials. The effects of 5 risk factors for OS and PFS, including age, histology, performance status (PS), white blood cell count, and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) risk score, were used in the analysis. Individual-level surrogacy was assessed by Kendall’s tau through a Clayton bivariate Copula survival (CBCS) model. Summary-level surrogacy was evaluated via the association between logarithms of the hazard ratio (log HR)—log HROS and log HRPFS—measured in R2 from a weighted least-square (WLS) regression model and the CBCS model. Results The median PFS for all patients was 3.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.8–3.5 months) and the median OS was 7.2 months (95% CI, 6.5–8.0 months). Moderate correlations between PFS and OS were observed across all risk factors at the individual level, with Kendall’s tau ranging from 0.46 to 0.47. The summary-level surrogacy varied among risk factors. The Copula R2 ranged from 0.51 for PS to 0.78 for histology. The WLS R2 ranged from 0.26 for EORTC and PS to 0.67 for age. Conclusions The analyses demonstrated low to moderate individual-level surrogacy between PFS and OS. At the summary level, the surrogacy between PFS and OS varied significantly across different risk factors. With a short postprogression survival and a moderate correlation between PFS and OS, there is no evidence that PFS is a valid surrogate endpoint for OS in malignant mesothelioma.