Role of Intermediate dose escalation of radiotherapy in the survival of unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer patients in the era of immunotherapy
Background The role of dose escalation of radiotherapy (RT) in unresectable stage III NSCLC followed by immunotherapy is unclear. The objective of the current study is to investigate if intermediate dose escalation (IDE) is beneficial in stage III NSCLC patients who receive definitive concurrent chemoradiation (dcCRT) followed by immunotherapy. Materials and methods The study used data from the National Cancer database. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was used to assess the all-cause mortality of patients who received standard RT dose (SD) (60 Gy ± 10%) and IDE (64–74 Gy). Results 47,315 patients were diagnosed in the era before immunotherapy and received dcCRT only, while 4,947 patients were treated with dcCRT and immunotherapy. In the cohort with dcCRT only, patients who received SD had statistically significant worse mortality but clinically minimal difference compared to patients with IDE (HR: 1.09, 95% CI: 1.07-1.12; p<0.0001). In the era of immunotherapy, SD was still associated with worse mortality compared to IDE (HR: 1.17, 95% CI: 1.03-1.33; p=0.02). However, the survival benefit associated with IDE was only restricted to patients who started immunotherapy within six weeks after RT completion (HR: 1.26, 95% CI: 1.05-1.6; p=0.01). There was no difference in mortality between SD and IDE among patients who started immunotherapy between 7–10 weeks (HR: 1.13, 95% CI: 0.88-1.45; p=0.35) or >10 weeks after RT completion (HR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.51-1.07; p=0.11). Conclusion IDE of RT is not needed for patients diagnosed with stage III unresectable NSCLC who receive immunotherapy > six weeks after dcCRT.
NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Small Cell Lung Cancer, Version 2.2026
The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Small Cell Lung Cancer provide recommendations for diagnostic workup, staging, and treatment. These NCCN Guidelines Insights highlight recent updates, with a particular focus on changes to systemic therapies and radiation treatment in the NCCN Guidelines for Small Cell Lung Cancer.
Quality of life outcomes in patients participating in the CALGB 30610 trial (CALGB 70702): Alliance
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.
The Risk of Lung Cancer in Rheumatoid Arthritis and Rheumatoid Arthritis–Associated Interstitial Lung Disease
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.
Comparison of quality of life in patients randomized to high-dose once daily (QD) thoracic radiotherapy (TRT) with standard twice daily (BID) TRT in limited stage small cell lung cancer (LS-SCLC) on CALGB 30610 (Alliance, Sub-study CALGB 70702).
8504 Background: The CALGB 30610 trial demonstrated that 70Gy QD TRT was not associated with a superior overall survival compared to standard BID 45Gy TRT in limited stage small cell lung cancer. Since both arms appeared to provide similar clinical benefit, other factors such as quality of life may help oncologists decide on the best treatment approach for their patients. The present analysis was conducted to compare patients’ quality of life between these regimens in terms of their physical symptoms, physical functioning and psychological state. Methods: In the CALGB 30610 planned sub-study CALGB 70702, patients were administered the FACT-L, FACT Trial Outcome Index-Lung Cancer (FACT-L TOI), FACT-Esophageal Cancer Eating and Swallowing Indices, ECOG Acute Esophagitis Scale, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), the EQ-5D at baseline and a single item assessing difficulty swallowing at baseline, 3, 5, 7, 12, 26, and 52 weeks after starting radiation therapy. Patients were also asked to assess treatment inconvenience at these time points. The primary endpoints of CALGB 70702 were FACT-L TOI and FACT eating and swallowing subscales at 12 weeks. Mean changes from baseline were compared between arms using general linear mixed models. Results: 417 patients consented to participate in the patient-reported outcomes substudy. The completion rate of the questionnaires was 87% at baseline and 71% at week 52. The FACT-L total score mean worsening was significantly less in the QD arm compared to the BID arm at week 3 (-1.0 vs -7.0; P=.003), and marginally less at week 5 (-5.3 vs -11.0; P=.06). The FACT-L TOI mean worsening was significantly less in the QD arm than in the BID arm at week 3 (-2.9 vs -7.6; P=.003) and greater at week 12 (-7.6 vs -2.8; P=.03). The QD arm also had a lesser EQ-5D index mean worsening at 3 weeks (-0.04 vs 0.03; P=.002). Mean increase in the acute esophagitis score (1.06 vs 2.89; P<.001) and difficulty swallowing (0.39 vs 1.14; P<.001) were significantly greater in the BID arm at week 3. Mean worsening in HADS anxiety was significantly less in the QD arm at week 5 (-1.99 vs -0.95; P=.03). There were no other significant differences at the remaining timepoints between the two arms. Across visits on the QD arm, patients felt that treatment was inconvenient at 26% (96/376) assessments, compared to 33% (116/352) in the BID arm (chi-sq P=.03). Conclusions: Both radiation regimens were well tolerated. However, the QD arm had better quality of life scores at week 3 and was perceived to be less inconvenient. Clinical trial information: NCT00632853.
Small Cell Lung Cancer, Version 2.2022, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology
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.
Integration of Immunotherapy into Adjuvant Therapy for Resected Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: ALCHEMIST Chemo-Io (ACCIO)
A pooled analysis of individual patient data from National Clinical Trials Network clinical trials of concurrent chemoradiotherapy for limited‐stage small cell lung cancer in elderly patients versus younger patients
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.
Validation of Progression-Free Survival as a Surrogate Endpoint for Overall Survival in Malignant Mesothelioma: Analysis of Cancer and Leukemia Group B and North Central Cancer Treatment Group (Alliance) Trials
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.