John M Varlotto1, Aaron N Yao2, Malcolm M DeCamp3, Satvik Ramakrishna4, Abe Recht5, John Flickinger6, Adin Andrei7, Michael F Reed8, Jennifer W Toth9, Thomas J Fizgerald10, Kristin Higgins11, Xiao Zheng2, Julie Shelkey12, Laura N Medford-Davis13, Chandra Belani14, Christopher R Kelsey15. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Massachusetts Medical Center, Worcester, Massachusetts. Electronic address: john.varlotto@umassmemorial.org. 2. Department of Healthcare Policy and Research, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia. 3. Division of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago, Illinois; Northwestern University School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois. 4. Northwestern University School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois. 5. Department of Radiation Oncology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts. 6. Department of Radiation Oncology, Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 7. Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois. 8. Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine, Hershey, Pennsylvania; Heart and Vascular Institute, Pennsylvania State University-Hershey, Hershey, Pennsylvania. 9. Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine, Hershey, Pennsylvania; Division of Pulmonary, Allergy, and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Pennsylvania State University-Hershey, Hershey, Pennsylvania. 10. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Massachusetts Medical Center, Worcester, Massachusetts. 11. Department of Radiation Oncology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia. 12. Department of Anesthesiology, Columbia University, New York, New York. 13. Department of Emergency Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas. 14. Pennsylvania State University-Hershey Cancer Institute, Hershey, Pennsylvania. 15. Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Cancer Institute, Durham, North Carolina.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Current National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines recommend postoperative radiation therapy (PORT) for patients with resected non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with N2 involvement. We investigated the relationship between nodal stage and local-regional recurrence (LR), distant recurrence (DR) and overall survival (OS) for patients having an R0 resection. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A multi-institutional database of consecutive patients undergoing R0 resection for stage I-IIIA NSCLC from 1995 to 2008 was used. Patients receiving any radiation therapy before relapse were excluded. A total of 1241, 202, and 125 patients were identified with N0, N1, and N2 involvement, respectively; 161 patients received chemotherapy. Cumulative incidence rates were calculated for LR and DR as first sites of failure, and Kaplan-Meier estimates were made for OS. Competing risk analysis and proportional hazards models were used to examine LR, DR, and OS. Independent variables included age, sex, surgical procedure, extent of lymph node sampling, histology, lymphatic or vascular invasion, tumor size, tumor grade, chemotherapy, nodal stage, and visceral pleural invasion. RESULTS: The median follow-up time was 28.7 months. Patients with N1 or N2 nodal stage had rates of LR similar to those of patients with N0 disease, but were at significantly increased risk for both DR (N1, hazard ratio [HR] = 1.84, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.30-2.59; P=.001; N2, HR = 2.32, 95% CI: 1.55-3.48; P<.001) and death (N1, HR = 1.46, 95% CI: 1.18-1.81; P<.001; N2, HR = 2.33, 95% CI: 1.78-3.04; P<.001). LR was associated with squamous histology, visceral pleural involvement, tumor size, age, wedge resection, and segmentectomy. The most frequent site of LR was the mediastinum. CONCLUSIONS: Our investigation demonstrated that nodal stage is directly associated with DR and OS but not with LR. Thus, even some patients with, N0-N1 disease are at relatively high risk of local recurrence. Prospective identification of risk factors for local recurrence may aid in selecting an appropriate population for further study of postoperative radiation therapy.
PURPOSE: Current National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines recommend postoperative radiation therapy (PORT) for patients with resected non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with N2 involvement. We investigated the relationship between nodal stage and local-regional recurrence (LR), distant recurrence (DR) and overall survival (OS) for patients having an R0 resection. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A multi-institutional database of consecutive patients undergoing R0 resection for stage I-IIIA NSCLC from 1995 to 2008 was used. Patients receiving any radiation therapy before relapse were excluded. A total of 1241, 202, and 125 patients were identified with N0, N1, and N2 involvement, respectively; 161 patients received chemotherapy. Cumulative incidence rates were calculated for LR and DR as first sites of failure, and Kaplan-Meier estimates were made for OS. Competing risk analysis and proportional hazards models were used to examine LR, DR, and OS. Independent variables included age, sex, surgical procedure, extent of lymph node sampling, histology, lymphatic or vascular invasion, tumor size, tumor grade, chemotherapy, nodal stage, and visceral pleural invasion. RESULTS: The median follow-up time was 28.7 months. Patients with N1 or N2 nodal stage had rates of LR similar to those of patients with N0 disease, but were at significantly increased risk for both DR (N1, hazard ratio [HR] = 1.84, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.30-2.59; P=.001; N2, HR = 2.32, 95% CI: 1.55-3.48; P<.001) and death (N1, HR = 1.46, 95% CI: 1.18-1.81; P<.001; N2, HR = 2.33, 95% CI: 1.78-3.04; P<.001). LR was associated with squamous histology, visceral pleural involvement, tumor size, age, wedge resection, and segmentectomy. The most frequent site of LR was the mediastinum. CONCLUSIONS: Our investigation demonstrated that nodal stage is directly associated with DR and OS but not with LR. Thus, even some patients with, N0-N1 disease are at relatively high risk of local recurrence. Prospective identification of risk factors for local recurrence may aid in selecting an appropriate population for further study of postoperative radiation therapy.
Authors: M Majem; J Hernández-Hernández; F Hernando-Trancho; N Rodríguez de Dios; A Sotoca; J C Trujillo-Reyes; I Vollmer; R Delgado-Bolton; M Provencio Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2019-06-06 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: Whitney S Brandt; Wanpu Yan; Jonathan E Leeman; Kay See Tan; Bernard J Park; Prasad S Adusumilli; Matthew J Bott; Daniela Molena; James Isbell; Jamie Chaft; Andreas Rimner; David R Jones Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2018-05-26 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Paolo Borghetti; Fernando Barbera; Marco Lorenzo Bonù; Francesca Trevisan; Stefano Ciccarelli; Paola Vitali; Marta Maddalo; Luca Triggiani; Nadia Pasinetti; Sara Pedretti; Bartolomea Bonetti; Gianluca Pariscenti; Andrea Tironi; Alberto Caprioli; Michela Buglione; Stefano Maria Magrini Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2016-05-26 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Yuhree Kim; Megan Winner; Andrew Page; Diana M Tisnado; Kathryn A Martinez; Stefan Buettner; Aslam Ejaz; Gaya Spolverato; Sydney E Morss Dy; Timothy M Pawlik Journal: Cancer Date: 2015-06-19 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Julio Francisco Jiménez-Bonilla; Remedios Quirce; I Martínez-Rodríguez; María De Arcocha-Torres; José Manuel Carril; Ignacio Banzo Journal: Diagnostics (Basel) Date: 2016-09-30
Authors: William G Breen; Kenneth W Merrell; Aaron S Mansfield; Dennis A Wigle; Yolanda I Garces; Sean S Park; Kenneth R Olivier; Christopher L Hallemeier Journal: Adv Radiat Oncol Date: 2016-12-21