Paul J Speicher1, Lin Gu2, Brian C Gulack1, Xiaofei Wang2, Thomas A D'Amico1, Matthew G Hartwig1, Mark F Berry3. 1. Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC. 2. Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC. 3. Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC; Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, CA. Electronic address: berry037@stanford.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the use of lobectomy and sublobar resection for clinical stage IA non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB). METHODS: The NCDB from 2003 to 2011 was analyzed to determine factors associated with the use of a sublobar resection versus a lobectomy for the treatment of clinical stage IA NSCLC. Overall survival was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazard modeling. RESULTS: Among 39,403 patients included for analysis, 29,736 (75.5%) received a lobectomy and 9667 (24.5%) received a sublobar resection: 84.7% wedge resection (n = 8192) and 15.3% segmental resection (n = 1475). Lymph node evaluation was not performed in 2788 (28.8%) of sublobar resection patients, and 7298 (75.5%) of sublobar resections were for tumors ≤ 2 cm. After multivariable logistic regression, older age, higher Charlson-Deyo comorbidity scores, smaller tumor size, and treatment at lower-volume institutions were associated with sublobar resection (all P < .001). Overall, lobectomy was associated with significantly improved 5-year survival compared to sublobar resection (66.2% vs. 51.2%; P < .001, adjusted hazard ratio 0.66; P < .001). However among sublobar resection patients, nodal sampling was associated with significantly better 5-year survival (58.2% vs. 46.4%; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Despite adjustment for patient and tumor related characteristics, a sublobar resection is associated with significantly reduced long-term survival compared to a formal surgical lobectomy among patients with NSCLC, even for stage 1A tumors. For patients who cannot tolerate lobectomy and who are treated with sublobar resection, lymph node evaluation is essential to help guide further treatment.
BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the use of lobectomy and sublobar resection for clinical stage IA non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB). METHODS: The NCDB from 2003 to 2011 was analyzed to determine factors associated with the use of a sublobar resection versus a lobectomy for the treatment of clinical stage IA NSCLC. Overall survival was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazard modeling. RESULTS: Among 39,403 patients included for analysis, 29,736 (75.5%) received a lobectomy and 9667 (24.5%) received a sublobar resection: 84.7% wedge resection (n = 8192) and 15.3% segmental resection (n = 1475). Lymph node evaluation was not performed in 2788 (28.8%) of sublobar resection patients, and 7298 (75.5%) of sublobar resections were for tumors ≤ 2 cm. After multivariable logistic regression, older age, higher Charlson-Deyo comorbidity scores, smaller tumor size, and treatment at lower-volume institutions were associated with sublobar resection (all P < .001). Overall, lobectomy was associated with significantly improved 5-year survival compared to sublobar resection (66.2% vs. 51.2%; P < .001, adjusted hazard ratio 0.66; P < .001). However among sublobar resection patients, nodal sampling was associated with significantly better 5-year survival (58.2% vs. 46.4%; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Despite adjustment for patient and tumor related characteristics, a sublobar resection is associated with significantly reduced long-term survival compared to a formal surgical lobectomy among patients with NSCLC, even for stage 1A tumors. For patients who cannot tolerate lobectomy and who are treated with sublobar resection, lymph node evaluation is essential to help guide further treatment.
Authors: David S Ettinger; Wallace Akerley; Hossein Borghaei; Andrew C Chang; Richard T Cheney; Lucian R Chirieac; Thomas A D'Amico; Todd L Demmy; Ramaswamy Govindan; Frederic W Grannis; Stefan C Grant; Leora Horn; Thierry M Jahan; Ritsuko Komaki; Feng-Ming Spring Kong; Mark G Kris; Lee M Krug; Rudy P Lackner; Inga T Lennes; Billy W Loo; Renato Martins; Gregory A Otterson; Jyoti D Patel; Mary C Pinder-Schenck; Katherine M Pisters; Karen Reckamp; Gregory J Riely; Eric Rohren; Theresa A Shapiro; Scott J Swanson; Kurt Tauer; Douglas E Wood; Stephen C Yang; Kristina Gregory; Miranda Hughes Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2013-06-01 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Amgad El-Sherif; William E Gooding; Ricardo Santos; Brian Pettiford; Peter F Ferson; Hiran C Fernando; Susan J Urda; James D Luketich; Rodney J Landreneau Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Robert J Keenan; Rodney J Landreneau; Richard H Maley; Deepak Singh; Robin Macherey; Susan Bartley; Tibetha Santucci Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Christopher Cao; David H Tian; Ben Fu; James Huang; Neel K Ranganath; Dominique Gossot Journal: J Thorac Dis Date: 2018-09 Impact factor: 2.895
Authors: Chi-Fu Jeffrey Yang; Matthew G Hartwig; Thomas A D'Amico; Mark F Berry Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2015-09-05 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Christopher Cao; David H Tian; Daniel R Wang; Caroline D Chung; Dominique Gossot; Matthew Bott Journal: J Thorac Dis Date: 2017-12 Impact factor: 2.895
Authors: Nasser K Altorki; Xiaofei Wang; Dennis Wigle; Lin Gu; Gail Darling; Ahmad S Ashrafi; Rodney Landrenau; Daniel Miller; Moishe Liberman; David R Jones; Robert Keenan; Massimo Conti; Gavin Wright; Linda J Veit; Suresh S Ramalingam; Mohamed Kamel; Harvey I Pass; John D Mitchell; Thomas Stinchcombe; Everett Vokes; Leslie J Kohman Journal: Lancet Respir Med Date: 2018-11-12 Impact factor: 30.700
Authors: Brian C Gulack; Chi-Fu Jeffrey Yang; Paul J Speicher; Babatunde A Yerokun; Betty C Tong; Mark W Onaitis; Thomas A D'Amico; David H Harpole; Matthew G Hartwig; Mark F Berry Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2016-09-01 Impact factor: 4.330