Talha Shaikh1, Thomas M Churilla2, Colin T Murphy2, Nicholas G Zaorsky2, Alan Haber3, Mark A Hallman2, Joshua E Meyer2. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Electronic address: Talha.Shaikh@fccc.edu. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 3. Department of Pulmonary Medicine, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to assess the trends in use of clinical diagnosis and its impact on treatment outcomes in patients receiving radiation therapy for early-stage lung cancer. METHODS: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry was queried from 2004 to 2012 for patients at least 18 years old in whom stage I (clinical stage T1a-T2a) lung cancer had been diagnosed and who underwent radiation therapy alone. Trends in diagnostic confirmation patterns were characterized. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to assess overall survival, and competing risk regression analysis was used to assess cancer-specific survival (CSS). RESULTS: A total of 7050 patients were included; the disease of 6399 of them (90.8%) was pathologically diagnosed and that of 651 (9.2%) was clinically diagnosed. There was no significant change in the utilization of clinical versus pathologic diagnosis (p = 0.172) over time. Patients with T1 disease (p < 0.001), tumors 0 to 1.9 cm in size (p < 0.001), and upper lobe tumors (p = 0.004) were more likely to have been clinically diagnosed. On multivariable analysis, clinical diagnosis was associated with an improved CSS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.82, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.71-0.96) but was not associated with an improved overall survival (HR = 1.01, 95% CI: 0.90-1.13). When stratified by T stage, patients whose disease had been clinically diagnosed as stage T1a had an improved CSS (HR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.58-0.96, p = 0.022). There was a trend toward improved CSS in patients with clinical stage T1b tumors (HR = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.55-1.00, p = 0.052). CONCLUSIONS: The improved CSS in patients with a clinical diagnosis suggests treatment of benign disease, particularly in smaller tumors. Prudent patient selection is needed to reduce the potential for overtreatment.
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to assess the trends in use of clinical diagnosis and its impact on treatment outcomes in patients receiving radiation therapy for early-stage lung cancer. METHODS: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry was queried from 2004 to 2012 for patients at least 18 years old in whom stage I (clinical stage T1a-T2a) lung cancer had been diagnosed and who underwent radiation therapy alone. Trends in diagnostic confirmation patterns were characterized. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to assess overall survival, and competing risk regression analysis was used to assess cancer-specific survival (CSS). RESULTS: A total of 7050 patients were included; the disease of 6399 of them (90.8%) was pathologically diagnosed and that of 651 (9.2%) was clinically diagnosed. There was no significant change in the utilization of clinical versus pathologic diagnosis (p = 0.172) over time. Patients with T1 disease (p < 0.001), tumors 0 to 1.9 cm in size (p < 0.001), and upper lobe tumors (p = 0.004) were more likely to have been clinically diagnosed. On multivariable analysis, clinical diagnosis was associated with an improved CSS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.82, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.71-0.96) but was not associated with an improved overall survival (HR = 1.01, 95% CI: 0.90-1.13). When stratified by T stage, patients whose disease had been clinically diagnosed as stage T1a had an improved CSS (HR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.58-0.96, p = 0.022). There was a trend toward improved CSS in patients with clinical stage T1b tumors (HR = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.55-1.00, p = 0.052). CONCLUSIONS: The improved CSS in patients with a clinical diagnosis suggests treatment of benign disease, particularly in smaller tumors. Prudent patient selection is needed to reduce the potential for overtreatment.
Authors: Joel R Wilkie; Rachel Lipson; Matthew C Johnson; Christina Williams; Drew Moghanaki; David Elliott; Dawn Owen; Namratha Atluri; Shruti Jolly; Christina Hunter Chapman Journal: Adv Radiat Oncol Date: 2021-04-20
Authors: Franz Zehentmayr; Martin Sprenger; Lukas Rettenbacher; Romana Wass; Peter Porsch; Gerd Fastner; Christian Pirich; Michael Studnicka; Felix Sedlmayer Journal: Thorac Cancer Date: 2019-01-07 Impact factor: 3.500
Authors: Kimberly D van der Willik; Liliana P Rojas-Saunero; Jeremy A Labrecque; M Arfan Ikram; Sanne B Schagen; Bruno H Stricker; Rikje Ruiter Journal: Eur J Epidemiol Date: 2019-12-20 Impact factor: 8.082