Quoc-Anh Ho1, Nima K Harandi1, Megan E Daly2. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Davis Comprehensive Cancer Center, Sacramento, CA. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Davis Comprehensive Cancer Center, Sacramento, CA. Electronic address: medaly@ucdavis.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Uncertainty exists regarding the optimal surveillance imaging schedule following definitive chemoradiation (CRT) for locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC) with regards to both frequency and modality. We sought to document the clinical impact of frequent (at least every 4 months) surveillance imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The records of all patients treated with CRT for stage IIIA/IIIB NSCLC between August 1999 and April 2014 were reviewed. Patients were included if they underwent frequent (at least every 4 months) chest computed tomography or positron emission tomography for routine surveillance following CRT for at least 1 year or until progression or death. Radiographic findings and clinical interventions within the first year were identified. RESULTS: We identified 145 patients with LA-NSCLC treated with CRT, 63 with eligible imaging. Median age was 63.6 years (range, 41.0-86.9 years). Asymptomatic recurrence was radiographically detected in 38 (60.3%). Twenty-one (33.3%) initiated systemic therapy. Two (3.2%) underwent definitive-intent treatment for isolated disease, including lobectomy for a histologically distinct primary NSCLC and stereotactic radiotherapy for an isolated recurrence, both of whom subsequently progressed. Eleven patients (17.5%) received no further therapy. Five patients (7.9%) underwent additional diagnostic procedures for false-positive findings. CONCLUSIONS: Frequent surveillance within the first year following CRT for LA-NSCLC lung cancer detects asymptomatic recurrence in a high proportion of patients. However, definitive-intent interventions were infrequent. The predominant benefit of frequent surveillance appears to be expedient initiation of palliative systemic therapy. Evidence-based algorithms for surveillance are needed, and should account for expected patient tolerance of and willingness to undergo additional cancer-directed therapies.
OBJECTIVE: Uncertainty exists regarding the optimal surveillance imaging schedule following definitive chemoradiation (CRT) for locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC) with regards to both frequency and modality. We sought to document the clinical impact of frequent (at least every 4 months) surveillance imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The records of all patients treated with CRT for stage IIIA/IIIB NSCLC between August 1999 and April 2014 were reviewed. Patients were included if they underwent frequent (at least every 4 months) chest computed tomography or positron emission tomography for routine surveillance following CRT for at least 1 year or until progression or death. Radiographic findings and clinical interventions within the first year were identified. RESULTS: We identified 145 patients with LA-NSCLC treated with CRT, 63 with eligible imaging. Median age was 63.6 years (range, 41.0-86.9 years). Asymptomatic recurrence was radiographically detected in 38 (60.3%). Twenty-one (33.3%) initiated systemic therapy. Two (3.2%) underwent definitive-intent treatment for isolated disease, including lobectomy for a histologically distinct primary NSCLC and stereotactic radiotherapy for an isolated recurrence, both of whom subsequently progressed. Eleven patients (17.5%) received no further therapy. Five patients (7.9%) underwent additional diagnostic procedures for false-positive findings. CONCLUSIONS: Frequent surveillance within the first year following CRT for LA-NSCLC lung cancer detects asymptomatic recurrence in a high proportion of patients. However, definitive-intent interventions were infrequent. The predominant benefit of frequent surveillance appears to be expedient initiation of palliative systemic therapy. Evidence-based algorithms for surveillance are needed, and should account for expected patient tolerance of and willingness to undergo additional cancer-directed therapies.
Authors: Jennifer S Temel; Joseph A Greer; Alona Muzikansky; Emily R Gallagher; Sonal Admane; Vicki A Jackson; Constance M Dahlin; Craig D Blinderman; Juliet Jacobsen; William F Pirl; J Andrew Billings; Thomas J Lynch Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-08-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Perran Fulden Yumuk; Nazia Mohammed; Alexander P W M Maat; Christian Fink; Benedicte Marchal; Mary E R O'Brien Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2012-05-26 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Gordon J S Rustin; Maria E L van der Burg; Clare L Griffin; David Guthrie; Alan Lamont; Gordon C Jayson; Gunnar Kristensen; César Mediola; Corneel Coens; Wendi Qian; Mahesh K B Parmar; Ann Marie Swart Journal: Lancet Date: 2010-10-02 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Suzanne L Topalian; F Stephen Hodi; Julie R Brahmer; Scott N Gettinger; David C Smith; David F McDermott; John D Powderly; Richard D Carvajal; Jeffrey A Sosman; Michael B Atkins; Philip D Leming; David R Spigel; Scott J Antonia; Leora Horn; Charles G Drake; Drew M Pardoll; Lieping Chen; William H Sharfman; Robert A Anders; Janis M Taube; Tracee L McMiller; Haiying Xu; Alan J Korman; Maria Jure-Kunkel; Shruti Agrawal; Daniel McDonald; Georgia D Kollia; Ashok Gupta; Jon M Wigginton; Mario Sznol Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-06-02 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Todd W Flannery; Mohan Suntharalingam; William F Regine; Lawrence S Chin; Mark J Krasna; Michael K Shehata; Martin J Edelman; Marnie Kremer; Roy A Patchell; Young Kwok Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2008-02-14 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Peter Goldstraw; Kari Chansky; John Crowley; Ramon Rami-Porta; Hisao Asamura; Wilfried E E Eberhardt; Andrew G Nicholson; Patti Groome; Alan Mitchell; Vanessa Bolejack Journal: J Thorac Oncol Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 15.609