Puneeth Iyengar1,2,3, Elizabeth Zhang-Velten1,2,3, Laurence Court4, Kenneth Westover1,2,3, Yulong Yan1,2,3, Mu-Han Lin1,2,3, Zhenyu Xiong1,2,3, Mehul Patel5, Douglas Rivera6, Joe Chang4, Mark Saunders7, Anand Shivnani8, Andrew Lee9, Randall Hughes1,2,3, David Gerber1,2,3, Jonathan Dowell1,2,3, Ang Gao1,2,3, John Heinzerling10, Ying Li11, Chul Ahn1,2,3, Hak Choy1,2,3, Robert Timmerman1,2,3. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas. 2. Department of Medical Oncology, Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas. 3. Department of Biostatistics, Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. 5. Department of Radiation Oncology, Baylor Scott & White Memorial Hospital, Temple, Texas. 6. Department of Radiation Oncology, Austin Cancer Center, Austin, Texas. 7. Department of Radiation Oncology, Texas Oncology Tyler, Tyler. 8. Department of Radiation Oncology, Texas Oncology Sherman, Sherman. 9. Department of Radiation Oncology, Texas Center for Proton Therapy, Irving. 10. Department of Radiation Oncology, Levine Cancer Institute, Atrium Heath, Charlotte, North Carolina. 11. Department of Radiation Oncology, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert, Arizona.
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: A significant subset of patients with stage II/III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cannot receive standard concurrent chemoradiotherapy owing to the risk of toxic effects outweighing potential benefits. Without concurrent chemotherapy, however, the efficacy of conventional radiotherapy is reduced. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether hypofractionated image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) would improve overall survival in patients with stage II/III NSCLC who could not receive concurrent chemoradiotherapy and therefore were traditionally relegated to receiving only conventionally fractionated radiotherapy (CFRT). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This nonblinded, phase 3 randomized clinical study enrolled 103 patients and analyzed 96 patients with stage II/III NSCLC and Zubrod performance status of at least 2, with greater than 10% weight loss in the previous 6 months, and/or who were ineligible for concurrent chemoradiotherapy after oncology consultation. Enrollment occurred at multiple US institutions. Patients were enrolled from November 13, 2012, to August 28, 2018, with a median follow-up of 8.7 (3.6-19.9) months. Data were analyzed from September 14, 2018, to April 11, 2021. INTERVENTIONS: Eligible patients were randomized to hypofractionated IGRT (60 Gy in 15 fractions) vs CFRT (60 Gy in 30 fractions). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was 1-year overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 103 patients (96 of whom were analyzed [63 men (65.6%); mean (SD) age, 71.0 (10.2) years (range, 50-90 years)]) were randomized to hypofractionated IGRT (n = 50) or CFRT (n = 46) when a planned interim analysis suggested futility in reaching the primary end point, and the study was closed to further accrual. There was no statistically significant difference between the treatment groups for 1-year overall survival (37.7% [95% CI, 24.2%-51.0%] for hypofractionated IGRT vs 44.6% [95% CI, 29.9%-58.3%] for CFRT; P = .29). There were also no significant differences in median overall survival, progression-free survival, time to local failure, time to distant metastasis, and toxic effects of grade 3 or greater between the 2 treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This phase 3 randomized clinical trial found that hypofractionated IGRT (60 Gy in 15 fractions) was not superior to CFRT (60 Gy in 30 fractions) for patients with stage II/III NSCLC ineligible for concurrent chemoradiotherapy. Further studies are needed to verify equivalence between these radiotherapy regimens. Regardless, for well-selected patients with NSCLC (ie, peripheral primary tumors and limited mediastinal/hilar adenopathy), the convenience of hypofractionated radiotherapy regimens may offer an appropriate treatment option. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01459497.
IMPORTANCE: A significant subset of patients with stage II/III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cannot receive standard concurrent chemoradiotherapy owing to the risk of toxic effects outweighing potential benefits. Without concurrent chemotherapy, however, the efficacy of conventional radiotherapy is reduced. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether hypofractionated image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) would improve overall survival in patients with stage II/III NSCLC who could not receive concurrent chemoradiotherapy and therefore were traditionally relegated to receiving only conventionally fractionated radiotherapy (CFRT). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This nonblinded, phase 3 randomized clinical study enrolled 103 patients and analyzed 96 patients with stage II/III NSCLC and Zubrod performance status of at least 2, with greater than 10% weight loss in the previous 6 months, and/or who were ineligible for concurrent chemoradiotherapy after oncology consultation. Enrollment occurred at multiple US institutions. Patients were enrolled from November 13, 2012, to August 28, 2018, with a median follow-up of 8.7 (3.6-19.9) months. Data were analyzed from September 14, 2018, to April 11, 2021. INTERVENTIONS: Eligible patients were randomized to hypofractionated IGRT (60 Gy in 15 fractions) vs CFRT (60 Gy in 30 fractions). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was 1-year overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 103 patients (96 of whom were analyzed [63 men (65.6%); mean (SD) age, 71.0 (10.2) years (range, 50-90 years)]) were randomized to hypofractionated IGRT (n = 50) or CFRT (n = 46) when a planned interim analysis suggested futility in reaching the primary end point, and the study was closed to further accrual. There was no statistically significant difference between the treatment groups for 1-year overall survival (37.7% [95% CI, 24.2%-51.0%] for hypofractionated IGRT vs 44.6% [95% CI, 29.9%-58.3%] for CFRT; P = .29). There were also no significant differences in median overall survival, progression-free survival, time to local failure, time to distant metastasis, and toxic effects of grade 3 or greater between the 2 treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This phase 3 randomized clinical trial found that hypofractionated IGRT (60 Gy in 15 fractions) was not superior to CFRT (60 Gy in 30 fractions) for patients with stage II/III NSCLC ineligible for concurrent chemoradiotherapy. Further studies are needed to verify equivalence between these radiotherapy regimens. Regardless, for well-selected patients with NSCLC (ie, peripheral primary tumors and limited mediastinal/hilar adenopathy), the convenience of hypofractionated radiotherapy regimens may offer an appropriate treatment option. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01459497.
Authors: Kenneth D Westover; Billy W Loo; David E Gerber; Puneeth Iyengar; Hak Choy; Maximilian Diehn; Randy Hughes; Joan Schiller; Jonathan Dowell; Zabi Wardak; David Sher; Alana Christie; Xian-Jin Xie; Irma Corona; Akanksha Sharma; Margaret E Wadsworth; Robert Timmerman Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2015-05-09 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: K Furuse; M Fukuoka; M Kawahara; H Nishikawa; Y Takada; S Kudoh; N Katagami; Y Ariyoshi Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1999-09 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Jeffrey D Bradley; Charles B Scott; Kristie J Paris; William F Demas; Mitchell Machtay; Ritsuko Komaki; Benjamin Movsas; Philip Rubin; William T Sause Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2002-04-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: C Schaake-Koning; W van den Bogaert; O Dalesio; J Festen; J Hoogenhout; P van Houtte; A Kirkpatrick; M Koolen; B Maat; A Nijs Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1992-02-20 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Joanne S Haviland; J Roger Owen; John A Dewar; Rajiv K Agrawal; Jane Barrett; Peter J Barrett-Lee; H Jane Dobbs; Penelope Hopwood; Pat A Lawton; Brian J Magee; Judith Mills; Sandra Simmons; Mark A Sydenham; Karen Venables; Judith M Bliss; John R Yarnold Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2013-09-19 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: S M Bentzen; R K Agrawal; E G A Aird; J M Barrett; P J Barrett-Lee; S M Bentzen; J M Bliss; J Brown; J A Dewar; H J Dobbs; J S Haviland; P J Hoskin; P Hopwood; P A Lawton; B J Magee; J Mills; D A L Morgan; J R Owen; S Simmons; G Sumo; M A Sydenham; K Venables; J R Yarnold Journal: Lancet Date: 2008-03-19 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Eugene J Koay; Alexander N Hanania; William A Hall; Cullen M Taniguchi; Neal Rebueno; Sten Myrehaug; Katharine L Aitken; Laura A Dawson; Christopher H Crane; Joseph M Herman; Beth Erickson Journal: Pract Radiat Oncol Date: 2020-02-13
Authors: Vincent Vinh-Hung; Olena Gorobets; Andre Duerinkcx; Suresh Dutta; Eromosele Oboite; Joan Oboite; Ahmed Ali; Thandeka Mazibuko; Ulf Karlsson; Alexander Chi; David Lehrman; Omer Hashim Mohammed; Mohammad Mohammadianpanah; Gokoulakrichenane Loganadane; Natalia Migliore; Maria Vasileiou; Nam P Nguyen; Huan Giap Journal: Transl Cancer Res Date: 2022-09 Impact factor: 0.496