Radiation pneumonitis is a dose-limiting toxicity for patients undergoing concurrent chemoradiation therapy (CCRT) for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We performed an individual patient data ...meta-analysis to determine factors predictive of clinically significant pneumonitis.
After a systematic review of the literature, data were obtained on 836 patients who underwent CCRT in Europe, North America, and Asia. Patients were randomly divided into training and validation sets (two-thirds vs one-third of patients). Factors predictive of symptomatic pneumonitis (grade ≥2 by 1 of several scoring systems) or fatal pneumonitis were evaluated using logistic regression. Recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) was used to define risk groups.
The median radiation therapy dose was 60 Gy, and the median follow-up time was 2.3 years. Most patients received concurrent cisplatin/etoposide (38%) or carboplatin/paclitaxel (26%). The overall rate of symptomatic pneumonitis was 29.8% (n=249), with fatal pneumonitis in 1.9% (n=16). In the training set, factors predictive of symptomatic pneumonitis were lung volume receiving ≥20 Gy (V(20)) (odds ratio OR 1.03 per 1% increase, P=.008), and carboplatin/paclitaxel chemotherapy (OR 3.33, P<.001), with a trend for age (OR 1.24 per decade, P=.09); the model remained predictive in the validation set with good discrimination in both datasets (c-statistic >0.65). On RPA, the highest risk of pneumonitis (>50%) was in patients >65 years of age receiving carboplatin/paclitaxel. Predictors of fatal pneumonitis were daily dose >2 Gy, V(20), and lower-lobe tumor location.
Several treatment-related risk factors predict the development of symptomatic pneumonitis, and elderly patients who undergo CCRT with carboplatin-paclitaxel chemotherapy are at highest risk. Fatal pneumonitis, although uncommon, is related to dosimetric factors and tumor location.
Summary Background We aimed to compare overall survival after standard-dose versus high-dose conformal radiotherapy with concurrent chemotherapy and the addition of cetuximab to concurrent ...chemoradiation for patients with inoperable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer. Methods In this open-label randomised, two-by-two factorial phase 3 study in 185 institutions in the USA and Canada, we enrolled patients (aged ≥18 years) with unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer, a Zubrod performance status of 0–1, adequate pulmonary function, and no evidence of supraclavicular or contralateral hilar adenopathy. We randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) patients to receive either 60 Gy (standard dose), 74 Gy (high dose), 60 Gy plus cetuximab, or 74 Gy plus cetuximab. All patients also received concurrent chemotherapy with 45 mg/m2 paclitaxel and carboplatin once a week (AUC 2); 2 weeks after chemoradiation, two cycles of consolidation chemotherapy separated by 3 weeks were given consisting of paclitaxel (200 mg/m2 ) and carboplatin (AUC 6). Randomisation was done with permuted block randomisation methods, stratified by radiotherapy technique, Zubrod performance status, use of PET during staging, and histology; treatment group assignments were not masked. Radiation dose was prescribed to the planning target volume and was given in 2 Gy daily fractions with either intensity-modulated radiation therapy or three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy. The use of four-dimensional CT and image-guided radiation therapy were encouraged but not necessary. For patients assigned to receive cetuximab, 400 mg/m2 cetuximab was given on day 1 followed by weekly doses of 250 mg/m2 , and was continued through consolidation therapy. The primary endpoint was overall survival. All analyses were done by modified intention-to-treat. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00533949. Findings Between Nov 27, 2007, and Nov 22, 2011, 166 patients were randomly assigned to receive standard-dose chemoradiotherapy, 121 to high-dose chemoradiotherapy, 147 to standard-dose chemoradiotherapy and cetuximab, and 110 to high-dose chemoradiotherapy and cetuximab. Median follow-up for the radiotherapy comparison was 22·9 months (IQR 27·5–33·3). Median overall survival was 28·7 months (95% CI 24·1–36·9) for patients who received standard-dose radiotherapy and 20·3 months (17·7–25·0) for those who received high-dose radiotherapy (hazard ratio HR 1·38, 95% CI 1·09–1·76; p=0·004). Median follow-up for the cetuximab comparison was 21·3 months (IQR 23·5–29·8). Median overall survival in patients who received cetuximab was 25·0 months (95% CI 20·2–30·5) compared with 24·0 months (19·8–28·6) in those who did not (HR 1·07, 95% CI 0·84–1·35; p=0·29). Both the radiation-dose and cetuximab results crossed protocol-specified futility boundaries. We recorded no statistical differences in grade 3 or worse toxic effects between radiotherapy groups. By contrast, the use of cetuximab was associated with a higher rate of grade 3 or worse toxic effects (205 86% of 237 vs 160 70% of 228 patients; p<0·0001). There were more treatment-related deaths in the high-dose chemoradiotherapy and cetuximab groups (radiotherapy comparison: eight vs three patients; cetuximab comparison: ten vs five patients). There were no differences in severe pulmonary events between treatment groups. Severe oesophagitis was more common in patients who received high-dose chemoradiotherapy than in those who received standard-dose treatment (43 21% of 207 patients vs 16 7% of 217 patients; p<0·0001). Interpretation 74 Gy radiation given in 2 Gy fractions with concurrent chemotherapy was not better than 60 Gy plus concurrent chemotherapy for patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer, and might be potentially harmful. Addition of cetuximab to concurrent chemoradiation and consolidation treatment provided no benefit in overall survival for these patients. Funding National Cancer Institute and Bristol-Myers Squibb.
Purpose Although intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is increasingly used to treat locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), IMRT and three-dimensional conformal external beam ...radiation therapy (3D-CRT) have not been compared prospectively. This study compares 3D-CRT and IMRT outcomes for locally advanced NSCLC in a large prospective clinical trial. Patients and Methods A secondary analysis was performed to compare IMRT with 3D-CRT in NRG Oncology clinical trial RTOG 0617, in which patients received concurrent chemotherapy of carboplatin and paclitaxel with or without cetuximab, and 60- versus 74-Gy radiation doses. Comparisons included 2-year overall survival (OS), progression-free survival, local failure, distant metastasis, and selected Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 3) ≥ grade 3 toxicities. Results The median follow-up was 21.3 months. Of 482 patients, 53% were treated with 3D-CRT and 47% with IMRT. The IMRT group had larger planning treatment volumes (median, 427 v 486 mL; P = .005); a larger planning treatment volume/volume of lung ratio (median, 0.13 v 0.15; P = .013); and more stage IIIB disease (30.3% v 38.6%, P = .056). Two-year OS, progression-free survival, local failure, and distant metastasis-free survival were not different between IMRT and 3D-CRT. IMRT was associated with less ≥ grade 3 pneumonitis (7.9% v 3.5%, P = .039) and a reduced risk in adjusted analyses (odds ratio, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.171 to 0.986; P = .046). IMRT also produced lower heart doses ( P < .05), and the volume of heart receiving 40 Gy (V40) was significantly associated with OS on adjusted analysis ( P < .05). The lung V5 was not associated with any ≥ grade 3 toxicity, whereas the lung V20 was associated with increased ≥ grade 3 pneumonitis risk on multivariable analysis ( P = .026). Conclusion IMRT was associated with lower rates of severe pneumonitis and cardiac doses in NRG Oncology clinical trial RTOG 0617, which supports routine use of IMRT for locally advanced NSCLC.
Patients with centrally located early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are at a higher risk of toxicity from high-dose ablative radiotherapy. NRG Oncology/RTOG 0813 was a phase I/II study ...designed to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), efficacy, and toxicity of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for centrally located NSCLC.
Medically inoperable patients with biopsy-proven, positron emission tomography-staged T1 to 2 (≤ 5 cm) N0M0 centrally located NSCLC were accrued into a dose-escalating, five-fraction SBRT schedule that ranged from 10 to 12 Gy/fraction (fx) delivered over 1.5 to 2 weeks. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined as any treatment-related grade 3 or worse predefined toxicity that occurred within the first year. MTD was defined as the SBRT dose at which the probability of DLT was closest to 20% without exceeding it.
One hundred twenty patients were accrued between February 2009 and September 2013. Patients were elderly, there were slightly more females, and the majority had a performance status of 0 to 1. Most cancers were T1 (65%) and squamous cell (45%). Organs closest to planning target volume/most at risk were the main bronchus and large vessels. Median follow-up was 37.9 months. Five patients experienced DLTs; MTD was 12.0 Gy/fx, which had a probability of a DLT of 7.2% (95% CI, 2.8% to 14.5%). Two-year rates for the 71 evaluable patients in the 11.5 and 12.0 Gy/fx cohorts were local control, 89.4% (90% CI, 81.6% to 97.4%) and 87.9% (90% CI, 78.8% to 97.0%); overall survival, 67.9% (95% CI, 50.4% to 80.3%) and 72.7% (95% CI, 54.1% to 84.8%); and progression-free survival, 52.2% (95% CI, 35.3% to 66.6%) and 54.5% (95% CI, 36.3% to 69.6%), respectively.
The MTD for this study was 12.0 Gy/fx; it was associated with 7.2% DLTs and high rates of tumor control. Outcomes in this medically inoperable group of mostly elderly patients with comorbidities were comparable with that of patients with peripheral early-stage tumors.
Imaging research laboratories are rapidly creating machine learning systems that achieve expert human performance using open-source methods and tools. These artificial intelligence systems are being ...developed to improve medical image reconstruction, noise reduction, quality assurance, triage, segmentation, computer-aided detection, computer-aided classification, and radiogenomics. In August 2018, a meeting was held in Bethesda, Maryland, at the National Institutes of Health to discuss the current state of the art and knowledge gaps and to develop a roadmap for future research initiatives. Key research priorities include: 1, new image reconstruction methods that efficiently produce images suitable for human interpretation from source data; 2, automated image labeling and annotation methods, including information extraction from the imaging report, electronic phenotyping, and prospective structured image reporting; 3, new machine learning methods for clinical imaging data, such as tailored, pretrained model architectures, and federated machine learning methods; 4, machine learning methods that can explain the advice they provide to human users (so-called explainable artificial intelligence); and 5, validated methods for image de-identification and data sharing to facilitate wide availability of clinical imaging data sets. This research roadmap is intended to identify and prioritize these needs for academic research laboratories, funding agencies, professional societies, and industry.
The biotic resistance hypothesis predicts that diverse native communities are more resistant to invasion. However, past studies vary in their support for this hypothesis due to an apparent ...contradiction between experimental studies, which support biotic resistance, and observational studies, which find that native and non‐native species richness are positively related at broad scales (small‐scale studies are more variable). Here, we present a novel analysis of the biotic resistance hypothesis using 24 456 observations of plant richness spanning four community types and seven ecoregions of the United States. Non‐native plant occurrence was negatively related to native plant richness across all community types and ecoregions, although the strength of biotic resistance varied across different ecological, anthropogenic and climatic contexts. Our results strongly support the biotic resistance hypothesis, thus reconciling differences between experimental and observational studies and providing evidence for the shared benefits between invasive species management and native biodiversity conservation.
The biotic resistance hypothesis predicts that diverse native communities are more resistant to invasion, but evidence for this hypothesis varies among past studies. Using a new statistical approach with 24 456 plant surveys across the United States, we found universal support for the biotic resistance hypothesis.
Radiation dose escalation has been shown to improve local control and survival in patients with non-small cell lung cancer in some studies, but randomized data have not supported this premise, ...possibly owing to adverse effects. Because of the physical characteristics of the Bragg peak, proton therapy (PT) delivers minimal exit dose distal to the target volume, resulting in better sparing of normal tissues in comparison to photon-based radiation therapy. This is particularly important for lung cancer given the proximity of the lung, heart, esophagus, major airways, large blood vessels, and spinal cord. However, PT is associated with more uncertainty because of the finite range of the proton beam and motion for thoracic cancers. PT is more costly than traditional photon therapy but may reduce side effects and toxicity-related hospitalization, which has its own associated cost. The cost of PT is decreasing over time because of reduced prices for the building, machine, maintenance, and overhead, as well as newer, shorter treatment programs. PT is improving rapidly as more research is performed particularly with the implementation of 4-dimensional computed tomography-based motion management and intensity modulated PT. Given these controversies, there is much debate in the oncology community about which patients with lung cancer benefit significantly from PT. The Particle Therapy Co-operative Group (PTCOG) Thoracic Subcommittee task group intends to address the issues of PT indications, advantages and limitations, cost-effectiveness, technology improvement, clinical trials, and future research directions. This consensus report can be used to guide clinical practice and indications for PT, insurance approval, and clinical or translational research directions.
RTOG 0617 compared standard-dose (SD; 60 Gy) versus high-dose (HD; 74 Gy) radiation with concurrent chemotherapy and determined the efficacy of cetuximab for stage III non-small-cell lung cancer ...(NSCLC).
The study used a 2 × 2 factorial design with radiation dose as 1 factor and cetuximab as the other, with a primary end point of overall survival (OS).
Median follow-up was 5.1 years. There were 3 grade 5 adverse events (AEs) in the SD arm and 9 in the HD arm. Treatment-related grade ≥3 dysphagia and esophagitis occurred in 3.2% and 5.0% of patients in the SD arm
12.1% and 17.4% in the HD arm, respectively (
= .0005 and < .0001). There was no difference in pulmonary toxicity, with grade ≥3 AEs in 20.6% and 19.3%. Median OS was 28.7
20.3 months (
= .0072) in the SD and HD arms, respectively, 5-year OS and progression-free survival (PFS) rates were 32.1% and 23% and 18.3% and 13% (
= .055), respectively. Factors associated with improved OS on multivariable analysis were standard radiation dose, tumor location, institution accrual volume, esophagitis/dysphagia, planning target volume and heart V5. The use of cetuximab conferred no survival benefit at the expense of increased toxicity. The prior signal of benefit in patients with higher H scores was no longer apparent. The progression rate within 1 month of treatment completion in the SD arm was 4.6%. For comparison purposes, the resultant 2-year OS and PFS rates allowing for that dropout rate were 59.6% and 30.7%, respectively, in the SD arms.
A 60-Gy radiation dose with concurrent chemotherapy should remain the standard of care, with the OS rate being among the highest reported in the literature for stage III NSCLC. Cetuximab had no effect on OS. The 2-year OS rates in the control arm are similar to the PACIFIC trial.
In the randomized trial of standard- versus high-dose chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced (LA) NSCLC (Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0617), overall survival (OS) was worse in the high-dose arm. ...Although heart dose was suggested as a contributing factor, actionable parameters have not been established. We present an analysis of clinical and dosimetric parameters affecting OS in this patient population, focusing on heart dose.
Clinical data were collected on 416 patients with LA NSCLC treated at a single institution, with a subset of 333 available treatment plans recontoured using Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0617 normal tissue guidelines. Toxicity and dosimetry data were analyzed for 322 patients; multivariate analysis was performed on 251 patients. Dosimetric parameters of radiation to tumor and organs at risk were analyzed with clinical data pertaining to OS, disease-free survival, and toxicity.
Patients were treated with radiation therapy to prescribed doses of 50.0 to 84.9 Gy (median 66.0 Gy). Median follow-up was 14.5 months. Median OS was 16.8 months. The 1- and 2-year OS rates were 61.4% and 38.8%, respectively. On multivariate analysis, factors independently associated with worse OS were increasing heart V50 (volume receiving ≥50 Gy), heart volume, lung V5 (proportion of the lung structure excluding the target volume) receiving at least 5 Gy), bilateral mediastinal lymph node involvement, and lack of concurrent chemotherapy. When stratified by heart V50 less than 25% versus 25% or greater, the 1-year OS rates were 70.2% versus 46.8% and the 2-year OS rates were 45.9% versus 26.7% (p < 0.0001). Median heart V50 was significantly higher (20.8% versus 13.9%, p < 0.0001) for patients with cardiac toxicity with a Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade of 1 or higher.
Heart dose is associated with OS and cardiac toxicity for patients with LA NSCLC treated with chemoradiotherapy.
Objectives Stereotactic body radiation therapy has been proposed as an alternative local treatment option for high-risk patients with early-stage lung cancer. A direct comparison of outcomes between ...stereotactic body radiation therapy and surgical resection has not been reported. This study compares short-term outcomes between stereotactic body radiation therapy and surgical treatment of non–small cell lung cancer. Methods We compared all patients treated with surgery (January 2000–December 2006) or stereotactic body radiation therapy (February 2004–May 2007) with clinical stage IA/B non–small cell lung cancer staged by computed tomography and positron emission tomography. Comorbidity scores were recorded prospectively using the Adult Co-Morbidity Evaluation scoring system. Charts were reviewed to determine local tumor recurrence, disease-specific survival, and overall survival. A propensity score matching analysis was used to adjust estimated treatment hazard ratios for confounding effects of patient age, comorbidity index, and clinical stage. Results A total of 462 patients underwent surgery and 76 received stereotactic body radiation therapy. Overall, surgical patients were younger ( P < .001), had lower comorbidity scores ( P < .001), and better pulmonary function (forced expiratory volume in 1 second and carbon monoxide diffusion in the lung) ( P < .001). Among the surgical and stereotactic body radiation therapy groups, 62.6% (291/462) and 78.9% (60/76) were in clinical stage IA, respectively. Final pathology upstaged 35% (161/462) of the surgery patients. In an unmatched comparison, overall 5-year survival was 55% with surgery, and the 3-year survival was 32% with radiation therapy. Among patients with clinical stage IA disease, 3-year local tumor control was 89% with radiation therapy and 96% with surgery ( P = .04). There was no difference in local tumor control in stage IB disease ( P = .89). No disease-specific survival differences were found in patients with 1A ( P = .33) or IB disease ( P = .69). Propensity analysis matched 57 high-risk surgical patients to 57 patients undergoing stereotactic body radiation therapy. In the matched comparison of this subgroup, there was no difference in freedom from local recurrence (88% vs 90%), disease-free survival (77% vs 86%), and overall survival (54% vs 38%) at 3 years. Conclusions In an unmatched comparison of clinical stage IA disease, surgical patients were healthier and had better local tumor control compared with those receiving stereotactic body radiation therapy. Propensity analysis in clinical stage IA/B non–small cell lung cancer revealed similar rates of local recurrence and disease-specific survival in patients treated with surgery compared with stereotactic body radiation therapy.
PDF
