Search

Larger tumors are underrepresented in most prospective trials on stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for inoperable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We performed this phase 1 trial to specifically study the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of SBRT for NSCLC >3 cm. A 3 + 3 dose-escalation design (cohort A) with an expansion cohort at the MTD (cohort B) was used. Patients with inoperable NSCLC >3 cm (T2-4) were eligible. Select ipsilateral hilar and single-station mediastinal nodes were permitted. The initial SBRT dose was 40 Gy in 5 fractions, with planned escalation to 50 and 60 Gy in 5 fractions. Adjuvant chemotherapy was mandatory for cohort A and optional for cohort B, but no patients in cohort B received chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was SBRT-related acute grade (G) 4+ or persistent G3 toxicities (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.03). Secondary endpoints included local failure (LF), distant metastases, disease progression, and overall survival. The median age was 80 years; tumor size was >3 cm and ≤5 cm in 20 (59%) and >5 cm in 14 patients (41%). In cohort A (n = 9), 3 patients treated to 50 Gy experienced G3 radiation pneumonitis (RP), thus defining the MTD. In the larger dose-expansion cohort B (n = 25), no radiation therapy–related G4+ toxicities and no G3 RP occurred; only 2 patients experienced G2 RP. The 2-year cumulative incidence of LF was 20.2%, distant failure was 34.7%, and disease progression was 54.4%. Two-year overall survival was 53%. A biologically effective dose (BED) <100 Gy was associated with higher LF (P =.006); advanced stage and higher neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio were associated with greater disease progression (both P =.004). Fifty Gy in 5 fractions is the MTD for SBRT to tumors >3 cm. A higher BED is associated with fewer LFs even in larger tumors. Cohort B appears to have had less toxicity, possibly due to the omission of chemotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has emerged as an effective treatment for early-stage lung cancer. The histologic subtype of surgically resected lung adenocarcinoma is recognized as a prognostic factor, with the presence of solid or micropapillary patterns predicting poor outcomes. We describe the outcomes after SBRT for early-stage lung adenocarcinoma stratified by histologic subtype.Methods and Materials: We identified 119 consecutive patients (124 lesions) with stage I to IIA lung adenocarcinoma who had undergone definitive SBRT at our institution from August 2008 to August 2015 and had undergone core biopsy. Histologic subtyping was performed according to the 2015 World Health Organization classification. Of the 124 tumors, 37 (30%) were a high-risk subtype, defined as containing a component of solid and/or micropapillary pattern. The cumulative incidences of local, nodal, regional, and distant failure were compared between the high-risk and non-high-risk adenocarcinoma subtypes using Gray's test, and multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated from propensity score-weighted Cox regression models.Results: The median follow-up for the entire cohort was 17 months and for surviving patients was 21 months. The 1-year cumulative incidence of and adjusted HR for local, nodal, regional, and distant failure in high-risk versus non-high-risk lesions was 7.3% versus 2.7% (HR 16.8; 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.5-81.4), 14.8% versus 2.6% (HR 3.8; 95% CI 0.95-15.0), 4.0% versus 1.2% (HR 20.9; 95% CI 2.3-192.3), and 22.7% versus 3.6% (HR 6.9; 95% CI 2.2-21.1), respectively. No significant difference was seen with regard to overall survival.Conclusions: The outcomes after SBRT for early-stage adenocarcinoma of the lung correlate highly with histologic subtype, with micropapillary and solid tumors portending significantly higher rates of locoregional and metastatic progression. In this context, the histologic subtype determined from core biopsies is a prognostic factor and could have important implications for patient selection, adjuvant treatment, biopsy methods, and clinical trial design. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]