Suresh Senan

Extra-pleural pneumonectomy versus no extra-pleural pneumonectomy for patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma: clinical outcomes of the Mesothelioma and Radical Surgery (MARS) randomised feasibility study

Summary Background The effects of extra-pleural pneumonectomy (EPP) on survival and quality of life in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma have, to our knowledge, not been assessed in a randomised trial. We aimed to assess the clinical outcomes of patients who were randomly assigned to EPP or no EPP in the context of trimodal therapy in the Mesothelioma and Radical Surgery (MARS) feasibility study. Methods MARS was a multicentre randomised controlled trial in 12 UK hospitals. Patients aged 18 years or older who had pathologically confirmed mesothelioma and were deemed fit enough to undergo trimodal therapy were included. In a prerandomisation registration phase, all patients underwent induction platinum-based chemotherapy followed by clinical review. After further consent, patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to EPP followed by postoperative hemithorax irradiation or to no EPP. Randomisation was done centrally with computer-generated permuted blocks stratified by surgical centre. The main endpoints were feasibility of randomly assigning 50 patients in 1 year (results detailed in another report), proportion randomised who received treatment, proportion eligible (registered) who proceeded to randomisation, perioperative mortality, and quality of life. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment allocation. This is the principal report of the MARS study; all patients have been recruited. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered, number ISRCTN95583524. Findings Between Oct 1, 2005, and Nov 3, 2008, 112 patients were registered and 50 were subsequently randomly assigned: 24 to EPP and 26 to no EPP. The main reasons for not proceeding to randomisation were disease progression (33 patients), inoperability (five patients), and patient choice (19 patients). EPP was completed satisfactorily in 16 of 24 patients assigned to EPP; in five patients EPP was not started and in three patients it was abandoned. Two patients in the EPP group died within 30 days and a further patient died without leaving hospital. One patient in the no EPP group died perioperatively after receiving EPP off trial in a non-MARS centre. The hazard ratio [HR] for overall survival between the EPP and no EPP groups was 1·90 (95% CI 0·92–3·93; exact p=0·082), and after adjustment for sex, histological subtype, stage, and age at randomisation the HR was 2·75 (1·21–6·26; p=0·016). Median survival was 14·4 months (5·3–18·7) for the EPP group and 19·5 months (13·4 to time not yet reached) for the no EPP group. Of the 49 randomly assigned patients who consented to quality of life assessment (EPP n=23; no EPP n=26), 12 patients in the EPP group and 19 in the no EPP group completed the quality of life questionnaires. Although median quality of life scores were lower in the EPP group than the no EPP group, no significant differences between groups were reported in the quality of life analyses. There were ten serious adverse events reported in the EPP group and two in the no EPP group. Interpretation In view of the high morbidity associated with EPP in this trial and in other non-randomised studies a larger study is not feasible. These data, although limited, suggest that radical surgery in the form of EPP within trimodal therapy offers no benefit and possibly harms patients. Funding Cancer Research UK (CRUK/04/003), the June Hancock Mesothelioma Research Fund, and Guys and St Thomas NHS Foundation Trust.

Early and locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC): ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up

The Clatterbridge Cancer Centre and Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, Liverpool; University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK; Center for Medical Imaging, University of Groningen, Groningen; Department of Radiation Oncology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Thoracic Surgery, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester, UK; University Hospitals KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Oncology Department, Service d’Oncologie Médicale, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois (CHUV), Lausanne, Switzerland

Standard-dose versus higher-dose prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) in patients with limited-stage small-cell lung cancer in complete remission after chemotherapy and thoracic radiotherapy (PCI 99-01, EORTC 22003-08004, RTOG 0212, and IFCT 99-01): a randomised clinical trial

BACKGROUNDnThe optimum dose of prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) for limited-stage small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) is unknown. A meta-analysis suggested that the incidence of brain metastases might be reduced with higher PCI doses. This randomised clinical trial compared the effect of standard versus higher PCI doses on the incidence of brain metastases.nnnMETHODSnBetween September, 1999, and December, 2005, 720 patients with limited-stage SCLC in complete remission after chemotherapy and thoracic radiotherapy from 157 centres in 22 countries were randomly assigned to a standard (n=360, 25 Gy in 10 daily fractions of 2.5 Gy) or higher PCI total dose (n=360, 36 Gy) delivered using either conventional (18 daily fractions of 2 Gy) or accelerated hyperfractionated (24 fractions in 16 days with two daily sessions of 1.5 Gy separated by a minimum interval of 6 h) radiotherapy. All of the treatment schedules excluded weekends. Randomisation was stratified according to medical centre, age (</=60 and >60 years), and interval between the start of induction treatment and the date of randomisation (</=90, 91-180, and >180 days). Eligible patients were randomised blindly by the data centre of the Institut Gustave Roussy (PCI99-01 and IFCT) using minimisation, and by the data centres of EORTC (EORTC ROG and LG) and RTOG (for CALGB, ECOG, RTOG, and SWOG), both using block stratification. The primary endpoint was the incidence of brain metastases at 2 years. Analysis was by intention-to-treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT00005062.nnnFINDINGSnFive patients in the standard-dose group and four in the higher-dose group did not receive PCI; nonetheless, all randomised patients were included in the effectiveness anlysis. After a median follow-up of 39 months (range 0-89 months), 145 patients had brain metastases; 82 in the standard-dose group and 63 in the higher-dose group. There was no significant difference in the 2-year incidence of brain metastases between the standard PCI dose group and the higher-dose group, at 29% (95% CI 24-35) and 23% (18-29), respectively (hazard ratio [HR] 0.80 [95% CI 0.57-1.11], p=0.18). 226 patients in the standard-dose group and 252 in the higher-dose group died; 2-year overall survival was 42% (95% CI 37-48) in the standard-dose group and 37% (32-42) in the higher-dose group (HR 1.20 [1.00-1.44]; p=0.05). The lower overall survival in the higher-dose group is probably due to increased cancer-related mortality: 189 patients in the standard group versus 218 in the higher-dose group died of progressive disease. Five serious adverse events occurred in the standard-dose group versus zero in the higher-dose group. The most common acute toxic events were fatigue (106 [30%] patients in the standard-dose group vs 121 [34%] in the higher-dose group), headache (85 [24%] vs 99 [28%]), and nausea or vomiting (80 [23%] vs 101 [28%]).nnnINTERPRETATIONnNo significant reduction in the total incidence of brain metastases was observed after higher-dose PCI, but there was a significant increase in mortality. PCI at 25 Gy should remain the standard of care in limited-stage SCLC.nnnFUNDINGnInstitut Gustave-Roussy, Association pour la Recherche sur le Cancer (2001), Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique (2007). The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) contribution to this trial was supported by grants 5U10 CA11488-30 through 5U10 CA011488-38 from the US National Cancer Institute.

2nd ESMO Consensus Conference on Lung Cancer: early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer consensus on diagnosis, treatment and follow-up

To complement the existing treatment guidelines for all tumour types, ESMO organises consensus conferences to focus on specific issues in each type of tumour. The 2nd ESMO Consensus Conference on Lung Cancer was held on 11-12 May 2013 in Lugano. A total of 35 experts met to address several questions on non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in each of four areas: pathology and molecular biomarkers, first-line/second and further lines in advanced disease, early-stage disease and locally advanced disease. For each question, recommendations were made including reference to the grade of recommendation and level of evidence. This consensus paper focuses on early-stage disease.

CONSIDERATION OF DOSE LIMITS FOR ORGANS AT RISK OF THORACIC RADIOTHERAPY: ATLAS FOR LUNG, PROXIMAL BRONCHIAL TREE, ESOPHAGUS, SPINAL CORD, RIBS, AND BRACHIAL PLEXUS

PURPOSEnTo review the dose limits and standardize the three-dimenional (3D) radiographic definition for the organs at risk (OARs) for thoracic radiotherapy (RT), including the lung, proximal bronchial tree, esophagus, spinal cord, ribs, and brachial plexus.nnnMETHODS AND MATERIALSnThe present study was performed by representatives from the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group, European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, and Soutwestern Oncology Group lung cancer committees. The dosimetric constraints of major multicenter trials of 3D-conformal RT and stereotactic body RT were reviewed and the challenges of 3D delineation of these OARs described. Using knowledge of the human anatomy and 3D radiographic correlation, draft atlases were generated by a radiation oncologist, medical physicist, dosimetrist, and radiologist from the United States and reviewed by a radiation oncologist and medical physicist from Europe. The atlases were then critically reviewed, discussed, and edited by another 10 radiation oncologists.nnnRESULTSnThree-dimensional descriptions of the lung, proximal bronchial tree, esophagus, spinal cord, ribs, and brachial plexus are presented. Two computed tomography atlases were developed: one for the middle and lower thoracic OARs (except for the heart) and one focusing on the brachial plexus for a patient positioned supine with their arms up for thoracic RT. The dosimetric limits of the key OARs are discussed.nnnCONCLUSIONSnWe believe these atlases will allow us to define OARs with less variation and generate dosimetric data in a more consistent manner. This could help us study the effect of radiation on these OARs and guide high-quality clinical trials and individualized practice in 3D-conformal RT and stereotactic body RT.

2nd ESMO Consensus Conference on Lung Cancer: non-small-cell lung cancer first-line/second and further lines of treatment in advanced disease

To complement the existing treatment guidelines for all tumour types, ESMO organises consensus conferences to focus on specific issues in each type of tumour. The 2nd ESMO Consensus Conference on Lung Cancer was held on 11-12 May 2013 in Lugano. A total of 35 experts met to address several questions on non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in each of four areas: pathology and molecular biomarkers, first-line/second and further lines of treatment in advanced disease, early-stage disease and locally advanced disease. For each question, recommendations were made including reference to the grade of recommendation and level of evidence. This consensus paper focuses on first line/second and further lines of treatment in advanced disease.

2nd ESMO Consensus Conference in Lung Cancer: locally advanced stage III non-small-cell lung cancer

To complement the existing treatment guidelines for all tumour types, ESMO organises consensus conferences to focus on specific issues in each type of tumour. The 2nd ESMO Consensus Conference on Lung Cancer was held on 11-12 May 2013 in Lugano. A total of 35 experts met to address several questions on non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in each of four areas: pathology and molecular biomarkers, first-line/second and further lines of treatment in advanced disease, early-stage disease and locally advanced disease. For each question, recommendations were made including reference to the grade of recommendation and level of evidence. This consensus paper focuses on locally advanced disease.

Second ESMO consensus conference on lung cancer: pathology and molecular biomarkers for non-small-cell lung cancer.

To complement the existing treatment guidelines for all tumour types, ESMO organises consensus conferences to focus on specific issues in each type of tumour. The Second ESMO Consensus Conference on Lung Cancer was held on 11-12 May 2013 in Lugano. A total of 35 experts met to address several questions on management of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in each of four areas: pathology and molecular biomarkers, early stage disease, locally advanced disease and advanced (metastatic) disease. For each question, recommendations were made including reference to the grade of recommendation and level of evidence. This consensus paper focuses on recommendations for pathology and molecular biomarkers in relation to the diagnosis of lung cancer, primarily non-small-cell carcinomas.To complement the existing treatment guidelines for all tumour types, ESMO organises consensus conferences to focus on specific issues in each type of tumour. The Second ESMO Consensus Conference on Lung Cancer was held on 11-12 May 2013 in Lugano. A total of 35 experts met to address several questions on management of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in each of four areas: pathology and molecular biomarkers, early stage disease, locally advanced disease and advanced (metastatic) disease. For each question, recommendations were made including reference to the grade of recommendation and level of evidence. This consensus paper focuses on recommendations for pathology and molecular biomarkers in relation to the diagnosis of lung cancer, primarily non-small-cell carcinomas.

Clinical neurological outcome and quality of life among patients with limited small-cell cancer treated with two different doses of prophylactic cranial irradiation in the intergroup phase III trial (PCI99-01, EORTC 22003-08004, RTOG 0212 and IFCT 99-01)

BACKGROUNDnWe recently published the results of the PCI99 randomised trial comparing the effect of a prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) at 25 or 36 Gy on the incidence of brain metastases (BM) in 720 patients with limited small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). As concerns about neurotoxicity were a major issue surrounding PCI, we report here midterm and long-term repeated evaluation of neurocognitive functions and quality of life (QoL).nnnPATIENTS AND METHODSnAt predetermined intervals, the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 and brain module were used for self-reported patient data, whereas the EORTC-Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Late Effects Normal Tissue-Subjective, Objective, Management, Analytic scale was used for clinicians assessment. For each scale, the unfavourable status was analysed with a logistic model including age, grade at baseline, time and PCI dose.nnnRESULTSnOver the 3 years studied, there was no significant difference between the two groups in any of the 17 selected items assessing QoL and neurological and cognitive functions. We observed in both groups a mild deterioration across time of communication deficit, weakness of legs, intellectual deficit and memory (all P < 0.005).nnnCONCLUSIONnPatients should be informed of these potential adverse effects, as well as the benefit of PCI on survival and BM. PCI with a total dose of 25 Gy remains the standard of care in limited-stage SCLC.

PROCLAIM: Randomized Phase III Trial of Pemetrexed-Cisplatin or Etoposide-Cisplatin Plus Thoracic Radiation Therapy Followed by Consolidation Chemotherapy in Locally Advanced Nonsquamous Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSEnThe phase III PROCLAIM study evaluated overall survival (OS) of concurrent pemetrexed-cisplatin and thoracic radiation therapy (TRT) followed by consolidation pemetrexed, versus etoposide-cisplatin and TRT followed by nonpemetrexed doublet consolidation therapy.nnnPATIENTS AND METHODSnPatients with stage IIIA/B unresectable nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer randomly received (1:1) pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) and cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) intravenously every 3 weeks for three cycles plus concurrent TRT (60 to 66 Gy) followed by pemetrexed consolidation every 3 weeks for four cycles (arm A), or standard therapy with etoposide 50 mg/m(2) and cisplatin 50 mg/m(2) intravenously, every 4 weeks for two cycles plus concurrent TRT (60 to 66 Gy) followed by two cycles of consolidation platinum-based doublet chemotherapy (arm B). The primary objective was OS. The study was designed as a superiority trial with 80% power to detect an OS hazard ratio of 0.74 with a type 1 error of .05.nnnRESULTSnEnrollment was stopped early because of futility. Five hundred ninety-eight patients were randomly assigned (301 to arm A, 297 to arm B) and 555 patients (283 in arm A, 272 in arm B) were treated. Arm A was not superior to arm B in terms of OS (hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.20; median, 26.8 v 25.0 months; P = .831). Arm A had a significantly lower incidence of any drug-related grade 3 to 4 adverse events (64.0% v 76.8%; P = .001), including neutropenia (24.4% v 44.5%; P < .001), during the overall treatment period.nnnCONCLUSIONnPemetrexed-cisplatin combined with TRT followed by consolidation pemetrexed was not superior to standard chemoradiotherapy for stage III unresectable nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer.