Xiaofei Wang

PURPOSE: Although level 1 evidence supports 45-Gy twice-daily radiotherapy as standard for limited-stage small-cell lung cancer, most patients receive higher-dose once-daily regimens in clinical practice. Whether increasing radiotherapy dose improves outcomes remains to be prospectively demonstrated. METHODS: This phase III trial, CALGB 30610/RTOG 0538 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00632853), was conducted in two stages. In the first stage, patients with limited-stage disease were randomly assigned to receive 45-Gy twice-daily, 70-Gy once-daily, or 61.2-Gy concomitant-boost radiotherapy, starting with either the first or second (of four total) chemotherapy cycles. In the second stage, allocation to the 61.2-Gy arm was discontinued following planned interim toxicity analysis, and the study continued with two remaining arms. The primary end point was overall survival (OS) in the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: Trial accrual opened on March 15, 2008, and closed on December 1, 2019. All patients randomly assigned to 45-Gy twice-daily (n = 313) or 70-Gy once-daily radiotherapy (n = 325) are included in this analysis. After a median follow-up of 4.7 years, OS was not improved on the once-daily arm (hazard ratio for death, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.17; P = .594). Median survival is 28.5 months for twice-daily treatment, and 30.1 months for once-daily treatment, with 5-year OS of 29% and 32%, respectively. Treatment was tolerable, and the frequency of severe adverse events, including esophageal and pulmonary toxicity, was similar on both arms. CONCLUSION: Although 45-Gy twice-daily radiotherapy remains the standard of care, this study provides the most robust information available to help guide the choice of thoracic radiotherapy regimen for patients with limited-stage small-cell lung cancer.

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title> <jats:p>We propose a test-based elastic integrative analysis of the randomised trial and real-world data to estimate treatment effect heterogeneity with a vector of known effect modifiers. When the real-world data are not subject to bias, our approach combines the trial and real-world data for efficient estimation. Utilising the trial design, we construct a test to decide whether or not to use real-world data. We characterise the asymptotic distribution of the test-based estimator under local alternatives. We provide a data-adaptive procedure to select the test threshold that promises the smallest mean square error and an elastic confidence interval with a good finite-sample coverage property.</jats:p>

BACKGROUND: For patients with stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) exon 19 deletions and exon 21 L858R mutations, osimertinib is the standard of care. Investigating the activity and safety of osimertinib in patients with EGFR exon 18 G719X, exon 20 S768I, or exon 21 L861Q mutations is of clinical interest. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer with confirmed EGFR exon 18 G719X, exon 20 S768I, or exon 21 L861Q mutations were eligible. Patients were required to have measurable disease, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and adequate organ function. Patients were required to be EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor-naive. The primary objective was objective response rate, and secondary objectives were progression-free survival, safety, and overall survival. The study used a two-stage design with a plan to enroll 17 patients in the first stage, and the study was terminated after the first stage due to slow accrual. RESULTS: Between May 2018 and March 2020, 17 patients were enrolled and received study therapy. The median age of patients was 70 years (interquartile range 62-76), the majority were female (n = 11), had a performance status of 1 (n = 10), and five patients had brain metastases at baseline. The objective response rate was 47% [95% confidence interval (CI) 23% to 72%], and the radiographic responses observed were partial response (n = 8), stable disease (n = 8), and progressive disease (n = 1). The median progression-free survival was 10.5 months (95% CI 5.0-15.2 months), and the median OS was 13.8 months (95% CI 7.3-29.2 months). The median duration on treatment was 6.1 months (range 3.6-11.9 months), and the most common adverse events (regardless of attribution) were diarrhea, fatigue, anorexia, weight loss, and dyspnea. CONCLUSIONS: This trial suggests osimertinib has activity in patients with these uncommon EGFR mutations.

BACKGROUND: The increased detection of small-sized peripheral non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has renewed interest in sublobar resection in lieu of lobectomy. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, noninferiority, phase 3 trial in which patients with NSCLC clinically staged as T1aN0 (tumor size, ≤2 cm) were randomly assigned to undergo sublobar resection or lobar resection after intraoperative confirmation of node-negative disease. The primary end point was disease-free survival, defined as the time between randomization and disease recurrence or death from any cause. Secondary end points were overall survival, locoregional and systemic recurrence, and pulmonary functions. RESULTS: From June 2007 through March 2017, a total of 697 patients were assigned to undergo sublobar resection (340 patients) or lobar resection (357 patients). After a median follow-up of 7 years, sublobar resection was noninferior to lobar resection for disease-free survival (hazard ratio for disease recurrence or death, 1.01; 90% confidence interval [CI], 0.83 to 1.24). In addition, overall survival after sublobar resection was similar to that after lobar resection (hazard ratio for death, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.26). The 5-year disease-free survival was 63.6% (95% CI, 57.9 to 68.8) after sublobar resection and 64.1% (95% CI, 58.5 to 69.0) after lobar resection. The 5-year overall survival was 80.3% (95% CI, 75.5 to 84.3) after sublobar resection and 78.9% (95% CI, 74.1 to 82.9) after lobar resection. No substantial difference was seen between the two groups in the incidence of locoregional or distant recurrence. At 6 months postoperatively, a between-group difference of 2 percentage points was measured in the median percentage of predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second, favoring the sublobar-resection group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with peripheral NSCLC with a tumor size of 2 cm or less and pathologically confirmed node-negative disease in the hilar and mediastinal lymph nodes, sublobar resection was not inferior to lobectomy with respect to disease-free survival. Overall survival was similar with the two procedures. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others; CALGB 140503 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00499330.).