Abstract Background While conventionally fractionated radiation therapy alone is an acceptable option for poor prognostic patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC, we hypothesized that accelerated hypofractionated radiotherapy will have similar efficacy without increasing toxicity. Methods This is a retrospective analysis of 300 patients diagnosed with stage III NSCLC treated between 1993 and 2009. Patients included in the study were medically or surgically inoperable, were free of metastatic disease at initial workup and did not receive concurrent chemotherapy. Patients were categorized into three groups. Group 1 received 45 Gy in 15 fractions over 3 weeks (Accelerated Radiotherapy (ACRT)) while group 2 received 60-63 Gy (Standard Radiation Therapy 1 (STRT1)) and group 3 received > 63 Gy (Standard Radiation Therapy (STRT2)). Results There were 119 (39.7%) patients in the ACRT group, 90 (30.0%) in STRT1 and 91 (30.3%) in STRT2. More patients in the ACRT group had KPS ≤ 60 (p < 0.001), more commonly presented with weight loss > 5% (p = 0.002), and had stage 3B disease (p < 0.001). After adjusting for clinical variables, there were no differences in the radiation groups in terms of the patterns of local or distant tumor control or overall survival. Some benefit in relapse free survival was seen in the STRT1 group as compared to ACRT (HR = 0.65, p = 0.011). Acute toxicity profiles in the ACRT were significantly lower for grade ≥ 2 radiation dermatitis (p = 0.002), nausea/vomiting (p = 0.022), and weight loss during treatment (p = 0.020). Conclusions Despite the limitations of a retrospective analysis, our experience of accelerated hypofractionated radiation therapy with 45 Gy in 15 fractions appears to be an acceptable treatment option for poor performance status patients with stage III inoperable tumors. Such a treatment regimen (or higher doses in 15 fractions) should be prospectively evaluated using modern radiation technologies with the addition of sequential high dose chemotherapy in stage III NSCLC.

Purpose

To compare 2 stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) schedules for medically inoperable early-stage lung cancer to determine which produces the lowest rate of grade ≥3 protocol-specified adverse events (psAEs) at 1 year.

Methods and materials

Patients with biopsy-proven peripheral (≥2 cm from the central bronchial tree) T1 or T2, N0 (clinically node negative by positron emission tomography), M0 tumors were eligible. Patients were randomized to receive either 34 Gy in 1 fraction (arm 1) or 48 Gy in 4 consecutive daily fractions (arm 2). Rigorous central accreditation and quality assurance confirmed treatment per protocol guidelines. This study was designed to detect a psAEs rate >17% at a 10% significance level (1-sided) and 90% power. Secondary endpoints included rates of primary tumor control (PC), overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS) at 1 year. Designating the better of the 2 regimens was based on prespecified rules of psAEs and PC for each arm.

Results

Ninety-four patients were accrued between September 2009 and March 2011. The median follow-up time was 30.2 months. Of 84 analyzable patients, 39 were in arm 1 and 45 in arm 2. Patient and tumor characteristics were balanced between arms. Four (10.3%) patients on arm 1 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.9%-24.2%) and 6 (13.3%) patients on arm 2 (95% CI 5.1%-26.8%) experienced psAEs. The 2-year OS rate was 61.3% (95% CI 44.2%-74.6%) for arm 1 patients and 77.7% (95% CI 62.5%-87.3%) for arm 2. The 2-year DFS was 56.4% (95% CI 39.6%-70.2%) for arm 1 and 71.1% (95% CI 55.5%-82.1%) for arm 2. The 1-year PC rate was 97.0% (95% CI 84.2%-99.9%) for arm 1 and 92.7% (95% CI 80.1%-98.5%) for arm 2.

Conclusions

34 Gy in 1 fraction met the prespecified criteria and, of the 2 schedules, warrants further clinical research.

Purpose

RTOG 0617 was a phase III randomized trial for patients with unresectable stage IIIA/IIIB non-small cell lung cancer comparing standard-dose (60 Gy) versus high-dose (74 Gy) radiotherapy and chemotherapy, plus or minus cetuximab. Although the study was negative, based on prior evidence that patients with the KRAS-variant, an inherited germline mutation, benefit from cetuximab, we evaluated KRAS-variant patients in RTOG 0617.

Experimental design

From RTOG 0617, 328 of 496 (66%) of patients were included in this analysis. For time-to-event outcomes, stratified log-rank tests and multivariable Cox regression models were used. For binary outcomes, Cochran-Mantel-Haenzel tests and multivariable logistic regression models were used. All statistical tests were two sided, and a P value <0.05 was considered significant.

Results

A total of 17.1% (56/328) of patients had the KRAS-variant, and overall survival rates were similar between KRAS-variant and non-variant patients. However, there was a time-dependent effect of cetuximab seen only in KRAS-variant patients-while the hazard of death was higher in cetuximab-treated patients within year 1 [HR = 3.37, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.13-10.10, P = 0.030], death was lower from year 1 to 4 (HR = 0.33, 95% CI: 0.11-0.97, P = 0.043). In contrast, in non-variant patients, the addition of cetuximab significantly increased local failure (HR = 1.59, 95% CI: 1.11-2.28, P = 0.012).

Conclusions/discussion

Although an overall survival advantage was not achieved in KRAS-variant patients, there is potential impact of cetuximab for this genetic subset of patients. In contrast, cetuximab seems to harm non-variant patients. These findings further support the importance of genetic patient selection in trials studying the addition of systemic agents to radiotherapy.

Significance

The KRAS-variant is the first functional, inherited miRNA-disrupting variant identified in cancer. Our findings support that cetuximab has a potentially beneficial impact on KRAS-variant patients treated with radiation. The work confirms prior evidence that KRAS-variant patients are a subgroup who are especially sensitive to radiation. These findings further support the potential of this class of variants to enable true treatment personalization, considering the equally important endpoints of response and toxicity.

Purpose

To present long-term results of RTOG 0915/NCCTG N0927, a randomized lung stereotactic body radiation therapy trial of 34 Gy in 1 fraction versus 48 Gy in 4 fractions.

Methods and materials

This was a phase 2 multicenter study of patients with medically inoperable non-small cell lung cancer with biopsy-proven peripheral T1 or T2 N0M0 tumors, with 1-year toxicity rates as the primary endpoint and selected failure and survival outcomes as secondary endpoints. The study opened in September 2009 and closed in March 2011. Final data were analyzed through May 17, 2018.

Results

Eighty-four of 94 patients accrued were eligible for analysis: 39 in arm 1 and 45 in arm 2. Median follow-up time was 4.0 years for all patients and 6.0 years for those alive at analysis. Rates of grade 3 and higher toxicity were 2.6% in arm 1 and 11.1% in arm 2. Median survival times (in years) for 34 Gy and 48 Gy were 4.1 versus 4.6, respectively. Five-year outcomes (95% confidence interval) for 34 Gy and 48 Gy were a primary tumor failure rate of 10.6% (3.3%-23.1%) versus 6.8% (1.7%-16.9%); overall survival of 29.6% (16.2%-44.4%) versus 41.1% (26.6%-55.1%); and progression-free survival of 19.1% (8.5%-33.0%) versus 33.3% (20.2%-47.0%). Distant failure as the sole failure or a component of first failure occurred in 6 patients (37.5%) in the 34 Gy arm and in 7 (41.2%) in the 48 Gy arm.

Conclusions

No excess in late-appearing toxicity was seen in either arm. Primary tumor control rates at 5 years were similar by arm. A median survival time of 4 years for each arm suggests similar efficacy, pending any larger studies appropriately powered to detect survival differences.

These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on recent updates in the 2016 NCCN Guidelines for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC; Versions 1-4). These NCCN Guidelines Insights will discuss new immunotherapeutic agents, such as nivolumab and pembrolizumab, for patients with metastatic NSCLC. For the 2016 update, the NCCN panel recommends immune checkpoint inhibitors as preferred agents (in the absence of contraindications) for second-line and beyond (subsequent) therapy in patients with metastatic NSCLC (both squamous and nonsquamous histologies). Nivolumab and pembrolizumab are preferred based on improved overall survival rates, higher response rates, longer duration of response, and fewer adverse events when compared with docetaxel therapy.

These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines for Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma (MPM). These NCCN Guidelines Insights discuss systemic therapy regimens and surgical controversies for MPM. The NCCN panel recommends cisplatin/pemetrexed (category 1) for patients with MPM. The NCCN panel also now recommends bevacizumab/cisplatin/pemetrexed as a first-line therapy option for patients with unresectable MPM who are candidates for bevacizumab. The complete version of the NCCN Guidelines for MPM, available at NCCN.org, addresses all aspects of management for MPM including diagnosis, evaluation, staging, treatment, surveillance, and therapy for recurrence and metastasis; NCCN Guidelines are intended to assist with clinical decision-making.