Treatment of stage i lung cancer in high-risk and inoperable patients: Comparison of prospective clinical trials using stereotactic body radiotherapy (RTOG 0236), sublobar resection (ACOSOG Z4032), and radiofrequency ablation (ACOSOG Z4033)

Traves Crabtree, Varun Puri, Robert Timmerman, Hiran Fernando, Jeffrey Bradley, Paul A. Decker, Rebecca Paulus, Joe B. Putnum, Damian E. Dupuy, Bryan Meyers

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

95 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of the present study was to compare the selection criteria and short-term outcomes among 3 prospective clinical trials using stereotactic body radiotherapy (Radiation Therapy Oncology Group [RTOG] trial 0236), sublobar resection (American College of Surgeons Oncology Group [ACOSOG] trial Z4032), and radiofrequency ablation (ACOSOG trial Z4033). Methods: The selection criteria and outcomes were compared among RTOG 0236 (n = 55), ACOSOG Z4032 (n = 211), and ACOSOG Z4033 (n = 51). Age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, percentage of predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second, and percentage of predicted carbon monoxide diffusing capacity of the lung were used to perform a propensity-matched analysis among patients with clinical stage 1A in RTOG 0236 and ACOSOG Z4032. Results: The patients in ACOSOG Z4033 undergoing radiofrequency ablation were older (75.6 ± 7.5 years) than those in RTOG 0236 (72.5 ± 8.8 years) and ACOSOG Z4032 (70.2 ± 8.5 years; P = .0003). The pretreatment percentage of predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second was 61.3% ± 33.4% for RTOG 0236, 53.8% ± 19.6% for ACOSOG Z4032, and 48.8% ± 20.3% for ACOSOG Z4033 (P = .15). The pretreatment percentage of predicted carbon monoxide diffusing capacity of the lung was 61.6% ± 30.2% for RTOG 0236, 46.4% ± 15.6% for ACOSOG Z4032, and 43.7% ± 18.0% for ACOSOG Z4033 (P = .001). The overall 90-day mortality for stereotactic body radiotherapy, surgery, and radiofrequency ablation was 0%, 2.4% (5/211), and 2.0% (1/51), respectively (P = .5). Overall, the unadjusted 30-day grade 3+ adverse events were more common with surgery than with stereotactic body radiotherapy (28% vs 9.1%, P = .004), although no difference was between the 2 groups at 90 days. Among the patients with clinical stage IA in ACOSOG Z4032, 29.3% had a more advanced pathologic stage at surgery. A propensity-matched comparison showed no difference between stereotactic body radiotherapy and surgery for 30-day grade 3+ adverse events (odds ratio, 2.37; 95% confidence interval, 0.75-9.90; P = .18). Conclusions: Among appropriately matched patients, no difference was seen in early morbidity between sublobar resection and stereotactic body radiotherapy. These results underscore the need for a randomized trial to delineate the relative survival benefit of each modality and to help stratify patients considered high risk.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)692-699
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
Volume145
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2013

Fingerprint

Radiation Oncology
Radiosurgery
Lung Neoplasms
Radiotherapy
Clinical Trials
Therapeutics
Lung Volume Measurements
Forced Expiratory Volume
Carbon Monoxide
Patient Selection
Surgeons
Ambulatory Surgical Procedures
Odds Ratio
Confidence Intervals
Morbidity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Surgery
  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine

Cite this

Treatment of stage i lung cancer in high-risk and inoperable patients : Comparison of prospective clinical trials using stereotactic body radiotherapy (RTOG 0236), sublobar resection (ACOSOG Z4032), and radiofrequency ablation (ACOSOG Z4033). / Crabtree, Traves; Puri, Varun; Timmerman, Robert; Fernando, Hiran; Bradley, Jeffrey; Decker, Paul A.; Paulus, Rebecca; Putnum, Joe B.; Dupuy, Damian E.; Meyers, Bryan.

In: Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Vol. 145, No. 3, 03.2013, p. 692-699.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{239933ba95cd46c9ba4fd3c278c43d91,
title = "Treatment of stage i lung cancer in high-risk and inoperable patients: Comparison of prospective clinical trials using stereotactic body radiotherapy (RTOG 0236), sublobar resection (ACOSOG Z4032), and radiofrequency ablation (ACOSOG Z4033)",
abstract = "Objective: The purpose of the present study was to compare the selection criteria and short-term outcomes among 3 prospective clinical trials using stereotactic body radiotherapy (Radiation Therapy Oncology Group [RTOG] trial 0236), sublobar resection (American College of Surgeons Oncology Group [ACOSOG] trial Z4032), and radiofrequency ablation (ACOSOG trial Z4033). Methods: The selection criteria and outcomes were compared among RTOG 0236 (n = 55), ACOSOG Z4032 (n = 211), and ACOSOG Z4033 (n = 51). Age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, percentage of predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second, and percentage of predicted carbon monoxide diffusing capacity of the lung were used to perform a propensity-matched analysis among patients with clinical stage 1A in RTOG 0236 and ACOSOG Z4032. Results: The patients in ACOSOG Z4033 undergoing radiofrequency ablation were older (75.6 ± 7.5 years) than those in RTOG 0236 (72.5 ± 8.8 years) and ACOSOG Z4032 (70.2 ± 8.5 years; P = .0003). The pretreatment percentage of predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second was 61.3{\%} ± 33.4{\%} for RTOG 0236, 53.8{\%} ± 19.6{\%} for ACOSOG Z4032, and 48.8{\%} ± 20.3{\%} for ACOSOG Z4033 (P = .15). The pretreatment percentage of predicted carbon monoxide diffusing capacity of the lung was 61.6{\%} ± 30.2{\%} for RTOG 0236, 46.4{\%} ± 15.6{\%} for ACOSOG Z4032, and 43.7{\%} ± 18.0{\%} for ACOSOG Z4033 (P = .001). The overall 90-day mortality for stereotactic body radiotherapy, surgery, and radiofrequency ablation was 0{\%}, 2.4{\%} (5/211), and 2.0{\%} (1/51), respectively (P = .5). Overall, the unadjusted 30-day grade 3+ adverse events were more common with surgery than with stereotactic body radiotherapy (28{\%} vs 9.1{\%}, P = .004), although no difference was between the 2 groups at 90 days. Among the patients with clinical stage IA in ACOSOG Z4032, 29.3{\%} had a more advanced pathologic stage at surgery. A propensity-matched comparison showed no difference between stereotactic body radiotherapy and surgery for 30-day grade 3+ adverse events (odds ratio, 2.37; 95{\%} confidence interval, 0.75-9.90; P = .18). Conclusions: Among appropriately matched patients, no difference was seen in early morbidity between sublobar resection and stereotactic body radiotherapy. These results underscore the need for a randomized trial to delineate the relative survival benefit of each modality and to help stratify patients considered high risk.",
author = "Traves Crabtree and Varun Puri and Robert Timmerman and Hiran Fernando and Jeffrey Bradley and Decker, {Paul A.} and Rebecca Paulus and Putnum, {Joe B.} and Dupuy, {Damian E.} and Bryan Meyers",
year = "2013",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1016/j.jtcvs.2012.10.038",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "145",
pages = "692--699",
journal = "Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery",
issn = "0022-5223",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Treatment of stage i lung cancer in high-risk and inoperable patients

T2 - Comparison of prospective clinical trials using stereotactic body radiotherapy (RTOG 0236), sublobar resection (ACOSOG Z4032), and radiofrequency ablation (ACOSOG Z4033)

AU - Crabtree, Traves

AU - Puri, Varun

AU - Timmerman, Robert

AU - Fernando, Hiran

AU - Bradley, Jeffrey

AU - Decker, Paul A.

AU - Paulus, Rebecca

AU - Putnum, Joe B.

AU - Dupuy, Damian E.

AU - Meyers, Bryan

PY - 2013/3

Y1 - 2013/3

N2 - Objective: The purpose of the present study was to compare the selection criteria and short-term outcomes among 3 prospective clinical trials using stereotactic body radiotherapy (Radiation Therapy Oncology Group [RTOG] trial 0236), sublobar resection (American College of Surgeons Oncology Group [ACOSOG] trial Z4032), and radiofrequency ablation (ACOSOG trial Z4033). Methods: The selection criteria and outcomes were compared among RTOG 0236 (n = 55), ACOSOG Z4032 (n = 211), and ACOSOG Z4033 (n = 51). Age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, percentage of predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second, and percentage of predicted carbon monoxide diffusing capacity of the lung were used to perform a propensity-matched analysis among patients with clinical stage 1A in RTOG 0236 and ACOSOG Z4032. Results: The patients in ACOSOG Z4033 undergoing radiofrequency ablation were older (75.6 ± 7.5 years) than those in RTOG 0236 (72.5 ± 8.8 years) and ACOSOG Z4032 (70.2 ± 8.5 years; P = .0003). The pretreatment percentage of predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second was 61.3% ± 33.4% for RTOG 0236, 53.8% ± 19.6% for ACOSOG Z4032, and 48.8% ± 20.3% for ACOSOG Z4033 (P = .15). The pretreatment percentage of predicted carbon monoxide diffusing capacity of the lung was 61.6% ± 30.2% for RTOG 0236, 46.4% ± 15.6% for ACOSOG Z4032, and 43.7% ± 18.0% for ACOSOG Z4033 (P = .001). The overall 90-day mortality for stereotactic body radiotherapy, surgery, and radiofrequency ablation was 0%, 2.4% (5/211), and 2.0% (1/51), respectively (P = .5). Overall, the unadjusted 30-day grade 3+ adverse events were more common with surgery than with stereotactic body radiotherapy (28% vs 9.1%, P = .004), although no difference was between the 2 groups at 90 days. Among the patients with clinical stage IA in ACOSOG Z4032, 29.3% had a more advanced pathologic stage at surgery. A propensity-matched comparison showed no difference between stereotactic body radiotherapy and surgery for 30-day grade 3+ adverse events (odds ratio, 2.37; 95% confidence interval, 0.75-9.90; P = .18). Conclusions: Among appropriately matched patients, no difference was seen in early morbidity between sublobar resection and stereotactic body radiotherapy. These results underscore the need for a randomized trial to delineate the relative survival benefit of each modality and to help stratify patients considered high risk.

AB - Objective: The purpose of the present study was to compare the selection criteria and short-term outcomes among 3 prospective clinical trials using stereotactic body radiotherapy (Radiation Therapy Oncology Group [RTOG] trial 0236), sublobar resection (American College of Surgeons Oncology Group [ACOSOG] trial Z4032), and radiofrequency ablation (ACOSOG trial Z4033). Methods: The selection criteria and outcomes were compared among RTOG 0236 (n = 55), ACOSOG Z4032 (n = 211), and ACOSOG Z4033 (n = 51). Age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, percentage of predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second, and percentage of predicted carbon monoxide diffusing capacity of the lung were used to perform a propensity-matched analysis among patients with clinical stage 1A in RTOG 0236 and ACOSOG Z4032. Results: The patients in ACOSOG Z4033 undergoing radiofrequency ablation were older (75.6 ± 7.5 years) than those in RTOG 0236 (72.5 ± 8.8 years) and ACOSOG Z4032 (70.2 ± 8.5 years; P = .0003). The pretreatment percentage of predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second was 61.3% ± 33.4% for RTOG 0236, 53.8% ± 19.6% for ACOSOG Z4032, and 48.8% ± 20.3% for ACOSOG Z4033 (P = .15). The pretreatment percentage of predicted carbon monoxide diffusing capacity of the lung was 61.6% ± 30.2% for RTOG 0236, 46.4% ± 15.6% for ACOSOG Z4032, and 43.7% ± 18.0% for ACOSOG Z4033 (P = .001). The overall 90-day mortality for stereotactic body radiotherapy, surgery, and radiofrequency ablation was 0%, 2.4% (5/211), and 2.0% (1/51), respectively (P = .5). Overall, the unadjusted 30-day grade 3+ adverse events were more common with surgery than with stereotactic body radiotherapy (28% vs 9.1%, P = .004), although no difference was between the 2 groups at 90 days. Among the patients with clinical stage IA in ACOSOG Z4032, 29.3% had a more advanced pathologic stage at surgery. A propensity-matched comparison showed no difference between stereotactic body radiotherapy and surgery for 30-day grade 3+ adverse events (odds ratio, 2.37; 95% confidence interval, 0.75-9.90; P = .18). Conclusions: Among appropriately matched patients, no difference was seen in early morbidity between sublobar resection and stereotactic body radiotherapy. These results underscore the need for a randomized trial to delineate the relative survival benefit of each modality and to help stratify patients considered high risk.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84873987803&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84873987803&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2012.10.038

DO - 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2012.10.038

M3 - Article

C2 - 23174176

AN - SCOPUS:84873987803

VL - 145

SP - 692

EP - 699

JO - Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

JF - Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

SN - 0022-5223

IS - 3

ER -