Virtual Library
Start Your Search
B. Slotman
Author of
-
+
MINI 18 - Radiation Topics in Localized NSCLC (ID 139)
- Event: WCLC 2015
- Type: Mini Oral
- Track: Treatment of Localized Disease - NSCLC
- Presentations: 1
-
+
MINI18.08 - A Systematic Review of Comparative Effectiveness Studies of Surgery versus SABR in Early Stage Lung Cancer: How Good Is the Data? (ID 1549)
17:25 - 17:30 | Author(s): B. Slotman
- Abstract
- Presentation
Background:
Three prospective randomized control trials (RCTs) comparing stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) and surgery in early stage non-small cell lung cancer (ES-NSCLC) failed to complete accrual. Numerous other comparative effectiveness studies have been published, but such studies may be more prone to bias, and conclusions may vary based on study quality. The goal of this study was to perform a systematic review of comparative effectiveness studies that compare both treatment modalities in this patient population, to assess study quality and conclusions.
Methods:
In accordance with PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review was conducted on studies reporting on comparative outcomes of surgery versus SABR for ES-NSCLC. Studies published in the English language over a 10-year period (April 2006-March 2015) were identified using PUBMED with an inclusive search strategy, using the National Library of Medicine’s medical subject headings. Eligible study designs included RCTs, population analyses, match pair comparisons, propensity-match score comparisons, retrospective case-control series, decision analyses, and cost-effectiveness analyses. Letters, editorial and systematic reviews were excluded. Abstracts identified were independently reviewed by two investigators to determine eligibility, with discrepancies settled by a third investigator. Using a standardized data abstraction form, study, patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics were abstracted. As patients undergoing surgery and SABR often differ in their baseline characteristics, we determined the proportion of studies reporting statistical adjustment for baseline characteristic imbalances (e.g. matching in patient studies, sensitivity analyses in modeling studies). The Fisher’s exact test was used to determine if there was an association between the use of statistical adjustment and differences in overall survival (OS) findings.
Results:
Of the 568 studies identified by our search strategy, 22 were eligible for analysis. Primary study design was retrospective (n=11), population-based (n=7), or model-based (n=4). Most patient studies (n=17) reported on a statistical adjustment for differences in baseline characteristics, with propensity score matching (n=12) being the most common technique employed. All studies, except for 1, reported details of the type of surgery performed. SABR doses employed ranged from 30 Gy in 1 fraction, to 60 Gy in 3 fractions. The weighted average pathologic confirmation of malignancy rate for SABR patients was 72% (range 22-100%). Of the 20 studies reporting on overall survival, 12 found that SABR and surgery were equal, or sensitive to variability in baseline patient, treatment, or tumor factors. The remaining 8 studies reported an overall survival benefit of surgery over SABR, however, 4 of these studies did not employ statistical adjustments for baseline characteristics. In the other 4 studies reporting overall survival superiority of surgery when controlling for various co-variates, at least one other recurrence endpoint (local, regional, or distant) was found to be equal between surgery and SABR. All but 2 studies stated in their conclusion that future clinical trials are warranted to investigate the role of SABR in the potentially operable ES-NSCLC patient.
Conclusion:
A systematic review of the comparative effectiveness literature indicates that the results of well-controlled studies comparing surgery and SABR argue for clinical equipoise. Results of a pooled analysis of two international RCTs that closed prematurely are expected shortly.
Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.
-
+
MINI 28 - Psychological Impact of Lung Cancer and its Treatment (ID 150)
- Event: WCLC 2015
- Type: Mini Oral
- Track: Palliative and Supportive Care
- Presentations: 1
- Moderators:A. Oton
- Coordinates: 9/09/2015, 16:45 - 18:15, 102+104+106
-
+
MINI28.04 - Discussant for MINI28.01, MINI28.02, MINI28.03 (ID 3382)
17:00 - 17:10 | Author(s): B. Slotman
- Abstract
- Presentation
Abstract not provided
Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.
-
+
MINI 32 - Topics in Localized Lung Cancer (ID 166)
- Event: WCLC 2015
- Type: Mini Oral
- Track: Treatment of Localized Disease - NSCLC
- Presentations: 1
- Moderators:D. Boffa, T. D'Amico
- Coordinates: 9/09/2015, 18:30 - 20:00, 201+203
-
+
MINI32.14 - Primary Early-Stage Lung Cancer Following Head and Neck Cancer: A Population Based Study of Treatment and Survival in the Netherlands (ID 1433)
19:45 - 19:50 | Author(s): B. Slotman
- Abstract
- Presentation
Background:
Second primary lung cancer (SPLC) is an important cause of death in survivors of head and neck squamous cell cancer (HNSCC). The goal of this Dutch population study was to compare treatment patterns and outcomes in early-stage SPLC after HNSCC.
Methods:
Details on all patients in a population of 16 million diagnosed with lung cancer between 1997 and 2011 were obtained from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. After excluding patients with a history of other malignancies, patients were dichotomized with a primary lung cancer or a SPLC after HNSCC. The latter included oral cavity, oropharynx, larynx, and hypopharynx sub-sites. Baseline characteristics of early-stage primary and SPLC were compared using the chi-square, fisher’s exact, or t-test, where appropriate. After stratifying patients into five consecutive 3-year time periods, the Chi-Square Trend test was used to determine trends in treatment patterns over time. Overall survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and the log-rank test used to assess differences in survival. 30- and 90-day treatment related mortality were calculated. To assess for stage migration due to routine availability of PET-staging, as well as the availability of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR), outcomes were analyzed before and after 2005. All statistical tests were two-sided and considered significant when p<0.05.
Results:
Of the 153,330 lung cancer patients, 19,501 with a history of a non-HNSCC primary cancer were excluded from the analysis. Of the 133,829 remaining patients, 2,556 (2%) represented a SPLC following HNSCC. SPLC patients were more likely to present in stage I (27% versus 16%, p<0.01) rather than stage IV (34% versus 44%, p<0.01). For early-stage SPLC, initial HNSCC anatomical subsites were most commonly larynx (53%) and oral cavity (24%). Treatment for early-stage SPLC included surgery (53%), radiotherapy (RT, 33%), or best supportive care (14%). The proportion of RT patients undergoing SABR was unknown. When compared to surgery, early-stage SPLC patients receiving any-form of RT tended to be older, with more advanced T-stage disease, poorly differentiated histology, and lower rates of pathologic diagnosis (all p<0.01). The proportion of all early-stage lung cancer patients receiving surgery over time remained stable in the primary setting (range: 59-63%, p=0.69), but decreased for early-stage SPLC patients (range: 68-42%, p<0.01). The use of RT increased over time for both primary (range: 21-30%, p<0.01) and early-stage SPLC patients (range: 23-43%, p<0.01). 30- and 90-day treatment related mortality rates were higher in surgical versus RT patients in both pre-2005 (3.8%, 8.6% versus 4.0%, 8.0%) and post-2005 (2.3%, 4.0% versus and 0%, 3.2%) eras. Overall, early-stage SPLC surgical patients had improved survival when compared to RT patients (p<0.01). In the post 2005 era, however, survival was similar for these two modalities (p=0.13).
Conclusion:
In survivors of HNSCC who develop early-stage SPLC, RT deserves attention as an alternative gold standard to surgery. Previous studies indicated that a majority of RT delivered for early-stage NSCLC after 2006 was SABR [Palma D, 2010]. Despite negative selection of poorer baseline characteristics, use of RT resulted in comparable survival and lower post-treatment mortality when compared to surgery in the modern era.
Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.
-
+
ORAL 10 - SCLC (ID 98)
- Event: WCLC 2015
- Type: Oral Session
- Track: Small Cell Lung Cancer
- Presentations: 1
- Moderators:C. Faivre-Finn, P. Lara Jr.
- Coordinates: 9/07/2015, 10:45 - 12:15, 605+607
-
+
ORAL10.03 - Which Patients with ES-SCLC Should Receive Thoracic Radiotherapy (TRT) Routinely? (ID 41)
11:27 - 11:38 | Author(s): B. Slotman
- Abstract
- Presentation
Background:
Although TRT in patients with ES-SCLC did not lead to a statistically significant difference in overall survival (p=0.066), it did improve 2-year survival rates (p=0.004) in the CREST trial (Slotman et al., Lancet 385:36-42:2015). The failure to meet the primary study endpoint has evoked some controversy in the lung cancer community as to which patients should be offered TRT routinely. To define which patients benefit most from radiotherapy, analysis for overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS) and recurrence pattern was performed in patients with and without RITD, which was one of the stratification factors in the randomized study.
Methods:
Patients with confirmed ES-SCLC who responded to 4-6 cycles of platinum-etoposide were randomized to TRT (30 Gy/10fx) or control. All received prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI). The primary study endpoint was OS. Secondary endpoints were PFS, intrathoracic control. relapse pattern and toxicity.
Results:
Out of 495 patients in the intent-to-treat analysis, 434 had RITD (215 allocated to TRT and 219 to the control arm) and 61 had not (32 allocated to TRT and 29 to the control arm). No significant differences in patient characteristics were observed between the groups. In patients with RITD, OS was significantly longer in the TRT-arm (HR 0.81,95% CI 0.66-1.00;p=0.044). Survival rates in the TRT and control arm were 33% (95%CI 27-40) vs 26% (95%CI 21-33) at 1 year, and 12% (95%CI 8-19) vs. 3% (95%CI 1-8) at 2 years, respectively. PFS was also significantly longer in the TRT-arm (HR=0.70, 95%CI 0.57-0.85; p<0.001). Intrathoracic progression was reported in 43.7% of the TRT arm vs. 81.3% in the control arm (p<0.001). There was no significant difference in the risk of brain metastases (10.2% vs. 5.5%). Exclusive progression outside thorax and brain occurred in 37.2% in the TRT arm, compared to 5.9% in the control arm (P<0.001). In patients without RITD, there was no significant difference in OS (HR 1.02, 95%CI 0.59-1.77, p=0.937) and PFS (HR=1,00, 95%CI 0.59-1.70, NS) between the TRT and control arms.
Conclusion:
This additional analysis of the CREST data shows that ES-SCLC patients with RITD after chemotherapy have a statistically significant improvement in OS, PFS and risk of intrathoracic progression if they undergo TRT. No such benefit for TRT is seen in patients without RITD. These findings support the routine use of TRT in patients who respond to chemotherapy but still have residual intrathoracic disease.
Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.
-
+
ORAL 35 - Surgical Approaches in Localized Lung Cancer (ID 155)
- Event: WCLC 2015
- Type: Oral Session
- Track: Treatment of Localized Disease - NSCLC
- Presentations: 1
- Moderators:M. de Perrot, J. Mitchell
- Coordinates: 9/09/2015, 16:45 - 18:15, 601+603
-
+
ORAL35.03 - Salvage Surgery for Local Failures after Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy for Lung Malignancies (ID 626)
17:07 - 17:18 | Author(s): B. Slotman
- Abstract
- Presentation
Background:
Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) is a guideline-recommended therapy for unfit patients with early stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and for pulmonary metastases. Experience with SABR for potentially operable patients is also increasing, and salvage surgery may have a role in patients who subsequently develop a local tumor recurrence. However, prior high-dose SABR could theoretically increase local adhesions and compromise wound healing. As the published literature is limited, we describe our experience with salvage surgery in 17 patients who developed a local recurrence after SABR.
Methods:
Patients who underwent surgical salvage for a local recurrence following SABR for pulmonary malignancies were identified from two Dutch institutional databases, as well as cases provided by other Dutch surgeons. Complications were scored using the Dindo-Clavien-classification.
Results:
Seventeen patients who underwent surgery for a local recurrence were identified. Patients were treated with SABR for either primary non-small cell lung cancers (N=9) or solitary metastasis (N=8). Four patients with solitary metastasis underwent surgery twice each for separate recurrences. Median time to local recurrence was 15.6 months. Recurrences were diagnosed with CT- and/or [18]FDG-PET-imaging, with 5 patients also having a pre-surgical pathological diagnosis. Extensive adhesions were observed during 5 resections, requiring conversion from a thoracoscopic procedure to thoracotomy in 3 procedures. Four patients experienced complications post-surgery; grade 2 (N=2) and grade 3a (N=2), respectively. All resected specimens confirmed the presence of viable tumor cells. Median length of hospital stay was 7 days (range 4-15 days) and 30-day mortality was 0%. Lymph node dissection revealed mediastinal metastases in 3 patients, all of whom received adjuvant therapy. Median follow-up after surgery was 41 months and median overall survival was 38 months.
Conclusion:
Experience with 21 surgical procedures for local recurrences post-SABR revealed only two grade IIIa complications, and a 30-day mortality of 0%. Median overall survival after surgery was 38 months. These results suggest that salvage surgery may be safely performed in selected patients following SABR.
Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.
-
+
PC 03 - Pro vs Con: Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation (PCI) Post Chemotherapy Response / Pro vs Con: Is There a Role for Radiation in Oligometastatic Disease? (ID 49)
- Event: WCLC 2015
- Type: Pro Con
- Track: Treatment of Advanced Diseases - NSCLC
- Presentations: 1
- Moderators:A. Brade, K. Rosenzweig, A. Bezjak, J.S. Lee
- Coordinates: 9/09/2015, 14:15 - 15:45, 708+710+712
-
+
PC03.01 - Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation (PCI) Post Chemotherapy Response - Pro (ID 2034)
14:20 - 14:40 | Author(s): B. Slotman
- Abstract
- Presentation
Abstract:
Background Brain metastases are an important clinical problem in patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC), with 20% of patients having them at diagnosis and about 80% at autopsy. In patients with LS-SCLC, prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) significantly reduces the risk of brain metastases, and it improves survival [1]. A meta-analysis showed a survival benefit of almost 6% at 3 years with PCI (21 vs 15%). A subsequent international multi-center study comparing higher and lower dose PCI found no improvement in outcomes with higher doses [2]. Consequently, a dose of 25 Gy in 10 fractions remains the standard dose for PCI. Since the risk of brain metastases is even higher in patients with ES-SCLC, PCI has also been investigated in these patients.A randomized EORTC study showed that PCI both reduced the risk of brain metastases and improved overall survival [3]. Survival at 1 year was 27% for the patients who received PCI compared to 13% for the controls. Interestingly, patients who received PCI were more likely to receive 2[nd] or 3[rd] line chemotherapy with subsequent disease progression (68 vs45%), presumably because they remained fitter without brain metastases. PCI was well tolerated in the effect on quality of life was small and transient [4]. The beneficial effect of of PCI was underscored in the recent CREST trial, where the risk of brain metastases was less than 5% [5]. Controversies surrounding the use of PCI Firstly, PCI can have a negative effect on cognition [6], with important risk factors being advanced age, pre-existing cerebrovascular problems, diabetes and the use of anti-epileptics. It should however be appreciated that brain metastases by themselves also have an important negative effect on cognition and quality of life. Moreover, SCLC patients may have impaired cognitive functioning in comparison with healthy controls, independent of the use of chemotherapy or radiotherapy. Another point to consider is that metastases in SCLC, often are multiple with limited options for high dose (stereotactic) radiotherapy, in contrast to NSCLC. Use of radiotherapy techniques that reduce doses to the hippocampus [7], as well as the use of Alzheimer drugs drugs such as memantine and donezepil [8] may further mitigate the effect of PCI. The effectiveness and safety of these approaches remains to be be evaluated in prospective clinical trials. Second, it has been questioned whether PCI will continue to show a beneficial effect if a brain MRI is repeated after completion of chemotherapy, in order to eliminate some subclinical metastases. This is discussion intensified after the presentation of a Japanese study in 2014 [9]. In the study, MRI brain was not only performed after chemotherapy, but also at regular intervals during the follow-up. Any brain metastases detected were treated with radiotherapy or radiosurgery. The study was designed as a superiority study for PCI, with overall survival as primary endpoint, but closed early due to futility. The likelihood of finding a survival benefit of PCI was less than 0,1%, but the discussion was fueled by the incorrect and misleading title using the word ‘detrimental’. Due to slow accrual, the Japanese study enrolled 160 patients entered from 40 centers in 4 years, thereby suggesting that patient selection may have played a roll. The publication of this analysis is awaited with interest. In order to address this topic from another angle, we have re-analyzed the effect of PCI on brain metastases and survival in a previous EORTC PCI study, after excluding patients who either died or developed brain metastases in the first 8 weeks after randomization, as such patients may have had asymptomatic brain metastases, visible if an MRI would have been performed. Even after exclusion of these patients, the EORTC PCI trial found a significant effect on brain metastases (HR 0.40; p<0.001) and overall survival (HR0.74; p=0.035) [unpublished data]. Conclusion In conclusion, PCI should remain standard of care in SCLC patients who have responded to chemotherapy. The pros and cons of PCI should be individually weighted and discussed with the patient. Some promising new techniques undergoing evaluation now may reduce the side-effects of PCI. References 1. Aupérin A, Arriagada R, Pignon JP, et al.. Prophylactic cranial irradiation for patients with small-cell lung cancer in complete remission. Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation Overview Collaborative Group. N Engl J Med. 1999 Aug 12;341(7):476-84. 2. Le Péchoux C, Dunant A, Senan S, et al. 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. Lancet Oncol. 2009 May;10(5):467-74. 3. Slotman B, Faivre-Finn C, Kramer G, et al. Prophylactic cranial irradiation in extensive small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 2007 Aug 16;357(7):664-72. 4. Slotman BJ, Mauer ME, Bottomley A, et al. Prophylactic cranial irradiation in extensive disease small-cell lung cancer: short-term health-related quality of life and patient reported symptoms: results of an international Phase III randomized controlled trial by the EORTC Radiation Oncology and Lung Cancer Groups. J Clin Oncol. 2009 Jan 1;27(1):78-84. 5. Slotman BJ, van Tinteren H, Praag JO, et al. Use of thoracic radiotherapy for extensive stage small-cell lung cancer: a phase 3 randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2015 Jan 3;385(9962):36-42. 6. Gondi V, Paulus R, Bruner DW, et al. Decline in tested and self-reported cognitive functioning after prophylactic cranial irradiation for lung cancer: pooled secondary analysis of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group randomized trials 0212 and 0214. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013 Jul 15;86(4):656-64. 7. Kundapur V, Ellchuk T, Ahmed S, Gondi V. Risk of hippocampal metastases in small cell lung cancer patients at presentation and after cranial irradiation: a safety profile study for hippocampal sparing during prophylactic or therapeutic cranial irradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2015 Mar 15;91(4):781-6 8. Day J, Zienius K, Gehring K, et al. Interventions for preventing and ameliorating cognitive deficits in adults treated with cranial irradiation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Dec 18;12:CD011335. 9. Seto T, Takahashi T, Yamanaka T, et al. Prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) has a detrimental effect on the overall survival (OS) of patients (pts) with extensive disease small cell lung cancer (ED-SCLC): Results of a Japanese randomized phase III trial. J Clin Oncol 32 (Suppl) Jun 11, 2014, abstract 7503
Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.
