Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014 Nov 15;90(4):850-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.07.012. Epub 2014 Sep 9.

Propensity score-matched analysis of comprehensive local therapy for oligometastatic non-small cell lung cancer that did not progress after front-line chemotherapy.

Author information

1
University of Texas School of Public Health, Houston, Texas; Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
2
Department of Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
3
Department of Thoracic Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
4
Department of Neurosurgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
5
Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
6
Department of Gastrointestinal Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
7
Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. Electronic address: dgomez@mdanderson.org.

Abstract

PURPOSE:

To retrospectively analyze factors influencing survival in patients with non-small cell lung cancer presenting with ≤3 synchronous metastatic lesions.

METHODS AND MATERIALS:

We identified 90 patients presenting between 1998 and 2012 with non-small cell lung cancer and ≤3 metastatic lesions who had received at least 2 cycles of chemotherapy followed by surgery or radiation therapy before disease progression. The median number of chemotherapy cycles before comprehensive local therapy (CLT) (including concurrent chemoradiation as first-line therapy) was 6. Factors potentially affecting overall (OS) or progression-free survival (PFS) were evaluated with Cox proportional hazards regression. Propensity score matching was used to assess the efficacy of CLT.

RESULTS:

Median follow-up time was 46.6 months. Benefits in OS (27.1 vs 13.1 months) and PFS (11.3 months vs 8.0 months) were found with CLT, and the differences were statistically significant when propensity score matching was used (P ≤ .01). On adjusted analysis, CLT had a statistically significant benefit in terms of OS (hazard ratio, 0.37; 95% confidence interval, 0.20-0.70; P ≤ .01) but not PFS (P=.10). In an adjusted subgroup analysis of patients receiving CLT, favorable performance status (hazard ratio, 0.43; 95% confidence interval, 0.22-0.84; P=.01) was found to predict improved OS.

CONCLUSIONS:

Comprehensive local therapy was associated with improved OS in an adjusted analysis and seemed to favorably influence OS and PFS when factors such as N status, number of metastatic lesions, and disease sites were controlled for with propensity score-matched analysis. Patients with favorable performance status had improved outcomes with CLT. Ultimately, prospective, randomized trials are needed to provide definitive evidence as to the optimal treatment approach for this patient population.

PMID:
25216859
DOI:
10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.07.012
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center