Primary lung signet-ring cell carcinoma: a national analysis.

Background: Primary lung signet-ring cell carcinoma (LSRCC) is a rare form of aggressive lung cancer whose clinical features remain inadequately discerned. The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinicopathological characteristics and independent prognostic factors of primary LSRCC. Methods: Overall survival (OS) of patients with LSRCC, lung adenocarcinoma (LAC), and lung mucinous adenocarcinoma (LMAC) in the National Cancer Database from 2004 to 2018 was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling. Independent prognostic indicators for patients with LSRCC were determined using multivariable Cox proportional hazards analysis. Results: A total of 1,705 LSRCC, 504,006 LAC, and 15,883 LMAC patients were included in our analysis. LSRCC histology was significantly associated with younger age, male sex, larger and more poorly differentiated tumors, later American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage disease, higher clinical T, N, and M status, more use of chemotherapy, and less use of surgery when compared to LAC and LMAC patients. In unadjusted analysis, patients with LSRCC had significantly worse OS when compared to patients with LAC and LMAC. In multivariable analysis, patients with LSRCC experienced significantly worse OS when compared to only patients with LAC. Independent predictors of survival for patients with LSRCC were younger age, later year of diagnosis, lower Charlson/Deyo comorbidity condition scores, lower AJCC stage, higher income, smaller tumors, treatment with surgery, and receipt of chemotherapy. Conclusions: In this national analysis, LSRCC was found to be associated with distinct clinicopathological characteristics from those of LAC.

Long-term Survival After Lung Cancer Resection in the National Lung Screening Trial.

BACKGROUND: This study sought to evaluate the long-term survival and causes of death after surgery among patients with pathologic stage IA non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST). METHODS: Patients who underwent surgery and who had a diagnosis of pathologic stage IA NSCLC in the NLST were identified for analysis. The 5- and 10-year overall survival and lung cancer-specific survival, stratified by operation type, were evaluated. Among patients who underwent lobectomy, the causes of death and the cumulative incidence of lung cancer death were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 380 patients (n = 329, 86.6% lobectomy; n = 20, 5.3% segmentectomy; n = 31, 8.1% wedge resection) met inclusion criteria. Median follow-up time from the date of surgery was 7.8 years (interquartile range, 4.8-10.7 years). The 10-year overall survival rate was 58.3% (95% CI, 52.4%-63.8%) for lobectomy, 59.9% (95% CI, 33.2%-78.8%) for segmentectomy, and 45.2% (95% CI, 20.8%-66.9%) for wedge resection. The 10-year lung cancer-specific survival rate was 74.3% (95% CI, 68.6%-79.1%) for lobectomy, 81.3% (95% CI, 51.3%-93.8%) for segmentectomy, and 84.8% (95% CI, 64.0%-94.1%) for wedge resection. Lung cancer was the leading cause of death, accounting for 55.8% of deaths after lobectomy. The 10-year cumulative incidence of lung cancer death after lobectomy was 22.5% (95% CI, 18.3%-27.1%). CONCLUSIONS: The 10-year overall survival rate after lobectomy among patients with pathologic stage IA NSCLC in the NLST was 58%. Lung cancer was the leading cause of death, accounting for more than 55% of deaths.

Segmentectomy versus lobectomy in the United States: Outcomes after resection for first primary lung cancer and treatment patterns for second primary lung cancers.

OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to identify whether the results of JCOG0802 could be generalized to US clinical settings. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with clinical stage IA (≤2 cm) non-small cell lung cancer who underwent segmentectomy versus lobectomy (2004-2017) in the National Cancer Database were identified. Overall survival of patients in the National Cancer Database was assessed using propensity score-matched analysis. A separate analysis of the Surveillance Epidemiology End Results database was conducted to evaluate treatment patterns of second primary lung cancers among patients who underwent segmentectomy versus lobectomy for a first primary lung cancer. RESULTS: Of the 23,286 patients in the National Cancer Database meeting inclusion criteria, 1397 (6.0%) underwent segmentectomy and 21,889 (94.0%) underwent lobectomy. In a propensity score-matched analysis of all patients in the study cohort, there were no significant differences in overall survival between patients undergoing segmentectomy versus lobectomy (5-year overall survival: 79.9% [95% CI, 76.7%-82.0%] vs 81.8% [95% CI, 78.7%-84.4%], log-rank: P = .72). In subgroup analyses by tumor grade and histologic subtype, segmentectomy was associated with similar overall survival compared with lobectomy in all subgroups evaluated. In a propensity score-matched analysis of patients in the Surveillance Epidemiology End Results database, there were no significant differences in treatment patterns of second primary lung cancers between patients who underwent segmentectomy and patients who underwent lobectomy for their first primary lung cancer. CONCLUSIONS: In this national analysis of US patients diagnosed with stage IA (≤2 cm) non-small cell lung cancer, there were no significant differences in overall survival between segmentectomy and lobectomy in the overall cohort or in subgroup analyses by tumor grade or histologic subtype.

Pack-Year Smoking History: An Inadequate and Biased Measure to Determine Lung Cancer Screening Eligibility.

PURPOSE: Pack-year smoking history is an imperfect and biased measure of cumulative tobacco exposure. The use of pack-year smoking history to determine lung cancer screening eligibility in the current US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) guideline may unintentionally exclude many high-risk individuals, especially those from racial and ethnic minority groups. It is unclear whether using a smoking duration cutoff instead of a smoking pack-year cutoff would improve the selection of individuals for screening. METHODS: We analyzed 49,703 individuals with a smoking history from the Southern Community Cohort Study (SCCS) and 22,126 individuals with a smoking history from the Black Women's Health Study (BWHS) to assess eligibility for screening under the USPSTF guideline versus a proposed guideline that replaces the ≥20-pack-year criterion with a ≥20-year smoking duration criterion. RESULTS: Under the USPSTF guideline, only 57.6% of Black patients with lung cancer in the SCCS would have qualified for screening, whereas a significantly higher percentage of White patients with lung cancer (74.0%) would have qualified (P < .001). Under the proposed guideline, the percentage of Black and White patients with lung cancer who would have qualified for screening increased to 85.3% and 82.0%, respectively, eradicating the disparity in screening eligibility between the groups. In the BWHS, using a 20-year smoking duration cutoff instead of a 20-pack-year cutoff increased the percentage of Black women with lung cancer who would have qualified for screening from 42.5% to 63.8%. CONCLUSION: Use of a 20-year smoking duration cutoff instead of a 20-pack-year cutoff greatly increases the proportion of patients with lung cancer who would qualify for screening and eliminates the racial disparity in screening eligibility between Black versus White individuals; smoking duration has the added benefit of being easier to calculate and being a more precise assessment of smoking exposure compared with pack-year smoking history.

Update on Lung Cancer Screening Guideline.

Lung cancer screening has been shown to reduce lung cancer mortality and is recommended for individuals meeting age and smoking history criteria. Despite the expansion of lung cancer screening guidelines in 2021, racial/ethnic and sex disparities persist. High-risk racial minorities and women are more likely to be diagnosed with lung cancer at younger ages and have lower smoking histories when compared with White and male counterparts, resulting in higher rates of ineligibility for screening. Risk prediction models, biomarkers, and deep learning may help refine the selection of individuals who would benefit from screening.

Primary clear cell adenocarcinoma of the lung: a national analysis.

Background: Primary clear cell adenocarcinoma of the lung (CCAL) is a rare form of lung cancer with poorly understood clinical features. We sought to investigate the clinicopathological characteristics and independent prognostic factors of primary CCAL. Methods: Overall survival (OS) of patients with CCAL in the National Cancer Database (NCDB) from 2004 to 2017 was compared to lung adenocarcinoma using Kaplan-Meier analysis, multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling, and propensity score matching. Independent prognostic indicators for patients with CCAL were determined using multivariable Cox proportional hazards analysis. Results: A total of 1,396 CCAL and 462,360 lung adenocarcinoma patients were included in our analysis. When compared to patients diagnosed with lung adenocarcinoma, those diagnosed with CCAL were more likely to be younger, white, reside farther from a hospital, have higher Charlson/Deyo comorbidity condition (CDCC) scores, have private insurance, have T1, N0, M0 status. In unadjusted analysis, patients with CCAL had better survival than those with lung adenocarcinoma, although no significant differences in survival were found between the two groups with multivariable Cox proportional hazards and propensity score-matched analyses. Conclusions: In this national analysis, we found that the clinicopathological characteristics of CCAL are distinct from those of lung adenocarcinoma, but CCAL is not itself an independent predictor of survival after multivariable adjustment or propensity score-matched analysis.

The Role of Salvage Resection After Definitive Radiation Therapy for Non-small Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated outcomes of patients who undergo extended delay to resection after definitive radiation therapy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Perioperative outcomes and 5-year overall survival of patients with NSCLC who underwent definitive radiation therapy, followed by resection, from 2004 to 2020 in the National Cancer Database were evaluated. Patients who underwent resection >180 days after the initiation of radiation therapy (including any external beam therapy at a total dose of >60 Gy) were included in the analysis. Subgroup analyses were conducted by operation type and pathologic nodal status. RESULTS: From 2004 to 2020, 293 patients had an extended delay to resection after definitive radiation therapy. The clinical stage distribution was stage I to II in 53 patients (18.1%), stage IIIA in 111 (37.9%), stage IIIB in 106 (36.2%), stage IIIC in 13 (4.4%), and stage IV in 10 (3.4%). Median dose of radiation therapy received was 64.8 Gy (interquartile range, 60.0-66.6 Gy). Median days from radiation therapy to resection were 221.0 (interquartile range, 193.0-287.0) days. Lobectomy (64.5%) was the most common operation, followed by pneumonectomy (17.1%) and wedge resection (7.5%). For wedge resection, lobectomy, and pneumonectomy, the 30-day readmission rate was 4.8%, 4.8%, and 8.3%, the 30-day mortality rate was 0%, 3.4%, and 6.4%, and the 90-day mortality rate was 0%, 6.2%, and 12.8%, respectively. Overall survival at 5 years for patients with pN0, pN1, and pN2 disease was 38.6% (95% CI, 30.0-47.2), 43.3% (95% CI, 16.3-67.9), and 24.0% (95% CI, 9.8-41.7), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this national analysis, extended delay to resection after definitive radiation therapy was associated with acceptable perioperative outcomes among a highly selected patient cohort.

Segmentectomy vs Lobectomy for Early Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer With Visceral Pleural Invasion.

BACKGROUND: Recent prospective trials have demonstrated the noninferiority of segmentectomy to lobectomy in the surgical management of early non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). It remains unknown, however, whether segmentectomy is sufficient for treating small tumors with visceral pleural invasion (VPI), a known indicator of aggressive disease biology and poor prognosis in NSCLC. METHODS: Patients in the National Cancer Database (2010-2020) with cT1a-bN0M0 NSCLC and VPI and additional high-risk features who underwent segmentectomy or lobectomy were identified for analysis. Only patients with no comorbidities were included in this analysis to reduce selection bias. Overall survival of patients who underwent segmentectomy vs lobectomy was evaluated using multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards and propensity score- matched analyses. Short-term and pathologic outcomes were also evaluated. RESULTS: Of the 2568 patients with cT1a-bN0M0 NSCLC and VPI included in our overall cohort, 178 (7%) underwent segmentectomy and 2390 (93%) underwent lobectomy. No significant differences were found in the 5-year overall survival between patients undergoing segmentectomy vs lobectomy in multivariable-adjusted and propensity score-matched analyses (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.55-1.51], P = .72; 86% [95% CI, 75%-92%] vs 76% [95% CI, 65%-84%], P = .15, respectively). There were also no differences in surgical margin positivity, 30-day readmission, and 30- and 90-day mortality between patients undergoing either surgical approach. CONCLUSIONS: In this national analysis, no differences were found in survival or in short-term outcomes between patients undergoing segmentectomy vs lobectomy for early-stage NSCLC with VPI. Our findings suggest that if VPI is detected after segmentectomy for cT1a-bN0M0 tumors, completion lobectomy is unlikely to confer an additional survival advantage.

Persistent race- and sex-based disparities in lung cancer screening eligibility.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate race- and sex-based disparities in lung cancer screening eligibility under the 2013 US Preventive Services Task Force, 2021 US Preventive Services Task Force, and National Comprehensive Cancer Network lung cancer screening guidelines. METHODS: Participants in the Southern Community Cohort Study with a smoking history diagnosed with lung cancer from 2002 to 2021 were identified for analysis. Differences in age at lung cancer diagnosis and smoking characteristics were evaluated among 4 groups: Black men, Black women, White men, and White women. RESULTS: A total of 2011 patients with lung cancer met study inclusion criteria, of whom 968 (48.1%) were women and 1248 (62.1%) were Black. Under the 2013 guideline, Black men with lung cancer were significantly less likely to be eligible for screening when compared with White men with lung cancer (37.7% vs 62.4%; P < .001), and Black women with lung cancer were significantly less likely to be eligible for screening when compared with White women with lung cancer (27.8% vs 56.7%; P < .001). Under the 2021 guideline, 62.6% of Black and 73.8% of White men (P < .001) with lung cancer would have been eligible for screening, resulting in an 11.2 percentage point difference in screening eligibility between Black and White men. Under the 2021 guideline, 50.3% of Black and 74.9% of White (P < .001) women with lung cancer would have been eligible for screening; notably, there remained a 24.6 percentage point difference in screening eligibility between Black and White women. In multivariable-adjusted analysis, under the 2021 USPSTF guideline, Black men with lung cancer had 46% lower odds of being eligible for screening compared with White men with lung cancer (multivariable-adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.54; 95% CI, 0.39-0.76; P < .001) and Black women with lung cancer had 66% lower odds of being eligible for screening compared with White women with lung cancer (aOR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.25-0.46; P < .001). The National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline increased the proportion of patients with lung cancer eligible for screening in each group. CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis of patients with lung cancer in the Southern Community Cohort Study, there remained a large gap in lung cancer screening eligibility between Black and White men and women under the 2021 US Preventive Services Task Force guideline. Only 50% of Black women and 63% of Black men diagnosed with lung cancer would have qualified for screening.

The Increasing Adoption of Minimally Invasive Lobectomy in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study is to evaluate the trends of and outcomes associated with the use of minimally invasive lobectomy for stage I and II non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the United States. METHODS: The use of and outcomes associated with open and minimally invasive lobectomy for clinical stage I and stage II NSCLC from 2010 to 2017 in the National Cancer Database were assessed by multivariable logistic regression and propensity score matching. RESULTS: From 2010 to 2017, use of minimally invasive lobectomies increased for stage I NSCLC (multivariable-adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 4.52; 95% CI, 3.95-5.18; P < .001) and stage II NSCLC (aOR 4.38; 95% CI, 3.38-5.68; P < .001). In 2015, for the first time, more lobectomies for stage I NSCLC were performed by minimally invasive techniques (52.2%, n = 5647) than by thoracotomy (47.8%, n = 5164); and in 2017, more lobectomies for stage II NSCLC were performed by minimally invasive techniques (54.7%, n = 1620) than by thoracotomy (45.3%, n = 1,342). From 2010 to 2017, the conversion rates from minimally invasive to open lobectomy for stage I NSCLC decreased from 19.6% (n = 466) to 7.2% (n = 521; aOR 0.32; 95% CI, 0.23-0.43; P < .001). Similarly, from 2010 to 2017, the conversion rates from minimally invasive to open lobectomy for stage II NSCLC decreased from 20% (n = 114) to 11.5% (n = 186; aOR 0.39; 95% CI, 0.21-0.72; P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: In the United States, for stage I and stage II NSCLC from 2010 to 2017, the use of minimally invasive lobectomy significantly increased while the conversion rate significantly decreased. By 2017, the minimally invasive approach had become the predominant approach for both stage I and stage II NSCLC.

Recurrence After Complete Resection for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in the National Lung Screening Trial.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to evaluate patterns, predictors, and long-term outcomes of recurrent disease after complete resection for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) using the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST). METHODS: The frequency of recurrence in patients with pathologic stage I-II NSCLC who underwent complete resection (lobectomy or bilobectomy) in the NLST was evaluated. Predictors of increased risk of recurrence were assessed by Fine-Gray competing risks regression. RESULTS: Of the 497 patients meeting study inclusion criteria, 94 experienced a recurrence-a rate of 4.9 (95% CI, 4.0-6.0) per 100 person-years. The 5-year cumulative incidence of recurrence was 20.1% (95% CI, 16.5%-23.9%). Most patients experienced recurrences at distant sites alone (n = 47 [50.0%]) or at both locoregional and distant sites (n = 30 [31.9%]). The median time from resection to recurrence was 18.8 (10.6-30.7) months. The incidence rate of recurrence was significantly lower among patients with lung cancer detected by low-dose computed tomography screening during one of the three screening rounds of the NLST when compared with patients with lung cancer detected by chest radiography screening and patients with lung cancer not detected by any form of screening (ie, those diagnosed after a negative or missed screening exam and those diagnosed during follow-up after the three screening rounds of the NLST were completed) (P < .001). Median survival (from the date of recurrence) of patients with pathologic stage I and stage II disease who had recurrences at locoregional, distant, or both sites was 63.0, 23.1, and 9.8 months and 28.9, 8.7, and 10.2 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis of NLST participants with completely resected stage I-II NSCLC, the 5-year cumulative incidence of recurrence was 20%. Nearly 82% of recurrences were at distant sites and associated with poor survival.