Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Más filtros











Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Lung Cancer ; 191: 107792, 2024 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38621343

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the Early-Stage LUNG cancer (ESLUNG) study was to compare outcomes after minimally invasive lobectomy (MIL) and stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) in patients with stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, patients with clinical stage I NSCLC (according to TNM7), treated in 2014-2016 with MIL or SABR, were included. 5-year overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were calculated and compared between patients treated with MIL and a propensity score (PS)-weighted SABR population with characteristics comparable to those of the MIL group. RESULTS: 1211 MIL and 972 SABR patients were included. Nodal upstaging occurred in 13.0 % of operated patients. 30-day mortality was 1.0 % after MIL and 0.2 % after SABR. After SABR, the 5-year regional recurrence rate (18.1 versus 14.2 %; HR 0.74, 95 % CI 0.58-0.94) and distant metastasis rate (26.2 versus 20.2 %; HR 0.72, 95 % CI 0.59-0.88) were significantly higher than after MIL, with similar local recurrence rate (13.1 versus 12.1 %; HR 0.90, 95 % CI 0.68-1.19). Unadjusted 5-year OS and RFS were 70.2 versus 40.3 % and 58.0 versus 25.1 % after MIL and SABR, respectively. PS-weighted, multivariable analyses showed no significant difference in OS (HR 0.89, 95 % CI 0.65-1.20) and better RFS after MIL (HR 0.70, 95 % CI 0.49-0.99). CONCLUSION: OS was not significantly different between stage I NSCLC patients treated with MIL and the PS-weighted population of patients treated with SABR. For operable patients with stage I NSCLC, SABR could therefore be an alternative treatment option with comparable OS outcome. However, RFS was better after MIL due to fewer regional recurrences and distant metastases. Future studies should focus on optimization of patient selection for MIL or SABR to further reduce postoperative mortality and morbidity after MIL and nodal failures after SABR.


Asunto(s)
Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas , Neoplasias Pulmonares , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Mínimamente Invasivos , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Neumonectomía , Radiocirugia , Humanos , Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas/patología , Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas/radioterapia , Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas/cirugía , Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas/mortalidad , Neoplasias Pulmonares/patología , Neoplasias Pulmonares/radioterapia , Neoplasias Pulmonares/cirugía , Neoplasias Pulmonares/mortalidad , Masculino , Femenino , Radiocirugia/métodos , Anciano , Estudios Retrospectivos , Neumonectomía/métodos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Mínimamente Invasivos/métodos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia
3.
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg ; 62(3)2022 08 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35348664

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: A minimally invasive lobectomy (MIL) is the standard treatment for stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in medically operable patients. Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) is recommended for inoperable patients and has been proposed as a potential alternative for operable patients as well. Here, we present the results of a feasibility study in preparation for a nationwide retrospective cohort study, comparing outcomes between both treatment modalities. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, data from patients with clinical stage I NSCLC treated with MIL or SABR in 2014-2015 were retrieved from databases from 12 Dutch hospitals. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and lung cancer-specific survival (LCSS) were compared between MIL and SABR. RESULTS: A total of 597 patients with clinical stage I NSCLC treated with MIL (n = 356) or SABR (n = 241) were included. In total, 106 (30%) patients had died in the MIL group and 142 (59%) in the SABR group. After MIL and SABR, unadjusted 5-year PFS was 63% and 30%, OS was 72% and 38% and LCSS was 81% and 76%, respectively. Propensity score-weighted analyses did not show significant differences between MIL and SABR in OS [hazard ratios (HR) 0.74 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43-1.29)], PFS [HR 0.74 (95% CI 0.42-1.32)] or LCSS [HR 0.81 (95% CI 0.42-1.59)]. CONCLUSIONS: Unadjusted analyses revealed superior OS and PFS for MIL and similar LCSS, but this feasibility study was not sufficiently powered to demonstrate significant differences using propensity score methodology. Therefore, this study is currently being extended to include more than half of Dutch hospitals in order to enlarge the population to ≥1880 patients, not only to determine the best treatment for patients with stage I NSCLC overall, but also to assess the preferred treatment for patient groups with specific characteristics.


Asunto(s)
Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas , Neoplasias Pulmonares , Radiocirugia , Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas/radioterapia , Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas/cirugía , Humanos , Neoplasias Pulmonares/radioterapia , Neoplasias Pulmonares/cirugía , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Neumonectomía/métodos , Radiocirugia/métodos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Resultado del Tratamiento
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA