The Use and Impact of a Decision Support Tool for Appendicitis Treatment.

OBJECTIVE: Since introducing new and alternative treatment options may increase decisional conflict, we aimed to describe the use of the decision support tool (DST) and its impact on treatment preference and decisional conflict. BACKGROUND: For the treatment of appendicitis, antibiotics are an effective alternative to appendectomy, with both approaches associated with a different set of risks (eg, recurrence vs surgical complications) and benefits (eg, more rapid return to work vs decreased chance of readmission). Patients often have limited knowledge of these treatment options, and DSTs that include video-based educational materials and questions to elicit patient preferences about outcomes may be helpful. Concurrent with the Comparing Outcomes of Drugs and Appendectomy trials, our group developed a DST for appendicitis treatment ( www.appyornot.org ). METHODS: A retrospective cohort including people who self-reported current appendicitis and used the AppyOrNot DST between 2021 and 2023. Treatment preferences before and after the use of the DST, demographic information, and Ottawa Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) were reported after completing the DST. RESULTS: A total of 8243 people from 66 countries and all 50 U.S. states accessed the DST. Before the DST, 14% had a strong preference for antibiotics and 31% for appendectomy, with 55% undecided. After using the DST, the proportion in the undecided category decreased to 49% ( P < 0.0001). Of those who completed the Ottawa Decisional Conflict Score (DCS; n = 356), 52% reported the lowest level of decisional conflict (<25) after using the DST; 43% had a DCS score of 25 to 50, 5.1% had a DCS score of >50 and 2.5% had and DCS score of >75. CONCLUSIONS: The publicly available DST appyornot.org reduced the proportion that was undecided about which treatment they favored and had a modest influence on those with strong treatment preferences. Decisional conflict was not common after use. The use of this DST is now a component of a nationwide implementation program aimed at improving the way surgeons share information about appendicitis treatment options. If its use can be successfully implemented, this may be a model for improving communication about treatment for patients experiencing emergency health conditions.

Development and Feasibility Testing of a Decision Aid for Acute Appendicitis.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with acute uncomplicated appendicitis will be increasingly asked to choose between surgery and antibiotic management. We developed a novel decision aid for patients in the emergency department (ED) with acute appendicitis who are facing this choice. We describe the development of the decision aid and an initial feasibility study of its implementation in a busy tertiary care ED. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a prepost survey analysis comparing patients before and after standardized implementation of the decision aid. Patients were surveyed about their experience making treatment decisions after discharge from the hospital. The primary outcome measure was the total score on the decisional conflict scale (; 0-100; lower scores better). RESULTS: The study included 24 participants (12 in the predecision aid period; 12 in the post period). Only 33% of participants in each group knew antibiotics were a treatment option prior to arriving at the ED. Prior to implementing the use of decision aid, only 75% of patients reported being told antibiotics were a treatment option, while this increased to 100% after implementation of the decision aid. The mean total decisional conflict scalescores were similar in the pre and post periods (mean difference = 0.13, 95% CI: -13 - 13, P > 0.9). CONCLUSIONS: This novel appendicitis decision aid was effectively integrated into clinical practice and helped toinform patients about multiple treatment options. These data support further large-scale testing of the decision aid as part of standardized pathways for the management of patients with acute appendicitis.

Verbal Descriptions of the Probability of Treatment Complications Lead to High Variability in Risk Perceptions: A Survey Study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether different methods for communicating the probability of treatment complications for operative and nonoperative appendicitis treatments result in differences in risk perception. BACKGROUND: Surgeons must communicate the probability of treatment complications to patients, and how risks are communicated may impact the accuracy and variability in patient risk perceptions and ultimately their decision making. METHODS: A series of online surveys of American adults communicated the probability of complications associated with surgical or antibiotic treatment of acute appendicitis. Probability was communicated with verbal descriptors (eg, "uncommon"), point estimates (eg, "3% risk"), or risk ranges (eg, "1% to 5%"). Respondents then estimated the probability of a complication for a "typical patient with appendicitis." The Fligner-Killeen test of homogeneity of variance was used to compare the variability in respondent risk estimates based on the method of probability communication. RESULTS: Among 296 respondents, variance in probability estimates was significantly higher when verbal descriptions were used compared to point estimates ( P < 0.001) or risk ranges ( P < 0.001). Identical verbal descriptors produced meaningfully different risk estimates depending on the complication being described. For example, "common" was perceived as a 45.6% for surgical site infection but 61.7% for antibiotic-associated diarrhea. CONCLUSION: Verbal probability descriptors are associated with widely varying and inaccurate perceptions about treatment risks. Surgeons should consider alternative ways to communicate probability during informed consent and shared decision-making discussions.

Randomized Pilot Test of a Decision Support Tool for Acute Appendicitis: Decisional Conflict and Acceptability in a Healthy Population.

To test the effect of a new decision support tool for acute appendicitis and assess its efficacy and acceptability. Background: Mounting evidence from randomized controlled trials have shown that antibiotics can be a safe and effective treatment for appendicitis. Patients and surgeons must work together to choose the optimal treatment approach for each patient based on their own preferences and values. We developed a decision support tool to facilitate shared decision-making for appendicitis and its effect on decisional outcomes remains unknown. Methods: We conducted an online randomized field test in at-risk individuals comparing the decision support tool to a standard infographic. Individuals were randomized 3:1 to view the decision support tool or infographic. The primary outcome was the total decisional conflict scale (DCS) score measured before and after exposure to the decision support tool. Secondary outcomes included between-group DCS scores, and between-group comparisons of the acceptability. Results: One hundred eighty individuals were included in the study. Total DCS scores decreased significantly after viewing the decision support tool (59 [95% confidence interval (CI): 55-63] to 15 [95% CI: 12-17], P < 0.001) representing movement from a state of high to low decisional conflict. Individuals exposed to the decision support tool reported higher acceptability ratings (3.7 [95% CI: 3.6-3.8] vs 3.3 [95% CI: 3.2-3.5] out of 4) and demonstrated increased willingness to consider both treatment options. Conclusions: These data support the further use and testing of this novel decision support tool in patients with acute appendicitis.

Respiratory events after intensive care unit discharge in trauma patients: Epidemiology, outcomes, and risk factors.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory complications are associated with significant morbidity and mortality in trauma patients. The care transition from the intensive care unit (ICU) to the acute care ward is a vulnerable time for injured patients. There is a lack of knowledge about the epidemiology of respiratory events and their outcomes during this transition. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study in a single Level I trauma center of injured patients 18 years and older initially admitted to the ICU from 2015 to 2019 who survived initial transfer to the acute care ward. The primary outcome was occurrence of a respiratory event, defined as escalation in oxygen therapy beyond nasal cannula or facemask for three or more consecutive hours. Secondary outcomes included unplanned intubation for a primary pulmonary cause, adjudicated via manual chart review, as well as in-hospital mortality and length of stay. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine patient characteristics associated with posttransfer respiratory events. RESULTS: There were 6,561 patients that met the inclusion criteria with a mean age of 52.3 years and median Injury Severity Score of 18 (interquartile range, 13-26). Two hundred and sixty-two patients (4.0%) experienced a respiratory event. Respiratory events occurred early after transfer (median, 2 days, interquartile range, 1-5 days), and were associated with high mortality (16% vs. 1.8%, p < 0.001), and ICU readmission rates (52.6% vs. 4.7%, p < 0.001). Increasing age, male sex, severe chest injury, and comorbidities, including preexisting alcohol use disorder, congestive heart failure, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, were associated with increased odds of a respiratory event. Fifty-eight patients experienced an unplanned intubation for a primary pulmonary cause, which was associated with an in-hospital mortality of 39.7%. CONCLUSION: Respiratory events after transfer to the acute care ward occur close to the time of transfer and are associated with high mortality. Interventions targeted at this critical time are warranted to improve patient outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological study, level III.

The Significance of Upfront Knowledge of N2 Disease in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Previous literature suggests that patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and unsuspected N2 disease (cN0, pN2) represent a distinct subgroup associated with improved overall survival compared to patients with N2 disease identified prior to resection (cN2, pN2). METHODS: Retrospective analysis of the National Cancer Database of patients from 2004 to 2011 with cN0 and cN2 status found to be pathologic stage III-N2 NSCLC after surgical resection. Comparison of 5-year survival of patients with unsuspected N2 disease versus those with known N2 disease after surgical resection using Kaplan-Meier analysis was made. The independent effect of unsuspected N2 disease on mortality was analyzed using multivariate analysis. RESULTS: A total of 3271 patients with pathologic stage III-N2 NSCLC underwent curative intent surgical resection with or without adjuvant chemotherapy or chemotherapy and radiation. Unsuspected N2 disease was identified in 48% of patients. Patients with unsuspected N2 disease were more likely to have T1 tumors (37 vs. 32%, p < 0.001). Unsuspected N2 disease did not impact 5-year overall survival compared with known N2 when adjuvant therapy was utilized (40 vs. 37%, p = 0.167). Multivariate analysis identified older age, higher comorbidity score, and treatment with surgery alone as independent risk factors for mortality. The presence of unsuspected N2 disease was not significant in this model. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study suggest that unsuspected N2 disease is associated with equivalent 5-year survival compared to cN2 disease when adjuvant therapy is employed. These results support the use of adjuvant chemotherapy and radiation therapy when confronted with unsuspected N2 disease after surgical resection for stage IIIA-NSCLC.

Fate of Pneumonectomy Patients Variably Captured by Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Staging System.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer patients rely on survival estimates to weigh risks and benefits of treatment. However, pneumonectomy-requiring lung cancer may have inherent oncologic or physiologic survival implications not captured by the current stage classification. Stage-specific survival was evaluated to refine survival expectations for patients with pneumonectomy-requiring disease. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for treatment-naive patients who underwent lobectomy or pneumonectomy for stage I to III non-small cell lung cancer between 2004 and 2013. Patients who died within 90 days after resection were excluded. Three-way propensity score weighted multivariable Cox models were built and incorporated into adjusted 5-year overall survival (OS) curves. RESULTS: A total of 79,953 patients met inclusion criteria: 75,708 lobectomies (95%) and 4,245 pneumonectomies (5%). Stage I and II patients undergoing right pneumonectomy had worse adjusted 5-year OS than patients undergoing left pneumonectomy, which was worse than lobectomy (stage I: 55%, 58%, 67%; stage II: 37%, 44%, 48%; indicating right pneumonectomy, left pneumonectomy, lobectomy). Stage III right pneumonectomy patients had worse adjusted 5-year OS; however, left pneumonectomy and lobectomy patients were similar (33%, 39%, 40%). A doubly robust Cox model identified a similar pattern for mortality risk for stage I and II (right pneumonectomy > left > lobectomy); however, stage III right pneumonectomy patients had higher mortality risk than lobectomy patients (hazard ratio [HR] 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.17 to 1.28, p < 0.001), whereas left pneumonectomy was similar to lobectomy (HR 1.02, 95% CI: 0.97 to 1.06, p = 0.47). CONCLUSIONS: Pneumonectomy-requiring lung cancer embodies a 5-year mortality risk not completely captured by the lung cancer staging system. Refined survival estimates for pneumonectomy patients may enhance shared decision making in this population.

Effectiveness of local therapy for stage I non-small-cell lung cancer in nonagenarians.

BACKGROUND: Stage I non-small-cell lung cancer is potentially curable, yet older patients undergo treatment at lower rates than younger patients. This analysis sought to describe the treatment outcomes of nonagenarians with stage I non-small-cell lung cancer to better guide treatment decisions in this population. METHODS: The National Cancer DataBase was queried for patients age ≥90 years old with stage I non-small-cell lung cancer (tumors ≤4 cm). Patients were divided into 3 groups: local therapy, other therapy, or no treatment. The primary outcomes were 5-year overall and relative survival. RESULTS: Of the 616 patients identified, 33% (202) were treated with local therapy, 34% (207) were treated with other therapy, and 34% (207) underwent no treatment. Compared with local therapy, overall mortality was significantly higher with no treatment (hazard ratio 2.50, 95% confidence interval, 1.95-3.21) and other therapy (hazard ratio 1.43, 95% confidence interval, 1.11-1.83). The 5-year relative survival was 81% for local therapy, 49% for other therapy, and 32% for no treatment (P < .0001). CONCLUSION: Nonagenarians managed with local therapy for stage I non-small-cell lung cancer (tumors ≤4 cm) have better overall survival than those receiving other therapy or no treatment and should be considered for treatment with either operation or stereotactic body radiation therapy if able to tolerate treatment.

Validating the Thoracic Revised Cardiac Risk Index Following Lung Resection.

BACKGROUND: The Thoracic Revised Cardiac Index (ThRCRI) is a tool that differentiates patients who may proceed to lung resection (classes A or B) from those who should receive additional cardiac evaluation (classes C or D). This study aims to describe the ability of the ThRCRI to stratify patients based on major cardiac complication rates using a large multi-institutional dataset. METHODS: Patients undergoing lobectomy or pneumonectomy were identified in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program dataset from 2005 to 2012. Patients were grouped into 4 risk classes based on a summary score of preoperative risk factors: ischemic heart disease, cerebrovascular disease, renal comorbidity, and pneumonectomy. The primary outcome was the incidence of perioperative major cardiac complication in each of the 4 risk classes. RESULTS: Of the 4,625 patients identified, the majority underwent surgery for malignant disease (78%) and had an open procedure (70%). Among ThRCRI risk factors, 9% of patients had ischemic heart disease, 7% had cerebrovascular disease, 2% had renal comorbidity, and 6% underwent pneumonectomy. Incidence of cardiac complication in all patients was 2%. Incidence of cardiac complication within risk classes A, B, C, and D were 1%, 3%, 9%, and 4%, respectively (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Using a large multi-institutional dataset, the ThRCRI can differentiate patients at higher risk for cardiac complication following lung resection (classes C and D) and can be a useful preoperative instrument. The ThRCRI may allow for identifying patients who would benefit from additional cardiac evaluation.

Using the National Cancer Database for Outcomes Research: A Review.

Importance: The National Cancer Database (NCDB), a joint quality improvement initiative of the American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer and the American Cancer Society, has created a shared research file that has changed the study of cancer care in the United States. A thorough understanding of the nuances, strengths, and limitations of the database by both readers and investigators is of critical importance. This review describes the use of the NCDB to study cancer care, with a focus on the advantages of using the database and important considerations that affect the interpretation of NCDB studies. Observations: The NCDB is one of the largest cancer registries in the world and has rapidly become one of the most commonly used data resources to study the care of cancer in the United States. The NCDB paints a comprehensive picture of cancer care, including a number of less commonly available details that enable subtle nuances of treatment to be studied. On the other hand, several potentially important patient and treatment attributes are not collected in the NCDB, which may affect the extent to which comparisons can be adjusted. Finally, the NCDB has undergone several significant changes during the past decade that may affect its completeness and the types of available data. Conclusions and Relevance: The NCDB offers a critically important perspective on cancer care in the United States. To capitalize on its strengths and adjust for its limitations, investigators and their audiences should familiarize themselves with the advantages and shortcomings of the NCDB, as well as its evolution over time.

Association of Delayed Adjuvant Chemotherapy With Survival After Lung Cancer Surgery.

IMPORTANCE: Adjuvant chemotherapy offers a survival benefit to a number of staging scenarios in non-small-cell lung cancer. Variable recovery from lung cancer surgery may delay a patient's ability to tolerate adjuvant chemotherapy, yet the urgency of chemotherapy initiation is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To assess differences in survival according to the time interval between non-small-cell lung cancer resection and the initiation of postoperative chemotherapy to determine the association between adjuvant treatment timing and efficacy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This retrospective observational study examined treatment-naive patients with completely resected non-small-cell lung cancer who received postoperative multiagent chemotherapy between 18 and 127 days after resection between January 2004 and December 2012. The study population was limited to patients with lymph node metastases, tumors 4 cm or larger, or local extension. Patients were identified from the National Cancer Database, a hospital-based tumor registry that captures more than 70% of incident lung cancer cases in the United States. The association between time to initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy and survival was evaluated using Cox models with restricted cubic splines. EXPOSURES: Adjuvant chemotherapy administered at different time points after surgery. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Effectiveness of adjuvant chemotherapy according to time to initiation after surgery. RESULTS: A total of 12 473 patients (median [interquartile range] age, 64 [57-70] years) were identified: 3073 patients (25%) with stage I disease; 5981 patients (48%), stage II; and 3419 patients (27%), stage III. A Cox model with restricted cubic splines identified the lowest mortality risk when chemotherapy was started 50 days postoperatively (95% CI, 39-56 days). Initiation of chemotherapy after this interval (57-127 days; ie, the later cohort) did not increase mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.037; 95% CI, 0.972-1.105; P = .27). Furthermore, in a Cox model of 3976 propensity-matched pairs, patients who received chemotherapy during the later interval had a lower mortality risk than those treated with surgery only (HR, 0.664; 95% CI, 0.623-0.707; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In the National Cancer Database, adjuvant chemotherapy remained efficacious when started 7 to 18 weeks after non-small-cell lung cancer resection. Patients who recover slowly from non-small-cell lung cancer surgery may still benefit from delayed adjuvant chemotherapy started up to 4 months after surgery.

Length of Stay From the Hospital Perspective: Practice of Early Discharge Is Not Associated With Increased Readmission Risk After Lung Cancer Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if hospitals that routinely discharge patients early after lobectomy have increased readmissions. BACKGROUND: Hospitals are increasingly motivated to reduce length of stay (LOS) after lung cancer surgery, yet it is unclear if a routine of early discharge is associated with increased readmissions. The relationship between hospital discharge practices and readmission rates is therefore of tremendous clinical and financial importance. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for patients undergoing lobectomy for lung cancer from 2004 to 2013 at Commission on Cancer-accredited hospitals, which performed at least 25 lobectomies in a 2-year period. Facility discharge practices were characterized by a facility's median LOS relative to the median LOS for all patients in that same time period. RESULTS: In all, 59,734 patients met inclusion criteria; 2687 (4.5%) experienced an unplanned readmission. In a hierarchical logistic regression model, a routine of early discharge (defined as a facility's tendency to discharge patients faster than the population median in the same time period) was not associated with increased risk of readmission (odds ratio 1.12, 95% confidence interval 0.97-1.28, P = 0.12). In a risk-adjusted hospital readmission rate analysis, hospitals that discharged patients early did not experience more readmissions (P = 0.39). The lack of effect of early discharge practices on readmission rates was observed for both minimally invasive and thoracotomy approaches. CONCLUSIONS: It is possible for hospitals to develop early discharge practices without increasing readmissions. Further study is needed to identify the critical practice elements that have enabled hospitals to aggressively discharge patients without increasing readmission risk.

Defining outcomes of patients with clinical stage I small cell lung cancer upstaged at surgery.

BACKGROUND: A proportion of patients with clinical stage I small cell lung cancer (SCLC) will be upstaged following surgical resection. The existing data regarding the management of upstaged SCLC patients and guidelines for their treatment remains sparse. The primary objective was to describe the impact of pathologic upstaging following surgical resection. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with clinical stage I SCLC (cT1-2a,N0,M0) who underwent resection with curative intent followed by adjuvant therapy, excluding patients who underwent surgery alone. Clinical and pathologic T, N, and M staging were compared to identify patients that were upstaged. RESULTS: Four-hundred and seventy-seven patients were identified with clinical stage I SCLC. Pathologic upstaging occurred in 25% (117). Of those upstaged, 30% (35) were due to a higher pathologic T descriptor and 81% (95) were due to the presence of nodal disease. Overall 5-year survival was significantly worse for upstaged patients compared with those patients who remained a pathologically stage I (36% vs 52%, p<0.001). Among patients with positive lymph node involvement, adjuvant chemotherapy and radiation therapy was associated a significantly improved 5-year survival compared to adjuvant chemotherapy alone (20% vs 55%, respectively, p<0.01). The use of adjuvant chemotherapy and radiation therapy in patients with nodal disease after surgical resection was an independent predictor of improved survival (HR 0.36, 95% CI 0.18-0.73, p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Pathologic upstaging is common after surgical resection of stage I SCLC, and is associated with significantly inferior survival. These data provide evidence that recommend the use of adjuvant chemotherapy and radiation therapy in the setting of nodal upstaging after resection of clinical stage I SCLC patients.

Postneoadjuvant adjuvant chemotherapy in resected N1 non-small cell lung cancer with residual nodal disease.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Nodal positivity following neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is considered a poor prognostic sign, but little data are available on the efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy in these cases. This analysis sought to determine whether adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with increased survival in NSCLC patients with residual N1 disease at resection. METHODS: Patients from the National Cancer Database (NCDB) with cN1T1-2M0 NSCLC treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and definitive resection between 2006 and 2012 were identified. Treatment groups were defined as those receiving no additional therapy or adjuvant chemotherapy ± radiation after resection. Five-year overall survival (OS) was estimated for each group. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to estimate hazard ratios adjusting for demographic, clinical, and facility characteristics. RESULTS: Among 90 eligible patients, 5-year OS was 43% and 56% for patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy and no additional treatment, respectively (P < 0.56). With multivariable analysis, the estimated hazard ratio was 0.61 (95% CI: 0.61-2.64, P = 0.51) for adjuvant chemotherapy compared to no additional therapy. CONCLUSION: This analysis suggests that adjuvant chemotherapy is not associated with increased survival in NSCLC patients with pathologic N1 NSCLC following neoadjuvant chemotherapy and resection.

Outcomes of a Highly Selective Surgical Approach to Oligometastatic Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: A highly selected subset of patients with oligometastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) will be cured after all sites of established disease (primary and metastases) have been eliminated by surgery or radiation (ie, "curative intent" approach). Mediastinal lymph node metastases (N2) have been found retrospectively to predict a poor prognosis in this setting (5-year survival of 4% for N2-positive versus 31% for N2-negative). Hence, our institution has programmatically limited the use of curative intent local therapy to oligometastatic NSCLC patients confirmed to be free of N2 disease. However, it is unclear whether the exclusion of N2-positive patients is an effective prospective selection step to aggressively treat oligometastatic NSCLC. METHODS: A prospectively maintained institutional tumor registry was reviewed for oligometastatic stage IV NSCLC patients evaluated for curative intent treatment from 2005 to 2014. RESULTS: All synchronous oligometastatic NSCLC cases were evaluated by invasive mediastinal staging before treatment. Twenty-two patients without N2 disease underwent curative intent treatment, and 13 patients with N2 disease were treated palliatively. The groups were similar by bivariate analyses. The N2-negative patients treated with curative intent had a superior 5-year survival compared with N2-positive patients treated palliatively (58% versus 0%, respectively; p = 0.028). CONCLUSIONS: Using invasive mediastinal staging to exclude N2 disease has a role in surgical decision making and achieving long-term survival among oligometastatic NSCLC patients. Further study is warranted to determine whether a subset of patients with N2 disease also have the potential for long-term survival with local therapy.

Lobectomy versus stereotactic body radiotherapy in healthy patients with stage I lung cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Stereotactic body radiotherapy is an effective treatment for patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer who are not healthy enough to undergo surgery; however, the relative efficacy versus surgery in healthy patients is unknown. The National Cancer Database contains information on patient health and eligibility for surgery, allowing the long-term survival associated with lobectomy and stereotactic body radiotherapy to be compared in healthy patients with clinical stage I disease. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for patients who underwent lobectomy or stereotactic body radiotherapy for clinical stage I lung cancer between 2008 and 2012. Healthy patients were selected by excluding patients not offered surgery because of health-related reasons and only including patients documented to be free of comorbidities. RESULTS: A total of 13,562 comorbidity-free patients with clinical stage I lung cancer treated with lobectomy were compared with 1781 patients treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy. Time-stratified Cox proportional hazards models found lobectomy to be associated with a significantly better outcome than stereotactic body radiotherapy for both T1N0M0 tumors (hazard ratio, 0.38; 95% confidence interval, 0.33-0.43; P < .001) and T2N0M0 tumors 5 cm or less (hazard ratio, 0.38; confidence interval, 0.31-0.46; P < .001). In a propensity-matched analysis of 1781 pairs, lobectomy remained superior to stereotactic body radiotherapy (5-year survival 59% vs 29%, P < .001). Furthermore, when the subset of stereotactic patients who had refused a recommended surgery (n = 229) were propensity matched to lobectomy patients, lobectomy was associated with improved survival (5-year survival 58% vs 40%, P = .010). CONCLUSIONS: Among healthy patients with clinical stage I non-small cell lung cancer in the National Cancer Database, lobectomy is associated with a significantly better outcome than stereotactic body radiotherapy. Further study is warranted to clarify the comparative effectiveness of surgery and stereotactic body radiotherapy across various strata of patient health.

Lung Cancer in the Very Young: Treatment and Survival in the National Cancer Data Base.

INTRODUCTION: Young patients with lung cancer represent a distinct subset of patients with this disease. The National Cancer Data Base includes patients of all ages and contains detailed staging, treatment, and survival information. The objective of this study was to examine treatment patterns and outcomes in young patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: The National Cancer Data Base was queried for NSCLC cases from 2003 to 2009. Younger patients were defined as those aged 20 to 46 years. Older patients were defined as those aged 47 to 89 years. Patient demographics, tumor characteristics, treatment, and survival were analyzed. The primary outcomes were 5-year overall and relative survival. RESULTS: The study included 173,856 patients; 5657 were 20 to 46 years of age. Younger patients were treated differently and received more aggressive therapy at each stage. At stage I, 64% of younger patients received surgery only versus 55% of the older patients (p < 0.0001). Younger patients had improved survival at all stages. This effect was more pronounced at earlier stages (the hazard ratios for the older group were 1.84, 1.62, 1.18, and 1.14 for stages I through IV, respectively [all p < 0.0001]). The absolute differences in 5-year overall survival between the younger and older groups were 25% for stages I and II but only 9% and 2% for stages III and IV, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Overall and relative survival in younger patients with NSCLC is better than in older patients, with greater benefit seen in earlier stages. Despite having fewer comorbidities and undergoing more aggressive treatment, younger patients with advanced-stage NSCLC have only marginally better overall and relative survival than older patients.

The Natural History of Operable Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in the National Cancer Database.

BACKGROUND: The survival of untreated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), or the natural history, is an important perspective for patients considering resection for NSCLC. The National Cancer Database (NCDB) allows untreated NSCLC patients who were recommended to undergo surgical resection (ie, "operable") to be identified. The survival of untreated NSCLC patients in the NCDB was studied to determine the natural history of operable NSCLC. METHODS: The NCDB was queried for untreated clinical stage I to IIIA NSCLC patients diagnosed between 2003 and 2009. The natural history cohort was defined as patients who were recommended to undergo resection but went untreated. RESULTS: We identified 1,693 untreated patients with operable NSCLC. The median survival for clinical stage I, II, and IIIA was 16.6, 9.4, and 8.4 months, respectively. The 5-year Kaplan-Meier estimates of survival for clinical stage I, II, and IIIA NSCLC were 10.1%, 7.3%, and 4.9%, respectively. At each stage (I to IIIA), the survival of untreated operable NSCLC patients was superior to that of untreated NSCLC patients not recommended to undergo resection (nonoperable, p < 0.001). A multivariable Cox regression model identified increasing age, male gender, white (vs black) race, increasing comorbidity, squamous cell or large cell histology, and increasing stage as predictors of decreased survival. CONCLUSIONS: The natural history of operable NSCLC, although poor, varies with clinical stage and is superior to that of nonoperable NSCLC.