Evaluation of a National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines-Based Decision Support Tool in Patients With Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Nonrandomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The association of guideline-based decision support with the quality of care in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is not known. Objective: To evaluate the association of exposure to the National Comprehensive Cancer Center (NCCN) guidelines with guideline-concordant care and patients' decisional conflict. Design, Setting, and Participants: A nonrandomized clinical trial, conducted at a tertiary care academic institution, enrolled patients from February 23, 2015, to September 28, 2017. Data analysis was conducted from July 19, 2019, to April 22, 2020. A cohort of 76 patients with NSCLC seen at diagnosis or disease progression and a retrospective cohort of 157 patients treated before the trial were included. Adherence to 6 NCCN recommendations were evaluated: (1) smoking cessation counseling, (2) adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with stage IB to IIB NSCLC after surgery, (3) pathologic mediastinal staging in patients with stage III NSCLC before surgery, (4) pathologic mediastinal staging in patients with stage III NSCLC before nonsurgical treatment, (5) definitive chemoradiotherapy for patients with stage III NSCLC not having surgery, and (6) molecular testing for epidermal growth factor receptor and anaplastic lymphoma kinase alterations for patients with stage IV NSCLC. Subgroup analysis was conducted to compare the rates of guideline concordance between the prospective and retrospective cohorts. Secondary end points included decisional conflict and satisfaction. Interventions: An online tool customizing the NCCN guidelines to patients' clinical and pathologic features was used during consultation, facilitated by a trained coordinator. Main Outcomes and Measures: Concordance of practice with 6 NCCN treatment recommendations on NSCLC and patients' decisional conflict. Results: Of the 76 patients with NSCLC, 44 were men (57.9%), median age at diagnosis was 68 years (interquartile range [IQR], 41-87 years), and 59 patients (77.6%) had adenocarcinoma. In the retrospective cohort, 91 of 157 patients (58.0%) were men, median age at diagnosis was 66 years (IQR, 61-65 years), and 105 patients (66.9%) had adenocarcinoma. After the intervention, patients received more smoking cessation counseling (4 of 5 [80.0%] vs 1 of 24 [4.2%], P < .001) and less adjuvant chemotherapy (0 of 7 vs 7 of 11 [63.6%]; P = .012). There was no significant change in mutation testing of non-squamous cell stage IV disease (20 of 20 [100%] vs 48 of 57 [84.2%]; P = .10). There was no significant change in pathologic mediastinal staging or initial chemoradiotherapy for patients with stage III disease. After consultation with the tool, decisional conflict scores improved by a median of 20 points (IQR, 3-34; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study suggest that exposure to the NCCN guidelines is associated with increased guideline-concordant care for 2 of 6 preselected recommendations and improvement in decisional conflict. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03982459.

Adjuvant Chemotherapy Guided by Molecular Profiling and Improved Outcomes in Early Stage, Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Many early stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients who are not considered candidates for adjuvant treatment according to current guidelines do harbor occult metastasis, and have disease recurrence despite complete resection. Although National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines suggest clinicopathologic characteristics to identify high-risk patients for adjuvant intervention, molecular profiling more accurately predicts 5-year survival. Early evidence of clinical benefit from application of this molecular-based management strategy, however, has not been reported. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An internationally validated, prognostic, 14-gene quantitative polymerase chain reaction expression assay was used to stratify risk prospectively in 100 consecutive patients with stage IA, IB, and IIA nonsquamous NSCLC. Kaplan-Meyer estimates, log rank analysis, and Cox regression were used to compare disease-free survival (DFS) between high-risk patients who did or did not elect adjuvant chemotherapy. RESULTS: Forty-eight patients (48%) were deemed high-risk according to molecular testing and 36 (36%) met NCCN high-risk criteria; risk designations were discordant in 34 (34%) of all patients. Estimated 5-year DFS was 48.9% among molecular high-risk patients who did not undertake adjuvant chemotherapy, 93.8% among untreated molecular low-risk patients, and 91.7% in molecular high-risk patients who did undergo chemotherapy (P = .004). In contrast, DFS was only 75.2% in untreated NCCN low-risk patients, and 61.9% in untreated NCCN high-risk patients (P = .183). CONCLUSION: This prospective, nonrandomized study provides initial evidence that high-risk designation according to the 14-gene prognostic assay also predicts benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy for very early stage NSCLC, and further supports the superiority of molecular stratification over current NCCN criteria at identifying high-risk patients.

A practical molecular assay to predict survival in resected non-squamous, non-small-cell lung cancer: development and international validation studies.

BACKGROUND: The frequent recurrence of early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is generally attributable to metastatic disease undetected at complete resection. Management of such patients depends on prognostic staging to identify the individuals most likely to have occult disease. We aimed to develop and validate a practical, reliable assay that improves risk stratification compared with conventional staging. METHODS: A 14-gene expression assay that uses quantitative PCR, runs on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue samples, and differentiates patients with heterogeneous statistical prognoses was developed in a cohort of 361 patients with non-squamous NSCLC resected at the University of California, San Francisco. The assay was then independently validated by the Kaiser Permanente Division of Research in a masked cohort of 433 patients with stage I non-squamous NSCLC resected at Kaiser Permanente Northern California hospitals, and on a cohort of 1006 patients with stage I-III non-squamous NSCLC resected in several leading Chinese cancer centres that are part of the China Clinical Trials Consortium (CCTC). FINDINGS: Kaplan-Meier analysis of the Kaiser validation cohort showed 5 year overall survival of 71·4% (95% CI 60·5-80·0) in low-risk, 58·3% (48·9-66·6) in intermediate-risk, and 49·2% (42·2-55·8) in high-risk patients (p(trend)=0·0003). Similar analysis of the CCTC cohort indicated 5 year overall survivals of 74·1% (66·0-80·6) in low-risk, 57·4% (48·3-65·5) in intermediate-risk, and 44·6% (40·2-48·9) in high-risk patients (p(trend)<0·0001). Multivariate analysis in both cohorts indicated that no standard clinical risk factors could account for, or provide, the prognostic information derived from tumour gene expression. The assay improved prognostic accuracy beyond National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria for stage I high-risk tumours (p<0·0001), and differentiated low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk patients within all disease stages. INTERPRETATION: Our practical, quantitative-PCR-based assay reliably identified patients with early-stage non-squamous NSCLC at high risk for mortality after surgical resection. FUNDING: UCSF Thoracic Oncology Laboratory and Pinpoint Genomics.