Prehabilitation and Rehabilitation for Patients with Lung Cancer: A Review of Where we are Today

Early prehabilitation reduces admissions and time in hospital in patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer

OBJECTIVES

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in the UK. Prehabilitation aims to maximise patient fitness and minimise the negative impact of anticancer treatment. What constitutes prehabilitation before non-surgical anticancer treatment is not well established. We present data from a pilot project of Early prehabilitation In lung Cancer.

METHODS

All new patients with likely advanced lung cancer were offered prehabilitation at respiratory clinic, if fit for further investigation. Prehabilitation included assessment and appropriate intervention from a consultant in palliative medicine, registered dietitian and rehabilitation physiotherapist. Four objective endpoints were identified, namely admissions to hospital, time spent in the hospital, treatment rates and overall survival. Outcomes were to be compared with 178 prehab eligible historical controls diagnosed from 2019 to 2021.

RESULTS

From July 2021 to June 2023, 65 patients underwent prehabilitation and 72% of patients underwent all 3 interventions. 54 patients had a stage 3 or 4 lung cancer. In the prehab group, fewer patients attended Accident and Emergency (31.5 vs 37.4 attendances per 100 patients) and fewer were admitted (51.9 vs 67.9) when compared with historical controls. Those receiving prehab spent a lot less time in the hospital (129.7 vs 543.5 days per 100 patients) with shorter admissions (2.5 vs 8 days). Systemic anticancer treatment rates increased in the short term but were broadly similar overall. Median survival was higher in the prehabilitation group (0.73 vs 0.41 years, p=0.046).

CONCLUSIONS

Early prehabilitation appears to reduce time spent in the hospital. It may improve survival. Further work is required to understand its full effect on treatment rates.

Effect of Exercise and Pulmonary Rehabilitation in Pre- and Post-Surgical Patients with Lung Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background and objectives: Lung cancer is a common cancer, and its impact on public health is not only reflected in the 1 million deaths it causes annually but also in the significant implications it has on daily activities and quality of life, resulting in a considerable burden on healthcare systems. This review aims to determine the effects of pulmonary rehabilitation and pre- or post-surgical exercise in patients with lung cancer. Materials and methods: A systematic review with a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials published between 2010 and 2024 was conducted; the search was carried out in PubMed, Cochrane Clinical Trial, SCOPUS, Science Direct, Web of Science, Scielo, and LILAC. Results: Pulmonary rehabilitation or exercise before surgery was associated with a greater 6 min walking distance (MD: 37.42, 95% CI: 9.68-65.1; p = 0.008); however, it had no implications on hospital stay (MD: -0.91, 95% CI: -1.88-0.055; p = 0.06). When the intervention was performed post-surgery, higher FEV1 (SMD: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.32-0.92; p = 0.0001) and improved 6 min walking distances (60.8, 95% CI: 20.96-100.6; p = 0.0033) were found compared to standard management. Conclusions: This review suggests that, depending on the timing of implementation, pulmonary rehabilitation or exercise could produce positive effects on certain clinical variables in lung cancer patients.

Summary of the best evidence for prehabilitation management of patients with non-small cell lung cancer

Objective

This study adopts an evidence-based methodology to establish a comprehensive theory foundation for preoperative prehabilitation management in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients.

Methods

A systematic literature review linked to prehabilitation management for NSCLC patients was conducted, utilizing reputable databases such as UpToDate, BMJ Best Practice, UK NICE, SIGN, GIN, Joanna Briggs Institute Library, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, OVID evidence-based database, PubMed, Chinese Wanfang database, CNKI, CBM, ATS, BTS, AACVPR, and EACTS. The search encompassed articles, including clinical decision-making, guidelines, evidence summaries, expert consensuses, and systematic reviews, from the inception of databases up to March 31st, 2023. Two researchers performed quality assessment of the literature and subsequent evidence extraction.

Results

Nineteen articles were included, comprising five guidelines, three expert consensuses, seven systematic reviews, and four randomized controlled trials. A total of 41 pieces of evidence were summarized, addressing key aspects such as the multidisciplinary team, appropriate patient population, prehabilitation modes, timing of prehabilitation, prehabilitation assessment, prehabilitation content, quality control, and effectiveness evaluation.

Conclusions

The synthesis of the best evidence for prehabilitation management in NSCLC patients provides a solid evidence-based foundation for its implementation. It is recommended that healthcare professionals conduct thorough patient evaluations, optimize and integrate medical resources, and collaboratively engage in interdisciplinarity efforts to develop and implement personalized and multimodal prehabilitation plans.

Identification of symptom clusters and sentinel symptoms during the first cycle of chemotherapy in patients with lung cancer

PURPOSE

To identify symptom clusters (SCs) in patients with lung cancer who are undergoing initial chemotherapy and to identify the sentinel symptoms of each SC.

METHODS

A convenience sampling method was used to recruit patients with lung cancer who were undergoing their initial chemotherapy treatment. Patient information was collected using the General Demographic Questionnaire, MD Anderson Symptom Inventory (including the lung cancer module) and a schedule documenting the initial occurrence of symptoms. The Walktrap algorithm was employed to identify SCs, while sentinel symptoms within each SC were identified using the Apriori algorithm in conjunction with the initial occurrence time of symptoms.

RESULTS

A total of 169 patients with lung cancer participated in this study, and four SCs were identified: the psychological SC (difficulty remembering, sadness, dry mouth, numbness or tingling, and distress), somatic SC (pain, fatigue, sleep disturbance, and drowsiness), respiratory SC (coughing, expectoration, chest tightness, and shortness of breath), and digestive SC (nausea, poor appetite, constipation, vomiting, and weight loss). Sadness, fatigue, and coughing were identified as sentinel symptoms of the psychological, somatic, and respiratory SCs, respectively. However, no sentinel symptom was identified for the digestive SC.

CONCLUSION

Patients with lung cancer who are undergoing chemotherapy encounter a spectrum of symptoms, often presenting as SCs. The sentinel symptom of each SC emerges earlier than the other symptoms and is characterized by its sensitivity, significance, and driving force. It serves as a vital indicator of the SC and assumes a sentry role. Targeting sentinel symptoms might be a promising strategy for determining the optimal timing of interventions and for mitigating or decelerating the progression of the other symptoms within the SC.

Prehabilitation for Patients with Cancer Undergoing Radiation Therapy: a Scoping Review

AIMS

Prehabilitation is a process of identifying and assessing factors that could compromise the physical and psychological health of patients undergoing cancer treatment and implementing an intervention to combat such concerns. The use of prehabilitation in cancer surgery has yielded positive outcomes in rectal, lung and abdominal cancers. Prehabilitation strategies have potential to improve the management of patients receiving radiation therapy or chemoradiation. The aim of the present study was to map the evidence of the assessment and evaluation of prehabilitation for radiation therapy patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A database search using EMBASE and PubMed was conducted. The PRISMA guidelines were adhered to. Keywords included prehabilitation, radiation therapy/radiotherapy, chemoradiotherapy/chemoradiation, intervention and exercise. Types of prehabilitation strategy, their purposes and impact, according to cancer site, were analysed.

RESULTS

Prehabilitation is most commonly evaluated in head and neck cancer, whereby unimodal, physical interventions manage dysphagia. Prehabilitation for lung cancer demonstrated its ability to widen treatment options for patients. Physical prehabilitation is administered to combat adverse effects of neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy in patients with rectal cancer.

CONCLUSION

Prehabilitation is adaptive and tailored to specific patient and site needs; thus it is applied across a wide range of cancer sites. More interventions by which radiation therapy is the definitive treatment modality and larger sample sizes within these studies are warranted to increase prehabilitation utilisation for patients undergoing radiation therapy.

Prognostic value of the Scottish Inflammatory prognostic Score in patients with NSCLC expressing PD-L1 ≥ 50 % progressing on first-line pembrolizumab

BACKGROUND

Most patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with first-line pembrolizumab monotherapy will experience progressive disease (PD). Only a minority will go on to receive subsequent systemic anticancer therapy for which outcomes are guarded. We investigated the prognostic significance of biomarkers of systemic inflammation following failure of first-line pembrolizumab for NSCLC to aid subsequent management decisions.

METHODS

Patients with radiological and/or clinical evidence of PD on first-line pembrolizumab for advanced NSCLC at a regional Scottish cancer centre were identified. Inflammatory biomarkers at the time of PD, including serum albumin, neutrophil count and the Scottish Inflammatory Prognostic Score (SIPS; combing albumin and neutrophils), and clinicopathological factors, including age, sex, histology, PDL1 expression and time to PD were recorded. The relationship between these and post-progression overall survival (ppOS) were examined.

RESULTS

Data were available for 211 patients. Median ppOS was 2.1 months. Only SIPS was predictive of ppOS on multivariate analysis (HR2.54 (95 %CI 1.81-3.56) (<0.001)), stratifying ppOS from 0.8 months (SIPS2), to 1.8 months (SIPS1), to 8.1 months (SIPS0) (p < 0.001). Thirty (14 %) patients received second-line systemic anticancer therapy with median ppOS 8.7 months. These patients had lower levels of systemic inflammation, as defined by albumin (p < 0.001), neutrophil count (p = 0.002), and SIPS (p = 0.004)), than all other patients.

CONCLUSIONS

SIPS, a simple biomarker of systemic inflammation, predicts ppOS after first-line pembrolizumab and may be useful alongside routine assessments of patient fitness to inform individualised discussions about subsequent treatment. We highlight poor outcomes in this patient group and a role for SIPS in signposting transition to best supportive care and early referral to palliative care. It may also help identify a small group of patients most likely to benefit from further lines of therapy.

The Prehabilitation Radiotherapy Exercise, smoking Habit cessation and Balanced diet Study (PREHABS) protocol to explore the feasibility of embedding behavioural modifications into the clinical pathway for patients undergoing radical radiotherapy for lung cancer

Patients with curable non-surgical lung cancer are often current smokers, have co-existing medical comorbidities and are treated with curative radiotherapy. To maximise the benefits of modern radiotherapy, there is an urgent need to optimise the patient's health to improve survival and quality of life.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The Yorkshire Cancer Research-funded Prehabilitation Radiotherapy Exercise, smoking Habit cessation and Balanced diet Study (PREHABS) (L426) is a single-centre prospective feasibility study to assess embedding behavioural changes into the radical radiotherapy pathway of patients with lung cancer. Feasibility will be assessed by measuring acceptability, demand and implementation. The duration of the study is 24 months. PREHABS has two workstreams: the intervention study and the theory of change (ToC) study.Intervention study: PREHABS will commence at the R-IDEAL phase 2 trial (exploratory) based on existing evidence and includes support for smoking cessation, increasing activity and dietary well-being. Patients undergoing radical radiotherapy for lung cancer will be recruited from the oncology department at Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust (LTHT). ToC study: to maximise the acceptability and adherence to the PREHABS, we will use a ToC approach to qualitatively explore the key barriers and enablers of implementing a tailored programme of 'prehabilitation'. The PREHABS ToC study participants will be recruited from patients with lung cancer undergoing radical radiotherapy and staff from the LTHT oncology department.

ANALYSIS

The primary endpoint analysis will report the number of participants and adherence to the study interventions. Secondary endpoints include continued engagement with study interventions post-treatment. The analysis will focus on descriptive statistics. Thematic analysis of the qualitative data from the ToC study will identify consensus on intervention optimisation and delivery.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

On 12 May 2021, the Cambridge East Ethics Committee granted ethical approval (21/EE/0048). The study is registered in the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) portfolio. The results will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed scientific journals and presented at conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NIHR portfolio 48420.