The Survival Advantage of Lobectomy over Wedge Resection Lessens as Health-Related Life Expectancy Decreases

Real-World Clinical Characteristics, Treatment Patterns, and Clinical Outcomes in US Patients with Stage I-III Resected NSCLC Without Known EGFR Mutations: The RESECT Study

BACKGROUND

Immunotherapy has altered the treatment landscape for resectable non-small cell lung cancer, increasing the complexity of treatment planning. Understanding treatment patterns and outcomes prior to the advent of immunotherapy can provide context for assessing the benefit of immunotherapies and other novel agents.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to characterize real-world demographics, clinical characteristics, treatment patterns, and clinical outcomes of patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer before widespread immunotherapy use.

METHODS

Analyses included patients from the US CancerLinQ Discovery® database diagnosed with stage I-III non-small cell lung cancer between 2014 and 2020 without known EGFR mutations who underwent surgical resection within 140 days of diagnosis. The primary outcome was treatment patterns by disease stage.

RESULTS

Analyses included 3077 patients with stage I (n = 1673), II (n = 853), and III (n = 551) disease. Most (92.8%, 52.3%, and 36.5% of stage I, II, and III patients) received surgery without systemic therapy. Among stage I, II, and III patients, 7.2%, 44.8%, and 46.6% received adjuvant therapy only. Of stage II and III patients, 2.0% and 10.2% received neoadjuvant therapy only, and 0.9% and 6.7% received both (stage I patients who received neoadjuvant only or perioperative therapy were excluded because of low numbers [n = 4]). Five-year overall survival rates were 73.4%, 61.9%, and 50.5% in stage I, II, and III patients; 5-year real-world relapse-free survival rates were 35.4%, 23.1%, and 14.0%. In an exploratory multivariate analysis, neoadjuvant treatment was associated with improved overall survival and real-world relapse-free survival in stage II-III patients (stage I patients not evaluable). Adjuvant treatment was associated with improved real-world relapse-free survival, but not overall survival, in stage II-III patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients received surgery alone, though the proportion receiving systemic treatment increased with disease stage. Modest 5-year, real-world relapse-free survival rates indicate a need for more effective neoadjuvant or adjuvant treatments in this setting.

Outcomes and Survival for Early-Stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Following Wedge Resection or Lobectomy: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis Using a Novel Peruvian Registry

Background

Using a previously unreported Peruvian registry of patients treated for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), this study explored whether wedge resection and lobectomy were equivalent regarding survival and impact on radiologic-pathologic variables.

Methods

This observational, analytical, longitudinal study used propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis of a single-center retrospective registry of 2,570 patients with pathologic stage I-II NSCLC who were treated with wedge resection (n=1,845) or lobectomy (n=725) during 2000-2020. After PSM, 650 cases were analyzed (resection, n=325; lobectomy, n=325) through preoperative and clinical variables, including patients with ≥1 lymph node removed. Kaplan-Meier curves and multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were created for 5-year overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and locoregional-recurrence-free survival (LRFS).

Results

The principal complication was operative pain persisting >7 days for lobectomy versus wedge resection (58% vs. 23%, p=0.034) and shorter hospital stays for resection than for lobectomy (5.3 days vs. 12.8 days, p=0.009). The 5-year OS (84.3% vs. 81.2%, p=0.09) and DFS (79.1% vs. 74.1%, p=0.07) were similar and statistically insignificant between resections and lobectomies, respectively. LRFS was worse overall following wedge resection than lobectomy (79.8% vs. 91.1%, p<0.02). Nevertheless, in the PSM analysis, both groups experienced similar LRFS when the resection margin was >10 mm (90.9% vs. 87.3%, p<0.048) and ≥4 lymph nodes were removed (82.8% vs. 79.1%, p<0.011).

Conclusion

Both techniques led to similar OS and DFS at 5 years; however, successful LRFS required a wedge resection with a surgical margin and adequate lymph node removal to obtain outcomes similar to lobectomy.

A guide for managing patients with stage I NSCLC: deciding between lobectomy, segmentectomy, wedge, SBRT and ablation-part 3: systematic review of evidence regarding surgery in compromised patients or specific tumors

Background

Clinical decision-making for patients with stage I lung cancer is complex. It involves multiple options [lobectomy, segmentectomy, wedge, stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), thermal ablation], weighing multiple outcomes (e.g., short-, intermediate-, long-term) and multiple aspects of each (e.g., magnitude of a difference, the degree of confidence in the evidence, and the applicability to the patient and setting at hand). A structure is needed to summarize the relevant evidence for an individual patient and to identify which outcomes have the greatest impact on the decision-making.

Methods

A PubMed systematic review from 2000-2021 of outcomes after lobectomy, segmentectomy and wedge resection in older patients, patients with limited pulmonary reserve and favorable tumors is the focus of this paper. Evidence was abstracted from randomized trials and non-randomized comparisons (NRCs) with adjustment for confounders. The analysis involved careful assessment, including characteristics of patients, settings, residual confounding etc. to expose degrees of uncertainty and applicability to individual patients. Evidence is summarized that provides an at-a-glance overall impression as well as the ability to delve into layers of details of the patients, settings and treatments involved.

Results

In older patients, perioperative mortality is minimally altered by resection extent and only slightly affected by increasing age; sublobar resection may slightly decrease morbidity. Long-term outcomes are worse after lesser resection; the difference is slightly attenuated with increasing age. Reported short-term outcomes are quite acceptable in (selected) patients with severely limited pulmonary reserve, not clearly altered by resection extent but substantially improved by a minimally invasive approach. Quality-of-life (QOL) and impact on pulmonary function hasn't been well studied, but there appears to be little difference by resection extent in older or compromised patients. Patient selection is paramount but not well defined. Ground-glass and screen-detected tumors exhibit favorable long-term outcomes regardless of resection extent; however solid tumors <1 cm are not a reliably favorable group.

Conclusions

A systematic, comprehensive summary of evidence regarding resection extent in compromised patients and favorable tumors with attention to aspects of applicability, uncertainty and effect modifiers provides a foundation for a framework for individualized decision-making.