Advances in the use of surgery and multimodality treatment for N2 non-small cell lung cancer

Moving Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors to Early Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Narrative Review

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Since prognosis of early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains dismal for common relapses after curative surgery, considerable efforts are currently focused on bringing immunotherapy into neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings. Previously, perioperative chemotherapy showed only a modest but significative improvement in overall survival. The presence of broad tumor neoantigens load at primary tumor prior to surgery as well as the known immunosuppressive status following resection represent the main rationale for immunotherapy in early disease. Several trials have been conducted in recent years, leading to atezolizumab and nivolumab approval in the adjuvant and neoadjuvant setting, respectively, and perioperative immunotherapy in NSCLC remains a field of active clinical and preclinical investigation. Unanswered questions in perioperative therapy in NSCLC include the optimal sequence and timing of chemotherapy and immunotherapy, the potential of combination strategies, the role of predictive biomarkers for patient selection and the choice of useful endpoints in clinical investigation.

Survival Analysis of Surgically Resected ypN2 Lung Cancer after Neoadjuvant Therapy

INTRODUCTION

 Surgery is widely accepted today when downstaging of mediastinal lymph nodes after neoadjuvant therapy is achieved. However, the role of surgery in patients with persistent N2 disease is still controversial. This study aims to detail the diagnostic problems, prognostic features, and long-term survival of the persistent N2 non-small cell lung cancer patient group.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

 One-hundred fifty patients who received neoadjuvant therapy and subsequently underwent resection, in-between 2003 and 2015, were retrospectively analyzed. In this study, "persistent N2" group refers to patients who received neoadjuvant therapy for clinically or histologically proven N2, who underwent a surgery after having been classified as "downstaged" at restaging, but in whom ypN2 lesions were subsequently confirmed on the operative specimens. Patients with multistation N2 were included in the study. There were 119 patients who met the criteria, whereas persistent ypN2 was detected in 28.5% (n = 34) of all patients.

RESULTS

 Overall 5-year survival rate was 47.2%, while it was 23.4% for patients with persistent N2. Factors that adversely affected survival were to have nonsquamous cell histological type (p = 0.006), high ypT stage (p = 0.001), persistent N2 (p = 0.02), and recurrence during follow-up (p < 0.001). A trend toward a shorter survival was observed when the ypN2 zone was subcarinal versus other zones, but did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.08). In addition, a trend toward a shorter survival of patients with multiple N2 involvement (p = 0.412) was observed.

CONCLUSION

 In the persistent N2 group, when multiple involvement or subcarinal involvement was excluded, relatively good survival was detected.

Outcomes with durvalumab after chemoradiotherapy in stage IIIA-N2 non-small-cell lung cancer: an exploratory analysis from the PACIFIC trial

Background

The phase III PACIFIC trial (NCT02125461) established consolidation durvalumab as standard of care for patients with unresectable, stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and no disease progression following chemoradiotherapy (CRT). In some cases, patients with stage IIIA-N2 NSCLC are considered operable, but the relative benefit of surgery is unclear. We report a post hoc, exploratory analysis of clinical outcomes in the PACIFIC trial, in patients with or without stage IIIA-N2 NSCLC.

Materials and methods

Patients with unresectable, stage III NSCLC and no disease progression after ≥2 cycles of platinum-based, concurrent CRT were randomized 2 : 1 to receive durvalumab (10 mg/kg intravenously; once every 2 weeks for up to 12 months) or placebo, 1-42 days after CRT. The primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS; assessed by blinded independent central review according to RECIST version 1.1) and overall survival (OS). Treatment effects within subgroups were estimated by hazard ratios (HRs) from unstratified Cox proportional hazards models.

Results

Of 713 randomized patients, 287 (40%) had stage IIIA-N2 disease. Baseline characteristics were similar between patients with and without stage IIIA-N2 NSCLC. With a median follow-up of 14.5 months (range: 0.2-29.9 months), PFS was improved with durvalumab versus placebo in both patients with [HR = 0.46; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.33-0.65] and without (HR = 0.62; 95% CI 0.48-0.80) stage IIIA-N2 disease. Similarly, with a median follow-up of 25.2 months (range: 0.2-43.1 months), OS was improved with durvalumab versus placebo in patients with (HR = 0.56; 95% CI 0.39-0.79) or without (HR = 0.78; 95% CI 0.57-1.06) stage IIIA-N2 disease. Durvalumab had a manageable safety profile irrespective of stage IIIA-N2 status.

Conclusions

Consistent with the intent-to-treat population, treatment benefits with durvalumab were confirmed in patients with stage IIIA-N2, unresectable NSCLC. Prospective studies are needed to determine the optimal treatment approach for patients who are deemed operable.

•

The PACIFIC trial established durvalumab after CRT as standard of care for unresectable, stage III NSCLC.

•

The optimum multimodal treatment strategy for patients with potentially resectable, stage IIIA-N2 NSCLC is unknown.

•

Survival benefit with durvalumab was observed in patients with stage IIIA-N2, unresectable NSCLC in this post hoc analysis.

•

Durvalumab after CRT also exhibited a manageable safety profile in this subpopulation from PACIFIC.

•

Studies of surgical vs. non-surgical strategies are needed to establish the best approach for potentially operable patients.

The Role of Surgery in Lung Cancer Treatment: Present Indications and Future Perspectives-State of the Art

Non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) are different today, due to the increased use of screening programs and of innovative systemic therapies, leading to the diagnosis of earlier and pre-invasive tumors, and of more advanced and controlled metastatic tumors. Surgery for NSCLC remains the cornerstone treatment when it can be performed. The role of surgery and surgeons has also evolved because surgeons not only perform the initial curative lung cancer resection but they also accompany and follow-up patients from pre-operative rehabilitation, to treatment for recurrences. Surgery is personalized, according to cancer characteristics, including cancer extensions, from pre-invasive and local tumors to locally advanced, metastatic disease, or residual disease after medical treatment, anticipating recurrences, and patients' characteristics. Surgical management is constantly evolving to offer the best oncologic resection adapted to each NSCLC stage. Today, NSCLC can be considered as a chronic disease and surgery is a valuable tool for the diagnosis and treatment of recurrences, and in palliative conditions to relieve dyspnea and improve patients' comfort.

Outcomes comparison between neoadjuvant chemotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy in stage IIIA non-small cell lung cancer patients

Background

A neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) is a feasible second-option other than an adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT); however, no definite conclusions have been drawn about whether or not a NCT is associated with better clinical outcomes for IIIA non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients.

Methods

We reviewed 68 clinical IIIA NSCLC patients who received preoperative chemotherapy (NCT group), and 535 pathological IIIA NSCLC patients who received ACT after surgery (ACT group). After a 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM), we compared the relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) rates as the long-term clinical outcomes, and hospital stay, surgery duration, postoperative complications as the short-term clinical outcomes. To evaluate the predictive value of the NCT response, we also assessed the response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) response to NCT.

Results

There was no significant difference in RFS or OS between the NCT group and ACT group (RFS: P=0.1138; OS: P=0.4234). On multivariate analysis, large cell lung carcinoma (P=0.0264), bilobectomy (P=0.0039) and clinical N2 stage (P=0.0309) were independent predictive factors of a worse OS. Short-term clinical outcomes including the hospital stay and postoperative complications had no statistically distinct difference between the ACT and NCT groups. Meanwhile, the OS of the partial response (PR) patients group was better than the stable disease/progressive disease (SD/PD) (P=0.0205) and ACT (P=0.0442) group, but none of the clinical features we tested was found to be a predictive factor for a PR response.

Conclusions

There was a non-significant difference between the long-term and short-term clinical outcomes of both NCT and ACT. The OS of PR patients was better than SD/PD and ACT, indicating that NCT response acts as a predictor for a higher long-term survival rate.

Surgical Management of Stage IIIA Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

According to the eighth edition of the tumor–node–metastasis classification, stage III non-small cell lung cancer is subdivided into stages IIIA, IIIB, and IIIC. They represent a heterogeneous group of bronchogenic carcinomas with locoregional involvement by extension of the primary tumor and/or ipsilateral or contralateral lymph node involvement. Surgical indications have not been definitely established but, in general, long-term survival is only obtained in those patients in whom a complete resection is obtained. This mini-review mainly focusses on stage IIIA disease comprising patients with locoregionally advanced lung cancers. Different subcategories of N2 involvement exist, which range from unexpected N2 disease after thorough preoperative staging or “surprise” N2, to bulky N2 involvement, mostly treated by chemoradiation, and finally, the intermediate category of potentially resectable N2 disease treated with a combined modality regimen. After induction therapy for preoperative N2 involvement, best surgical results are obtained with proven mediastinal downstaging when a lobectomy is feasible to obtain a microscopic complete resection. However, no definite, universally accepted guidelines exist. A relatively new entity is salvage surgery applied for recurrent disease after full-dose chemoradiation when no other therapeutic options exist. Equally, only a small subset of patients with T4N0-1 disease qualify for surgical resection after thorough discussion within a multidisciplinary tumor board on the condition that a complete resection is feasible. Targeted therapies and immunotherapy have recently become part of our therapeutic armamentarium, and it might be expected that they will be incorporated in current regimens after careful evaluation in randomized clinical trials.