SABR-BRIDGE: Stereotactic ABlative Radiotherapy Before Resection to AvoId Delay for Early-Stage LunG Cancer or OligomEts During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Transitioning to Neoadjuvant Therapy for Resectable Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Trends and Surgical Outcomes in a Regionalized Pulmonary Oncology Network

BACKGROUND

Several regulatory agencies have approved the use of the neoadjuvant chemo-immunotherapy for resectable stage II and III of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and numerous trials investigating novel agents are underway. However, significant concerns exist around the feasibility and safety of offering curative surgery to patients treated within such pathways. The goal in this study was to evaluate the impact of a transition towards a large-scale neoadjuvant therapy program for NSCLC.

METHODS

Medical charts of patients with clinical stage II and III NSCLC who underwent resection from January 2015 to December 2020 were reviewed. The primary outcome was perioperative complication rate between neoadjuvant-treated versus upfront surgery patients. Multivariable logistic regression estimated occurrence of postoperative complications and overall survival was assessed as an exploratory secondary outcome by Kaplan-Meier and Cox-regression analyses.

RESULTS

Of the 428 patients included, 106 (24.8%) received neoadjuvant therapy and 322 (75.2%) upfront surgery. Frequency of minor and major postoperative complications was similar between groups (P = .22). Occurrence in postoperative complication was similar in both cohort (aOR = 1.31, 95% CI 0.73-2.34). Neoadjuvant therapy administration increased from 10% to 45% with a rise in targeted and immuno-therapies over time, accompanied by a reduced rate of preoperative radiation therapy use. 1-, 2-, and 5-year overall survival was higher in neoadjuvant therapy compared to upfront surgery patients (Log-Rank P = .017).

CONCLUSIONS

No significant differences in perioperative outcomes and survival were observed in resectable NSCLC patients treated by neoadjuvant therapy versus upfront surgery. Transition to neoadjuvant therapy among resectable NSCLC patients is safe and feasible from a surgical perspective.

COVID-19 and lung cancer

COVID-19 pandemic had affected health services around the world, also reducing the diagnosis of lung cancer. On the other hand, examination of surgical specimens in patients with lung cancer and SARS-CoV-2 gave the opportunity to evidence early histologic features related to this emerging pandemic.

Different prioritization of health organizations during COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a significant decline of lung cancer screening (up to 56%), delayed diagnosis (up to 30-40%) and higher advanced stage, with some exceptions (i.e., Canada). Increased use of stereotactic radiation treatments in stage I-IIA have been noticed in better-organized health systems. Surgical specimens performed for lung cancer in patients with incipient SARS-CoV-2 permitted to appreciate early histologic findings of COVID-19 with hyperplastic pneumocytes with/without fibrin exudate, alveolar macrophages/myeloid cells, perivascular T-lymphocytic infiltrate and lack of hyaline membrane.

While the COVID-19 pandemic has declined the rate of lung cancer diagnosis worldwide, some institutions have significantly limited detrimental effects. Histology related to early SARS-CoV-2 infection in surgical samples for lung cancer revealed specific histologic changes.

Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy before resection to avoid delay for early-stage lung cancer or oligometastases during the COVID-19 pandemic: Pathologic outcomes from the SABR-BRIDGE protocol

BACKGROUND

During coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related operating room closures, some multidisciplinary thoracic oncology teams adopted a paradigm of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) as a bridge to surgery, an approach called SABR-BRIDGE. This study presents the preliminary surgical and pathological results.

METHODS

Eligible participants from four institutions (three in Canada and one in the United States) had early-stage presumed or biopsy-proven lung malignancy that would normally be surgically resected. SABR was delivered using standard institutional guidelines, with surgery >3 months following SABR with standardized pathologic assessment. Pathological complete response (pCR) was defined as absence of viable cancer. Major pathologic response (MPR) was defined as ≤10% viable tissue.

RESULTS

Seventy-two patients underwent SABR. Most common SABR regimens were 34 Gy/1 (29%, n = 21), 48 Gy/3-4 (26%, n = 19), and 50/55 Gy/5 (22%, n = 16). SABR was well-tolerated, with one grade 5 toxicity (death 10 days after SABR with COVID-19) and five grade 2-3 toxicities. Following SABR, 26 patients underwent resection thus far (13 pending surgery). Median time-to-surgery was 4.5 months post-SABR (range, 2-17.5 months). Surgery was reported as being more difficult because of SABR in 38% (n = 10) of cases. Thirteen patients (50%) had pCR and 19 (73%) had MPR. Rates of pCR trended higher in patients operated on at earlier time points (75% if within 3 months, 50% if 3-6 months, and 33% if ≥6 months; p = .069). In the exploratory best-case scenario analysis, pCR rate does not exceed 82%.

CONCLUSIONS

The SABR-BRIDGE approach allowed for delivery of treatment during a period of operating room closure and was well-tolerated. Even in the best-case scenario, pCR rate does not exceed 82%.

Real-World Impact of SABR on Stage I Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Outcomes at a Scottish Cancer Centre

INTRODUCTION

Stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) offers patients with stage I non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) a safe, effective radical therapy option. The impact of introducing SABR at a Scottish regional cancer centre was studied.

METHODS

The Edinburgh Cancer Centre Lung Cancer Database was assessed. Treatment patterns and outcomes were compared across treatment groups (no radical therapy (NRT), conventional radical radiotherapy (CRRT), SABR and surgery) and across three time periods reflecting the availability of SABR (A, January 2012/2013 (pre-SABR); B, 2014/2016 (introduction of SABR); C, 2017/2019, (SABR established)).

RESULTS

1143 patients with stage I NSCLC were identified. Treatment was NRT in 361 (32%), CRRT in 182 (16%), SABR in 132 (12%) and surgery in 468 (41%) patients. Age, performance status, and comorbidities correlated with treatment choice. The median survival increased from 32.5 months in time period A to 38.8 months in period B to 48.8 months in time period C. The greatest improvement in survival was seen in patients treated with surgery between time periods A and C (HR 0.69 (95% CI 0.56-0.86), p < 0.001). The proportion of patients receiving a radical therapy rose between time periods A and C in younger (age ≤ 65, 65-74 and 75-84 years), fitter (PS 0 and 1), and less comorbid patients (CCI 0 and 1-2), but fell in other patient groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The introduction and establishment of SABR for stage I NSCLC has improved survival outcomes in Southeast Scotland. Increasing SABR utilisation appears to have enhanced the selection of surgical patients and increased the proportion of patients receiving a radical therapy.

The role transition of radiotherapy for the treatment of liver cancer in the COVID-19 era

The uncontrollable COVID-19 crises in the SARS-CoV-2 high-prevalence areas have greatly disrupted the routine treatment of liver cancer and triggered a role transformation of radiotherapy for liver cancer. The weight of radiotherapy in the treatment algorithm for liver cancer has been enlarged by the COVID-19 pandemic, which is helpful for the optimal risk-benefit profile.

Interactions between COVID-19 and Lung Cancer: Lessons Learned during the Pandemic

Simple Summary

COVID-19 is a respiratory infectious disease caused by the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. Lung cancer is the leading cause of all cancer-related deaths worldwide. As both SARS-CoV-2 and lung cancer affect the lungs, the aim of this narrative review is to provide a consolidation of lessons learned throughout the pandemic regarding lung cancer and COVID-19. Risk factors found in lung cancer patients, such as advanced cancers, smoking, male, etc., have been associated with severe COVID-19. The cancer treatments hormonal therapy, immunotherapy, and targeted therapy have shown no association with severe COVID-19 disease, but chemotherapy and radiation therapy have shown conflicting results. Logistical changes and modifications in treatment plans were instituted during the pandemic to minimize SARS-CoV-2 exposure while maintaining life-saving cancer care. Finally, medications have been developed to treat early COVID-19, which can be highly beneficial in vulnerable cancer patients, with paxlovid being the most efficacious drug currently available.

Abstract

Cancer patients, specifically lung cancer patients, show heightened vulnerability to severe COVID-19 outcomes. The immunological and inflammatory pathophysiological similarities between lung cancer and COVID-19-related ARDS might explain the predisposition of cancer patients to severe COVID-19, while multiple risk factors in lung cancer patients have been associated with worse COVID-19 outcomes, including smoking status, older age, etc. Recent cancer treatments have also been urgently evaluated during the pandemic as potential risk factors for severe COVID-19, with conflicting findings regarding systemic chemotherapy and radiation therapy, while other therapies were not associated with altered outcomes. Given this vulnerability of lung cancer patients for severe COVID-19, the delivery of cancer care was significantly modified during the pandemic to both proceed with cancer care and minimize SARS-CoV-2 infection risk. However, COVID-19-related delays and patients’ aversion to clinical settings have led to increased diagnosis of more advanced tumors, with an expected increase in cancer mortality. Waning immunity and vaccine breakthroughs related to novel variants of concern threaten to further impede the delivery of cancer services. Cancer patients have a high risk of severe COVID-19, despite being fully vaccinated. Numerous treatments for early COVID-19 have been developed to prevent disease progression and are crucial for infected cancer patients to minimize severe COVID-19 outcomes and resume cancer care. In this literature review, we will explore the lessons learned during the COVID-19 pandemic to specifically mitigate COVID-19 treatment decisions and the clinical management of lung cancer patients.

Covid-19 and radiotherapy: a systematic review after 2 years of pandemic

Introduction

Following the Covid-19 pandemic spread, changes in clinical practice were necessary to limit the pandemic diffusion. Also, oncological practice has undergone changes with radiotherapy (RT) treatments playing a key role.Although several experiences have been published, the aim of this review is to summarize the current evidence after 2 years of pandemic to provide useful conclusions for clinicians.

Methods

A Pubmed/MEDLINE and Embase systematic review was conducted. The search strategy was "Covid AND Radiotherapy" and only original articles in the English language were considered.

Results

A total of 2.733 papers were obtained using the mentioned search strategy. After the complete selection process, a total of 281 papers were considered eligible for the analysis of the results.

Discussion

RT has played a key role in Covid-19 pandemic as it has proved more resilient than surgery and chemotherapy. The impact of the accelerated use of hypofractionated RT and telemedicine will make these strategies central also in the post-pandemic period.

Metabolic Alterations in Sputum and Exhaled Breath Condensate of Early Stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients After Surgical Resection: A Pilot Study

Every year, close to two million people world-wide are diagnosed with and die of lung cancer. Most patients present with advanced-stage cancer with limited curative options and poor prognosis. Diagnosis of lung cancer at an early stage provides the best chance for a cure. Low- dose CT screening of the chest in the high-risk population is the current standard of care for early detection of lung cancer. However, CT screening is invasive due to radiation exposure and carries the risk of unnecessary biopsies in non-cancerous tumors. In this pilot study, we present metabolic alterations observed in sputum and breath condensate of the same population of early- stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients cancer before and after surgical resection (SR), which could serve as noninvasive diagnostic tool. Exhaled breath condensate (EBC) (n=35) and sputum (n=15) were collected from early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients before and after SR. Median number of days for EBC and sputum collection before and after SR were 7 and 42; and 7 and 36 respectively Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) and liquid chromatography quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry (LC-QTOF-MS) were used to analyze the metabolic profile of the collected samples. A total of 26 metabolites with significant alteration post SR were identified, of which 14 (54%) were lipids and 12 constituted nine different chemical metabolite classes. Eighteen metabolites (69%) were significantly upregulated and 8 (31%) were downregulated. Median fold change for all the up- and downregulated metabolites (LC-QTOF-MS) were 10 and 8, respectively. Median fold change (MFC) in concentration of all the up- and downregulated metabolites (NMR) were 0.04 and 0.27, respectively. Furthermore, glucose (median fold change, 0.01, p=0.037), adenosine monophosphate (13 log fold, p=0.0037) and N1, N12- diacetylspermine (8 log fold p=0.011) sputum levels were significantly increased post-SR. These identified sputa and EBC indices of altered metabolism could serve as basis for further exploration of biomarkers for early detection of lung cancer, treatment response, and targets for drug discovery. Validation of these promising results by larger clinical studies is warranted.

Exploring the trends of acute appendicitis following recovery or vaccination from COVID-19

Introduction

The relationship that vaccination against corona virus disease 19 (COVID-19) or recovery from the acute form of the illness may have with the incidence or severity of acute appendicitis (AA) has not been explored. The aim of this study was to evaluate this relationship.

Methods

A single centre retrospective study of all consecutive adult patients presenting with AA in the 6 mo after the initiation of a national vaccination program was performed. The presenting characteristics and pathological data of patients who had either been vaccinated against or recovered from COVID-19 were compared with those who had not. In addition, historical data from the equivalent period 12 and 24 mo beforehand was also extracted. The incidence of AA was compared between each of these time-frames.

Results

Of the 258 patients initially identified, 255 were included in the analysis of which 156 had either been vaccinated and/or recovered from COVID-19 (61.2%) whilst 99 (38.8%) patients had not. When comparing these two groups, there were no significant differences in the presenting characteristics, operative findings or postoperative courses. There was also no significant change in the incidence of AA when comparing the study dates with historical data (median weekly incidence of AA 8.0 versus 8.0 versus 8.0 respectively, P = 0.672).

Conclusions

Based on the data presented here, we failed to find a relationship between a national vaccination program and both the nature and incidence of AA presenting to a busy urban hospital.

Single-fraction stereotactic ablative body radiation therapy for primary and metastasic lung tumor: A new paradigm?

Stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) is an effective technique comparable to surgery in terms of local control and efficacy in early stages of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and pulmonary metastasis. Several fractionation schemes have proven to be safe and effective, including the single fraction (SF) scheme. SF is an option cost-effectiveness, more convenience and comfortable for the patient and flexible in terms of its management combined with systemic treatments. The outbreak of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic has driven this not new but underutilized paradigm, recommending this option to minimize patients’ visits to hospital. SF SABR already has a long experience, strong evidence and sufficient maturity to reliably evaluate outcomes in peripheral primary NSCLC and there are promising outcomes in pulmonary metastases, making it a valid treatment option; although its use in central locations, synchronous and recurrencies tumors requires more prospective safety and efficacy studies. The SABR radiobiology study, together with the combination with systemic therapies, (targeted therapies and immunotherapy) is a direction of research in both advanced disease and early stages whose future includes SF.

Hyperthermia ablation combined with transarterial chemoembolization versus monotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The existing evidence has indicated that hyperthermia ablation (HA) and HA combined with transarterial chemoembolization (HATACE) are the optimal alternative to surgical resection for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in the COVID-19 crisis. However, the evidence for decision-making is lacking in terms of comparison between HA and HATACE. Herein, a comprehensive evaluation was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of HATACE with monotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Worldwide studies were collected to evaluate the HATACE regimen for HCC due to the practical need for global extrapolation of applicative population. Meta-analyses were performed using the RevMan 5.3 software (The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark).

RESULTS

Thirty-six studies involving a large sample of 5036 patients were included finally. Compared with HA alone, HATACE produced the advantage of 5-year overall survival (OS) rate (OR:1.90; 95%CI:1.46,2.46; p < 0.05) without increasing toxicity (p ≥ 0.05). Compared with TACE alone, HATACE was associated with superior 5-year OS rate (OR:3.54; 95%CI:1.96,6.37; p < 0.05) and significantly reduced the incidences of severe liver damage (OR:0.32; 95%CI:0.11,0.96; p < 0.05) and ascites (OR:0.42; 95%CI:0.20,0.88; p < 0.05). Subgroup analysis results of small (≤3 cm) HCC revealed that there were no significant differences between the HATACE group and HA monotherapy group in regard to the OS rates (p ≥ 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with TACE alone, HATACE was more effective and safe for HCC. Compared with HA alone, HATACE was more effective for non-small-sized (>3 cm) HCC with comparable safety. However, the survival benefit of adjuvant TACE in HATACE regimen was not found for the patients with small (≤3 cm) HCC.

Maintaining safe lung cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in a global city

BACKGROUND

SARS-CoV-2 has challenged health service provision worldwide. This work evaluates safe surgical pathways and standard operating procedures implemented in the high volume, global city of London during the first wave of SARS-CoV-2 infection. We also assess the safety of minimally invasive surgery(MIS) for anatomical lung resection.

METHODS

This multicentre cohort study was conducted across all London thoracic surgical units, covering a catchment area of approximately 14.8 Million. A Pan-London Collaborative was created for data sharing and dissemination of protocols. All patients undergoing anatomical lung resection 1st March-1st June 2020 were included. Primary outcomes were SARS-CoV-2 infection, access to minimally invasive surgery, post-operative complication, length of intensive care and hospital stay (LOS), and death during follow up.

FINDINGS

352 patients underwent anatomical lung resection with a median age of 69 (IQR: 35-86) years. Self-isolation and pre-operative screening were implemented following the UK national lockdown. Pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 swabs were performed in 63.1% and CT imaging in 54.8%. 61.7% of cases were performed minimally invasively (MIS), compared to 59.9% pre pandemic. Median LOS was 6 days with a 30-day survival of 98.3% (comparable to a median LOS of 6 days and 30-day survival of 98.4% pre-pandemic). Significant complications developed in 7.3% of patients (Clavien-Dindo Grade 3-4) and 12 there were re-admissions(3.4%). Seven patients(2.0%) were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection, two of whom died (28.5%).

INTERPRETATION

SARS-CoV-2 infection significantly increases morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing elective anatomical pulmonary resection. However, surgery can be safely undertaken via open and MIS approaches at the peak of a viral pandemic if precautionary measures are implemented. High volume surgery should continue during further viral peaks to minimise health service burden and potential harm to cancer patients.

FUNDING

This work did not receive funding.

Radiotherapy based management during Covid-19 pandemic - A systematic review of presented consensus and guidelines

Treatment management of cancer patients in the radiation oncology departments during the current COVID-19 pandemic is challenging. A systematic review of published consensus/guidelines on the role of radiotherapy prioritization, suggested treatment protocols, and set up management was undertaken based on the PRISMA protocol and through PubMed/PMC, Scopus, Google Scholar, Web of Science databases until 01/20/2021. One hundred and sixty-eight publications or regional consensus were included. Summary of recommendations contained: (1) using hypo-fractionated (Hypo-F) regimens for therapeutic/palliative indications, (2) delaying radiotherapy for several weeks or until pandemic over, (3) omitting radiotherapy by replacement of alternative therapies or active surveillance, (4) applying safer patients' setup and preparation protocols, (5) developing telemedicine/telehealth service. To conclude, it is essential to carefully weigh the risk of exposure to COVID-19 infection and the benefit of treating cancer patients during the pandemic. Trying to have a global guideline facing this or any other probable crisis is crucial for health care service.

Imaging diagnosis of bronchogenic carcinoma (the forgotten disease) during times of COVID-19 pandemic: Current and future perspectives

Patients with bronchogenic carcinoma comprise a high-risk group for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), pneumonia and related complications. Symptoms of COVID-19 related pulmonary syndrome may be similar to deteriorating symptoms encountered during bronchogenic carcinoma progression. These resemblances add further complexity for imaging assessment of bronchogenic carcinoma. Similarities between clinical and imaging findings can pose a major challenge to clinicians in distinguishing COVID-19 super-infection from evolving bronchogenic carcinoma, as the above-mentioned entities require very different therapeutic approaches. However, the goal of bronchogenic carcinoma management during the pandemic is to minimize the risk of exposing patients to COVID-19, whilst still managing all life-threatening events related to bronchogenic carcinoma. The current pandemic has forced all healthcare stakeholders to prioritize per value resources and reorganize therapeutic strategies for timely management of patients with COVID-19 related pulmonary syndrome. Processing of radiographic and computed tomography images by means of artificial intelligence techniques can facilitate triage of patients. Modified and newer therapeutic strategies for patients with bronchogenic carcinoma have been adopted by oncologists around the world for providing uncompromised care within the accepted standards and new guidelines.

Oligometastatic Cancer: Key Concepts and Research Opportunities for 2021 and Beyond

Traditionally, clinicians distinguished three forms of cancer outgrowth [...].

COVID-19 After Lung Resection in Northern Italy

We reviewed surgical cases from 4 Thoracic Surgery departments in the Lombardia region of Italy, the area mostly affected by Coronavirus pandemic in Europe, with the aim to describe the impact of COVID-19 on the treatment of thoracic surgical patients. Clinical, radiological and laboratory data from patients who underwent lung resection from December 2019 to March 2020 were retrospectively collected until June 2020. Univariable Cox regression models were estimated to evaluate potential prognostic factors for developing COVID-19 and to investigate postoperative mortality among patients who developed symptomatic COVID-19 infection. We examined data from 107 patients. (74 lobectomies, 32 wedge/segmentectomies and 1 pneumonectomy). Twelve patients developed COVID-19 (Group 1), whereas 95 patients were not infected (Group 2). In Group 1, 6 patients (50%) died from complications related to infection; in Group 2, one patient (1%) died because of non-COVID-19-related causes. Median days from surgery to first symptoms, CT confirmation, clinical confirmation and PCR positivity was 48.1, 54.3, 55.1, and 55.2 respectively. At univariable analysis, DLCO/VA% (P = 0.008), duration of the surgery (P = 0.009), smoking history (pack/year) (P < 0.001), BMI (P< 0.001) and number of segments resected (P = 0.010) were associated with COVID-19 onset. Moreover, CCI (P < 0.001), DLCO/VA% (P = 0.002), cigarette pack/year (P < 0.001), BMI (P < 0.001) and COVID-19 (P < 0.001) were associated with death. Patients who undergo lung resection and then develop symptomatic COVID-19 infection are at higher risk of developing severe respiratory complications and postoperative death. Insidious symptoms’ onset may lead to a delay in diagnosis. We suggest two mitigating strategies: (1) Improve symptoms surveillance and isolation during recovery period, (2) Be aware of a potential greater risk of developing symptomatic COVID-19 and death correlated with elevated CCI, BMI, smoking history, DLCO/VA%, number of resected segments and duration of surgery.