Comparison of concurrent chemoradiotherapy versus sequential radiochemotherapy in patients with completely resected non-small cell lung cancer.
- Author:
Hwan Ik KIM
1
;
O Kyu NOH
;
Young Taek OH
;
Mison CHUN
;
Sang Won KIM
;
Oyeon CHO
;
Jaesung HEO
Author Information
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords: Non-small-cell lung carcinoma; Adjuvant chemotherapy; Adjuvant radiotherapy; Sequence of therapies
- MeSH: Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung*; Chemoradiotherapy*; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Drug Therapy; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Radiotherapy; Radiotherapy, Adjuvant
- From:Radiation Oncology Journal 2016;34(3):202-208
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
- Abstract: PURPOSE: Our institution has implemented two different adjuvant protocols in treating patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): chemotherapy followed by concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CT-CCRT) and sequential postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) followed by postoperative chemotherapy (POCT). We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes between the two adjuvant protocols. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From March 1997 to October 2012, 68 patients were treated with CT-CCRT (n = 25) and sequential PORT followed by POCT (RT-CT; n = 43). The CT-CCRT protocol consisted of 2 cycles of cisplatin-based POCT followed by PORT concurrently with 2 cycles of POCT. The RT-CT protocol consisted of PORT followed by 4 cycles of cisplatin-based POCT. PORT was administered using conventional fractionation with a dose of 50.4–60 Gy. We compared the outcomes between the two adjuvant protocols and analyzed the clinical factors affecting survivals. RESULTS: Median follow-up time was 43.9 months (range, 3.2 to 74.0 months), and the 5-year overall survival (OS), locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) were 53.9%, 68.2%, and 51.0%, respectively. There were no significant differences in OS (p = 0.074), LRFS (p = 0.094), and DMFS (p = 0.490) between the two protocols. In multivariable analyses, adjuvant protocol remained as a significant prognostic factor for LRFS, favouring CT-CCRT (hazard ratio [HR] = 3.506, p = 0.046) over RT-CT, not for OS (HR = 0.647, p = 0.229). CONCLUSION: CT-CCRT protocol increased LRFS more than RT-CT protocol in patients with completely resected NSCLC, but not in OS. Further studies are warranted to evaluate the benefit of CCRT strategy compared with sequential strategy.
