A palliative accelerated irradiation regimen for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer vs. conventionally fractionated 60 GY: results of a randomized equivalence study. A prospective, randomised study to compare two palliative radiotherapy schedules for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Evaluation of nurse-led follow up for patients undergoing pelvic radiotherapy. [Radiotherapy for stage III, inoperable, asymptomatic small cell lung cancer. Final results of a prospective randomized study (240 patients)]. Results of the Dutch National study of the palliative effect of irradiation using two different treatment schemes for non-small-cell lung cancer. Radical radiotherapy for early nonsmall cell lung cancer. Hyperfractionated radiotherapy alone for clinical stage I nonsmall cell lung cancer. [Radiotherapy in locoregional treatment of inoperable non-small cell lung cancer: results from a series of 381 patients]. Results of radical radiation therapy in clinical stage I, technically operable non-small cell lung cancer.
Radiation oncologists are often faced with patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), who are not suitable candidates for state-of-the-art radical treatment, but who also are not judged to have a very short life expectancy. Some physicians treat these patients palliatively, whereas others advocate more intensive treatment. To find out if there is a substantial difference in outcome between these approaches, we performed a randomized prospective study.
                Between 1994 and 1998, 152 eligible patients with advanced NSCLC Stage III (n = 121) or minimal Stage IV (n = 31) were randomized to receive conventionally fractionated (cf; A: 60 Gy, 6 weeks, n = 79) or short-term treatment (PAIR; B: 32 Gy, 2 Gy b.i.d.; n = 73) of tumor and mediastinum.
                One-year survival rate for all patients was 37% with no significant difference between the two treatment arms (A: 36%; B: 38%; p = 0.76). As far as can be judged from limited data available, palliation was adequate and similar for the two treatment arms. Apart from expected differences in the time course of esophagitis, acute side effects were moderate and equally distributed. No severe late effects were observed.
                In the present randomized trial, survival and available data on palliation were not different after cf to 60 Gy compared to the palliative PAIR regimen. Therefore, for patients who are not suitable for radical treatment approaches, the prescription of a palliative short-term irradiation appears preferable compared to cf over several weeks. A prospective randomised study compared two palliative radiotherapy schedules for inoperable symptomatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). After stratification, 100 patients were randomly assigned to 20 Gy/5 fractions (fr)/5 days (arm A) or 16 Gy/2 fr/day 1 and 8 (arm B). There were 90 men and 10 women aged 47-81 years (mean 66), performance status 1-4 (median 2). The major clinical characteristics and incidence and degree of initial disease-related symptoms were similar in both groups. Treatment effects were assessed using patient's chart, doctor's scoring of symptomatic change and chest X-ray. Study end points included degree and duration of symptomatic relief, treatment side effects, objective response rates and overall survival. A total of 55 patients were assigned to arm A and 45 to arm B. In all, 98 patients received assigned treatment, whereas two patients died before its termination. Treatment tolerance was good and did not differ between study arms. No significant differences between study arms were observed in the degree of relief of all analysed symptoms. Overall survival time differed significantly in favour of arm B (median 8.0 vs 5.3 months; P=0.016). Both irradiation schedules provided comparable, effective palliation of tumour-related symptoms. The improved overall survival and treatment convenience of 2-fraction schedule suggest its usefulness in the routine management of symptomatic inoperable NSCLC. This study reports results from a randomised controlled trial of nurse-led care and was designed to determine whether nurse-led follow up improved patients morbidity and satisfaction with care in men treated with radical radiotherapy for prostate and bladder cancer. The aim was to compare outcomes in terms of toxicity, symptoms experienced, quality of life, satisfaction with care and health care costs, between those receiving nurse-led care and a group receiving standard care. The study population was of men prescribed radical radiotherapy (greater than 60 Gy). Participants completed self-assessment questionnaires for symptoms and quality of life within the first week of radiotherapy treatment, at week 3, 6 and 12 weeks from start of radiotherapy. Satisfaction with clinical care was also assessed at 12 weeks post-treatment. Observer-rated RTOG toxicity scores were recorded pre-treatment, weeks 1, 3, 6 and 12 weeks from start of radiotherapy. The results presented in this paper are on 115 of 132 (87%) of eligible men who agreed to enter the randomised trial. 6 men (4%) refused and 11 (8%) were missed for inclusion in the study. Data were analysed as a comparison at cross-sectional time points and as a general linear model using multiple regression. There was no significant difference in maximum symptom scores over the time of the trial between nurse-led follow-up care and conventional medical care. Differences were seen in scores in the initial self assessment of symptoms (week 1) that may have been as a result of early nursing intervention. Those men who had received nurse-led care were significantly more satisfied (P < 0.002) at 12 weeks and valued the continuity of the service provided. There were also significant (P < 0.001) cost benefits, with a 31% reduction in costs with nurse-led, compared to medically led care. Evidence from this study suggests that a specialist nurse is able to provide safe follow up for men undergoing radiotherapy. The intervention focused on coping with symptoms, and provided continuity of care and telephone support. Further work is required to improve the management of patients during and after radiotherapy. To report the results of a prospective randomized study concerning the role of radiotherapy in the treatment of stage III, unresectable, asymptomatic non-small cell lung cancer.
                Between 1992 and 1996, 240 patients with stage III, unresectable, asymptomatic non-small cell lung cancer were enrolled in this study, and sequentially randomized to one of the three treatment arms: conventional irradiation, hypofractionated irradiation and control group. In the conventional irradiation arm (79 patients), a dose of 50 Gy in 25 fractions in five weeks was delivered to the primary tumor and the mediastinum. In the hypofractionated irradiation arm (81 patients), there were two courses of irradiation separated by an interval of four weeks. In each series, patients received 20 Gy in five fractions in five days, in the same treatment volume as the conventional irradiation group. In the control group arm, 80 patients initially did not receive radiotherapy and were only observed. Delayed palliative hypofractionated irradiation (20-25 Gy in four to five fractions in four to five days) was given to the primary tumor when major symptoms developed.
                The two-year actuarial survival rates for patients in the conventional irradiation, hypofractionated irradiation and control group arms were 18%, 6% and 0%, with a median survival time of 12 months, nine months and six months respectively. The differences between survival rates were statistically significant at the 0.05 level.
                Although irradiation provides good palliation, the results are disappointing. The comparison of conventional and hypofractionated irradiation shows an advantage for conventional schedules. A national multicenter randomized study compared the efficacy of 2 x 8 Gy versus our standard 10 x 3 Gy in patients with inoperable stage IIIA/B (with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score of 3 to 4 and/or substantial weight loss) and stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer.
                Between January 1999 and June 2002, 297 patients were eligible and randomized to receive either 10 x 3 Gy or 2 x 8 Gy by external-beam irradiation. The primary end point was a patient-assessed score of treatment effect on seven thoracic symptoms using an adapted Rotterdam Symptom Checklist. Study sample size was determined based on an average total symptom score difference of more than one point over the initial 39 weeks post-treatment. The time course of symptom scores were also evaluated, and other secondary end points were toxicity and survival.
                Both treatment arms were equally effective, as the average total symptom score over the initial 39 weeks did not differ. However, the pattern in time of these scores differed significantly (P < .001). Palliation in the 10 x 3-Gy arm was more prolonged (until week 22) with less worsening symptoms than in 2 x 8-Gy. Survival in the 10 x 3-Gy arm was significantly (P = .03) better than in the 2 x 8-Gy arm with 1-year survival of 19.6% (95%CI, 14.1% to 27.3%) v 10.9% (95%CI, 6.9% to 17.3%).
                The 10 x 3-Gy radiotherapy schedule is preferred over the 2 x 8-Gy schedule for palliative treatment, as it improves survival and results in a longer duration of the palliative response. To evaluate the results of a departmental treatment policy in a consecutive series of patients with nonsmall cell carcinoma of the lung. A second purpose was to estimate the survival of patients treated with radical intent. A third purpose was to estimate the impact of comorbidity on the selection of patients for treatment and on its outcome.
                The records of 720 consecutive patients referred to a single Department of Radiation Oncology between 1979 and 1985 were reviewed. One hundred fifty patients with early stage (Stage I and II disease) were studied in detail and the results are presented for the outcome of 103 patients treated by radical radiotherapy. All patients were followed for a minimum period of five years or until death.
                Patients referred for radiation therapy were elderly and usually had squamous cell carcinoma of the lung. Comorbidity was significant as was weight loss which occurred in a third of patients. The overall survival of patients treated with radical intent was 13%. In a small subgroup of patients with T1 tumors without weight loss and aged under 70 survival reached 50% at 5 years with no treatment-related mortality and with insignificant treatment-related morbidity.
                Highly selected subsets of patients suitable for treatment with radiotherapy can be defined equally as well as highly selected subsets of patients can be selected for surgery. Treatment outcome can be surprisingly good in these subsets indicating that the treatment of nonsmall cell lung cancer, particularly in older patients without comorbidity should not automatically be by a surgical approach. Among patients with Stage I nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC), those treated with conventional radiotherapy show poorer prognosis than those treated by surgery. To improve the prognosis of such patients, we have used hyperfractionated radiation therapy.
                Between 1988 and 1993, 49 patients were treated with hyperfractionated radiotherapy with 1.2 Gy twice daily to a total dose of 69.6 Gy. All patients were technically operable, but 29 had medical problems and 20 refused surgery. The median age and Karnofsky Performance Status was 63 years and 90, respectively. No patient received chemotherapy or immunotherapy. Prophylactic mediastinal irradiation was not given.
                The median survival time was 33 months, and the 5-year survival rate was 30%. The rate at 5 years for freedom from each of relapse, local recurrence, mediastinal lymphnode metastasis, and distant metastasis was 41%, 55%, 89%, and 75%, respectively. Univariate analysis revealed that higher Karnofsky Performance Status score, absence of weight loss before treatment, and T1 stage were associated with better survival, although the T stage became insignificant on multivariate analysis. There were two Grade 3 acute toxicities and three Grade 3 late toxicities, but there was no Grade 4-5 toxicity.
                The results of this study compare favorably with those of most previous studies employing conventional fractionation. Further studies on hyperfractionation seem to be warranted for Stage I NSCLC. The prognosis of inoperable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is poor and thoracic radiation therapy is usually the main step of the therapeutic approach. The results of a retrospective analysis of a series of 381 patients treated from 1977 to 1990 for an inoperable NSCLC are reported.
                Three hundred and twenty two men and 59 women were included into the study. Their mean age was 66 years. A squamous cell carcinoma was observed in 276 cases (72%). A superior vena cava syndrome or a Pancoast's syndrome were present in 21 and 26 patients, respectively. Fifty-two per cent of the patients had a WHO performance status > or = 2. According to the TNM classification, the tumor distribution was as follows: 11 T1, 153 T2, 175 T3, and 42 T4. The mediastinum was involved in 174 patients. All patients were treated by external radiation therapy with a total dose of 60-65 Gy. Classical fractionation of the irradiation dose was done in 217 patients and hypofractionation was used for 164 patients.
                After treatment, improvement of the superior vena and Pancoast's syndromes was observed in 90% of the patients. Radiological complete response was obtained in 177 patients (47%). The 5-year overall survival rate was 6.2%. No significant differences in survival according to the initial tumor size, the mediastinum status or the fractionation scheme were noted. The 5-year survival rate was 13% in patients with a tumor that completely responded to irradiation. Death was mainly due to local failure (231 patients, 69%) and metastatic disease (107 patients, 32%). The radiotherapy tolerance was acceptable.
                Although irradiation provides good palliation and a 10%-survival rate at 3 years, the results relating to radiation therapy were disappointing. From 1970 to 1983, 1,646 lung cancer patients were referred for treatment to the Hunter Radiation Therapy Center, Yale-New Haven Hospital. Forty-three patients had clinical Stage I non-small cell lung cancer felt to be surgically resectable but were treated with radical radiation therapy either for medical reasons (37 patients) or because the patient refused surgery (six patients). This group of clinical Stage I lung cancer patients is understaged by modern criteria since the majority of patients did not have thoracic CT scans and staging was based on fairly limited clinical and radiographic studies. The histological diagnosis was squamous cell carcinoma in 53% of the Stage I patients, adenocarcinoma in 25%, and other non-small cell histologies in 22%. All patients were treated with megavoltage irradiation and the mediastinum was treated in 88% of the patients. Eleven patients were treated with a continuous course (CC) and 32 patients received split course (SC) therapy based on physician preference. The CC consisted of a median fraction size of 200 cGy to a total median dose of 5900 cGy in 6-7 weeks. The SC used a median fraction site of 275 cGy to a total median dose of 5400 cGy over a 6-week period with a 2-week rest in the middle of treatment. The actuarial survival rate of the 43 clinical Stage I patients was 36% at 3 years and 21% at 5 years. Intrathoracic failures occurred in 39% of the patients. Despite the fact that the CC group was similar to the SC group in terms of age, histology, and tumor extent, the CC patients had a lower thoracic failure rate (2/11) versus 15/32), a longer median survival (51.6 months versus 27 months), and a better actuarial 5-year survival rate (45% versus 12%) when compared to the SC patients. Using Cox regression analysis to compare survival curves, the CC group had a significantly better survival compared to the SC group (p = .04).
There were no randomised trials that compared a policy of immediate radical radiotherapy with palliative radiotherapy given when patients develop symptoms. In the absence of such trials, radical radiotherapy appears to result in a better survival than might be expected had treatment not been given. A substantial, though variable, proportion of patients died during follow-up from causes other than cancer. The optimal radiation dose and treatment technique (particularly with respect to mediastinal irradiation) remain uncertain.