Local Consolidative Therapy Vs. Maintenance Therapy or Observation for Patients With Oligometastatic Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Long-Term Results of a Multi-Institutional, Phase II, Randomized Study

Pourquoi ce travail est-il dans la base ?

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Écart entre enseignants

0,356 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail

Statut de validation

score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Résumé

PURPOSE Our previously published findings reported that local consolidative therapy (LCT) with radiotherapy or surgery improved progression-free survival (PFS) and delayed new disease in patients with oligometastatic non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that did not progress after front-line systemic therapy. Herein, we present the longer-term overall survival (OS) results accompanied by additional secondary end points. PATIENTS AND METHODS This multicenter, randomized, phase II trial enrolled patients with stage IV NSCLC, three or fewer metastases, and no progression at 3 or more months after front-line systemic therapy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to maintenance therapy or observation (MT/O) or to LCT to all active disease sites. The primary end point was PFS; secondary end points were OS, toxicity, and the appearance of new lesions. All analyses were two sided, and P values less than .10 were deemed significant. RESULTS The Data Safety and Monitoring Board recommended early trial closure after 49 patients were randomly assigned because of a significant PFS benefit in the LCT arm. With an updated median follow-up time of 38.8 months (range, 28.3 to 61.4 months), the PFS benefit was durable (median, 14.2 months [95% CI, 7.4 to 23.1 months] with LCT v 4.4 months [95% CI, 2.2 to 8.3 months] with MT/O; P = .022). We also found an OS benefit in the LCT arm (median, 41.2 months [95% CI, 18.9 months to not reached] with LCT v 17.0 months [95% CI, 10.1 to 39.8 months] with MT/O; P = .017). No additional grade 3 or greater toxicities were observed. Survival after progression was longer in the LCT group (37.6 months with LCT v 9.4 months with MT/O; P = .034). Of the 20 patients who experienced progression in the MT/O arm, nine received LCT to all lesions after progression, and the median OS was 17 months (95% CI, 7.8 months to not reached). CONCLUSION In patients with oligometastatic NSCLC that did not progress after front-line systemic therapy, LCT prolonged PFS and OS relative to MT/O.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

La notice

Revue

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Thématique

Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment

Domaine

Medicine

Établissements canadiens

London Health Sciences Centre

Organismes subventionnaires

National Cancer InstituteIgnytaUniversity of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterGenentech

Mots-clés

MedicineClinical endpointRadiation therapyLung cancerRandomized controlled trialSurgerySystemic therapyProgression-free survivalInternal medicineCancerChemotherapy

Résumé présent dans OpenAlex

oui

API

/api/v1/works/W2944301866