Clinical Outcomes After Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Early Stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Single Institutional Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction The standard of care for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is surgery. However, for medical inoperable patients stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is an alternative method. The aim of the study is to assess the overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and local control (LC) of patients diagnosed with NSCLC in Manitoba, Canada, between 2013 and 2017 and managed with SBRT. Materials and methods This retrospective study included a total of 158 patients (60.13% of the population were females) that were diagnosed with stage I-II NSCLC and were treated with lung SBRT between 2013 and 2017 in Manitoba. Demographics and clinical data were retrospectively extracted from the electronic patient record. Kaplan-Meier and Cumulative incidence curves were used to describe the OS, PFS, and LC outcomes. Results From the 158 patients, 32 patients were treated with 60 Gy in eight fractions, while 121 patients were treated with 48 Gy in four fractions. Only 85 patients had biopsy-proven NSCLC. The median OS was 2.87 years (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.16-3.43). OS rates at one and two years were 85% and 66%, respectively. The median PFS was 2.03 years (95% CI 1.65-2.77). Furthermore, one-year and two-year PFS rates were 77% and 51%, respectively. Only 10 patients progressed locally at one year and 17 at two years, making the LC rate 93% at the one-year and 87% at the two-year mark. Conclusion These findings add to a growing evidence base supporting SBRT in the treatment of clinically suspected and biopsy-proven early-stage NSCLC patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".