https://www.hal.inserm.fr/inserm-00561753/document

International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer/American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society International Multidisciplinary Classification of Lung Adenocarcinoma

Treatment of stage I and II non-small cell lung cancer: Diagnosis and management of lung cancer, 3rd ed: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines.

A collaboration of multidisciplinary experts on the functional evaluation of lung cancer patients has been facilitated by the European Respiratory Society (ERS) and the European Society of Thoracic Surgery (ESTS), in order to draw up recommendations and provide clinicians with clear, up-to-date guidelines on fitness for surgery and chemo-radiotherapy. The subject was divided into different topics, which were then assigned to at least two experts. The authors searched the literature according to their own strategies, with no central literature review being performed. The draft reports written by the experts on each topic were reviewed, discussed and voted on by the entire expert panel. The evidence supporting each recommendation was summarised, and graded as described by the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network Grading Review Group. Clinical practice guidelines were generated and finalized in a functional algorithm for risk stratification of the lung resection candidates, emphasising cardiological evaluation, forced expiratory volume in 1 s, systematic carbon monoxide lung diffusion capacity and exercise testing. Contrary to lung resection, for which the scientific evidences are more robust, we were unable to recommend any specific test, cut-off value, or algorithm before chemo-radiotherapy due to the lack of data. We recommend that lung cancer patients should be managed in specialised settings by multidisciplinary teams.

https://erj.ersjournals.com/content/erj/34/1/17.full.pdf

ERS/ESTS clinical guidelines on fitness for radical therapy in lung cancer patients (surgery and chemo-radiotherapy)

Ers/ests clinical guidelines on fitness for radical therapy in lung cancer patients (surgery and chemo-radiotherapy) . a. brunelli, a. charloux, c.t. bolliger, g. rocco, j-p. sculier, g. varela

PURPOSE To compare outcomes between lung stereotactic radiotherapy (SBRT) and wedge resection for stage I non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS One hundred twenty-four patients with T1-2N0 NSCLC underwent wedge resection (n = 69) or image-guided lung SBRT (n = 58) from February 2003 through August 2008. All were ineligible for anatomic lobectomy; of those receiving SBRT, 95% were medically inoperable, with 5% refusing surgery. Mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second and diffusing capacity of lung for carbon monoxide were 1.39 L and 12.0 mL/min/mmHg for wedge versus 1.31 L and 10.14 mL/min/mmHg for SBRT (P = not significant). Mean Charlson comorbidity index and median age were 3 and 74 years for wedge versus 4 and 78 years for SBRT (P .16). SBRT reduced the risk of local recurrence (LR), 4% versus 20% for wedge (P = .07). Overall survival (OS) was higher with wedge but cause-specific survival (CSS) was identical. Results excluding synchronous primaries, nonbiopsied tumors, or pathologic T4 disease (wedge satellite lesion) showed reduced LR (5% v 24%, P = .05), RR (0% v 18%, P = .07), and LRR (5% v 29%, P = .03) with SBRT. There were no differences in DM, FFF, or CSS, but OS was higher with wedge. CONCLUSION Both lung SBRT and wedge resection are reasonable treatment options for stage I NSCLC patients ineligible for anatomic lobectomy. SBRT reduced LR, RR, and LRR. In this nonrandomized population of patients selected for surgery versus SBRT (medically inoperable) at physician discretion, OS was higher in surgical patients. SBRT and surgery, however, had identical CSS.

https://ascopubs.org/doi/pdf/10.1200/jco.2009.25.0928

Susan J. Urda

Papers

Outcomes of sublobar resection versus lobectomy for stage I non-small cell lung cancer: a 13-year analysis.