Trond Eirik Strand

Bio: Trond Eirik Strand is an academic researcher from Oslo University Hospital. The author has contributed to research in topics: Lung cancer & Cancer registry. The author has an hindex of 18, co-authored 37 publications receiving 2900 citations. Previous affiliations of Trond Eirik Strand include Norwegian Armed Forces.

Survival after resection for primary lung cancer: a population based study of 3211 resected patients

Abstract: Background: Very few population based results have been presented for survival after resection for lung cancer. The purpose of this study was to present long term survival after resection and to quantify prognostic factors for survival. Methods: All lung cancer patients diagnosed in Norway in 1993–2002 were reported to the Cancer Registry of Norway (n = 19 582). A total of 3211 patients underwent surgical resection and were included for analysis. Supplementary information from hospitals (including co-morbidity data) was collected for patients diagnosed in 1993–8. Five year observed and relative survival was analysed for patients diagnosed and operated in 1993–9. Factors believed to influence survival were analysed by a Cox proportional hazard regression model. Results: Five year relative survival in the period 1993–9 was 46.4% (n = 2144): 58.4% for stage I disease (n = 1375), 28.4% for stage II (n = 532), 15.1% for IIIa (n = 133), 24.1% for IIIb (n = 63), and 21.1% for stage IV disease (n = 41). The high survival in stage IIIb and IV was due to the contribution of multiple tumours. Cox regression analysis identified male sex, higher age, procedures other than upper and middle lobectomy, histologies such as adenocarcinoma and large cell carcinoma, surgery on the right side, infiltration of resection margins, and larger tumour size as non-favourable prognostic factors. Conclusions: Survival was favourable for resected patients in a population based group including subgroups such as elderly patients, those with advanced stage, small cell lung cancer, tumours with nodal invasion, and patients with multiple tumours. These results question the validity of the current TNM system for lung cancer with regard to tumour size and categorization of multiple tumours.

National comparisons of lung cancer survival in England, Norway and Sweden 2001-2004: differences occur early in follow-up

Abstract: BACKGROUND Countries with a similar expenditure on healthcare within Europe exhibit differences in lung cancer survival. Survival in lung cancer was studied in 2001-2004 in England, Norway and Sweden. METHODS Nationwide cancer registries in England, Norway and Sweden were used to identify 250 828 patients with lung cancer from England, 18 386 from Norway and 24 886 from Sweden diagnosed between 1996 and 2004, after exclusion of patients registered through death certificate only or with missing, zero or negative survival times. 5-Year relative survival was calculated by application of the period approach. The excess mortality between the countries was compared using a Poisson regression model. RESULTS In all subcategories of age, sex and follow-up period, the 5-year survival was lower in England than in Norway and Sweden. The age-standardised survival estimates were 6.5%, 9.3% and 11.3% for men and 8.4%, 13.5% and 15.9% for women in the respective countries in 2001-2004. The difference in excess risk of dying between the countries was predominantly confined to the first year of follow-up. The relative excess risk ratio during the first 3 months of follow-up comparing England with Norway 2001-2004 varied between 1.23 and 1.46, depending on sex and age, and between 1.56 and 1.91 comparing England with Sweden. CONCLUSION Access to healthcare and population awareness are likely to be major reasons for the differences, but it cannot be excluded that diagnostic and therapeutic activity play a role. Future improvements in lung cancer management may be seen early in follow-up.

Carcinoid lung tumors — incidence, treatment and outcomes: a population-based study

Abstract: Objective: Few published reports have examined the incidence and outcomes for patients with carcinoid lung tumors. The aim of the current study was to explore incidence, type of surgical treatment given, and outcome for patients with typical (TC) and atypical (AC) lung carcinoids in a national cohort (Norway).Methods: All lung-cancer patients diagnosed in the period 1993—2005 and who were reported to the Cancer Registry of Norway were identified. Biopsies or resection specimens were reviewed and reclassified according to the World Health Organization (WHO) 2004 classification. Surgically treated patients were staged according to the seventh edition of the pathological tumor—node—metastasis (pTNM) staging system. Results: Of 26 665 lung cancers registered during the period, 265 (1%) had carcinoid tumors, of which 11 were diagnosed coincidentally at autopsy. In the remaining 254 patients, TCs were found in 188 cases, and ACs were found in 59 cases; seven cases had unclassifiable carcinoids. Of the 217 resected tumors, 173 (80%) were TCs. General surgeons performed 94 resections, including 11 of 17 pneumonectomies. All six bronchial resections were performed by thoracic surgeons. Of the 33 operated patients who died during follow-up, 18 had metastatic carcinoid tumors, of which 10 (56%) were ACs. In 37 non-resected patients (15 with AC and seven with unclassifiable histology), metastatic or locally advanced disease (N = 21, 12 of which were ACs) was the main cause of inoperability and death. Five-year survival for all patients was 92% for TC and 66% for AC; for resected patients, the survival rates were 96% and 79%, respectively. Conclusions:Carcinoids are rare malignant tumors and are, in most cases, resectable; the TC subgroup had better prognosis than the AC in univariate analyses. The main cause of death was metastasis/locally advanced tumor at presentation or recurrent disease following resection; both situations were three times more common in patients with AC. # 2010 European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

The biology and management of non-small cell lung cancer

Abstract: Important advancements in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have been achieved over the past two decades, increasing our understanding of the disease biology and mechanisms of tumour progression, and advancing early detection and multimodal care. The use of small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors and immunotherapy has led to unprecedented survival benefits in selected patients. However, the overall cure and survival rates for NSCLC remain low, particularly in metastatic disease. Therefore, continued research into new drugs and combination therapies is required to expand the clinical benefit to a broader patient population and to improve outcomes in NSCLC.

Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer: Epidemiology, Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment

Abstract: Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer deaths in the United States. In the past decade, significant advances have been made in the science of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Screening has been introduced with the goal of early detection. The National Lung Screening Trial found a lung cancer mortality benefit of 20% and a 6.7% decrease in all-cause mortality with the use of low-dose chest computed tomography in high-risk individuals. The treatment of lung cancer has also evolved with the introduction of several lines of tyrosine kinase inhibitors in patients with EGFR, ALK, ROS1, and NTRK mutations. Similarly, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have dramatically changed the landscape of NSCLC treatment. Furthermore, the results of new trials continue to help us understand the role of these novel agents and which patients are more likely to benefit; ICIs are now part of the first-line NSCLC treatment armamentarium as monotherapy, combined with chemotherapy, or after definite chemoradiotherapy in patients with stage III unresectable NSCLC. Expression of programmed cell death protein-ligand 1 in malignant cells has been studied as a potential biomarker for response to ICIs. However, important drawbacks exist that limit its discriminatory potential. Identification of accurate predictive biomarkers beyond programmed cell death protein-ligand 1 expression remains essential to select the most appropriate candidates for ICI therapy. Many questions remain unanswered regarding the proper sequence and combinations of these new agents; however, the field is moving rapidly, and the overall direction is optimistic.