Lung cancer is the most common cause of death by malignancy, responsible for more deaths than the next 4 causes combined and predicted to account for nearly 220,000 new cancer diagnoses and 160,000 deaths in 2009. The cornerstone of therapy for early-stage lung cancer is lobectomy and mediastinal lymph node dissection. Although lobectomy is considered the standard procedure, segmentectomy may be appropriate for selected patients. Conventional approaches to resection may be used, including posterolateral and muscle-sparing thoracotomy. However, minimally invasive lobectomy and segmentectomy procedures are now commonly used with superior outcomes.
Thomas A. D'Amico
Thomas A. D'Amico
Thomas A. D’Amico
Jacob Klapper and Thomas A. D’Amico
The use of video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) has become the standard approach for the surgical resection of early-stage lung cancer. Although no large prospective, randomized, controlled trial has compared VATS lobectomy with thoracotomy, well-designed retrospective studies have consistently shown that VATS has comparable oncologic outcomes and is associated with fewer complications, reduced length of hospital stay, improvement in patient quality of life, and superior tolerance of adjuvant therapies.
Vivian E. Strong, Thomas A. D’Amico, Lawrence Kleinberg and Jaffer Ajani
The 7th edition of the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual has attempted to harmonize gastric and esophageal cancers, including management of gastroesophageal junction (GEJ)-type tumors. The treatment of complex tumor types is best guided by a staging classification that reliably groups patients according to prognosis and therapy. This article reviews and discusses these changes with the goal of elucidating key features of the staging system and outlining how these changes relate to the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology with regard to the care and treatment of patients. The 7th edition of the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual has certainly improved harmonization of gastric and distal esophageal/GEJ-type adenocarcinomas, although issues persist, particularly regarding the optimal neoadjuvant treatment for the management of GEJ carcinomas.
Paul J. Speicher, Lin Gu, Xiaofei Wang, Matthew G. Hartwig, Thomas A. D'Amico and Mark F. Berry
Background: Evidence guiding adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) use after lobectomy for stage I non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is limited. This study evaluated the impact of AC use and tumor size on outcomes using a large, nationwide cancer database. Methods: The effect of AC on long-term survival among patients who underwent lobectomy for margin-negative pathologic T1–2N0M0 NSCLC in the National Cancer Data Base from 2003 to 2006 was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The specific tumor size threshold at which AC began providing benefit was estimated with multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling. Results: Overall 3,496 of 34,360 patients (10.2%) who met inclusion criteria were treated with AC, although AC use increased over time from 2003, when only 2.7% of patients with tumors less than 4 cm and 6.2% of patients with tumors of 4 cm or larger received AC. In unadjusted survival analysis, AC was associated with a significant 5-year survival benefit for patients with tumors less than 4 cm (74.3% vs 66.9%; P<.0001) and 4 cm or greater (64.8% vs 49.8%; P<.0001). In subanalyses of patients grouped by strata of 0.5-cm increments in tumor size, AC was associated with a survival advantage for tumor sizes ranging from 3.0 to 8.5 cm. Conclusions: Use of AC among patients with stage I NSCLC has increased over time but remains uncommon. The results of this study support current treatment guidelines that recommend AC use after lobectomy for stage I NSCLC tumors larger than 4 cm. These results also suggest that AC use is associated with superior survival for patients with tumors ranging from 3.0 to 8.5 cm in diameter.
Carrie Zornosa, Jonathan L. Vandergrift, Gregory P. Kalemkerian, David S. Ettinger, Michael S. Rabin, Mary Reid, Gregory A. Otterson, Marianna Koczywas, Thomas A. D'Amico, Joyce C. Niland, Rizvan Mamet and Katherine M. Pisters
The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) allow many systemic therapy options for patients with metastatic non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This analysis uses the NCCN NSCLC Outcomes Database to report on first-line therapy practice patterns and concordance with NCCN Guidelines. The analysis was limited to patients diagnosed with metastatic NSCLC between September 2006 and November 2009 at 1 of 8 participating NCCN Member Institutions. Patient characteristics, regimens used, and guidelines concordance were analyzed. Institutional variation and changes in practice over time were also measured. A total of 1717 patients were included in the analysis. Of these, 1375 (80%) were treated with systemic therapy, most often in the form of a carboplatin-based doublet (51%) or carboplatin-based doublet with targeted therapy (17%). Overall, 76% of patients received care that was concordant with NCCN Guidelines. Among patients with good performance status (n = 167), the most common reasons for not receiving first-line therapy were that therapy was not recommended (39%) or death occurred before treatment (33%). The most common reason for receiving nonconcordant drug therapy was the administration of pemetrexed or erlotinib before its incorporation into the NCCN Guidelines for first-line therapy (53%). Most patients in this cohort received care that was concordant with NCCN Guidelines. The NSCLC Outcomes Database is a valuable resource for evaluating practice patterns and concordance with NCCN Guidelines among patients with NSCLC.
Todd L. Demmy, Lin Gu, Jack E. Burkhalter, Eric M. Toloza, Thomas A. D'Amico, Susan Sutherland, Xiaofei Wang, Laura Archer, Linda J. Veit, Leslie Kohman and the Cancer and Leukemia Group B
The optimal strategy to achieve palliation of malignant pleural effusions (MPEs) is unknown. This multi-institutional, prospective, randomized trial compares 2 established methods for controlling symptomatic unilateral MPEs. Patients with unilateral MPEs were randomized to either daily tunneled catheter drainage (TCD) or bedside talc pleurodesis (TP). This trial is patterned after a previous randomized trial that showed that bedside TP was equivalent to thoracoscopic TP (CALGB 9334). The primary end point of the current study was combined success: consistent/reliable drainage/pleurodesis, lung expansion, and 30-day survival. A secondary end point, survival with effusion control, was added retrospectively. This trial randomized 57 patients who were similar in terms of age (62 years), active chemotherapy (28%), and histologic diagnosis (lung, 63%; breast, 12%; other/unknown cancers, 25%) to either bedside TP or TCD. Combined success was higher with TCD (62%) than with TP (46%; odds ratio, 5.0; P = .064). Multivariate regression analysis revealed that patients treated with TCD had better 30-day activity without dyspnea scores (8.7 vs. 5.9; P = .036), especially in the subgroup with impaired expansion (9.1 vs. 4.6; P = .042). Patients who underwent TCD had better survival with effusion control at 30 days compared with those who underwent TP (82% vs. 52%, respectively; P = .024). In this prospective randomized trial, TCD achieved superior palliation of unilateral MPEs than TP, particularly in patients with trapped lungs.
Renato G. Martins, Thomas A. D’Amico, Billy W. Loo Jr, Mary Pinder-Schenck, Hossein Borghaei, Jamie E. Chaft, Apar Kishor P. Ganti, Feng-Ming (Spring) Kong, Mark G. Kris, Inga T. Lennes and Douglas E. Wood
Patients with stage IIIA non–small cell lung cancer, determined based on involvement of ipsilateral mediastinal lymph nodes, represent the most challenging management problem in this disease. Patients with this stage disease may have very different degrees of lymph node involvement. The pathologic confirmation of this involvement is a key step in the therapeutic decision. The difference in the degree of lymph node compromise has prognostic and treatment implications. Based on multiple considerations, patients can be treated with induction chemotherapy, chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery, or definitive chemoradiotherapy without surgery. Data derived from clinical trials have provided incomplete guidance for physicians and their patients. The best therapeutic plan is achieved through the multidisciplinary cooperation of a team specialized in lung cancer.
Thomas A. D’Amico, Lindsey A.M. Bandini, Alan Balch, Al B. Benson III, Stephen B. Edge, C. Lyn Fitzgerald, Robert J. Green, Wui-Jin Koh, Michael Kolodziej, Shaji Kumar, Neal J. Meropol, James L. Mohler, David Pfister, Ronald S. Walters and Robert W. Carlson
Although oncology care has evolved, outcome assessment remains a key challenge. Outcome measurement requires identification and adoption of a succinct list of metrics indicative of high-quality cancer care for use within and across healthcare systems. NCCN established an advisory committee, the NCCN Quality and Outcomes Committee, consisting of provider experts from NCCN Member Institutions and other stakeholders, including payers and patient advocacy, community oncology, and health information technology representatives, to review the existing quality landscape and identify contemporary, relevant cancer quality and outcomes measures by reevaluating validated measures for endorsement and proposing new measure concepts to fill crucial gaps. This manuscript reports on 22 measures and concepts; 15 that align with existing measures and 7 that are new.