Virtual Library

Start Your Search

R..G. Boldt

Author of

  • +

    OA 16 - Treatment Strategies and Follow Up (ID 686)

    • Event: WCLC 2017
    • Type: Oral
    • Track: Early Stage NSCLC
    • Presentations: 1
    • +

      OA 16.01 - Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy Versus Surgery in Early Lung Cancer: A Meta-analysis of Propensity Score-Adjusted Studies (ID 8066)

      14:30 - 16:15  |  Author(s): R..G. Boldt

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      There is currently no completed randomized controlled trial data comparing stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) and surgery in operable patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (ES-NSCLC). Propensity score methods are increasingly utilized in oncology to balance the baseline characteristics of non-randomized cohorts, mimicking the setting of a clinical trial. No previous meta-analysis of propensity score analyses comparing a surgical and non-surgical modality has been conducted. Our goal was therefore to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of all propensity score analyses comparing SABR and surgery in patients with ES-NSCLC.

      A systematic review was carried out according to PRISMA guidelines by querying the MEDLINE and Embase databases from inception until December 2016. Hazard ratios (HR) with confidence intervals (CI) for overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) were directly extracted, if available, or estimated from Kaplan-Meier curves. Meta-analysis was carried out with inverse variance-weighted random-effects models.

      After reviewing 1039 records, 17 PS-adjusted studies with a total of 20151 patients were included in the final analysis. Overall survival (OS) favoured surgery over SABR (HR = 1.52 [95% CI: 1.33-1.74], p < 0.001). However, the rate at which patients died from lung cancer (DSS) was not significantly different (HR = 1.13 [95% CI: 0.86-1.49], p = 0.38). On subgroup analysis, OS was superior for both lobectomy (HR = 1.61 [95% CI: 1.27-2.03], p < 0.001) and sublobar resection (HR = 1.33 [95% CI: 1.15-1.55], p < 0.001) versus SABR while DSS again did not significantly differ (HR = 1.35 [95% CI: 0.70-2.62] and HR = 1.18 [95% CI: 0.84-1.67], respectively). On secondary analysis, meta-analysis of proportions revealed a lymph node upstaging rate of 16.0% (95% CI: 13.6%-18.6%) and adjuvant chemotherapy usage rate of 11.5% (95% CI: 8.6%-14.8%) among patients who received surgery. On meta-regression, with every increase of 0.1 in the maximum allowable difference in propensity score within a matched pair - representing increases in imbalance between cohorts, DSS outcomes increasingly favoured surgery by 1.36-fold. Critical appraisal revealed inconsistent reporting of propensity score methods.

      Overall survival favoured surgery over SABR in this meta-analysis of 17 propensity score analyses. However, the effectiveness of SABR was reflected in a similar DSS to surgery, supporting ongoing clinical equipoise. A direct relationship between propensity score methodology and DSS outcomes were demonstrated. Whether this observed benefit in OS for surgery is real or due to limitations in the propensity score methodology requires confirmation through randomized data.

      Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.

      Only Active Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.