This randomized trial compared induction therapy for pathologically-proven N2/IIIA NSCLC with 3 cycles of cisplatinum and docetaxel chemotherapy alone to chemotherapy combined with 44 Gy of radiation therapy. 232 pts in 23 centers were enrolled over a 12 year period. No differences were identified in the chemotherapy vs chemoradiotherapy groups for
ALERT!
This site is not optimized for Internet Explorer 8 (or older).
Please upgrade to a newer version of Internet Explorer or use an alternate browser such as Chrome or Firefox.
Lung Cancer - Radiation Therapy
September 12, 2015
August 20, 2015
Thus far, only 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have compared stereotactive ablative radiotherapy (SABR) versus surgery in patients with early stage NSCLC (STARS trial, ROSEL trial, and ACOSOG Z4099 trial). Unfortunately all 3 were unable to meet the accrual goals and were closed early.
August 20, 2015
This is an invited commentary on the article by Chang and colleagues (Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy versus lobectomy for operable stage I non-small-cell lung cancer: a pooled analysis of two randomised trials).
August 20, 2015
This expert opinion editorial is published in JTCVS in response to the article by Chang and colleagues. Meyers and colleagues begin by emphasizing that a large randomized controlled trial (RCT) would be the best way to answer the question of whether SABR or lobectomy is superior treatment for patients with early stage NSCLC.
August 20, 2015
This is a letter in response to the article by Chang and colleagues. The authors point out that only 58 patients were enrolled from 38 centers over 66.3 months, and speculate that this might be due to patients' preference for surgery.
August 20, 2015
This is a letter in response to the article by Chang and colleagues.
August 20, 2015
This is a letter in response to the article by Chang and colleagues. The authors warn to interpret the findings of the original article, that SABR is better tolerated and might lead to improved survival compared to surgery for good risk patients with clinical stage I NSCLC, with caution. They highlight two pitfalls of the original study.
August 20, 2015
This is a letter in response to the article by Chang and colleagues. The authors begin by stating that the data from this study should be graded according to an internationally accepted system, GRADE.
August 19, 2015
This is a letter in response to the article by Chang and colleagues. The authors state that this type of analysis was necessary as it is difficult to conduct a clinical trial that involves new technology.
August 19, 2015
This is the authors' reply to the letters submitted to The Lancet Oncology. They begin by stating that the strength of their analysis was that patients were randomised, thereby avoiding selection bias. With regards to low accrual, one major factor was failure of thoracic surgeons to participate. In addition, stage I NSCLC is relatively uncommon.