Long-Term Prospective Outcomes of Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy for Locally Advanced Lung Cancer: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial
Stephen G Chun,Chen Hu,Ritsuko U Komaki,Robert D Timmerman,Steven E Schild,Jeffrey A Bogart,Michael C Dobelbower,Walter Bosch,Vivek S Kavadi,Samir Narayan,Puneeth Iyengar,Clifford Robinson,Jan Rothman,Adam Raben,Mark E Augspurger,Robert M MacRae,Rebecca Paulus,Jeffrey D Bradley
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2024.1841
2024-08-01
Abstract:Importance: The optimal radiotherapy technique for unresectable locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is controversial, so evaluating long-term prospective outcomes of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) is important. Objective: To compare long-term prospective outcomes of patients receiving IMRT and 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) with concurrent carboplatin/paclitaxel for locally advanced NSCLC. Design, setting, and participants: A secondary analysis of a prospective phase 3 randomized clinical trial NRG Oncology-RTOG 0617 assessed 483 patients receiving chemoradiotherapy (3D-CRT vs IMRT) for locally advanced NSCLC based on stratification. Main outcomes and measures: Long-term outcomes were analyzed, including overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), time to local failure, development of second cancers, and severe grade 3 or higher adverse events (AEs) per Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 3. The percentage of an organ volume (V) receiving a specified amount of radiation in units of Gy is reported as V(radiation dose). Results: Of 483 patients (median [IQR] age, 64 [57-70] years; 194 [40.2%] female), 228 (47.2%) received IMRT, and 255 (52.8%) received 3D-CRT (median [IQR] follow-up, 5.2 [4.8-6.0] years). IMRT was associated with a 2-fold reduction in grade 3 or higher pneumonitis AEs compared with 3D-CRT (8 [3.5%] vs 21 [8.2%]; P = .03). On univariate analysis, heart V20, V40, and V60 were associated with worse OS (hazard ratios, 1.06 [95% CI, 1.04-1.09]; 1.09 [95% CI, 1.05-1.13]; 1.16 [95% CI, 1.09-1.24], respectively; all P < .001). IMRT significantly reduced heart V40 compared to 3D-CRT (16.5% vs 20.5%; P < .001). Heart V40 (<20%) had better OS than V40 (≥20%) (median [IQR], 2.5 [2.1-3.1] years vs 1.7 [1.5-2.0] years; P < .001). On multivariable analysis, heart V40 (≥20%), was associated with worse OS (hazard ratio, 1.34 [95% CI, 1.06-1.70]; P = .01), whereas lung V5 and age had no association with OS. Patients receiving IMRT and 3D-CRT had similar rates of developing secondary cancers (15 [6.6%] vs 14 [5.5%]) with long-term follow-up. Conclusions and relevance: These findings support the standard use of IMRT for locally advanced NSCLC. IMRT should aim to minimize lung V20 and heart V20 to V60, rather than constraining low-dose radiation bath. Lung V5 and age were not associated with survival and should not be considered a contraindication for chemoradiotherapy. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00533949.