Context Patients with early stage but medically inoperable lung cancer patients have a poor rate of primary tumor control (30-40%) and a high rate of mortality (3-year survival 20-35%) with current management. Objective To evaluate the toxicity and efficacy of stereotactic body radiation therapy in a high risk population of patients with early stage but medically inoperable lung cancer. Design, Setting, and Patients Phase 2 North American multicenter study of patients with biopsy-proven peripheral T1-T2, N0, M0 non-small cell tumors less than 5 cm in diameter and medical conditions precluding surgical treatment. The prescription dose was 18 Gy per fraction times 3 fractions (54 Gy total) delivered in 1½-2 weeks. The study opened May 26, 2004, and closed October 13, 2006; data were analyzed through August 31, 2009. Main Outcome Measures The primary endpoint was primary tumor control with overall survival, disease free survival, adverse events, involved lobe, regional, and disseminated recurrence as secondary endpoints. Results A total of 59 patients accrued, of which 55 were evaluable (44 T1 and 11 T2 tumors) with a median follow-up of 34.4 months (range, 4.8 to 49.9 months). Only 1 patient had a primary tumor failure; the estimated 3-year primary tumor control rate was 97.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 84.3%, 99.7%). Three patients had recurrence within the involved lobe; the 3-year primary tumor and involved lobe (local) control rate was 90.6% (95% CI, 76.0%, 96.5%). Two patients experienced regional failure; the local-regional control rate was 87.2% (95%CI, 71.0%, 94.7%). Eleven patients experienced disseminated recurrence; the 3-year rate of disseminated failure was 22.1% (95% CI, 12.3%, 37.8%). The rates of disease-free and overall survival at 3 years were 48.3% (95% CI, 34.4%, 60.8%) and 55.8% (95% CI, 41.6%, 67.9%), respectively. The median overall survival was 48.1 months (95% CI, 29.6% to not reached). Protocol specified treatment-related grade 3 adverse events were reported in 7 patients (12.7%; 95% CI, 9.6%, 15.8%); grade 4 events were reported in 2 patients (3.6%; 95%CI, 2.7%, 4.5%). No grade 5 adverse events were reported. Conclusion Patients with inoperable non-small cell lung cancer who received stereotactic body radiation therapy had a survival rate of 55.8% at 3 years, high rates of local tumor control, and moderate treatment-related morbidity.

No abstract

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) involves the delivery of a small number of ultra-high doses of radiation to a target volume using very advanced technology and has emerged as a novel treatment modality for cancer. The role of SBRT is most important at two cancer stages-in early primary cancer and in oligometastatic disease. This modality has been used in the treatment of early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer, prostate cancer, renal-cell carcinoma, and liver cancer, and in the treatment of oligometastases in the lung, liver, and spine. A large body of evidence on the use of SBRT for the treatment of primary and metastatic tumors in various sites has accumulated over the past 10-15 years, and efficacy and safety have been demonstrated. Several prospective clinical trials of SBRT for various sites have been conducted, and several other trials are currently being planned. The results of these clinical trials will better define the role of SBRT in cancer management. This article will review the radiobiologic, technical, and clinical aspects of SBRT.

No abstract

BACKGROUND: Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is an alternative to surgery for clinical stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but comparing its effectiveness is difficult because of differences in patient selection and staging. METHODS: Two databases were combined which contained patients treated from 1999 to 2008 by lobectomy (LR, n 5 132), sublobar resection (SLR, n 5 48), and SBRT (n 5 137) after negative staging. Univariate and multivariate analysis were performed for survival (OS), total recurrence control (TRC comprises local-regional and distant control), and locoregional control (LRC) in our entire population. A matchedpair analysis was also performed that compared surgery and SBRT results. Median follow-up for the entire study population was 25.8 months. RESULTS: On univariate analysis, OS was significantly worse with SBRT and also correlated with histology, the Charlson comorbidity index, tumor size, and aspirin use; TRC correlated only with histology; and no variable significantly correlated with LRC. OS was significantly poorer for SBRT in the matched-pair analysis than for patients treated with surgery, but TRC and LRC were not significantly different between these groups. Multivariate analyses including propensity score as a covariate (controlling for all factors affecting treatment selection) found that OS correlated only with Charlson comorbidity index, and TRC correlated only with tumor grade. LRC correlated only with tumor size with or without propensity score correction. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective study has demonstrated similar OS, LRC, and TRC with SBRT or surgery after controlling for prognostic and patient selection factors. Randomized clinical trials are needed to better compare the effectiveness of these treatments. Cancer 2013;119:2683-91.