Microwave Ablation versus Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Stage I Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

PurposeTo assess the cost effectiveness of microwave ablation (MWA) and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for patients with inoperable stage I non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).Materials and MethodsA literature search was performed in MEDLINE with broad search clusters. A decision-analytic model was constructed over a 5-year period. The model incorporated treatment-related complications and long-term recurrence. All clinical parameters were derived from the literature with preference to long-term prospective trials. A healthcare payers’ perspective was adopted. Outcomes were measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) extracted from prior studies and U.S. dollars from Medicare reimbursements and prior studies. Base case calculations, probabilistic sensitivity analysis with 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations, and multiple 1- and 2-way sensitivity analyses were performed.ResultsMWA yielded a health benefit of 2.31 QALYs at a cost of $195,331, whereas SBRT yielded a health benefit of 2.33 QALYs at a cost of $225,271. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $1,480,597/QALY, indicating that MWA is the more cost-effective strategy. The conclusion remains unchanged in probabilistic sensitivity analysis with MWA being the optimal cost strategy in 99.84% simulations. One-way sensitivity analyses revealed that MWA remains cost effective when its annual recurrence risk is <18.4% averaged over 5 years, when the SBRT annual recurrence risk is >1.44% averaged over 5 years, or when MWA is at least $7,500 cheaper than SBRT.ConclusionsMWA appears to be more cost effective than SBRT for patients with inoperable stage I NSCLC.     

Sélection de patientes et tolérance précoce de l’irradiation mammaire selon le protocole « Fast Forward » : résultats préliminaires

PurposeModerate hypofractionated radiotherapy has become routine practice for a selected population of patients treated for early-stage breast cancer. In April 2020, the Fast Forward (FF) study was published which introduced another extreme hypofractionated radiotherapy regimen in five sessions over a week. The aim of this work is to evaluate the population of first patients in whom this regimen was used in our department, as well as the results in terms of early toxicity.Material and methodsWe retrospectively analysed all the patients treated in our department according to the Fast Forward protocol after establishing an institutional consensus regarding the selection of patients with breast cancer without indication for lymph node irradiation. All patients received breast-only irradiation at a total dose of 26 Gy in five fractions according to protocol. All patients were treated by modern conformational techniques with planning large volume coverage between 95 and 100%. Acute toxicity of the treatment was assessed using the NCI CTC v4.0 scale and the general condition was assessed according to the WHO classification.ResultsBetween August 2020 and May 2021, 30 patients were included, treated on the breast alone without complement on the tumour bed or irradiation of the lymph node areas. The median age of the patients was 80 years (range: 60–85 years) with performance status 2 in 27 cases (89%). Only one patient had metastatic disease (3%), one patient presented locally advanced and 28 (94%) patients had early stage disease. Three patients (10%) were treated in dorsal decubitus according to the “field in the field” technique and 27 patients (90%) in isocentric lateral decubitus, which made it possible to avoid the organs at risk such as the heart (average dose of less than 1 Gy) and the lungs. The early toxicity observed was grade I radio dermatitis in 8 patients (27%). No grade 2 and 3 toxicity, as well as radiation-induced pain or lymphedema were observed.ConclusionsThe results of this series of patients treated with hypofractionated radiotherapy according to the Fast Forward protocol on the breast alone with adapted techniques show that the protocol is feasible, with little early toxicity but a greater follow-up is necessary to assess long-term toxicity.     

Tongue cancer treatment and oncological outcomes: The role of glossectomy classification

BackgroundNowadays surgery remains the gold standard of treatment for tongue cancer. Via a more clear and precise terminology, the glossectomy classification by Ansarin et al. facilitates shared communication between surgeons, allowing comparison between published research and improving surgical practice and patient care. To establish the association of glossectomies, according to their classification by Ansarin et al. with overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DSF), and cause-specific survival (CSS) in tongue cancer, we conducted a systemic retrospective study on 300 consecutive patients affected by primary oral tongue cancer and treated with surgery at the European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS (IEO).MethodsThree hundred patients with tongue squamous cell carcinoma and treated at the Division of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery of the European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS were cataloged according to the glossectomy classification. OS, DFS, and CSS were compared by surgical treatments.ResultsOS-5yrs was 80% for the type I glossectomy group, 75% for type II, 65% for type III, and 35% for type IV-V. DFS-5yrs was 74%, 60%, 55%, and 27%, respectively for I, II, III, and IV-V glossectomy group; CSS-5yrs was 82%, 80%, 72%, and 48%, respectively for I, II, III, and IV-V glossectomy group (p < 0.01).ConclusionsThis study confirmed that the application of the glossectomy classification was statistically correlated with patients' oncological outcomes.     

A contemporary systematic review on liver transplantation for unresectable liver metastases of colorectal cancer

The 5-year overall survival rate of a patient with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer is poor at approximately 14%. Similarly, historical data on liver transplantation (LT) in those with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) showed poor outcomes, with 5-year survival rates between 12% and 21%. More recently, limited data have shown improved outcomes in select patients with 5-year overall survival rates of approximately 60%. Despite these reported survival improvements, there is no significant improvement in disease-free survival. Given the uncertain benefit with this therapeutic approach and a renewed investigational interest, we aimed to conduct a contemporary systematic review on LT for CRLM. A systematic review of the literature was performed according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis statement. English articles reporting on data regarding LT for CRLM were identified through the MEDLINE (via PubMed), Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases (last search date: December 16th, 2021) by 2 researchers independently. A total of 58 studies (45 published and 13 ongoing) were included. Although early retrospective studies suggest the possibility that some carefully selected patients may benefit from LT, there is minimal prospective data on the topic and LT remains exploratory in the setting of CRLM. Additionally, several other challenges, such as the limited availability of deceased donor organs and defining appropriate selection criteria, remain when considering the implementation of LT for these patients. Further evidence from ongoing prospective trials is needed to determine if and to what extent there is a role for LT in patients with surgically unresectable CRLM.     

Tumor-induced erythroid precursor-differentiated myeloid cells mediate immunosuppression and curtail anti-PD-1/PD-L1 treatment efficacy

1. Download : Download high-res image (235KB)
2. Download : Download full-size image

     

Impact of Joint Lung Cancer Screening and Cessation Interventions Under the New Recommendations of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force

IntroductionIn 2021, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) revised its lung cancer screening recommendations expanding its eligibility. As more smokers become eligible, cessation interventions at the point of screening could enhance the benefits. Here, we evaluate the effects of joint screening and cessation interventions under the new recommendations.MethodsA validated lung cancer natural history model was used to estimate lifetime number of low-dose computed tomography screens, percentage ever screened, lung cancer deaths, lung cancer deaths averted, and life-years gained for the 1960 U.S. birth cohort aged 45 to 90 years (4.5 million individuals). Screening occurred according to the USPSTF 2013 and 2021 recommendations with varying uptake (0%, 30%, 100%), with or without a cessation intervention at the point of screening with varying effectiveness (15%, 100%).ResultsScreening 30% of the eligible population according to the 2021 criteria with no cessation intervention (USPSTF 2021, 30% uptake, without cessation intervention) was estimated to result in 6845 lung cancer deaths averted and 103,725 life-years gained. These represent 28% and 34% increases, respectively, relative to screening according to the 2013 guidelines (USPSTF 2013, 30% uptake, without cessation intervention). Adding a cessation intervention at the time of the first screen with 15% effectiveness (USPSTF 2021, 30% uptake, with cessation intervention with 15% effectiveness) was estimated to result in 2422 additional lung cancer deaths averted (9267 total, ∼73% increase versus USPSTF 2013, 30% uptake, without cessation intervention) and 322,785 life-years gained (∼318% increase). Screening 100% of the eligible according to the 2021 guidelines with no cessation intervention (USPSTF 2021, 100% uptake, without cessation intervention) was estimated to result in 23,444 lung cancer deaths averted (∼337% increase versus USPSTF 2013, 30% uptake, without cessation intervention) and 354,330 life-years gained (∼359% increase). Adding a cessation intervention with 15% effectiveness (USPSTF 2021, 100% uptake, with cessation intervention with 15% effectiveness) would result in 31,998 lung cancer deaths averted (∼497% increase versus USPSTF 2013, 30% uptake, without cessation intervention) and 1,086,840 life-years gained (∼1309% increase).ConclusionsJoint screening and cessation interventions would result in considerable lung cancer deaths averted and life-years gained. Adding a one-time cessation intervention of modest effectiveness (15%) results in comparable life-years gained as increasing screening uptake from 30% to 100% because while cessation decreases mortality from many causes, screening only reduces lung cancer mortality. This simulation indicates that incorporating cessation programs into screening practice should be a priority as it can maximize overall benefits.     

Ultrahypofractionated Radiotherapy for Localised Prostate Cancer: How Far Can We Go?

Following adoption of moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy as a standard for localised prostate cancer, ultrahypofractioned radiotherapy delivered in five to seven fractions is rapidly being embraced by clinical practice and international guidelines. However, the question remains: how low can we go? Can radiotherapy for prostate cancer be delivered in fewer than five fractions? The current review summarises the evidence that radiotherapy for localised prostate cancer can be safely and effectively delivered in fewer than five fractions using high dose rate brachytherapy or stereotactic body radiotherapy. We also discuss important lessons learned from the single-fraction high dose rate brachytherapy experience.     

Pan-cancer proteomic map of 949 human cell lines

1. Download : Download high-res image (220KB)
2. Download : Download full-size image

     

Can we increase the cervical cancer screening interval with an HPV test for women living with HIV? Results of a cohort study from Maharashtra,India

We are reporting (a) updated incidence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) among women who did not have colposcopic or histopathological disease at baseline and (b) disease outcomes among women treated for CIN and their follow-up HPV status; in a cohort of women living with HIV (WHIV). The median overall follow-up was 3.5 years (IQR 2.8-4.3). The incidence of any CIN and that of CIN 2 or worse disease was 16.7 and 7.0 per 1000 person-years of observation (PYO), respectively. Compared with women who were HPV negative at baseline, women who cleared HPV infection had 23.95 times increased risk of incident CIN 2 or worse lesions (95% CI 2.40-661.07). Women with persistent HPV infection had 138.18 times increased risk of CIN 2 or worse lesions (95% CI 20.30-3300.22). Complete disease regression was observed in 65.6% of the HPV positive women with high-grade CIN and were treated with thermal ablation but HPV persistence was seen in 44.8% of those with high-grade disease. Among those who did not have any disease at baseline and were also HPV negative, about 87% (95% CI 83.79-89.48) women remained HPV negative during consecutive HPV test/s with the median interval of 3.5 years. Long-term surveillance of WHIV treated for any CIN is necessary for the prevention of cervical cancer among them. Our study provides an early indication that the currently recommended screening interval of 3 to 5 years among WHIV may be extended to at least 5 years among HPV negative women. Increasing the screening interval can be cost saving and improve scalability among WHIV to support WHO's cervical cancer elimination initiative.