Patterns of Care and Treatment Pathways for Non-Surgically Managed Early and Locally Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients at Ain Shams University Clinical Oncology Department: a Retrospective and Descriptive Analysis
Authors: Karim Dr/Khaled Abdel , Nagib Dr/Khaled , Aziz Dr/Ahmed Hassan Abd El , Garas Christina Gamil 
Published: October 2021

Background

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death worldwide, but little is known about how patients with this disease are managed.

Aim of the Work

We aim to study patterns of care and treatment pathways of non- surgically managed early and locally advanced NSCLC patients from January 2015 to December 2018 in Ain Shams University Clinical Oncology Department.

Patients and Methods

In this retrospective analysis we included patients the met the following criteria; age &gt;18, histologically confirmed NSCLC patients whom didn’t undergo surgical resection with at least 6 months of follow up data. We collected data from Clinical Oncology department archive in Ain Shams university hospital. Our primary objective is to identify the patterns of care and treatment pathway for non surgically managed NSCLC patients in ASUCOD from January 2015 to December 2018.

Results

86 patients finally met our inclusion criteria. Median age at diagnosis of 61 years with a range of (38-85), 95.3% were male. Most of the patients were stage III; 40.7% were stage IIIA, 41.9% were stage IIIB, and 9.3% were stage IIIC. 41 were treated radically, 37 received palliative treatment and only 8 patients received supportive care. Overall median progression free survival in our patients was 9.23 (7.4-13.5) and overall survival duration was13.4 (9.5-18.0). In radically treated patients, 68.3% received sequential chemoradiotherapy (sCRT), 29.2% received concurrent chemoradiotherapy (cCRT) or 2.4% received definitive radiotherapy alone (RT). In palliative treated patients, 73% received chemotherapy alone (CTX), 8.1% received palliative RT and 18.9% received both chemotherapy and palliative dose of radiotherapy (CRT). All treatment modalities were similar regarding median progression free survival and overall survival durations, 17.5 (3.6–19.6) and 20.6 (3.6–31.6) in cCRT, 17.5 (3.6–19.6) and 23.3 (17.7–31.2) in sCRT, 12.9 and 13.4 RT group, P value=0.57 and 0.16 receptively. Similarly, progression free survival and overall survival durations were 8.8 (3.0–15.8) and 16.2 (3.6–18.7) in CRT, 5.3 (0.4–7.6) and 8.6 (6.2–10.2) in CTX, 8.5 (0.4–8.5) and 8.5 (0.4–8.5) in palliative RT group, P value=0.64 and 0.15 receptively. In our study, first-line chemotherapy were Gemcitabine plus Cisplatin (41.9%) or Carboplatin (35.1%).The Second -line chemotherapy were Docetaxel (63.1%) or Paclitaxel plus Carboplatin (26.3%). Paclitaxel plus Carboplatin were the most regimen given with RT. Most of the patients received radiation dose of 60Gy/30Fr (73.2%). Regarding the incidence of toxicity, there were significant high rates of esophagitis in cCRT in grade 3 or more compared to sCRT.

Conclusion

We have found that less than half of this study population were treated radically while the other half received palliative treatment. And only few patients received best supportive care. Radically treated patients had higher progression free survival and overall survival durations compared to palliative and supportive treatment.