Observation - An Favorable Option Forthoracic Dissemination Patients with Lung Adenocarcinoma or Squamous Carcinoma

• Main Authors: Ying CHEN, Wei LI, Wenfang TANG, Xuening YANG, Wenzhao ZHONG
• Format: Article
• Language: zho
• Published: Chinese Anti-Cancer Association; Chinese Antituberculosis Association 2018-04-01
• Series: Chinese Journal of Lung Cancer
• Subjects: Adenocarcinoma; Squamous carcinoma; Thoracic dissemination; Observation
• Online Access: http://dx.doi.org/10.3779/j.issn.1009-3419.2018.04.14

Background and objective Surgery was not standard-of-care of patients with advanced lung cancer. However, a serial of retrospective studies demonstrated that thoracic dissemination (M1a) patients could benefit from contraindicated surgery. After non-standard treatment, how should these patients choose following treatment approaches? Herein, we conducted this retrospective study to explore subsequent optimal treatment approaches. Methods Different therapeutic approaches were evaluated by comparing progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), time to treatment interval (TTI) using the Kaplan-Meier method and Log-rank test. A Cox proportional hazards regression model was used for multivariate analysis. Results 141 eligible were enrolled. The median PFS of chemotherapy group, targeted therapy group and observation group were 14.7, 41.0 and 31.0 months, respectively (95%CI: 19.01-26.01; P<0.001). There was no significantly statistically difference between median PFS of targeted group and observation group (P=0.006). The median OS were 39.0, 42.6 and 38.1 months (95%CI: 32.47-45.33; P=0.478). The median PFS and OS of TTI<3 months and TTI ≥3 months were 15.2 months versus 31.0 months (95%CI: 19.01-26.06; P<0.001) and 41.7 months versus 38.7 months (95%CI: 32.47-45.33; P=0.714). Multivariate analyses revealed gender (P=0.027), lymph node status (P=0.036) and initial therapy (P<0.001) were independent prognostic factors for PFS. Conclusion Observation did not shorten survival of thoracic dissemination patients with lung adenocarcinoma or squamous carcinoma, therefore, it could be an favorable option. But prospective randomized controlled study was needed to confirm its validity.