ABSTRACT
Purpose@#Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) had been increasingly recognized as a favorable alternative to surgical resection in patients with high risk for surgery. This study compared survival outcomes between sublobar resection (SLR) and SBRT for clinical stage I non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). @*Materials and Methods@#Data were obtained from the Korean Association of Lung Cancer Registry, a sampled nationwide database. This study retrospectively reviewed 382 patients with clinical stage I NSCLC who underwent curative SLR or SBRT from 2014 to 2016. @*Results@#Of the patients, 43 and 339 underwent SBRT and SLR, respectively. Patients in the SBRT group were older and had worse pulmonary function. The 3-year overall survival (OS) rate was significantly better in the SLR group compared with the SBRT group (86.6% vs. 57%, log-rank p < 0.001). However, after adjusting for age, sex, tumor size, pulmonary function, histology, smoking history, and adjuvant therapy, treatment modality was not an independent prognostic factor for survival (hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.43 to 2.77; p=0.974). We performed subgroup analysis in the following high-risk populations: patients who were older than 75 years; patients who were older than 70 years and had diffusing capacity of lung for carbon monoxide ≤ 80%. In each subgroup, there were no differences in OS and recurrence-free survival between patients who underwent SLR and those who received SBRT. @*Conclusion@#In our study, there were no significant differences in terms of survival or recurrence between SBRT and SLR in medically compromised stage I NSCLC patients. Our findings suggest that SBRT could be considered as a potential treatment option for selected patients.