Different pathways to lung cancer diagnosis in a real-life setting.

BACKGROUND: Most lung cancers are diagnosed at an advanced stage and therefore have a poor prognosis. One major challenge is to choose the most adapted sampling technique to obtain a rapid pathological diagnosis so as to start treatment as early as possible. A growing number of techniques have been developed in recent years. This study sought to assess the diagnostic efficiency of each, along with the respective duration of the diagnostic pathways. METHODS: This retrospective, bicentric, observational study enrolled patients with inoperable lung cancer (stage III or IV) diagnosed in 2018-2019. Diagnostic efficiency was assessed based on the different examinations performed to achieve a precise diagnosis (pathology, immunohistochemistry, and/or molecular biology). The time between the first medical contact and treatment initiation was also assessed. RESULTS: Overall, 625 patients were included (median age 67 years; men 67 %; adenocarcinoma 55 %). The most frequent examinations were bronchial endoscopy (n = 469, 75 %), followed by metastasis biopsy (n = 137, 21.9 %) and guided transthoracic core-needle biopsy (TCNB) (n = 116, 18.6 %). 372 patients had only one procedure (59.5 %), mainly bronchial endoscopy (n = 217, 34.7 %) and metastasis biopsy (n = 71, 11 %). The most efficient examination was thoracic surgery (surgical pleural biopsy, (n = 32, 100 %); mediastinoscopy (n = 26, 96.3 %); surgical pulmonary biopsy (n = 14, 93.3 %). The second most efficient examination was metastasis biopsy (n = 126, 94 %) followed by guided TCNB (n = 108, 93.1 %). The median time from first medical contact to first examination was 4 days (interquartile range 25 %-75 % 1-8). The median time from first medical contact to pathological result was 17 days (10-34). The median time from first medical contact to treatment start was 48 days (30-69). CONCLUSIONS: In order to make an accurate and rapid diagnosis of lung cancer, it is crucial to choose the most appropriate technique. Bronchial endoscopy remains the first-line examination for central lesions, as it is efficient and easily accessible. Guided TCNB and metastasis biopsy are the preferred techniques for peripheral lesions. The choice of the diagnostic technique should be part of a multidisciplinary approach and a dedicated pathway to optimize initial management.

Impact of extended interval dosing of immune checkpoint inhibitors in lung cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID 19-pandemic has led physicians to change their approach to treating non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) to reduce hospital stays for patients. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to assess the toxicity and efficacy of extended interval (EI) dosing of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) compared to standard dosing (SD). METHODS: In this retrospective two-center study, we included patients with stage III/IV NSCLC who were treated with ICIs with or without maintenance pemetrexed during the month before March 2020. Adverse events and efficacy were collected until June 2021. Toxicity and survival were assessed using multivariate Cox models. RESULTS: Among the 134 patients identified (8 stage III and 126 stage IV; 66 first line and 60 second or subsequent lines), 70.9% received EI dosing. In the EI group, 12.6% of patients developed grade 3 or 4 immune-related adverse events versus 15.4% in the SD group (P- value = 0.8). Treatment was definitively discontinued due to toxicity in 9 patients in the EI group and in 5 in the SD group (P-value =0.5). Overall survival was not associated with dosage regimen or toxicity analyzed as a time-dependent variable. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that EI dosing of ICIs did not affect toxicity and overall survival in lung cancer patients.

Survival of clinical stage III NSCLC according to therapeutic strategy: Relevance of the tumor board decision in the era of immunotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: Stage III NSCLC comprises a heterogeneous population. Different treatment strategies are available, including surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy. The PACIFIC trial results represented a significant change and improvement in the therapeutic strategy for these patients. We aimed to compare the different treatment strategies employed in Stage III NSCLC patients within our institution. METHODS: All Stage III NSCLC patients discussed during the weekly thoracic oncology multidisciplinary team meetings at the University hospital Grenoble Alpes (France) between January 2010 and January 2017 were included. Patients' overall survival (OS) according to treatment strategies along with their respective changes were compared. RESULTS: Overall, 476 patients were identified. Among patients initially scheduled to receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery (n = 60), only 37 (62%) actually underwent surgery. Median OS of the cohort was 21.3 months [IQR 25%-75%: 9.6-48.3]. Patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery displayed better survival than those treated by CT-RT: 53.2 months [IQR 25%-75%: 16.1-87.3] versus 23.9 [IQR 25%-75%, 13.3-48.1]. Survival was slightly superior for patients treated by upfront CT-RT than for those planned for neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery who eventually converted to CT-RT (concurrent or sequential): 23.9 months [IQR 25%-75%: 13.3-48.1] versus 20.4 [IQR 25%-75%:10.8-36], respectively. CONCLUSION: While patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery displayed a better survival than those treated using CT-RT, switch from surgery to CT-RT actually shortened survival. These results stress the relevance of the tumor board in deciding which is the best therapeutic strategy for Stage III disease patients.