Survey of treatment and care practices in small-cell lung cancer among German radiation oncologists

BACKGROUND: The management of small-cell lung cancer shows differences, particularly with regard to the use of radio- (RT), chemo-, and immunotherapy. We performed a survey among German radiation oncologists to assess the management of small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). METHODS: A 34-question online survey was created and sent out by e‑mail to radiation oncologists throughout Germany. The survey period extended from August 2020 to January 2021. The questions addressed indications for RT, planning techniques, dosing/fractionation, target volume definition for consolidative thoracic irradiation, and the use of prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI). At the same time, we surveyed the use of atezolizumab. The survey addressed the treatment practice for limited-stage SCLC (LS-SCLC) and extensive-stage SCLC (ES-SCLC). RESULTS: We received 74 responses. In LS-SCLC, treatment is planned predominantly based on diagnostic information from computed tomography (CT) of the thorax/abdomen/pelvis (88%), PET-CT (86%), and pulmonary function testing (88%). In LS-SCLC, 99% of respondents perform radiation concurrently with chemotherapy, preferably starting with cycle one or two (71%) of chemotherapy. The most common dose and fractionation schedule was 60–66 Gy in 30–33 fractions (once daily: 62% of all respondents). In ES-SCLC, 30 Gy in 10 fractions (once daily: 33% of all respondents) was the most commonly used regimen in consolidative thoracic irradiation. Only 25% use chemosensitization with RT. The inclusion criteria for PCI were similar for limited and extensive disease, with Karnofsky index (78% and 75%) being the most important decision factor. Respondents use a schedule of 30 Gy in 15 fractions most frequently in both stages (68% limited stage [LS], 60% extensive stage [ES]). Immunotherapy was used regularly or occasionally in LS-SCLC by 45% of respondents, with reduced lung function (37%), cardiac comorbidities (30%), and hepatic insufficiency (30%) being the most commonly mentioned exclusion criteria for this form of therapy. In ES-SCLC, atezolizumab use was reported in 78% of all questionnaires. Half of the respondents (49%) administer it simultaneously with cranial irradiation. CONCLUSION: Our survey showed variability in the management of SCLC. Results from future studies might help to clarify open questions regarding the optimal treatment paradigms. In addition, new treatment modalities, such as immunotherapy, might change practices in the near future.