Cargando…

Oligorecurrence Non–small Cell Lung Cancer After Failure of First-Line Chemotherapy: Computed Tomography–Guided (125)I Seed Implantation vs. Second-Line Chemotherapy

Purpose: To compare the efficacy and safety of computed tomography (CT)–guided (125)I seed implantation with second-line chemotherapy in treatment of oligorecurrence non–small cell lung cancer after failure of first-line chemotherapy. Methods: Data of oligorecurrence non–small cell lung cancer patie...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wang, Hao, Lu, Jian, Zheng, Xiao-Ting, Zha, Jun-Hao, Jing, Wen-Dong, Wang, Yong, Zhu, Guang-Yu, Zeng, Chu-Hui, Chen, Lei, Guo, Jin-He
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7179670/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32373512
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.00470
_version_ 1783525683990888448
author Wang, Hao
Lu, Jian
Zheng, Xiao-Ting
Zha, Jun-Hao
Jing, Wen-Dong
Wang, Yong
Zhu, Guang-Yu
Zeng, Chu-Hui
Chen, Lei
Guo, Jin-He
author_facet Wang, Hao
Lu, Jian
Zheng, Xiao-Ting
Zha, Jun-Hao
Jing, Wen-Dong
Wang, Yong
Zhu, Guang-Yu
Zeng, Chu-Hui
Chen, Lei
Guo, Jin-He
author_sort Wang, Hao
collection PubMed
description Purpose: To compare the efficacy and safety of computed tomography (CT)–guided (125)I seed implantation with second-line chemotherapy in treatment of oligorecurrence non–small cell lung cancer after failure of first-line chemotherapy. Methods: Data of oligorecurrence non–small cell lung cancer patients after failure of first-line chemotherapy at two institutions were retrospectively reviewed from January 2013 to July 2018. A total of 53 patients who received the treatment of (125)I seed implantation or second-line chemotherapy were eligible for this study. In group A, 25 patients, 84 lesions, received CT-guided permanent (125)I seed implantation, whereas in group B, 28 patients, 96 lesions, received second-line chemotherapy. The outcomes were measured in terms of disease control rate, overall survival, quality of life, and complications. Results: The median follow-up period was 13 months (range, 5–42 months). Disease control rate in group A was higher than that in group B (70.8 vs. 42.3%, P = 0.042) at 6 months after treatment. The median overall survival was 12.8 months (95% confidence interval, 10.5–15.1 months) in group A and 15.2 months (95% confidence interval, 12.2–18.2 months) in group B, with no significant difference (P = 0.847). Since the fourth month, the number of patients in group A with a non-decreasing Karnofsky Performance Scale score was more than that in group B (P < 0.05). The incidence of grade 3 or higher complications especially hematologic toxicity in group A was significantly lower than that in group B (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Radioactive (125)I seed implantation is safe and feasible in selected non–small cell lung cancer patients with oligorecurrence after failure of first-line chemotherapy and seems to provide a better long-term quality of life in these patients compared with second-line chemotherapy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7179670
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-71796702020-05-05 Oligorecurrence Non–small Cell Lung Cancer After Failure of First-Line Chemotherapy: Computed Tomography–Guided (125)I Seed Implantation vs. Second-Line Chemotherapy Wang, Hao Lu, Jian Zheng, Xiao-Ting Zha, Jun-Hao Jing, Wen-Dong Wang, Yong Zhu, Guang-Yu Zeng, Chu-Hui Chen, Lei Guo, Jin-He Front Oncol Oncology Purpose: To compare the efficacy and safety of computed tomography (CT)–guided (125)I seed implantation with second-line chemotherapy in treatment of oligorecurrence non–small cell lung cancer after failure of first-line chemotherapy. Methods: Data of oligorecurrence non–small cell lung cancer patients after failure of first-line chemotherapy at two institutions were retrospectively reviewed from January 2013 to July 2018. A total of 53 patients who received the treatment of (125)I seed implantation or second-line chemotherapy were eligible for this study. In group A, 25 patients, 84 lesions, received CT-guided permanent (125)I seed implantation, whereas in group B, 28 patients, 96 lesions, received second-line chemotherapy. The outcomes were measured in terms of disease control rate, overall survival, quality of life, and complications. Results: The median follow-up period was 13 months (range, 5–42 months). Disease control rate in group A was higher than that in group B (70.8 vs. 42.3%, P = 0.042) at 6 months after treatment. The median overall survival was 12.8 months (95% confidence interval, 10.5–15.1 months) in group A and 15.2 months (95% confidence interval, 12.2–18.2 months) in group B, with no significant difference (P = 0.847). Since the fourth month, the number of patients in group A with a non-decreasing Karnofsky Performance Scale score was more than that in group B (P < 0.05). The incidence of grade 3 or higher complications especially hematologic toxicity in group A was significantly lower than that in group B (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Radioactive (125)I seed implantation is safe and feasible in selected non–small cell lung cancer patients with oligorecurrence after failure of first-line chemotherapy and seems to provide a better long-term quality of life in these patients compared with second-line chemotherapy. Frontiers Media S.A. 2020-04-15 /pmc/articles/PMC7179670/ /pubmed/32373512 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.00470 Text en Copyright © 2020 Wang, Lu, Zheng, Zha, Jing, Wang, Zhu, Zeng, Chen and Guo. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Oncology
Wang, Hao
Lu, Jian
Zheng, Xiao-Ting
Zha, Jun-Hao
Jing, Wen-Dong
Wang, Yong
Zhu, Guang-Yu
Zeng, Chu-Hui
Chen, Lei
Guo, Jin-He
Oligorecurrence Non–small Cell Lung Cancer After Failure of First-Line Chemotherapy: Computed Tomography–Guided (125)I Seed Implantation vs. Second-Line Chemotherapy
title Oligorecurrence Non–small Cell Lung Cancer After Failure of First-Line Chemotherapy: Computed Tomography–Guided (125)I Seed Implantation vs. Second-Line Chemotherapy
title_full Oligorecurrence Non–small Cell Lung Cancer After Failure of First-Line Chemotherapy: Computed Tomography–Guided (125)I Seed Implantation vs. Second-Line Chemotherapy
title_fullStr Oligorecurrence Non–small Cell Lung Cancer After Failure of First-Line Chemotherapy: Computed Tomography–Guided (125)I Seed Implantation vs. Second-Line Chemotherapy
title_full_unstemmed Oligorecurrence Non–small Cell Lung Cancer After Failure of First-Line Chemotherapy: Computed Tomography–Guided (125)I Seed Implantation vs. Second-Line Chemotherapy
title_short Oligorecurrence Non–small Cell Lung Cancer After Failure of First-Line Chemotherapy: Computed Tomography–Guided (125)I Seed Implantation vs. Second-Line Chemotherapy
title_sort oligorecurrence non–small cell lung cancer after failure of first-line chemotherapy: computed tomography–guided (125)i seed implantation vs. second-line chemotherapy
topic Oncology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7179670/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32373512
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.00470
work_keys_str_mv AT wanghao oligorecurrencenonsmallcelllungcancerafterfailureoffirstlinechemotherapycomputedtomographyguided125iseedimplantationvssecondlinechemotherapy
AT lujian oligorecurrencenonsmallcelllungcancerafterfailureoffirstlinechemotherapycomputedtomographyguided125iseedimplantationvssecondlinechemotherapy
AT zhengxiaoting oligorecurrencenonsmallcelllungcancerafterfailureoffirstlinechemotherapycomputedtomographyguided125iseedimplantationvssecondlinechemotherapy
AT zhajunhao oligorecurrencenonsmallcelllungcancerafterfailureoffirstlinechemotherapycomputedtomographyguided125iseedimplantationvssecondlinechemotherapy
AT jingwendong oligorecurrencenonsmallcelllungcancerafterfailureoffirstlinechemotherapycomputedtomographyguided125iseedimplantationvssecondlinechemotherapy
AT wangyong oligorecurrencenonsmallcelllungcancerafterfailureoffirstlinechemotherapycomputedtomographyguided125iseedimplantationvssecondlinechemotherapy
AT zhuguangyu oligorecurrencenonsmallcelllungcancerafterfailureoffirstlinechemotherapycomputedtomographyguided125iseedimplantationvssecondlinechemotherapy
AT zengchuhui oligorecurrencenonsmallcelllungcancerafterfailureoffirstlinechemotherapycomputedtomographyguided125iseedimplantationvssecondlinechemotherapy
AT chenlei oligorecurrencenonsmallcelllungcancerafterfailureoffirstlinechemotherapycomputedtomographyguided125iseedimplantationvssecondlinechemotherapy
AT guojinhe oligorecurrencenonsmallcelllungcancerafterfailureoffirstlinechemotherapycomputedtomographyguided125iseedimplantationvssecondlinechemotherapy