Skip Navigation
Skip to contents

Cancer Res Treat : Cancer Research and Treatment

Search
Advanced Search
OPEN ACCESS
mobile search button mobile menu button

Articles

Page Path
HOME > Cancer Res Treat > Volume 53(4); 2021 > Article
Original Article
Lung Cancer Prognostic Factor and Clinical Outcome in Stage III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Study Based on Real-World Clinical Data in the Korean Population
Ho Cheol Kim1, Wonjun Ji1, Jae Cheol Lee2, Hyeong Ryul Kim3, Si Yeol Song4, Chang-Min Choi1,2, Korean Association for Lung Cancer, Korea Central Cancer Registry
Cancer Research and Treatment : Official Journal of Korean Cancer Association 2021;53(4):1033-1041.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.4143/crt.2020.1350
Published online: February 16, 2021

1Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

2Department of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

3Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

4Department of Radiation Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

Correspondence: Chang-Min Choi, Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88 Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul 05505, Korea,
Tel: 82-2-3010-5902, Fax: 82-2-3010-5902, E-mail: ccm@amc.seoul.kr
• Received: December 22, 2020   • Accepted: February 14, 2021

Copyright © 2021 by the Korean Cancer Association

This is an Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

  • 7,691 Views
  • 215 Download
  • 10 Web of Science
  • 10 Crossref
  • 9 Scopus
prev next
Full Article

Download PDF Download PDF

  • Purpose
    The optimal treatment for patients with stage III non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains controversial. This study aimed to investigate prognostic factors and clinical outcome in stage III NSCLC using real-world clinical data in the Korean population.
  • Materials and Methods
    Among 8,110 patients with lung cancer selected from 52 hospitals in Korea during 2014–2016, only patients with stage III NSCLC were recruited and analyzed. A standardized protocol was used to collect clinical information and Cox proportional hazards models were used to identify risk factors for mortality.
  • Results
    A total of 1,383 patients (46.5% had squamous cell carcinoma and 40.9% had adenocarcinoma) with stage III NSCLC were enrolled, and their median age was 70 years. Regarding clinical stage, 548 patients (39.6%) had stage IIIA, 517 (37.4%) had stage IIIB, and 318 (23.0%) had stage IIIC. Pertaining to the initial treatment method, the surgery group (median survival period, 36 months) showed better survival outcomes than the non-surgical treatment group (median survival period, 18 months; p=0.001) in patients with stage IIIA. Moreover, among patients with stage IIIB and stage IIIC, those who received concurrent chemotherapy and radiation therapy (CCRT; median survival period, 24 months) showed better survival outcomes than those who received chemotherapy (median survival period, 11 months), or radiation therapy (median survival period, 10 months; p < 0.001).
  • Conclusion
    While surgery might be feasible as the initial treatment option in patients with stage IIIA NSCLC, CCRT showed a beneficial role in patients with stage IIIB and IIIC NSCLC.
  • Key words: Lung neoplasms, Korea, Surgery, Concurrent chemotherapy and radiation therapy
Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide and causes a substantial socio-economic burden [1]. Non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) accounts for more than 85% of all lung cancer cases, and stage III disease accounts for approximately one-third of patients with NSCLC at initial diagnosis [2]. However, stage III NSCLC is highly heterogeneous [3] and is divided into stage IIIA, IIIB, and IIIC according to the recent eighth edition of American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system [4].
Despite recent advances in this field, including immunotherapy, in the treatment and management of lung cancer [5], optimal management for stage III NSCLC remains controversial [6]. Traditionally, concurrent chemotherapy and radiation therapy (CCRT) has been recommended in these patients, especially in unresectable stage III NSCLC cases [7]. However, the beneficial role of surgical treatment has been reported in select patients with stage III NSCLC [8]. Moreover, upfront surgery for stage III NSCLC has been more commonly performed in Asian population than in populations of Western countries [9]. Indeed, a recent expert consensus statement in Asia suggested a proposed clinical algorithm for stage III NSCLC, which divided patients as resectable, potentially resectable, and unresectable cases [10].
Despite these previous lines of evidence, little is known about the clinical characteristics and treatment patterns of patients with stage III NSCLC in the real-world setting among Asian population. In this study, we aimed to investigate prognostic factors and clinical outcome in stage III NSCLC using real-world clinical data in the Korean population.
1. Study populations and methods
During 2014–2016, the Korean Central Cancer Registry (KCCR) registered the data of patients who were newly diagnosed with lung cancer (24,354 patients in 2014, 24,502 patients in 2015, and 25,780 patients in 2016). Among the eligible patients, the final survey population comprised 13 regional cancer centers and 39 hospitals in Korea, from which a significant number of registrations were made. In total, 8,110 patients with lung cancer were selected from each of the 52 hospitals using a systematic sampling method [11], and only patients with clinical information which could be converted to the 8th edition of the TNM International Staging System were analyzed in this study.
A standardized protocol was used to collect information about clinical characteristics including age, sex, body mass index (BMI), smoking history, histopathologic tumor type, symptoms, performance status (PS), Eastern Corporative Oncology Group (ECOG) score, clinical stage (according to the 8th edition of the TNM International Staging System) [4], treatment modality, results of molecular tests including epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) translocation, and survival status. Information on BMI and PS was obtained on the initial date of visit at the time of diagnosis. Patients were followed up until December 2018.
2. Statistical analysis
All data of continuous variables are expressed as mean± standard deviation or median (interquartile range [IQR]), and the data of categorical variables are expressed as percentages. One-way analysis of variance was used to compare continuous variables, while Pearson’s chi-square test was used to compare categorical variables. Cox proportional hazards models were used to identify risk factors for mortality, and variables with a p-value of < 0.20 on univariate analysis were used for the multivariate analysis. Survival was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using log-rank tests. All p-values were two-tailed, with statistical significance set at p < 0.05. All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS ver. 20.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY).
1. Patient characteristics
A total of 1,383 patients with stage III NSCLC were enrolled at 52 sites in South Korea. The baseline characteristics of the study patients are presented in Table 1. Median patient age was 70 years (IQR, 61 to 76 years), and 79.4% of them were male. According to histopathology, 46.5% had squamous cell carcinoma and 40.9% had adenocarcinoma. Among the study patients, 548 (39.6%) had stage IIIA, 517 (37.4%) had stage IIIB, and 318 (23.0%) had stage IIIC. There were no significant differences in age, sex, smoking history, PS, and histopathology between stage groups. The proportion of patients who experienced weight loss was higher in stage IIIC (9.7%) than in stage IIIB (7.4%) or stage IIIC (3.6%, p=0.001).
2. Risk factor for mortality according to baseline characteristics
The median follow-up period for the study patients was 16 months (IQR, 7 to 39 years), and 1,052 patients (76.1%) died during follow-up period. In patients with squamous cell cancer, univariate Cox analysis revealed that old age, poor PS, and clinical stage IIIC (compared to stage IIIA) were significant predictors of mortality (Table 2). In multivariate Cox analysis, old age (hazard ratio [HR], 1.031; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.019 to 1.043; p < 0.001), poor PS (HR, 1.353; 95% CI, 1.010 to 1.813; p=0.043), and stage IIIC (compared with stage IIIA; HR, 1.720; 95% CI, 1.328 to 2.229; p < 0.001) were independently associated with mortality.
Among patients with adenocarcinoma, univariate Cox analysis revealed that old age, male sex, ever-smoker, lower BMI, poor PS, and clinical stage IIIC (compared with stage IIIA) were significant predictors of mortality (Table 3). On multivariate Cox analysis, lower BMI (HR, 0.944; 95% CI, 0.917 to 0.972; p < 0.001), and clinical stage IIIC (compared with stage IIIA; HR, 1.848; 95% CI, 1.390 to 2.457; p < 0.001) were independently associated with mortality.
3. Initial treatment modality
The initial treatment modality among the study patients is listed in Table 4. Among patients with squamous cell carcinoma, 17.4% received surgery as the initial treatment (9.3% of the patients underwent surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and 8.1% of the patients received upfront surgery). In addition, 11.5% of the patients received radiation therapy, 32.3% of the patients received chemotherapy, 25.3% the patients received CCRT, and 9.3% received no specific anti-cancer treatment as the initial treatment.
Among patients with adenocarcinoma, 27.1% underwent surgery as the initial treatment (13.3% of patients underwent surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and 13.8% of patients underwent upfront surgery). Moreover, 4.6% of patients received radiation therapy, 31.9% were treated with chemotherapy, 21.9% were received CCRT, and 10.1% received no specific anti-cancer treatment as the initial treatment.
4. Survival analysis
Among the total subjects, patients with stage IIIC (median survival period, 12 months) had worse survival compared to patients with stage IIIA (median survival period, 20 months) or patients with stage IIIB (median survival period, 18 months; p < 0.001) (Fig. 1). According to the initial treatment method in patients with stage IIIA, the surgery group (median survival period, 36 months) showed better survival than the non-surgical treatment group (median survival period, 18 months; p=0.001) (Fig. 2A). These results were consistent for squamous cell carcinoma (Fig. 2B), and the surgery group tended to have better survival than the non-surgical treatment group in adenocarcinoma (Fig. 2C). A comparison of baseline characteristics between the surgery group and the non-surgical treatment group is shown in S1 Table. Patients in the surgery group had younger age, higher BMI, and better PS than those in the non-surgical treatment group. Although, stage N1 group tended to have better survival than stage N2 group among stage IIIA who have undergone surgery on stage IIIA, there were no significant statistical difference in survival time between nodal stages N1 and N2 (median survival, 41 months vs. 30 months; p=0.703). In addition, there was no significant statistical difference in survival time between pneumonectomy group (n=7) and lobectomy group (n=84) in who have undergone surgery on stage IIIA (median survival, 55 months vs. not reached; p=0.773). Among patients with stage IIIB or stage IIIC, those who received CCRT (median survival period, 24 months) showed better survival than those who received chemotherapy (median survival period, 11 months), radiation therapy (median survival period, 10 months; p < 0.001) (Fig. 3A). These results were also consistent for squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma (Fig. 3B and C). A comparison of patients’ baseline characteristics according to the treatment modality is shown in S2 Table. Patients in the CCRT group had younger age and better PS than those in the chemotherapy group or the radiation therapy group.
Our study investigated prognostic factors and clinical outcomes in stage III NSCLC. Baseline characteristics such as age, PS, BMI, clinical stage according to the AJCC 8th edition, and treatment modality were associated with the prognosis of the study patients irrespective of histopathology. Moreover, while surgical treatment was associated with better survival outcomes in patients with stage IIIA, CCRT showed clinical benefit in patients with stage IIIB and IIIC. To the best of our knowledge, the present study is the first nationwide-based study in Asia to focus on stage III NSCLC.
Several previous studies reported the clinical characteristics of patients with stage III NSCLC. Morgensztern et al. [12] conducted a study in 12,315 patients with unresectable NSCLC stage III according to the TNM staging 6th edition and showed that tumor size was independently associated with poor prognosis, after adjusting for age, sex, and histopathology. Additionally, Vinod et al. [13] conducted a study in 2,153 patients with stage III NSCLC according to the TNM classification 6th edition and reported that male sex, older age, higher ECOG score, and stage IIIB (vs. stage IIIA) were independently associated with mortality. In addition, Ademuyiwa et al. [14] conducted a study in 203 patients with stage III NSCLC and reported that preserved lung function and higher pretreatment hemoglobin were independent prognostic factors, rather than age and stage (stage IIIA vs. stage IIIB). In the present study, older age, poor PS (in squamous cell carcinoma), and lower BMI (in adenocarcinoma) were independent prognostic factors, a finding that is comparable to those reported in previous studies [15,16].
Several previous studies showed prognostic difference according to the TNM classification system of lung cancer 8th edition [17]. Goldstraw et al. [17] conducted a study on stage III NSCLC and reported that the 5-year survival of patients with clinical stage IIIA, IIIB, and IIIC was 36%, 26%, and 13%, respectively. Chansky et al. [18] conducted a study in 780,294 cases of NSCLC using data from the National Cancer Database, validating the eighth edition of the TNM stage; they showed different median survival time between clinical stages (37.8 months for stage IIIA, 22.2 months for stage IIIB, and 13.8 months for stage IIIC, respectively). However, these previous studies were performed in the Western population, and only few studies validated the TNM classification system eighth edition in the Asian population [19,20]. Although, previous studies showed correlation and prognostic information between the seventh and eighth editions of the TNM classification system in Asia (Korea and Japan) [19,20], these studies focused only on surgical cases. In the present study, although there was no significant prognostic difference between stage IIIA and stage IIIB (median survival period, 20 months vs. 18 months; p=0.080), patients with stage IIIC had worse survival compared to the patients with stage IIIA (median survival period, 12 months vs. 20 months; p < 0.001) or patients with stage IIIB (median survival period, 12 months vs. 18 months; p < 0.001). Future studies with larger populations in Asia will be needed to validate the eighth edition of the TNM classification system and determine prognostic difference.
In the present study, surgical treatment played a beneficial role in patients with stage IIIA NSCLC. Although, surgery group tended to have better survival than the non-surgical treatment group in adenocarcinoma, there was no statistically significant difference. Among patients with stage IIIA adenocarcinoma who did not receive surgery, about 14.1% of patients were treated with EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors, which might have induced these results. In patients with T3N1 or T4N1 NSCLC (stage IIIA), surgery might be considered in feasible cases [21]. However, there remains controversy about the role of surgery, especially in patients with N2 involvement. Albain et al. [8] conducted a study in 396 patients with stage T1-3pN2M0 NSCLC and reported that there was no significant survival benefit of surgery after chemoradiation therapy but showed improved progression-free survival in the surgery group. Van Meerbeeck et al. [22] conducted a study in 332 stage IIIA (N2) patients who received induction chemotherapy and reported that surgical treatment did not show any association with better survival outcome than radiation therapy. However, approximately 47% of patients of the surgery group received pneumonectomy in that study, which might have caused a negative clinical outcome in the surgery group. Although currently there are no data available about the definitive benefit of surgery in patients with stage III NSCLC, several studies have suggested the potential role of surgery in these patients. Eberhardt et al. [23] conducted a study in 246 patients who received induction chemotherapy with stage IIIA and IIIB NSCLC and reported that the 5-year overall survival and progression-free survival were not different between the surgery group and the chemoradiation therapy boost group. Yun et al. [24] conducted a study in 706 patients with pathologic N2 disease who underwent upfront surgery and reported that the median survival time of study patients was 52 months, which was comparable to that reported in a previous study. McElnay et al. [25] performed a systematic review and meta-analysis and reported that surgery, as part of trimodality treatment led to better overall survival than chemoradiotherapy alone despite no significant differences. However, there may be selection bias in these results. In the present study, the surgery group had younger age and better PS than the non-surgical treatment group, which might have influenced a better clinical outcome. Considering these findings, surgical treatment can be considered in select patients with stage III NSCLC.
According to the initial treatment methods, the CCRT group showed favorable outcome compared to the chemotherapy or radiation therapy group in patients with stage IIIB and IIIC NSCLC. These findings were consistent with those of previous studies [26–28]. Several randomized phase III trials conducted among patients with stage III NSCLC have shown that the CCRT group had better survival than the sequential treatment group [26,28]. However, there is a lack of data for real-world treatment outcome in patients with stage III NSCLC. Although Ryan et al. [29] showed that most stage III NSCLC patients received CCRT in the clinical setting, the prognosis according to the treatment modality was not shown in their study. Horinouchi et al. [30] conducted a study in 214 patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC who received CCRT and reported that the median overall survival of the study patients from completing CCRT was 36.4 months. Although the CCRT group had younger age and better PS than the chemotherapy alone or radiation therapy alone group, our study showed a beneficial role of CCRT using real-world data. Thus, CCRT should be considered in eligible stage III patients.
There were several limitations in our current study. First, the present study had a retrospective study design and was conducted in Korea. However, the subjects were recruited from 52 centers in Korea, which might have reduced selection bias. Second, although a standardized protocol was used to collect information, missing some clinical information was inevitable. For example, the reason 37 patients with stage IIIC underwent surgery is still unclear. Third, the study population was enrolled between 2014 and November 2016, at which time, the clinical effect of immunotherapy could not be analyzed. Fourth, there are a lot of missing data about exact date of disease progression in each patient, so we did not perform analysis about progression-free survival results. Finally, although this is the largest series of stage III NSCLC cases in Asia reported to date, the numbers are still relatively small to perform a meaningful subgroup analysis. Especially, it is hard to perform meaningful subgroup analysis about N category because there was no accurate information about exact lymph node involvement in many cases. Despite these limitations, we believe that our study will serve as the basis to understand the clinical characteristics of stage III NSCLC patients in the Asian population.
In conclusion, clinical stage according to the eighth edition of TNM staging was associated with the prognosis of stage III NSCLC patients. While surgery might be suitable as an appropriate first-line treatment in select patients with stage IIIA NSCLC, CCRT might be important in patients with stage IIIB or IIIC NSCLC.
Supplementary materials are available at Cancer Research and Treatment website (https://www.e-crt.org).
crt-2020-1350-suppl1.pdf
crt-2020-1350-suppl2.pdf

Ethical Statement

The study protocol was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board at the National Cancer Center (NCC2018-0193), which waived the requirement for informed consent due to the retrospective study design.

Author Contributions

Conceived and designed the analysis: Kim HC, Ji W, Lee JC, Kim HR, Song SY, Choi CM.

Collected the data: Kim HC, Choi CM.

Contributed data or analysis tools: Kim HC, Ji W, Lee JC, Kim HR, Song SY, Choi CM.

Performed the analysis: Kim HC.

Conflicts of Interest

Conflict of interest relevant to this article was not reported.

Acknowledgements
This study was supported by the Health Promotion Fund, Ministry of Health and Welfare, Republic of Korea (1660680). The data used in this study were provided by the Korean Association for Lung Cancer (KALC) and the Ministry of Health and Welfare, Korea Central Cancer Registry (KCCR).
Fig. 1
Overall survival of patients according to clinical stage.
crt-2020-1350f1.jpg
Fig. 2
Overall survival of stage IIIA patients according to initial treatment: in total stage IIIA patients (A), in squamous cell carcinoma stage IIIA patients (B), and in adenocarcinoma stage IIIA patients (C).
crt-2020-1350f2.jpg
Fig. 3
Overall survival of stage IIIB and IIIC patients according to initial treatment: in total stage IIIB and IIIC patients (A), in squamous cell carcinoma stage IIIB and IIIC patients (B), and in adenocarcinoma stage IIIB and IIIC patients (C). CCRT, concurrent chemoradiation therapy.
crt-2020-1350f3.jpg
Table 1
Baseline characteristics of the study patients
Characteristic Total Stage IIIA Stage IIIB Stage IIIC p-value
No. of patients 1,383 548 (39.6) 517 (37.4) 318 (23.0)
Age (yr) 70 (62–75) 70 (62–76) 69 (61–75) 70 (61–76) 0.578
Male sex 1,098 (79.4) 434 (79.2) 412 (79.7) 252 (79.2) 0.978
Ever-smoker (n=1,365) 1,012 (74.1) 393 (72.5) 381 (74.6) 238 (76.3) 0.462
BMI (kg/m2) 23.1±13.3 22.6±4.1 23.4±15.8 23.4±18.2 0.579
Symptoms
 Asymptomatic 180 (13.0) 79 (14.4) 73 (14.1) 28 (8.8) 0.039
 Cough 568 (41.1) 216 (39.4) 208 (40.2) 144 (45.3) 0.212
 Sputum 335 (24.2) 130 (23.7) 123 (23.8) 82 (25.8) 0.759
 Dyspnea 259 (18.7) 111 (20.3) 93 (18.0) 55 (17.3) 0.483
 Hoarseness 36 (2.6) 12 (2.2) 14 (2.7) 10 (3.1) 0.684
 Hemoptysis 141 (10.2) 41 (7.5) 64 (12.4) 36 (11.3) 0.023
 Weight loss 89 (6.4) 20 (3.6) 38 (7.4) 31 (9.7) 0.001
 Pain 214 (15.5) 83 (15.1) 73 (14.1) 58 (18.2) 0.269
Performance status (n=1,044)
 0–1 916 (87.7) 361 (86.8) 346 (89.9) 209 (86.0) 0.265
 2–4 128 (12.3) 55 (13.2) 39 (10.1) 34 (14.0)
Histopathology
 Squamous cell carcinoma 643 (46.5) 238 (43.4) 256 (49.5) 149 (46.9) 0.137
 Adenocarcinoma 565 (40.9) 226 (41.2) 209 (40.4) 130 (40.9) 0.964
 Large cell carcinoma 6 (0.4) 0 3 (0.6) 3 (0.9) 0.102
 NSCLC, NOS 154 (11.1) 69 (12.6) 53 (10.3) 32 (10.1) 0.377

Values are presented as median (interquartile range), number (%), or mean±standard deviation. BMI, body mass index; NOS, not otherwise specified; NSCLC, non small cell lung cancer.

Table 2
Risk factors for mortality in patients with squamous cell carcinoma assessed using the Cox proportional hazards model
Risk factor Univariate analysis Multivariate analysis
Hazard ratio 95% CI p-value Hazard ratio 95% CI p-value
Age 1.039 1.028–1.050 < 0.001 1.031 1.019–1.043 < 0.001
Male sex 1.293 0.904–1.850 0.160
Ever-smoker 1.035 0.775–1.383 0.815
BMI 0.994 0.971–1.018 0.646
Performance status
 0–1 (reference) 1.000 1.000
 2–4 1.618 1.219–2.147 0.001 1.353 1.010–1.813 0.043
Clinical stage
 IIIA (reference) 1.000 1.000
 IIIB 1.216 0.993–1.490 0.059 1.212 0.962–1.527 0.103
 IIIC 1.689 1.345–2.121 < 0.001 1.720 1.328–2.229 < 0.001

BMI, body mass index; CI, confidence interval.

Table 3
Risk factors for mortality in patients with adenocarcinoma assessed using the Cox proportional hazards model
Risk factor Univariate analysis Multivariate analysis
Hazard ratio 95% CI p-value Hazard ratio 95% CI p-value
Age 1.009 1.000–1.019 0.057
Male sex 1.334 1.082–1.645 0.007
Ever-smoker 1.385 1.131–1.697 0.002
BMI 0.953 0.930–0.976 < 0.001 0.944 0.917–0.972 < 0.001
Performance status
 0–1 (reference) 1.000
 2–4 1.450 0.999–2.104 0.050
Clinical stage
 IIIA (reference) 1.000 1.000
 IIIB 1.097 0.871–1.381 0.433 0.971 0.743–1.268 0.827
 IIIC 1.729 1.346–2.220 < 0.001 1.848 1.390–2.457 < 0.001
EGFR mutation 0.849 0.675–1.066 0.159

BMI, body mass index; CI, confidence interval; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor.

Table 4
Initial treatment modality for study patients
Total Stage IIIA Stage IIIB Stage IIIC p-value
Squamous cell carcinoma (n=643) 238 (37.0) 256 (39.8) 149 (23.2)
 Surgery 112 (17.4) 58 (24.4) 40 (15.6) 14 (9.4) < 0.001
  After neoadjuvant chemotherapy 60 (9.3) 30 (12.6) 24 (9.4) 6 (4.0) 0.019
  Upfront surgery 52 (8.1) 28 (11.8) 16 (6.3) 8 (5.4) 0.031
 RT only 74 (11.5) 31 (13.0) 33 (12.9) 10 (6.7) 0.112
 Chemotherapy 208 (32.3) 61 (25.6) 82 (32.0) 65 (43.6) 0.001
 CCRT 163 (25.3) 57 (23.9) 69 (27.0) 37 (24.8) 0.735
 Best supportive care 60 (9.3) 24 (10.1) 21 (8.2) 15 (10.1) 0.726
 Unknown 25 (3.9) 6 (2.5) 11 (4.3) 8 (5.4) 0.336
Adenocarcinoma (n=565) 226 (40.0) 209 (37.0) 130 (23.0)
 Surgery 153 (27.1) 84 (37.2) 48 (23.0) 21 (16.2) < 0.001
  After neoadjuvant chemotherapy 75 (13.3) 41 (18.1) 25 (12.0) 9 (6.9) 0.009
  Upfront surgery 78 (13.8) 43 (19.0) 23 (11.0) 12 (9.2) 0.012
 RT only 26 (4.6) 13 (5.8) 9 (4.3) 4 (3.1) 0.494
 Chemotherapy 180 (31.9) 59 (26.1) 67 (32.1) 54 (41.5) 0.011
 CCRT 124 (21.9) 43 (19.0) 51 (24.4) 30 (23.1) 0.376
 Best supportive care 57 (10.1) 19 (8.4) 22 (10.5) 16 (12.3) 0.483
 Unknown 24 (4.2) 8 (3.5) 11 (5.3) 5 (3.8) 0.651

Values are presented as number (%). CCRT, concurrent chemoradiation therapy; RT, radiation therapy.

  • 1. Barta JA, Powell CA, Wisnivesky JP. Global epidemiology of lung cancer. Ann Glob Health. 2019;85:8.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 2. Morgensztern D, Ng SH, Gao F, Govindan R. Trends in stage distribution for patients with non-small cell lung cancer: a National Cancer Database survey. J Thorac Oncol. 2010;5:29–33. ArticlePubMed
  • 3. Majem M, Hernandez-Hernandez J, Hernando-Trancho F, Rodriguez de Dios N, Sotoca A, Trujillo-Reyes JC, et al. Multidisciplinary consensus statement on the clinical management of patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer. Clin Transl Oncol. 2020;22:21–36. ArticlePubMed
  • 4. Detterbeck FC, Chansky K, Groome P, Bolejack V, Crowley J, Shemanski L, et al. The IASLC Lung Cancer Staging Project: methodology and validation used in the development of proposals for revision of the stage classification of NSCLC in the forthcoming (Eighth) edition of the TNM classification of lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol. 2016;11:1433–46. PubMed
  • 5. Antonia SJ, Villegas A, Daniel D, Vicente D, Murakami S, Hui R, et al. Durvalumab after chemoradiotherapy in stage III non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:1919–29. ArticlePubMed
  • 6. Rajappa S, Sharma S, Prasad K. Unmet clinical need in the management of locally advanced unresectable lung cancer: treatment dtrategies to improve patient outcomes. Adv Ther. 2019;36:563–78. ArticlePubMed
  • 7. Bezjak A, Temin S, Franklin G, Giaccone G, Govindan R, Johnson ML, et al. Definitive and adjuvant radiotherapy in loocally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Endorsement of the American Society for Radiation Oncology Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:2100–5. PubMed
  • 8. Albain KS, Swann RS, Rusch VW, Turrisi AT 3rd, Shepherd FA, Smith C, et al. Radiotherapy plus chemotherapy with or without surgical resection for stage III non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase III randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2009;374:379–86. ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 9. Zheng D, Ye T, Hu H, Zhang Y, Sun Y, Xiang J, et al. Upfront surgery as first-line therapy in selected patients with stage IIIA non-small cell lung cancer. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2018;155:1814–22. ArticlePubMed
  • 10. Tan WL, Chua KL, Lin CC, Lee VH, Tho LM, Chan AW, et al. Asian Thoracic Oncology Research Group Expert Consensus Statement on Optimal Management of Stage III NSCLC. J Thorac Oncol. 2020;15:324–43. ArticlePubMed
  • 11. Black K. Business statistics for contemporary decision making. New Delhi: Wiley-India; 2004.
  • 12. Morgensztern D, Waqar S, Subramanian J, Gao F, Trinkaus K, Govindan R. Prognostic significance of tumor size in patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer: a surveillance, epidemiology, and end results (SEER) survey from 1998 to 2003. J Thorac Oncol. 2012;7:1479–84. ArticlePubMed
  • 13. Vinod SK, Wai E, Alexander C, Tyldesley S, Murray N. Stage III non-small-cell lung cancer: population-based patterns of treatment in British Columbia, Canada. J Thorac Oncol. 2012;7:1155–63. ArticlePubMed
  • 14. Ademuyiwa FO, Johnson CS, White AS, Breen TE, Harvey J, Neubauer M, et al. Prognostic factors in stage III non-small-cell lung cancer. Clin Lung Cancer. 2007;8:478–82. ArticlePubMed
  • 15. Lee JG, Lee CY, Park IK, Kim DJ, Cho SH, Kim KD, et al. The prognostic significance of multiple station N2 in patients with surgically resected stage IIIA N2 non-small cell lung cancer. J Korean Med Sci. 2008;23:604–8. ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 16. Shepshelovich D, Xu W, Lu L, Fares A, Yang P, Christiani D, et al. Body mass index (BMI), BMI change, and overall survival in patients with SCLC and NSCLC: a pooled analysis of the International Lung Cancer Consortium. J Thorac Oncol. 2019;14:1594–607. ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 17. Goldstraw P, Chansky K, Crowley J, Rami-Porta R, Asamura H, Eberhardt WE, et al. The IASLC Lung Cancer Staging Project: proposals for revision of the TNM stage groupings in the forthcoming (eighth) edition of the TNM classification for Lung Cancer. J Thorac Oncol. 2016;11:39–51. PubMed
  • 18. Chansky K, Detterbeck FC, Nicholson AG, Rusch VW, Vallieres E, Groome P, et al. The IASLC Lung Cancer Staging Project: external validation of the revision of the TNM stage groupings in the eighth edition of the TNM classification of lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol. 2017;12:1109–21. PubMed
  • 19. Okami J, Shintani Y, Okumura M, Ito H, Ohtsuka T, Toyooka S, et al. Demographics, safety and quality, and prognostic information in both the seventh and eighth editions of the TNM classification in 18,973 surgical cases of the Japanese Joint Committee of Lung Cancer Registry database in 2010. J Thorac Oncol. 2019;14:212–22. ArticlePubMed
  • 20. Yun JK, Lee GD, Kim HR, Kim YH, Kim DK, Park SI, et al. Validation of the 8th edition of the TNM staging system in 3,950 patients with surgically resected non-small cell lung cancer. J Thorac Dis. 2019;11:2955–64. ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 21. Watanabe Y, Shimizu J, Oda M, Hayashi Y, Watanabe S, Iwa T. Results of surgical treatment in patients with stage IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1991;39:44–9. ArticlePubMed
  • 22. van Meerbeeck JP, Kramer GW, Van Schil PE, Legrand C, Smit EF, Schramel F, et al. Randomized controlled trial of resection versus radiotherapy after induction chemotherapy in stage IIIA-N2 non-small-cell lung cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007;99:442–50. ArticlePubMed
  • 23. Eberhardt WE, Pottgen C, Gauler TC, Friedel G, Veit S, Heinrich V, et al. Phase III study of surgery versus definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy boost in patients with resectable stage IIIA(N2) and selected IIIB non-small-cell lung cancer after induction chemotherapy and concurrent chemoradiotherapy (ESPATUE). J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:4194–201. ArticlePubMed
  • 24. Yun JK, Bok JS, Lee GD, Kim HR, Kim YH, Kim DK, et al. Long-term outcomes of upfront surgery in patients with resectable pathological N2 non-small-cell lung cancer. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2020;58:59–69. ArticlePubMed
  • 25. McElnay PJ, Choong A, Jordan E, Song F, Lim E. Outcome of surgery versus radiotherapy after induction treatment in patients with N2 disease: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials. Thorax. 2015;70:764–8. ArticlePubMed
  • 26. Curran WJ Jr, Paulus R, Langer CJ, Komaki R, Lee JS, Hauser S, et al. Sequential vs. concurrent chemoradiation for stage III non-small cell lung cancer: randomized phase III trial RTOG 9410. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011;103:1452–60. ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 27. Jeremic B, Shibamoto Y, Acimovic L, Djuric L. Randomized trial of hyperfractionated radiation therapy with or without concurrent chemotherapy for stage III non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1995;13:452–8. ArticlePubMed
  • 28. Atagi S, Kawahara M, Hosoe S, Ogawara M, Kawaguchi T, Okishio K, et al. A phase II study of continuous concurrent thoracic radiotherapy in combination with mitomycin, vindesine and cisplatin in unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer. 2002;36:105–11. ArticlePubMed
  • 29. Ryan KJ, Skinner KE, Fernandes AW, Punekar RS, Pavilack M, Walker MS, et al. Real-world treatment patterns among patients with unresected stage III non-small-cell lung cancer. Future Oncol. 2019;15:2943–53. ArticlePubMed
  • 30. Horinouchi H, Atagi S, Oizumi S, Ohashi K, Kato T, Kozuki T, et al. Real-world outcomes of chemoradiotherapy for unresectable Stage III non-small cell lung cancer: The SOLUTION study. Cancer Med. 2020;9:6597–608. ArticlePubMedPMC

Figure & Data

REFERENCES

    Citations

    Citations to this article as recorded by  
    • Real‐world treatment patterns and clinical outcomes in patients with stage III NSCLC in Korea: The KINDLE study
      Jiyun Lee, Hee Kyung Ahn, Sang‐We Kim, Ji‐Youn Han, Sung Sook Lee, Hyung Soon Park, Hyun Woo Lee, Joo‐Hang Kim, Eunhan Cho, Reto Huggenberger, Byoung Chul Cho
      Cancer Medicine.2024;[Epub]     CrossRef
    • Contribution of Enhanced Locoregional Control to Improved Overall Survival with Consolidative Durvalumab after Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy in Locally Advanced Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer: Insights from Real-World Data
      Jeong Yun Jang, Si Yeol Song, Young Seob Shin, Ha Un Kim, Eun Kyung Choi, Sang-We Kim, Jae Cheol Lee, Dae Ho Lee, Chang-Min Choi, Shinkyo Yoon, Su Ssan Kim
      Cancer Research and Treatment.2024; 56(3): 785.     CrossRef
    • Glucose metabolic heterogeneity correlates with pathological features and improves survival stratification of resectable lung adenocarcinoma
      Yu-Hung Chen, Yen-Chang Chen, Kun-Han Lue, Sung-Chao Chu, Bee-Song Chang, Ling-Yi Wang, Ming-Hsun Li, Chih-Bin Lin
      Annals of Nuclear Medicine.2023; 37(2): 139.     CrossRef
    • The combined tumor-nodal glycolytic entropy improves survival stratification in nonsmall cell lung cancer with locoregional disease
      Yu-Hung Chen, Kun-Han Lue, Sung-Chao Chu, Bee-Song Chang, Chih-Bin Lin
      Nuclear Medicine Communications.2023; 44(1): 100.     CrossRef
    • Prognostic value of pretherapeutic FDG PET/CT in non-small cell lung cancer with pulmonary lymphangitic carcinomatosis
      Yong-Jin Park, Yunjoo Im, O. Jung Kwon, Joungho Han, Myung-Ju Ahn, Jhingook Kim, Sang-Won Um, Joon Young Choi
      Scientific Reports.2023;[Epub]     CrossRef
    • A Propensity-Matched Retrospective Comparative Study with Historical Control to Determine the Real-World Effectiveness of Durvalumab after Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy in Unresectable Stage III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
      Cheol-Kyu Park, Nakyung Jeon, Hwa-Kyung Park, Hyung-Joo Oh, Young-Chul Kim, Ha-Lim Jeon, Yong-Hyub Kim, Sung-Ja Ahn, In-Jae Oh
      Cancers.2023; 15(5): 1606.     CrossRef
    • Association between clinical outcomes and local treatment in stage IV non‐small cell lung cancer patients with single extrathoracic metastasis
      Jeong Uk Lim, Hye Seon Kang, Ah Young Shin, Chang Dong Yeo, Chan Kwon Park, Sang Haak Lee, Seung Joon Kim
      Thoracic Cancer.2022; 13(9): 1349.     CrossRef
    • Conversion therapy from unresectable stage IIIC non-small-cell lung cancer to radical surgery via anti-PD-1 immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy and anti-angiogenesis: A case report and literature review
      Guohua Jia, Shuimei Zhou, Tangpeng Xu, Yabing Huang, Xiangpan Li
      Frontiers in Oncology.2022;[Epub]     CrossRef
    • A phase II, multicenter study of lazertinib as consolidation therapy in patients with locally advanced, unresectable, EGFR mutation‐positive non‐small cell lung cancer (stage III) who have not progressed following definitive, platinum‐based, chemoradiatio
      Juwhan Choi, Jeong Eun Lee, Chang‐Min Choi, In‐Jae Oh, Kye Young Lee, Tae Won Jang, Seung Hyeun Lee, Eun Young Kim, Dong Won Park, Sun Hyo Park, Sung Yong Lee
      Thoracic Cancer.2022; 13(23): 3431.     CrossRef
    • Prognostic Value of Combing Primary Tumor and Nodal Glycolytic–Volumetric Parameters of 18F-FDG PET in Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer and Regional Lymph Node Metastasis
      Yu-Hung Chen, Sung-Chao Chu, Ling-Yi Wang, Tso-Fu Wang, Kun-Han Lue, Chih-Bin Lin, Bee-Song Chang, Dai-Wei Liu, Shu-Hsin Liu, Sheng-Chieh Chan
      Diagnostics.2021; 11(6): 1065.     CrossRef

    • PubReader PubReader
    • ePub LinkePub Link
    • Cite
      CITE
      export Copy Download
      Close
      Download Citation
      Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.
      Format:
      • RIS — For EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and most other reference management software
      • BibTeX — For JabRef, BibDesk, and other BibTeX-specific software
      Include:
      • Citation for the content below
      Prognostic Factor and Clinical Outcome in Stage III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Study Based on Real-World Clinical Data in the Korean Population
      Cancer Res Treat. 2021;53(4):1033-1041.   Published online February 16, 2021
      DOI: https://doi.org/10.4143/crt.2020.1350
      Close
    • XML DownloadXML Download
    Figure
    • 0
    • 1
    • 2
    Related articles
    Prognostic Factor and Clinical Outcome in Stage III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Study Based on Real-World Clinical Data in the Korean Population
    Image Image Image
    Fig. 1 Overall survival of patients according to clinical stage.
    Fig. 2 Overall survival of stage IIIA patients according to initial treatment: in total stage IIIA patients (A), in squamous cell carcinoma stage IIIA patients (B), and in adenocarcinoma stage IIIA patients (C).
    Fig. 3 Overall survival of stage IIIB and IIIC patients according to initial treatment: in total stage IIIB and IIIC patients (A), in squamous cell carcinoma stage IIIB and IIIC patients (B), and in adenocarcinoma stage IIIB and IIIC patients (C). CCRT, concurrent chemoradiation therapy.

    Fig. 1

    Fig. 2

    Fig. 3

    Prognostic Factor and Clinical Outcome in Stage III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Study Based on Real-World Clinical Data in the Korean Population

    Baseline characteristics of the study patients

    Characteristic Total Stage IIIA Stage IIIB Stage IIIC p-value
    No. of patients 1,383 548 (39.6) 517 (37.4) 318 (23.0)
    Age (yr) 70 (62–75) 70 (62–76) 69 (61–75) 70 (61–76) 0.578
    Male sex 1,098 (79.4) 434 (79.2) 412 (79.7) 252 (79.2) 0.978
    Ever-smoker (n=1,365) 1,012 (74.1) 393 (72.5) 381 (74.6) 238 (76.3) 0.462
    BMI (kg/m2) 23.1±13.3 22.6±4.1 23.4±15.8 23.4±18.2 0.579
    Symptoms
     Asymptomatic 180 (13.0) 79 (14.4) 73 (14.1) 28 (8.8) 0.039
     Cough 568 (41.1) 216 (39.4) 208 (40.2) 144 (45.3) 0.212
     Sputum 335 (24.2) 130 (23.7) 123 (23.8) 82 (25.8) 0.759
     Dyspnea 259 (18.7) 111 (20.3) 93 (18.0) 55 (17.3) 0.483
     Hoarseness 36 (2.6) 12 (2.2) 14 (2.7) 10 (3.1) 0.684
     Hemoptysis 141 (10.2) 41 (7.5) 64 (12.4) 36 (11.3) 0.023
     Weight loss 89 (6.4) 20 (3.6) 38 (7.4) 31 (9.7) 0.001
     Pain 214 (15.5) 83 (15.1) 73 (14.1) 58 (18.2) 0.269
    Performance status (n=1,044)
     0–1 916 (87.7) 361 (86.8) 346 (89.9) 209 (86.0) 0.265
     2–4 128 (12.3) 55 (13.2) 39 (10.1) 34 (14.0)
    Histopathology
     Squamous cell carcinoma 643 (46.5) 238 (43.4) 256 (49.5) 149 (46.9) 0.137
     Adenocarcinoma 565 (40.9) 226 (41.2) 209 (40.4) 130 (40.9) 0.964
     Large cell carcinoma 6 (0.4) 0 3 (0.6) 3 (0.9) 0.102
     NSCLC, NOS 154 (11.1) 69 (12.6) 53 (10.3) 32 (10.1) 0.377

    Values are presented as median (interquartile range), number (%), or mean±standard deviation. BMI, body mass index; NOS, not otherwise specified; NSCLC, non small cell lung cancer.

    Risk factors for mortality in patients with squamous cell carcinoma assessed using the Cox proportional hazards model

    Risk factor Univariate analysis Multivariate analysis
    Hazard ratio 95% CI p-value Hazard ratio 95% CI p-value
    Age 1.039 1.028–1.050 < 0.001 1.031 1.019–1.043 < 0.001
    Male sex 1.293 0.904–1.850 0.160
    Ever-smoker 1.035 0.775–1.383 0.815
    BMI 0.994 0.971–1.018 0.646
    Performance status
     0–1 (reference) 1.000 1.000
     2–4 1.618 1.219–2.147 0.001 1.353 1.010–1.813 0.043
    Clinical stage
     IIIA (reference) 1.000 1.000
     IIIB 1.216 0.993–1.490 0.059 1.212 0.962–1.527 0.103
     IIIC 1.689 1.345–2.121 < 0.001 1.720 1.328–2.229 < 0.001

    BMI, body mass index; CI, confidence interval.

    Risk factors for mortality in patients with adenocarcinoma assessed using the Cox proportional hazards model

    Risk factor Univariate analysis Multivariate analysis
    Hazard ratio 95% CI p-value Hazard ratio 95% CI p-value
    Age 1.009 1.000–1.019 0.057
    Male sex 1.334 1.082–1.645 0.007
    Ever-smoker 1.385 1.131–1.697 0.002
    BMI 0.953 0.930–0.976 < 0.001 0.944 0.917–0.972 < 0.001
    Performance status
     0–1 (reference) 1.000
     2–4 1.450 0.999–2.104 0.050
    Clinical stage
     IIIA (reference) 1.000 1.000
     IIIB 1.097 0.871–1.381 0.433 0.971 0.743–1.268 0.827
     IIIC 1.729 1.346–2.220 < 0.001 1.848 1.390–2.457 < 0.001
    EGFR mutation 0.849 0.675–1.066 0.159

    BMI, body mass index; CI, confidence interval; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor.

    Initial treatment modality for study patients

    Total Stage IIIA Stage IIIB Stage IIIC p-value
    Squamous cell carcinoma (n=643) 238 (37.0) 256 (39.8) 149 (23.2)
     Surgery 112 (17.4) 58 (24.4) 40 (15.6) 14 (9.4) < 0.001
      After neoadjuvant chemotherapy 60 (9.3) 30 (12.6) 24 (9.4) 6 (4.0) 0.019
      Upfront surgery 52 (8.1) 28 (11.8) 16 (6.3) 8 (5.4) 0.031
     RT only 74 (11.5) 31 (13.0) 33 (12.9) 10 (6.7) 0.112
     Chemotherapy 208 (32.3) 61 (25.6) 82 (32.0) 65 (43.6) 0.001
     CCRT 163 (25.3) 57 (23.9) 69 (27.0) 37 (24.8) 0.735
     Best supportive care 60 (9.3) 24 (10.1) 21 (8.2) 15 (10.1) 0.726
     Unknown 25 (3.9) 6 (2.5) 11 (4.3) 8 (5.4) 0.336
    Adenocarcinoma (n=565) 226 (40.0) 209 (37.0) 130 (23.0)
     Surgery 153 (27.1) 84 (37.2) 48 (23.0) 21 (16.2) < 0.001
      After neoadjuvant chemotherapy 75 (13.3) 41 (18.1) 25 (12.0) 9 (6.9) 0.009
      Upfront surgery 78 (13.8) 43 (19.0) 23 (11.0) 12 (9.2) 0.012
     RT only 26 (4.6) 13 (5.8) 9 (4.3) 4 (3.1) 0.494
     Chemotherapy 180 (31.9) 59 (26.1) 67 (32.1) 54 (41.5) 0.011
     CCRT 124 (21.9) 43 (19.0) 51 (24.4) 30 (23.1) 0.376
     Best supportive care 57 (10.1) 19 (8.4) 22 (10.5) 16 (12.3) 0.483
     Unknown 24 (4.2) 8 (3.5) 11 (5.3) 5 (3.8) 0.651

    Values are presented as number (%). CCRT, concurrent chemoradiation therapy; RT, radiation therapy.
    Table 1 Baseline characteristics of the study patients

    Values are presented as median (interquartile range), number (%), or mean±standard deviation. BMI, body mass index; NOS, not otherwise specified; NSCLC, non small cell lung cancer.

    Table 2 Risk factors for mortality in patients with squamous cell carcinoma assessed using the Cox proportional hazards model

    BMI, body mass index; CI, confidence interval.

    Table 3 Risk factors for mortality in patients with adenocarcinoma assessed using the Cox proportional hazards model

    BMI, body mass index; CI, confidence interval; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor.

    Table 4 Initial treatment modality for study patients

    Values are presented as number (%). CCRT, concurrent chemoradiation therapy; RT, radiation therapy.

    Table 1

    Table 2

    Table 3

    Table 4

    Cancer Res Treat : Cancer Research and Treatment
    © Korean Cancer Association.
    Close layer
    TOP