Article and Video CATEGORIES

Cancer Journey

Search By

High vs. Standard Dose Chest Radiation in Stage III Lung Cancer
Author
GRACE Videos and Articles
Image
GRACE Cancer Video Library - Lung

 

Dr. Jeffrey Bradley, Radiation Oncologist at Washington University in St. Louis, provides trial evidence showing that patients may not benefit from high dose chest radiation therapy vs. standard dose therapy.

 

Transcript

This is a topic I’ve been a little passionate about over the past ten years or so. We published a paper in Lancet Oncology this past February, it was RTOG 0617, and it was a comparison of high dose radiation therapy, 74 Gy, versus standard dose radiation, 60 Gy, in patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer. They were unresectable, they received either the high dose or standard dose of radiation, and they were further randomized to receive cetuximab or not; cetuximab is an EGFR antibody.

The trial was published — it didn’t show an advantage to high dose radiation therapy, in fact, it shows a disadvantage to high dose radiation therapy. The median survival of the patients that were treated with 60 Gy without cetuximab was 28 months, compared to 20 months for patients receiving high dose radiation therapy. It turns out, even though we used the most sophisticated treatment techniques at the time, perhaps normal tissue doses were the cause of the high dose arm failing to achieve a better outcome, and a poor outcome in fact. We look at this as the heart dose — it turned out to be very important. We didn’t place heart dose constraints because, at the time, no one was placing heart dose constraints, and now we find out that’s very important. So, our subsequent trials have included heart dose constraints going forward, within, at least, the Energy Oncology Cooperative Group.

Likewise, there was no advantage to cetuximab in this patient population. These patients were unselected for EGFR status, and there’s an indication from the paper that if you look for EGFR status, people who had a high H-score may have benefitted from that drug. Nevertheless, there was no distinct survival advantage to receive cetuximab.

So the standard of care nowadays is 60 Gy with concurrent chemotherapy  — in that trial we used weekly paclitaxel and carboplatinum. We also used two cycles of consolidative chemotherapy in that study.

Video Language

Next Previous link

Previous PostNext Post

Related Content

Article
Advance directives are a powerful way to take control of healthcare choices. These documents allow you to outline preferences for medical care and specify end-of-life wishes. These documents can also be a way to appoint loved ones who you would like to help with these decisions, such as a healthcare proxy (someone to make decisions on your behalf, if you cannot). As cancer treatments can involve aggressive treatments and/or complex medical management, having advance directives ensures that your desires regarding treatment options and end-of-life care are clearly communicated. 
Image
2024-25 patient perspectives header
Article
Tell your story and help us help others! Apply online now for this paid opportunity. This program gives a voice to those who have experience in participating in a clinical trial for a cancer diagnosis. Your voice helps to educate and advocate for others who are in or who may be considering a clinical trial.  We want to hear from you!
Image
Foro de Pacientes de Terapias Dirigidas de Cáncer de Pulmón
Video
¡El vídeo completo bajo demanda está disponible para verlo!

Forum Discussions

Hi Stan,

It's so good to hear you and yours are doing well and that you were able to spend time with both families for Thanksgiving.  I know it meant a...

Hi Stan!  It is good to hear from you -- I am so very happy you are doing well.  I agree with Janine that family and friends - our chosen family...

Recent Comments

JOIN THE CONVERSATION
Hey Bluebird,

I understand…
By JanineT GRACE … on
So good to hear from you Stan
By dbrock on
Hi Stan,

It's so good to…
By JanineT GRACE … on