Over the last several years, chemo for resected early stage NSCLC has become a standard of care, but while it's pretty widely accepted for stage II and IIIA patients after surgery, the role for chemo is much more debatable for stage I patients. I'll try to explain why, starting with the downside, and then turn to some of the reasons to consider it.

In addition to a direct comparison of iressa to chemo in the second line setting for advanced NSCLC (see recent post on INTEREST trial), as conducted with the INTEREST trial I described in a recent post, a very similar comparison of Iressa to chemo was also performed in another setting where single-agent chemo is also the treatment of choice. Specifically, the INVITE trial evaluated iressa vs.

Staging in lung cancer, as well has two categories, clinical and pathologic. The clinical staging is based on what appears on scans like the CT and PET scan that are now pretty routine parts of the staging workup. Our scans are better than ever before, but some lymph nodes with cancer involvement are not enlarged and have no visible abnormalities, and no scan can pick up lesions that are only visible as a small collection of cancer cells under a microscope.

At long last, and after years of planning, a new large phase III randomized clinical trial is getting underway to determine whether adding avastin to chemotherapy as post-operative (adjuvant) treatment for early stage NSCLC provides added benefit compared to chemotherapy alone.

One of the more intriguing presentations at ASCO this year was the one in which a novel vaccine against a protein called MAGE-A3 was tested in patients who underwent surgery and then received the vaccine post-operatively. What is MAGE-A3? It's a nearly tumor-specific antigen, which means that it's a protein seen almost exclusively on cancer cells, including lung cancer, head & neck, bladder, and melanomas.

While post-operative chemotherapy has emerged as the standard treatment for patients with stage II and resected IIIA NSCLCC, and some patients with stage IB disease, trials conducted over the past few years are providing information about the option of treating with initial chemotherapy before surgery. A couple of trials were presented at ASCO this year that did not demonstrate a significant survival benefit of pre-operative chemo compared with no treatment.

Over the last several years, chemotherapy after surgery has become the standard strategy for improving survival compared to surgery alone, at least for stage II and IIIA patients who don't have mediastinal (N2) lymph nodes involved, and it's often used also for patients with stage IB NSCLC (no lymph nodes, but a larger tumor or tumor involvement with the pleural lining around the lung). However, another approach that has been studied, albeit less so than adjuvant (post-operative) chemotherapy is neoadjuvant (pre-operative, also known as induction) chemotherapy.

We'll break from brain metastases for a while to talk about another potential avenue of targeted therapy in lung cancer: the cyclo-oxygenase, or COX, pathway.

The notorious and always welcomed words after surgery are, "we got it all", providing great relief to the patients and families who hear the phrase. We know that surgeons can take out all identifiable disease that they see when they do surgery, and that there is no evidence of visible disease on CT scans or on newer imaging techniques like PET scans. But why do we see that approximately 30% of patients with stage I NSCLC or about 50% of patients with stage II NSCLC recur?

Historically, surgery for lung cancer has been through an open thoracotomy (thorax = chest; otomy = cutting/slicing), which involves a long incision around the side of the chest, removal of ribs, and spreading of the remaining ribs to get a good view of the area of the operation. Even with the most skilled surgeons, it's a procedure that is rigorous for a patient to get through and has a recovery period typically of weeks.