My good friend Heather Wakelee, along with her colleagues at Stanford, just published an important study in the Journal of Clinical Oncology on the incidence of lung cancer among never-smokers, essentially the first and most comprehensive work defining the magnitude of the problem.

Surgery is the standard treatment for early stage lung cancer, sometimes also including other types of threrapy in addition. There are many types of lung cancer surgery, and there is still active debate about whether a pneumonectomy or lobectomy should be the preferred surgery for lung cancer, or whether a sub-lobar resection, either a segmentectomy or a wedge resection, is appropriate for certain patients. We need to start with some definitions.

Purists have considered mediastinoscopy, which is invasive staging of the mediastinum through a small incision just at the base of the neck to get down behind the sternum, or breastbone, to be the "gold standard" for determining whether lymph nodes in the mediastinum, or middle of the chest, is involved with a cancer. The procedure is as shown:

In addition to risk for having a recurrence of a lung cancer that has been surgically removed, patients with a history of early NSCLC are also at risk for a second primary (unrelated to the first) lung cancer. In other words, having had a lung cancer, even if it was cured, means that a person remains at higher risk for a new lung cancer than people who never had a lung cancer.

The guidelines from the American Society for Clinical Oncology (ASCO) for NSCLC start the discussion on how long to continue first-line chemo as follows: "The optimal duration of chemotherapy remains a matter of debate." Just in case you thought it was only me saying that we don't know the exact answer for one issue or another, the evidence-based guidelines are filled with hedge comments like this.

In my last post, I described our evolving recognition in the lung cancer field that significant response as the threshold for clinical benefit is too high and that stable disease is likely a relative benefit as well. An important trial presented by Dr.

It's only been in the past few years that we have begun to appreciate that there may be many different subgroups of patients who fit within the broader lung cancer population. We now have begun to see differences in the safety and/or activity of certain drugs in never-smokers vs. smokers, patients with adenocarcinomas (and especially bronchioloalveolar carcinoma, or BAC)vs. squamous cell carcinomas or other subtypes, and even in women compared with men.

For patients with locally advanced NSCLC, the question of whether to pursue a surgical or a non-surgical approach has a great deal to do with the extent of mediastinal (middle of the chest) lymph node involvement. The mediastinal nodes are shown here:

As a medical oncologist, my primary role is to direct general management plans for many cancer patients and to develop chemotherapy and targeted therapy regimens. These regimens are sometimes directly administered through my office, and sometimes are coordinated with oncologists closer to a patient's home. The treatment is pretty much a cookbook approach, so it's really the same no matter who administers it.

We define whether someone has cancer, and what type of cancer it is, by a piece of tumor tissue. This evidence of cancer under a microscope is considered critical, so much so that there is a general oncology dictum of “no meat, no treat”, requiring a tissue diagnosis before starting a treatment with potentially significant side effects.