The setting of unresectable, stage IIIA or IIIB NSCLC (without a malignant pleural effusion) is currently one for which what we feel is best for the patient isn't necessarily something for which we have good evidence. For fit patients, there is a strong consensus that giving concurrent chemo with radiation provides a modestly but consistently higher cure rate than giving chemo and radiation sequentially. But that concurrent chemoradiation plan lasts for only 6-8 weeks, but whether there's more we should be doing, or what we should do, is entirely unclear.

One of the core ideas in the management of stage III, or locally advanced, NSCLC is that unresectable disease that is being treated with curative intent is most effectively treated with a combination of concurrent systemic ("whole body") therapy and chest radiation to all of the visible cancer.

As a follow-up to my last post on the appeal of developing new regimens for combining with radiation in treatment of locally advanced unresectable NSCLC, I wanted to highlight work being done by the Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALBG), one of the major cancer cooperative research groups in the US.

While there have been new agents introduced and rapidly changing standards in advanced NSCLC, another 40% of patients with NSCLC have locally advanced (stage III) NSCLC, many of whom with disease that is not resectable but is potentially curable with agressive chemo and radiation.

People who have been following my comments know that I am often questioning the wisdom of surgery in patients who don't fit the usual criteria for resection, which is most commonly pursued in stage I and II NSCLC and is often considered an option for some patients with stage IIIA NSCLC. To provide a very quick review of NSCLC staging, it's a combination of three factors:

1) Tumor (T) stage -- from 1 to 4, going from smallest and easiest to remove to hardest or largest to remove

2) Node (N) stage -- from 0 to 3, going from none to further distances from the main tumor

Despite the fact that a very significant proportion of the "real world" patients have considerable medical problems such as markedly decreased lung function (pretty common with many years of smoking), weight loss (5 or 10% of body weight is usually considered a problem), or otherwise are not able to be very active.

As a follow-up to my last post and an end to this extended discusison of locally advanced NSCLC before moving to other topics, I'll just cover some more recent work on the topic of chemo followed by chemo and radiation for stage III NSCLC. In that post, I showed that over the past several years, we hadn't seen the promise of this induction strategy in small trials translate into especially favorable results in larger multicenter trials.

The last topic in our discussion of the evolving field of optimal treatment for locally advanced NSCLC is the potential role for induction chemotherapy before radiation, or, more commonly concurrent chemo/radiation (CT/RT).

My last post included studies that demonstrated no additional benefit from giving chemo after concurrent chemo/radiation for locally advanced NSCLC, but it's important to add a qualifier to that conclusion. The studies that have shown an overall favorable result from two cycles, or about 6-7 weeks, of chemo with radiation have thus far primarily been with cisplatin and not carboplatin.

Although consolidation taxotere after concurrent chemo and radiation therapy (CT/RT) emerged as the preferred treatment approach for about 2/3 of American oncologists over the last few years, this was predicated on an incomplete story. We received information from an additional two studies this year, and now it’s a big mess.