Table 1.
Selected clinical trials evaluating postoperative radiation therapy in the setting of non-small cell lung cancer.
| Author/Name of Study | Year | No. of Patients | Inclusion Criteria | Survival Outcomes | Conclusions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lung Cancer Study Group [7] (4) | 1986 | 230 (110 with PORT) | Stage I–III | 3 vs. 41% LRR with PORT (p = 0.001) 40 vs. 40% 5-year OS with PORT (p = NS) |
PORT improved recurrence rate, no effect on OS. |
| Dautzenberg et al. [8] (5) | 1999 | 728 (373 with PORT) | Stage I–III | 5-year OS 30% vs. 43% with PORT (p = 0.002) Intercurrent death 31 vs. 8% with PORT |
PORT detrimental in survival. |
| Douilliard et al. [9] (ANITA) (6) | 2008 | 840 (232 with PORT) | I B–III A | MS–N1 Obs—50 vs. 26 months N1 Chemo—47 vs. 94 months N2 Obs—47 vs. 24 months N2 Chemo—23 vs. 13 months |
Positive effect of PORT in pN2 disease and pN1 disease without chemotherapy. |
| Feng et al. [10] (7) | 2000 | 366 (183 with PORT) | N1 and N2 | 13 vs. 33% thoracic failure with PORT (p < 0.01) 5-year OS 43 vs. 41% (p = NS) |
PORT improved LRR but no impact on survival. |
| Mayer et al. [11] (8) | 1997 | 155 (83 with PORT) | pT1–T3 pN0–N2 | 27 vs. 16% 5-year DFS with PORT (p = 0.07) 30 vs. 20% 5-year OS with PORT (p > 0.05) |
PORT improved recurrence rate, no effect on OS. |
| Trodella et al. [12] (9) | 2002 | 104 (51 with PORT) | Stage I | 2 vs. 23% local recurrence with PORT. 71 vs. 60% 5-year DFS with PORT (p = 0.039). 67 vs. 58% OS with PORT (p = 0.048) |
Improvement in local control with PORT, “promising trend” in 5-year OS and DFS. |
PORT = postoperative radiation therapy; LRR = locoregional recurrence; OS = overall survival; DFS = disease-free survival.