D
deleted1002574
This is something that I've realized is extremely regional and doesn't seem to follow anything except what the group has decided they'd like to do. At residency we treated one way, first job treated another way, and now another way.
Example case: 64 year old man with 35 pack year history presents with cough and slight worsening of SOB. CXR shows right hilar mass, CT shows 3.5cm suprahilar mass and enlarged (1.8cm) right paratracheal LN. EBUS/bx performed for dx and both the suprahilar mass and the right paratracheal LN come back as adenocarcinoma. PET-CT confirms these findings. No distant disease. MRI negative for brain mets. PFTs are good and would be operable candidate.
In residency, this patient would get chemotherapy, then surgery, then consideration of radiation depending on response/findings, but usually would get PORT.
In first job, surgeons preferred we take them to full dose if operable and minimal nodal disease (1 or 2 nodes, nothing greater 2cm), 60ish Gy with carbo/taxol and then they'd operate.
New job, definitive CRT to 60-66 Gy.
My preference is option 2, based on Vyfhuis data. I think the "negative" study is because 45 Gy is a homeopathic (not that there's anything wrong with that) dose. And you shouldn't take out people's whole lungs. Not cool.
Option 1 or 3, not unreasonable. Option 3, especially after RTOG 0617 where 60 Gy + chemo gets you median survival of 29 months (way higher than RTOG9410!). Option 1 makes some oncologic sense to get full dose chemo in.
What do you guys do and why?
Example case: 64 year old man with 35 pack year history presents with cough and slight worsening of SOB. CXR shows right hilar mass, CT shows 3.5cm suprahilar mass and enlarged (1.8cm) right paratracheal LN. EBUS/bx performed for dx and both the suprahilar mass and the right paratracheal LN come back as adenocarcinoma. PET-CT confirms these findings. No distant disease. MRI negative for brain mets. PFTs are good and would be operable candidate.
In residency, this patient would get chemotherapy, then surgery, then consideration of radiation depending on response/findings, but usually would get PORT.
In first job, surgeons preferred we take them to full dose if operable and minimal nodal disease (1 or 2 nodes, nothing greater 2cm), 60ish Gy with carbo/taxol and then they'd operate.
New job, definitive CRT to 60-66 Gy.
My preference is option 2, based on Vyfhuis data. I think the "negative" study is because 45 Gy is a homeopathic (not that there's anything wrong with that) dose. And you shouldn't take out people's whole lungs. Not cool.
Option 1 or 3, not unreasonable. Option 3, especially after RTOG 0617 where 60 Gy + chemo gets you median survival of 29 months (way higher than RTOG9410!). Option 1 makes some oncologic sense to get full dose chemo in.
What do you guys do and why?