Search

Introduction: Stage III NSCLC is a heterogeneous disease, representing approximately one-third of newly diagnosed lung cancers. Brazil lacks detailed information regarding stage distribution, treatment patterns, survival, and prognostic variables in locally advanced NSCLC. Methods: RELANCE/LACOG 0118 is an observational, retrospective cohort study assessing sociodemographic and clinical data of patients diagnosed with having stage III NSCLC from January 2015 to June 2019, regardless of treatment received. The study was conducted across 13 cancer centers in Brazil. Disease status and survival data were collected up to June 2021. Descriptive statistics, survival analyses, and a multivariable Cox regression model were performed. p values less than 0.05 were considered significant. Results: We recruited 403 patients with stage III NSCLC. Most were male (64.0%), White (31.5%), and smokers or former smokers (86.1%). Most patients had public health insurance (67.5%), had stage IIIA disease (63.2%), and were treated with concurrent chemoradiation (53.1%). The median follow-up time was 33.83 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 30.43–37.50). Median overall survival (OS) was 27.97 months (95% CI: 21.57–31.73), and median progression-free survival was 11.23 months (95% CI: 10.70–12.77). The type of treatment was independently associated with OS and progression-free survival, whereas the types of health insurance and histology were independent predictors of OS only. Conclusions: Brazilian patients with stage III NSCLC with public health insurance are diagnosed later and have poorer OS. Nevertheless, patients with access to adequate treatment have outcomes similar to those reported in the pivotal trials. Health policy should be improved to make lung cancer diagnosis faster and guarantee prompt access to adequate treatment in Brazil.

Introduction: Advances in comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) of lung adenocarcinomas (LUADs) led to personalized treatment for patients. This study evaluated medical oncologists’ attitudes toward CGP in a scenario where sponsored funding for CGP was available. Methods: We designed an online survey assessing CGP use and treating physicians’ confidence, composed of three self-confidence domains, which are as follows: confidence in interpreting CGP results, confidence in treating oncogenic-driven LUAD, and confidence in managing tyrosine kinase inhibitor adverse events. The survey was distributed to medical oncologists who treat lung cancer in Brazil. Comparisons between groups were performed using the chi-square or Fisher’s exact test. Univariable and multivariable (adjusted OR) analyses were performed. Results: Among 104 respondents who treat patients with lung cancer, 55% were from the Southeast region, 28% had high lung cancer clinical load, and 33% had in-house molecular testing. More than half (51%) of the participants request CGP systematically to stage IV LUAD. As for provider confidence, 67% stated being confident in all three domains: 76% confident in interpreting CGP, 84% confident in treating oncogenic-driven LUAD, and 81% in managing tyrosine kinase inhibitor adverse events. Providers’ confidence was associated with systematically requesting CGP to stage IV LUAD (p = 0.013). After controlling for the variables of interest, systematic requesting CGP for stage IV LUAD revealed a significant association with the provider’s confidence (adjusted OR = 0.35, p = 0.028, 95% CI: 0.14–0.84). The major challenge for properly requesting CGP was the long turnaround time and the fear of treatment delays. Conclusions: Even though CGP for stage IV LUAD in Brazil is fully sponsored, only half of the oncologists in our survey systematically request it.. Requesting CGP was associated with providers’ confidence. Improving access and promoting providers’ awareness of CGP utility is necessary to increase CGP use and better inform treatment decisions.

PURPOSEDespite the advances in the approach to non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with CNS metastasis, access to timely diagnosis and treatment may not be optimal in many instances. Our main objective was to describe a cohort of patients with NSCLC with brain metastases from public and private cancer centers, and the differences between patients' presentation, treatment, and outcomes.METHODSGBOT-LACOG 0417 is a multi-institutional retrospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with NSCLC and CNS metastasis in Brazil. All patients had confirmed diagnosis of NSCLC between January 2010 and December 2015. CNS metastases were identified by imaging.RESULTSA total of 273 patients were included. Patients treated at public institutions were more often Black or Brown (38.8% v 15.4%), current or former smoker (88.6% v 60.0%), of squamous cell histology (25.0% v 9.1%), EGFR- and ALK-negative (95.9% v 74.9%), and were less frequently assessed by using brain magnetic resonance imaging (38.8% v 83.6%). At public institutions, patients were more often symptomatic (78.1% v 44.6%) and had worse performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 2 or higher 61.5% v 10.3%). CNS metastases were larger (median size 25 v 15 mm) and more often surrounded by edema (67.7% v 55.2%) at public institutions. Patients at public institutions were more frequently treated with whole-brain radiation therapy (72.9% v 45.4%) and less frequently with radiosurgery (6.3% v 24.1%). Among patients from private care, median overall survival was 24.2 months (95% CI, 20.0 to 30.6), significantly higher than in public care (median 12.1 months; 95% CI, 6.7 to 13.6; P < .001).CONCLUSIONOur results demonstrate the discrepancy between public and private health care system in the critical setting of patients with CNS metastasis from NSCLC.