Abstract
PURPOSE: Irradical resection of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a detrimental prognostic factor. Recently, Rasing et al. presented an internationally validated risk score for pre-treatment prediction of irradical resection. We hypothesized that chemoradiation therapy (CRT) could serve as an alternative approach in patients with a high risk score and compared overall survival (OS) outcomes between surgery and CRT. METHODS: Patients from a population-based cohort with stage IIB-III NSCLC between 2015 and 2018 in The Netherlands were selected. Patients with a 'Rasing score' > 4 who underwent surgery were matched with patients who underwent CRT using 1:1 nearest-neighbor propensity score matching. The primary endpoint of OS was compared using a Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: In total, 2582 CRT and 638 surgery patients were eligible. After matching, 523 well-balanced pairs remained. Median OS in the CRT group was 27.5 months, compared with 45.6 months in the surgery group (HR 1.44, 95% CI 1.23-1.70, p < 0.001). The 114 surgical patients who underwent an R1-2 resection (21.8%) had a worse median OS than the CRT group (20.2 versus 27.5 months, HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.61-0.99, p = 0.039). CONCLUSION: In NSCLC patients at high predicted risk of irradical resection, CRT appears to yield inferior survival compared with surgery. Therefore, choosing CRT instead of surgery cannot solely be based on the Rasing score. Since patients receiving an R1-2 resection do have detrimental outcomes compared with primary CRT, the treatment decision should be based on additional information, such as imaging features, comorbidities, patient preference, and the surgeon's confidence in achieving an R0 resection.