Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Jul 30;16(7):4275-4285.
doi: 10.21037/jtd-23-1973. Epub 2024 Jul 22.

Impact of radiological follow-up frequency on resected lung cancer: a propensity score matching analysis

Collaborators, Affiliations

Impact of radiological follow-up frequency on resected lung cancer: a propensity score matching analysis

Álvaro Fuentes-Martín et al. J Thorac Dis. .

Abstract

Background: Despite advances in lung cancer treatment and the subsequent improvement in oncological outcomes, the optimal frequency of radiological follow-up remains unclear. Current recommendations lack consensus and do not consider individual patient characteristics and tumor factors. This study aimed to examine the impact of radiological follow-up frequency on oncological outcomes following lung cancer resection.

Methods: A prospective multicenter study, involving patients who underwent anatomical lung resection in the GEVATS database between December 2016 and March 2018. The relationship between surveillance frequency and oncological outcomes was evaluated. Two groups were established based on follow-up frequency: low frequency (LF) and high frequency (HF). Subgroup analyses were performed based on tumor stage, histology, lymphadenectomy, and adjuvant therapy. Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to balance the groups.

Results: A total of 1,916 patients were included in the study, LF 444 (23.17%), HF 1,472 (76.83%). Factors associated with HF surveillance included higher stage, adjuvant chemotherapy and adjuvant radiotherapy. Subanalyses were performed after PSM for various factors, revealing significant differences between LF and HF groups in cancer-specific survival among who received adjuvant therapy {LF 53.021 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 48.622-57.421] vs. HF 58.836 months (95% CI: 55.343-62.330); HR 0.453, 95% CI: 0.242-0.849; P=0.013}, as well as overall survival for patients with squamous cell carcinoma [LF 54.394 months (95% CI: 51.424-57.364) vs. HF 61.578 months (95% CI: 59.091-64.065); HR 0.491, 95% CI: 0.299-0.806; P=0.005] and those who received adjuvant therapy LF 50.176 months [95% CI: 45.609-54.742) vs. HF 57.189 months (95% CI: 53.599-60.778); HR 0.503, 95% CI: 0.293-0.865; P=0.013].

Conclusions: Findings suggest that high-frequency surveillance only improves survival outcomes in lung cancer patients who received adjuvant treatment or had squamous cell carcinoma. Therefore, future guidelines for lung cancer follow-up should consider individualizing the frequency of radiological surveillance based on patients' risk profiles.

Keywords: Lung cancer; follow-up; oncological outcomes; radiological surveillance.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://jtd.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/jtd-23-1973/coif). The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flowchart of patient selection for the analysis of the total number of patients in the GEVATS database. HF, high frequency; LF, low frequency; GEVATS, Spanish Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery Group.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Overall survival (A) and cancer-specific survival (B) by the Kaplan-Meier method, log-rank test, and Cox regression method of HF and LF groups. HF, high frequency; LF, low frequency.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Subanalysis of cancer-specific survival (A) in adjuvant treatment and overall survival in squamous cell carcinoma (B) and adjuvant treatment (C) using the Kaplan-Meier method, log-rank test, and Cox regression method for the HF and LF groups after propensity score matching. HF, high frequency; LF, low frequency.

References

    1. Goldstraw P, Chansky K, Crowley J, et al. The IASLC Lung Cancer Staging Project: Proposals for Revision of the TNM Stage Groupings in the Forthcoming (Eighth) Edition of the TNM Classification for Lung Cancer. J Thorac Oncol 2016;11:39-51. 10.1016/j.jtho.2015.09.009 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lou F, Sima CS, Rusch VW, et al. Differences in patterns of recurrence in early-stage versus locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 2014;98:1755-60; discussion 1760-1. 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2014.05.070 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Leroy T, Monnet E, Guerzider S, et al. Let us not underestimate the long-term risk of SPLC after surgical resection of NSCLC. Lung Cancer 2019;137:23-30. 10.1016/j.lungcan.2019.09.001 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Mariotto AB, Yabroff KR, Shao Y, et al. Projections of the cost of cancer care in the United States: 2010-2020. J Natl Cancer Inst 2011;103:117-28. 10.1093/jnci/djq495 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Mayer DK, Alfano CM. Personalized Risk-Stratified Cancer Follow-Up Care: Its Potential for Healthier Survivors, Happier Clinicians, and Lower Costs. J Natl Cancer Inst 2019;111:442-8. 10.1093/jnci/djy232 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources