Stage IIIA pathologic N2 non-small cell lung cancer patients may maximize benefit from preoperative radiotherapy: a population-based study

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-21045/v1

Download PDF

Research

Stage IIIA pathologic N2 non-small cell lung cancer patients may maximize benefit from preoperative radiotherapy: a population-based study

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-21045/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate the best surgery and radiotherapy sequence in patients affected by stage IIIA pathologic N2 (IIIA/N2) non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and to identify its potential risk factors.

Method: A total of 17,654 patients (8,786 men and 8,868 women), diagnosed with NSCLC stage IIIA-N2 from 2004 to 2015 were identified in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Among the relevant clinical parameters, we evaluated overall survival (OS), lung cancer-specific survival (LCSS) and other variables such as age, sex and tumor size in patients who were treated with different combinations of surgery and radiotherapy strategies.

Results: We discovered that among patients who refused radiotherapy, there was a higher prevalence of elderly individuals and patients who underwent less chemotherapy than the average. Survival of patients treated by radiotherapy combined with surgery was higher than that of patients who underwent surgery only (p < 0.001). Compared with surgery only, preoperative radiotherapy significantly improved the survival rate most (p < 0.001). When we performed the OS and LCSS analysis in the subgroup of patients who were >75 years old, who underwent postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) had the highest survival rate in all groups (p < 0.001). Multivariate analyses showed that the following parameters had a negative impact on survival: female sex, older age, no chemotherapy, large tumor size, high tumor grade, no surgery or radiotherapy.

Conclusions: In IIIA/N2 NSCLC patients, the use of radiotherapy and chemotherapy resulted in better survival, while preoperative radiotherapy is the most promising regimen, except for patients whose age > 75.

Health Economics & Outcomes Research

Oncology

Non-small-cell lung carcinoma

Survival

Radiotherapy

Surgery

SEER

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide [1]. Lung cancer includes small cell lung cancer (SCLC) and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the major type of which are adenocarcinoma (AD) and squamous cell carcinoma (SQCC). In patients diagnosed with lung cancer, 15% are stage IIIA NSCLC [2-4], while stage IIIA pathologic N2 (IIIA/N2) account for 50% of the locally advanced NSCLCs cases [5-7]. NSCLC patients in IIIA stage having a tumor size T1–T2 (T2: tumor > 3 cm and ≤ 5 cm) and M0 (without distant metastasis), along with ipsilateral mediastinal and/or subcarinal lymph node (N2), are diagnosed as IIIA/N2 NSCLC according to the 8th edition TNM Stage Classification [8]. N2 lymph nodes are classified into three different groups: occult N2, resectable N2, and non-resectable N2 [9]. Therefore, the optimal treatment for IIIA/N2 NSCLC is still controversial because stage IIIA/N2 NSCLC patients form a very broad and diverse population [10, 11].

Currently, surgery is still the standard treatment of early-stage NSCLC, but the five year survival rate is only 50% to 60% [6], with a risk of locoregional recurrence of 20%–40% in node-positive patients [12]. Thus, radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy combined with surgery represent the current therapeutic options for these patients. Adjuvant chemotherapy was considered to enhance survival in IIIA NSCLC patients with surgery [13, 14], but 20–40% of patients still had a local tumor failure [12]. So, the efficacy of radiotherapy, including preoperative radiotherapy and postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) is controversial.

Since tumor size, lymph node involvement, and comorbidities can widely vary among patients, the idea of having a universal treatment plan for stage IIIA/N2 NSCLC patients seems not feasible. While some studies confirmed that preoperative radiotherapy significantly improve survival [15, 16], other studies showed PORT demonstrated better survival instead [17, 18]. Thus, by retrospectively studying the outcomes of IIIA/N2 NSCLC patients that underwent surgery with either pre- or post-operative radiotherapy or both we sought to answer the question of which strategy is ideal. Since prospective clinical study are lacking, we perform a retrospective study by using data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database to determine which clinical parameters have an impact in the therapy outcome and to provide clinicians and patients more information to make an informed decision.

Data source

We used the US National Cancer Institute's SEER database, which contain data from 18 registered cancer institute covering nearly 26% of the total US population [19]. The database coverage which is considered an accurate statistical representation of the U.S. population affected with cancer [20]. SEER*-Stat software, version 8.3.2, was used to extract data from the database.

Cohort

The cohort included patients who were pathologically diagnosed with lung adenocarcinoma (AD) (histological codes 8244, 8245, 8250–8255, 8260, 8290, 8310, 8323, 8333, 8480, 8481, 8490, 8507, 8550, 8570, 8571, 8574, and 8576), squamous cell carcinoma (SQCC) (histologic codes 8052, 8070–8075, 8083, 8084, 8123), and large cell carcinoma (LCC) (histological codes 8012–8014, 8046, 8050, 8003, 8004, 8022, 8031–8035, 8082, 8200, 8240, 8249, 8430, 8560, 8562, 8980) during a 10-year period, from 2004 to 2015. Patients graded as stage T1–2 and N2 were included in this study, while those having a previous malignant disease or distant metastasis were excluded, along with patients who died within 30 days after surgery. Another exclusion criteria was the lack of complete information for the following parameters: age, complete staging, tumor size and location, regional LN examination results, histology, differentiation grade, cause of death, and survival period. We considered the following types of surgery: wedge resection, segmentectomy, lobectomy and pneumonectomy.

Covariates

Demographic parameters included age, sex, race, insurance coverage, marital status, year of diagnosis, region, education, and median household income. Tumor characteristics included size, histology, T stage (based on the Eighth Edition Lung Cancer Stage Classification), primary site, and pathologic differentiation grade and laterality.

Statistical analysis

Pearson’s chi-square test was used to assess the baseline parameters and to evaluate the association between the groups. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to generate survival curves, the log-rank test was used to examine the differences in survival among subgroups and multivariate Cox Proportional Hazards Analysis was used to examine the effects of multiple potential prognostic factors on survival. Overall survival (OS) and lung cancer-specific survival (LCSS) were the endpoint measurements. OS was calculated as the time from diagnosis to death from any cause, while LCSS was calculated from the time of diagnosis to death from lung cancer. OS and LCSS were estimated using follow-up data through 2017 and compared in different groups by using the Kaplan-Meier method. All tests were two-sided and p < 0.05 was considered to be significant. All analyses were performed using the SPSS software, version 22.0 (SPSS Inc. Chicago, IL).

Baseline Cohort Characteristics

Based on the inclusion criteria, this study cohort was formed by 17,654 IIIA/N2 NSCLC patients, of which 8,786 males and 8,868 females. Among the patients, 5,512 (31.22%) were treated neither with surgery or radiotherapy, 7,184 (40.69%) received surgery only, 652 (3.69%) were given preoperative radiotherapy, 4,206 (23.82%) were given PORT, and 100 (0.57%) were treated with radiotherapy both before and after surgery. The demographic and clinical parameter of patients are listed in Table 1.

Patients that underwent surgery only (40.69%) constitute the vast majority of patients included in the study, while those treated with radiotherapy both before and after surgery (0.57%) were the least representative, especially in elderly patients. PORT with surgery constituted an increasing proportion of therapeutic procedures during the period considered (26.3% from 2004-2007, 31.5% from 2008-2011, and 42.2% from 2012-2017), whereas preoperative radiotherapy with surgery decreased (37.0% from 2004-2007, 33.1% from 2008-2011, and 29.9% from 2012-2017) in the same period (Figure 1). The majority of patients over 75 years of age refused radiotherapy (84.8%) regardless of whether they underwent surgery, while the refusal rate was only at 67.4% in patients younger than 75 years. Additionally, patients who underwent radiotherapy combined with surgery (over 90%) were more likely to receive chemotherapy than those who only had surgery (44.3%). We found statistically significant difference in all the baseline parameters between groups (p<0.001). Moreover, patients who refused radiotherapy were older (30.43% vs 2.32% over 75 years old) and less treated with chemotherapy than others (58.33% vs 91.13%).

Univariate and multivariate analysis

In the univariate COX regression analysis of OS and LCSS, the hazard ratio (HR), 95% confidence interval (CI) [HR(95% CI)] compared with patients underwent surgery only of patients that underwent preoperative radiotherapy was 0.477 (0.429-0.531) and 0.507 (0.452-0.568) for OS and LCSS, respectively; of PORT patients 0.632 (0.602-0.662) and 0.645 (0.612-0.679); of patients that underwent radiotherapy both before and after sugary 0.593 (0.466-0.755) and 0.56 (0.426-0.736), and of patients that underwent neither radiotherapy nor surgery was 1.052 (1.010-1.095) and 1.057(1.011-1.104),. All the p-values were less than 0.05. This analysis showed that the following parameters are associated with a significantly shorter OS and LCSS: female sex, old age, not AD, no chemotherapy, lager tumor, higher grade, no surgery or radiotherapy, white ethnicity, earlier year of diagnosis, non-upper lobe primary lesion, higher grade, unmarried, low income.

According to the multivariate analysis, age, sex, tumor size, histology, laterality, primary site, pathologic differentiation grade, chemotherapy and radiotherapy with surgery variables were statistically significant (p < 0.001). The multivariate analysis showed that all the four combination of surgery and radiotherapy promoted a better survival than having neither surgery or radiotherapy. Patients with only surgery were taken as the reference for the subsequent analysis. The HR (95% CI, p) of patients that underwent preoperative radiotherapy was 0.589 (0.529-0.657), p < 0.001 and 0.606 (0.539-0.681), p < 0.001 for OS and LCSS, respectively; for patients that underwent PORT was 0.775 (0.737-0.816), p < 0.001 and 0.772 (0.731-0.816), p < 0.001; and for patients that underwent radiotherapy both before and after surgery was 0.752 (0.590-0.957), p = 0.021 and 0.687 (0.522-0.904), p = 0.007. For patients who refused surgery or radiotherapy, p values were not significant. Results of the univariate and multivariate Cox regression of prognostic factors for OS and LCSS in IIIA/N2 NSCLC patients are shown in Table 2.

Survival Outcomes

The median follow-up for the whole cohort was 39 months for OS and 48 months for LCSS. The median follow-up for the surgery only, preoperative radiotherapy with surgery, PORT with surgery, radiotherapy both before and after surgery, and no surgery or radiotherapy groups were 36, 66, 51, 55 and 31 months, respectively for OS and 45, 72, 59, 66 and 40 months for LCSS. Patients who received preoperative radiotherapy with surgery had the longest 5-year overall survival (42.8%) and lung cancer-specific survival (47.1%).

The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the OS and LCSS, showing that preoperative radiotherapy was the optimal strategy among IIIA/N2 patients (p < 0.001). Moreover, patients that underwent surgery had better survival than who refused it (p < 0.001). The survival of patients that underwent surgery combined with radiotherapy was better than patients who underwent surgery only (p < 0.001). The Survival analysis was performed using the log-rank test, and showed that the pairwise difference between each groups were statistically significant (Figure 2).

A similar result was observed in the subgroup analysis of the OS and LCSS Kaplan-Meier. Importantly, we found that the optimal treatment for the subgroup of patients with > 75 years old was PORT, while in the subgroup of no chemotherapy the optimal treatment was radiotherapy both before and after surgery (Figure 3, Figure 4). The OS and LCSS analysis showed that the survival rate of patients that underwent preoperative radiotherapy was not significantly different than patients who underwent PORT in the AD subgroup (p = 0.8274 and 0.7653 for OS and LCSS analysis, respectively). Moreover, there was no significant difference between the survival of patients who refused surgery and that of patients who received surgery (p = 0.6848 and 0.5293 for OS and LCSS analysis, respectively) in the subgroup of patients with age > 75.

In this study, we used the SEER Database to analyze the prognostic value of surgery and radiotherapy combinations and the relationship between therapeutic strategy with survival and HRs in IIIA/N2 NSCLC patients. Our data demonstrated that the use of surgery in IIIA/N2 NSCLC patients was effective in all the analyzed groups, except in patients older than 75 years old. For patients who underwent surgery combined with radiotherapy, the preoperative radiotherapy regimen led to the best result, while those who underwent neither surgery nor radiotherapy had the worst prognosis. However, we found that PORT is the optimal strategy in the subgroup of patients with age > 75, while radiotherapy before and after surgery is the best regimen for IIIA/N2 NSCLC patients who refused chemotherapy. The LCSS rate in the overall patients was similar to of the OS rate. In the Cox-regression analysis the following parameters were associated with a higher risk of death: female sex, age > 75, SCC and other histologic types, no chemotherapy, poor differentiated, and lager tumor.

There is a significant heterogeneity in the survival rate of IIIA/N2 NSCLC patients, for which the standard treatment has been debated for a long time [11, 21-23]. Although the optimal treatment approach in IIIA/N2 NSCLC patients remains undetermined, almost all studies confirmed the effectiveness of surgery. A recent review argued that in patients with ⅢA/N2 NSCLC, radical resection with lymph node cleaning is reasonable and early operation leads to a greater benefit [24]. Bryan DS et al. found that surgery improve survival in IIIA/N2 NSCLC, and in a survey, most thoracic surgeons recommended surgery as part of the therapy for IIIA/N2 NSCLC patients, because resection improves the rate of local control [25]. Consistently with this view, in our study patients who underwent surgery showed an improved survival rate compared to those that do not. However, there is still a lack of high-quality prospective evidence showing that the addition of surgery to the treatment provides a survival advantage.

Historically, surgery alone or combined with chemotherapy and radiotherapy has been the most common approach, and in recent decades there is a trend of performing radiotherapy before surgery. Previous studies reported that radiotherapy followed by surgery gave a survival benefit for IIIA/N2 NSCLC patients [26-29]. Several trials have been performed to determine the safety and efficacy of the combination of chemo- and radiotherapy [13, 27, 30-34]. Some of those reports demonstrated that chemotherapy combined with radiotherapy prolonged the survival of III/N2 NSCLC patients, as we found in this study [27, 30] while one clinical trial showed that radiotherapy combined with chemotherapy does not improve survival of IIIA/N2 NSCLC patients that underwent surgery [33]. Another study [35] suggested that surgery combined with chemoradiotherapy could improve the patients’ survival. Therefore, in previous studies there is no consensus for the optimal combination time of radiotherapy and chemotherapy [36]. In our study, we demonstrated that preoperative radiotherapy is the best strategy for approaches combining chemo and radiotherapy, consistently with a previous study based on SEER data [17], as well as another independent study [13]

The subgroup of patients with an age > 75 was different than the others, because surgery did not appear to significantly improve survival in comparison to no surgery and PORT was the optimal treatment strategy. These results can be probably explained by a worse treatment tolerance in this subgroup. In addition to that, these patients also underwent radiotherapy less frequently and had a higher death risk, consistently to a previous study [37]. Therefore, it is important to determine optimal treatment for the elderly population. However, older and frail patients are often excluded from clinical trials which use strict eligibility criteria [38] and receive less standard treatment [39, 40]. Thus, future research should focus on the elderly population who could benefit from specific treatment regimens.

The SEER database includes a population size larger than other clinical trials [41], and the inclusion of the revision made by the TNM classification project makes it more reliable to predict the survival outcomes [42-44]. This study has several limitations: other than the intrinsic defects of retrospective study, important information, such as gene mutations, lymph nodes station, and chemotherapy sequences are not provided in the SEER database. Moreover, patients treated with radiotherapy are more likely to be treated with chemotherapy as well. As role of chemotherapy must be seriously taken into account [30], this study could have a bias favoring radiotherapy. Future prospective studies will need more detailed information on chemotherapy data.

In conclusion, the different clinical outcomes between different strategies of surgery and radiotherapy combination may be useful to determine prognosis and to provide an important reference for clinicians and patients. Our data revealed that surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy was associated with improved OS and LCSS in patients with stage IIIA/N2 NSCLC. Patients who underwent surgical resection and preoperative radiotherapy had the best chance of survival (p < 0.001). Based on our results, the rank of therapeutic strategies to improve OS and LCSS in IIIA/N2 NSCLC patients is the following: preoperative radiotherapy > radiotherapy both before and after surgery > PORT > only surgery > neither surgery nor radiotherapy (p < 0.001). However, in patients with more than 75 years there is no clear benefit from surgery and PORT; novel treatments like immunotherapy and targeting therapy as additional options will need to be evaluated in future studies.

NSCLC, Non–small cell lung cancer; IIIA/N2, Stage IIIA pathologic N2; OS, Overall survival; LCSS, Lung cancer-specific survival; SEER, Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry; HRs, Hazard ratios; PORT, Postoperative radiotherapy; AD, Adenocarcinoma; SQCC, Squamous cell carcinoma; LCC, Large cell carcinoma.

Ethical approval and consent to participate

All experiments performed in this study are in accordance with the approved ethical standards. Formal consent is waived for this type of study.

Consent for publication

All the co-authors agreed to publish.

Availability of data and materials

All the data in the article was from SEER database, which contain data from 18 registered cancer institute covering nearly 26% of the total US population.

Competing interests

The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest related to this study.

Authors' contributions

guarantor of integrity of the entire study H.X.D, S.S.X, C.H.W
study concepts and design H.X.D, S.S.X
literature research H.X.D, S.S.X
clinical studies S.S.X, L.L
experimental studies / data analysis H.X.D
statistical analysis H.X.D, L.L, S.S.X
manuscript preparation H.X.D, S.S.X, C.H.W
manuscript editing S.S.X, C.H.W

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank all the staff of the National Cancer Institute for their efforts in the SEER program.

Funding

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 81802262,), the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (No. 22120180584), Shanghai Tenth Hospital's Improvement Plan for NSFC (No. 04.03.17.032, 04.01.18.048, SYGZRPY2017014).

Siegel, R., J. Ma, Z. Zou, and A. Jemal, (2014) Cancer statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin, 64(1): 9-29. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21208
Mountain, C.F., (2002) Staging classification of lung cancer. A critical evaluation. Clin Chest Med, 23(1): 103-21.
Sawabata, N., E. Miyaoka, H. Asamura, Y. Nakanishi, K. Eguchi, M. Mori, H. Nomori, Y. Fujii, M. Okumura, K. Yokoi, and R. Japanese Joint Committee for Lung Cancer, (2011) Japanese lung cancer registry study of 11,663 surgical cases in 2004: demographic and prognosis changes over decade. J Thorac Oncol, 6(7): 1229-35. DOI: 10.1097/JTO.0b013e318219aae2
Siegel, R.L., K.D. Miller, and A. Jemal, (2017) Cancer Statistics, 2017. CA Cancer J Clin, 67(1): 7-30. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21387
Zeng, X., J. Karnon, S. Wang, B. Wu, X. Wan, and L. Peng, (2012) The cost of treating advanced non-small cell lung cancer: estimates from the chinese experience. PLoS One, 7(10): e48323. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048323
Goldstraw, P., J. Crowley, K. Chansky, D.J. Giroux, P.A. Groome, R. Rami-Porta, P.E. Postmus, V. Rusch, L. Sobin, C. International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer International Staging, and I. Participating, (2007) The IASLC Lung Cancer Staging Project: proposals for the revision of the TNM stage groupings in the forthcoming (seventh) edition of the TNM Classification of malignant tumours. J Thorac Oncol, 2(8): 706-14. DOI: 10.1097/JTO.0b013e31812f3c1a
Shi, Y., Y. Sun, J. Yu, C. Ding, Z. Wang, C. Wang, D. Wang, C. Wang, Z. Wang, M. Wang, X. Zhi, Y. Lu, J. Feng, Y. Liu, X. Liu, W. Liu, G. Wu, X. Li, K. Li, E. Li, W. Li, G. Chen, Z. Chen, P. Yu, N. Wu, M. Wu, W. Xiao, L. Zhang, Y. Zhang, S. Zhang, S. Yang, X. Song, D. Lin, R. Luo, L. Shan, C. Zhou, Z. Zhou, Q. Zhao, C. Hu, Y. Hu, Q. Guo, J. Chang, C. Huang, X. Zeng, B. Han, X. Han, B. Jia, Y. Han, and Y. Huang, (2016) [China Experts Consensus on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Advanced Stage Primary Lung Cancer (2016 Version)]. Zhongguo Fei Ai Za Zhi, 19(1): 1-15. DOI: 10.3779/j.issn.1009-3419.2016.01.01
Detterbeck, F.C., D.J. Boffa, A.W. Kim, and L.T. Tanoue, (2017) The Eighth Edition Lung Cancer Stage Classification. Chest, 151(1): 193-203. DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2016.10.010
Evison, M., A. Clive, L. Castle, H. Powell, R. Thomas, R. Buttery, V. Masani, S. Harden, D. West, and I. Woolhouse, (2017) Resectable Clinical N2 Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer; What Is the Optimal Treatment Strategy? An Update by the British Thoracic Society Lung Cancer Specialist Advisory Group. J Thorac Oncol, 12(9): 1434-1441. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtho.2017.05.023
Lally, B.E., D. Zelterman, J.M. Colasanto, B.G. Haffty, F.C. Detterbeck, and L.D. Wilson, (2006) Postoperative radiotherapy for stage II or III non-small-cell lung cancer using the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results database. J Clin Oncol, 24(19): 2998-3006. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2005.04.6110
Bryan, D.S. and J.S. Donington, (2019) The Role of Surgery in Management of Locally Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. Curr Treat Options Oncol, 20(4): 27. DOI: 10.1007/s11864-019-0624-7
Le Pechoux, C., (2011) Role of postoperative radiotherapy in resected non-small cell lung cancer: a reassessment based on new data. Oncologist, 16(5): 672-81. DOI: 10.1634/theoncologist.2010-0150
Thomas, M., C. Rube, P. Hoffknecht, H.N. Macha, L. Freitag, A. Linder, N. Willich, M. Hamm, G.W. Sybrecht, D. Ukena, K.M. Deppermann, C. Droge, D. Riesenbeck, A. Heinecke, C. Sauerland, K. Junker, W.E. Berdel, M. Semik, and G. German Lung Cancer Cooperative, (2008) Effect of preoperative chemoradiation in addition to preoperative chemotherapy: a randomised trial in stage III non-small-cell lung cancer. Lancet Oncol, 9(7): 636-48. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(08)70156-6
Shah, A.A., M.F. Berry, C. Tzao, M. Gandhi, M. Worni, R. Pietrobon, and T.A. D'Amico, (2012) Induction chemoradiation is not superior to induction chemotherapy alone in stage IIIA lung cancer. Ann Thorac Surg, 93(6): 1807-12. DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2012.03.018
Sonett, J.R., M. Suntharalingam, M.J. Edelman, A.B. Patel, Z. Gamliel, A. Doyle, P. Hausner, and M. Krasna, (2004) Pulmonary resection after curative intent radiotherapy (>59 Gy) and concurrent chemotherapy in non-small-cell lung cancer. Ann Thorac Surg, 78(4): 1200-5; discussion 1206. DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2004.04.085
Chen, D., H. Wang, X. Song, J. Yue, and J. Yu, (2018) Preoperative radiation may improve the outcomes of resectable IIIA/N2 non-small-cell lung cancer patients: A propensity score matching-based analysis from surveillance, epidemiology, and end results database. Cancer Med, 7(9): 4354-4360. DOI: 10.1002/cam4.1701
Pang, Z., Y. Yang, N. Ding, C. Huang, T. Zhang, Y. Ni, J. Du, and Q. Liu, (2017) Optimal managements of stage IIIA (N2) non-small cell lung cancer patients: a population-based survival analysis. J Thorac Dis, 9(10): 4046-4056. DOI: 10.21037/jtd.2017.10.47
Wang, S., Z. Ma, X. Yang, Y. Wang, Y. Xu, W. Xia, R. Chen, M. Qiu, F. Jiang, R. Yin, L. Xu, and K. Xu, (2017) Choice of postoperative radiation for stage IIIA pathologic N2 non-small cell lung cancer: impact of metastatic lymph node number. Radiat Oncol, 12(1): 207. DOI: 10.1186/s13014-017-0946-1
Cronin, K.A., L.A. Ries, and B.K. Edwards, (2014) The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program of the National Cancer Institute. Cancer, 120 Suppl 23: 3755-7. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.29049
Park, H.S., S. Lloyd, R.H. Decker, L.D. Wilson, and J.B. Yu, (2012) Overview of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database: evolution, data variables, and quality assurance. Curr Probl Cancer, 36(4): 183-90. DOI: 10.1016/j.currproblcancer.2012.03.007
Sanchez-Lorente, D., R. Guzman, M. Boada, A. Guirao, N. Carriel, and L. Molins, (2018) N2 disease in non-small-cell lung cancer: straight to surgery? Future Oncol, 14(6s): 13-16. DOI: 10.2217/fon-2017-0387
Suzuki, K., K. Nagai, J. Yoshida, M. Nishimura, K. Takahashi, and Y. Nishiwaki, (1999) The prognosis of surgically resected N2 non-small cell lung cancer: the importance of clinical N status. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 118(1): 145-53. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5223(99)70153-4
Regnard, J.F., P. Magdeleinat, D. Azoulay, P. Dartevelle, M. Deneuville, A. Rojas-Miranda, and P. Levasseur, (1991) Results of resection for bronchogenic carcinoma with mediastinal lymph node metastases in selected patients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, 5(11): 583-6; discussion 587. DOI: 10.1016/1010-7940(91)90224-8
Massard, G., S. Renaud, J. Reeb, N. Santelmo, A. Olland, and P.E. Falcoz, (2016) N2-IIIA non-small cell lung cancer: a plea for surgery! J Thorac Dis, 8(Suppl 11): S849-S854. DOI: 10.21037/jtd.2016.09.34
Veeramachaneni, N.K., R.H. Feins, B.J. Stephenson, L.J. Edwards, and F.G. Fernandez, (2012) Management of stage IIIA non-small cell lung cancer by thoracic surgeons in North America. Ann Thorac Surg, 94(3): 922-6; discussion 926-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2012.04.087
Caglar, H.B., E.H. Baldini, M. Othus, M.S. Rabin, R. Bueno, D.J. Sugarbaker, S.J. Mentzer, P.A. Janne, B.E. Johnson, and A.M. Allen, (2009) Outcomes of patients with stage III nonsmall cell lung cancer treated with chemotherapy and radiation with and without surgery. Cancer, 115(18): 4156-66. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.24492
Toyooka, S., K. Kiura, K. Shien, K. Katsui, K. Hotta, S. Kanazawa, H. Date, and S. Miyoshi, (2012) Induction chemoradiotherapy is superior to induction chemotherapy for the survival of non-small-cell lung cancer patients with pathological mediastinal lymph node metastasis. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg, 15(6): 954-60. DOI: 10.1093/icvts/ivs412
Koshy, M., S.A. Fedewa, R. Malik, M.K. Ferguson, W.T. Vigneswaran, L. Feldman, A. Howard, K. Abdelhady, R.R. Weichselbaum, and K.S. Virgo, (2013) Improved survival associated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation in patients with clinical stage IIIA(N2) non-small-cell lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol, 8(7): 915-22. DOI: 10.1097/JTO.0b013e31828f68b4
Yamaguchi, M., G. Toyokawa, T. Ohba, T. Sasaki, T. Kometani, M. Hamatake, F. Hirai, K. Taguchi, T. Yamanaka, T. Seto, M. Takenoyama, K. Sugio, and Y. Ichinose, (2013) Preoperative concurrent chemoradiotherapy of S-1/cisplatin for stage III non-small cell lung cancer. Ann Thorac Surg, 96(5): 1783-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2013.06.036
Johnstone, D.W., R.W. Byhardt, D. Ettinger, and C.B. Scott, (2002) Phase III study comparing chemotherapy and radiotherapy with preoperative chemotherapy and surgical resection in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer with spread to mediastinal lymph nodes (N2); final report of RTOG 89-01. Radiation Therapy Oncology Group. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 54(2): 365-9.
Katakami, N., H. Tada, T. Mitsudomi, S. Kudoh, H. Senba, K. Matsui, H. Saka, T. Kurata, Y. Nishimura, and M. Fukuoka, (2012) A phase 3 study of induction treatment with concurrent chemoradiotherapy versus chemotherapy before surgery in patients with pathologically confirmed N2 stage IIIA nonsmall cell lung cancer (WJTOG9903). Cancer, 118(24): 6126-35. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.26689
Pless, M., R. Stupp, H.B. Ris, R.A. Stahel, W. Weder, S. Thierstein, M.A. Gerard, A. Xyrafas, M. Fruh, R. Cathomas, A. Zippelius, A. Roth, M. Bijelovic, A. Ochsenbein, U.R. Meier, C. Mamot, D. Rauch, O. Gautschi, D.C. Betticher, R.O. Mirimanoff, S. Peters, and S.L.C.P. Group, (2015) Induction chemoradiation in stage IIIA/N2 non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase 3 randomised trial. Lancet, 386(9998): 1049-56. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60294-X
Yang, C.F., B.C. Gulack, L. Gu, P.J. Speicher, X. Wang, D.H. Harpole, M.W. Onaitis, T.A. D'Amico, M.F. Berry, and M.G. Hartwig, (2015) Adding radiation to induction chemotherapy does not improve survival of patients with operable clinical N2 non-small cell lung cancer. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 150(6): 1484-92; discussion 1492-3. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2015.06.062
Girard, N., F. Mornex, J.Y. Douillard, N. Bossard, E. Quoix, V. Beckendorf, D. Grunenwald, E. Amour, and B. Milleron, (2010) Is neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy a feasible strategy for stage IIIA-N2 non-small cell lung cancer? Mature results of the randomized IFCT-0101 phase II trial. Lung Cancer, 69(1): 86-93. DOI: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2009.10.003
Mirimanoff, R.O., (2015) Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery for stage IIIa and IIIb non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC): is it still justified? Chin Clin Oncol, 4(4): 49. DOI: 10.3978/j.issn.2304-3865.2015.12.05
Rigotti, N.A., (2012) Strategies to help a smoker who is struggling to quit. JAMA, 308(15): 1573-80. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2012.13043
Driessen, E.J.M., M.L.G. Janssen-Heijnen, H.A. Maas, A.C. Dingemans, and J.G.M. van Loon, (2018) Study Protocol of the NVALT25-ELDAPT Trial: Selecting the Optimal Treatment for Older Patients With Stage III Non-small-cell Lung Cancer. Clin Lung Cancer, 19(6): e849-e852. DOI: 10.1016/j.cllc.2018.07.003
Schulkes, K.J., M.E. Hamaker, F. van den Bos, and L.J. van Elden, (2016) Relevance of a Geriatric Assessment for Elderly Patients With Lung Cancer-A Systematic Review. Clin Lung Cancer, 17(5): 341-349 e3. DOI: 10.1016/j.cllc.2016.05.007
Mellemgaard, A., M. Luchtenborg, M. Iachina, E. Jakobsen, A. Green, M. Krasnik, and H. Moller, (2015) Role of comorbidity on survival after radiotherapy and chemotherapy for nonsurgically treated lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol, 10(2): 272-9. DOI: 10.1097/JTO.0000000000000416
Semrau, S., H. Zettl, G. Hildebrandt, G. Klautke, and R. Fietkau, (2014) Older patients with inoperable non-small cell lung cancer: long-term survival after concurrent chemoradiotherapy. Strahlenther Onkol, 190(12): 1125-32. DOI: 10.1007/s00066-014-0710-5
Kelly, R.J., A. Rajan, J. Force, A. Lopez-Chavez, C. Keen, L. Cao, Y. Yu, P. Choyke, B. Turkbey, M. Raffeld, L. Xi, S.M. Steinberg, J.J. Wright, S. Kummar, M. Gutierrez, and G. Giaccone, (2011) Evaluation of KRAS mutations, angiogenic biomarkers, and DCE-MRI in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer receiving sorafenib. Clin Cancer Res, 17(5): 1190-9. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-2331
Eberhardt, W.E., A. Mitchell, J. Crowley, H. Kondo, Y.T. Kim, A. Turrisi, 3rd, P. Goldstraw, R. Rami-Porta, S. International Association for Study of Lung Cancer, A.B.M. Prognostic Factors Committee, and I. Participating, (2015) The IASLC Lung Cancer Staging Project: Proposals for the Revision of the M Descriptors in the Forthcoming Eighth Edition of the TNM Classification of Lung Cancer. J Thorac Oncol, 10(11): 1515-22. DOI: 10.1097/JTO.0000000000000673
Groome, P.A., V. Bolejack, J.J. Crowley, C. Kennedy, M. Krasnik, L.H. Sobin, P. Goldstraw, I.I.S. Committee, R. Cancer, Biostatistics, C. Observers to the, and I. Participating, (2007) The IASLC Lung Cancer Staging Project: validation of the proposals for revision of the T, N, and M descriptors and consequent stage groupings in the forthcoming (seventh) edition of the TNM classification of malignant tumours. J Thorac Oncol, 2(8): 694-705. DOI: 10.1097/JTO.0b013e31812d05d5
Ball, D., A. Mitchell, D. Giroux, R. Rami-Porta, I.S. Committee, and I. Participating, (2013) Effect of tumor size on prognosis in patients treated with radical radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer. An analysis of the staging project database of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. J Thorac Oncol, 8(3): 315-21. DOI: 10.1097/JTO.0b013e31827dc74d

Table 1. Demographic and Clinical Parameters of patients with IIIA/N2 NSCLC.

Characteristics

No surgery or

Radiation

(n=5512)

Surgery only

(n =7184 )

Preoperative radiotherapy

(n =652)

postoperative radiotherapy

(n = 4206)

Radiation both before and after surgery(n =100)

P value for X²

Gender

Male

Female

2572(46.7%)

2940(53.3%)

3680(51.2%)

3504(48.8%)

329(50.5%)

323(49.5%)

2152(51.2%)

2054(48.8%)

53(53.0%)

47(47.0%)

＜0.001

Age

<=75

>75

3893(70.6%)

1619(29.4%)

4940(68.8%)

2244(31.2%)

608(93.3%)

44(6.7%)

3567(84.8%)

639(15.2%)

92(92.0%)

8(8.0%)

＜0.001

His

Adenocarcinoma

Squamous

Adenosquamous

Large cell

OTHER

2081(37.8%)

2118(38.4%)

67(1.2%)

144(2.6%)

1102(20.0%)

3831(53.3%)

1922(26.8%)

158(2.2%)

201(2.8%)

1072(14.9%)

342(52.5%)

173(26.5%)

17(2.6%)

23(3.5%)

97(14.9%)

2486(59.1%)

1003(23.8%)

88(2.1%)

129(3.1%)

500(11.9%)

65(65.0%)

19(19.0%)

1(1.0%)

14(14.0%)

＜0.001

Tumor Size (cm)

≤3

3-5

2318(42.1%)

3194(57.9%)

3765(52.4%)
3419(47.6%)

295(45.2%)

357(54.8%)

2483(59.0%)

1723(41.0%)

47(47.0%)

53(53.0%)

＜0.001

Race

White

Black

Others

Unknown

4444(80.6%)

763(13.8%)

297(5.4%)

8(0.1%)

5810（80.9%）

802（11.2%）

553（7.7%）

19（0.3%）

544(83.4%)

68(10.4%)

40(6.1%)

0（0.0%）

3436(81.7%)

482(11.5%)

281(6.7%)

7(0.2%)

78(78.0%)

9(9.0%)

13(13.0%)

0(0.0%)

＜0.001

Primary Site

Upper lobe

Middle lobe

Lower lobe

NOS

Overlapping lesion

Main bronchus

3454(62.7%)

241(4.4%)

1337(24.3%)

155(2.8%)

33(0.6%)

292(5.3%)

4302（59.9%）

326（4.5%）

2141（29.8%）

195（2.7%）

64（0.9%）

156（2.2%）

447(68.6%)

34(5.2%)

138(21.2%)

9(1.4%)

6(0.9%)

18(2.8%)

2628(62.5%)

226(5.4%)

1098(26.1%)

123(2.9%)

28(0.7%)

103(2.4%)

65(65.0%)

5(5.0%)

27(27.0%)

0(0.0%)

2(2.0%)

1(1.0%)

＜0.001

Grade

Grade I

Grade II

Grade III

Grade IV

unknown

154(2.8%)

900(16.3%)

1722(31.2%)

83(1.5%)

2653(48.1%)

327（4.6%）

1935（26.9%）

2427（33.8%）

122（1.7%）

2373（33.0%）

23(3.5%)

138(21.2%)

278(42.6%)

5(0.8%)

208(31.9%)

138(3.3%)

1021(24.3%)

1361(32.4%)

62(1.5%)

1624(38.6%)

3(3.0%)

26(26.0%)

39(39.0%)

3(3.0%)

29(29.0%)

＜0.001

Laterality

Right-origin of primary

Left-origin of primary

Paired sit

Only one side - side unspecified

Not a paired site

3421(62.1%)

2063(37.4%)

23(0.4%)

4(0.1%)

1(0.0%)

4316(60.1%)

2840(39.5%)

20(0.3%)

6(0.1%)

2(0.0%)

405(62.1%)

246(37.7%)

1(0.2%)

0(0.0%)

2631(62.6%)

1531(36.4%)

38(0.9%)

4(0.1%)

2(0.0%)

67(67.0%)

33(33.0%)

0(0.0%)

0.001

Insurance status

Medicaid

Uninsured

Unknown

Insured

594(10.8%)

101(1.8%)

1316(23.9%)

3501(63.5)

768(10.7%)

118(1.6%)

1858(25.9%)

4440(61.8%)

45(6.9%)

10(1.5%)

180(27.6%)

417(64.0%)

399(9.5%)

59(1.4%)

847(20.1%)

2901(69.0%)

7(7.0%)

2(2.0%)

29(29.0%)

62(62.0%)

＜0.001

Marital status

Married

Single

Divorced

widowed

Unknown

Unmarried or domestic partner

Separated

2812(51.0%)

671(12.2%)

681(12.4%)

1079(19.6%)

181(3.3%)

6(0.1%)

82(1.5%)

3644(50.7%)

887(12.3%)

903(12.6%)

1401(19.5%)

262(3.6%)

12(0.2%)

75(1.0%)

393(60.3%)

76(11.7%)

93(14.3%)

63(9.7%)

20(3.1%)

1(0.2%)

6(0.9%)

2440(58.0%)

467(11.1%)

540(12.8%)

574(13.6%)

131(3.1%)

12(0.3%)

42(1.0%)

58(58.0%)

12(12.0%)

11(11.0%)

1(1.0%)

0(0.0%)

6(6.0%)

＜0.001

Year of diagnosis

2004-2007

2008-2011

2012-2017

1756(31.9%)

1982(36.0%)

1774(32.2%)

2399（33.4%）

2437（33.9%）

2348(32.7%)

241(37.0%)

216(33.1%)

195(29.9%)

1105(26.3%)

1326(31.5%)

1775(42.2%)

37(37.0%)

35(35.0%)

28(28.0%)

＜0.001

Region

EAST

NORTHWEST

SOUTHWEST

Pacific Coast

2733(49.6%)

1965(35.6%)

661(12.0%)

153(2.8%)

3243（45.1%）

3082（42.9%）

647（9.0%）

212（3.0%）

283(43.4%)

265(40.6%)

86(13.2%)

18(2.8%)

2148(51.1%)

1417(33.7%)

561(13.3%)

80(1.9%)

38(38.0%)

50(50.0%)

10(10.0%)

2(2.0%)

＜0.001

High school education

≥21

13-20

7-12.99

977(17.7%)

1823(33.1%)

2363(42.9%)

349(6.3%)

1524(21.2%)

2293(31.9%)

2968(41.3%)

399(5.6%)

102(15.6%)

159(24.4%)

344(52.8%)

47(7.2%)

590(14.0%)

1199(28.5%)

2101(50.0%)

316(7.5%)

19(19.0%)

32(32.0%)

41(41.0%)

8(8.0%)

＜0.001

Median household income, in tens

<38000

38000-47999

48000-62999

>63000

422(7.7%)

1080(19.6%)

2064(37.4%)

1946(35.3%)

570(7.9%)

1097(15.3%)

2842(39.6%)

2675(37.2%)

28(4.3%)

88(13.5%)

276(42.3%)

260(39.9%)

290(6.9%)

731(17.4%)

1588(37.8%)

1597(38.0%)

5(5.0%)

14(14.0%)

40(40.0%)

41(41.0%)

＜0.001

Chem

Yes

4221(76.6%)

1291(23.4%)

3184(44.3%)

4000(55.7%)

631(96.8%)

21(3.2%)

3791(90.1%)

415(9.9%)

96(96.0%)

4(4.0%)

＜0.001

Abbreviations: NSCLC, non-small cell lung cancer; IIIA/N2, stage IIIA pathologic N2.

Table 2. Multivariate COX hazards regression for OS and LCSS in IIIA/N2 NSCLC patients based on prognostic factors.

Variables	OS				LCSS
	Univariate analysis		Multivariate analysis		Univariate analysis		Multivariate analysis
	HR(95% Cl)	P	HR(95% Cl)	P	HR(95% Cl)	P	HR(95% Cl)	P
Gender		＜0.001		＜0.001		＜0.001		＜0.001
Female	Reference		Reference		Reference		Reference
Male	0.799(0.772,0.828)	＜0.001	0.823(0.794,0.853)	＜0.001	0.823(0.792,0.855)	＜0.001	0.845(0.813,0.879)	＜0.001
Age		＜0.001		＜0.001		＜0.001		＜0.001
<75	Reference		Reference		Reference		Reference
>=75	1.645(1.582,1.710)	＜0.001	1.364(1.310,1.421)	＜0.001	1.590(1.524,1.659)	＜0.001	1.334(1.276,1.395)	＜0.001
Histology		＜0.001		＜0.001		＜0.001		＜0.001
Adenocarcinoma	Reference		Reference		Reference		Reference
Squamous	1.429(1.372,1.489)	＜0.001	1.228(1.177,1.281)	＜0.001	1.388(1.328,1.451)	＜0.001	1.193(1.139,1.250)	＜0.001
Adenosquamous	1.159(1.018,1.319)	0.026	1.114(0.977,1.269)	0.106	1.138(0.988,1.312)	0.073	1.087(0.943,1.254)	0.25
Large cell	1.248(1.125,1.384)	＜0.001	1.159(1.041,1.292)	0.007	1.303(1.167,1.456)	＜0.001	1.209(1.077,1.357)	0.001
OTHER	1.395(1.328,1.464)	＜0.001	1.187(1.128,1.250)	＜0.001	1.411(1.339,1.488)	＜0.001	1.196(1.132,1.265)	＜0.001
Chem		＜0.001		＜0.001		＜0.001		＜0.001
No	Reference		Reference		Reference		Reference
Yes	0.556(0.536,0.577)	＜0.001	0.635(0.610,0.662)	＜0.001	0.586(0.563,0.610)	＜0.001	0.665(0.636,0.695)	＜0.001
Tumor Size		＜0.001		＜0.001		＜0.001		＜0.001
≤3	Reference		Reference		Reference		Reference
3--5	1.275(1.231,1.320)	＜0.001	1.221(1.178,1.266)	＜0.001	1.311(1.261,1.362)	＜0.001	1.258(1.209,1.308)	＜0.001
Grade		＜0.001		＜0.001		＜0.001		＜0.001
Grade I	Reference		Reference		Reference		Reference
Grade II	1.128(1.015,1.253)	0.025	1.134(1.020,1.260)	0.02	1.147(1.021,1.289)	0.021	1.154(1.027,1.297)	0.016
Grade III	1.34(1.210,1.485)	＜0.001	1.334(1.203,1.480)	＜0.001	1.399(1.249,1.567)	＜0.001	1.386(1.235,1.554)	＜0.001
Grade IV	1.593(1.351,1.880)	＜0.001	1.512(1.275,1.794)	＜0.001	1.604(1.336,1.926)	＜0.001	1.495(1.237,1.806)	＜0.001
unknow	1.569(1.417,1.737)	＜0.001	1.496(1.348,1.660)	＜0.001	1.627(1.453,1.821)	＜0.001	1.544(1.377,1.732)	＜0.001
Radiation with surgery		＜0.001		＜0.001		＜0.001		＜0.001
Only surgery	Reference		Reference		Reference		Reference
Preoperative radiotherapy	0.477(0.429,0.531)	＜0.001	0.589(0.529,0.657)	＜0.001	0.507(0.452,0.568)	＜0.001	0.606(0.539,0.681)	＜0.001
postoperative radiotherapy	0.632(0.602,0.662)	＜0.001	0.775(0.737,0.816)	＜0.001	0.645(0.612,0.679)	＜0.001	0.772(0.731,0.816)	＜0.001
Raiotherapy both before and after sugery	0.593(0.466,0.755)	＜0.001	0.752(0.590,0.957)	0.021	0.56(0.426,0.736)	＜0.001	0.687(0.522,0.904)	0.007
No surgery or radiation	1.052(1.010,1.095)	0.015	1.035(0.991,1.082)	0.121	1.057(1.011,1.104)	0.014	1.023(0.975,1.073)	0.356
Primary Site		＜0.001		＜0.001		＜0.001		＜0.001
Upper lobe	Reference		Reference		Reference		Reference
Middle lobe	1.026(0.943,1.116)	0.557	1.009(0.926,1.099)	0.833	1.053(0.962,1.153)	0.26	1.026(0.935,1.124)	0.592
Lower lobe	1.103(1.059,1.149)	＜0.001	1.08(1.037,1.125)	＜0.001	1.102(1.054,1.151)	＜0.001	1.078(1.032,1.127)	0.001
NOS	1.303(1.172,1.449)	＜0.001	1.314(1.172,1.474)	＜0.001	1.29(1.148,1.449)	＜0.001	1.311(1.157,1.486)	＜0.001
Overlapping lesion	0.985(0.808,1.199)	0.877	1.024(0.840,1.248)	0.814	0.922(0.738,1.153)	0.478	0.945(0.756,1.182)	0.62
Main bronchus	1.252(1.136,1.379)	＜0.001	1.128(1.023,1.245)	0.016	1.302(1.174,1.444)	＜0.001	1.171(1.054,1.301)	0.003
Laterality		0.001		＜0.001		＜0.001		＜0.001
Right-origin of primary	Reference		Reference		Reference		Reference
Left-origin of primary	0.932(0.899,0.966)	＜0.001	0.926(0.893,0.961)	＜0.001	0.907(0.872,0.944)	＜0.001	0.904(0.868,0.941)	＜0.001
Paired sit	0.836(0.633,1.104)	0.206	0.717(0.532,0.966)	0.029	0.809(0.595,1.100)	0.177	0.694(0.500,0.964)	0.029
Only one side - side unspecified	1.556(0.861,2.810)	0.143	1.339(0.737,2.430)	0.338	1.14(0.543,2.391)	0.73	0.991(0.470,2.090)	0.982
Not a paired site	1.266(0.408,3.927)	0.683	1.371(0.438,4.288)	0.587	1.532(0.494,4.752)	0.46	1.647(0.526,5.158)	0.392

Abbreviations: NSCLC, non-small cell lung cancer; IIIA/N2, stage IIIA pathologic N2; OS, Overall survival; LCSS, Lung cancer-specific survival; HRs, hazard ratios.

Download PDF

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Stage IIIA pathologic N2 non-small cell lung cancer patients may maximize benefit from preoperative radiotherapy: a population-based study

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Background

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion

Abbreviations

Declarations

References

Tables

Status:

Version 1