SummaryBackgroundConcurrent chemoradiotherapy is the standard of care in limited-stage small-cell lung cancer, but the optimal radiotherapy schedule and dose remains controversial. The aim of this study was to establish a standard chemoradiotherapy treatment regimen in limited-stage small-cell lung cancer.MethodsThe CONVERT trial was an open-label, phase 3, randomised superiority trial. We enrolled adult patients (aged ≥18 years) who had cytologically or histologically confirmed limited-stage small-cell lung cancer, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–2, and adequate pulmonary function. Patients were recruited from 73 centres in eight countries. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either 45 Gy radiotherapy in 30 twice-daily fractions of 1·5 Gy over 19 days, or 66 Gy in 33 once-daily fractions of 2 Gy over 45 days, starting on day 22 after commencing cisplatin–etoposide chemotherapy (given as four to six cycles every 3 weeks in both groups). The allocation method used was minimisation with a random element, stratified by institution, planned number of chemotherapy cycles, and performance status. Treatment group assignments were not masked. The primary endpoint was overall survival, defined as time from randomisation until death from any cause, analysed by modified intention-to-treat. A 12% higher overall survival at 2 years in the once-daily group versus the twice-daily group was considered to be clinically significant to show superiority of the once-daily regimen. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00433563) and is currently in follow-up.FindingsBetween April 7, 2008, and Nov 29, 2013, 547 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive twice-daily concurrent chemoradiotherapy (274 patients) or once-daily concurrent chemoradiotherapy (273 patients). Four patients (one in the twice-daily group and three in the once-daily group) did not return their case report forms and were lost to follow-up; these patients were not included in our analyses. At a median follow-up of 45 months (IQR 35–58), median overall survival was 30 months (95% CI 24–34) in the twice-daily group versus 25 months (21–31) in the once-daily group (hazard ratio for death in the once daily group 1·18 [95% CI 0·95–1·45]; p=0·14). 2-year overall survival was 56% (95% CI 50–62) in the twice-daily group and 51% (45–57) in the once-daily group (absolute difference between the treatment groups 5·3% [95% CI −3·2% to 13·7%]). The most common grade 3–4 adverse event in patients evaluated for chemotherapy toxicity was neutropenia (197 [74%] of 266 patients in the twice-daily group vs 170 [65%] of 263 in the once-daily group). Most toxicities were similar between the groups, except there was significantly more grade 4 neutropenia with twice-daily radiotherapy (129 [49%] vs 101 [38%]; p=0·05). In patients assessed for radiotherapy toxicity, was no difference in grade 3–4 oesophagitis between the groups (47 [19%] of 254 patients in the twice-daily group vs 47 [19%] of 246 in the once-daily group; p=0·85) an...

AstraZeneca.

No abstract

No abstract

a b s t r a c tIntroduction: The evidence on the effectiveness of rehabilitation in lung cancer patients is limited. Whole body vibration (WBV) has been proposed as an alternative to conventional resistance training (CRT). Methods: We investigated the effect of radical treatment (RT) and of two rehabilitation programmes in lung cancer patients. The primary endpoint was a change in 6-min walking distance (6MWD) after rehabilitation. Patients were randomised after RT to either CRT, WBVT or standard follow-up (CON). Patients were evaluated before, after RT and after 12 weeks of intervention. Results: Of 121 included patients, 70 were randomised to either CON (24), CRT (24) or WBVT (22). After RT, 6MWD decreased with a mean of 38 m (95% CI 22-54) and increased with a mean of 95 m (95% CI 58-132) in CRT (p < 0.0001), 37 m (95% CI −1-76) in WBVT (p = 0.06) and 1 m (95% CI −34-36) in CON (p = 0.95), respectively. Surgical treatment, magnitude of decrease in 6MWD by RT and allocation to either CRT or WBVT were prognostic for reaching the minimally clinically important difference of 54 m increase in 6MWD after intervention. Conclusions: RT of lung cancer significantly impairs patients' exercise capacity. CRT significantly improves and restores functional exercise capacity, whereas WBVT does not fully substitute for CRT.