A prognostic score for non-small cell lung cancer resected after neoadjuvant therapy in comparison with the tumor-node-metastases classification and major pathological response

Abstract

AbstractStudies validating the prognostic accuracy of the tumor-node-metastases (TNM) classification in patients with lung cancer treated by neoadjuvant therapy are scarce. Tumor regression, particularly major pathological response (MPR), is an acknowledged prognostic factor in this setting. We aimed to validate a novel combined prognostic score. This retrospective single-center study was conducted on 117 consecutive patients with non-small cell lung cancer resected after neoadjuvant treatment at a Swiss University Cancer Center between 2000 and 2016. All cases were clinicopathologically re-evaluated. We assessed the prognostic performance of a novel prognostic score (PRSC) combining T-category, lymph node status, and MPR, in comparison with the eighth edition of the TNM classification (TNM8), the size adapted TNM8 as proposed by the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) and MPR alone. The isolated ypT-category and the combined TNM8 stages accurately differentiated overall survival (OS, stage p = 0.004) and disease-free survival (DFS, stage p = 0.018). Tumor regression had a prognostic impact. Optimal cut-offs for MPR emerged as 65% for adenocarcinoma and 10% for non-adenocarcinoma and were statistically significant for survival (OS p = 0.006, DFS p < 0.001). The PRSC differentiated between three prognostic groups (OS and DFS p < 0.001), and was superior compared to the stratification using MPR alone or the TNM8 systems, visualized by lower Akaike (AIC) and Bayesian information criterion (BIC) values. In the multivariate analyses, stage III tumors (HR 4.956, p = 0.003), tumors without MPR (HR 2.432, p = 0.015), and PRSC high-risk tumors (HR 5.692, p < 0.001) had significantly increased risks of occurring death. In conclusion, we support 65% as the optimal cut-off for MPR in adenocarcinomas. TNM8 and MPR were comparable regarding their prognostic significance. The novel prognostic score performed distinctly better regarding OS and DFS.