Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Editorial Policies
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics

User menu

  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
In Vivo
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
In Vivo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Editorial Policies
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Visit iiar on Facebook
  • Follow us on Linkedin
Research ArticleClinical Studies
Open Access

Prognostic Factors of Survival After Radiotherapy for Lung Cancer–The Impact of Smoking Pack Years

ELISA M. WERNER, ESTHER GLATZEL, SABINE BOHNET, STEVEN E. SCHILD and DIRK RADES
In Vivo May 2022, 36 (3) 1297-1301; DOI: https://doi.org/10.21873/invivo.12830
ELISA M. WERNER
1Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
ESTHER GLATZEL
1Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
SABINE BOHNET
2Department of Pulmonology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
STEVEN E. SCHILD
3Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, U.S.A.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DIRK RADES
1Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background/Aim: The prognostic role of smoking pack years after thoracic irradiation for lung cancer needs further clarification, since previous studies showed conflicting results. Therefore, this study investigated potential prognostic factors for survival including pack years in 170 lung cancer patients receiving local radiotherapy. Patients and Methods: Twelve factors were retrospectively evaluated for survival including age, sex, tumor site, histology, primary tumor stage, nodal stage, distant metastasis, radiation dose, upfront surgery or systemic treatment, pulmonary function, and number of pack years. Results: On univariate analyses, absence of distant metastasis (p=0.049), radiation dose >56 Gy (p=0.019), and ≤40 pack years (p=0.005) were significantly associated with better survival. In the multivariate analysis, number of pack years (hazard ratio 2.18, 95% confidence interval 1.25-3.82, p=0.006) maintained significance; distant metastasis (p=0.34) and radiation dose (p=0.16) were not significant. Conclusion: Number of pack years was an independent predictor of survival after thoracic irradiation for lung cancer.

  • Lung cancer
  • thoracic irradiation
  • survival
  • prognostic factors
  • smoking pack years

Lung cancer is one of the most threatening malignant diseases with the highest number of disease-associated deaths worldwide (1). Many lung cancer patients with loco-regionally advanced disease receive thoracic irradiation with or without systemic therapies (2). During the last decade, modern precision radiotherapy techniques such as intensity-modulated radiotherapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy have become available in many countries (3, 4). For curative treatment of lung cancer, several dose-fractionation regimens with different overall treatment times are available (4, 5). When selecting the appropriate individual dose-fractionation regimen, the patient’s personal situation, age, comorbidity and also the survival prognosis should be considered. In case of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), patients with favorable prognoses are, depending on age, performance status and comorbidity index, often candidates for conventionally fractionated radiotherapy (5×2.0 Gy per week) with total doses of 60-70 Gy (4, 5). Patients with less favorable prognoses or other limitations may receive hypo-fractionated (doses per fraction >2.0 Gy) irradiation, e.g. with 2.75 Gy per fraction up to 55 Gy (5). For curative treatment of small-cell lung cancer (SCLC), commonly used dose-fractionation regimens include hyper-fractionated radiotherapy with 45 Gy in 30 fractions (2×1.5 Gy per day) and conventionally fractionated radiotherapy with total doses of 60-66 Gy (4, 6, 7). Like patients with NSCLC, those with SCLC and poor survival prognoses or significant other limitations may also receive hypo-fractionated radiotherapy.

These considerations suggest that it is important to know a patient’s survival prognosis as precisely as possible to provide the best individual treatment. Several prognostic factors for survival have already been identified for lung cancer patients receiving thoracic irradiation (8, 9). However, conflicting results were reported regarding the prognostic role of the number of smoking pack years. In two studies of patients with NSCLC and one study of patients with SCLC, the number of pack years prior to treatment had no significant impact on survival (10-12). In another study of patients with limited- SCLC disease, the 2-year survival rate was significantly higher after <40 pack years than after ≥40 pack years, whereas in the multivariate analysis of that study, the number of pack years was not significant (8). Moreover, in several studies of patients receiving radiotherapy or radio-chemotherapy for head-and-neck cancers, a higher number of smoking pack years was negatively associated with survival (13-17). When looking at the available data, it becomes obvious that additional studies are required in order to properly define the prognostic role of the number of smoking pack years in the survival of patients receiving thoracic irradiation for lung cancer. Therefore, this study investigated the number of pack years plus several potential prognostic factors in such a patient cohort.

Patients and Methods

Twelve potential prognostic factors (Table I) were retrospectively investigated for survival in a cohort of 170 patients who received thoracic irradiation for lung cancer at our institution between 2016 and 2019. These factors included age at the start of irradiation (≤67 vs. >67 years, median=67 years), sex (female vs. male), main tumor site (upper lobe vs. lower or middle lobe vs. central location or main bronchus), histology of lung cancer (NSCLC vs. SCLC), primary tumor stage (T1-2 vs. T3-4), nodal stage (N0-1 vs. N2-3), presence of distant metastasis (no vs. yes), total radiation dose (≤56 vs. 56 Gy, median=56 Gy) upfront surgery (no vs. yes), systemic treatment prior to thoracic irradiation (no vs. yes), pulmonary function represented by the forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1 ≤1.69 vs. >1.69 l, median=1.69 l), and number of pack years (≤40 vs. >40). The number of pack years was calculated according to the generally available definition of the National Cancer Institute, namely by multiplying the average number of packs of cigarettes smoked per day by the number of years the patient has smoked.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table I.

Distribution of the investigated potential prognostic factors.

Statistical analyses were performed with the Kaplan-Meier method and the log-rank test. p-Values <0.05 were considered indicating significance and p-values <0.10 indicating a trend. Those factors that were found to be significant on univariate analysis were subsequently analyzed for independence in a multivariate analysis performed with the Cox proportional hazard model. Again, p-values <0.05 and <0.10 were considered indicating significance and a trend, respectively. The study has obtained approval from the responsible ethics committee (University of Lubeck, 22-049).

Results

On univariate analyses (Table II), better survival was significantly associated with absence of distant metastasis (p=0.049), radiation dose >56 Gy (p=0.019), and ≤40 pack years (p=0.005, Figure 1). A trend was observed for nodal stage N0-1 (p=0.09). In the multivariate analysis, number of pack years [hazard ratio (HR)=2.18, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.25-3.82, p=0.006] was significant and, therefore, identified as independent predictor of survival. Distant metastasis (HR=1.31, 95%CI=0.75-2.30, p=0.34) and radiation dose (HR=1.49, 95%CI=0.85-2.63, p=0.16) did not achieve significance.1298

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table II.

Survival rates of the analyzed potential prognostic factors at 1, 2, and 3 years following radiotherapy.

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1.

Kaplan-Meier curves for survival of patients with ≤40 smoking pack years and those patients with >40 pack years. The p-value was calculated using the log-rank test.

Discussion

The outcomes after thoracic irradiation for lung cancer can be improved with precision radiotherapy and novel systemic agents (4, 18-23). Another modern approach to improve the outcomes after loco-regional radiotherapy for lung cancer is the use of personalized treatment programs. These programs consider particularly a patient’s individual situation including the survival prognosis. Therefore, it is very important to have an idea, as precisely as possible, of a patient’s remaining lifespan. This can be considerably facilitated with the knowledge of prognostic factors independently associated with survival. Several predictors have already been identified for lung cancer patients receiving thoracic irradiation alone or in combination with chemotherapy or immunotherapy (8, 9). In 2016, female sex (p=0.003), a Karnofsky performance score of 80-100 (p<0.001) and pre-radiotherapy hemoglobin levels of ≥12 g/dl (p=0.04) were identified as independent predictors of survival in a retrospective cohort of 71 patients receiving definitive radio-chemotherapy for limited-disease SCLC (8). Moreover, in a systematic review and meta-analysis, primary tumor size, nodal size, and pleural effusion had a prognostic impact on survival of patients treated with radio-chemotherapy for stage III NSCLC (9).

However, conflicting results exist regarding the prognostic role of the number of pre-radiotherapy smoking pack years. In two retrospective studies from 2008 and 2012, respectively, the number of pack years (≤50 vs. >50) was not significantly associated with survival in patients with NSCLC (10, 11). In one study (10), the 2-year survival rates were 35% and 27%, respectively (p=0.46), and in the other study (11), the rates were 50% and 50%, respectively (p=0.78). Moreover, in a retrospective study of 284 patients with limited-stage SCLC, the number of smoking pack years (0 vs. ≤40 vs. 41-60 vs. ≥61) had no significant impact on survival, either (12). In another retrospective study of patients with limited-disease SCLC, the 2-year survival rate was significantly higher after <40 pack years when compared to that after ≥40 pack years (48% vs. 36%, p=0.04) on univariate analysis (8). However, in the multivariate analysis of that study, the number of pack years was not significant (risk ratio=1.33, 95%CI=0.71-2.52, p=0.37).

Since the prognostic role of the number of smoking pack years for survival in lung cancer patients receiving thoracic irradiation with or without systemic treatment is still controversial, additional studies are warranted. The present study was performed to contribute to further clarification of this issue. According to its results, a lower number of pack years (≤40 vs. >40) was significantly associated survival in both the univariate and the multivariate analysis. Thus, the number of smoking pack years can be considered an independent predictor of survival in lung cancer patients receiving loco-regional radiotherapy. This prognostic factor should be considered when designing personalized treatment programs including the optimal radiotherapy approach. Patients with NSCLC and favorable survival prognoses should preferably receive conventionally fractionated radiotherapy with total doses of 60-70 Gy (4, 5, 24). Those patients with less favorable prognoses may be considered for hypo-fractionated irradiation (5). For patients with SCLC and favorable survival prognoses, hyper-fractionated radiotherapy (45 Gy, 2×1.5 Gy per day) and conventionally fractionated radiotherapy with 60-66 Gy are generally used, whereas for patients with SCLC and poor survival prognoses also hypo-fractionated radiotherapy programs may be an alternative option (4, 6, 7). When considering these recommendations, the retrospective nature of the present study including the risk of hidden selection biases should be noted.

In summary, the number of pre-radiotherapy smoking pack years was shown to be an independent predictor of survival after thoracic irradiation for lung cancer. This prognostic factor should be considered when designing personalized (radiation) treatment programs for these patients.

Acknowledgements

As part of the project NorDigHealth, this study was funded by the European Regional Development Fund through the Interreg Deutschland-Danmark program.

Footnotes

  • Authors’ Contributions

    E.M.W., E.G., S.B. and D.R. participated in the study design. E.G. provided the data that were analyzed by D.R. and S.E.S., and interpreted by all Authors. The manuscript drafted by E.M.W., S.E.S. and D.R. was reviewed and approved by all Authors.

  • Conflicts of Interest

    On behalf of all Authors, the corresponding Author states that there are no conflicts of interest related to this study.

  • Received February 18, 2022.
  • Revision received February 28, 2022.
  • Accepted March 1, 2022.
  • Copyright © 2022, International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved

This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY-NC-ND) 4.0 international license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0).

References

  1. ↵
    1. Siegel RL,
    2. Miller KD,
    3. Fuchs HE and
    4. Jemal A
    : Cancer statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J Clin 72(1): 7-33, 2022. PMID: 35020204. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21708
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    Leitlinienprogramm Onkologie (Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft, Deutsche Krebshilfe, AWMF): Prävention, Diagnostik, Therapie und Nachsorge des Lungenkarzinoms, Lang-version 1.0, 2018, AWMF-Registernummer: 020/007OL. Available at: http://leitlinienprogramm-onkologie.de/Lungenkarzinom.98.0.html [Last assessed on February 10, 2022]
  3. ↵
    1. Fujiwara M,
    2. Doi H,
    3. Igeta M,
    4. Suzuki H,
    5. Kitajima K,
    6. Tanooka M,
    7. Ishida T,
    8. Wakayama T,
    9. Yokoi T,
    10. Kuribayashi K,
    11. Kijima T,
    12. Hashimoto M,
    13. Kondo N,
    14. Matsumoto S,
    15. Hasegawa S,
    16. Kamikonya N and
    17. Yamakado K
    : Radiation pneumonitis after volumetric modulated arc therapy for non-small cell lung cancer. Anticancer Res 41(11): 5793-5802, 2021. PMID: 34732453. DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.15396
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. ↵
    1. Vinod SK and
    2. Hau E
    : Radiotherapy treatment for lung cancer: Current status and future directions. Respirology 25 Suppl 2: 61-71, 2020. PMID: 32516852. DOI: 10.1111/resp.13870
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    1. Brada M,
    2. Forbes H,
    3. Ashley S and
    4. Fenwick J
    : Improving outcomes in NSCLC: Optimum dose fractionation in radical radiotherapy matters. J Thorac Oncol, 2022. PMID: 35092841. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtho.2022.01.006
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Turrisi AT 3rd.,
    2. Kim K,
    3. Blum R,
    4. Sause WT,
    5. Livingston RB,
    6. Komaki R,
    7. Wagner H,
    8. Aisner S and
    9. Johnson DH
    : Twice-daily compared with once-daily thoracic radiotherapy in limited small-cell lung cancer treated concurrently with cisplatin and etoposide. N Engl J Med 340(4): 265-271, 1999. PMID: 9920950. DOI: 10.1056/NEJM199901283400403
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Faivre-Finn C,
    2. Snee M,
    3. Ashcroft L,
    4. Appel W,
    5. Barlesi F,
    6. Bhatnagar A,
    7. Bezjak A,
    8. Cardenal F,
    9. Fournel P,
    10. Harden S,
    11. Le Pechoux C,
    12. McMenemin R,
    13. Mohammed N, O’
    14. Brien M,
    15. Pantarotto J,
    16. Surmont V,
    17. Van Meerbeeck JP,
    18. Woll PJ,
    19. Lorigan P,
    20. Blackhall F and CONVERT Study Team
    : Concurrent once-daily versus twice-daily chemoradiotherapy in patients with limited-stage small-cell lung cancer (CONVERT): an open-label, phase 3, randomised, superiority trial. Lancet Oncol 18(8): 1116-1125, 2017. PMID: 28642008. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(17)30318-2
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Rades D,
    2. Kaesmann L,
    3. Janssen S and
    4. Schild SE
    : A new score for estimating survival after definitive radiochemotherapy of limited disease small cell lung cancers. Lung 194(4): 625-629, 2016. PMID: 27140191. DOI: 10.1007/s00408-016-9886-z
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. ↵
    1. van Laar M,
    2. van Amsterdam WAC,
    3. van Lindert ASR,
    4. de Jong PA and
    5. Verhoeff JJC
    : Prognostic factors for overall survival of stage III non-small cell lung cancer patients on computed tomography: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiother Oncol 151: 152-175, 2020. PMID: 32710990. DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2020.07.030
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. ↵
    1. Rades D,
    2. Setter C,
    3. Dahl O,
    4. Schild SE and
    5. Noack F
    : Fibroblast growth factor 2—a predictor of outcome for patients irradiated for stage II-III non-small-cell lung cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 82(1): 442-447, 2012. PMID: 20950963. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.08.048
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. ↵
    1. Rades D,
    2. Setter C,
    3. Schild SE and
    4. Dunst J
    : Effect of smoking during radiotherapy, respiratory insufficiency, and hemoglobin levels on outcome in patients irradiated for non-small-cell lung cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 71(4): 1134-1142, 2008. PMID: 18258387. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.11.006
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Chen J,
    2. Jiang R,
    3. Garces YI,
    4. Jatoi A,
    5. Stoddard SM,
    6. Sun Z,
    7. Marks RS,
    8. Liu Y and
    9. Yang P
    : Prognostic factors for limited-stage small cell lung cancer: a study of 284 patients. Lung Cancer 67(2): 221-226, 2010. PMID: 19497635. DOI: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2009.04.006
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. ↵
    1. Oliva M,
    2. Huang SH,
    3. Xu W,
    4. Su J,
    5. Hansen AR,
    6. Bratman SV,
    7. Ringash J,
    8. Jang R,
    9. Cho J,
    10. Bayley A,
    11. Hope AJ,
    12. Chen E,
    13. Giuliani M,
    14. Waldron J,
    15. Weinreb I,
    16. Perez-Ordonez B,
    17. Chepeha D,
    18. Kim J,
    19. O Sullivan B,
    20. Siu LL and
    21. Spreafico A
    : Impact of cisplatin dose and smoking pack-years in human papillomavirus-positive oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma treated with chemoradiotherapy. Eur J Cancer 118: 112-120, 2019. PMID: 31330486. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2019.06.019
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Rios Velazquez E,
    2. Hoebers F,
    3. Aerts HJ,
    4. Rietbergen MM,
    5. Brakenhoff RH,
    6. Leemans RC,
    7. Speel EJ,
    8. Straetmans J,
    9. Kremer B and
    10. Lambin P
    : Externally validated HPV-based prognostic nomogram for oropharyngeal carcinoma patients yields more accurate predictions than TNM staging. Radiother Oncol 113(3): 324-330, 2014. PMID: 25443497. DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2014.09.005
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Chen C,
    2. Shen LJ,
    3. Li BF,
    4. Gao J and
    5. Xia YF
    : Smoking is a poor prognostic factor for male nasopharyngeal carcinoma treated with radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol 110(3): 409-415, 2014. PMID: 24021341. DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2013.08.003
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Kawakita D,
    2. Hosono S,
    3. Ito H,
    4. Oze I,
    5. Watanabe M,
    6. Hanai N,
    7. Hasegawa Y,
    8. Tajima K,
    9. Murakami S,
    10. Tanaka H and
    11. Matsuo K
    : Impact of smoking status on clinical outcome in oral cavity cancer patients. Oral Oncol 48(2): 186-191, 2012. PMID: 21996543. DOI: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2011.09.012
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. ↵
    1. Vawda N,
    2. Banerjee RN and
    3. Debenham BJ
    : Impact of smoking on outcomes of HPV-related oropharyngeal cancer treated with primary radiation or surgery. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 103(5): 1125-1131, 2019. PMID: 30513378. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.11.046
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. ↵
    1. Saito T,
    2. Ohnishi K,
    3. Ishikawa H,
    4. Nakamura M,
    5. Hoshiai S,
    6. Numajiri H,
    7. Murofushi KN,
    8. Mizumoto M,
    9. Okumura T and
    10. Sakurai H
    : Hypofractionated proton beam therapy for cT1-2N0M0 non-small cell lung cancer patients with interstitial lung disease. Anticancer Res 41(11): 5635-5642, 2021. PMID: 34732436. DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.15379
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Janssen S,
    2. Kaesmann L,
    3. Rudat V and
    4. Rades D
    : Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) with lower doses for selected patients with stage I non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Lung 194(2): 291-294, 2016. PMID: 26842723. DOI: 10.1007/s00408-016-9849-4
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Yoshida D,
    2. Kusunoki T,
    3. Takayama Y,
    4. Kusano Y,
    5. Minohara S,
    6. Kano K,
    7. Anno W,
    8. Tsuchida K,
    9. Takakusagi Y,
    10. Mizoguchi N,
    11. Serizawa I,
    12. Ebara T and
    13. Katoh H
    : Comparison of dose distribution between VMAT-SBRT and scanning carbon-ion radiotherapy for early-stage NSCLC. Anticancer Res 41(9): 4571-4575, 2021. PMID: 34475085. DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.15270
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Mitsuya S,
    2. Tsuruoka K,
    3. Kanaoka K,
    4. Funamoto T,
    5. Tsuji H,
    6. Matsunaga N,
    7. Nakamura T,
    8. Tamura Y,
    9. Imanishi M,
    10. Ikeda S,
    11. Fujisaka Y,
    12. Goto I and
    13. Imagawa A
    : Comparison between second- and third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors as first-line treatment in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer: a retrospective analysis. Anticancer Res 41(10): 5137-5145, 2021. PMID: 34593465. DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.15331
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Zaitsu J,
    2. Yamashita Y,
    3. Ishikawa A,
    4. Saito A,
    5. Kagimoto A,
    6. Mimura T,
    7. Hirakawa T,
    8. Mito M,
    9. Fukuhara K,
    10. Senoo T,
    11. Nakano K,
    12. Kuraoka K and
    13. Taniyama K
    : Systemic inflammatory score predicts response and prognosis in patients with lung cancer treated with immunotherapy. Anticancer Res 41(7): 3673-3682, 2021. PMID: 34230166. DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.15158
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  16. ↵
    1. Lee GD,
    2. Chung B,
    3. Song JS,
    4. Jang SJ and
    5. Kim HR
    : The prognostic value of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) in patients who received neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy followed by surgery for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Anticancer Res 41(6): 3193-3204, 2021. PMID: 34083315. DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.15106
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. ↵
    1. Schild SE,
    2. Pang HH,
    3. Fan W,
    4. Stinchcombe TE,
    5. Vokes EE,
    6. Ramalingam SS,
    7. Bradley JD,
    8. Kelly K and
    9. Wang X
    : Exploring Radiotherapy Targeting Strategy and Dose: A pooled analysis of cooperative group trials of combined modality therapy for stage III NSCLC. J Thorac Oncol 13(8): 1171-1182, 2018. PMID: 29689435. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtho.2018.04.011
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

In Vivo
Vol. 36, Issue 3
May-June 2022
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Ed Board (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on In Vivo.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Prognostic Factors of Survival After Radiotherapy for Lung Cancer–The Impact of Smoking Pack Years
(Your Name) has sent you a message from In Vivo
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the In Vivo web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
3 + 10 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Prognostic Factors of Survival After Radiotherapy for Lung Cancer–The Impact of Smoking Pack Years
ELISA M. WERNER, ESTHER GLATZEL, SABINE BOHNET, STEVEN E. SCHILD, DIRK RADES
In Vivo May 2022, 36 (3) 1297-1301; DOI: 10.21873/invivo.12830

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Reprints and Permissions
Share
Prognostic Factors of Survival After Radiotherapy for Lung Cancer–The Impact of Smoking Pack Years
ELISA M. WERNER, ESTHER GLATZEL, SABINE BOHNET, STEVEN E. SCHILD, DIRK RADES
In Vivo May 2022, 36 (3) 1297-1301; DOI: 10.21873/invivo.12830
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Patients and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Acknowledgements
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Response to Letter to the Editor from Finsterer: “Encephalitis Associated With SARS-CoV-2 Infection in a Child With Chiari Malformation Type I”
  • Solitary Fibrous Tumor in the Retroperitoneal Space Arising from the Diaphragm
  • The Relationship Between Oxidative Stress, Selenium, and Cumulative Risk in Metabolic Syndrome
Show more Clinical Studies

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • lung cancer
  • thoracic irradiation
  • survival
  • prognostic factors
  • smoking pack years
In Vivo

© 2023 In Vivo

Powered by HighWire