LUNAR: Full Moon or Eclipse? An exploration into tumor treating fields in lung cancer

IF 5 2区 医学 Q2 Medicine
Timothée Olivier , Vinay Prasad
{"title":"LUNAR: Full Moon or Eclipse? An exploration into tumor treating fields in lung cancer","authors":"Timothée Olivier ,&nbsp;Vinay Prasad","doi":"10.1016/j.tranon.2025.102397","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The LUNAR trial investigated the addition of Tumor Treating Fields (TTFs) to “standard therapy” in patients with metastatic lung cancer after at least one line of platinum-based chemotherapy. The “standard therapy” was either an anti-PD(L)1 therapy (immunotherapy) or docetaxel. The addition of TTFs provided a 3.3 months median survival gain. We raised concerns about LUNAR results internal and external validity.</div><div>First, patient selection and the control arm do not mirror current practice. Two-thirds of patients did not receive prior immunotherapy, which is standard in first-line treatment. Also, the “choice” of the “standard therapy” was restricted by drug availability, resulting in 41 % of patients not receiving immunotherapy during the trial – those allocated to receive docetaxel – had no prior exposure to immunotherapy. Some patients may have harbored actionable mutations, and did not receive targeted therapy.</div><div>Second, we raised statistical questions. The sample size was shrunk after an unplanned analysis, with unshared and unclear justifications. The decision may have been influenced by a chance deviation in data favoring the intervention. Also, as significantly more patients were censored after withdrawals in the TTFs group, informative censoring could have amplified the survival gain.</div><div>Third and last, without a sham-control design (the equivalent of placebo for devices), it's hard to isolate the impact of TTFs from the extra-attention associated with its administration (continuous 24/7 support, frequent home-based interactions).</div><div>Overall, LUNAR do not apply to clinical settings where immunotherapy and molecular testing is offered, and many factors may have artificially boosted the reported survival gain. A sham-controlled trial is needed to answer whether TTFs are beneficial.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48975,"journal":{"name":"Translational Oncology","volume":"56 ","pages":"Article 102397"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Translational Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1936523325001287","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The LUNAR trial investigated the addition of Tumor Treating Fields (TTFs) to “standard therapy” in patients with metastatic lung cancer after at least one line of platinum-based chemotherapy. The “standard therapy” was either an anti-PD(L)1 therapy (immunotherapy) or docetaxel. The addition of TTFs provided a 3.3 months median survival gain. We raised concerns about LUNAR results internal and external validity.
First, patient selection and the control arm do not mirror current practice. Two-thirds of patients did not receive prior immunotherapy, which is standard in first-line treatment. Also, the “choice” of the “standard therapy” was restricted by drug availability, resulting in 41 % of patients not receiving immunotherapy during the trial – those allocated to receive docetaxel – had no prior exposure to immunotherapy. Some patients may have harbored actionable mutations, and did not receive targeted therapy.
Second, we raised statistical questions. The sample size was shrunk after an unplanned analysis, with unshared and unclear justifications. The decision may have been influenced by a chance deviation in data favoring the intervention. Also, as significantly more patients were censored after withdrawals in the TTFs group, informative censoring could have amplified the survival gain.
Third and last, without a sham-control design (the equivalent of placebo for devices), it's hard to isolate the impact of TTFs from the extra-attention associated with its administration (continuous 24/7 support, frequent home-based interactions).
Overall, LUNAR do not apply to clinical settings where immunotherapy and molecular testing is offered, and many factors may have artificially boosted the reported survival gain. A sham-controlled trial is needed to answer whether TTFs are beneficial.

Abstract Image

月亮:满月还是月食?肺癌肿瘤治疗领域的探索
LUNAR试验研究了转移性肺癌患者在接受至少一条铂类化疗后,将肿瘤治疗场(TTFs)加入“标准治疗”。“标准治疗”是抗pd (L)1治疗(免疫治疗)或多西他赛。ttf的加入提供了3.3个月的中位生存期延长。我们提出了对LUNAR结果内部和外部有效性的关注。首先,患者选择和对照组不能反映当前的做法。三分之二的患者之前没有接受免疫治疗,这是一线治疗的标准。此外,“标准治疗”的“选择”受到药物可用性的限制,导致41%的患者在试验期间没有接受免疫治疗-那些被分配接受多西他赛的患者-之前没有接受过免疫治疗。一些患者可能有可操作的突变,并没有接受靶向治疗。第二,我们提出了统计问题。在进行了一次计划外的分析后,样本量缩小了,理由也不明确。这一决定可能受到有利于干预的数据的偶然偏差的影响。此外,由于TTFs组中更多的患者在停药后被审查,信息审查可能扩大了生存收益。第三也是最后一点,如果没有假控制设计(相当于设备的安慰剂),很难将ttf的影响与与其管理相关的额外关注(连续的24/7支持,频繁的家庭互动)分离开来。总的来说,LUNAR不适用于提供免疫治疗和分子检测的临床环境,许多因素可能人为地提高了报告的生存增益。需要一项假对照试验来回答ttf是否有益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.40
自引率
2.00%
发文量
314
审稿时长
54 days
期刊介绍: Translational Oncology publishes the results of novel research investigations which bridge the laboratory and clinical settings including risk assessment, cellular and molecular characterization, prevention, detection, diagnosis and treatment of human cancers with the overall goal of improving the clinical care of oncology patients. Translational Oncology will publish laboratory studies of novel therapeutic interventions as well as clinical trials which evaluate new treatment paradigms for cancer. Peer reviewed manuscript types include Original Reports, Reviews and Editorials.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信