Hiring in life sciences? Share your open positions with our professional community. Read more Close

Advertisement

Association Between Treatment Sequencing and Overall Survival in Stage IV NSCLC With Brain Metastases: A National Cancer Database Study.

Created on 20 Jul 2026

Authors

Anand Shah, Pranav Gwalani, Merry Zhai, Ritik Goyal, Joshua Kra

Published in

Thoracic cancer. Volume 17. Issue 14. Pages e70359.

Abstract

The optimal sequencing of brain-directed radiation and systemic therapy in stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with brain metastases remains uncertain in the era of CNS-active systemic agents. We evaluated survival outcomes using national real-world data.
We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adults diagnosed between 2010 and 2022 with stage IV NSCLC and brain metastases in the National Cancer Database who received both brain-directed radiation and systemic therapy. Treatment sequence was classified as radiation-first or systemic-first based on initiation dates. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models, stratified by treatment era (pre-2015 vs. 2015+), assessed associations with overall survival (OS), adjusting for demographic, clinical, tumor, and treatment factors. Propensity score matching and delayed-entry sensitivity analyses were performed to address confounding and immortal time bias.
Among 45 577 patients, 78.3% received radiation-first and 21.7% received systemic therapy first. Unadjusted Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no significant difference in OS (log-rank p = 0.624). In multivariable analysis, systemic-first sequencing was associated with a modest increase in mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.06; 95% CI: 1.04-1.09), which was consistent in propensity-matched (HR 1.07; 95% CI: 1.04-1.11) and delayed-entry analyses (aHR 1.09; 95% CI: 1.07-1.12). The use of systemic-first therapy increased over time. Established prognostic factors demonstrated larger effect sizes.
Systemic-first sequencing was associated with a modest increase in adjusted mortality; however, the effect size was small relative to established prognostic factors and likely influenced by residual confounding and selection bias. These findings support individualized, multidisciplinary treatment decisions rather than a uniform sequencing strategy.

PMID:
42472632
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 20 Jul 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Advertisement

Stats

  • Community rating n/a 0 votes
  • Reviewers' rating n/a 0 votes
  • Your rating

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

  • Recommendations n/a n/a positive of 0 vote(s)
  • Views 7
  • Comments 0

Recommended by

  • No recommendations yet.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Advertisement