SABR versus Surgery Evidence

Comparisons

Evidence quality

Highlighted claims

• Randomized comparisons between SABR and surgery in operable early-stage NSCLC have been difficult to complete. — Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy versus video-assisted lobectomy for operable stage I non-small-cell lung cancer: study protocol for an emulated target trial
• Prior observational studies were limited by retrospective data quality and incomplete control of selection bias. — Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy versus video-assisted lobectomy for operable stage I non-small-cell lung cancer: study protocol for an emulated target trial
• The revised STARS trial reported similar 5-year overall survival for SABR and VATS lobectomy with mediastinal lymph node dissection. — Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy versus video-assisted lobectomy for operable stage I non-small-cell lung cancer: study protocol for an emulated target trial
• Major meta-analyses conflict with favorable SABR findings by reporting worse all-cause or overall survival after SABR than after surgery or lobectomy. — Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy versus video-assisted lobectomy for operable stage I non-small-cell lung cancer: study protocol for an emulated target trial
• A small pooled analysis from STARS and ROSEL suggested SABR might be better tolerated and improve overall survival compared with surgery, but its sample size generated debate. — Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy versus video-assisted lobectomy for operable stage I non-small-cell lung cancer: study protocol for an emulated target trial