Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Mini Oral - Thoracic cancers

1436 - Quality of life in the CHISEL randomized trial of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) versus standard radiotherapy for stage I non-small cell lung cancer (Trans Tasman Radiation Oncology Group 09.02).


25 Nov 2018


Mini Oral - Thoracic cancers


David Ball


Annals of Oncology (2018) 29 (suppl_9): ix139-ix142. 10.1093/annonc/mdy445


D. Ball1, G..T. Mai2, S. Vinod3, S. Babington4, J. Ruben5, T. Kron6, B. Chesson7, A. Herschtal8, M. Vanevski8, A. Rezo9, C. Elder10, M. Skala11, A. Wirth1, G. Wheeler1, A. Lim12, M. Shaw1, P. Schofield13, L. Irving14, B. Solomon15

Author affiliations

  • 1 Radiation Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, 3000 - Melbourne/AU
  • 2 Radiation Oncology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, 4102 - Woolloongabba/AU
  • 3 Radiation Oncology, Liverpool Hospital, 2170 - Liverpool/AU
  • 4 Radiation Oncology, Christchurch Hospital, 8011 - Christchurch/NZ
  • 5 Radiation Oncology, Alfred Hospital, 3004 - Melbourne/AU
  • 6 Physical Sciences, Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, 3000 - Melbourne/AU
  • 7 Radiation Therapy, Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, 3000 - Melbourne/AU
  • 8 Biostatistics And Clinical Trials, Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, 3000 - Melbourne/AU
  • 9 Radiation Oncology, Canberra Hospital, 2605 - Canberra/AU
  • 10 Radiation Oncology, Auckland City Hospital, 1023 - Auckland/NZ
  • 11 Radiation Oncology, Royal Hobart Hospital, 7000 - Hobart/AU
  • 12 Radiation Oncology, Austin Hospital, 3084 - Heidelberg/AU
  • 13 Cancer Experiences, Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, 3000 - Melbourne/AU
  • 14 Respiratory Medicine, Royal Melbourne Hospital, 3050 - Parkville/AU
  • 15 Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, 3000 - Melbourne/AU


Login to access the resources on OncologyPRO.

If you do not have an ESMO account, please create one for free.

Abstract 1436


In the randomized phase III trial of SABR versus standard radiotherapy for stage I NSCLC (CHISEL TROG09.02), we demonstrated superior progression free and overall survival for patients randomized to SABR. Here we report comparisons in quality of life (QoL) between the two treatment arms.


Patients with biopsy proven stage I NSCLC confirmed by FDG PET/CT were randomized (2 to 1) to SABR (54 Gy in 3 fractions or 48 Gy in 4 fractions) or standard radiotherapy (66 Gy in 33 fractions or 50 Gy in 20 fractions). The primary endpoint was local progression free survival, with overall survival and QoL secondary endpoints. QoL was measured with the EORTC QLQ C30 and LC13 scales, before treatment, then at 1 and 3 months after treatment, then at 3 monthly intervals until 2 years and then at 6 monthly intervals. The area under the QoL – time curve (AUC) until 3½ years was estimated for each arm and differences between arms calculated using a linear mixed effects model with the appropriate linear contrast applied. Scores were standardised to be on a scale from 0 to 100.


101 patients were randomized, 35 to standard radiotherapy and 66 to SABR. Local failure and overall survival favoured patients randomized to SABR, with hazard ratios of 0.32 (95% CI 0.13, 0.77, P = 0.008) and 0.53 (95% CI 0.30, 0.94, P = 0.027) respectively. For global health status measured with the QLQ C30, the difference in the mean AUC was 5.46 favouring the SABR arm (95% CI -3.6, 14.5). Similarly, there were no significant differences in functional or symptom scales, including fatigue (mean AUC difference 0.83, 95% CI-8.0, 9.7), pain (-3.60, 95% CI -13.4, 6.2) dyspnea (-6.2, 95% CI -16.8, 4.4) or cough (-7.68, 95% CI -19.7, 4.4) - for all these symptom scales, negative values represent lesser symptoms in the SABR arm.


In spite of substantial differences in treatment duration and intensity between the two arms, there were no differences in any of the QoL measures, providing further support for SABR as the standard of care in this patient group.

Editorial acknowledgement

Clinical trial identification


Legal entity responsible for the study

Trans Tasman Radiation Oncology Group.


The Radiation and Optometry Section of the Australian Government Department of Health with the assistance of Cancer Australia; The Cancer Society of New Zealand; and The Cancer Research Trust, New Zealand.


All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.