Adaptive radiotherapy (up to 74 Gy) or standard radiotherapy (66 Gy) for patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer, according to [18F]FDG-PET tumour residual uptake at 42 Gy (RTEP7-IFCT-1402): a multicentre, randomised, controlled phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Thoracic radiation intensification is debated in patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to assess the activity and safety of a boost radiotherapy dose up to 74 Gy in a functional sub-volume given according to on-treatment [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose ([18F]FDG)-PET results. METHODS: In this multicentre, randomised, controlled non-comparative phase 2 trial, we recruited patients aged 18 years or older with inoperable stage III NSCLC without EGFR mutation or ALK rearrangement with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and who were affiliated with or a beneficiary of a social benefit system, with evaluable tumour or node lesions, preserved lung function, and who were amenable to curative-intent radiochemotherapy. Patients were randomly allocated using a central interactive web-response system in a non-masked method (1:1; minimisation method used [random factor of 0·8]; stratified by radiotherapy technique [intensity-modulated radiotherapy vs three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy] and by centre at which patients were treated) either to the experimental adaptive radiotherapy group A, in which only patients with positive residual metabolism on [18F]FDG-PET at 42 Gy received a boost radiotherapy (up to 74 Gy in 33 fractions), with all other patients receiving standard radiotherapy dosing (66 Gy in 33 fractions over 6·5 weeks), or to the standard radiotherapy group B (66 Gy in 33 fractions) over 6·5 weeks. All patients received two cycles of induction platinum-based chemotherapy cycles (paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 intravenously once every 3 weeks and carboplatin area under the curve [AUC]=6 once every 3 weeks, or cisplatin 80 mg/m2 intravenously once every 3 weeks and vinorelbine 30 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 and 60 mg/m2 orally [or 30 mg/m2 intravenously] on day 8 once every 3 weeks). Then they concomitantly received radiochemotherapy with platinum-based chemotherapy (three cycles for 8 weeks, with once per week paclitaxel 40 mg/m2 intravenously and carboplatin AUC=2 or cisplatin 80 mg/m2 intravenously and vinorelbine 20 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 and 40 mg/m2 orally (or 20 mg/m2 intravenously) on day 8 in 21-day cycles). The primary endpoint was the 15-month local control rate in the eligible patients who received at least one dose of concomitant radiochemotherapy. This RTEP7-IFCT-1402 trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02473133), and is ongoing. FINDINGS: From Nov 12, 2015, to July 7, 2021, we randomly assigned 158 patients (47 [30%] women and 111 [70%] men) to either the boosted radiotherapy group A (81 [51%]) or to the standard radiotherapy group B (77 [49%)]. In group A, 80 (99%) patients received induction chemotherapy and 68 (84%) received radiochemotherapy, of whom 48 (71%) with residual uptake on [18F]FDG-PET after 42 Gy received a radiotherapy boost. In group B, all 77 patients received induction chemotherapy and 73 (95%) received radiochemotherapy. At the final analysis, the median follow-up for eligible patients who received radiochemotherapy (n=140) was 45·1 months (95% CI 39·3-48·3). The 15-month local control rate was 77·6% (95% CI 67·6-87·6%) in group A and 71·2% (95% CI 60·8-81·6%) in group B. Acute (within 90 days from radiochemotherapy initiation) grade 3-4 adverse events were observed in 20 (29%) of 68 patients in group A and 33 (45%) of 73 patients in group B, including serious adverse events in five (7%) patients in group A and ten (14%) patients in group B. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were febrile neutropenia (seven [10%] of 68 in group A vs 16 [22%] of 73 in group B), and anaemia (five [7%] vs nine [12%]). In the acute phase, two deaths (3%) occurred in group B (one due to a septic shock related to chemotherapy, and the other due to haemotypsia not related to study treatment), and no deaths occurred in group A. After 90 days, one additional treatment-unrelated death occurred in group A and two deaths events occurred in group B (one radiation pneumonitis and one pneumonia unrelated to treatment). INTERPRETATION: A thoracic radiotherapy boost, based on interim [18F]FDG-PET, led to a meaningful local control rate with no difference in adverse events between the two groups in organs at risk, in contrast with previous attempts at thoracic radiation intensification, warranting a randomised phase 3 evaluation of such [18F]FDG-PET-guided radiotherapy dose adaptation in patients with stage III NSCLC. FUNDING: Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique National 2014.

Radiotherapy or Autologous Stem-Cell Transplantation for Primary CNS Lymphoma in Patients 60 Years of Age and Younger: Results of the Intergroup ANOCEF-GOELAMS Randomized Phase II PRECIS Study.

PURPOSE: To determine the efficacy and toxicity of chemoimmunotherapy followed by either whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) or intensive chemotherapy and autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) as a first-line treatment of primary CNS lymphoma (PCNSL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Immunocompetent patients (18 to 60 years of age) with untreated PCNSL were randomly assigned to receive WBRT or ASCT as consolidation treatment after induction chemotherapy consisting of two cycles of R-MBVP (rituximab 375 mg/m2 day (D) 1, methotrexate 3 g/m2 D1; D15, VP16 100 mg/m2 D2, BCNU 100 mg/m2 D3, prednisone 60 mg/kg/d D1-D5) followed by two cycles of R-AraC (rituximab 375 mg/m2 D1, cytarabine 3 g/m2 D1 to D2). Intensive chemotherapy consisted of thiotepa (250 mg/m2/d D9; D8; D7), busulfan (8 mg/kg D6 through D4), and cyclophosphamide (60 mg/kg/d D3; D2). WBRT delivered 40 Gy (2 Gy/fraction). The primary end point was 2-year progression-free survival. Cognitive outcome was the main secondary end point. Analysis was intention to treat in a noncomparative phase II trial. RESULTS: Between October 2008 and February 2014, 140 patients were recruited from 23 French centers. Both WBRT and ASCT met the predetermined threshold (among the first 38 patients in each group, at least 24 patients were alive and disease free at 2 years). The 2-year progression-free survival rates were 63% (95% CI, 49% to 81%) and 87% (95% CI, 77% to 98%) in the WBRT and ASCT arms, respectively. Toxicity deaths were recorded in one and five patients after WBRT and ASCT, respectively. Cognitive impairment was observed after WBRT, whereas cognitive functions were preserved or improved after ASCT. CONCLUSION: WBRT and ASCT are effective consolidation treatments for patients with PCNSL who are 60 years of age and younger. The efficacy end points tended to favor the ASCT arm. The specific risk of each procedure should be considered.

Lung cancer in renal transplant recipients: A case-control study.

INTRODUCTION: Solid organ transplant patients are at heightened risk of several cancers compared to the general population. Secondary to a higher number of procedures and better survival after transplantation, cancer is a rising health concern in this situation. Limited data exist for lung cancer (LC) after renal transplantation. We report here the most important series of renal transplant recipients with lung cancer. METHODS: Retrospective study of all cases of LC diagnosed in three French Renal Transplant Units from 2003 to 2012. A control group consisted of non-transplant patients with LC matched with the cases for age (<30; 30-50; 50-65; >65 years), gender and diagnosis date. We recruited two controls for each case. RESULTS: Thirty patients (median age 60 years; range 29-85; male/female ratio 80/20%) with LC were analysed. LC incidence was 1.89/1000 person-years over the period 2008-2012. All patients were former or active smokers (median 30 pack-years). Transplanted patients had significantly more comorbidities, mainly cardiovascular disease. The median interval of time from kidney transplantation (KT) to diagnosis of LC was 7 years (range 0.5-47 years). LC was incidentally diagnosed in 40%. Most patients (70%) had advanced LC (stage III or IV) disease. Stage of LC at diagnosis was similar in cases and controls. Surgery and chemotherapy were proposed to the same proportion of patients. In cases, mortality was cancer related in 87% and median survival time after diagnosis was 24 months. Survival was not significantly different between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: Despite frequent medical and radiological examinations, diagnosis of LC is usually made at an advanced stage and the overall prognosis remains poor.

Locoregional treatment for breast carcinoma after Hodgkin's lymphoma: the breast conservation option.

PURPOSE: To report clinical and pathologic characteristics and outcome of breast cancer (BC) after irradiation for Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL) in women treated at the Institut Curie, with a special focus on the breast-conserving option. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Medical records of 72 women who developed either ductal carcinoma in situ or Stage I-III invasive carcinoma of the breast after HL between 1978 and 2009 were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: Median age at HL diagnosis was 23 years (range, 14-53 years). Median total dose received by the mediastinum was 40 Gy, mostly by a mantle-field technique. Breast cancers occurred after a median interval of 21 years (range, 5-40 years). Ductal invasive carcinoma and ductal carcinoma in situ represented, respectively, 51 cases (71%) and 14 cases (19%). Invasive BCs consisted of 47 cT0-2 tumors (82%), 5 cN1-3 tumors (9%), and 20 Grade 3 tumors (35%). Locoregional treatment for BCs consisted of mastectomy with (3) or without (36) radiotherapy in 39 patients and lumpectomy with (30) or without (2) adjuvant radiotherapy in 32 patients. The isocentric lateral decubitus radiation technique was used in 17 patients after breast-conserving surgery (57%). With a median follow-up of 7 years, 5-year overall survival rate and locoregional control rate were, respectively, 74.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 64-88%) and 82% (95% CI, 72-93%) for invasive carcinoma and 100% (95% CI, 100 -100%) and 92% (95% CI, 79-100%) for in situ carcinoma. In patients with invasive tumors, the 5-year distant disease-free survival rate was 79% (95% CI, 69-91%), and 13 patients died of progressive BC. Contralateral BC was diagnosed in 10 patients (14%). CONCLUSIONS: Breast-conserving treatment can be an option for BCs that occur after HL, despite prior thoracic irradiation. It should consist of lumpectomy and adjuvant breast radiotherapy with use of adequate techniques, such as the lateral decubitus isocentric position, to protect the underlying heart and lung.

Is regional lymph node irradiation necessary in stage II to III breast cancer patients with negative pathologic node status after neoadjuvant chemotherapy?

PURPOSE: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) generally induces significant changes in the pathologic extent of disease. This potential down-staging challenges the standard indications of adjuvant radiation therapy. We assessed the utility of lymph node irradiation (LNI) in breast cancer (BC) patients with pathologic N0 status (pN0) after NAC and breast-conserving surgery (BCS). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Among 1,054 BC patients treated with NAC in our institution between 1990 and 2004, 248 patients with clinical N0 or N1 to N2 lymph node status at diagnosis had pN0 status after NAC and BCS. Cox regression analysis was used to identify factors influencing locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRR-FS), disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: All 248 patients underwent breast irradiation, and 158 patients (63.7%) also received LNI. With a median follow-up of 88 months, the 5-year LRR-FS and OS rates were respectively 89.4% and 88.7% with LNI and 86.2% and 92% without LNI (no significant difference). Survival was poorer among patients who did not have a pathologic complete primary tumor response (hazard ratio, 3.05; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-7.99) and in patients with N1 to N2 clinical status at diagnosis (hazard ratio = 2.24; 95% confidence interval, 1.15-4.36). LNI did not significantly affect survival. CONCLUSIONS: Relative to combined breast and local lymph node irradiation, isolated breast irradiation does not appear to be associated with a higher risk of locoregional relapse or death among cN0 to cN2 breast cancer patients with pN0 status after NAC. These results need to be confirmed in a prospective study.

Breast cancer with synchronous metastases: survival impact of exclusive locoregional radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: Several studies suggest that surgical excision of the primary tumor improves survival among patients with stage IV breast cancer at diagnosis. Exclusive locoregional radiotherapy (LRR) is an alternative form of locoregional treatment (LRT) in this setting. We retrospectively studied the impact of LRT on the survival of breast cancer patients with synchronous metastases. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Among 18,753 breast cancer patients treated in our institution between 1980 and 2004, 598 patients (3.2%) had synchronous metastasis at diagnosis. Demographic data, tumor characteristics, metastatic sites, and treatments were prospectively recorded. The impact of LRT on overall survival (OS) was evaluated by multivariate analysis including known prognostic factors. RESULTS: Among 581 eligible patients, 320 received LRT (group A), and 261 received no LRT (group B). LRT consisted of exclusive LRR in 249 patients (78%), surgery of the primary tumor with adjuvant LRR in 41 patients (13%), and surgery alone in 30 patients (9%). With a median follow-up time of 39 months, the 3-year OS rates were 43.4% and 26.7% in group A and group B (P =.00002), respectively. The association between LRT and improved survival was particularly marked in women with visceral metastases. LRT was an independent prognostic factor in multivariate analysis (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.70; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.85; P = .0002). The adjusted HR for late death (>or= 1 year) was 0.76 (95% CI, 0.61 to 0.96; P = .02). CONCLUSION: In our experience, LRT, consisting mainly of exclusive LRR, was associated with improved survival in breast cancer patients with synchronous metastases. Exclusive LRR may thus represent an active alternative to surgery.

Brain metastases from breast carcinoma: validation of the radiation therapy oncology group recursive partitioning analysis classification and proposition of a new prognostic score.

PURPOSE: To validate the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Recursive Partitioning Analysis (RTOG RPA) classification and determine independent prognostic factors, to create a simple and specific prognostic score for patients with brain metastases (BM) from breast carcinoma treated with whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: From January 1998 through December 2003, 132 patients with BM from breast carcinoma were treated with WBRT. We analyzed several potential predictors of survival after WBRT: age, Karnofsky performance status, RTOG-RPA class, number of BM, presence and site of other systemic metastases, interval between primary tumor and BM, tumor hormone receptor (HR) status, lymphocyte count, and HER-2 overexpression. RESULTS: A total of 117 patients received exclusive WBRT and were analyzed. Median survival with BM was 5 months. One-year and 2-year survival rates were 27.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 19.9-36.8%) and 12% (95% CI 6.5-21.2%), respectively. In multivariate analysis, RTOG RPA Class III, lymphopenia (< or =0.7 x 10(9)/L) and HR negative status were independent prognostic factors for poor survival. We constructed a three-factor prognostic scoring system that predicts 6-month and 1-year rates of overall survival in the range of 76.1-29.5% (p = 0.00033) and 60.9-15.9% (p = 0.0011), respectively, with median survival of 15 months, 5 months, or 3 months for patients with none, one, or more than one adverse prognostic factor(s), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the prognostic value of the RTOG RPA classification, lymphopenia, and tumor HR status, which can be used to form a prognostic score for patients with BM from breast carcinoma.