ACR-ACNM-ASTRO-SNMMI Practice Parameter for the Performance of Therapy With Radium-223.

AIM/OBJECTIVES/BACKGROUND: The goal of therapy with unsealed radiopharmaceutical sources is to provide either cure or significant prolongation of disease-specific survival, and effective reduction and/or prevention of adverse disease-related symptoms or untoward events while minimizing treatment-associated side effects and complications. Radium-223 dichloride (radium-223) is an alpha particle-emitting isotope used for targeted bone therapy. This practice parameter is intended to guide appropriately trained and licensed physicians performing therapy with radium-223. Such therapy requires close cooperation and communication between the physicians who are responsible for the clinical management of the patient and those who administer radiopharmaceutical therapy and manage the attendant side effects. Adherence to this parameter should help to maximize the efficacious use of radium-223, maintain safe conditions, and ensure compliance with applicable regulations. METHODS: This practice parameter was developed according to the process described on the American College of Radiology (ACR) website ("The Process for Developing ACR Practice Parameters and Technical Standards," www.acr.org/ClinicalResources/Practice-Parameters-and-Technical-Standards) by the Committee on Practice Parameters of the ACR Commission on Radiation Oncology in collaboration with the American College of Nuclear Medicine (ACNM), the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), and the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (SNMMI). All these societies contributed to the development of the practice parameter and approved the final document. RESULTS: This practice parameter addresses the many factors which contribute to appropriate, safe, and effective clinical use of radium-223. Topics addressed include qualifications and responsibilities of personnel, specifications of patient examination and treatment; documentation, radiation safety, quality control/improvement, infection control, and patient education. CONCLUSIONS: This practice parameter is intended as a tool to guide clinical use of radium-223 with the goal of facilitating safe and effective medical care based on current knowledge, available resources and patient needs. The sole purpose of this document is to assist practitioners in achieving this objective.

Anti-CD22 90Y-epratuzumab tetraxetan combined with anti-CD20 veltuzumab: a phase I study in patients with relapsed/refractory, aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

A lingering criticism of radioimmunotherapy in non-Hodgkin lymphoma is the use of cold anti-CD20 antibody along with the radiolabeled anti-CD20 antibody. We instead combined radioimmunotherapy with immunotherapy targeting different B-cell antigens. We evaluated the anti-CD22 (90)Y-epratuzumab tetraxetan with the anti-CD20 veltuzumab in patients with aggressive lymphoma in whom at least one prior standard treatment had failed, but who had not undergone stem cell transplantation. Eighteen patients (median age 73 years, median of 3 prior treatments) received 200 mg/m(2) veltuzumab once-weekly for 4 weeks, with (90)Y-epratuzumab tetraxetan at planned doses in weeks 3 and 4, and (111)In-epratuzumab tetraxetan in week 2 for imaging and dosimetry. Veltuzumab effectively lowered levels of B cells in the blood prior to the radioimmunotherapy doses. No significant immunogenicity or change in pharmacokinetics of either agent occurred in combination. (111)In imaging showed tumor targeting with acceptable radiation dosimetry to normal organs. For (90)Y-epratuzumab tetraxetan, transient myelosuppression was dose-limiting with 6 mCi/m(2) (222 MBq/m(2)) × 2 being the maximal tolerated dose. Of 17 assessable patients, nine (53%) had objective responses according to the 2007 revised treatment response criteria, including three (18%) complete responses (2 relapsing after 11 and 13 months, 1 continuing to be clinically disease-free at 19 months), and six (35%) partial responses (1 relapsing after 14 months, 5 at 3 - 7 months). Responses occurred in patients with different lymphoma histologies, treated at different (90)Y dose levels, and with a predicted risk of poor outcome, most importantly including five of the six patients treated with the maximal tolerated dose (2 of whom achieved durable complete responses). In conclusion, the combination of (90)Y-epratuzumab tetraxetan and veltuzumab was well-tolerated with encouraging therapeutic activity in this difficult-to-treat population.

The new golden era for radioimmunotherapy: not just for lymphomas anymore.

BACKGROUND: Radioimmunotherapy (RIT) has been approved for the treatment of B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas in the United States for more than a decade. However, the history of the development of RIT agents for advanced-stage solid malignancies dates back much further, and recent advances have renewed interest in this approach for solid tumors. METHODS: This paper reviews available evidence for the preclinical and clinical development of RIT agents for solid tumors. RESULTS: Several RIT agents have been studied for the treatment of a variety of solid malignancies, particularly colorectal, breast, prostate, ovarian, pancreatic, hepatocellular, and primary brain tumors. Multiple novel RIT agents are in active clinical investigation, either as single agents or combined with radiosensitizing chemotherapy or with external beam radiotherapy. Improvements in antibody (and antibody fragment) design and the availability of novel radionuclides have improved the therapeutic window for these agents. CONCLUSIONS: RIT for solid malignancies shows promise, typically with fewer adverse events than traditional cytotoxic systemic therapy. The greatest efficacy will likely be in the adjuvant setting of minimal residual disease. Newer radionuclides, particularly alpha-emitters, offer increased antitumor potency with less toxicity. Physicians and patients should be encouraged to participate in clinical trials of these promising agents.

Cetuximab plus cisplatin, irinotecan, and thoracic radiotherapy as definitive treatment for locally advanced, unresectable esophageal cancer: a phase-II study of the SWOG (S0414).

INTRODUCTION: The specific aims of the study were to evaluate the 2-year overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), toxicity profile, and best objective response rate in patients with locally advanced, clinically unresectable esophageal cancer receiving cetuximab, cisplatin, irinotecan, and thoracic radiotherapy (TRT) within a multi-institutional cooperative-group setting. METHODS: Eligible patients (cT4 M0 or medically unresectable, biopsy proven, and noncervical esophageal cancer) were to receive four 21-day cycles of cetuximab 400 mg/m (day 1, cycle 1), cetuximab 250 mg/m (day 8, 15, cycle 1; then days 1, 8, and 15 for subsequent cycles), cisplatin 30 mg/m (days 1 and 8, all cycles), and irinotecan 65 mg/m (days 1 and 8, all cycles). TRT was administered at 1.8 Gy in 28 daily fractions to a total dose of 50.4 Gy, to begin with on day 1 of cycle 3. The primary endpoint was 2-year OS, with an accrual goal of 75 patients with adenocarcinoma. RESULTS: The study was closed because of slow accrual, with 21 eligible patients (11 squamous, 10 adenocarcinoma) enrolled from May 2005 to September 2007. Two-year OS and PFS (95% confidence interval [CI]) were 33.3% (14.6-57.0%) and 23.8% (8.2-47.2%), respectively. Kaplan-Meier estimates of median (95% CI) OS and PFS were 11.2 (6.4-43.6) and 6.4 (3.7-12.0) months, respectively. The overall response rate (95% CI) among 17 evaluable patients was 17.6% (3.8-43.4%), including 6% confirmed complete responders and 12% unconfirmed partial responders. Two deaths resulted from protocol treatment (sudden death and gastrointestinal necrosis). Ten (47.6%) and 6 (28.6%) patients had grade-3 or -4 toxicity, respectively: 52.4% were hematologic, 23.8% had fatigue, 19.0% had nausea, 19.0% had dehydration, and 19.0% had anorexia. CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant cetuximab, cisplatin, irinotecan, and TRT were poorly tolerated in the first North American cooperative group trial testing this regimen for locally advanced esophageal cancer as treatment-related mortality approached 10%. Single-institution phase-II cetuximab-based combined modality trials have yielded encouraging results in preliminary analyses. The SWOG GI Committee endorses enrollment to open clinical trials to clarify the therapeutic ratio of cetuximab-based combined modality approaches for esophageal cancer.

Myeloablative hematopoietic cell transplantation for acute lymphoblastic leukemia: analysis of graft sources and long-term outcome.

PURPOSE: Analysis of hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) for high-risk or recurrent acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) using different donor sources is confounded by variable conditioning and supportive care. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We studied 623 consecutive ALL myeloablative HCT (1980 to 2005). Donors were autologous (n = 209), related (RD; n = 245), unrelated (URD; n = 100), and umbilical cord blood (UCB; n = 69). RESULTS: After median of 8.3 years of follow-up, 5-year overall survival (OS), leukemia-free survival (LFS), and relapse were 29% (95% CI, 26% to 32%), 26% (95% CI, 23% to 29%), and 43% (95% CI, 39% to 47%), respectively. Treatment-related mortality (TRM) at 2 years was 28% (95% CI, 25% to 31%). Mismatched URD sources yielded higher TRM (relative risk [RR], 2.2; P < .01) and lower OS (RR, 1.5; P = .05) than RD or UCB HCT. Autografting yielded significantly more relapse (68%; 95% CI, 59% to 77%; P < .01) and poorer LFS (14%; 95% CI, 10% to 18%; P = .01). HCT in first complete remission (CR1) yielded significantly better outcomes than later HCT. In a 1990 to 2005 allogeneic CR1/second complete response cohort, 5-year OS, LFS, and relapse rates were 41% (95% CI, 35% to 47%), 38% (95% CI, 32% to 44%), and 25% (95% CI, 19% to 31%), respectively; 2-year TRM was 34% (95% CI, 28% to 40%). With RD, well-matched URD and UCB sources, 5-year LFS was 40% (95% CI, 31% to 49%), 42% (95% CI, 14% to 70%), and 49% (95% CI, 34% to 64%), respectively, while relapse was 31% (95% CI, 22% to 40%), 17% (95% CI, 0% to 37%), and 27% (95% CI, 13% to 41%). Acute graft-versus-host disease was associated with fewer relapses. Since 1995, we noted progressive improvements in OS, LFS, and TRM. CONCLUSION: Allogeneic, but not autologous, HCT for ALL results in durable LFS. Importantly, HCT using UCB led to similar outcomes as either RD or well-matched URD. HCT in early remission can best exploit the potent antileukemic efficacy of allografting from UCB, RD, or URD sources.