Clinical outcomes of melanoma brain metastases treated with nivolumab and ipilimumab alone versus nivolumab and ipilimumab with stereotactic radiosurgery.

PURPOSE: Upfront dual checkpoint blockade with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) has demonstrated efficacy for treating melanoma brain metastases (MBM) in asymptomatic patients. Whether the combination of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) with dual checkpoint blockade improves outcomes over dual-checkpoint blockade alone is unknown. We evaluated clinical outcomes of patients with MBM receiving ICI with nivolumab and ipilimumab, with and without SRS. METHODS: 49 patients with 158 MBM receiving nivolumab and ipilimumab for untreated MBM between 2015 and 2022 were identified at our institution. Patient and tumor characteristics including age, Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS), presence of symptoms, cancer history, MBM burden, and therapy course were recorded. Outcomes measured from initiation of MBM-directed therapy included overall survival (OS), local control (LC), and distant intracranial control (DIC). Time-to-event analysis was conducted with the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: 25 patients with 74 MBM received ICI alone, and 24 patients with 84 MBM received concurrent SRS. Median follow-up was 24 months. No differences in age (p = 0.96), KPS (p = 0.85), presence of symptoms (p = 0.79), prior MBM (p = 0.68), prior MBM-directed surgery (p = 0.96) or SRS (p = 0.68), MBM size (p = 0.67), or MBM number (p = 0.94) were seen. There was a higher rate of nivolumab and ipilimumab course completion in the SRS group (54% vs. 24%; p = 0.029). The SRS group received prior immunotherapy more often than the ICI alone group (54% vs. 8.0%; p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in 1-year OS (72% vs. 71%, p = 0.20) and DIC (63% v 51%, p = 0.26) between groups. The SRS group had higher 1-year LC (92% vs. 64%; p = 0.002). On multivariate analysis, LC was improved with combination therapy (AHR 0.38, p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: In our analysis, patients who received SRS with nivolumab and ipilimumab had superior LC without increased risk of toxicity or compromised immunotherapy treatment completion despite the SRS cohort having higher rates of prior immunotherapy. Further prospective study of combination nivolumab and ipilimumab with SRS is warranted.

Stereotactic radiosurgery and anti-PD-1 + CTLA-4 therapy, anti-PD-1 therapy, anti-CTLA-4 therapy, BRAF/MEK inhibitors, BRAF inhibitors, or conventional chemotherapy for the management of melanoma brain metastases.

BACKGROUND: Immunotherapy and targeted BRAF/MEK inhibitors (i) have revolutionised the systemic management of advanced melanoma. Given the role of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) in the local management of brain metastases, we sought to evaluate clinical outcomes in patients with melanoma brain metastases (MBM) treated with SRS and various systemic therapies. METHODS: Patients were included if MBM were diagnosed and treated with SRS within 3 months of receiving anti-PD-1+CTLA-4 therapy, anti-PD-1 therapy, anti-CTLA-4 therapy, BRAF/MEK-i, BRAF-i, or conventional chemotherapy. Comparisons between groups were made for overall survival (OS), distant MBM control, local MBM, systemic progression-free survival (sPFS), and neurotoxicity. RESULTS: In total, 257 patients with 1048 MBM treated over 368 SRS sessions between 2011 and 2020 were identified. On MVA, treatment with anti-PD1+anti-CTLA-4, anti-PD-1, and BRAF/MEK-i improved distant intracranial control over conventional chemotherapy. No significant differences were noted in local control (LC) between groups (p = 0.78). Kaplan-Meier OS at 12 months for anti-PD-1 + CTLA-4 therapy, anti-PD-1 therapy, anti-CTLA-4 therapy, BRAF/MEK-i, BRAF-i, and conventional chemotherapy was 68%, 59%, 45%, 62%, 21%, and 15%, respectively (p = <0.0001). The sPFS rates at 12 months were 57%, 53%, 42%, 45%, 14%, and 6% (p = <0.0001). No significant differences were noted in rates of radiation necrosis (p = 0.93). CONCLUSIONS: This is among the largest series evaluating MBM treated with SRS and various systemic therapy regimens. Our analysis noted significant differences in OS, distant MBM control, and sPFS by systemic therapy. No differences in LC or radiation necrosis risk were noted.

Clinical outcomes of non-small cell lung cancer brain metastases treated with stereotactic radiosurgery and immune checkpoint inhibitors, EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors, chemotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors, or chemotherapy alone.

OBJECTIVE: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) are commonly used in the systemic management of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) brain metastases (BMs). However, optimizing control of NSCLC BM with stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and various systemic therapies remains an area of investigation. METHODS: Between 2016 and 2019, the authors identified 171 NSCLC BM patients with 646 BMs treated with single-fraction SRS within 3 months of receiving treatment with ICIs (n = 56; 33%), EGFR-TKI (n = 30; 18%), chemotherapy and ICIs (n = 23; 14%), or standard chemotherapy alone (n = 62; 36%). Time-to-event analysis was conducted, and outcomes included distant intracranial control (DIC), local control (LC), and overall survival from SRS. RESULTS: The median follow-up from BM diagnosis was 8.9 months (range 0.3-127 months). The 12-month Kaplan-Meier DIC rates were 37%, 53%, 41%, and 21% (p = 0.047) for the ICI, EGFR-TKI, ICI and chemotherapy, and chemotherapy-alone groups, respectively. On multivariate analysis, DIC was improved with EGFR-TKI (HR 0.4, 95% CI 0.3-0.8, p = 0.005) compared with conventional chemotherapy and treatment with SRS before systemic therapy (HR 0.5, 95% CI 0.3-0.9, p = 0.03) compared with after; and LC was improved with SRS before (HR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2-0.9, p = 0.03) or concurrently (HR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1-0.6, p = 0.003) compared with after. No differences in radionecrosis were noted by timing or type of systemic therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The authors' analysis showed significant differences in DIC based on receipt of systemic therapy and treatment with SRS before systemic therapy improved DIC. Prospective evaluation of the potential synergism between systemic therapy and SRS in NSCLC BM management is warranted.

Clinical assessment of a biophysical model for distinguishing tumor progression from radiation necrosis.

PURPOSE: The efficacy of an imaging-driven mechanistic biophysical model of tumor growth for distinguishing radiation necrosis from tumor progression in patients with enhancing lesions following stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for brain metastasis is validated. METHODS: We retrospectively assessed the model using 73 patients with 78 lesions and histologically confirmed radiation necrosis or tumor progression. Postcontrast T1-weighted MRI images were used to extract parameters for a mechanistic reaction-diffusion logistic growth model mechanically coupled to the surrounding tissue. The resulting model was then used to estimate mechanical stress fields, which were then compared with edema visualized on FLAIR imaging using DICE similarity coefficients. DICE, model, and standard radiographic morphometric analysis parameters were evaluated using a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for prediction of radiation necrosis or tumor progression. Multivariate logistic regression models were then constructed using mechanistic model parameters or advanced radiomic features. An independent validation was performed to evaluate predictive performance. RESULTS: Tumor cell proliferation rate resulted in ROC AUC = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.76-0.95, P < 0.0001, 74% sensitivity and 95% specificity) and DICE similarity coefficient associated with high stresses demonstrated an ROC AUC = 0.93, 95% CI: 0.86-0.99, P < 0.0001, 81% sensitivity and 95% specificity. In a multivariate logistic regression model using an independent validation dataset, mechanistic modeling parameters had an ROC AUC of 0.95, with 94% sensitivity and 96% specificity. CONCLUSIONS: Imaging-driven biophysical modeling of tumor growth represents a novel method for accurately predicting clinically significant tumor behavior.

Surgical resection and postoperative radiosurgery versus staged radiosurgery for large brain metastases.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to retrospectively evaluate the new treatment paradigm of staged stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for the treatment of large brain metastases (BM) compared to the standard of surgical resection followed by SRS. METHODS: We evaluated 78 patients with large BM treated 2012-2017 with surgical resection and postoperative SRS (surgery + SRS) or staged SRS separated by 1 month. Overall survival (OS) was estimated using the Kaplan Meier method and compared across groups using the log-rank test. Cumulative incidence of neurologic death and local and distant brain failure (LF, DBF) were estimated using competing risk methodology. RESULTS: Forty patients were treated with surgery + SRS and 38 patients were treated with staged SRS. Median follow-up was 23.2 months (95% CI 20.5-39.3). Median OS was 13.2 months for staged SRS compared to surgery + SRS 9.7 months (p = 0.53). Cumulative incidence of neurologic death at 1 year was 23% after surgery + SRS, 27% after staged SRS (p = 0.69); cumulative incidence of LF at 1 year was 6% and 8% (p = 0.65) and 1-year DBF was 59% and 21% (p ≤ 0.01). Overall rates of leptomeningeal failure and radiation necrosis were similar between the groups (p = 0.63 and p = 1.0). CONCLUSIONS: Though surgery and postoperative SRS is the standard, staged SRS represents an attractive treatment paradigm for treating large BM without sacrificing LC or survival, and potentially decreases DBF. Prospective studies are needed to validate these findings.