Latin American Consensus on the Treatment of Head and Neck Cancer.

Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is well known as a serious health problem worldwide, especially in low-income countries or those with limited resources, such as most countries in Latin America. International guidelines cannot always be applied to a population from a large region with specific conditions. This study established a Latin American guideline for care of patients with head and neck cancer and presented evidence of HNSCC management considering availability and oncologic benefit. A panel composed of 41 head and neck cancer experts systematically worked according to a modified Delphi process on (1) document compilation of evidence-based answers to different questions contextualized by resource availability and oncologic benefit regarding Latin America (region of limited resources and/or without access to all necessary health care system infrastructure), (2) revision of the answers and the classification of levels of evidence and degrees of recommendations of all recommendations, (3) validation of the consensus through two rounds of online surveys, and (4) manuscript composition. The consensus consists of 12 sections: Head and neck cancer staging, Histopathologic evaluation of head and neck cancer, Head and neck surgery-oral cavity, Clinical oncology-oral cavity, Head and neck surgery-oropharynx, Clinical oncology-oropharynx, Head and neck surgery-larynx, Head and neck surgery-larynx/hypopharynx, Clinical oncology-larynx/hypopharynx, Clinical oncology-recurrent and metastatic head and neck cancer, Head and neck surgery-reconstruction and rehabilitation, and Radiation therapy. The present consensus established 48 recommendations on HNSCC patient care considering the availability of resources and focusing on oncologic benefit. These recommendations could also be used to formulate strategies in other regions like Latin America countries.

Common Sense (Radiation) Oncology: Redefining targets in radiotherapy.

In 2023, the Common Sense Oncology (CSO) movement was launched with the goal of recalibrating cancer care to focus on outcomes that matter to patients. We extend the three CSO pillars - evidence generation, interpretation and communication - to radiation oncology and advocate for better evidence demonstrating the value of our modality.

Real-World Evidence on the Use of Endocrine Therapy for Ductal Carcinoma In Situ in Patients Treated With Breast-Conserving Surgery Followed by Postoperative Radiation Therapy: A Brazilian Retrospective Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND: This study aims to evaluate the reproducibility of findings from randomized controlled trials regarding adjuvant hormone therapy (HT) for breast ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) in a real-life scenario. MATERIALS/METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used Fundação Oncocentro de São Paulo database. It included DCIS patients DCIS who received breast-conserving surgery and postoperative radiation therapy. The endpoints were local control (LC), breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: We analyzed 2192 patients treated between 2000 and 2020. The median FU was 48.99 months. Most patients (53.33%; n = 1169) received adjuvant HT. Patients not receiving adjuvant HT tend to be older (P = .021) and have a lower educational level (P < .001). At the end of FU, 1.5% of patients had local recurrence, and there was no significant difference between groups (P = .19). The 10-year OS and BCSS were 89.4% and 97.5% for adjuvant HT versus 91.5% and 98.5% for no adjuvant HT, respectively, and there were no significant differences between groups. The 10-year OS was 93.25% for medium/high education level versus 87.31% for low (HR for death 0.51; 95% CI, 0.32-0.83; P = .007). CONCLUSIONS: The benefits of adjuvant HT for DCIS were not reproduced in a Brazilian cohort. Education significantly impacted survival and HT usage, reflecting the influence of socioeconomic factors. These findings can allow for more precise interventions.

Recommended first-line management of asymptomatic brain metastases from EGFR mutant and ALK positive non-small cell lung cancer varies significantly according to specialty: an international survey of clinical practice.

Background: The role for radiotherapy or surgery in the upfront management of brain metastases (BrM) in epidermal growth factor receptor mutant (EGFRm) or anaplastic lymphoma kinase translocation positive (ALK+) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is uncertain because of a lack of prospective evidence supporting tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) monotherapy. Further understanding of practice heterogeneity is necessary to guide collaborative efforts in establishing guideline recommendations. Methods: We conducted an international survey among medical (MO), clinical (CO), and radiation oncologists (RO), as well as neurosurgeons (NS), of treatment recommendations for asymptomatic BrM (in non-eloquent regions) EGFRm or ALK+ NSCLC patients according to specific clinical scenarios. We grouped and compared treatment recommendations according to specialty. Responses were summarized using counts and percentages and analyzed using the Fisher exact test. Results: A total of 449 surveys were included in the final analysis: 48 CO, 85 MO, 60 NS, and 256 RO. MO and CO were significantly more likely than RO and NS to recommend first-line TKI monotherapy, regardless of the number and/or size of asymptomatic BrM (in non-eloquent regions). Radiotherapy in addition to TKI as first-line management was preferred by all specialties for patients with ≥4 BrM. NS recommended surgical resection more often than other specialties for BrM measuring >2 cm. Conclusions: Recommendations for the management of BrM from EGFRm or ALK+ NSCLC vary significantly according to oncology sub-specialties. Development of multidisciplinary guidelines and further research on establishing optimal treatment strategies is warranted.

Survival outcomes and predicting intracranial metastasis in stage III non-small cell lung cancer treated with definitive chemoradiation: Real-world data from a tertiary cancer center.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE: Around 30% of patients with non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) are diagnosed with stage III disease at presentation, of which about 50% are treated with definitive chemoradiation (CRT). Around 65-80% of patients will eventually develop intracranial metastases (IM), though associated risk factors are not clearly described. We report survival outcomes and risk factors for development of IM in a cohort of patients with stage III NSCLC treated with CRT at a tertiary cancer center. MATERIALS/METHODS: We identified 195 patients with stage III NSCLC treated with CRT from January 2010 to May 2021. Multivariable logistic regression was used to generate odds ratios for covariates associated with development of IM. Kaplan-Meier analysis with the Log Rank test was used for unadjusted time-to-event analyses. P-value for statistical significance was set at < 0.05 with a two-sided test. RESULTS: Out of 195 patients, 108 (55.4%) had stage IIIA disease and 103 (52.8%) had adenocarcinoma histology. The median age and follow-up (in months) was 67 (IQR 60-74) and 21 (IQR 12-43), respectively. The dose of radiation was 60 Gy in 30 fractions for148 patients (75.9%). Of the 77 patients who received treatment since immunotherapy was available and standard at our cancer center, 45 (58.4%) received at least one cycle. During follow-up, 84 patients (43.1%) developed any metastasis, and 33 (16.9%) developed IM (either alone or with extracranial metastasis). 150 patients (76.9%) experienced a treatment delay (interval between diagnosis and treatment > 4 weeks). Factors associated with developing any metastasis included higher overall stage at diagnosis (p = 0.013) and higher prescribed dose (p = 0.022). Factors associated with developing IM included higher ratio of involved over sampled lymph nodes (p = 0.001) and receipt of pre-CRT systemic or radiotherapy for any reason (p = 0.034). On multivariate logistical regression, treatment delay (OR 3.9, p = 0.036) and overall stage at diagnosis (IIIA vs. IIIB/IIIC) (OR 2.8, p = 0.02) predicted development of IM. These findings were sustained on sensitivity analysis using different delay intervals. Median OS was not reached for the overall cohort, and was 43.1 months for patients with IM and 40.3 months in those with extracranial-only metastasis (p = 0.968). In patients with any metastasis, median OS was longer (p = 0.003) for those who experienced a treatment delay (48.4 months) compared to those that did not (12.2 months), likely due to expedited diagnosis and treatment in patients with a higher symptom burden secondary to more advanced disease. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with stage III NSCLC treated with definitive CRT, the risk of IM appears to increase with overall stage at diagnosis and, importantly, may be associated with experiencing a treatment delay (> 4 weeks). Metastatic disease of any kind remains the primary life-limiting prognostic factor in these patients with advanced lung cancer. In patients with metastatic disease, treatment delay was associated with better survival. Patients who experience a treatment delay and those initially diagnosed at a more advanced overall stage may warrant more frequent surveillance for early diagnosis and treatment of IM. Healthcare system stakeholders should strive to mitigate treatment delay in patients with locally NSCLC to reduce the risk of IM. Further research is needed to better understand factors associated with survival, treatment delay, and the development of IM after CRT in the immunotherapy era.

The Choosing Wisely Oncology Canada Cancer List: An Update.

BACKGROUND: Choosing Wisely (CW) Canada is a national campaign to identify unnecessary or harmful services that are frequently used in Canada. The original CW Oncology Canada Cancer list was developed in 2014. A CW Oncology Canada working group was established to review new evidence and guidelines and to update the current CW Oncology Canada Cancer List. METHODS: Between January and March 2022, we conducted a survey of members of the Canadian Association of Medical Oncology (CAMO), Canadian Association of Radiation Oncology (CARO) and the Canadian Society of Surgical Oncology (CSSO). We took the feedback from the survey, including potential new recommendations as well as those that were thought to be no longer relevant and up to date, and conducted a literature review with the assistance of the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technology in Health (CADTH). The final updated list of recommendations was made by the CW Oncology Canada working group based on a consensus process. RESULTS: We reviewed two potential recommendations to add and two potential recommendations to remove from the existing CW Oncology Canada Cancer List. The recommendation "Do not prescribe whole brain radiation over stereotactic radiosurgery for patient with limited brain metastases (≤4 lesions)" was supported by several evidence-based guidelines with the strength of recommendations ranging from strong to moderate and the quality of evidence ranging from level 1 to level 3. After reviewing the evidence, the working group felt that the other potential recommendation to add and the two potential recommendations to remove did not have sufficient strength and quality of evidence at this time to be added or removed from the list. CONCLUSION: The updated Choosing Wisely Oncology Canada Cancer List consists of 11 items that oncologists should question in the treatment of patients with cancer. This list can be used to design specific interventions to reduce low value care.

Are the Choosing Wisely Canada Cancer recommendations relevant and up to date with the current evidence?

INTRODUCTION: The Choosing Wisely (CW) Canada campaign was launched in 2012 to identify low-value, unnecessary and/or harmful services that are frequently used. The CW Canada Cancer list was developed in 2014 by a task force convened by the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer. The list outlines ten harmful or low-value practices that oncologists should avoid. We conducted a study of oncologists to understand the familiarity with the current recommendations and whether these continue to be relevant and up to date. METHODS: An electronic survey was developed by the members of the CW Oncology Working Group and distributed to practicing oncologists. The survey consisted of questions on 1) the familiarity of the existing CW Canada Cancer list 2) the relevance of the current list to current evidence and 3) any recommendation(s) that could be added or removed from the existing list. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze responses and narrative analysis was used to identify themes in open-ended questions. RESULTS: Between January 14 and May 3, 2022, 151 survey responses were received (overall response rate of 20 %) from 68 medical oncologists (45 % of study cohort, response rate 32 %), 54 radiation oncologists (36 % of study cohort, response rate 14 %) and 29 surgical oncologists (19 % of study cohort, response rate 18 %). Seventy-nine percent (120/151) of respondents were familiar with the current list and 65 % (78/119) said they implemented the recommendations "always" or "most of the time". Eight recommendations had > 80 % agreement that they were relevant and up to date with current evidence. There was interest in adding a new recommendation to avoid whole brain radiation and consider stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) in patients with ≤ 4 brain metastases. CONCLUSIONS: There is excellent familiarity with the CW Canada Cancer list amongst the survey respondents and most recommendations continue to be relevant and up to date with current evidence. There is an opportunity to educate physicians about the intent of the campaign and to add a new recommendation on the use of SRS for patients with a limited number of brain metastases. There is also an opportunity to identify barriers at the patient, provider and institution level that are hindering adoption of the CW Canada Cancer list POLICY SUMMARY: This survey will impact implementation and publication of an updated CW Canada Cancer list.

Neurocognitive Performance in Adults Treated With Radiation for a Primary Brain Tumor.

Purpose: The contributory effects of radiation dose to different brain regions on neurocognitive performance after radiation therapy (RT) for primary brain tumors is not well known. Methods and Materials: In this retrospective cohort study, 30 patients with brain tumors treated with photon RT were identified, and radiation dosimetric parameters across brain regions were calculated. All patients had longitudinal neurocognitive evaluations at baseline and after treatment. Generalized estimating equations were used to model each neurocognitive endpoint over time in a multivariable analysis, while adjusted for multiple comparisons of brain regions. Results: Median follow-up from RT to last assessment was 4.1 years. Fewer years of formal education and older age at the time of RT were associated with lower scores in language, verbal memory, and working memory, after adjustment for baseline scores in multivariable analyses. Higher radiation dose to specific brain regions was not associated with declines in any of the evaluated cognitive domains. On average, there was no clinically significant decline (magnitude of z score change >1) between first and last neurocognitive evaluation. Across each individual cognitive domain, fewer than 15% of patients were impaired at most recent follow-up. Conclusions: In this small study of 30 patients treated with RT for a primary brain tumor, brain region dosimetry was not associated with decline in cognitive performance. Older age at time of RT and fewer years of formal education were associated with declines in cognitive performance, suggesting that effects of nondosimetric factors on cognitive performance should be considered alongside treatment factors and dosimetry in neuro-oncology research.

Barriers to Access: Global Variability in Implementing Treatment Advances in Lung Cancer.

Globally, lung cancer is the second most-diagnosed cancer and is the leading cause of cancer death. Advances in science and technology have contributed to improvements in primary cancer prevention, cancer diagnosis, and cancer therapy, leading to an increase in survival and improvement in quality of life. Many of these advances have been seen in high-income countries. Accessibility, availability, and affordability are key domains in barriers to access of care between countries and within countries. The impact of these domains, as they relate to molecular testing, radiation therapy, and systemic therapy, are discussed.

A Comparison of Hypofractionated and Twice-Daily Thoracic Irradiation in Limited-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer: An Overlap-Weighted Analysis.

Despite evidence for the superiority of twice-daily (BID) radiotherapy schedules, their utilization in practice remains logistically challenging. Hypofractionation (HFRT) is a commonly implemented alternative. We aim to compare the outcomes and toxicities in limited-stage small-cell lung cancer (LS-SCLC) patients treated with hypofractionated versus BID schedules. A bi-institutional retrospective cohort review was conducted of LS-SCLC patients treated with BID (45 Gy/30 fractions) or HFRT (40 Gy/15 fractions) schedules from 2007 to 2019. Overlap weighting using propensity scores was performed to balance observed covariates between the two radiotherapy schedule groups. Effect estimates of radiotherapy schedule on overall survival (OS), locoregional recurrence (LRR) risk, thoracic response, any ≥grade 3 (including lung, and esophageal) toxicity were determined using multivariable regression modelling. A total of 173 patients were included in the overlap-weighted analysis, with 110 patients having received BID treatment, and 63 treated by HFRT. The median follow-up was 20.4 months. Multivariable regression modelling did not reveal any significant differences in OS (hazard ratio [HR] 1.67, p = 0.38), LRR risk (HR 1.48, p = 0.38), thoracic response (odds ratio [OR] 0.23, p = 0.21), any ≥grade 3+ toxicity (OR 1.67, p = 0.33), ≥grade 3 pneumonitis (OR 1.14, p = 0.84), or ≥grade 3 esophagitis (OR 1.41, p = 0.62). HFRT, in comparison to BID radiotherapy schedules, does not appear to result in significantly different survival, locoregional control, or toxicity outcomes.

Tracking the Workforce 2020-2030: Making the Case for a Cancer Workforce Registry.

Existing literature has described the projected increase in cancer incidence and the associated deficiencies in the cancer workforce. However, there is currently a lack of research into the necessary policy and planning steps that can be taken to mitigate this issue. Herein, we review current literature in this space and highlight the importance of implementing oncology workforce registries. We propose the establishment of cancer workforce registries using the WHO Minimum Data Set for Health Workforce Registry by adapting the data set to suit the multidisciplinary nature of the cancer workforce. The cancer workforce registry will track the trends of the workforce, so that evidence can drive decisions at the policy level. The oncology community needs to develop and optimize methods to collect information for these registries. National cancer societies are likely to continue to lead such efforts, but ministries of health, licensing bodies, and academic institutions should contribute and collaborate.

Management of Diffuse Low-Grade Glioma: The Renaissance of Robust Evidence.

The surgical management of diffuse low-grade gliomas (DLGGs) has undergone a paradigm shift toward striving for maximal safe resection when feasible. While extensive observational data supports this transition, unbiased evidence in the form of high quality randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) is lacking. Furthermore, despite a high volume of molecular, genetic, and imaging data, the field of neuro-oncology lacks personalized care algorithms for individuals with DLGGs based on a robust foundation of evidence. In this manuscript, we (1) discuss the logistical and philosophical challenges hindering the development of surgical RCTs for DLGGs, (2) highlight the potential impact of well-designed international prospective observational registries, (3) discuss ways in which cutting-edge computational techniques can be harnessed to generate maximal insight from high volumes of multi-faceted data, and (4) outline a comprehensive plan of action that will enable a multi-disciplinary approach to future DLGG management, integrating advances in clinical medicine, basic molecular research and large-scale data mining.

Glioblastoma in the elderly: initial management.

Glioblastoma is the most common primary CNS malignancy and it is becoming more frequently diagnosed in the elderly population. Glioblastoma is associated with a dismal prognosis and remains a huge challenge for the neuro-oncology community. Surgical resection/biopsy is well defined as an important first approach in the care of this disease, for tumor diagnosis, molecular analysis and maximum resection. MGMT promoter methylation status has proved to be a useful indicator of whether single modality (RT or TMZ alone) or combined modality treatment may achieve better outcomes. Post-operative treatment options include: (I) hypofractionated radiotherapy (HRT) with concurrent and adjuvant temozolomide (TMZ) or (II) HRT alone (MGMT unmethylated patients); (III) TMZ alone (MGMT methylated patients) when combined modality is not feasible due to patient poor performance status or multiple comorbidities. Following the positive survival outcomes of the CCTG CE.6/EORTC 26062-22061 phase III trial which randomized newly diagnosed glioblastoma patients aged 65 or older to HRT (40 Gy/15 fractions) with concurrent and adjuvant temozolomide to HRT alone, combined modality therapy (CMT) with HRT with concurrent temozolomide as the initial post-surgical approach should be considered in patients well enough to have treatment. In meantime, future trials addressing new approaches are needed to improve outcomes in this fatal disease.

Spine radiosurgery for the local treatment of spine metastases: Intensity-modulated radiotherapy, image guidance, clinical aspects and future directions.

Many cancer patients will develop spinal metastases. Local control is important for preventing neurologic compromise and to relieve pain. Stereotactic body radiotherapy or spinal radiosurgery is a new radiation therapy technique for spinal metastasis that can deliver a high dose of radiation to a tumor while minimizing the radiation delivered to healthy, neighboring tissues. This treatment is based on intensity-modulated radiotherapy, image guidance and rigid immobilization. Spinal radiosurgery is an increasingly utilized treatment method that improves local control and pain relief after delivering ablative doses of radiation. Here, we present a review highlighting the use of spinal radiosurgery for the treatment of metastatic tumors of the spine. The data used in the review were collected from both published studies and ongoing trials. We found that spinal radiosurgery is safe and provides excellent tumor control (up to 94% local control) and pain relief (up to 96%), independent of histology. Extensive data regarding clinical outcomes are available; however, this information has primarily been generated from retrospective and nonrandomized prospective series. Currently, two randomized trials are enrolling patients to study clinical applications of fractionation schedules spinal Radiosurgery. Additionally, a phase I clinical trial is being conducted to assess the safety of concurrent stereotactic body radiotherapy and ipilimumab for spinal metastases. Clinical trials to refine clinical indications and dose fractionation are ongoing. The concomitant use of targeted agents may produce better outcomes in the future.

Postoperative nodal irradiation in breast cancer patients with 1 to 3 axillary lymph nodes involved: the debate continues .

Regional lymph node irradiation is usually indicated in patients with positive node breast cancer. However, there are some controversies regarding the clinical benefits of adding regional nodal irradiation to whole-breast or thoracic-wall irradiation after breast surgery especially for patients with 1 to 3 positive axillary lymph nodes. More recently, two important studies (NCIC MA.20 and EORTC 22,922-10925) were published to address this significant issue and some further points need to be discussed.