Reirradiation versus systemic therapy versus combination therapy for recurrent high-grade glioma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of survival and toxicity.

PURPOSE: This review compares reirradiation (reRT), systemic therapy and combination therapy (reRT & systemic therapy) with regards to overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), adverse effects (AEs) and quality of life (QoL) in patients with recurrent high-grade glioma (rHGG). METHODS: A search was performed on PubMed, Scopus, Embase and CENTRAL. Studies reporting OS, PFS, AEs and/or QoL and encompassing the following groups were included; reirradiation vs systemic therapy, combination therapy vs systemic therapy, combination therapy vs reRT, and bevacizumab-based combination therapy vs reRT with/without non-bevacizumab-based systemic therapy. Meta-analyses were performed utilising a random effects model. Certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE. RESULTS: Thirty-one studies (three randomised, twenty-eight non-randomised) comprising 2084 participants were included. In the combination therapy vs systemic therapy group, combination therapy improved PFS (HR 0.57 (95% CI 0.41-0.79); low certainty) and OS (HR 0.73 (95% CI 0.56-0.95); low certainty) and there was no difference in grade 3 + AEs (RR 1.03 (95% CI 0.57-1.86); very low certainty). In the combination therapy vs reRT group, combination therapy improved PFS (HR 0.52 (95% CI 0.38-0.72); low certainty) and OS (HR 0.69 (95% CI 0.52-0.93); low certainty). In the bevacizumab-based combination therapy vs reRT with/without non-bevacizumab-based systemic therapy group, adding bevacizumab improved PFS (HR 0.46 (95% CI 0.27-0.77); low certainty) and OS (HR 0.42 (95% CI 0.24-0.72; low certainty) and reduced radionecrosis (RR 0.17 (95% CI 0.06-0.48); low certainty). CONCLUSIONS: Combination therapy may improve OS and PFS with acceptable toxicities in patients with rHGG compared to reRT or systemic therapy alone. Particularly, combining bevacizumab with reRT prophylactically reduces radionecrosis. REGISTRATION: CRD42022291741.

Risk factors for immune-related adverse events from anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 treatment in an Asian cohort of nonsmall cell lung cancer patients.

Immune-related adverse events (IrAEs) of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) can be serious and unpredictable. We examine the incidence rate and risk factors for IrAEs in an Asian cohort of nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with immunotherapy. Between June 2014 and August 2020, we retrospectively analysed IrAEs in NSCLC patients treated with anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 inhibitors at the National University Cancer Institute, Singapore. A Poisson regression model was used to estimate the effect of risk factors on incidence rate of any grade IrAEs. One hundred and forty-one patients were enrolled. Median age was 63. Majority were male (67%) with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) PS 0-1 (77%). More than half (56%) received pembrolizumab. Eleven percent harboured epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation. Eighteen percent received concomitant chemotherapy. Median number of cycles was 4, and median duration of treatment was 2.1 months. IrAEs were seen in 71 (50.4%) patients, with an incidence rate of 99 events per 1000 person-months. Fatigue (25%), rash (10.5%) and pneumonitis (7.9%) were the most common IrAEs. Twenty out of 152 IrAEs (13.2%) were Grade 3 or higher in severity: most common being pneumonitis (5.3%), fatigue (3.3%) and transaminitis (1.3%). Multivariable analysis demonstrated that concomitant chemotherapy use, higher BMI and presence of EGFR mutation are significant predictors for IrAEs (P < .0001; P = .016; P = .007). Our findings can help guide risk stratification and monitoring of IrAEs among NSCLC patients on immunotherapy.

Should adjuvant radiotherapy be used in atypical meningioma (WHO grade 2) following gross total resection? A systematic review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The role of adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) following gross total resection (GTR) in atypical meningioma (AM) is not well established and its benefit remains unclear. We aim to evaluate the survival benefit of adjuvant RT in AM following GTR. METHODS: We searched biomedical databases for studies published between January 1964-February 2021 and included studies reporting primary outcomes of 5-year PFS, 5-year OS and had survival curves for restricted mean survival time (RMST) calculations. Data extracted from survival curves were pooled and analyzed using a random-effects model. Hazard ratio (HR) was calculated for sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: We included 12 non-randomized studies comprising 1,078 patients. 803 (74.5%) patients were treated with GTR alone and 275 (25.5%) patients received adjuvant RT. In 9 studies, RT included 3 D conformal RT, intensity modulated RT, or fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy); in 3 studies, stereotactic radiosurgery was also used. Median dose of RT was 59.4 Gy. Adjuvant RT resulted in an increase of 3.9 months for restricted mean PFS truncated at 5 years (95% CI 0.23-7.72; p = 0.037) and a 22% reduction in the hazard of disease progression or death (hazards ratio 0.78; 95% CI 0.46-1.33; p = 0.370). Restricted mean OS, truncated at 5 years, was improved with adjuvant RT by 1.1 months (95% CI 0.37-1.81; p = 0.003) and a 21% reduction in the hazard of death from any cause (HR 0.79; 95% CI 0.51-1.24; p = 0.310). Meta-regression analysis of the RMST of EBRT dose did not reveal any significant difference in PFS or OS between studies reporting median dose of <59.4 Gy vs. ≥ 59.4 Gy. CONCLUSION: Adjuvant RT following GTR in patients with AM improved restricted mean PFS and OS. While we await the results from ongoing randomized controlled trials, adjuvant RT should be recommended.

Survival rates and safety associated with chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery and chemoradiotherapy alone for patients with T4 esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment approach for T4 esophageal cancer is not well established. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the survival rates and safety of chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery (CRT-S) and chemoradiotherapy alone (CRT) in patients with T4 Nany M0 esophageal cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched databases for eligible prospective or retrospective studies. The outcomes of interest were overall survival (OS) at 1, 3 and 5 years, treatment-related fistula formation and mortality rates. Meta-analyses were performed using the random effects models separately for studies evaluating CRT-S and CRT. Subgroup analyses were performed based on histology, radiation dose, chemotherapy regimen and duration of the interval between CRT and surgery. RESULTS: We identified 23 studies including 1,119 patients with predominantly squamous cell carcinoma (93%) and adenocarcinoma (3%) histology. The OS rates of patients receiving CRT-S were 65%, 36% and 20% at 1, 3 and 5 years, respectively. The OS rates of patients receiving CRT were 30%, 11% and 10% at 1, 3 and 5 years, respectively. Treatment-related fistula formation rates were 4% for CRT-S and 9% for CRT. Treatment-related mortality rates were 3% for both groups. Subgroup analyses showed that the interval of >2 months between CRT and surgery was associated with significantly improved OS rates at 1, 3 and 5 years. CONCLUSION: Chemoradiotherapy is an efficacious treatment approach for T4 esophageal cancer, with clinically acceptable rates of treatment-related fistula formation and mortality. Tri-modality approach with surgery can be considered in carefully selected patients. Our study findings should be interpreted with caution due to the lack of high-quality evidence. Randomized controlled trials are warranted to confirm these findings.

Weekly versus tri-weekly paclitaxel with carboplatin for first-line treatment in women with epithelial ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Epithelial ovarian cancer is the sixth most common cancer worldwide: 295,414 new cases were diagnosed in 2018, with 184,799 deaths. The lack of an effective screening strategy has led to the majority of women being diagnosed at an advanced stage. For these women, intravenous carboplatin combined with paclitaxel for six cycles is widely accepted as the standard first-line treatment for epithelial ovarian cancer, in combination with debulking surgery. However, there is conflicting evidence regarding the optimal dosing schedule of paclitaxel when combined with carboplatin in this setting. OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of intravenous weekly paclitaxel with that of tri-weekly paclitaxel, in combination with intravenous carboplatin, as first-line treatment for epithelial ovarian cancer (defined as epithelial ovarian, primary peritoneal and fallopian tube cancer). SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase databases for relevant studies up to 15 November 2021, using keywords and MeSH terms. We additionally handsearched conference libraries, online clinical trial databases and screened through lists of retrieved references. SELECTION CRITERIA: We Included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing weekly paclitaxel in combination with carboplatin versus tri-weekly paclitaxel in combination with carboplatin, for treatment of newly-diagnosed epithelial ovarian cancer. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used the hazard ratio (HR) to estimate the primary efficacy outcomes progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). We used the risk ratio (RR) to estimate the primary toxicity outcome of severe neutropenia and secondary outcomes of quality of life (QoL) and treatment-related adverse events. Two review authors independently selected studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias, using standard Cochrane methodological procedures. We included individual participant data (IPD) from one of the included studies, ICON-8, provided by the study team. We analysed data using a random-effects model in Review Manager 5.4 software. Additionally, we reconstructed IPD for PFS and OS data from published Kaplan-Meier curves from all studies and subsequently pooled these to analyse the two primary efficacy outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: From 2469 records, we identified four eligible RCTs with data for 3699 participants. All eligible studies were included in the main meta-analysis and reported on PFS and OS. There was likely a slight improvement in PFS when paclitaxel was dosed weekly compared to tri-weekly (HR 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 0.98; 4 studies, 3699 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We found little to no improvement in OS when paclitaxel was dosed weekly compared to tri-weekly (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.06; 4 studies, 3699 participants; high-certainty evidence). There was likely little to no difference in high-grade (grade 3 or 4) neutropenia when paclitaxel was dosed weekly compared to tri-weekly (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.43; 4 studies, 3639 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). However, weekly paclitaxel increased high-grade (grade 3 or 4) anaemia when compared to tri-weekly dosing (RR 1.57, 95% CI 1.12 to 2.20; 4 studies, 3639 participants; high-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference in high-grade neuropathy when paclitaxel was dosed weekly compared to tri-weekly (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.94; 4 studies, 3639 participants; low-certainty evidence). The overall risk of detection bias and performance bias was low for OS, but was unclear for other outcomes, as treatments were not blinded. The risk of bias in other domains was low or unclear. We note that OS data were immature for three of the included studies (GOG-0262, ICON-8 and MITO-7). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Weekly paclitaxel combined with carboplatin for first-line treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer likely improves PFS slightly (moderate-certainty evidence) but not OS (high-certainty evidence), compared to tri-weekly paclitaxel combined with carboplatin. However, this was associated with increased risk for high-grade anaemia, treatment discontinuation, dose delays and dose omissions (high- to low-certainty evidence). Our findings may not apply to women receiving bevacizumab in first-line therapy, those receiving treatment in the neo-adjuvant setting, or those with rare subtypes of clear cell or mucinous ovarian cancer.

Palliative radiotherapy for bladder cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: The optimal dose fractionation for palliative radiotherapy (RT) in patients with symptomatic advanced bladder cancer is unclear. This study aimed to determine if a higher dose of RT was associated with improved symptoms response rates. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Central and Embase for eligible studies published from 1990 to 2019. The primary outcomes were symptoms response rates for hematuria, dysuria and frequency. Secondary outcomes included treatment-related adverse events and quality of life. RESULTS: We found one randomized, four prospective and eight retrospective non-comparative observational studies including 1320 patients who received palliative bladder radiotherapy for symptom relief. The dose fractionation schedules varied across studies ranging from 8 Gy single fraction to 60 Gy in 2 to 8 Gy per fraction. The pooled response rates for hematuria, dyuria and frequency symptoms were 74%, 58% and 71% respectively. A higher dose of RT was not associated with improved response rates of hematuria and frequency. However, a higher dose of RT was associated with a longer duration of hematuria response and reduced response of dysuria. Grade 3 gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity occurred in up to 26% of patients. Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) outcomes were reported in one study. CONCLUSION: This systematic review demonstrates that a higher dose of bladder RT was not associated with improved response rates of hematuria and frequency symptoms but was associated with reduced response of dysuria. Higher doses of bladder RT was associated with more durable hematuria response. Prospective studies to determine the effects of palliative bladder radiotherapy on HRQOL outcomes are warranted.

Impact of programmed death-ligand 1 expression on the patients of stage IV non-small cell lung cancer harboring epidermal growth factor receptor mutation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: To determine the impact of programed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression on progression-free survival (PFS) outcomes in stage IV epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with first-line EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). MATERIAL AND METHODS: We searched biomedical databases for studies comparing PFS outcomes of PD-L1-positive versus (vs) PD-L1-negative tumors. We assessed the methodological quality of eligible studies using ROBINS-I tool. We employed a two-staged meta-analysis approach by reconstructing individual patient data of each study from the published Kaplan-Meier curves and then pooling the individual hazard ratios (HRs) and weighted mean differences (WMDs) for restricted mean PFS time at 6 (RMPFST6) and 12 (RMPFST12) months using random-effect models. We assessed the quality of summarized evidence using GRADE approach. RESULTS: We identified five non-randomized comparative studies including 435 patients. The overall risk of bias in the methodological quality of included studies was moderate. PD-L1-positive tumors were associated with significantly worse PFS outcomes compared to PD-L1-negative tumors (HR: 2.41, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.59-3.66, p < .001; WMD in RMPFST6: -1.01, 95% CI: -1.65 to -0.37, p = .002; WMD in RMPFST12: -2.64, 95% CI: -4.40 to -0.88, p = .003). Subgroup analysis showed that the effect of PD-L1 expression on PFS outcomes was greater for studies using older-generation rather than third-generation TKIs (HR: 2.69 vs 1.22, p = .069; WMD in RMPFST6: -1.23 vs -0.07, p = .005; WMD in RMPFST12: -3.29 vs -0.12, p = .003). The quality of summarized evidence was judged to be low. CONCLUSION: There is low certainty in the evidence to suggest that positive PD-L1 expression is associated with inferior disease control and survival outcomes in patients with stage IV EGFR-mutated NSCLC treated with first-line EGFR TKIs.

Frequency of discordance in programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression between primary tumors and paired distant metastases in advanced cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: To determine the frequency of discordance in programmed death-ligand 1(PD-L1) expression between primary tumors and paired distant metastases in advanced cancers.Methods: We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for eligible studies and assessed their methodologic quality using QUADAS-2 tool. We estimated the discordant rates (positive to negative or vice versa) of PD-L1 expression in primary tumors and paired distant metastases using logistic-normal random effects model. We performed subgroup analyses based on the PD-L1 status of primary tumors (positive or negative), location of primary tumors (lung or others) and distant metastases (central nervous system or others), timing of distant metastases (synchronous or metachronous), positivity thresholds of PD-L1 expression (1% or 5%) and types of antibody clones used (E1L3N or SP142).Results: Thirteen eligible studies including 451 cases were identified. The included studies were judged to have low to unclear risk of bias. The pooled estimate of discordant rates in PD-L1 expression was 31% (95% CI= 19-47%), with high heterogeneity across the studies (I2 = 75%). There was no significant effect modification in the discordant rates according to the predefined subgroups.Conclusion: Approximately one-third of advanced cancer cases have discordance in PD-L1 expression between primary tumors and paired distant metastases. A more liberal testing of PD-L1 expression in both primary and metastatic tumors is recommended in order to identify patients who may benefit from immune checkpoint blockade treatment. Further research exploring the mechanisms and its impact are warranted.

Re-irradiation for recurrent glioblastoma (GBM): a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To determine the efficacy and toxicity of re-irradiation for patients with recurrent GBM. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched various biomedical databases from 1998 to 2018, for eligible studies where patients were treated with re-irradiation for recurrent GBM. Outcomes of interest were 6 and 12-month overall survival (OS-6, OS-12), 6 and 12-month progression free survival (PFS-6, PFS-12) and serious (Grade 3 +) adverse events (AE). We used the random effects model to pool outcomes across studies and compared pre-defined subgroups using interaction test. Methodological quality of each study was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scoring system. RESULTS: We found 50 eligible non-comparative studies including 2095 patients. Of these, 42% were of good or fair quality. The pooled results were as follows: OS-6 rate 73% (95% confidence interval (CI) 69-77%), OS-12 rate 36% (95% CI 32-40%), PFS-6 rate 43% (95% CI 35-50%), PFS-12 rate 17% (95% CI 13-20%), and Grade 3 + AE rate 7% (95% CI 4-10%). Subgroup analysis showed that prospective studies reported higher toxicity rates, and studies which utilized brachytherapy to have a longer OS-12. Within the external beam radiotherapy group, there was no dose-response [above or below 36 Gy in 2 Gy equivalent doses (EQD2)]. However, a short fractionation regimen (≤ 5 fractions) seemed to provide superior PFS-6. CONCLUSION: The available evidence, albeit mostly level III, suggests that re-irradiation provides encouraging disease control and survival rates. Toxicity was not uniformly reported, but seemed to be low from the included studies. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) are needed to establish the optimal management strategy for recurrent GBM.

Chemoradiotherapy versus chemoradiotherapy plus surgery for esophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Please see Appendix 4 for a glossary of terms.The outcome of patients with esophageal cancer is generally poor. Although multimodal therapy is standard, there is conflicting evidence regarding the addition of esophagectomy to chemoradiotherapy. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness and safety of chemoradiotherapy plus surgery with that of chemoradiotherapy alone in people with nonmetastatic esophageal carcinoma. SEARCH METHODS: We performed a computerized search for relevant studies, up to Feburary 2017, on the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase databases using MeSH headings and keywords. We searched five online databases of clinical trials, handsearched conference proceedings, and screened reference lists of retrieved papers. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing chemoradiotherapy plus esophagectomy with chemoradiotherapy alone for localized esophageal carcinoma. We excluded RCTs comparing chemotherapy or radiotherapy alone with esophagectomy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently selected studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and the quality of the evidence, using standardized Cochrane methodological procedures. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), estimated with Hazard Ratio (HR). Secondary outcomes, estimated with risk ratio (RR), were local and distant progression-free survival (PFS), quality of life (QoL), treatment-related mortality and morbidity, and use of salvage procedures for dysphagia. Data were analyzed using a random effects model in Review Manager 5.3 software. MAIN RESULTS: From 2667 references, we identified two randomized studies, in six reports, that included 431 participants. All participants were clinically staged to have at least T3 and/or node positive thoracic esophageal carcinoma, 93% of which was squamous cell histology. The risk of methodological bias of the included studies was low to moderate.High-quality evidence found the addition of esophagectomy had little or no difference on overall survival (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.24; P = 0.92; I² = 0%; two trials). Neither study reported PFS, therefore, freedom from loco-regional relapse was used as a proxy. Moderate-quality evidence suggested that the addition of esophagectomy probably improved freedom from locoregional relapse (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.76; P = 0.0004; I² = 0%; two trials), but low-quality evidence suggested it may increase the risk of treatment-related mortality (RR 5.11, 95% CI 1.74 to 15.02; P = 0.003; I² = 2%; two trials).The other pre-specified outcomes (quality of life, treatment-related toxicity, and use of salvage procedures for dysphagia) were reported by only one study, which found very low-quality evidence that use of esophagectomy was associated with reduced short-term QoL (MD 0.93, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.62), and low-quality evidence that it reduced use of salvage procedures for dysphagia (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.75). Neither study compared treatment-related morbidity between treatment groups. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on the available evidence, the addition of esophagectomy to chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, provides little or no difference on overall survival, and may be associated with higher treatment-related mortality. The addition of esophagectomy probably delays locoregional relapse, however, this end point was not well defined in the included studies. It is undetermined whether these results can be applied to the treatment of adenocarcinomas, tumors involving the distal esophagus and gastro-esophageal junction, and to people with poor response to chemoradiation.

Surgery or radiosurgery plus whole brain radiotherapy versus surgery or radiosurgery alone for brain metastases.

BACKGROUND: The benefits of adding upfront whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) to surgery or stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) when compared to surgery or SRS alone for treatment of brain metastases are unclear. OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and safety of surgery or SRS plus WBRT with that of surgery or SRS alone for treatment of brain metastases in patients with systemic cancer. SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) up to May 2013 and annual meeting proceedings of ASCO and ASTRO up to September 2012 for relevant studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing surgery or SRS plus WBRT with surgery or SRS alone for treatment of brain metastases. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors undertook the quality assessment and data extraction. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes include progression free survival (PFS), local and distant intracranial disease progression, neurocognitive function (NF), health related quality of life (HRQL) and neurological adverse events. Hazard ratios (HR), risk ratio (RR), confidence intervals (CI), P-values (P) were estimated with random effects models using Revman 5.1 MAIN RESULTS: We identified five RCTs including 663 patients with one to four brain metastases. The risk of bias associated with lack of blinding was high and impacted to a greater or lesser extent on the quality of evidence for all of the outcomes. Adding upfront WBRT decreased the relative risk of any intracranial disease progression at one year by 53% (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.66, P value < 0.0001, I(2) =34%, Chi(2) P value = 0.21, low quality evidence) but there was no clear evidence of a difference in  OS (HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.48, P value = 0.47, I(2) = 52%, Chi(2) P value = 0.08, low quality evidence) and PFS (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.10, P value = 0.14, I(2) = 16%, Chi(2) P value = 0.28, low quality evidence). Subgroup analyses showed that the effects on overall survival were similar regardless of types of focal therapy used, number of brain metastases, dose and sequence of WBRT. The evaluation of the impact of upfront WBRT on NF, HRQL and neurological adverse events was limited by the unclear and high risk of reporting, performance and detection bias, and inconsistency in the instruments and methods used to measure and report results across studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is low quality evidence that adding upfront WBRT to surgery or SRS decreases any intracranial disease progression at one year. There was no clear evidence of an effect on overall and progression free survival. The impact of upfront WBRT on neurocognitive function, health related quality of life and neurological adverse events was undetermined due to the high risk of performance and detection bias, and inconsistency in the instruments and methods used to measure and report results across studies.

Accuracy of (18)F-flurodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the staging of newly diagnosed nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The specific role of 18F-flurodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) in staging of nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) remains to be validated. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to assess the accuracy of staging FDG-PET/CT for newly diagnosed NPC. METHODS: We searched various biomedical databases and conference proceedings for relevant studies. We determined the pooled sensitivities and specificities, diagnostic odds ratios (DOR) and constructed summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves using the hierarchical regression model. RESULTS: 15 relevant studies including 851 patients were identified. Five addressed primary tumor (T), nine addressed regional lymph nodes (N) and seven addressed distant metastasis (M). The combined sensitivity estimate for FDG-PET/CT in T classification was 0.77 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59-0.95). For N classification, combined sensitivity was 0.84 (95% CI 0.76-0.91), specificity was 0.90 (95% CI 0.83-0.97), DOR was 82.4 (23.2-292.6) and Q*-index was 0.90. For M classification, the combined sensitivity estimate was 0.87 (95% CI 0.74-1.00), specificity was 0.98 (95% CI 0.96-1.00), DOR was 120.9 (43.0-340.0) and Q*-index was 0.89. CONCLUSION: FDG-PET/CT showed good accuracy in N and M but not T classification for newly diagnosed NPC. FDG-PET/CT, together with Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the nasopharynx, should be part of the routine staging investigations.

Stroke Risk in Survivors of Head and Neck Cancer.

Importance: Survivors of head and neck cancers (HNC) have increased risk of stroke. A comprehensive report using standardized methods is warranted to characterize the risk and to inform on survivorship strategy. Objective: To determine the stroke risk in subpopulations of survivors of HNC in Singapore. Design, Setting, and Participants: This national, registry-based, cross-sectional study aimed to estimate stroke risk in subgroups of the HNC population between January 2005 and December 2020. Participants were identified from the Singapore Cancer Registry, the Singapore Stroke Registry, and the Registry of Birth and Deaths using relevant International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) and International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision, Australian Modification (ICD-10-AM) codes. HNC subgroups were defined based on patient demographic, disease, and treatment factors. Data were analyzed from September 2022 to September 2023. Exposure: Diagnosis of HNC. Main Outcomes and Measures: Both ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke were studied. The age-standardized incidence rate ratio (SIRR) and age-standardized incidence rate difference (SIRD) were reported. The Singapore general population (approximately 4 million) served as the reference group for these estimations. Results: A total of 9803 survivors of HNC (median [IQR] age at diagnosis, 58 [49-68] years; 7166 [73.1%] male) were identified. The most common HNC subsites were nasopharynx (4680 individuals [47.7%]), larynx (1228 individuals [12.5%]), and tongue (1059 individuals [10.8%]). A total of 337 individuals (3.4%) developed stroke over a median (IQR) follow-up of 42.5 (15.0-94.5) months. The overall SIRR was 2.46 (95% CI, 2.21-2.74), and the overall SIRD was 4.11 (95% CI, 3.37-4.85) strokes per 1000 person-years (PY). The cumulative incidence of stroke was 3% at 5 years and 7% at 10 years after HNC diagnosis. The SIRR was highest among individuals diagnosed at younger than 40 years (SIRR, 30.55 [95% CI, 16.24-52.35]). All population subsets defined by age, sex, race and ethnicity, HNC subsites (except tongue), stage, histology, and treatment modalities had increased risk of stroke compared with the general population. The SIRR and SIRD were significantly higher among individuals who had a primary radiation treatment approach (SIRR, 3.01 [95% CI, 2.64-3.43]; SIRD, 5.12 [95% CI, 4.18-6.29] strokes per 1000 PY) compared with a primary surgery approach (SIRR, 1.64 [95% CI, 1.31-2.05]; SIRD, 1.84 [95% CI, 0.923.67] strokes per 1000 PY). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of survivors of HNC, elevated stroke risks were observed across different age, subsites, and treatment modalities, underscoring the importance of early screening and intervention.

Protocol for a systematic review with prospective individual patient data meta-analysis in EGFR-mutant NSCLC with brain metastases to assess the effect of SRS+osimertinib compared to osimertinib alone: the STARLET Collaboration.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with activating mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene are a heterogeneous population who often develop brain metastases (BM). The optimal management of patients with asymptomatic brain metastases is unclear given the activity of newer-generation targeted therapies in the central nervous system. We present a protocol for an individual patient data (IPD) prospective meta-analysis to evaluate whether the addition of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) before osimertinib treatment will lead to better control of intracranial metastatic disease. This is a clinically relevant question that will inform practice. METHODS: Randomised controlled trials will be eligible if they include participants with BM arising from EGFR-mutant NSCLC and suitable to receive osimertinib both in the first-line and second-line settings (P); comparisons of SRS followed by osimertinib versus osimertinib alone (I, C) and intracranial disease control included as an endpoint (O). Systematic searches of Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), CINAHL (EBSCO), PsychInfo, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform's Search Portal will be undertaken. An IPD meta-analysis will be performed using methodologies recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration. The primary outcome is intracranial progression-free survival, as determined by response assessment in neuro-oncology-BM criteria. Secondary outcomes include overall survival, time to whole brain radiotherapy, quality of life, and adverse events of special interest. Effect differences will be explored among prespecified subgroups. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approved by each trial's ethics committee. Results will be relevant to clinicians, researchers, policymakers and patients, and will be disseminated via publications, presentations and media releases. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42022330532.

Dosimetric comparison between Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) vs dual arc Volumetric Arc Therapy (VMAT) for nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC): Systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Previous non-randomised studies comparing dosimetric outcomes between advanced techniques such as IMRT and VMAT reported conflicting findings. We thus sought to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to consolidate the findings of these studies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched PUBMED and EMBASE for eligible studies from their time of inception to 10 March 2022. A random effects model was used to estimate the pooled mean differences (MDs) and their 95% confidence intervals(CIs) for target volume coverage, organ-at-risk(OAR) doses, monitor units(MUs) and treatment delivery times. We also performed a subgroup analysis to evaluate if different treatment planning systems (TPS) (Eclipse, Monaco and Pinnacle) used affected the pooled mean differences. RESULTS: A total of 17 studies (383 patients) were eligible to be included. The pooled results showed that dual arc VMAT reduced D2% of PTV (MD=0.71Gy,95%CI=0.14-1.27,P=0.01), mean left cochlea dose (MD=2.6Gy,95%CI=0.03-5.16,P=0.05), mean right cochlea dose (MD=3.4Gy,95%CI=0.7-6.1,P=0.01), MUs (MD=554.9,95%CI=245.8-863.9,P=0.0004), treatment delivery times (MD=6.7mins,95%CI=4.5-8.9,P<0.0001) and integral dose (MD=0.97Gy,95%CI=0.28-1.67,P=0.006). None of the other indices were significantly better for the IMRT plans. The subgroup analysis showed that the integral dose was significantly lower only for Eclipse (MD=0.88Gy, 95%CI=0.14-1.63, P=0.02). The total MUs was significantly lower only for Eclipse (MD=1035.2, 95%CI=624.6-1445.9, P<0.0001) and Pinnacle (MD=293, 95%CI=15.6-570.5, P=0.04). Similarly, delivery time was also significantly lower only for Eclipse (MD=6.1mins, 95%CI=5.7-6.5, P<0.0001) and Pinnacle (MD=4.9mins, 95%CI=2.6-7.2, P<0.0001). The subgroup analysis however showed that target coverage was superior for the IMRT plans for both Pinnacle (MD=0.48Gy, 95%CI=0.31-0.66, P<0.0001) and Monaco (MD=0.12Gy, 95%CI=0.07-0.17, P<0.0001). CONCLUSION: Dual-arc VMAT plans improved OAR doses, MUs and treatment times as compared to IMRT plans. The different TPS used may modify dosimetric outcomes.

Clinical Trial and Real-World Outcomes of Patients With Metastatic NSCLC in the Post-Platinum-Based Chemotherapy Failure Setting.

Introduction: A literature review was undertaken to identify clinical trials and real-world studies of patients with stage IV NSCLC who had progressed on or after treatment with platinum-based chemotherapy. Methods: The EMBASE and MEDLINE databases were used to search for English-language studies published between September 28, 2017, and September 28, 2021. Studies were included in the review if they (1) were clinical trials or real-world analyses of one or more treatment regimens for patients with stage IV NSCLC who had progressed on or after treatment with platinum-based chemotherapy, (2) contained an end point including efficacy, effectiveness, or safety, and (3) included 45 or more patients. Results: In total, there were 15 publications (nine unique trials and three real-world studies) included. Sample size ranged from 49 to 1253 patients. At least one treatment arm in eight of the nine clinical trials reported an overall response rate of ≥15%. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival ranged from 1.9 to 5.2 months and 5.4 to 15.4 months in clinical trials and 4.4 to 6.8 months and 8.3 to 18.0 months in real-world studies, respectively. Within studies reporting median PFS, a median PFS of more than or equal to 3 months was reported in eight of 11 clinical trials and both real-world studies. Discontinuation due to adverse events ranged from 1.9% to 18% across all included studies. Conclusions: Patients with stage IV NSCLC had limited response and a high burden of adverse events during treatment after progression on platinum-containing chemotherapy. There remains a pressing unmet need for additional, effective, and tolerable treatment options in this setting.

Factors Predictive of Primary Resistance to Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Patients with Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Primary resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) is observed in routine clinical practice. We sought to determine factors predictive of primary resistance to ICI monotherapy, defined by the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) as progression within 6 months of ICI treatment with patients receiving at least 6 weeks of ICI monotherapy, in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHOD: Patients with stage IV NSCLC treated with at least 6 weeks of single-agent ICI at two tertiary hospitals in Singapore were included. A multivariate logistic regression model was utilised to elucidate factors predictive of primary resistance to ICI. RESULTS: Of the 108 eligible patients, 59 (54.6%) experienced primary resistance. The majority were male (65.7%), smokers (66.3%), Chinese (79.6%), had adenocarcinoma (76.9%), received Pembrolizumab (55.6%) and received immunotherapy treatment in the later line setting (≥2 lines) (61.1%). Female gender (aOR = 3.16, p = 0.041), a sixth-week neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) of ≥3) (aOR = 3.454, p = 0.037) and a later line of immunotherapy treatment (≥2 lines) (aOR = 2.676, p = 0.040) were factors predictive of primary resistance to ICI monotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC. CONCLUSIONS: Using SITC criteria, an elevated NLR (≥3) at 6 weeks, female gender and a later line of immunotherapy treatment (≥2 lines) were predictive factors of developing primary resistance to ICI monotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC.

Management Paradigm of Central Nervous System Metastases in NSCLC: An Australian Perspective.

Life-prolonging central nervous system active systemic therapies for metastatic NSCLC have increased the complexity of managing brain metastases (BMs). Australian medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, and neurosurgeons discussed the evidence guiding the diverse clinical approaches to the management of BM in NSCLC. The Australian context is broadly applicable to other jurisdictions; therefore, we have documented these discussions as principles with broader applications. Patient management was stratified according to clinical and radiologic factors under two broad classifications of newly diagnosed BMs: symptomatic and asymptomatic. Other important considerations include the number and location of metastases, tumor histotypes, molecular subtype, and treatment purpose. Careful consideration of the pace and burden of symptoms, risk of worsening neurologic function at a short interval, and extracranial disease burden should determine whether central nervous system active systemic therapies are used alone or in combination with local therapies (surgery with or without radiation therapy). Most clinical trial evidence currently focuses on historical treatment options or a single treatment modality rather than the optimal sequencing of multiple modern therapies; therefore, an individualized approach is key in a rapidly changing therapeutic landscape.

Restaging of rectal cancer with hybrid positron emission tomography magnetic resonance imaging after preoperative chemoradiotherapy.

Introduction: This study determines the sensitivity and specificity of positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (PET/MRI) parameters in predicting treatment response in patients with localised rectal cancer who have undergone preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT). Method: Patients with stage I-III adenocarcinoma of the rectum planned for preoperative CRT followed by surgery were recruited. Patients had PET/MRI scans at baseline and 6-8 weeks post-CRT. Functional MRI and PET parameters were assessed for their diagnostic accuracy for tumour regression grade (TRG). Nonparametric receiver operating characteristic analysis was employed to determine the area under the ROC curve (AUC), and the sensitivity and specificity of each quantile cut-off. Results: A total of 31 patients were recruited, of whom 20 completed study protocol. All patients included had mid or lower rectal tumours. There were 16 patients (80%) with node-positive disease at presentation. The median time to surgery was 75.5 days (range 52-106 days). Histopathological assessment revealed 20% good responders (TRG 1/2), and the remaining 80% of patients had a poor response (TRG 3/4). When predicting good responders, the AUC values for percent maximum thickness reduction and percent apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) change were 0.82 and 0.73, respectively. A maximum thickness reduction cut-off of >47% and a percent ADC change of >20% yielded a sensitivity and specificity of 75%/95% and 75%/73%, respectively. Conclusion: Parameters such as percent maximum thickness reduction and percent ADC change may be useful for predicting good responders in patients undergoing preoperative CRT for rectal cancer. Larger studies are warranted to establish the utility of PET/MRI in rectal cancer staging.

Prevention of Oxaliplatin-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Oxaliplatin-induced peripheral neuropathy (OIPN) has significant clinical impact on the quality of life for cancer patients and is a dose limiting toxicity. Trials studying preventive measures have been inconclusive. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to evaluate the existing pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions to prevent chronic OIPN. METHODS: Literature databases PubMed-MEDLINE, Embase and Scopus, were searched from 1 Jan 2005 to 08 Aug 2020 and major conferences' abstracts were reviewed for randomized controlled trials that examined the efficacy of any preventive measure for OIPN. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of chronic OIPN with a preventive intervention as compared to placebo or no intervention. The pooled risk ratio and its 95% confidence interval were calculated using a random effects model. A network meta-analysis was conducted to derive indirect evidence of any preventive effect of an intervention against placebo when original trials compared one intervention against another. RESULTS: Forty-four trials were analyzed describing 29 chemoprotective interventions, including combinations, and 1 non-pharmacological intervention. Ratings were assessed via a combination of outcomes with quality assessment using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) framework. Of the 30 interventions examined, there were six interventions supporting potential efficacy, 11 interventions with insufficient evidence and 13 interventions not recommended. CONCLUSION: Currently, there is insufficient certainty to support any intervention as effective in preventing OIPN. Of note is that most of these studies have focused on pharmacological interventions; non-pharmacological interventions are underexplored. Further research on ways to limit OIPN is needed. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=225095, Prospero Registration Number: CRD42021225095.