Combined nivolumab and ipilimumab with or without stereotactic body radiation therapy for advanced Merkel cell carcinoma: a randomised, open label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Merkel cell carcinoma is among the most aggressive and lethal of primary skin cancers, with a high rate of distant metastasis. Anti-programmed death receptor 1 (anti-PD-1) and programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) monotherapy is currently standard of care for unresectable, recurrent, or metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma. We assessed treatment with combined nivolumab plus ipilimumab, with or without stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in patients with advanced Merkel cell carcinoma as a first-line therapy or following previous treatment with anti-PD-1 and PD-L1 monotherapy. METHODS: In this randomised, open label, phase 2 trial, we randomly assigned adults from two cancer sites in the USA (one in Florida and one in Ohio) to group A (combined nivolumab and ipilimumab) or group B (combined nivolumab and ipilimumab plus SBRT) in a 1:1 ratio. Eligible patients were aged at least 18 years with histologically proven advanced stage (unresectable, recurrent, or stage IV) Merkel cell carcinoma, a minimum of two tumour lesions measureable by CT, MRI or clinical exam, and tumour tissue available for exploratory biomarker analysis. Patients were stratified by previous immune-checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) status to receive nivolumab 240 mg intravenously every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg intravenously every 6 weeks (group A) or the same schedule of combined nivolumab and ipilimumab with the addition of SBRT to at least one tumour site (24 Gy in three fractions at week 2; group B). Patients had to have at least two measurable sites of disease so one non-irradiated site could be followed for response. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) in all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of combined nivolumab and ipilimumab. ORR was defined as the proportion of patients with a complete response or partial response per immune-related Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours. Response was assessed every 12 weeks. Safety was assessed in all patients. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03071406. FINDINGS: 50 patients (25 in both group A and group B) were enrolled between March 14, 2017, and Dec 21, 2021, including 24 ICI-naive patients (13 [52%] of 25 group A patients and 11 [44%] of 25 group B patients]) and 26 patients with previous ICI (12 [48%] of 25 group A patients and 14 [56%] of 25 group B patients]). One patient in group B did not receive SBRT due to concerns about excess toxicity. Median follow-up was 14·6 months (IQR 9·1-26·5). Two patients in group B were excluded from the analysis of the primary endpoint because the target lesions were irradiated and so the patients were deemed non-evaluable. Of the ICI-naive patients, 22 (100%) of 22 (95% CI 82-100) had an objective response, including nine (41% [95% CI 21-63]) with complete response. Of the patients who had previously had ICI exposure, eight (31%) of 26 patients (95% CI 15-52) had an objective response and four (15% [5-36]) had a complete response. No significant differences in ORR were observed between groups A (18 [72%] of 25 patients) and B (12 [52%] of 23 patients; p=0·26). Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events were observed in 10 (40%) of 25 patients in group A and 8 (32%) of 25 patients in group B. INTERPRETATION: First-line combined nivolumab and ipilimumab in patients with advanced Merkel cell carcinoma showed a high ORR with durable responses and an expected safety profile. Combined nivolumab and ipilimumab also showed clinical benefit in patients with previous anti-PD-1 and PD-L1 treatment. Addition of SBRT did not improve efficacy of combined nivolumab and ipilimumab. The combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab represents a new first-line and salvage therapeutic option for advanced Merkel cell carcinoma. FUNDING: Bristol Myers Squibb Rare Population Malignancy Program.

Phase I dose escalation trial of stereotactic radiotherapy prior to robotic prostatectomy in high risk prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to investigate the safety of combining preoperative stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) with robotic radical prostatectomy (RP) for high risk prostate cancer (HRCaP). Many patients with HRCaP will require adjuvant or salvage radiotherapy after RP. The addition of preoperative SBRT before RP may spare patients from subsequent prolonged courses of RT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eligible patients had NCC N HRCaP and received a total of 25 Gy or 30 Gy in five daily fractions of SBRT to the prostate and seminal vesicles followed by robotic RP with pelvic lymphadenectomy 31-45 days later. The primary endpoint was prevalence of acute genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity. Secondary endpoints were patient-reported quality of life (QOL) and biochemical recurrence (BcR). RESULTS: Three patients received preoperative SBRT to 25 Gy and four received 30 Gy. Median follow-up was 18 months. Highest toxicity was grade 2 and 3 in six (85.7%) and one (14.3%) patients, respectively. All patients developed grade 2 erectile dysfunction and 4 of 7 (57%) developed grade 2 urinary incontinence (UI) within a month after surgery. One patient developed acute grade 3 UI, but there was no grade ≥ 4 toxicity. One patient experienced acute grade 2 hemorrhoidal bleeding. On QOL, acute GU complaints were common and peaked within 3 months. Bowel symptoms were mild. Two patients with pN+ experienced BcR. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative SBRT before robotic RP in HRCaP is feasible and safe. The severity of acute GU toxicity with preoperative SBRT may be worse than RP alone, while bowel toxicity was mild.

Novel Postoperative Hypofractionated Accelerated Radiation Dose-Painting Approach for Soft Tissue Sarcoma.

Purpose: Hypofractionated radiation therapy (RT) offers benefits in the treatment of soft tissue sarcomas (STS), including exploitation of the lower α/ß, patient convenience, and cost. This study evaluates the acute toxicity of a hypofractionated accelerated RT dose-painting (HARD) approach for postoperative treatment of STS. Methods and Materials: This is a retrospective review of 53 consecutive patients with STS who underwent resection followed by postoperative RT. Standard postoperative RT dosing for R0/R1/gross disease with sequential boost (50 Gy + 14/16/20 Gy in 32-35 fractions) were replaced with dose-painting, which adapts dose based on risk of disease burden, to 50.4 and 63, 64.4, 70 Gy in 28 fractions, respectively. The first 10 patients were replanned with a sequential boost RT approach and dosimetric indices were compared. Time-to-event outcomes, including local control, regional control, distant control, and overall survival, were estimated with Kaplan-Meier analysis. Results: Median follow-up was 25.2 months. Most patients had high-grade (59%) STS of the extremity (63%) who underwent resection with either R1 (40%) or close (36%) margins. Four patients experienced grade 3 acute dermatitis which resolved by the 3-month follow-up visit. The 2-year local control, regional control, distant control, and overall survival were 100%, 92%, 68%, and 86%, respectively. Compared with the sequential boost plan, HARD had a significantly lower field size (total V50 Gy; P = .002), bone V50 (P = .031), and maximum skin dose (P = .008). Overall treatment time was decreased by 4 to 7 fractions, which translated to a decrease in estimated average treatment cost of $3056 (range, $2651-$4335; P < .001). Conclusions: In addition to benefits in cost, convenience, and improved biologic effect in STS, HARD regimen offers a safe treatment approach with dosimetric advantages compared with conventional sequential boost, which may translate to improved long-term toxicity.

Clinical Outcomes of Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Leptomeningeal Disease Following Receipt of EGFR-Targeted Therapy, Immune-Checkpoint Blockade, Intrathecal Chemotherapy, or Radiation Therapy Alone.

BACKGROUND: EGFR-targeted therapy (ETT) and immune-checkpoint blockade (ICB) have shown promising results in treating NSCLC brain metastases (BM). However, little is known of their effect in treating leptomeningeal disease (LMD). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective review of 80 patients diagnosed with NSCLC LMD from January 2014 to March 2021. Patients were grouped based on initial LMD treatment: radiotherapy (RT) alone, ETT, ICB, and intrathecal chemotherapy (ITC). RESULTS: EGFR mutation was present in 22 patients (28%). Twenty patients had positive cytology in cerebrospinal fluid, while 60 patients were diagnosed based on MRI with clinical correlation. The RT alone group consisted primarily of whole brain radiation (n = 20; 77%), stereotactic radiation (n = 3; 12%), and palliative spine radiation (n = 2; 7%). There were no significant differences amongst the treatment groups in age, performance status, or neurologic symptoms. Overall, the 6-month overall survival (OS) and craniospinal progression free survival (CS-PFS) were 35% and 24%, respectively. The 6-month OS for the ETT, ICB, ITC, and RT alone groups was 64%, 33%, 57%, and 29% respectively (log-rank P = .026). The 6-month CS-PFS for the ETT, ICB, ITC, and RT alone groups was 43%, 33%, 29%, and 19% respectively (log-rank P = .049). Upon univariate analysis, receipt of ETT compared to RT alone reached significance for OS (HR 0.35, P = .006) and CS-PFS (HR 0.39, P = .013). CONCLUSIONS: The prognosis for patients with NSCLC LMD remains poor overall. However, the receipt of ETT for patients with EGFR-positive disease was associated with improved outcomes.

Novel Definitive Hypofractionated Accelerated Radiation Dose-painting (HARD) for Unresected Soft Tissue Sarcomas.

Purpose: Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) are historically radioresistant, with surgery being an integral component of their treatment. With their low α/ß, STS may be more responsive to hypofractionated radiation therapy (RT), which is often limited by long-term toxicity risk to surrounding normal tissue. An isotoxic approach using a hypofractionated accelerated radiation dose-painting (HARD) regimen allows for dosing based on clinical risk while sparing adjacent organs at risk. Methods and Materials: We retrospectively identified patients from 2019 to 2022 with unresected STS who received HARD with dose-painting to high, intermediate, and low-risk regions of 3.0 Gy, 2.5 Gy, and 2.0 to 2.3 Gy, respectively, in 20 to 22 fractions. Clinical endpoints included local control, locoregional control, progression free survival, overall survival, and toxicity outcomes. Results: Twenty-seven consecutive patients were identified and had a median age of 68 years and tumor size of 7.0 cm (range, 1.2-21.0 cm). Tumors were most often high-grade (70%), stage IV (70%), located in the extremities (59%), and locally recurrent (52%). With a median follow-up of 33.4 months, there was a 3-year locoregional control rate of 100%. The 3-year overall and progression-free survival were 44.9% and 23.3%, respectively. There were 5 (19%) acute and 2 (7%) late grade 3 toxicities, and there were no grade 4 or 5 toxicities at any point. Conclusions: The HARD regimen is a safe method of dose-escalating STS, with durable 3-year locoregional control. This approach is a promising alternative for unresected STS, though further follow-up is required to determine long-term control and toxicity.

Structure-specific rigid dose accumulation dosimetric analysis of ablative stereotactic MRI-guided adaptive radiation therapy in ultracentral lung lesions.

BACKGROUND: Definitive local therapy with stereotactic ablative radiation therapy (SABR) for ultracentral lung lesions is associated with a high risk of toxicity, including treatment related death. Stereotactic MR-guided adaptive radiation therapy (SMART) can overcome many of the challenges associated with SABR treatment of ultracentral lesions. METHODS: We retrospectively identified 14 consecutive patients who received SMART to ultracentral lung lesions from 10/2019 to 01/2021. Patients had a median distance from the proximal bronchial tree (PBT) of 0.38 cm. Tumors were most often lung primary (64.3%) and HILUS group A (85.7%). A structure-specific rigid registration approach was used for cumulative dose analysis. Kaplan-Meier log-rank analysis was used for clinical outcome data and the Wilcoxon Signed Rank test was used for dosimetric data. RESULTS: Here we show that SMART dosimetric improvements in favor of delivered plans over predicted non-adapted plans for PBT, with improvements in proximal bronchial tree DMax of 5.7 Gy (p = 0.002) and gross tumor 100% prescription coverage of 7.3% (p = 0.002). The mean estimated follow-up is 17.2 months and 2-year local control and local failure free survival rates are 92.9% and 85.7%, respectively. There are no grade ≥ 3 toxicities. CONCLUSIONS: SMART has dosimetric advantages and excellent clinical outcomes for ultracentral lung tumors. Daily plan adaptation reliably improves target coverage while simultaneously reducing doses to the proximal airways. These results further characterize the therapeutic window improvements for SMART. Structure-specific rigid dose accumulation dosimetric analysis provides insights that elucidate the dosimetric advantages of SMART more so than per fractional analysis alone.

Stereotactic MR-guided Adaptive Radiation Therapy (SMART) is a type of radiation therapy for cancer. With SMART, treatment can be adapted based on daily changes in the body seen via imaging. SMART can safely deliver radiation to lung tumors near the center of the body which are risky to treat, due to potential damage to nearby organs. We looked at 14 patients who received SMART to determine how much changing the radiation plan each day improved our ability to safely deliver high doses. We found that SMART not only improved our ability to cover the entirety of the tumor with the dose originally intended, but also reduced dose to nearby organs. Treatment resulted in excellent control of the tumor with few side effects. SMART shows promise for safer and more effective treatment for lung tumors in this part of the body.

Intricacies of Human-AI Interaction in Dynamic Decision-Making for Precision Oncology: A Case Study in Response-Adaptive Radiotherapy.

Background: Adaptive treatment strategies that can dynamically react to individual cancer progression can provide effective personalized care. Longitudinal multi-omics information, paired with an artificially intelligent clinical decision support system (AI-CDSS) can assist clinicians in determining optimal therapeutic options and treatment adaptations. However, AI-CDSS is not perfectly accurate, as such, clinicians' over/under reliance on AI may lead to unintended consequences, ultimately failing to develop optimal strategies. To investigate such collaborative decision-making process, we conducted a Human-AI interaction case study on response-adaptive radiotherapy (RT). Methods: We designed and conducted a two-phase study for two disease sites and two treatment modalities-adaptive RT for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and adaptive stereotactic body RT for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)-in which clinicians were asked to consider mid-treatment modification of the dose per fraction for a number of retrospective cancer patients without AI-support (Unassisted Phase) and with AI-assistance (AI-assisted Phase). The AI-CDSS graphically presented trade-offs in tumor control and the likelihood of toxicity to organs at risk, provided an optimal recommendation, and associated model uncertainties. In addition, we asked for clinicians' decision confidence level and trust level in individual AI recommendations and encouraged them to provide written remarks. We enrolled 13 evaluators (radiation oncology physicians and residents) from two medical institutions located in two different states, out of which, 4 evaluators volunteered in both NSCLC and HCC studies, resulting in a total of 17 completed evaluations (9 NSCLC, and 8 HCC). To limit the evaluation time to under an hour, we selected 8 treated patients for NSCLC and 9 for HCC, resulting in a total of 144 sets of evaluations (72 from NSCLC and 72 from HCC). Evaluation for each patient consisted of 8 required inputs and 2 optional remarks, resulting in up to a total of 1440 data points. Results: AI-assistance did not homogeneously influence all experts and clinical decisions. From NSCLC cohort, 41 (57%) decisions and from HCC cohort, 34 (47%) decisions were adjusted after AI assistance. Two evaluations (12%) from the NSCLC cohort had zero decision adjustments, while the remaining 15 (88%) evaluations resulted in at least two decision adjustments. Decision adjustment level positively correlated with dissimilarity in decision-making with AI [NSCLC: ρ = 0.53 ( p < 0.001); HCC: ρ = 0.60 ( p < 0.001)] indicating that evaluators adjusted their decision closer towards AI recommendation. Agreement with AI-recommendation positively correlated with AI Trust Level [NSCLC: ρ = 0.59 ( p < 0.001); HCC: ρ = 0.7 ( p < 0.001)] indicating that evaluators followed AI's recommendation if they agreed with that recommendation. The correlation between decision confidence changes and decision adjustment level showed an opposite trend [NSCLC: ρ = -0.24 ( p = 0.045), HCC: ρ = 0.28 ( p = 0.017)] reflecting the difference in behavior due to underlying differences in disease type and treatment modality. Decision confidence positively correlated with the closeness of decisions to the standard of care (NSCLC: 2 Gy/fx; HCC: 10 Gy/fx) indicating that evaluators were generally more confident in prescribing dose fractionations more similar to those used in standard clinical practice. Inter-evaluator agreement increased with AI-assistance indicating that AI-assistance can decrease inter-physician variability. The majority of decisions were adjusted to achieve higher tumor control in NSCLC and lower normal tissue complications in HCC. Analysis of evaluators' remarks indicated concerns for organs at risk and RT outcome estimates as important decision-making factors. Conclusions: Human-AI interaction depends on the complex interrelationship between expert's prior knowledge and preferences, patient's state, disease site, treatment modality, model transparency, and AI's learned behavior and biases. The collaborative decision-making process can be summarized as follows: (i) some clinicians may not believe in an AI system, completely disregarding its recommendation, (ii) some clinicians may believe in the AI system but will critically analyze its recommendations on a case-by-case basis; (iii) when a clinician finds that the AI recommendation indicates the possibility for better outcomes they will adjust their decisions accordingly; and (iv) When a clinician finds that the AI recommendation indicate a worse possible outcome they will disregard it and seek their own alternative approach.

Effect of Favorable Pathologic Response After Neoadjuvant Radiation Therapy Alone in Soft-tissue Sarcoma.

Purpose: Whether the therapeutic response of soft-tissue sarcoma to neoadjuvant treatment is predictive for clinical outcomes is unclear. Given the rarity of this disease and the confounding effects of chemotherapy, this study analyzes whether a favorable pathologic response (fPR) after neoadjuvant radiation therapy (RT) alone is associated with clinical benefits. Methods and Materials: An institutional review board-approved retrospective review was conducted on a database of patients with primary soft-tissue sarcoma treated at our institution between 1987 and 2015 with neoadjuvant RT alone followed by surgical resection. Time-to-event outcomes estimated with a Kaplan-Meier analysis included overall survival, progression-free survival (PFS), locoregional control, and distant control (DC). Cox regression analyses were performed to determine prognostic variables associated with clinical outcomes. Results: Of the overall cohort of 315 patients, 181 patients (57%) were included in the primary analysis with documented pathologic necrosis (PN) rates (mean: 59%) and a median follow up from diagnosis of 48 months (range, 4-170 months). The median neoadjuvant RT dose was 50 Gy (range, 40-60 Gy), and the majority of patients had negative surgical margins (79%). Only 35 patients (19%) achieved a fPR (PN ≥95%), which was associated with a higher R0 resection rate (94% vs. 75%; P = .013), a significant 5-year PFS benefit (74% vs. 43%; P = .014), and a nonsignificant 5-year DC benefit (76% vs. 62%; P = .12) compared with PN <95%. On multivariable analysis, fPR was an independent predictor for PFS (hazard ratio: 0.47; 95% confidence interval, 0.25-0.90; P = .022). Conclusions: Achieving fPR with neoadjuvant RT alone is associated with a higher R0 resection rate and possible DC benefit, translating into a significant improvement in PFS. Further studies to improve pathologic response rates and prospectively validate this endpoint are warranted.

Feasibility and Toxicity of Full-Body Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy Technique for High-Dose Total Body Irradiation.

Introduction: High-dose total body irradiation (TBI) is often part of myeloablative conditioning in acute leukemia. Modern volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT)-based plans employ arcs to the inferior-most portion of the body that can be simulated in a head-first position and use 2D planning for the inferior body which can result in heterogeneous doses. Here, we describe our institution's unique protocol for delivering high-dose TBI entirely with VMAT and retrospectively compare dosimetric outcomes with helical tomotherapy (HT) plans. Additionally, we describe our method of oropharyngeal mucosal sparing that was implemented after fatal mucositis occurred in two patients. Methods: Thirty-one patients were simulated and treated in head-first (HFS) and feet-first (FFS) orientations. Patients were treated with VMAT (n = 26) or HT (n = 5). In VMAT plans, to synchronize doses between the orientations, images were deformably registered and the HFS dose was transferred to the FFS plan and used as a background dose when optimizing plans. Six to eight isocenters with two arcs per isocenter were generated. HT was delivered with an established technique. Patients were treated to 13.2 Gy over eight twice daily fractions. Dosimetric outcomes and toxicities were retrospectively compared. Results: Prescription dose and organ at risk (OAR) constraints were met for all patients. Lower lung doses were achieved with VMAT relative to HT plans (7.4 vs 7.7 Gy, P = .009). Statistically significant improvement in mucositis was not achieved after adopting a mucosal-sparing technique, however lower doses to the oropharyngeal mucosal were achieved (6.9 vs 14.1 Gy, P = .009), and no further mucositis-related deaths occurred. Conclusions: This full-body VMAT method of TBI achieves dose goals, eliminates risk of heterogenous doses within the femur, and demonstrates that selective OAR sparing with the purpose of reducing TBI-related morbidity and mortality is possible at any institution with a VMAT-capable linear accelerator.

Neoadjuvant Simultaneous Integrated Boost Radiation Therapy Improves Clinical Outcomes for Retroperitoneal Sarcoma.

PURPOSE: Neoadjuvant radiation therapy (RT) with standard techniques (ST) offers a modest benefit in retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS). As the high-risk region (HRR) at risk for a positive surgical margin and recurrence is posterior and away from radiosensitive organs at risk, using a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) allows targeted dose escalation to the HRR while sparing these organs. We hypothesized that neoadjuvant SIB RT can improve disease control compared with ST, without increasing toxicity. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We retrospectively identified patients with resectable nonmetastatic RPS from 2000 to 2021 who received neoadjuvant RT of 180 to 200 cGy/fraction to standard volumes. SIB patients received 205 to 230 cGy/fraction to the appropriate HRR. Clinical endpoints included abdominopelvic control (APC), recurrence-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS), and acute toxicity. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 57 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 50-64), there were 103 patients with RPS who received either ST (n = 69) or SIB (n = 34) RT. Median standard volume dose was 5000 cGy (ST) and 4500 cGy (SIB), with a median HRR SIB dose of 5750 cGy. Liposarcomas (79% vs 53%; P = .004) and cT4 tumors (59% vs 19%; P < .001) were more common in the SIB cohort, without a significant difference in the rate of resection (82% vs 81%; P = .88) or R1 margin (53.5% vs 50%; P = .36); there were no R2 resections. SIB was associated with a significant improvement in 5-year APC (96% vs 70%; P = .046) and RFS (60.2% vs 36.3%; P = .036), with a nonsignificant OS difference (90.1% vs 67.5%; P = .164). On multivariable analysis, SIB remained a predictor for APC (hazard ratio, 0.07; 95% CI, 0.01-0.74; P = .027) and RFS (hazard ratio, 0.036; 95% CI, 0.13-0.98; P = .045). SIB showed no significant detriment in toxicity, albeit with a lower rate of overall grade 3 acute toxicity (3% vs 22%; P = .023) compared with ST. CONCLUSIONS: In RPS, dose escalation with neoadjuvant SIB RT may be independently associated with improved APC and RFS, without a detriment in toxicity, compared with ST. With the addition of standard RT having only a modest benefit compared with surgery alone, our study suggests that future prospective studies evaluating for the benefit of SIB RT should be considered.

Accurate, repeatable, and geometrically precise diffusion-weighted imaging on a 0.35 T magnetic resonance imaging-guided linear accelerator.

Background and purpose: Diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) allows for the interrogation of tissue cellularity, which is a surrogate for cellular proliferation. Previous attempts to incorporate DWI into the workflow of a 0.35 T MR-linac (MRL) have lacked quantitative accuracy. In this study, accuracy, repeatability, and geometric precision of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps produced using an echo planar imaging (EPI)-based DWI protocol on the MRL system is illustrated, and in vivo potential for longitudinal patient imaging is demonstrated. Materials and methods: Accuracy and repeatability were assessed by measuring ADC values in a diffusion phantom at three timepoints and comparing to reference ADC values. System-dependent geometric distortion was quantified by measuring the distance between 93 pairs of phantom features on ADC maps acquired on a 0.35 T MRL and a 3.0 T diagnostic scanner and comparing to spatially precise CT images. Additionally, for five sarcoma patients receiving radiotherapy on the MRL, same-day in vivo ADC maps were acquired on both systems, one of which at multiple timepoints. Results: Phantom ADC quantification was accurate on the 0.35 T MRL with significant discrepancies only seen at high ADC. Average geometric distortions were 0.35 (±0.02) mm and 0.85 (±0.02) mm in the central slice and 0.66 (±0.04) mm and 2.14 (±0.07) mm at 5.4 cm off-center for the MRL and diagnostic system, respectively. In the sarcoma patients, a mean pretreatment ADC of 910x10-6 (±100x10-6) mm2/s was measured on the MRL. Conclusions: The acquisition of accurate, repeatable, and geometrically precise ADC maps is possible at 0.35 T with an EPI approach.

Trimodal Therapy Using an MR-guided Radiation Therapy Partial Bladder Tumor Boost in Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer.

Purpose: Bladder preservation with trimodal therapy (TMT; maximal tumor resection followed by chemoradiation) is an effective paradigm for select patients with muscle invasive bladder cancer. We report our institutional experience of a TMT protocol using nonadaptive magnetic resonance imaging-guided radiation therapy (MRgRT) for partial bladder boost (PBB). Methods and Materials: A retrospective analysis was performed on consecutive patients with nonmetastatic muscle invasive bladder cancer who were treated with TMT using MRgRT between 2019 and 2022. Patients underwent intensity modulated RT-based nonadaptive MRgRT PBB contoured on True fast imaging with steady state precession (FISP) images (full bladder) followed sequentially by computed tomography-based RT to the whole empty bladder and pelvic lymph nodes with concurrent chemotherapy. MRgRT treatment time, table shifts, and dosimetric parameters of target coverage and normal tissue exposure were described. Prospectively assessed acute and late genitourinary and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity were reported. Two-year local control was assessed with Kaplan-Meier methods. Results: Seventeen patients were identified for analysis. PBB planning target volume margins were ≤8 mm in 94% (n = 16) of cases. Dosimetric target coverage parameters were favorable and all normal tissue dose constraints were met. For MRgRT PBB fractions, median table shifts were 0.4 cm (range, 0-3.15), 0.45 cm (0-2.65), and 0.75 cm (0-4.8) in the X, Y, and Z planes, respectively. Median treatment time for MRgRT PBB fractions was 9 minutes (range, 6.9-17.4). We identified 32 out of 100 total MRgRT fractions that may have benefitted from online adaptation based on changes in organ position relative to planning target volume, predominantly because of small bowel (13/32, 41%) or rectum (8/32, 25%). Two patients discontinued RT prematurely. The incidence of highest-grade acute genitourinary toxicity was 1 to 2 (69%) and 3 (6%), whereas the incidence of acute GI toxicity was 1 to 2 (81%) and 3 (6%). There were no late grade 3 events; 17.6% had late grade 2 cystitis and none had late GI toxicity. With median follow-up of 18.2 months (95% CI, 12.4-22.5), the local control rate was 92%, and no patient has required salvage cystectomy. Conclusions: Nonadaptive MRgRT PBB is feasible with favorable dosimetry and low resource utilization. Larger studies are needed to evaluate for potential benefits in toxicity and local control associated with this approach in comparison to standard treatment techniques.

Dose-Limiting Pulmonary Toxicity in a Phase 1/2 Study of Radiation and Chemotherapy with Ipilimumab Followed by Nivolumab for Patients With Stage 3 Unresectable Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: We hypothesized that concurrent ipilimumab with chemoradiationtherapy (chemoRT) followed by maintenance nivolumab would be safe for patients with unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to assess the safety (phase 1) and the 12-month progression-free survival (PFS) (phase 2) in a multi-institution prospective trial. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Eligible patients had unresectable stage III NSCLC. The treatment included platinum doublet chemotherapy with concurrent thoracic radiation therapy to 60 Gy in 30 fractions and ipilimumab (1 mg/kg) delivered during weeks 1 and 4. After chemoRT, maintenance nivolumab (480 mg) was given every 4 weeks for up to 12 cycles. Adverse events (AEs) were assessed according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 5.0. Survival analyses were performed with Kaplan Meier (KM) methods and log-rank tests. RESULTS: The trial was discontinued early after enrolling 19 patients without proceeding to the phase 2 component because of unacceptable toxicity. Sixteen patients (84%) had grade ≥3 (G3+) possible treatment-related toxicity, most commonly pulmonary AEs (n = 8, 42%). Fourteen patients (74%) discontinued study therapy early because of AEs (n = 12, 63%) or patient choice (n = 2, 11%). Eleven patients (58%) experienced G2+ pulmonary toxicity with median time to onset 4.1 months (95% CI 2.6-not reached [NR]), and 12-month freedom from G2+ pulmonary toxicity 37% (95% CI, 16-59). Five patients had G5 AEs, including 3 with G5 pulmonary AEs (1 respiratory failure with pneumonitis and pulmonary embolism, 1 pneumonia/chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation, 1 pulmonary fibrosis). Despite toxicities, the median PFS was 19.2 months (95% CI 6.1-NR) and the median overall survival was NR (95% CI 6.1-NR) with median follow-up of 30.1 months by the reverse KM method. CONCLUSIONS: Concurrent ipilimumab with chemoRT for unresectable stage III NSCLC is associated with pulmonary toxicity that may limit opportunities for improved outcomes. Future studies aiming to incorporate ipilimumab or other anti-CTLA4 therapies into management of unresectable stage III NSCLC should consider careful measures to minimize toxicity risk.

Surgical and Pathologic Outcomes of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma (PA) After Preoperative Ablative Stereotactic Magnetic Resonance Image Guided Adaptive Radiation Therapy (A-SMART).

Purpose: Preoperative radiation therapy (RT) for pancreatic adenocarcinoma reduces positive surgical margin rates, and when delivered to an ablative dose range it may improve local control and overall survival for patients with unresectable disease. Use of stereotactic body RT to achieve a higher biologically effective dose has been limited by toxicity to adjacent radiosensitive structures, but this can be mitigated by stereotactic magnetic resonance image guided adaptive radiation therapy (SMART). Methods and Materials: We describe our single-institution experience of high biologically effective dose SMART before resection of localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Toxicity was evaluated according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (V 5.0). Tumor response was evaluated according to the College of American Pathologists tumor regression grading criteria. Results: We analyzed 26 patients with borderline resectable (80.8%), locally advanced (11.5%), and resectable (7.7%) tumors who received ablative dose SMART (A-SMART) followed by surgical resection. Median age at diagnosis was 68 years (range, 34-86). Most patients received chemotherapy (80.8%) before RT. All patients received A-SMART to a median dose of 50 (range, 40-50) Gy in 5 fractions. Toxicity data were collected prospectively and there were no acute grade 2+ toxicities associated with RT. The median time to resection was 50 days (range, 37-115), and the procedure types included Whipple (69%), distal (23%), or total pancreatectomy (8%). The R0 resection rate was 96% and no perioperative deaths occurred within 90 days. Pathologic response was observed in 88% of cases. The time from RT to surgery was associated with tumor regression grade (P = .0003). The median follow-up after RT was 16.5 months (range, 3.9-26.2). The derived median progression-free survival from RT was 13.2 months. Conclusions: The initial surgical and pathologic outcomes after A-SMART are encouraging. Preoperative A-SMART was associated with low toxicity rates and no surgical or RT-associated mortality. The surgical morbidity was comparable to historic rates after upfront resection. These data also suggest that the time from stereotactic body RT to surgical resection is associated with pathologic response.

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.

The prevalence of luminal B subtype is higher in older postmenopausal women with ER+/HER2- breast cancer and is associated with inferior outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: To establish whether clinicopathologic and genomic characteristics may explain the poor prognosis associated with advanced age in ER+/HER2- breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The cohort included 271 consecutive post-menopausal patients with ER+/HER2- invasive breast cancer ages 55 years and older. Patients were categorized as "younger" (ages 55- < 75) and "older" (ages ≥75). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate locoregional recurrence (LRR), recurrence-free interval (RFi), and overall survival (OS). Gene expression of tumor samples was assessed with Affymetrix Rosetta/Merck Human RSTA microarray platform. Differential gene expression analysis of tumor samples was performed using R package Limma. RESULTS: 271 breast cancer patients were identified, including 186 younger and 85 older patients. Older patients had higher rates of Luminal B subtype (53% vs 34%) and lower rates of Luminal A subtype (42% vs 58%, p = 0.02). Older patients were less likely to receive chemotherapy (9% vs 40%, p < 0.001) and hormone therapy (71% vs 89%, p < 0.001). For cases of grade 1-2 disease, older patients had a higher proportion of the luminal B subtype (49% vs. 30%, p = 0.014). Age ≥ 75 predicted for inferior OS (HR = 3.06, p < 0.001). The luminal B subtype predicted for inferior OS (HR = 2.12, p = 0.014), RFi (HR 5.02, p < 0.001), and LRR (HR = 3.12, p = 0.045). There were no significant differences in individual gene expression between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Women with ER+/HER2- breast cancer ≥75 years old had higher rates of the more aggressive luminal B subtype and inferior outcomes. Genomic testing of these patients should be strongly considered, and treatment should be intensified when appropriate.

Genomically Guided Breast Radiation Therapy: A Review of the Current Data and Future Directions.

PURPOSE: To highlight the current evidence and the limitations in data to support a personalized approach in breast oncology radiation therapy management and define steps needed for clinical implementation. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A critical review of the current literature on the use of genomics in breast radiation therapy was undertaken by a group of breast radiation oncologists to discuss current data, future directions, and challenges. RESULTS: A summary of the existing data, ongoing clinical trials, and future directions is provided. The authors note many groups have developed radiation-specific genomic assays, which demonstrate promise in prediction of local control and benefit from radiation therapy; however, prospective validation of their utility is needed. Limitations continue to exist in our understanding of tumor biology and how it can be integrated into clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: Given the relative ubiquity of breast radiation therapy, the variety of dose and fractionation approaches, and the current data to support a personalized approach, it is our belief that the delivery of breast radiation therapy is uniquely poised for a genomically personalized radiation therapy approach. Prospective clinical trials implementing genomic signatures are needed at this time to advance the field.

Radiotherapy for early stage diffuse large B-cell lymphoma with or without double or triple hit genetic alterations.

We investigated whether adding radiation (RT) to systemic therapy improved outcomes in early stage diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients with or without double- or triple-hit lymphoma (DHL/THL) biology. This analysis included 183 patients profiled with fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) for alterations in MYC, BLC2, and/or BCL6. A total of 146 (80%) were non-DHL/THL, 27 (15%) were DHL, and 10 (6%) were THL. Systemic therapy without RT resulted in inferior freedom from relapse (FFR) (HR: 2.28; 95% CI, 1.10-4.77; p = .02). The median FFR for non-DHL/THL was not reached and was 33 and 22.3 months for DHL and THL, respectively; p < .001. Low-risk (R-IPI <2) DHL/THL patients treated with rituximab-based therapy had 3-year FFR rates of 11% and 71% for systemic therapy without and with RT, respectively; p = .04. No differences in overall survival were observed between the treatment groups. Treatment intensification with RT may improve early stage DHL/THL outcomes.

Utilizing the genomically adjusted radiation dose (GARD) to personalize adjuvant radiotherapy in triple negative breast cancer management.

BACKGROUND: Utilizing the linear quadratic model and the radiosensitivity index (RSI), we have derived an expression for the genomically adjusted radiation dose (GARD) to model radiation dose effect. We hypothesize GARD is associated with local recurrence and can be used to optimize individual triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) radiation dose. METHODS: TN patients from two independent datasets were assessed. The first cohort consisted of 58 patients treated at 5 European centers with breast conservation surgery followed by adjuvant radiotherapy (RT). The second dataset consisted of 55 patients treated with adjuvant radiation therapy. FINDINGS: In cohort 1, multivariable analysis revealed that as a dichotomous variable (HR: 2.5 95% CI 1-7.1; p = .05), GARD was associated with local control. This was confirmed in the second independent dataset where GARD was the only significant factor associated with local control (HR: 4.4 95% CI 1.1-29.5; p = .04). We utilized GARD to calculate an individualized radiation dose for each TN patient in cohort 2 by determining the physical dose required to achieve the GARD target value (GARD ≥ 21). While 7% of patients were optimized with a dose of 30 Gy, 91% of patients would be optimized with 70 Gy. INTERPRETATION: GARD is associated with local control following whole breast or post-mastectomy radiotherapy (RT) in TN patients. By modeling RT dose effect with GARD, we demonstrate that no single dose is optimal for all patients and propose the first dose range to optimize RT at an individual patient level in TNBC.