Impact of Radiation Therapy on Biological Parameters in Cancer Patients: Sub-analysis from the RIT Prospective Epidemiological Study.

Scarce data investigate the impact of radiotherapy (RT) on biology markers. An analysis of ancillary study of RIT (Radiation Impact on Thromboembolic events) prospective trial was carried out. All patients with non-metastatic solid tumors and treated with radiotherapy and/or brachytherapy in curative and consenting to have blood samples were included. A significant decrease in white blood count, (i.e. lymphocytes, monocytes, neutrophils and basophils) and platelet counts was observed after RT and maintained at 6 months. Whereas, eosinophils, D-dimers and hemoglobin levels were affected respectively 3 months and 6 months after RT initiation. Conversely, red cells count and CRP level were not affected by RT. This study is an advocacy to develop an understanding of basic immune system in relation with RT.

Venous thromboembolism and radiation therapy: The final radiation-induced thrombosis study analysis.

BACKGROUND: Thromboembolic events frequently complicate the course of malignancy and represent a major cause of morbidity and mortality in cancer patients. In contrast to chemotherapy and other systemic therapies, little is known about the impact of ionizing radiations on the incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in cancer patients. METHODS: In the present prospective study, we aimed to investigate the incidence, management, and outcome of VTE in newly diagnosed cancer patients who received curative radiotherapy. RESULTS: VTE was found in 8 patients, out of 401 patients at a median time of 80 days after radiotherapy initiation. The incidence rate of VTE at 6 months post-treatment was 2% (95% CI, 0.9-3.7), with 50% of cases occurring during the radiotherapy course and 50% of cases in patients who received or were receiving chemotherapy. As none of the patients harbored a personal history of VTE, no prophylactic measure was initiated during cancer therapy. Most patients received monotherapy with low-molecular-weight heparin and were still on surveillance at the end of the study. No specific clinical risk factor was identified that might systematically indicate the need of thromboprophylaxis in the context of curative radiotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Although this pan-cancer descriptive study did not relate an increased risk of short-term thrombosis following ionizing radiation, it provides important insight as a basis for future studies with subcategories of cancer, in order to in fine guide further recommendations in frail patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02696447.

Assessing toxicities of curative radiotherapy combined with concomitant non anti-cancer drugs: A sub-analysis of the prospective epidemiological RIT trial.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Limited data are available about non-anticancer treatment (NACTs)/radiation combinations. MORSE 02-17 was the first study to report on the interaction resulting from such combinations in a heterogeneous population. Therefore, the aim of this study was to describe acute and late toxicities in a homogenous cohort of cancer patients receiving NACTs and undergoing radiation therapy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An analysis of the RIT (Radiation Impact on Thromboembolic events) prospective trial was carried-out. Patients with non-metastatic solid tumors and treated with radiotherapy and/or brachytherapy in a curative intent between 2016 and 2019 were included. Data about NACTs and toxicities were then collected. RESULTS: Out of 382 patients, 293 were prescribed NACTs (76.7%) with a median number of 3.6 (range: 1-14) NACTs per patient. Among1006 NACTs, the most prescribed drugs were anti-hypertensive, in 153 patients (52.2%). In accordance with MORSE 02-17 data, four of the main side effects of radiotherapy were analysed: genitourinary, gastrointestinal, dermatitis/mucositis and fatigue. Regarding acute and late toxicities -whatever the grade- no statistical difference was found between NACTs classes and these toxicities. CONCLUSION: When we compared the rates of toxicities with literature data, NACTs did not seem to have a worsening effect. One could conclude that NACTs concomitantly given with RT do not influence toxicity outcome. We then advocate a development of new platform for toxicity profile investigation of drugs-RT combination.

Salvage brachytherapy with or without external beam radiotherapy for oral or oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinomas in previously irradiated areas: carcinologic and toxicity outcomes of 25 patients.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess outcomes of salvage brachytherapy for oral and oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma in previously irradiated areas. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a retrospective study with 25 patients, treated between 1997 and 2016 for primary (21 cases) or recurrent (4 cases) oral or oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinomas in previously irradiated areas. Fifteen patients were treated with salvage brachytherapy (BT) alone, while 10 patients additionally received external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). Median BT dose was 45 Gy (range, 15-64 Gy), and a median total cumulative dose was 57 Gy (range, 40-70 Gy). Patient age, tumor stage, radiotherapy dose, and time between first treatment and recurrence were analyzed as prognostic factors. RESULTS: Median overall survival (OS) was 16 months. Patients with less advanced (T1) tumors survived significantly longer (27 vs. 14.5 months, p = 0.046). Five patients experienced a local recurrence, and only one of them was treated with a total dose greater than 60 Gy. In multivariate analysis, patients with T1 lesions had a significant higher OS rate compared to patients with larger lesions (HR = 6.25, 95% CI: 1.18-33.1%, p = 0.031). Patients who received more than 60 Gy had a non-significant, 80% increased OS than those treated with a lower dose (p = 0.072). There was four grade 3 acute toxicities, and no grade 3 or more late toxicities. CONCLUSIONS: Multimodal treatment, including salvage BT, may offer a curative option for selected patients with an acceptable risk of severe toxicity for the treatment of primary or recurrent tumors in previously irradiated areas.

Short-term androgen deprivation therapy combined with radiotherapy as salvage treatment after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer (GETUG-AFU 16): a 112-month follow-up of a phase 3, randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Radiotherapy is the standard salvage treatment after radical prostatectomy. To date, the role of androgen deprivation therapy has not been formally shown. In this follow-up study, we aimed to update the results of the GETUG-AFU 16 trial, which assessed the efficacy of radiotherapy plus androgen suppression versus radiotherapy alone. METHODS: GETUG-AFU 16 was an open-label, multicentre, phase 3, randomised, controlled trial that enrolled men (aged ≥18 years) with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, with histologically confirmed adenocarcinoma of the prostate (but no previous androgen suppression or pelvic radiotherapy), stage pT2, T3, or T4a (bladder neck involvement only) and pN0 or pNx according to the tumour, node, metastasis (TNM) staging system, whose prostate-specific antigen (PSA) concentration increased from 0·1 ng/mL to between 0·2 ng/mL and 2·0 ng/mL after radical prostatectomy, without evidence of clinical disease. Patients were assigned through central randomisation (1:1) to short-term androgen suppression (subcutaneous injection of 10·8 mg goserelin on the first day of irradiation and 3 months later) plus radiotherapy (3D conformal radiotherapy or intensity modulated radiotherapy of 66 Gy in 33 fractions, 5 days a week for 7 weeks) or radiotherapy alone. Randomisation was stratified using a permuted block method (block sizes of two and four) according to investigational site, radiotherapy modality, and prognosis. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. This post-hoc one-shot data collection done 4 years after last data cutoff included patients who were alive at the time of the primary analysis and updated long-term patient status by including dates for first local progression, metastatic disease diagnosis, or death (if any of these had occurred) or the date of the last tumour evaluation or last PSA measurement. Survival at 120 months was reported. Late serious adverse effects were assessed. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00423475. FINDINGS: Between Oct 19, 2006, and March 30, 2010, 743 patients were randomly assigned, 374 to radiotherapy alone and 369 to radiotherapy plus goserelin. At the time of data cutoff (March 12, 2019), the median follow-up was 112 months (IQR 102-123). The 120-month progression-free survival was 64% (95% CI 58-69) for patients treated with radiotherapy plus goserelin and 49% (43-54) for patients treated with radiotherapy alone (hazard ratio 0·54, 0·43-0·68; stratified log-rank test p<0·0001). Two cases of secondary cancer occurred since the primary analysis, but were not considered to be treatment related. No treatment-related deaths occurred. INTERPRETATION: The 120-month progression-free survival confirmed the results from the primary analysis. Salvage radiotherapy combined with short-term androgen suppression significantly reduced risk of biochemical or clinical progression and death compared with salvage radiotherapy alone. The results of the GETUG-AFU 16 trial confirm the efficacy of androgen suppression plus radiotherapy as salvage treatment in patients with increasing PSA concentration after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. FUNDING: The French Health ministry, AstraZeneca, la Ligue Contre le Cancer, and La Ligue de Haute-Savoie.

Treatment patterns and survival in an exhaustive French cohort of pazopanib-eligible patients with metastatic soft tissue sarcoma (STS).

BACKGROUND: The French EMS study prospectively collected exhaustive data from STS patients diagnosed in the Rhone-Alpes region from 2005 to 07. METHODS: The database included diagnosis/histology, surgery, radiotherapy, systemic treatments and treatment response. Treatment patterns and outcomes of patients with metastatic disease, excluding adipocytic sarcoma and GIST were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 888 total patients, 145 were included based on having metastatic disease and appropriate subtypes. All patients received treatment with systemic therapy being most common (74%, n = 107), followed by radiotherapy (30%, n = 44) and surgery (23%, n = 33). Doxorubicin, alone or in combination, was the most common first line systemic therapy (65%, n = 46). Drugs without license in sarcoma were used in 38-83% of treatments depending on treatment line. 24% of frontline patients demonstrated an objective response, decreasing to 11% objective responses in second line but no responses were documented beyond second line, with median PFS declining with each additional line. Median PFS also declined in patients receiving surgery compared to those receiving no surgery (8-15 m vs 5 m). Median OS from metastatic diagnosis for patients receiving systemic therapy was double that of patients without systemic treatment (24 m vs 12 m, p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes in this population were poor and declined with successive treatment. However, results suggest that further anticancer therapies in recurrent sarcoma might be beneficial.

Daily Practice Management of pT1a-b pN0 Breast Carcinoma: A Prospective French ODISSEE Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Most breast cancer (BC) tumors ≤10 mm have an excellent prognosis. The subgroups with a higher risk for distant recurrence requiring adjuvant systemic therapy are not precisely defined in current international guidelines. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The OBSERVATOIRE DES PETITS CANCERS DU SEIN HER2 +/- (ODISSEE) study was a prospective, multicenter, cohort study that aimed to describe the daily adjuvant management and outcome of 616 patients with unifocal, invasive pT1a-b pN0 nonmetastatic BC who underwent surgery. RESULTS: At the time of diagnosis, the median age of patients was 61 years. Tumor was detected on imaging or during a screening program in 397 patients (64.6%). Most patients (96%) underwent conservative surgery with sentinel node biopsy (89%), completed with axillary lymph node dissection in 15%. At inclusion, 82% of tumors were pT1b, 73% were pN0 (i-), 53% were Scarff-Bloom-Richardson Grade I, 91% were estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, 5% overexpressed/amplified HER2, and 5% were triple negative (TNBC). Adjuvant treatments were radiotherapy (95%), hormone therapy (82%), chemotherapy (7%), and trastuzumab (3.5%). In patients with TNBC and HER2-positive BC, chemotherapy and trastuzumab (if needed) were administered in 45% and 68%, respectively. After 5 years of follow-up, 7 patients had contralateral BC, 7 had locoregional recurrence, and 1 had distant metastasis. At 5 years, overall survival, disease-free survival, and recurrence-free survival were: 98.4% (96.9%-99.1%), 94.7% (92.4%-96.3%), and 97.1% (95.2%-98.2%), respectively. CONCLUSION: This prospective cohort study showed that in France, the routine practice in pT1a-b pN0 breast cancers follows international standard guidelines for practice including conservative surgery followed by radiotherapy and endocrine therapy for ER-positive patients. Adjuvant chemotherapy with or without trastuzumab was used but their benefit in breast cancer of ≤10 mm remains controversial.

Is There a Role for Pelvic Irradiation in Localized Prostate Adenocarcinoma? Update of the Long-Term Survival Results of the GETUG-01 Randomized Study.

PURPOSE: To report the long-term results of the French Genitourinary Study Group (GETUG)-01 study in terms of event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) and assess the potential interaction between hormonotherapy and pelvic nodes irradiation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between December 1998 and June 2004, 446 patients with T1b-T3, N0pNx, M0 prostate carcinoma were randomly assigned to either pelvic nodes and prostate or prostate-only radiation therapy. Patients were stratified into 2 groups: "low risk" (T1-T2 and Gleason score 6 and prostate-specific antigen <3× the upper normal limit of the laboratory) (92 patients) versus "high risk" (T3 or Gleason score >6 or prostate-specific antigen >3× the upper normal limit of the laboratory). Short-term 6-month neoadjuvant and concomitant hormonal therapy was allowed only for high-risk patients. Radiation therapy was delivered with a 3-dimensional conformal technique, using a 4-field technique for the pelvic volume (46 Gy). The total dose recommended to the prostate moved from 66 Gy to 70 Gy during the course of the study. Criteria for EFS included biologic prostate-specific antigen recurrences and/or a local or metastatic progression. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 11.4 years, the 10-year OS and EFS were similar in the 2 treatment arms. A higher but nonsignificant EFS was observed in the low-risk subgroup in favor of pelvic nodes radiation therapy (77.2% vs 62.5%; P=.18). A post hoc subgroup analysis showed a significant benefit of pelvic irradiation when the risk of lymph node involvement was <15% (Roach formula). This benefit seemed to be limited to patients who did not receive hormonal therapy. CONCLUSION: Pelvic nodes irradiation did not statistically improve EFS or OS in the whole population but may be beneficial in selected low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients treated with exclusive radiation therapy.

Salvage radiotherapy with or without short-term hormone therapy for rising prostate-specific antigen concentration after radical prostatectomy (GETUG-AFU 16): a randomised, multicentre, open-label phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: How best to treat rising prostate-specific antigen (PSA) concentration after radical prostatectomy is an urgent clinical question. Salvage radiotherapy delays the need for more aggressive treatment such as long-term androgen suppression, but fewer than half of patients benefit from it. We aimed to establish the effect of adding short-term androgen suppression at the time of salvage radiotherapy on biochemical outcome and overall survival in men with rising PSA following radical prostatectomy. METHODS: This open-label, multicentre, phase 3, randomised controlled trial, was done in 43 French study centres. We enrolled men (aged ≥18 years) who had received previous treatment for a histologically confirmed adenocarcinoma of the prostate (but no previous androgen deprivation therapy or pelvic radiotherapy), and who had stage pT2, pT3, or pT4a (bladder neck involvement only) in patients who had rising PSA of 0·2 to less than 2·0 µg/L following radical prostatectomy, without evidence of clinical disease. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) centrally via an interactive web response system to standard salvage radiotherapy (three-dimensional [3D] conformal radiotherapy or intensity modulated radiotherapy, of 66 Gy in 33 fractions 5 days a week for 7 weeks) or radiotherapy plus short-term androgen suppression using 10·8 mg goserelin by subcutaneous injection on the first day of irradiation and 3 months later. Randomisation was stratified using a permuted block method according to investigational site, radiotherapy modality, and prognosis. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, analysed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00423475. FINDINGS: Between Oct 19, 2006, and March 30, 2010, 743 patients were randomly assigned, 374 to radiotherapy alone and 369 to radiotherapy plus goserelin. Patients assigned to radiotherapy plus goserelin were significantly more likely than patients in the radiotherapy alone group to be free of biochemical progression or clinical progression at 5 years (80% [95% CI 75-84] vs 62% [57-67]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·50, 95% CI 0·38-0·66; p<0·0001). No additional late adverse events occurred in patients receiving short-term androgen suppression compared with those who received radiotherapy alone. The most frequently occuring acute adverse events related to goserelin were hot flushes, sweating, or both (30 [8%] of 366 patients had a grade 2 or worse event; 30 patients [8%] had hot flushes and five patients [1%] had sweating in the radiotherapy plus goserelin group vs none of 372 patients in the radiotherapy alone group). Three (8%) of 366 patients had grade 3 or worse hot flushes and one patient had grade 3 or worse sweating in the radiotherapy plus goserelin group versus none of 372 patients in the radiotherapy alone group. The most common late adverse events of grade 3 or worse were genitourinary events (29 [8%] in the radiotherapy alone group vs 26 [7%] in the radiotherapy plus goserelin group) and sexual disorders (20 [5%] vs 30 [8%]). No treatment-related deaths occurred. INTERPRETATION: Adding short-term androgen suppression to salvage radiotherapy benefits men who have had radical prostatectomy and whose PSA rises after a postsurgical period when it is undetectable. Radiotherapy combined with short-term androgen suppression could be considered as a reasonable option in this population. FUNDING: French Ministry of Health, AstraZeneca, and La Ligue Contre le Cancer.

Safety assessment of molecular targeted therapies in association with radiotherapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a real-life report.

Molecular targeted therapies (TT) are the cornerstone of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) treatment. There is a paucity of data on the safety of the radiotherapy (RT)-TT association in a sequential or a concomitant setting. The aim of the present study is to retrospectively assess the safety of the RT-TT association. From 2006 to 2014, data from 84 consecutive patients treated with RT and TT for metastatic RCC were retrospectively collected. RT-TT sequential and concomitant associations were, respectively, defined by a time interval of more than five TT half-lives and less than or equal to five TT half-lives between the last TT administration and RT initiation. Toxicities in the fields of RT were assessed systematically. As many patients received several TT and RT courses, 136 RT-TT associations were analyzed, with 66 sequential and 70 concomitant schemes. RT was mainly delivered on bone (75%) and brain metastases (14.7%). TT were tyrosine kinase inhibitors (73.5%), mTOR inhibitors (19.8%), and monoclonal antibodies (6.7%). With a median follow-up of 9.5 months, whatever the sequence, no grade≥4 toxicity was reported. Two grade 3 toxicities were reported with sequential (3%) and concomitant (2.9%) RT-TT, respectively. Sequential or concomitant RT-TT associations in metastatic RCC do not seem to cause major toxicity.

Ten-year survival results of a randomized trial of irradiation of internal mammary nodes after mastectomy.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of irradiation of internal mammary nodes (IMN) on 10-year overall survival in breast cancer patients after mastectomy. METHODS AND PATIENTS: This multicenter phase 3 study enrolled patients with positive axillary nodes (pN+) or central/medial tumors with or without pN+. Other inclusion criteria were age <75 and a Karnofsky index ≥70. All patients received postoperative irradiation of the chest wall and supraclavicular nodes and were randomly assigned to receive IMN irradiation or not. Randomization was stratified by tumor location (medial/central or lateral), axillary lymph node status, and adjuvant therapy (chemotherapy vs no chemotherapy). The prescribed dose of irradiation to the target volumes was 50 Gy or equivalent. The first 5 intercostal spaces were included in the IMN target volume, and two-thirds of the dose (31.5 Gy) was given by electrons. The primary outcome was overall survival at 10 years. Disease-free survival and toxicity were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: T total of 1334 patients were analyzed after a median follow-up of 11.3 years among the survivors. No benefit of IMN irradiation on the overall survival could be demonstrated: the 10-year overall survival was 59.3% in the IMN-nonirradiated group versus 62.6% in the IMN-irradiated group (P=.8). According to stratification factors, we defined 6 subgroups (medial/central or lateral tumor, pN0 [only for medial/central] or pN+, and chemotherapy or not). In all these subgroups, IMN irradiation did not significantly improve overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: In patients treated with 2-dimensional techniques, we failed to demonstrate a survival benefit for IMN irradiation. This study cannot rule out a moderate benefit, especially with more modern, conformal techniques applied to a higher risk population.

Is there a role for pelvic irradiation in localized prostate adenocarcinoma? Preliminary results of GETUG-01.

PURPOSE: To assess the benefit and toxicity and quality-of-life (QOL) outcomes of pelvic nodes irradiation in nonmetastatic prostate carcinoma patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between December 1998 and June 2004, 444 patients with T1b-T3, N0 pNx, M0 prostate carcinoma were randomly assigned to either pelvic and prostate radiotherapy or prostate radiotherapy only. Patients were stratified according to the prognostic factor of lymph node involvement (LNI). Short-term 6-month neoadjuvant and concomitant hormonal therapy was allowed only for patients in the high-risk group. The pelvic dose was 46 Gy. The total dose recommended to the prostate was changed during the course of the study from 66 Gy to 70 Gy. Criteria for progression-free survival (PFS) included biologic prostate-specific antigen recurrences or a local or metastatic evolution. Acute and late toxicities were recorded according to the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group and Late Effects in Normal Tissues Subjective, Objective, Management, and Analytic scales, respectively. The QOL outcome was recorded with the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30, the International Prostatic Symptom Score, and the Sexual Function Index scales. RESULTS: With a 42.1-month median follow-up time, the 5-year PFS and overall survival were similar in the two treatment arms for the whole series and for each stratified group. On multivariate analysis, low LNI risk and hormonal therapy were statistically associated with increased PFS. However, subgroup analyses based on these factors did not show any benefit for pelvic irradiation. There were no significant differences in acute and late digestive toxicities and in QOL outcomes. CONCLUSION: Pelvic node irradiation was well tolerated but did not improve PFS.

Persistence of medical change at implementation of clinical guidelines on medical practice: a controlled study in a cancer network.

PURPOSE: A cancer network of general or private hospitals of a French region was started in 1995 for improving quality of care and rationalizing medical prescriptions. The impact of implementing a clinical practice guidelines (CPG) project assessed conformity with guidelines in medical practice; significant changes were observed within the network, whereas no changes were observed in a control region without cancer network. In the present study, we evaluated the persistence of conformity to guidelines through a new medical audit. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In 1999, the hospitals of the previously compared experimental and control groups accepted to reassess the impact of CPG. A controlled transversal study was performed in the experimental group (cancer network) and in the control group (no regional cancer network). In 1996 (first audit) and in 1999 (present audit), all new patients with colon cancer (177 and 200 in experimental group and 118 and 100 in control group, respectively) and early breast cancer (444 and 381 in experimental group and 172 and 204 in control group, respectively) were selected. RESULTS: In the experimental group, the compliance of medical decisions with CPG was significantly higher in 1999 than in 1996 for colon cancer (73%; 95% CI, 67% to 79% v 56%; 95% CI, 49% to 63%, respectively; P = .003) and similar for the two periods for breast cancer (36%; 95% CI, 31% to 41% v 40%; 95% CI, 35% to 44%, respectively; P = .24). In the control group, compliance was significantly higher in 1999 than in 1996 for colon cancer (67%; 95% CI, 58% to 76% v 38%; 95% CI, 29% to 47%, respectively; P < .001) and identical for the two periods for breast cancer (4%; 95% CI, 1% to 7% v 7%; 95% CI, 3% to 11%, respectively; P = .19). CONCLUSION: The CPG program for cancer management produced persistent changes in medical practice in our cancer network in terms of conformity with CPG.