Radiation therapy for cancer is potentially associated with reduced growth of concomitant abdominal aortic aneurysm.

PURPOSE: Co-prevalence of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) and cancer poses a unique challenge in medical care since both diseases and their respective therapies might interact. Recently, reduced AAA growth rates were observed in cancer patients that received radiation therapy (RT). The purpose of this study was to perform a fine-grained analysis of the effects of RT on AAA growth with respect to direct (infield) and out-of-field (outfield) radiation exposure, and radiation dose-dependency. METHODS: A retrospective single-center analysis identified patients with AAA, cancer, and RT. Clinical data, radiation plans, and aneurysm diameters were analyzed. The total dose of radiation to each aneurysm was computed. AAA growth under infield and outfield exposure was compared to patients with AAA and cancer that did not receive RT (no-RT control) and to an external noncancer AAA reference cohort. RESULTS: Between 2003 and 2020, a total of 38 AAA patients who had received well-documented RT for their malignancy were identified. AAA growth was considerably reduced for infield patients (n = 18) compared to outfield patients (n = 20), albeit not significantly (0.8 ± 1.0 vs. 1.3 ± 1.6 mm/year, p = 0.28). Overall, annual AAA growth in RT patients was lower compared to no-RT control patients (1.1 ± 1.5 vs. 1.8 ± 2.2 mm/year, p = 0.06) and significantly reduced compared to the reference cohort (1.1 ± 1.5 vs. 2.7 ± 2.1 mm/year, p < 0.001). The pattern of AAA growth reduction due to RT was corroborated in linear regression analyses correcting for initial AAA diameter. A further investigation with respect to dose-dependency of radiation effects on AAA growth, however, revealed no apparent association. CONCLUSION: In this study, both infield and outfield radiation exposure were associated with reduced AAA growth. This finding warrants further investigation, both in a larger scale clinical cohort and on a molecular level.

Radiation and Chemotherapy are Associated with Altered Aortic Aneurysm Growth in Patients with Cancer: Impact of Synchronous Cancer and Aortic Aneurysm.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the associations between malignancy, therapeutic regimens, and aorto-iliac aneurysm (i.e., abdominal aortic aneurysm [AAA]) growth rates. METHODS: A retrospective single centre analysis identified patients with an AAA plus cancer. Patients who had two or more computed tomography angiograms over six months or more and additional malignancy were included. Clinical data and aneurysm diameters were analysed. AAA growth under cancer therapy (chemotherapy or radiation) was compared with a non-cancer AAA control cohort and to meta-analysis data. Statistics included t tests and a linear regression model with correction for initial aortic diameter and type of treatment. RESULTS: From 2003 to 2020, 217 patients (median age 70 years; 92% male) with 246 aneurysms (58.8% AAA) and 238 malignancies were identified. Prostate (26.7%) and lung (15.7%) cancer were most frequently seen. One hundred and fifty-seven patients (72.3%) received chemotherapy, 105 patients (48.4%) radiation, and 79 (36.4%) both. Annual AAA growth (mean ± standard deviation) was not statistically significantly different for cancer and non-cancer patients (2.0 ± 2.3 vs. 2.8 ± 2.1 mm/year; p = .20). However, subgroup analyses revealed that radiation was associated with a statistically significantly reduced mean aneurysm growth rate compared with cancer patients without radiation (1.1 ± 1.3 vs. 1.6 ± 2.1 mm/year; p = .046) and to the non-cancer control cohort (1.7 ± 1.9 vs. 2.8 ± 2.1 mm/year; p = .007). Administration of antimetabolites resulted in statistically significantly increased AAA growth (+ 0.9 mm/year; p = .011), while topoisomerase inhibitors (- 0.8 mm/year; p = .17) and anti-androgens (- 0.5 mm/year; p = .27) showed a possible trend for reduced growth. Similar observations were noted for iliac aneurysms (n = 85). Additionally, the effects persisted for chemotherapy combinations (2.6 ± 1.4 substances/patient). CONCLUSION: Patients with cancer and concomitant aortic aneurysms may require intensified monitoring when undergoing specific therapies, such as antimetabolite treatment, as they may experience an increased aneurysm growth rate. Radiation may be associated with reduced aneurysm growth.

Pre-operative cellular dissociation grading in biopsies is highly predictive of post-operative tumour stage and patient outcome in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Pre-operative treatment planning in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is mainly dictated by clinical staging, which has major shortcomings. Histologic grading is irrelevant due to its lack of prognostic impact. Recently, a novel grading termed Cellular Dissociation Grade (CDG) based on Tumour Budding and Cell Nest Size was shown to be highly prognostic for resected HNSCC. We aimed to probe the predictive and prognostic impact of CDG in the pre-operative biopsies of HNSCC. METHODS: We evaluated CDG in n = 160 pre-therapeutic biopsies from patients who received standardised treatment following German guidelines, and correlated the results with pre- and post-therapeutic staging data and clinical outcome. RESULTS: Pre-operative CDG was highly predictive of post-operative tumour stage, including the prediction of occult lymph node metastasis. Uni- and multivariate analysis revealed CDG to be an independent prognosticator of overall, disease-specific and disease-free survival (p < 0.001). Hazard ratio for disease-specific survival was 6.1 (11.1) for nG2 (nG3) compared with nG1 tumours. CONCLUSIONS: CDG is a strong outcome predictor in the pre-treatment scenario of HNSCC and identifies patients with nodal-negative disease. CDG is a purely histology-based prognosticator in the pre-therapeutic setting that supplements clinical staging and may aide therapeutic stratification of HNSCC patients.

Sotorasib in KRAS G12C-mutated non-small cell lung cancer: A multicenter real-world experience from the compassionate use program in Germany.

BACKGROUND: Sotorasib is a first-in-class KRAS p.G12C-inhibitor that has entered clinical trials in pretreated patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in 2018. First response rates were promising in the CodeBreaK trials. It remains unclear whether response to sotorasib and outcomes differ in a real-world setting when including patients underrepresented in clinical trials. METHODS: Patients with KRAS p.G12C-mutated advanced or metastatic NSCLC received sotorasib within the German multicenter sotorasib compassionate use program between 2020 to 2022. Data on efficacy, tolerability, and survival were analyzed in the full cohort and in subgroups of special interest such as co-occurring mutations and across PD-L1 expression levels. RESULTS: We analyzed 163 patients who received sotorasib after a median of two treatment lines (range, 0 to 7). Every fourth patient had a poor performance status and 38% had brain metastases (BM). The objective response rate was 38.7%. The median overall survival was 9.8 months (95% CI, 6.5 to not reached). Median real-world (rw) progression-free survival was 4.8 months (9% CI, 3.9 to 5.9). Dose reductions and permanent discontinuation were necessary in 35 (21.5%) and 7 (4.3%) patients, respectively. Efficacy seems to be influenced by PD-L1 expression and a co-occurring KEAP1 mutation. KEAP1 was associated with an inferior survival. Other factors such as BM, STK11, and TP53 mutations had no impact on response and survival. CONCLUSION: First results from a real-world population confirm promising efficacy of sotorasib for the treatment of advanced KRAS p.G12C-mutated NSCLC. Patients with co-occurring KEAP1 mutations seem to derive less benefit.

Survival benefit with checkpoint inhibitors versus chemotherapy is modified by brain metastases in patients with recurrent small cell lung cancer.

Introduction: Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a rapidly growing malignancy with early distant metastases. Up to 70% will develop brain metastases, and the poor prognosis of these patients has not changed considerably. The potential of checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) in treating recurrent (r/r) SCLC and their effect on brain metastases remain unclear. Methods: In this retrospective multicenter study, we analyzed r/r SCLC patients receiving second or further-line CPI versus chemotherapy between 2010 and 2020. We applied multivariable-adjusted Cox regression analysis to test for differences in 1-year mortality and real-world progression. We then used interaction analysis to evaluate whether brain metastases (BM) and/or cranial radiotherapy (CRT) modified the effect of CPI versus chemotherapy on overall survival. Results: Among 285 patients, 99 (35%) received CPI and 186 (65%) patients received chemotherapy. Most patients (93%) in the CPI group received nivolumab/ipilimumab. Chemotherapy patients were entirely CPI-naïve and only one CPI patient had received atezolizumab for first-line treatment. CPI was associated with a lower risk of 1-year mortality (adjusted Hazard Ratio [HRadj] 0.59, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.82, p=0.002). This benefit was modified by BM and CRT, indicating a pronounced effect in patients without BM (with CRT: HRadj 0.34, p=0.003; no CRT: HRadj 0.50, p=0.05), while there was no effect in patients with BM who received CRT (HRadj 0.85, p=0.59). Conclusion: CPI was associated with a lower risk of 1-year mortality compared to chemotherapy. However, the effect on OS was significantly modified by intracranial disease and radiotherapy, suggesting the benefit was driven by patients without BM.

Low-dose melphalan in elderly patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia: A well-tolerated and effective treatment after hypomethylating-agent failure.

Relapsed or refractory (R/R) disease remains challenging in acute myeloid leukemia (AML), especially in elderly patients not considered eligible for intensive treatment options. We retrospectively evaluated the safety and efficacy of low-dose melphalan (LD-Mel) in a multicenter analysis in patients over 65 years with R/R AML, who previously had received ≥1 non-curative treatment line. The study included 31 patients (median age 77 years) with 1-4 previous treatment lines. Three patients (9.7%) achieved a complete remission. Two patients (6.5%) achieved a partial remission, nine patients (29.0%) had disease stabilization with reduction of peripheral or bone marrow blast burden, resulting in an overall response rate of 16.1% and 45.2% achieved clinical benefit. Responders showed a significantly longer median overall survival than non-responders (16.3 vs. 2.3 months, p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis identified complex karyotype as the only risk factor associated with inferior survival (p < 0.001), whereas prior treatment with hypomethylating agents (HMAs) in 25 of 31 patients was associated with superior OS, regardless of prior response to HMAs (p = 0.03). LD-Mel was well tolerated, with mild myelosuppressive side effects. Conclusively, LD-Mel is an effective treatment option in elderly patients with R/R AML, particularly after HMA therapy and in the absence of a complex karyotype.

Correlation between delivered radiation doses to the brainstem or vestibular organ and nausea & vomiting toxicity in patients with head and neck cancers - an observational clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: Today intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) can be considered the standard of care in patients with head and neck tumors. IMRT treatment plans are proven to reduce acute treatment related side effects by optimal sparing of organs at risk (OAR). At the same time, areas that were out of the former 3D fields now receive low radiation doses. Amongst those areas the brainstem (BS) and the vestibular system (VS) are known to be physiologically connected to nausea and vomiting (NV). In our study we tried to find out, if doses to these areas are linked to NV. MATERIAL & METHODS: NV were assessed at different time points during treatment in 26 patients leading to 98 documented toxicity scores that were later correlated to dose deposition in the described areas. Patients were either treated with normo-fractionated or simultaneously integrated boost IMRT plans in a curative approach. Subareas of the BS as well as the VS were delineated. Toxicity was rated based on the common toxicity criteria (CTCAE Version 4.0). Other factors such as age, gender, chemotherapy, location of the tumor, irradiated volume and unilateral dose to the VS were taken into account and analyzed also. RESULTS: The majority (65.4%) of our patients experienced an episode of NV at least once during treatment. NV was more frequent when treating the oropharyngeal region compared to the hypopharyngeal region, as well as when patients were female and/ or of a younger age. Nevertheless, upon statistical analysis (ROC analysis, 'within/ between analysis') no significant association between delivered doses to subareas and toxicity could be demonstrated. CONCLUSION: In our analysis, no significant correlation between radiation dose to the BS or the VS and the occurrence of NV could be found. Therefore, until conclusive data are available, we recommend to rely on the published data regarding OAR tolerance within the BS and not to compromise on dose coverage.