Standard-of-care systemic therapy with or without stereotactic body radiotherapy in patients with oligoprogressive breast cancer or non-small-cell lung cancer (Consolidative Use of Radiotherapy to Block [CURB] oligoprogression): an open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with metastatic cancer eventually develop resistance to systemic therapy, with some having limited disease progression (ie, oligoprogression). We aimed to assess whether stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) targeting oligoprogressive sites could improve patient outcomes. METHODS: We did a phase 2, open-label, randomised controlled trial of SBRT in patients with oligoprogressive metastatic breast cancer or non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after having received at least first-line systemic therapy, with oligoprogression defined as five or less progressive lesions on PET-CT or CT. Patients aged 18 years or older were enrolled from a tertiary cancer centre in New York, NY, USA, and six affiliated regional centres in the states of New York and New Jersey, with a 1:1 randomisation between standard of care (standard-of-care group) and SBRT plus standard of care (SBRT group). Randomisation was done with a computer-based algorithm with stratification by number of progressive sites of metastasis, receptor or driver genetic alteration status, primary site, and type of systemic therapy previously received. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, measured up to 12 months. We did a prespecified subgroup analysis of the primary endpoint by disease site. All analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03808662, and is complete. FINDINGS: From Jan 1, 2019, to July 31, 2021, 106 patients were randomly assigned to standard of care (n=51; 23 patients with breast cancer and 28 patients with NSCLC) or SBRT plus standard of care (n=55; 24 patients with breast cancer and 31 patients with NSCLC). 16 (34%) of 47 patients with breast cancer had triple-negative disease, and 51 (86%) of 59 patients with NSCLC had no actionable driver mutation. The study was closed to accrual before reaching the targeted sample size, after the primary efficacy endpoint was met during a preplanned interim analysis. The median follow-up was 11·6 months for patients in the standard-of-care group and 12·1 months for patients in the SBRT group. The median progression-free survival was 3·2 months (95% CI 2·0-4·5) for patients in the standard-of-care group versus 7·2 months (4·5-10·0) for patients in the SBRT group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·53, 95% CI 0·35-0·81; p=0·0035). The median progression-free survival was higher for patients with NSCLC in the SBRT group than for those with NSCLC in the standard-of-care group (10·0 months [7·2-not reached] vs 2·2 months [95% CI 2·0-4·5]; HR 0·41, 95% CI 0·22-0·75; p=0·0039), but no difference was found for patients with breast cancer (4·4 months [2·5-8·7] vs 4·2 months [1·8-5·5]; 0·78, 0·43-1·43; p=0·43). Grade 2 or worse adverse events occurred in 21 (41%) patients in the standard-of-care group and 34 (62%) patients in the SBRT group. Nine (16%) patients in the SBRT group had grade 2 or worse toxicities related to SBRT, including gastrointestinal reflux disease, pain exacerbation, radiation pneumonitis, brachial plexopathy, and low blood counts. INTERPRETATION: The trial showed that progression-free survival was increased in the SBRT plus standard-of-care group compared with standard of care only. Oligoprogression in patients with metastatic NSCLC could be effectively treated with SBRT plus standard of care, leading to more than a four-times increase in progression-free survival compared with standard of care only. By contrast, no benefit was observed in patients with oligoprogressive breast cancer. Further studies to validate these findings and understand the differential benefits are warranted. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute.

Impact of Telemedicine on Patient Satisfaction and Perceptions of Care Quality in Radiation Oncology.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has transformed cancer care with the rapid expansion of telemedicine, but given the limited use of telemedicine in oncology, concerns have been raised about the quality of care being delivered. We assessed the patient experience with telemedicine in routine radiation oncology practice to determine satisfaction, quality of care, and opportunities for optimization. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients seen within a multistate comprehensive cancer center for prepandemic office visits and intrapandemic telemedicine visits in December 2019 through June 2020 who completed patient experience questionnaires were evaluated. Patient satisfaction between office and telemedicine consultations were compared, patient visit-type preferences were assessed, and factors associated with an office visit preference were determined. RESULTS: In total, 1,077 patients were assessed (office visit, n=726; telemedicine, n=351). The telemedicine-consult survey response rate was 40%. No significant differences were seen in satisfaction scores between office and telemedicine consultations, including the appointment experience versus expectation, quality of physician's explanation, and level of physician concern and friendliness. Among telemedicine survey respondents, 45% and 34% preferred telemedicine and office visits, respectively, and 21% had no preference for their visit type. Most respondents found their confidence in their physician (90%), understanding of the treatment plan (88%), and confidence in their treatment (87%) to be better or no different than with an office visit. Patients with better performance status and who were married/partnered were more likely to prefer in-person office visit consultations (odds ratio [OR], 1.04 [95% CI, 1.00-1.08]; P=.047, and 2.41 [95% CI, 1.14-5.47]; P=.009, respectively). Patients with telephone-only encounters were more likely to report better treatment plan understanding with an office visit (OR, 2.25; 95% CI, 1.00-4.77; P=.04). CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to assess telemedicine in routine radiation oncology practice, and found high patient satisfaction and confidence in their care. Optimization of telemedicine in oncology should be a priority, specifically access to audiovisual capabilities that can improve patient-oncologist communication.

Treatment planning and outcomes effects of reducing the preferred mean esophagus dose for conventionally fractionated non-small cell lung cancer radiotherapy.

Based on an analysis of published literature, our department recently lowered the preferred mean esophagus dose (MED) constraint for conventionally fractionated (2 Gy/fraction in approximately 30 fractions) treatment of locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC) with the goal of reducing the incidence of symptomatic acute esophagitis (AE). The goal of the change was to encourage treatment planners to achieve a MED close to 21 Gy while still permitting MED to go up to the previous guideline of 34 Gy in difficult cases. We compared all our suitable LA-NSCLC patients treated with plans from one year before through one year after the constraint change. The primary endpoint for this study was achievability of the new constraint by the planners; the secondary endpoint was reduction in symptomatic AE. Planners were able to achieve the new constraint in statistically significantly more cases during the year following its explicit implementation than in the year before (P = 0.0025). Furthermore, 38% of patients treated after the new constraint developed symptomatic AE during their treatment as opposed to 48% of the patients treated before. This is a clinically desirable endpoint although the observed difference was not statistically significant. A subsequent power calculation suggests that this is due to the relatively small number of patients in the study.

Cost Effectiveness of External Beam Radiation Therapy versus Percutaneous Image-Guided Cryoablation for Palliation of Uncomplicated Bone Metastases.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the cost effectiveness of incorporating cryoablation in the treatment regimens for uncomplicated bone metastases using radiation therapy (RT) in single-fraction RT (SFRT) or multiple-fraction RT (MFRT) regimens. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A Markov model was constructed using 1-month cycles over a lifetime horizon to compare the cost effectiveness of multiple strategies, including RT followed by RT (RT-RT) for recurrent pain, RT followed by cryoablation (RT-ablation), and cryoablation followed by RT (ablation-RT). RT-RT consisted of 8 Gy in 1 fraction/8 Gy in 1 fraction (SFRT-SFRT) and 30 Gy in 10 fractions/20 Gy in 5 fractions (MFRT-MFRT). Probabilities and utilities were extracted from a search of the medical literature. Costs were calculated from a payer perspective using 2017 Medicare reimbursement in an outpatient setting. Incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated using strategies evaluated for willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). To account for model uncertainty, one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: In the base case analysis, SFRT-ablation was cost effective relative to SFRT-SFRT at $96,387/QALY. MFRT-ablation was cost effective relative to MFRT-MFRT at $85,576/QALY. Ablation-SFRT and ablation-MFRT were not cost effective with ICERs >$100,000/QALY. In one-way sensitivity analyses, results were highly sensitive to variation in multiple model parameters, including median survival (base: 9 months), with SFRT-SFRT favored at median survival ≤8.7 months. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis examining SFRT-based regimens showed that SFRT-ablation was preferred in 36.9% of simulations at WTP of $100,000/QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Cryoablation is a potentially cost-effective alternative to reirradiation with RT for recurrent of pain following RT; however, no strategy incorporating initial cryoablation was cost effective.

The patient's perspective on breast radiotherapy: Initial fears and expectations versus reality.

BACKGROUND: Although the efficacy and toxicity of breast radiotherapy (RT) has been studied extensively, to the authors' knowledge little is known regarding the patient's perspective on the modern breast RT experience. To better inform future patients and providers, the authors explored patient perceptions of their RT experience. METHODS: Consecutive patients who were free of disease recurrence and who had been treated between 2012 and 2016 were surveyed regarding their original fears, how short-term and long-term toxicities compared with initial expectations, and how pretreatment beliefs concerning RT compared with the actual experience. RESULTS: A total of 502 patients were surveyed, with a response rate of 65% (327 patients). The median patient age and posttreatment follow-up was 59 years and 31 months, respectively. Approximately 83% of patients (269 patients) underwent breast conservation therapy. Although approximately 68% of patients (221 patients) endorsed that they initially had little to no knowledge regarding RT, approximately 47% (152 patients) reported that they had heard frightening stories. Approximately 2% of patients (6 patients) agreed that the negative stories they previously heard about RT were actually true. Approximately 92% of patients treated with breast conservation (247 patients) and 81% of patients who underwent mastectomy (47 patients) agreed with the statement "If future patients knew the real truth about RT, they would be less scared about treatment." Approximately 83% (272 patients) and 84% (274 patients), respectively, of all patients reported the overall severity of short-term and long-term side effects to be better than or as expected. CONCLUSIONS: Breast RT is associated with misconceptions and fears. Patients' experiences with modern breast RT appear to be superior to expectations, and the majority of patients in the current study agreed that their initial negative impressions were unfounded. Cancer 2018;124:1673-81. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Patient-reported quality-of-life outcomes after de-escalated chemoradiation for human papillomavirus-positive oropharyngeal carcinoma: Findings from a phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: The current study represents a subset analysis of quality-of-life (QOL) outcomes among patients treated on a phase 2 trial of de-escalated chemoradiation for human papillomavirus (HPV)-associated oropharyngeal cancer. METHODS: Eligibility included newly diagnosed, (American Joint Committee on Cancer, 7th edition) stage III or IV oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma, p16 positivity, age ≥ 18 years, and a Zubrod performance status of 0 to 1. Treatment was induction paclitaxel at a dose of 175 mg/m2 and carboplatin at an area under the curve of 6 for 2 cycles followed by response-adapted, dose-reduced radiation of 54 Gy or 60 Gy with weekly concurrent paclitaxel at a dose of 30 mg/m2 . The University of Washington Quality of Life (UW-QOL) and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Head and Neck questionnaires were used to assess patient-reported QOL as a secondary endpoint. RESULTS: A total of 45 patients were registered, 40 of whom completed QOL surveys and were evaluable. Nadirs for overall UW-QOL and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Head and Neck scores were reached at 4 weeks after treatment but returned to baseline at 3 months. Nearly all functional indices returned to baseline levels by 6 to 9 months. The mean overall UW-QOL score was 71.6 at baseline compared with 70.8, 73.0, 83.3, and 81.1, respectively, at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years after therapy. The percentage of patients rating their overall QOL as "very good" or "outstanding" at 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years using the UW-QOL was 50%, 77%, and 84%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This de-escalation regimen achieved QOL outcomes that were favorable compared with historical controls. These results serve as powerful evidence that ongoing de-escalation efforts lead to tangible gains in function and QOL. Cancer 2018;124:521-9. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Previous radiotherapy and the clinical activity and toxicity of pembrolizumab in the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer: a secondary analysis of the KEYNOTE-001 phase 1 trial.

BACKGROUND: Preclinical studies have found radiotherapy enhances antitumour immune responses. We aimed to assess disease control and pulmonary toxicity in patients who previously received radiotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) before receiving pembrolizumab. METHODS: We assessed patients with advanced NSCLC treated on the phase 1 KEYNOTE-001 trial at a single institution (University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA). Patients were aged 18 years or older, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1 or less, had adequate organ function, and no history of pneumonitis. Patients received pembrolizumab at a dose of either 2 mg/kg of bodyweight or 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks, or 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks, until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or other protocol-defined reasons for discontinuation. Disease response and pulmonary toxicity were prospectively assessed by Immune-related Response Criteria and Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0. The primary objective of the KEYNOTE-001 trial was to assess the safety, side-effect profile, and antitumour activity of pembrolizumab. For our secondary analysis, patients were divided into subgroups to compare patients who previously received radiotherapy with patients who had not. Our primary objective was to determine whether previous radiotherapy affected progression-free survival, overall survival, and pulmonary toxicity in the intention-to-treat population. The KEYNOTE-001 trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01295827. FINDINGS: Between May 22, 2012, and July 11, 2014, 98 patients were enrolled and received their first cycle of pembrolizumab. One patient was lost to follow-up. 42 (43%) of 97 patients had previously received any radiotherapy for the treatment of NSCLC before the first cycle of pembrolizumab. 38 (39%) of 97 patients received extracranial radiotherapy and 24 (25%) of 97 patients received thoracic radiotherapy. Median follow-up for surviving patients was 32·5 months (IQR 29·8-34·1). Progression-free survival with pembrolizumab was significantly longer in patients who previously received any radiotherapy than in patients without previous radiotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] 0·56 [95% CI 0·34-0·91], p=0·019; median progression-free survival 4·4 months [95% CI 2·1-8·6] vs 2·1 months [1·6-2·3]) and for patients who previously received extracranial radiotherapy compared with those without previous extracranial radiotherapy (HR 0·50 [0·30-0·84], p=0·0084; median progression-free survival 6·3 months [95% CI 2·1-10·4] vs 2·0 months [1·8-2·1]). Overall survival with pembrolizumab was significantly longer in patients who previously received any radiotherapy than in patients without previous radiotherapy (HR 0·58 [95% CI 0·36-0·94], p=0·026; median overall survival 10·7 months [95% CI 6·5-18·9] vs 5·3 months [2·7-7·7]) and for patients who previously received extracranial radiotherapy compared with those without previous extracranial radiotherapy (0·59 [95% CI 0·36-0·96], p=0·034; median overall survival 11·6 months [95% CI 6·5-20·5] vs 5·3 months [3·0-8·5]). 15 (63%) of 24 patients who had previously received thoracic radiotherapy had any recorded pulmonary toxicity versus 29 (40%) of 73 patients with no previous thoracic radiotherapy. Three (13%) patients with previous thoracic radiotherapy had treatment-related pulmonary toxicity compared with one (1%) of those without; frequency of grade 3 or worse treatment-related pulmonary toxicities was similar (one patient in each group). INTERPRETATION: Our data suggest that previous treatment with radiotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC results in longer progression-free survival and overall survival with pembrolizumab treatment than that seen in patients who did not have previous radiotherapy, with an acceptable safety profile. Further clinical trials investigating this combination are needed to determine the optimal treatment strategy for patients with advanced NSCLC. FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health.

Treatment trends for patients with brain metastases: Does practice reflect the data?

BACKGROUND: Published guidelines regarding the optimal treatment strategies for brain metastases focus on patients with ≤3 lesions. As delivery techniques for stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) improve, radiation oncologists are increasingly using it for patients with >3 metastases. In the current study, the authors sought to characterize practice patterns among practitioners to identify areas of controversy. METHODS: A survey of practicing radiation oncologists was distributed via e-mail. Responses were collected from April 1 to May 5, 2016. Survey data were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 711 currently practicing radiation oncologists responded, for a response rate of 12.5%. Specialists in central nervous system tumors (CNS specialists) were more likely to treat higher numbers of patients with brain metastases with SRS. There was a significant difference in the optimal "cutoff number" used when deciding how many lesions to treat with SRS versus whole-brain radiotherapy. Cutoff numbers were significantly higher for high-volume CNS specialists (≥10 patients/month) than for either low-volume CNS specialists (5-9 patients/month) or high-volume, non-CNS specialists (8.1 vs 5.6 and 5.1, respectively; P<.001). A majority of respondents (56%) identified patients with 4 to 6 brain metastases as being the most challenging patients to treat. CONCLUSIONS: To the authors' knowledge, there appears to be no consensus regarding the optimal treatment strategy among patients with >3 brain metastases, and practice patterns are heterogeneous. Radiation oncologists, especially high-volume CNS specialists, are treating significantly more brain metastases with SRS than what currently is recommended by published consensus guidelines. Providers struggle with patients with a moderate intracranial disease burden. Further prospective studies are needed to support these practice patterns and guide decision making. Cancer 2017;123:2274-2282. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

MyD88 and TRIF synergistic interaction is required for TH1-cell polarization with a synthetic TLR4 agonist adjuvant.

Glucopyranosyl lipid adjuvant-stable emulsion (GLA-SE) is a synthetic adjuvant TLR4 agonist that promotes potent poly-functional T(H)1 responses. Different TLR4 agonists may preferentially signal via MyD88 or TIR-domain-containing adapter inducing IFN-beta (TRIF) to exert adjuvant effects; however, the contribution of MyD88 and TRIF signaling to the induction of polyclonal T(H)1 responses by TLR4 agonist adjuvants has not been studied in vivo. To determine whether GLA-SE preferentially signals through MyD88 or TRIF, we evaluated the immune response against a candidate tuberculosis (TB) vaccine Ag following immunization of mice lacking either signaling adapter compared with that of wild-type mice. We find that both MyD88 and TRIF are necessary for GLA-SE to induce a poly-functional T(H)1 immune response characterized by CD4(+) T cells producing IFN-γ, TNF, and IL-2, as well as IgG2c class switching, when paired with the TB vaccine Ag ID93. Accordingly, the protective efficacy of ID93/GLA-SE immunization against aerosolized Mycobacterium tuberculosis was lost when either signaling molecule was ablated. We demonstrate that MyD88 and TRIF must be expressed in the same cell for the in vivo T(H)1-skewing adjuvant activity, indicating that these two signaling pathways cooperate on an intracellular level. Thus engagement of both the MyD88 and TRIF signaling pathways are essential for the effective adjuvant activity of this TLR4 agonist.

An 18F-FDG PET/CT and Mean Lung Dose Model to Predict Early Radiation Pneumonitis in Stage III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients Treated with Chemoradiation and Immunotherapy.

Radiation pneumonitis (RP) that develops early (i.e., within 3 mo) (RPEarly) after completion of concurrent chemoradiation (cCRT) leads to treatment discontinuation and poorer survival for patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer. Since no RPEarly risk model exists, we explored whether published RP models and pretreatment 18F-FDG PET/CT-derived features predict RPEarly Methods: One hundred sixty patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer treated with cCRT and consolidative immunotherapy were analyzed for RPEarly Three published RP models that included the mean lung dose (MLD) and patient characteristics were examined. Pretreatment 18F-FDG PET/CT normal-lung SUV featured included the following: 10th percentile of SUV (SUVP10), 90th percentile of SUV (SUVP90), SUVmax, SUVmean, minimum SUV, and SD. Associations between models/features and RPEarly were assessed using area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC), P values, and the Hosmer-Lemeshow test (pHL). The cohort was randomly split, with similar RPEarly rates, into a 70%/30% derivation/internal validation subset. Results: Twenty (13%) patients developed RPEarly Predictors for RPEarly were MLD alone (AUC, 0.72; P = 0.02; pHL, 0.87), SUVP10, SUVP90, and SUVmean (AUC, 0.70-0.74; P = 0.003-0.006; pHL, 0.67-0.70). The combined MLD and SUVP90 model generalized in the validation subset and was deemed the final RPEarly model (RPEarly risk = 1/[1+e(- x )]; x = -6.08 + [0.17 × MLD] + [1.63 × SUVP90]). The final model refitted in the 160 patients indicated improvement over the published MLD-alone model (AUC, 0.77 vs. 0.72; P = 0.0001 vs. 0.02; pHL, 0.65 vs. 0.87). Conclusion: Patients at risk for RPEarly can be detected with high certainty by combining the normal lung's MLD and pretreatment 18F-FDG PET/CT SUVP90 This refined model can be used to identify patients at an elevated risk for premature immunotherapy discontinuation due to RPEarly and could allow for interventions to improve treatment outcomes.

Clinical and Dosimetric Risk Factors Associated With Radiation-Induced Lung Toxicities After Multiple Courses of Lung Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy.

Purpose: Data are limited on radiation-induced lung toxicities (RILT) after multiple courses of lung stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). We herein analyze a large cohort of patients to explore the clinical and dosimetric risk factors associated with RILT in such settings. Methods and Materials: A single institutional database of patients treated with multiple courses of lung SBRT between January 2014 and December 2019 was analyzed. Grade 2 or higher (G2+) RILT after the last course of SBRT was the primary endpoint. Composite plans were generated with advanced algorithms including deformable registration and equivalent dose adjustment. Logistic regression analyses were performed to examine correlations between patient or treatment factors including dosimetry and G2+ RILT. Risk stratification of patients and lung constraints based on acceptable normal tissue complication probability were calculated based on risk factors identified. Results: Among 110 eligible patients (56 female and 54 male), there were 64 synchronous (58.2%; defined as 2 courses of SBRT delivered within 30 days) and 46 metachronous (41.8%) courses of SBRT. The composite median lung V20, lung V5, and mean lung dose were 9.9% (interquartile range [IQR], 7.3%-12.4%), 32.2% (IQR, 25.5%-40.1%), and 7.0 Gy (IQR, 5.5 Gy-8.6 Gy), respectively. With a median follow-up of 21.1 months, 30 patients (27.3%) experienced G2+ RILT. Five patients (4.5%) developed G3 RILT, and 1 patient (0.9%) developed G4 RILT, and no patients developed G5 RILT. On multivariable regression analysis, female sex (odds ratio [OR], 4.35; 95% CI, 1.49%-14.3%; P = .01), synchronous SBRT (OR, 8.78; 95% CI, 2.27%-47.8%; P = .004), prior G2+ RILT (OR, 29.8; 95% CI, 2.93%-437%; P = .007) and higher composite lung V20 (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.02%-1.38%; P = .030) were associated with significantly higher likelihood of G2+ RILT. Conclusions: Our data suggest an acceptable incidence of G2+ RILT after multiple courses of lung SBRT. Female sex, synchronous SBRT, prior G2+ RILT, and higher composite lung V20 may be risk factors for G2+ RILT.

Clinical outcomes of stereotactic body radiation therapy for malignant pleural mesothelioma.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study is to determine the outcomes and toxicities of patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were extracted from an institutional tumor registry for patients diagnosed with mesothelioma and treated with SBRT. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses were employed to determine local control (LC) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Forty-four patients with 59 total treated tumors from December 2006 to April 2022 were identified. Fifty-one (86.4 %) cases had oligoprogressive disease (five sites or less). The median prescription dose delivered was 3000 cGy in 5 fractions (range: 2700-6000 cGy in 3-8 fractions). Fifty-one (86.4 %) tumors were in the pleura, 4 (6.8 %) spine, 2 (3.4 %) bone, 1 (1.7 %) brain, and 1 (1.7 %) pancreas. The median follow-up from SBRT completion for those alive at last follow-up was 28 months (range: 14-52 months). The most common toxicities were fatigue (50.8 %), nausea (22.0 %), pain flare (15.3 %), esophagitis (6.8 %), dermatitis (6.8 %), and pneumonitis (5.1 %). There were no grade ≥ 3 acute or late toxicities. There were 2 (3.4 %) local failures, one of the pleura and another of the spine. One-year LC was 92.9 % (95 % CI: 74.6-98.2 %) for all lesions and 96.3 % (95 % CI: 76.5-99.5 %) for pleural tumors. One-year LC was 90.9 % (95 % CI: 68.1-97.6 %) for epithelioid tumors and 92.1 % (95 % CI: 72.1-98.0 %) for oligoprogressive tumors. One-year OS from time of SBRT completion was 36.4 % (95 % CI: 22.6-50.3 %). On multivariable analysis, KPS was the lone significant predictor for OS (p = 0.029). CONCLUSIONS: Our single-institutional experience on patients with MPM suggests that SBRT is safe with a low toxicity profile and potentially achieve good local control.

Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Stage IIA to IIIA Inoperable Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Phase 1 Dose-Escalation Trial.

PURPOSE: Larger tumors are underrepresented in most prospective trials on stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for inoperable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We performed this phase 1 trial to specifically study the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of SBRT for NSCLC >3 cm. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A 3 + 3 dose-escalation design (cohort A) with an expansion cohort at the MTD (cohort B) was used. Patients with inoperable NSCLC >3 cm (T2-4) were eligible. Select ipsilateral hilar and single-station mediastinal nodes were permitted. The initial SBRT dose was 40 Gy in 5 fractions, with planned escalation to 50 and 60 Gy in 5 fractions. Adjuvant chemotherapy was mandatory for cohort A and optional for cohort B, but no patients in cohort B received chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was SBRT-related acute grade (G) 4+ or persistent G3 toxicities (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.03). Secondary endpoints included local failure (LF), distant metastases, disease progression, and overall survival. RESULTS: The median age was 80 years; tumor size was >3 cm and ≤5 cm in 20 (59%) and >5 cm in 14 patients (41%). In cohort A (n = 9), 3 patients treated to 50 Gy experienced G3 radiation pneumonitis (RP), thus defining the MTD. In the larger dose-expansion cohort B (n = 25), no radiation therapy-related G4+ toxicities and no G3 RP occurred; only 2 patients experienced G2 RP. The 2-year cumulative incidence of LF was 20.2%, distant failure was 34.7%, and disease progression was 54.4%. Two-year overall survival was 53%. A biologically effective dose (BED) <100 Gy was associated with higher LF (P = .006); advanced stage and higher neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio were associated with greater disease progression (both P = .004). CONCLUSIONS: Fifty Gy in 5 fractions is the MTD for SBRT to tumors >3 cm. A higher BED is associated with fewer LFs even in larger tumors. Cohort B appears to have had less toxicity, possibly due to the omission of chemotherapy.

40 Gray in 5 Fractions for Salvage Reirradiation of Spine Lesions Previously Treated With Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: A retrospective single-center analysis of the safety and efficacy of reirradiation to 40 Gy in 5 fractions (reSBRT) in patients previously treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy to the spine was performed. METHODS: We identified 102 consecutive patients treated with reSBRT for 105 lesions between 3/2013 and 8/2021. Sixty-three patients (61.8%) were treated to the same vertebral level, and 39 (38.2%) to overlapping immediately adjacent levels. Local control was defined as the absence of progression within the treated target volume. The probability of local progression was estimated using a cumulative incidence curve. Death without local progression was considered a competing risk. RESULTS: Most patients had extensive metastatic disease (54.9%) and were treated to the thoracic spine (53.8%). The most common regimen in the first course of stereotactic body radiotherapy was 27 Gy in 3 fractions, and the median time to reSBRT was 16.4 months. At the time of simulation, 44% of lesions had advanced epidural disease. Accordingly, 80% had myelogram simulations. Both the vertebral body and posterior elements were treated in 86% of lesions. At a median follow-up time of 13.2 months, local failure occurred in 10 lesions (9.5%). The 6- and 12-month cumulative incidences of local failure were 4.8% and 6%, respectively. Seven patients developed radiation-related neuropathy, and 1 patient developed myelopathy. The vertebral compression fracture rate was 16.7%. CONCLUSION: In patients with extensive disease involvement, reSBRT of spine metastases with 40 Gy in 5 fractions seems to be safe and effective. Prospective trials are needed to determine the optimal dose and fractionation in this clinical scenario.

Utility of ¹¹¹indium-pentetreotide scintigraphy in patients with neuroendocrine tumors.

BACKGROUND: Neuroendocrine (NE) tumors pose a diagnostic challenge with the need to utilize a combination of biochemical analysis, standard cross-sectional imaging, and more recently, nuclear medicine scans such as (111)indium-pentetreotide scintigraphy (somatostatin receptor scintigraphy, SRS; OctreoScan, Covidien Imaging Solutions, Hazelwood, MO). In this study we sought to evaluate the clinical utility of scintigraphy in the diagnosis and management of patients with NE tumors at a major university hospital. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed on all patients who underwent both (111)indium-pentetreotide scintigraphy and computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (CT/MRI) at a single institution between February 2001 and July 2008. Charts were reviewed for patient demographics, symptoms of NE disease, and results of biochemical testing, imaging studies, histopathologic diagnosis, and medical and/or surgical management. RESULTS: One hundred forty-five patients received (111)indium-pentetreotide scintigraphy (SRS) and concurrent cross-sectional imaging (CT/MRI) over the 7-year period studied. In the evaluation of primary disease, 60 % of tumors were localized by anatomic imaging, significantly greater than the 15 % detection rate achieved by SRS. In the evaluation of recurrent disease, 61 % of NE tumors were localized by cross-sectional imaging, significantly greater than the 31 % detection rate of SRS. Scintigraphy identified disease foci not seen on CT/MRI in just 8 of 74 of the cohort with evidence of disease and only altered the surgical management in 3 of 74 cases. CONCLUSIONS: Cross-sectional CT/MRI imaging is sufficient for the localization of NE tumors. (111)Indium-pentetreotide scintigraphy does not significantly alter the surgical management of patients with NE tumors, and we suggest that it be selectively reserved for patients with disease that is occult to cross-sectional imaging.

Detection of COVID-19 pulmonary manifestations with radiotherapy simulation CT imaging.

COVID-19 is associated with characteristic lung CT findings. Radiotherapy simulation CT scans may reveal characteristic COVID-19 findings and identify patients with active or prior infection. We reviewed patients undergoing CT simulation at a major cancer center in an early epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. Scans were reviewed by radiation oncologists using established radiographic criteria for COVID-19 pneumonia. Radiographic classifications were compared with available COVID-19 PCR test results. A one-tailed t-test was used to compare the rate of positive COVID-19 tests in radiographically suspicious vs. non-suspicious groups. Scans deemed suspicious were re-reviewed by expert diagnostic radiologists. 414 CT simulation scans were performed on 400 patients. 119 patients had COVID-19 PCR test results available. Radiation oncologists considered 71 scans (17.1%) suspicious for COVID-19. Of these, 23 had corresponding COVID-19 PCR tests, and 3/23 (15.7%) were positive for COVID. 107 non-suspicious scans had corresponding COVID-19 test results, and 9 were positive (8.4%). The difference in positive test results between suspicious and non-suspicious groups was not significant (p = 0.23). Upon re-review by a diagnostic radiologist, 25 (35%) scans deemed suspicious by radiation oncologists were confirmed to meet criteria, while the rest were re-classified as "atypical" for COVID-19. We conclude that radiotherapy simulation CT scans can be reviewed for signs of COVID-19 pneumonia by radiation oncologists. However, suspicious CT simulation was not associated with a higher incidence of COVID infection compared with non-suspicious CT simulation, and there was low concordance between radiation oncologist and diagnostic radiologist classification of scans.

The Patient's perspective on radiation therapy for anal cancer: Evaluation of expectations and stigma.

BACKGROUND: Little is known regarding anal cancer patients' perspectives on undergoing radiation therapy. Additionally, the stigma surrounding anal cancer diagnosis warrants a better understanding of the barriers to complete disclosure in patient-healthcare team interactions. METHODS: Included patients had squamous cell carcinoma of the anus treated with definitive chemoradiation (CRT) from 2009 to 2018. Survey questions were adapted from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire and Discrimination and Stigma Scale. RESULTS: A total of 46 anal cancer patients who underwent CRT were surveyed, of which 72% responded. 73% of respondents indicated little to no pre-treatment knowledge of CRT. 70% reported overall short-term effects as worse than expected, most commonly with bowel habits (82%), energy (73%), and interest in sexual activity (64%). 39% reported overall long-term effects to be worse than expected, most commonly with changes to bowel habits (73%), sexual function (67%), and interest in sexual activity (58%). However, 94% agreed they were better off after treatment. Regarding stigma, a subset reported hiding their diagnosis (12%, 24%) and side effects (24%, 30%) from friends/family or work colleagues, respectively, and 15% indicating they stopped having close relationships due to concerns over stigma. CONCLUSIONS: Although patients' perceptions of the severity of short-term CRT side effects were worse than expectations, the vast majority agreed they were better off after treatment. Targeted counseling on common concerns may improve the anal cancer treatment experience. A notable subset reported stigma associated with treatment, warranting further evaluation to understand the impact on the patient experience.

The patient's perspective on radiation for rectal cancer: Initial expectations versus actual experience.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare patient perceptions of radiotherapy (RT) before and after treatment to better inform future patients and providers. METHODS: Seventy-eight consecutive patients with rectal adenocarcinoma treated with neo- or adjuvant chemoradiation, surgical resection, and adjuvant chemotherapy from 2009 to 2018 and who were without recurrence were included. Patients were surveyed ≥6 months after ileostomy reversal or ≥3 months after adjuvant chemotherapy. The survey assessed patients' baseline knowledge and fears of RT, how their short- and long-term side effects compared with initial expectations, and how their experiences compared for each modality (RT, surgery, and chemotherapy). RESULTS: Forty patient-responses were received. Before treatment, 70% of patients indicated little to no knowledge of RT, though 43% reported hearing frightening stories about RT. The most commonly top-ranked fears included organ damage (26%), skin burns (14%), and inability to carry out normal daily activities (10%). Eighty percent reported short-term effects of RT to be less than or as expected, with urinary changes (93%), abdominal discomfort (90%), and anxiety (88%) most commonly rated as less than or as expected. 85% reported long-term effects to be less than or as expected, with pain (95%), changes to the appearance of the treated area (85%), and dissatisfaction with body image (80%) most commonly rated as less than or as expected. Surgery was most commonly rated as the most difficult treatment (50%) and most responsible for long-term effects (55%). RT was least commonly rated as the most difficult treatment (13%), and chemotherapy was least commonly rated as most responsible for long-term effects (13%). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients indicated short- and long-term side effects of RT for rectal cancer to be better than initial expectations. In the context of trimodality therapy, patients reported RT to be the least difficult of the treatments.

Analysis of Tumor Mutational Burden, Progression-Free Survival, and Local-Regional Control in Patents with Locally Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Treated With Chemoradiation and Durvalumab.

Importance: The addition of consolidative durvalumab to chemoradiation has improved disease control and survival in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, there remains a need to identify biomarkers for response to this therapy to allow for risk adaptation and personalization. Objectives: To evaluate whether TMB or other variants associated with radiation response are also associated with outcomes following definitive chemoradiation and adjuvant durvalumab among patients with locally advanced unresectable NSCLC. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included consecutive patients with unresectable locally advanced NSCLC treated with chemoradiation and adjuvant durvalumab between November 2013 and March 2020 who had prospective comprehensive genomic profiling. This study was completed at a multisite tertiary cancer center. The median (IQR) follow-up time was 26 (21-36) months. Statistical analysis was conducted from April to October 2022. Exposures: Patients were grouped into TMB-high (≥10 mutations/megabase [mt/Mb]) and TMB-low (<10 mt/Mb) groups and were additionally evaluated by the presence of somatic alterations associated with radiation resistance (KEAP1/NFE2L2) or radiation sensitivity (DNA damage repair pathway). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were 24-month local-regional failure (LRF) and progression-free survival (PFS). Results: In this cohort study of 81 patients (46 [57%] male patients; median [range] age, 67 [45-85] years), 36 patients (44%) had TMB-high tumors (≥10 mt/Mb). Patients with TMB-high vs TMB-low tumors had markedly lower 24-month LRF (9% [95% CI, 0%-46%] vs 51% [95% CI, 36%-71%]; P = .001) and improved 24-month PFS (66% [95% CI, 54%-84%] vs 27% [95% CI, 13%-40%]; P = .003). The 24-month LRF was 52% (95% CI, 25%-84%) among patients with KEAP1/NFE2L2-altered tumors compared with 27% (95% CI, 17%-42%) among patients with KEAP1/NFE2L2-wildtype tumors (P = .05). On Cox analysis, only TMB status was associated with LRF (hazard ratio [HR], 0.17; 95% CI, 0.03-0.64; P = .02) and PFS (HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.21-0.90; P = .03). Histology, disease stage, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status, programmed cell death ligand 1 expression, and pathogenic KEAP1/NFE2L2, KRAS, and DNA damage repair pathway alterations were not significantly associated with LRF or PFS. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, TMB-high status was associated with improved local-regional control and PFS after definitive chemoradiation and adjuvant durvalumab. TMB status may facilitate risk-adaptive radiation strategies in unresectable locally advanced NSCLC.