NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Mesothelioma: Pleural, Version 1.2024.

Mesothelioma is a rare cancer that originates from the mesothelial surfaces of the pleura and other sites, and is estimated to occur in approximately 3,500 people in the United States annually. Pleural mesothelioma is the most common type and represents approximately 85% of these cases. The NCCN Guidelines for Mesothelioma: Pleural provide recommendations for the diagnosis, evaluation, treatment, and follow-up for patients with pleural mesothelioma. These NCCN Guidelines Insights highlight significant updates to the NCCN Guidelines for Mesothelioma: Pleural, including revised guidance on disease classification and systemic therapy options.

Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer, Version 4.2024, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) provide recommendations for the treatment of patients with NSCLC, including diagnosis, primary disease management, surveillance for relapse, and subsequent treatment. The panel has updated the list of recommended targeted therapies based on recent FDA approvals and clinical data. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for NSCLC focuses on treatment recommendations for advanced or metastatic NSCLC with actionable molecular biomarkers.

Mesothelioma: Peritoneal, Version 2.2023, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Mesothelioma is a rare cancer originating in mesothelial surfaces of the peritoneum, pleura, and other sites. These NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) focus on peritoneal mesothelioma (PeM). The NCCN Guidelines for PeM provide recommendations for workup, diagnosis, and treatment of primary as well as previously treated PeM. The diagnosis of PeM may be delayed because PeM mimics other diseases and conditions and because the disease is so rare. The pathology section was recently updated to include new information about markers used to identify mesothelioma, which is difficult to diagnose. The term "malignant" is no longer used to classify mesotheliomas, because all mesotheliomas are now defined as malignant.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer, Version 2.2023.

The NCCN Guidelines for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) provide recommendations for management of disease in patients with NSCLC. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on neoadjuvant and adjuvant (also known as perioperative) systemic therapy options for eligible patients with resectable NSCLC.

Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer, Version 3.2022, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) provide recommended management for patients with NSCLC, including diagnosis, primary treatment, surveillance for relapse, and subsequent treatment. Patients with metastatic lung cancer who are eligible for targeted therapies or immunotherapies are now surviving longer. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for NSCLC focuses on targeted therapies for patients with metastatic NSCLC and actionable mutations.

Developing a Dedicated Leadership Curriculum for Radiation Oncology Residents.

The increasing complexity of healthcare emphasizes the need for continued physician leadership and leadership training. This study aims to determine baseline attitudes toward the perceptions and utility of a leadership development curriculum (LDC) for radiation oncology (RO) residents. A novel longitudinal LDC was implemented for RO residents at our institution from 2018 to 2019. Prior to the curriculum, current and past residents in our institution's RO residency program were surveyed on their attitudes towards leadership in healthcare, emotional intelligence competencies, and leadership training interests. After the completion of the LDC, a post-curriculum survey was forwarded to current residents. The response rate was 84% (21 of 24) for the baseline survey and 90% (9 of 10) for the post-curriculum survey. Having a leadership training curriculum during residency was rated as extremely useful, with top training interests involving leading clinical teams, effective communication strategies, and conflict management. After the LDC, the residents reported high satisfaction with the curriculum and utilization of leadership training into their daily work. Our LDC demonstrates significant potential to engage trainees and improve their leadership skills at the graduate medical education level.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer, Version 2.2021.

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) address all aspects of management for NSCLC. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines regarding targeted therapies, immunotherapies, and their respective biomarkers.

Polyazamacrocycle Ligands Facilitate 89Zr Radiochemistry and Yield 89Zr Complexes with Remarkable Stability.

Over the last three decades, the chemistry of zirconium has facilitated antibody development and the clinical management of disease in the precision medicine era. Scientists have harnessed its reactivity, coordination chemistry, and nuclear chemistry to develop antibody-based radiopharmaceuticals incorporating zirconium-89 (89Zr: t1/2 = 78.4 h, ß+: 22.8%, Eß+max = 901 keV; EC: 77%, Eγ = 909 keV) to improve disease detection, identify patients for individualized therapeutic interventions. and monitor their response to those interventions. However, release of the 89Zr4+ ion from the radiopharmaceutical remains a concern, since it may confound the interpretation of clinical imaging data, negatively affect dosimetric calculations, and hinder treatment planning. In this report, we relate our novel observations involving the use of polyazamacrocycles as zirconium-89 chelators. We describe the synthesis and complete characterization of zirconium 2,2',2″,2‴-(1,4,7,10-tetraazacyclotridecane-1,4,7,10-tetrayl)tetraacetic acid (Zr-TRITA), zirconium 3,6,9,15-Tetraazabicyclo[9.3.1] pentadeca-1(15),11,13-triene-3,6,9-triacetic acid (Zr-PCTA), and zirconium 2,2',2″-(1,4,7-triazacyclononane-1,4,7-triyl)triacetic acid (Zr-NOTA). In addition, we elucidate the solid-state structure of each complex using single-crystal X-ray diffraction analysis. Finally, we found that [89Zr]Zr-PCTA and [89Zr]Zr-NOTA demonstrate excellent stability in vitro and in vivo and provide a rationale for these observations. These innovative findings have the potential to guide the development of safer and more robust immuno-PET agents to improve precision medicine applications.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer, Version 1.2020.

The NCCN Guidelines for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) address all aspects of management for NSCLC. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on recent updates in immunotherapy. For the 2020 update, all of the systemic therapy regimens have been categorized using a new preference stratification system; certain regimens are now recommended as "preferred interventions," whereas others are categorized as either "other recommended interventions" or "useful under certain circumstances."

Bioorthogonal Masking of Circulating Antibody-TCO Groups Using Tetrazine-Functionalized Dextran Polymers.

Pretargeting strategies have gained popularity for the in vivo imaging and therapy of cancer by combining antibodies with small molecule radioligands. In vivo recombination of both moieties can be achieved using the bioorthogonal inverse electron demand Diels-Alder (IEDDA) chemistry between tetrazine (Tz) and trans-cyclooctene (TCO). An issue that arises with pretargeting strategies is that while part of the antibody dose accumulates at antigen-expressing tumor tissue, there is a significant portion of the injected antibody that remains in circulation, causing a reduction in target-to-background ratios. Herein, we report the development of a novel TCO scavenger, the masking agent DP-Tz. DP-Tz is based on Tz-modified dextran polymers (DP, MW = 0.5-2 MDa). Large dextran polymers were reported to exhibit low penetration of tumor vasculature and appeared nontoxic, nonimmunogenic, and easily modifiable. Our newly developed masking agent deactivates the remaining TCO-moieties on the circulating mAbs yet does not impact the tumor uptake of the Tz-radioligand. In pretargeting studies utilizing a 68Ga-labeled tetrazine radioligand ([68Ga]Ga-NOTA-PEG11-tetrazine), DP-Tz constructs (Tz/DP ratios of 62-254) significantly increased TTB ratios from 0.8 ± 0.3 (control cohorts) to up to 5.8 ± 2.3 at 2 h postinjection. Tumor tissue delineation in PET imaging experiments employing DP-Tz is significantly increased compared to control. Uptake values of other significant organs, such as heart, lungs, pancreas, and stomach, were decreased on average by 2-fold when using DP-Tz. Overall, pretargeting experiments utilizing DP-Tz showed significantly improved tumor delineation, enhanced PET image quality, and reduced uptake in vital organs. We believe that this new masking agent is a powerful new addition to the IEDDA-based pretargeting tool box and, due to its properties, an excellent candidate for clinical translation.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer, Version 5.2018.

The NCCN Guidelines for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) address all aspects of management for NSCLC. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on recent updates to the targeted therapy and immunotherapy sections in the NCCN Guidelines. For the 2018 update, a new section on biomarkers was added.

Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer, Version 5.2017, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) focuses on targeted therapies and immunotherapies for metastatic NSCLC, because therapeutic recommendations are rapidly changing for metastatic disease. For example, new recommendations were added for atezolizumab, ceritinib, osimertinib, and pembrolizumab for the 2017 updates.

Outcomes targeting the PD-1/PD-L1 axis in conjunction with stereotactic radiation for patients with non-small cell lung cancer brain metastases.

Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapies have demonstrated activity in patients with advanced stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, little is known about the safety and feasibility of patients receiving anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy and stereotactic radiation for the treatment of brain metastases. Data were analyzed retrospectively from NSCLC patients treated with stereotactic radiation either before, during or after anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy with nivolumab (anti-PD-1) or durvalumab (anti-PD-L1). Seventeen patients treated with stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) or fractionated stereotactic radiation therapy (FSRT) to 49 brain metastases over 21 sessions were identified. Radiation was administered prior to, during and after anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy in 22 lesions (45%), 13 lesions (27%), and 14 lesions (29%), respectively. The 6 months Kaplan-Meier (KM) distant brain control rate was 48% following stereotactic radiation. Six and 12 month KM rates of OS from the date of stereotactic radiation and the date of cranial metastases diagnosis were 48/41% and 81/51%, respectively. The 6 month rate of distant brain control following stereotactic radiation for patients treated with stereotactic radiation during or prior to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy was 57% compared to 0% among patients who received anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy before stereotactic radiation (p = 0.05). A Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) of <90 was found to be predictive of worse OS following radiation treatment on both univariate and multivariate analyses (MVA, p = 0.01). In our series, stereotactic radiation to NSCLC brain metastases was well tolerated in patients who received anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy. Prospective evaluation to determine how these two modalities can be used synergistically to improve distant brain control and OS is warranted.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma, Version 3.2016.

These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines for Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma (MPM). These NCCN Guidelines Insights discuss systemic therapy regimens and surgical controversies for MPM. The NCCN panel recommends cisplatin/pemetrexed (category 1) for patients with MPM. The NCCN panel also now recommends bevacizumab/cisplatin/pemetrexed as a first-line therapy option for patients with unresectable MPM who are candidates for bevacizumab. The complete version of the NCCN Guidelines for MPM, available at NCCN.org, addresses all aspects of management for MPM including diagnosis, evaluation, staging, treatment, surveillance, and therapy for recurrence and metastasis; NCCN Guidelines are intended to assist with clinical decision-making.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer, Version 4.2016.

These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on recent updates in the 2016 NCCN Guidelines for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC; Versions 1-4). These NCCN Guidelines Insights will discuss new immunotherapeutic agents, such as nivolumab and pembrolizumab, for patients with metastatic NSCLC. For the 2016 update, the NCCN panel recommends immune checkpoint inhibitors as preferred agents (in the absence of contraindications) for second-line and beyond (subsequent) therapy in patients with metastatic NSCLC (both squamous and nonsquamous histologies). Nivolumab and pembrolizumab are preferred based on improved overall survival rates, higher response rates, longer duration of response, and fewer adverse events when compared with docetaxel therapy.

Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer, Version 6.2015.

These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on recent updates to the 2015 NCCN Guidelines for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC). Appropriate targeted therapy is very effective in patients with advanced NSCLC who have specific genetic alterations. Therefore, it is important to test tumor tissue from patients with advanced NSCLC to determine whether they have genetic alterations that make them candidates for specific targeted therapies. These NCCN Guidelines Insights describe the different testing methods currently available for determining whether patients have genetic alterations in the 2 most commonly actionable genetic alterations, notably anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) gene rearrangements and sensitizing epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations.

Non-small cell lung cancer, version 1.2015.

This selection from the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) focuses on the principles of radiation therapy (RT), which include the following: (1) general principles for early-stage, locally advanced, and advanced/metastatic NSCLC; (2) target volumes, prescription doses, and normal tissue dose constraints for early-stage, locally advanced, and advanced/palliative RT; and (3) RT simulation, planning, and delivery. Treatment recommendations should be made by a multidisciplinary team, including board-certified radiation oncologists who perform lung cancer RT as a prominent part of their practice.

Surgery and Stereotactic Radiotherapy for Stage I Small-Cell Lung Carcinoma: A 25-Year Experience.

OBJECTIVES: Small-cell lung carcinoma (SCLC) is usually a wide-spread, highly-lethal malignancy but occasionally presents as localized, limited stage cancer amenable to local treatment. We reviewed our experience using surgery or stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) to assess safety, survival rates and treatment toxicity in clinical stage I SCLC patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Electronic medical records of patients with clinical stage I lymph node-negative SCLC who underwent surgical resection or SBRT between 1996 and 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. A multivariable Cox Proportional Hazards model was constructed. RESULTS: Of 96 patients meeting inclusion criteria, 77 underwent resection and 19 underwent SBRT. Surgical patients were younger (mean 68.4 ± 9.2 years surgery versus 74.3 ± 6.6 years SBRT, P = .005) and had better pulmonary function (81.5 ± 19.6 FEV1% of predicted surgery versus 44.0 ± 20.9% SBRT, P < .001). SBRT patients had significantly more comorbidities. For both cohorts, 59 tumors were pure SCLC and 37 were mixed SCLC/NSCLC histology. Median survivals were 21 months versus 31 months for SBRT and surgery patients respectively (P = .07). There were no treatment-related mortalities. Mean length of hospital stay for surgical patients was 5.4 ± 5.7 days. Survival was longer in lymph node-negative surgery patients (median 48 months node-negative versus 19 months node-positive, P = .04). For node-negative-surgery patients, the estimated 2- and 5-year survival rates are 60% and 48%. CONCLUSIONS: Our single-institutional experience over 25 years demonstrates that local treatment with surgery or SBRT for clinical stage I SCLC is safe and effective, with survivals lower than similar stage non-small-cell carcinoma patients. However, our results compare favorably with prior small-cell surgical series and far better than reported results of chemoradiotherapy for similar stage patients, thereby validating current recommendations for employing surgery or SBRT for stage I SCLC.

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.