Spatial proteomic profiling elucidates immune determinants of neoadjuvant chemo-immunotherapy in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) presents significant clinical and therapeutic challenges due to its aggressive nature and generally poor prognosis. We initiated a Phase II clinical trial (ChiCTR1900027160) to assess the efficacy of a pioneering neoadjuvant chemo-immunotherapy regimen comprising programmed death-1 (PD-1) blockade (Toripalimab), nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel (nab-paclitaxel), and the oral fluoropyrimidine derivative S-1, in patients with locally advanced ESCC. This study uniquely integrates clinical outcomes with advanced spatial proteomic profiling using Imaging Mass Cytometry (IMC) to elucidate the dynamics within the tumor microenvironment (TME), focusing on the mechanistic interplay of resistance and response. Sixty patients participated, receiving the combination therapy prior to surgical resection. Our findings demonstrated a major pathological response (MPR) in 62% of patients and a pathological complete response (pCR) in 29%. The IMC analysis provided a detailed regional assessment, revealing that the spatial arrangement of immune cells, particularly CD8+ T cells and B cells within tertiary lymphoid structures (TLS), and S100A9+ inflammatory macrophages in fibrotic regions are predictive of therapeutic outcomes. Employing machine learning approaches, such as support vector machine (SVM) and random forest (RF) analysis, we identified critical spatial features linked to drug resistance and developed predictive models for drug response, achieving an area under the curve (AUC) of 97%. These insights underscore the vital role of integrating spatial proteomics into clinical trials to dissect TME dynamics thoroughly, paving the way for personalized and precise cancer treatment strategies in ESCC. This holistic approach not only enhances our understanding of the mechanistic basis behind drug resistance but also sets a robust foundation for optimizing therapeutic interventions in ESCC.

Dosimetric comparison of ZAP-X, Gamma Knife, and CyberKnife stereotactic radiosurgery for single brain metastasis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the dosimetric characteristics of ZAP-X stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for single brain metastasis by comparing with two mature SRS platforms. METHODS: Thirteen patients with single brain metastasis treated with CyberKnife (CK) G4 were selected retrospectively. The prescription dose for the planning target volume (PTV) was 18-24 Gy for 1-3 fractions. The PTV volume ranged from 0.44 to 11.52 cc.Treatment plans of thirteen patients were replanned using the ZAP-X plan system and the Gamma Knife (GK) ICON plan system with the same prescription dose and organs at risk (OARs) constraints. The prescription dose of PTV was normalized to 70% for both ZAP-X and CK, while it was 50% for GK. The dosimetric parameters of three groups included the plan characteristics (CI, GI, GSI, beams, MUs, treatment time), PTV (D2, D95, D98, Dmin, Dmean, Coverage), brain tissue (volume of 100%-10% prescription dose irradiation V100%-V10%, Dmean) and other OARs (Dmax, Dmean),all of these were compared and evaluated. All data were read and analyzed with MIM Maestro. One-way ANOVA or a multisample Friedman rank sum test was performed, where p < 0.05 indicated significant differences. RESULTS: The CI of GK was significantly lower than that of ZAP-X and CK. Regarding the mean value, ZAP-X had a lower GI and higher GSI, but there was no significant difference among the three groups. The MUs of ZAP-X were significantly lower than those of CK, and the mean value of the treatment time of ZAP-X was significantly shorter than that of CK. For PTV, the D95, D98, and target coverage of CK were higher, while the mean of Dmin of GK was significantly lower than that of CK and ZAP-X. For brain tissue, ZAP-X showed a smaller volume from V100% to V20%; the statistical results of V60% and V50% showed a difference between ZAP-X and GK, while the V40% and V30% showed a significant difference between ZAP-X and the other two groups; V10% and Dmean indicated that GK was better. Excluding the Dmax of the brainstem, right optic nerve and optic chiasm, the mean value of all other OARs was less than 1 Gy. For the brainstem, GK and ZAP-X had better protection, especially at the maximum dose. CONCLUSION: For the SRS treating single brain metastasis, all three treatment devices, ZAP-X system, CyberKnife G4 system, and GammaKnife system, could meet clinical treatment requirements. The newly platform ZAP-X could provide a high-quality plan equivalent to or even better than CyberKnife and Gamma Knife, with ZAP-X presenting a certain dose advantage, especially with a more conformal dose distribution and better protection for brain tissue. As the ZAP-X systems get continuous improvements and upgrades, they may become a new SRS platform for the treatment of brain metastasis.

Application of MR images in radiotherapy planning for brain tumor based on deep learning.

PURPOSE: Explore the function and dose calculation accuracy of MRI images in radiotherapy planning through deep learning methods. METHODS: 131 brain tumor patients undergoing radiotherapy with previous MR and CT images were recruited for this study. A new series of MRI from the aligned MR was firstly registered to CT images strictly using MIM software and then resampled. A deep learning method (U-NET) was used to establish a MRI-to-CT conversion model, for which 105 patient images were used as the training set and 26 patient images were used as the tuning set. Data from additional 8 patients were collected as the test set, and the accuracy of the model was evaluated from a dosimetric standpoint. RESULTS: Comparing the synthetic CT images with the original CT images, the difference in dosimetric parameters D98, D95, D2 and Dmean of PTV in 8 patients was less than 0.5%. The gamma passed rates of PTV and whole body volume were: 1%/1 mm: 93.96%±6.75%, 2%/2 mm: 99.87%±0.30%, 3%/3 mm: 100.00%±0.00%; and 1%/1 mm: 99.14%±0.80%, 2%/2 mm: 99.92%±0.08%, 3%/3 mm: 99.99%±0.01%. CONCLUSION: MR images can be used both in delineation and treatment efficacy evaluation and in dose calculation. Using the deep learning way to convert MR image to CT image is a viable method and can be further used in dose calculation.