Randomized, Double-Blind Phase III Study of Pazopanib Versus Placebo in Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Who Have No Evidence of Disease After Metastasectomy: ECOG-ACRIN E2810.

PURPOSE: Patients with no evidence of disease (NED) after metastasectomy for renal cell carcinoma are at high risk of recurrence. Pazopanib is an inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor and other kinases that improves progression-free survival in patients with metastatic RCC (mRCC). We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter study to test whether pazopanib would improve disease-free survival (DFS) in patients with mRCC rendered NED after metastasectomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with NED after metastasectomy were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive pazopanib 800 mg once daily versus placebo for 52 weeks. The study was designed to observe an improvement in DFS from 25% to 45% with pazopanib at 3 years, corresponding to 42% reduction in the DFS event rate. RESULTS: From August 2012 to July 2017, 129 patients were enrolled. The study was unblinded after 83 DFS events (92% information). The study did not meet its primary end point. An updated analysis at 60.5-month median follow-up from random assignment (95% CI, 59.3 to 71.0) showed that the 3-year DFS was 27.4% (95% CI, 17.9 to 41.7) for pazopanib and 21.9% (95% CI, 13.3 to 36.2) for placebo. Hazard ratio (HR) for DFS was 0.90 ([95% CI, 0.60 to 1.34]; Pone-sided = .29) in favor of pazopanib. Three-year overall survival (OS) was 81.9% (95% CI, 72.7 to 92.2) for pazopanib and 91.4% (95% CI, 84.4 to 98.9) for placebo. The HR for OS was 2.55 (95% CI, 1.23 to 5.27) in favor of placebo (Ptwo-sided = .012). Health-related quality-of-life measures deteriorated in the pazopanib group during the treatment period. CONCLUSION: Pazopanib did not improve DFS as the primary end point compared with blinded placebo in patients with mRCC with NED after metastasectomy. In addition, there was a concerning trend favoring placebo in OS.

Prognosis of South Asian Buccal Mucosa Cancer Patients in the United States: Association of Race with Overall Survival.

BACKGROUND: Squamous Cell Carcinoma (SCC) of the buccal mucosa and gingiva accounts for approximately 10% of oral and pharyngeal cancers diagnosed in the United States each year, with a disproportionally higher incidence in individuals of South Asian descent. However, little has been documented regarding trends pertaining to overall survival. Thus, this research serves to identify predictors of survival and determine if overall survival (OS) differs for South Asians compared to other races once they develop non-metastatic buccal mucosa or gingiva squamous cell carcinoma. METHODS: A population-based, cohort study of patients registered in the National Cancer Database® (NCDB) between the years 2004-2016 was performed. Kaplan-Meyer Survival Curves were executed to examine overall survival, while univariable (UVA) and multivariable analysis (MVA) was performed to determine the effect of multiple variables on OS. RESULTS: South Asians had longer median OS at 88.7 months, compared to 58.6 months and 38.3 months for Caucasians and African Americans respectively (p<0.001). In UVA, race was highly significant, but when the cohort was selected to include only those who had undergone surgical resection, no statistically significant difference remained. On MVA, lack of surgery, older age, higher grade, higher T and N stage, use of chemotherapy, higher comorbidity scores were associated with worse OS, but race was not significant. CONCLUSION: South Asians in the US with non-metastatic buccal mucosa or gingiva SCC have better OS compared to Caucasians or African Americans, likely due to younger age at diagnosis (median 59 vs. 71 and 62 years old) and more frequent surgical resection (75% vs. 72% and 64%). In MVA, South Asians have similar OS as Caucasians.

Systemic Therapy Update on 177Lutetium-PSMA-617 for Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: ASCO Guideline Rapid Recommendation Update.

ASCO Rapid Recommendation Updates highlight revisions to select ASCO guideline recommendations as a response to the emergence of new and practice-changing data. The rapid updates are supported by an evidence review and follow the guideline development processes outlined in the ASCO Guideline Methodology Manual. The goal of these articles is to disseminate updated recommendations, in a timely manner, to better inform health practitioners and the public on the best available cancer care options. Guidelines and updates are not intended to substitute for independent professional judgment of the treating provider and do not account for individual variation among patients. See appendix for disclaimers and other important information (Appendix 1 and Appendix 2, online only).

A Phase I Study of Combination Olaparib and Radium-223 in Men with Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer (mCRPC) with Bone Metastases (COMRADE).

Given that radium-223 is a radiopharmaceutical that induces DNA damage, and olaparib is a PARP inhibitor that interferes with DNA repair mechanisms, we hypothesized their synergy in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). We sought to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of olaparib + radium-223. We conducted a multicenter phase I 3+3 dose escalation study of olaparib with fixed dose radium-223 in patients with mCRPC with bone metastases. The primary objective was to establish the RP2D of olaparib, with secondary objectives of safety, PSA response, alkaline phosphatase response, radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS), overall survival, and efficacy by homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene status. Twelve patients were enrolled; all patients received a prior androgen receptor signaling inhibitor (ARSI; 100%) and 3 patients (25%) prior docetaxel. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) included cytopenias, fatigue, and nausea. No DLTs were seen in the observation period however delayed toxicities guided the RP2D. The RP2D of olaparib was 200 mg orally twice daily with radium-223. The most common treatment-related adverse events were fatigue (92%) and anemia (58%). The rPFS at 6 months was 58% (95% confidence interval, 27%-80%). Nine patients were evaluable for HRR gene status; 1 had a BRCA2 alteration (rPFS 11.8 months) and 1 had a CDK12 alteration (rPFS 3.1 months). Olaparib can be safely combined with radium-223 at the RP2D 200 mg orally twice daily with fixed dose radium-223. Early clinical benefit was observed and will be investigated in a phase II study.

Assessment of Lymphoma and Other Hematologic Malignancies Training Needs Among Radiation Oncology Residents: a Brief Report.

The role of radiation therapy (RT) varies across hematologic malignancies (HM). Radiation oncology (RO) resident comfort with specific aspects of HM patient management is unknown. The International Lymphoma RO Group (ILROG) assessed resident HM training opportunities and interest in an HM away elective. RO residents (PGY2-5) in the Association of Residents in RO (ARRO) database (n = 572) were emailed an anonymous, web-based survey in January 2019 including binary, Likert-type scale (1 = not at all, 5 = extremely, reported as median [interquartile range]), and multiple-choice questions. Of 134 resident respondents (23%), 86 (64%) were PGY4/5 residents and 36 (27%) were in larger programs (≥ 13 residents). Residents reported having specialized HM faculty (112, 84%) and a dedicated HM rotation (95, 71%). Residents reported "moderate" preparedness to advocate for RT in multidisciplinary conferences (3 [2-3]); make HM-related clinical decisions (3 [2-4]); and critique treatment planning (3 [2-4]). They reported feeling "moderately" to "quite" prepared to contour HM cases (3.5 [3-4]) and "quite" prepared to utilize the PET-CT five-point scale (4 [3-5]). Overall, residents reported feeling "moderately" prepared to treat HM patients (3 [2-3]); 24 residents (23%) felt "quite" or "extremely" prepared. Sixty-six residents (49%) were potentially interested in an HM away elective, commonly to increase comfort with treating HM patients (65%). Therefore, HM training is an important component of RO residency, yet a minority of surveyed trainees felt quite or extremely well prepared to treat HM patients. Programs should explore alternative and additional educational opportunities to increase resident comfort with treating HM patients.

EphrinB2 Inhibition and Pembrolizumab in Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma have poor prognosis after failure of standard first-line chemotherapy. Immune check point programmed death 1-programmed death ligand 1 antibodies have low response rates and thus there exists a major unmet need. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this phase II trial, patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma that recurred or progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy received soluble EphB4-human serum albumin (sEphB4-HSA) in combination with pembrolizumab. The primary end points were tolerability and overall survival (OS). The secondary end points were progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), duration of response, and toxicity. The expression of sEphB4-HSA target EphrinB2 was correlated with outcomes. RESULTS: Seventy patients were enrolled. The median follow up was 22.9 months (range, 1.3-54.7). The regimen had acceptable toxicity. In the intent-to-treat analysis (N = 70), the median OS was 14.6 months (95% CI, 9.2 to 21.5). Twenty-six (37%) patients had an objective response (95% CI, 26 to 48). The median PFS was 4.1 (95% CI, 1.5 to 5.7) months. Forty-six (66%) patients expressed EphrinB2, and among them, the median OS was 21.5 months (95% CI, 12.4 to not reached), the ORR was 52% (95% CI, 37 to 67), including a complete response rate of 24% (11 of 46; 95% CI, 12 to 36). The median PFS was 5.7 (95% CI, 2.7 to 27.9) months. Response was maintained at 6, 12, and 24 months in 88%, 74%, and 69% of the patients, respectively. CONCLUSION: The combination of sEphB4-HSA and pembrolizumab appears synergistic with improved OS and ORR compared with historical data for programmed death 1/programmed death ligand 1 monotherapy.

Extensive stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) and palliative care disparities: a national cancer database study.

OBJECTIVES: Literature on disparities in palliative care receipt among extensive stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) patients is scarce. The purpose of this study was to examine disparities in palliative care receipt among ES-SCLC patients. METHODS: Patients aged 40 years or older diagnosed with ES-SCLC between 2004 and 2015 in the National Cancer DataBase (NCDB) were eligible. Two palliative care variables were created: (1) no receipt of any palliative care and (2) no receipt of pain management-palliative care. The latter variable indicated pain management receipt among those who received any palliative care. Log binomial regression models were constructed to calculate risk ratios by covariates. Unadjusted and mutually adjusted models were created for both variables. RESULTS: Among 83 175 patients, the risk of no palliative care receipt was higher among Blacks compared with Whites in unadjusted and adjusted models (both model HRs 1.02; 95% CIs 1.00 to 1.03, p<0.05). Patients older than 59 years were at a higher risk of not receiving palliative care than younger patients (HR 1.02; 95% CI 1.01 to 1.03 for 59-66, HR 1.04; 95% CI 1.03 to 1.05 for 66-74, HR 1.06; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.08 for >74). Among 19 931 patients, the risk of no pain management-palliative care was higher among black patients on unadjusted analysis (HR 1.02; 95% CI 1.00 to 1.03, p<0.05). Patients between 66 and 74 years were at a higher risk of not receiving pain management-palliative care than patients younger than 59 years (HR 1.02; 95% CI 1.00 to 1.03, p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Significant disparities exist in palliative care receipt among ES-SCLC patients.

Systematic review for deep inspiration breath hold in proton therapy for mediastinal lymphoma: A PTCOG Lymphoma Subcommittee report and recommendations.

PURPOSE: To systematically review all dosimetric studies investigating the impact of deep inspiration breath hold (DIBH) compared with free breathing (FB) in mediastinal lymphoma patients treated with proton therapy as compared to IMRT (intensity-modulated radiation therapy)-DIBH. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a systematic review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guideline using the PubMed database to identify studies of mediastinal lymphoma patients with dosimetric comparisons of proton-FB and/or proton-DIBH with IMRT-DIBH. Parameters included mean heart (MHD), lung (MLD), and breast (MBD) doses, among other parameters. Case reports were excluded. Absolute differences in mean doses > 1 Gy between comparators were considered to be clinically meaningful. RESULTS: As of April 2021, eight studies fit these criteria (n = 8), with the following comparisons: proton-FB vs IMRT-DIBH (n = 5), proton-DIBH vs proton-FB (n = 5), and proton-DIBH vs IMRT-DIBH (n = 8). When comparing proton-FB with IMRT-DIBH in 5 studies, MHD was reduced with proton-FB in 2 studies, was similar (<1 Gy difference) in 2 studies, and increased in 1 study. On the other hand, MLD and MBD were reduced with proton-FB in 3 and 4 studies, respectively. When comparing proton-DIBH with proton-FB, MHD and MLD were reduced with proton DIBH in 4 and 3 studies, respectively, while MBD remained similar. Compared with IMRT-DIBH in 8 studies, proton-DIBH reduced the MHD in 7 studies and was similar in 1 study. Furthermore, MLD and MBD were reduced with proton-DIBH in 8 and 6 studies respectively. Integral dose was similar between proton-FB and proton-DIBH, and both were substantially lower than IMRT-DIBH. CONCLUSION: Accounting for heart, lung, breast, and integral dose, proton therapy (FB or DIBH) was superior to IMRT-DIBH. Proton-DIBH can lower dose to the lungs and heart even further compared with proton-FB, depending on disease location in the mediastinum, and organ-sparing and target coverage priorities.

Systemic Therapy Update on 177Lutetium-PSMA-617 for Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: ASCO Rapid Recommendation.

ASCO Rapid Recommendations Updates highlight revisions to select ASCO guideline recommendations as a response to the emergence of new and practice-changing data. The rapid updates are supported by an evidence review and follow the guideline development processes outlined in the ASCO Guideline Methodology Manual. The goal of these articles is to disseminate updated recommendations, in a timely manner, to better inform health practitioners and the public on the best available cancer care options.

Evaluation of the Durability of the Immune Humoral Response to COVID-19 Vaccines in Patients With Cancer Undergoing Treatment or Who Received a Stem Cell Transplant.

Importance: The durability of the antibody response to COVID-19 vaccines in patients with cancer undergoing treatment or who received a stem cell transplant is unknown and may be associated with infection outcomes. Objective: To evaluate anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein receptor binding domain (anti-RBD) and neutralizing antibody (nAb) responses to COVID-19 vaccines longitudinally over 6 months in patients with cancer undergoing treatment or who received a stem cell transplant (SCT). Design, Setting, and Participants: In this prospective, observational, longitudinal cross-sectional study of 453 patients with cancer undergoing treatment or who received an SCT at the University of Kansas Cancer Center in Kansas City, blood samples were obtained before 433 patients received a messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273), after the first dose of the mRNA vaccine, and 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after the second dose. Blood samples were also obtained 2, 4, and 7 months after 17 patients received the JNJ-78436735 vaccine. For patients receiving a third dose of an mRNA vaccine, blood samples were obtained 30 days after the third dose. Interventions: Blood samples and BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, or JNJ-78436735 vaccines. Main Outcomes and Measures: Geometric mean titers (GMTs) of the anti-RBD; the ratio of GMTs for analysis of demographic, disease, and treatment variables; the percentage of neutralization of anti-RBD antibodies; and the correlation between anti-RBD and nAb responses to the COVID-19 vaccines. Results: This study enrolled 453 patients (mean [SD] age, 60.4 [13,1] years; 253 [56%] were female). Of 450 patients, 273 (61%) received the BNT162b2 vaccine (Pfizer), 160 (36%) received the mRNA-1273 vaccine (Moderna), and 17 (4%) received the JNJ-7846735 vaccine (Johnson & Johnson). The GMTs of the anti-RBD for all patients were 1.70 (95% CI, 1.04-2.85) before vaccination, 18.65 (95% CI, 10.19-34.11) after the first dose, 470.38 (95% CI, 322.07-686.99) at 1 month after the second dose, 425.80 (95% CI, 322.24-562.64) at 3 months after the second dose, 447.23 (95% CI, 258.53-773.66) at 6 months after the second dose, and 9224.85 (95% CI, 2423.92-35107.55) after the third dose. The rate of threshold neutralization (≥30%) was observed in 203 of 252 patients (80%) 1 month after the second dose and in 135 of 166 patients (81%) 3 months after the second dose. Anti-RBD and nAb were highly correlated (Spearman correlation coefficient, 0.93 [0.92-0.94]; P < .001). Three months after the second dose, anti-RBD titers were lower in male vs female patients (ratio of GMTs, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.34-0.81]), patients older than 65 years vs patients 50 years or younger (ratio of GMTs, 0.38 [95% CI, 0.25-0.57]), and patients with hematologic malignant tumors vs solid tumors (ratio of GMTs, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.20-0.81]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, after 2 doses of an mRNA vaccine, anti-RBD titers peaked at 1 month and remained stable over the next 6 months. Patients older than 65 years of age, male patients, and patients with a hematologic malignant tumor had low antibody titers. Compared with the primary vaccine course, a 20-fold increase in titers from a third dose suggests a brisk B-cell anamnestic response in patients with cancer.

Acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) in adults: disparities in treatment intervention based on access to treatment facility.

Adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) is associated with poor outcomes. We evaluated differences by facility type in the parameters of 6766 adult ALL patients ≥ 40 years of age diagnosed from 2004 to 2015 in the National Cancer DataBase (NCDB) and survival outcomes using two-sample t-tests or chi-square tests and Cox proportional hazards models. Those treated in academic facilities were younger (mean 58.5 versus 61.7 years, p < 0.001), Black (8.1% versus 5.6%, p < 0.001), had private insurance (50.9% versus 44.0%, p < 0.001), and more likely to receive chemotherapy (93.2% versus 81.4%, p < 0.001), any radiotherapy (14.9% versus 7.3%, p < 0.001), stem cell transplant (9.4% versus 2.5%, p < 0.001), or total body irradiation (TBI) (11.3% versus 4.3%, p < 0.001). Patients treated at an academic facility had a higher hazard of death (p<.05) while those that received any chemotherapy or TBI or CNS radiation had a lower risk of death (all p < 0.05). These parameters should be evaluated in future studies.

Patterns of Initial Relapse from a Phase 3 Study of Response-Based Therapy for High-Risk Hodgkin Lymphoma (AHOD0831): A Report from the Children's Oncology Group.

PURPOSE: The Children's Oncology Group protocol AHOD0831, for pediatric patients with high-risk classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL), used response-adapted radiation fields, rather than larger involved-field radiation therapy (IFRT) that were historically used. This retrospective analysis of patterns of relapse among patients enrolled in the study was conducted to study the potential effect of a reduction in RT exposure. METHODS AND MATERIALS: From December 2009 to January 2012, 164 eligible patients under 22 years old with stage IIIB (43%) and stage IVB (57%) enrolled on AHOD0831. All patients received 4 cycles of doxorubicin, bleomycin, vincristine, etoposide, prednisone, and cyclophosphamide (ABVE-PC). Those patients with a slow early response (SER) after the first 2 ABVE-PC courses were nonrandomly assigned to 2 intensification cycles with ifosfamide/vinorelbine before the final 2 ABVE-PC cycles. Response-adapted RT (21 Gy) was prescribed to initial areas of bulky disease and SER sites. Rapid early response (RER) sites without bulk were not targeted. Imaging studies at the time of progression or relapse were reviewed centrally for this retrospective analysis. Relapses were characterized with respect to site (initial, new, or both; and initial bulk or initial nonbulk), initial chemotherapy response, and radiation field (in-field, out-of-field, or both). RESULTS: Of the entire cohort, 140 patients were evaluable for the patterns of failure analyses. To investigate the pattern of failure, this analysis focuses on 23 patients who followed protocol treatment and suffered relapses at a median 1.05 years with 7.97-year median follow-up time. These 23 patients (11 RER and 12 SER) experienced a relapse in 105 total sites (median, 4; range, 1-11). Of the 105 relapsed sites, 67 sites (64%) occurred within an initial site of involvement, with 12 of these 67 sites (18%) at an initial site of bulky disease and 63 of these 67 relapses (94%) occurring in sites that were not fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-avid after 2 cycles of ABVE-PC (PET2-negative). Of the 105 relapsed sites, 34 sites (32%) occurred in a new site of disease (that would not have been covered by RT); and, overall, only 4 of 140 patients (2.8%) (occurring in 3 RER and 1 SER) experienced isolated out-of-field relapses that would have been covered by historical IFRT. CONCLUSIONS: For a cohort of high-risk patients with cHL patients, most failures occurred in nonbulky, initially involved sites, largely due to response-based consolidation RT delivered to patients with bulky disease. In this analysis, we discovered low rates of failures outside of these modern risk-adapted radiation treatment volumes. Also, FDG uptake on PET2 did not identify most relapse sites.

Consensus Statement on Proton Therapy for Prostate Cancer.

Proton therapy is a promising but controversial treatment in the management of prostate cancer. Despite its dosimetric advantages when compared with photon radiation therapy, its increased cost to patients and insurers has raised questions regarding its value. Multiple prospective and retrospective studies have been published documenting the efficacy and safety of proton therapy for patients with localized prostate cancer and for patients requiring adjuvant or salvage pelvic radiation after surgery. The Particle Therapy Co-Operative Group (PTCOG) Genitourinary Subcommittee intends to address current proton therapy indications, advantages, disadvantages, and cost effectiveness. We will also discuss the current landscape of clinical trials. This consensus report can be used to guide clinical practice and research directions.

Effect of Cisplatin and Gemcitabine With or Without Berzosertib in Patients With Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma: A Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Preclinical studies suggest that inhibition of single-stranded DNA repair by ataxia telangiectasia and Rad3 (ATR) may enhance the cytotoxicity of cisplatin, gemcitabine, and other chemotherapeutic agents. Cisplatin with gemcitabine remains the standard up-front therapy for treatment in patients with metastatic urothelial cancer. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the use of the selective ATR inhibitor, berzosertib, could augment the activity of cisplatin with gemcitabine. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In a phase 2 randomized clinical trial, 87 patients across 23 centers in the National Cancer Institute Experimental Therapeutics Clinical Trials Network were randomized to receive either cisplatin with gemcitabine alone (control arm) or cisplatin with gemcitabine plus berzosertib (experimental arm). Key eligibility criteria included confirmed metastatic urothelial cancer, no prior cytotoxic therapy for metastatic disease, 12 months or more since perioperative therapy, and eligibility for cisplatin receipt based on standard criteria. The study was conducted from January 27, 2017, to December 15, 2020. INTERVENTIONS: In the control arm, cisplatin, 70 mg/m2, was given on day 1 and gemcitabine, 1000 mg/m2, was given on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle. In the experimental arm, cisplatin, 60 mg/m2, was given on day 1; gemcitabine, 875 mg/m2, on days 1 and 8; and berzosertib, 90 mg/m2, on days 2 and 9 of a 21-day cycle. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point of the study was progression-free survival. The analysis was on all patients who started therapy. RESULTS: Of the total of 87 patients randomized, 41 patients received cisplatin with gemcitabine alone and 46 received cisplatin with gemcitabine plus berzosertib. Median age was 67 (range, 32-84) years, and 68 patients (78%) were men. Median progression-free survival was 8.0 months for both arms (Bajorin risk-adjusted hazard ratio, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.72-2.08). Median overall survival was shorter with cisplatin with gemcitabine plus berzosertib compared with cisplatin with gemcitabine alone (14.4 vs 19.8 months; Bajorin risk-adjusted hazard ratio, 1.42; 95% CI, 0.76-2.68). Higher rates of grade 3 vs grade 4 thrombocytopenia (59% vs 39%) and neutropenia (37% vs 27%) were observed with cisplatin with gemcitabine and berzosertib compared with cisplatin with gemcitabine alone; consequently, more dose reductions were needed in the experimental arm. Patients in the experimental arm received a median cisplatin dose of 250 mg/m2, which was significantly lower than the median dose of 370 mg/m2 in the control arm (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The addition of berzosertib to cisplatin with gemcitabine did not prolong progression-free survival relative to cisplatin with gemcitabine alone in patients with metastatic urothelial cancer, and a trend toward inferior survival was observed with this combination. Berzosertib plus cisplatin with gemcitabine was associated with significantly higher hematologic toxicities despite attenuated dosing of cisplatin with gemcitabine. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02567409.

Observation with or without late radiotherapy is equivalent to early radiotherapy in high-risk prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy: A SEER-Medicare analysis on trends, survival outcomes, and complications.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to illustrate national trends of post-radical prostatectomy (RP) radiotherapy (RT) and compare outcomes and toxicities in patients receiving eRT versus observation with or without late radiotherapy (lRT). METHODS: Utilizing the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data from 2001 to 2011, we identified 7557 patients with high-risk pathologic features after RP (≥pT3N0 and/or positive surgical margins). Our study cohort consisted of patients receiving RT within 6 months of surgery (eRT), those receiving RT after 6 months (lRT), and those never receiving RT (observation). Another subcohort, delayed RT (dRT), encompassed both lRT and observation. Trends of post-RP RT were compared using the Cochran-Armitage trend test. Cox regression models identified factors predictive of worse survival outcomes. Kaplan-Meier analyses compared the eRT and the dRT groups. RESULTS: Among those with pathologically confirmed high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) after RP, 12.7% (n = 959), 13.2% (n = 1710), and 74.1% (n = 4888) underwent eRT, lRT, and observation without RT, respectively. Of these strategies, the proportion of men on observation without RT increased significantly over time (p = 0.004). The multivariable Cox regression model demonstrated similar outcomes between the eRT and the dRT groups. At a median follow-up of 5.9 years, five-year overall and cancer-specific survival outcomes were more favorable in the dRT group, when compared to the eRT group. CONCLUSIONS: A blanket adoption of the eRT in high-risk PCa based on clinical trials with limited follow-up may result in overtreatment of a significant number of men and expose them to unnecessary radiation toxicity.

Does kV Image Guidance for Bone Metastases Improve Pain Control?

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: Despite its widespread availability, the use of kilovoltage (kV) image guidance is often related to factors such as perceived adequacy of clinical patient setup and individual practice patterns. We sought to determine whether kV image guidance in the treatment of painful bone metastases would improve therapeutic efficacy. MATERIALS/METHODS: Under an Institutional Review Board approved protocol, hospital records of 164 patients having received radiation therapy to 257 individual painful osseous metastases were retrospectively reviewed. Marginal logistic regression analyses using the generalized estimating equation (GEE) approach were used to investigate potential associations between pain reduction and several patient, disease, and treatment related variables. Correlation of kV image guidance with pain reduction was analyzed by univariate and multivariate GEE logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Median time to pain reduction was 3 days (range 0~109 days) from the start of radiation therapy. Pain reduction ≥ 50% was noted in 196 (77%) metastatic lesions with 136 (53%) demonstrating complete pain relief. Patients with metastatic lesions from non-small cell lung cancer experienced less pain relief (p = 0.007). Disease extension outside of bone was a negative predictor for pain reduction (p = 0.02). On univariate and multivariate logistic regression, kV image guidance demonstrated a statistically significant correlation with improved pain control in cases involving treatment of the lower extremities (p = 0.03) and those with fewer treatment fractions (p = 0.01), particularly in the setting of extra-osseous disease extension (p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Kilovoltage image guidance in the treatment of painful bone metastases may offer greater pain control through improved patient setup, particularly for patients with tumors of the lower extremities, extraosseous disease extension, and fewer treatment fractions.

Overall survival based on oncologist density in the United States: A retrospective cohort study.

Medically underserved areas (MUA) or health professional shortage areas (HPSA) designations are based on primary care health services availability. These designations are used in recruiting international medical graduates (IMGs) trained in primary care or subspecialty (e.g., oncology) to areas of need. Whether the MUA/HPSA designation correlates with Oncologist Density (OD) and supports IMG oncologists' recruitment to areas of need is unknown. We evaluated the concordance of OD with the designation of MUAs/HPSAs and evaluated the impact of OD and MUA/HPSA status on overall survival. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with hematological malignancies or metastatic solid tumors in 2011 from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database. SEER was linked to the American Medical Association Masterfile to calculate OD, defined as the number of oncologists per 100,000 population at the county level. We calculated the proportion of counties with MUA or HPSA designation for each OD category. Overall survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared between the OD category using a log-rank test. We identified 68,699 adult patients with hematologic malignancies or metastatic solid cancers in 609 counties. The proportion of MUA/HPSA designation was similar across counties categorized by OD (93.2%, 95.4%, 90.3%, and 91.7% in counties with <2.9, 2.9-6.5, 6.5-8.4 and >8.4 oncologists per 100K population, p = 0.7). Patients' median survival in counties with the lowest OD was significantly lower compared to counties with the highest OD (8 vs. 11 months, p<0.0001). The difference remained statistically significant in multivariate and subgroup analysis. MUA/HPSA status was not associated with survival (HR 1.03, 95%CI 0.97-1.09, p = 0.3). MUA/HPSA designation based on primary care services is not concordant with OD. Patients in counties with lower OD correlated with inferior survival. Federal programs designed to recruit physicians in high-need areas should consider the availability of health care services beyond primary care.