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.

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.

Consequences of ionizing radiation exposure to the cardiovascular system.

Ionizing radiation is widely used in various industrial and medical applications, resulting in increased exposure for certain populations. Lessons from radiation accidents and occupational exposure have highlighted the cardiovascular and cerebrovascular risks associated with radiation exposure. In addition, radiation therapy for cancer has been linked to numerous cardiovascular complications, depending on the distribution of the dose by volume in the heart and other relevant target tissues in the circulatory system. The manifestation of symptoms is influenced by numerous factors, and distinct cardiac complications have previously been observed in different groups of patients with cancer undergoing radiation therapy. However, in contemporary radiation therapy, advances in treatment planning with conformal radiation delivery have markedly reduced the mean heart dose and volume of exposure, and these variables are therefore no longer sole surrogates for predicting the risk of specific types of heart disease. Nevertheless, certain cardiac substructures remain vulnerable to radiation exposure, necessitating close monitoring. In this Review, we provide a comprehensive overview of the consequences of radiation exposure on the cardiovascular system, drawing insights from various cohorts exposed to uniform, whole-body radiation or to partial-body irradiation, and identify potential risk modifiers in the development of radiation-associated cardiovascular disease.

Pulmonary interstitial lymphography: A prospective trial with potential impact on stereotactic ablative radiotherapy planning for early-stage lung cancer.

This prospective feasibility trial investigated pulmonary interstitial lymphography to identify thoracic primary nodal drainage (PND). A post-hoc analysis of nodal recurrences was compared with PND for patients with early-stage lung cancer; larger studies are needed to establish correlation. Exploratory PND-inclusive stereotactic ablative radiotherapy plans were assessed for dosimetric feasibility.

Redefining FLASH RT: the impact of mean dose rate and dose per pulse in the gastrointestinal tract.

Background: The understanding of how varying radiation beam parameter settings affect the induction and magnitude of the FLASH effect remains limited. Purpose: We sought to evaluate how the magnitude of radiation-induced gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity (RIGIT) depends on the interplay between mean dose rate (MDR) and dose per pulse (DPP). Methods: C57BL/6J mice were subjected to total abdominal irradiation (11-14 Gy single fraction) under conventional irradiation (low DPP and low MDR, CONV) and various combinations of DPP and MDR up to ultra-high-dose-rate (UHDR) beam conditions. The effects of DPP were evaluated for DPPs of 1-6 Gy while the total dose and MDR were kept constant; the effects of MDR were evaluated for the range 0.3- 1440 Gy/s while the total dose and DPP were kept constant. RIGIT was quantified in non-tumor-bearing mice through the regenerating crypt assay and survival assessment. Tumor response was evaluated through tumor growth delay. Results: Within each tested total dose using a constant MDR (>100 Gy/s), increasing DPP led to better sparing of regenerating crypts, with a more prominent effect seen at 12 and 14 Gy TAI. However, at fixed DPPs >4 Gy, similar sparing of crypts was demonstrated irrespective of MDR (from 0.3 to 1440 Gy/s). At a fixed high DPP of 4.7 Gy, survival was equivalently improved relative to CONV for all MDRs from 0.3 Gy/s to 104 Gy/s, but at a lower DPP of 0.93 Gy, increasing MDR produced a greater survival effect. We also confirmed that high DPP, regardless of MDR, produced the same magnitude of tumor growth delay relative to CONV using a clinically relevant melanoma mouse model. Conclusions: This study demonstrates the strong influence that the beam parameter settings have on the magnitude of the FLASH effect. Both high DPP and UHDR appeared independently sufficient to produce FLASH sparing of GI toxicity, while isoeffective tumor response was maintained across all conditions.

Navigating the Critical Translational Questions for Implementing FLASH in the Clinic.

The "FLASH effect" is an increased therapeutic index, that is, reduced normal tissue toxicity for a given degree of anti-cancer efficacy, produced by ultra-rapid irradiation delivered on time scales orders of magnitude shorter than currently conventional in the clinic for the same doses. This phenomenon has been observed in numerous preclinical in vivo tumor and normal tissue models. While the underlying biological mechanism(s) remain to be elucidated, a path to clinical implementation of FLASH can be paved by addressing several critical translational questions. Technological questions pertinent to each beam type (eg, electron, proton, photon) also dictate the logical progression of experimentation required to move forward in safe and decisive clinical trials. Here we review the available preclinical data pertaining to these questions and how they may inform strategies for FLASH cancer therapy clinical trials.

First in Human Phase 1 Clinical Trial of Stereotactic Irradiation to Achieve Lung Volume Reduction (SILVR) in Severe Emphysema.

PURPOSE: Only a subset of patients with severe emphysema qualify for lung volume reduction surgery or endobronchial valves. We previously demonstrated that stereotactic ablative radiation therapy of lung tumors reduces lung volume in treated lobes by creating localized lung fibrosis. We aimed to determine the safety and secondarily explore the efficacy of stereotactic irradiation for lung volume reduction (SILVR) over 18 months after intervention in patients with severe emphysema. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We conducted a single-arm, prospective clinical trial in eligible patients with severe emphysema treated with unilateral stereotactic ablative radiation therapy (45 Gy in 3 fractions) to a target within the most emphysematous region. The primary outcome was safety in terms of incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events, and the secondary outcome was efficacy. RESULTS: Eight patients received the intervention. Median (range) baseline characteristics were age 73 years (63-78); forced expiratory volume in 1 second percent of predicted value (FEV1%) 28.5% (19.0-42.0); diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide percent of predicted value 40% (24.0-67.0); and body mass index, airflow obstruction, dyspnea, and exercise capacity (BODE) index 5.5 (5-9). The incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events was 3 of 8 (37.5%). The relative change in target lobe volume was -23.1% (-1.6 to -41.5) and -26.5% (-20.6 to -40.8) at 6 and 18 months, respectively. The absolute ΔFEV1% was greater in patients with a BODE index ≤5 versus ≥6 (+12.0% vs -2.0%). The mean baseline lung density (in Hounsfield units, reflecting the amount of preserved parenchyma) within the intermediate dose volume (V60BED3) correlated with the absolute change in target lobe volume at 18 months. CONCLUSIONS: SILVR appears to be safe, with a signal for efficacy as a novel therapeutic alternative for patients with severe emphysema. SILVR may be most safe and effective in patients with a lower BODE index and/or less parenchymal destruction.

Exploring Deep Learning for Estimating the Isoeffective Dose of FLASH Irradiation From Mouse Intestinal Histological Images.

PURPOSE: Ultrahigh-dose-rate (FLASH) irradiation has been reported to reduce normal tissue damage compared with conventional dose rate (CONV) irradiation without compromising tumor control. This proof-of-concept study aims to develop a deep learning (DL) approach to quantify the FLASH isoeffective dose (dose of CONV that would be required to produce the same effect as the given physical FLASH dose) with postirradiation mouse intestinal histology images. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Eighty-four healthy C57BL/6J female mice underwent 16 MeV electron CONV (0.12 Gy/s; n = 41) or FLASH (200 Gy/s; n = 43) single fraction whole abdominal irradiation. Physical dose ranged from 12 to 16 Gy for FLASH and 11 to 15 Gy for CONV in 1 Gy increments. Four days after irradiation, 9 jejunum cross-sections from each mouse were hematoxylin and eosin stained and digitized for histological analysis. CONV data set was randomly split into training (n = 33) and testing (n = 8) data sets. ResNet101-based DL models were retrained using the CONV training data set to estimate the dose based on histological features. The classical manual crypt counting (CC) approach was implemented for model comparison. Cross-section-wise mean squared error was computed to evaluate the dose estimation accuracy of both approaches. The validated DL model was applied to the FLASH data set to map the physical FLASH dose into the isoeffective dose. RESULTS: The DL model achieved a cross-section-wise mean squared error of 0.20 Gy2 on the CONV testing data set compared with 0.40 Gy2 of the CC approach. Isoeffective doses estimated by the DL model for FLASH doses of 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16 Gy were 12.19 ± 0.46, 12.54 ± 0.37, 12.69 ± 0.26, 12.84 ± 0.26, and 13.03 ± 0.28 Gy, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our proposed DL model achieved accurate CONV dose estimation. The DL model results indicate that in the physical dose range of 13 to 16 Gy, the biologic dose response of small intestinal tissue to FLASH irradiation is represented by a lower isoeffective dose compared with the physical dose. Our DL approach can be a tool for studying isoeffective doses of other radiation dose modifying interventions.

Chest wall pain after single-fraction thoracic stereotactic ablative Radiotherapy: Dosimetric analysis from the iSABR trial.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Concerns over chest wall toxicity has led to debates on treating tumors adjacent to the chest wall with single-fraction stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR). We performed a secondary analysis of patients treated on the prospective iSABR trial to determine the incidence and grade of chest wall pain and modeled dose-response to guide radiation planning and estimate risk. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This analysis included 99 tumors in 92 patients that were treated with 25 Gy in one fraction on the iSABR trial which individualized dose by tumor size and location. Toxicity events were prospectively collected and graded based on the CTCAE version 4. Dose-response modeling was performed using a logistic model with maximum likelihood method utilized for parameter fitting. RESULTS: There were 22 grade 1 or higher chest wall pain events, including five grade 2 events and zero grade 3 or higher events. The volume receiving at least 11 Gy (V11Gy) and the minimum dose to the hottest 2 cc (D2cc) were most highly correlated with toxicity. When dichotomized by an estimated incidence of ≥ 20 % toxicity, the D2cc > 17 Gy (36.6 % vs. 3.7 %, p < 0.01) and V11Gy > 28 cc (40.0 % vs. 8.1 %, p < 0.01) constraints were predictive of chest wall pain, including among a subset of patients with tumors abutting or adjacent to the chest wall. CONCLUSION: For small, peripheral tumors, single-fraction SABR is associated with modest rates of low-grade chest wall pain. Proximity to the chest wall may not contraindicate single fractionation when using highly conformal, image-guided techniques with sharp dose gradients.

Multi-Institutional Audit of FLASH and Conventional Dosimetry With a 3D Printed Anatomically Realistic Mouse Phantom.

PURPOSE: We conducted a multi-institutional dosimetric audit between FLASH and conventional dose rate (CONV) electron irradiations by using an anatomically realistic 3-dimensional (3D) printed mouse phantom. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A computed tomography (CT) scan of a live mouse was used to create a 3D model of bony anatomy, lungs, and soft tissue. A dual-nozzle 3D printer was used to print the mouse phantom using acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (∼1.02 g/cm3) and polylactic acid (∼1.24 g/cm3) simultaneously to simulate soft tissue and bone densities, respectively. The lungs were printed separately using lightweight polylactic acid (∼0.64 g/cm3). Hounsfield units (HU), densities, and print-to-print stability of the phantoms were assessed. Three institutions were each provided a phantom and each institution performed 2 replicates of irradiations at selected anatomic regions. The average dose difference between FLASH and CONV dose distributions and deviation from the prescribed dose were measured with radiochromic film. RESULTS: Compared with the reference CT scan, CT scans of the phantom demonstrated mass density differences of 0.10 g/cm3 for bone, 0.12 g/cm3 for lung, and 0.03 g/cm3 for soft tissue regions. Differences in HU between phantoms were <10 HU for soft tissue and bone, with lung showing the most variation (54 HU), but with minimal effect on dose distribution (<0.5%). Mean differences between FLASH and CONV decreased from the first to the second replicate (4.3%-1.2%), and differences from the prescribed dose decreased for both CONV (3.6%-2.5%) and FLASH (6.4%-2.7%). Total dose accuracy suggests consistent pulse dose and pulse number, although these were not specifically assessed. Positioning variability was observed, likely due to the absence of robust positioning aids or image guidance. CONCLUSIONS: This study marks the first dosimetric audit for FLASH using a nonhomogeneous phantom, challenging conventional calibration practices reliant on homogeneous phantoms. The comparison protocol offers a framework for credentialing multi-institutional studies in FLASH preclinical research to enhance reproducibility of biologic findings.

Predicting Adverse Cardiac Events After Radiotherapy for Locally Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

Background: Radiotherapy may cause grade ≥3 cardiac events, necessitating a better understanding of risk factors. The potential predictive role of imaging biomarkers with radiotherapy doses for cardiac event occurrence has not been studied. Objectives: The aim of this study was to establish the associations between cardiac substructure dose and coronary artery calcium (CAC) scores and cardiac event occurrence. Methods: A retrospective cohort analysis included patients with locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated with radiotherapy (2006-2018). Cardiac substructures, including the left anterior descending coronary artery, left main coronary artery, left circumflex coronary artery, right coronary artery, and TotalLeft (left anterior descending, left main, and left circumflex coronary arteries), were contoured. Doses were measured in 2-Gy equivalent units, and visual CAC scoring was compared with automated scoring. Grade ≥3 adverse cardiac events were recorded. Time-dependent receiver-operating characteristic modeling, the log-rank statistic, and competing-risk models were used to measure prediction performance, threshold modeling, and the cumulative incidence of cardiac events, respectively. Results: Of the 233 eligible patients, 61.4% were men, with a median age of 68.1 years (range: 34.9-90.7 years). The median follow-up period was 73.7 months (range: 1.6-153.9 months). Following radiotherapy, 22.3% experienced cardiac events, within a median time of 21.5 months (range: 1.7-118.9 months). Visual CAC scoring showed significant correlation with automated scoring (r = 0.72; P < 0.001). In a competing-risk multivariable model, TotalLeft volume receiving 15 Gy (per 1 cc; HR: 1.38; 95% CI: 1.11-1.72; P = 0.004) and CAC score >5 (HR: 2.51; 95% CI: 1.08-5.86; P = 0.033) were independently associated with cardiac events. A model incorporating age, TotalLeft CAC (score >5), and volume receiving 15 Gy demonstrated a higher incidence of cardiac events for a high-risk group (28.9%) compared with a low-risk group (6.9%) (P < 0.001). Conclusions: Adverse cardiac events associated with radiation occur in more than 20% of patients undergoing thoracic radiotherapy within a median time of <2 years. The present findings provide further evidence to support significant associations between TotalLeft radiotherapy dose and cardiac events and define CAC as a predictive risk factor.

Transformative Technology for FLASH Radiation Therapy.

The general concept of radiation therapy used in conventional cancer treatment is to increase the therapeutic index by creating a physical dose differential between tumors and normal tissues through precision dose targeting, image guidance, and radiation beams that deliver a radiation dose with high conformality, e.g., protons and ions. However, the treatment and cure are still limited by normal tissue radiation toxicity, with the corresponding side effects. A fundamentally different paradigm for increasing the therapeutic index of radiation therapy has emerged recently, supported by preclinical research, and based on the FLASH radiation effect. FLASH radiation therapy (FLASH-RT) is an ultra-high-dose-rate delivery of a therapeutic radiation dose within a fraction of a second. Experimental studies have shown that normal tissues seem to be universally spared at these high dose rates, whereas tumors are not. While dose delivery conditions to achieve a FLASH effect are not yet fully characterized, it is currently estimated that doses delivered in less than 200 ms produce normal-tissue-sparing effects, yet effectively kill tumor cells. Despite a great opportunity, there are many technical challenges for the accelerator community to create the required dose rates with novel compact accelerators to ensure the safe delivery of FLASH radiation beams.