A qualitative evaluation of factors influencing Tumor Treating fields (TTFields) therapy decision making among brain tumor patients and physicians.

BACKGROUND: Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) Therapy is an FDA-approved therapy in the first line and recurrent setting for glioblastoma. Despite Phase 3 evidence showing improved survival with TTFields, it is not uniformly utilized. We aimed to examine patient and clinician views of TTFields and factors shaping utilization of TTFields through a unique research partnership with medical neuro oncology and medical social sciences. METHODS: Adult glioblastoma patients who were offered TTFields at a tertiary care academic hospital were invited to participate in a semi-structured interview about their decision to use or not use TTFields. Clinicians who prescribe TTFields were invited to participate in a semi-structured interview about TTFields. RESULTS: Interviews were completed with 40 patients with a mean age of 53 years; 92.5% were white and 60% were male. Participants who decided against TTFields stated that head shaving, appearing sick, and inconvenience of wearing/carrying the device most influenced their decision. The most influential factors for use of TTFields were the efficacy of the device and their clinician's opinion. Clinicians (N = 9) stated that TTFields was a good option for glioblastoma patients, but some noted that their patients should consider the burdens and benefits of TTFields as it may not be the desired choice for all patients. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to examine patient decision making for TTFields. Findings suggest that clinician support and efficacy data are among the key decision-making factors. Properly understanding the path to patients' decision making is crucial in optimizing the use of TTFields and other therapeutic decisions for glioblastoma patients.

Long-term outcomes of spinal ependymomas: an institutional experience of more than 60 cases.

PURPOSE: Spinal ependymomas represent the most common primary intramedullary tumors for which optimal management remains undefined. When possible, gross total resection (GTR) is often the mainstay of treatment, with consideration of radiotherapy (RT) in cases of residual or recurrent tumor. The impact of extent of resection and radiotherapy remain understudied. OBJECTIVE: Report on a large institutional cohort with lengthy follow-up to provide information on long-term outcomes and to contribute to limited data assessing the value of extent of resection and RT. METHODS: Patients with pathologically proven primary spinal ependymoma between 1990 and 2018 were identified. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to calculate progression-free survival (PFS); local-control (LC) and overall survival (OS). Logistic regression was used to analyze variables' association with receipt of RT. RESULTS: We identified 69 patients with ependymoma of which 4 had leptomeningeal dissemination at diagnosis and were excluded. Of the remaining cohort (n = 65), 42 patients (65%) had Grade II spinal ependymoma, 20 (31%) had Grade I myxopapillary ependymoma and 3 (5%) had Grade III anaplastic ependymoma; 54% underwent GTR and 39% underwent RT. With a median follow-up of 5.7 years, GTR was associated with improved PFS. For grade II lesions, STR+RT yielded better outcomes than STR alone (10y PFS 77.1% vs 68.2%, LC 85.7% vs 50%). Degree of resection was the only significant predictor of adjuvant radiotherapy (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Our findings confirm the importance of GTR in spinal ependymomas. Adjuvant RT should be utilized in the setting of a subtotal resection with expectation of improved disease-related outcomes.

Cost-effectiveness of lung MRI in lung cancer screening.

OBJECTIVES: Recent studies with lung MRI (MRI) have shown high sensitivity (Sn) and specificity (Sp) for lung nodule detection and characterization relative to low-dose CT (LDCT). Using this background data, we sought to compare the potential screening performance of MRI vs. LDCT using a Markov model of lung cancer screening. METHODS: We created a Markov cohort model of lung cancer screening which incorporated lung cancer incidence, progression, and mortality based on gender, age, and smoking burden. Sensitivity (Sn) and Sp for LDCT were taken from the MISCAN Lung Microsimulation and Sn/Sp for MRI was estimated from a published substudy of the German Lung Cancer Screening and Intervention Trial. Screening, work-up, and treatment costs were estimated from published data. Screening with MRI and LDCT was simulated for a cohort of male and female smokers (2 packs per day; 36 pack/years of smoking history) starting at age 60. We calculated the screening performance and cost-effectiveness of MRI screening and performed a sensitivity analysis on MRI Sn/Sp and cost. RESULTS: There was no difference in life expectancy between MRI and LDCT screening (males 13.28 vs. 13.29 life-years; females 14.22 vs. 14.22 life-years). MRI had a favorable cost-effectiveness ratio of $258,169 in men and $403,888 in women driven by fewer false-positive screens. On sensitivity analysis, MRI remained cost effective at screening costs < $396 dollars and Sp > 81%. CONCLUSIONS: In this Markov model of lung cancer screening, MRI has a near-equivalent life expectancy benefit and has superior cost-effectiveness relative to LDCT. KEY POINTS: • In this Markov model of lung cancer screening, there is no difference in mortality between yearly screening with MRI and low-dose CT. • Compared to low-dose CT, screening with MRI led to a reduction in false-positive studies from 26 to 2.8% in men and 26 to 2.6% in women. • Due to similar life-expectancy and reduced false-positive rate, we found a favorable cost-effectiveness ratio of $258,169 in men and $403,888 in women of MRI relative to low-dose CT.

Lymphopenia predicts response to stereotactic radiosurgery in lung cancer patients with brain metastases.

BACKGROUND: Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) can enhance immune activation and improve disease control through stimulation of anti-tumor immunity. However, patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy are often immunosuppressed, which may impact the efficacy of SRS. Here we investigate the relationship between systemic lymphopenia and response to SRS in patients with brain-metastatic lung cancer. METHODS: We reviewed 125 patients with lung cancer brain metastases treated with SRS between January 2014 and May 2017. Complete blood counts from the time of SRS were reviewed, and lymphopenia was defined as absolute lymphocyte count < 1×109 cells/L. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and cox proportional-hazards models were used to evaluate risks of progression and death. RESULTS: The median age was 65 years (range 43-86), with 54% female patients. Lymphopenia was present in 60 patients. In univariate analysis, lymphopenic patients had significantly shorter PFS (HR = 2.995, p < 0.0001) and OS (HR = 3.928, p < 0.0001). When accounting for age, gender, smoking history, ECOG score, surgery, and tumor histology in a multivariate model, lymphopenia remained significantly predictive of worse PFS (HR = 1.912, p = 0.002) and OS (HR = 2.257, p < 0.001). Patients who received immunotherapy within 3 months of SRS demonstrated significantly shorter PFS (HR = 3.578, p = 0.006) and OS (HR = 6.409, p = 0.001) if lymphopenic. CONCLUSIONS: Brain-metastatic lung cancer patients with lymphopenia treated with SRS had significantly worse PFS and OS. The effect of lymphopenia was even more pronounced in patients receiving immunotherapy. These data demonstrate the significant impact of deficient immunity on disease control and survival. Lymphopenic patients may benefit from interventions to improve immune function prior to SRS for brain metastases.

Gross total resection and adjuvant radiotherapy most significant predictors of improved survival in patients with atypical meningioma.

BACKGROUND: Atypical and malignant meningiomas are far less common than benign meningiomas. As aggressive lesions, they are prone to local recurrence and may lead to decreased survival. Although malignant meningiomas typically are treated with maximal surgical resection and adjuvant radiotherapy (RT), to the authors' knowledge the optimal treatment for atypical lesions remains to be defined. There are limited prospective data in this setting. METHODS: The National Cancer Data Base was queried to investigate cases of histologically confirmed meningiomas diagnosed from 2004 to 2014. This included 7811 patients with atypical meningiomas (World Health Organization grade 2) and 1936 patients with malignant meningiomas (World Health Organization grade 3); during the same period, a total of 60,345 patients were diagnosed with benign meningiomas (World Health Organization grade 1). Data collected included patient and tumor characteristics, extent of surgical resection, and use of RT. Survival analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier estimates with the log-rank test of significance and Cox univariate and multivariate regression. Logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with use of RT. RESULTS: The 5-year overall survival rate was 85.5% in patients with benign meningiomas, 75.9% in patients with atypical meningiomas, and 55.4% in patients with malignant meningiomas (P<.0001). In patients with atypical meningiomas, gross (macroscopic) total resection (GTR) and adjuvant RT were found to be associated with significantly improved survival, independently and especially in unison (GTR plus RT: hazard ratio, 0.47; P = .002). On multivariate analysis, the combination of GTR plus RT was found to be the most important factor for improved survival. However, GTR was associated with significantly lower rates of RT use. CONCLUSIONS: GTR and adjuvant RT appear to be highly associated with improved survival, independent of other factors, in patients with atypical meningiomas. Cancer 2018;124:734-42. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

An overview of meningiomas.

Meningiomas are the most common primary intracranial tumor. Important advances are occurring in meningioma research. These are expected to accelerate, potentially leading to impactful changes on the management of meningiomas in the near and medium term. This review will cover the histo- and molecular pathology of meningiomas, including recent 2016 updates to the WHO classification of CNS tumors. We will discuss clinical and radiographic presentation and therapeutic management. Surgery and radiotherapy, the two longstanding primary therapeutic modalities, will be discussed at length. In addition, data from prior and ongoing investigations of other treatment modalities, including systemic and targeted therapies, will be covered. This review will quickly update the reader on the contemporary management and future directions in meningiomas. [Formula: see text].

Optimal management of radiation pneumonitis: Findings of an international Delphi consensus study.

PURPOSE: Radiation pneumonitis (RP) is a dose-limiting toxicity for patients undergoing radiotherapy (RT) for lung cancer, however, the optimal practice for diagnosis, management, and follow-up for RP remains unclear. We thus sought to establish expert consensus recommendations through a Delphi Consensus study. METHODS: In Round 1, open questions were distributed to 31 expert clinicians treating thoracic malignancies. In Round 2, participants rated agreement/disagreement with statements derived from Round 1 answers using a 5-point Likert scale. Consensus was defined as ≥ 75 % agreement. Statements that did not achieve consensus were modified and re-tested in Round 3. RESULTS: Response rate was 74 % in Round 1 (n = 23/31; 17 oncologists, 6 pulmonologists); 82 % in Round 2 (n = 19/23; 15 oncologists, 4 pulmonologists); and 100 % in Round 3 (n = 19/19). Thirty-nine of 65 Round 2 statements achieved consensus; a further 10 of 26 statements achieved consensus in Round 3. In Round 2, there was agreement that risk stratification/mitigation includes patient factors; optimal treatment planning; the basis for diagnosis of RP; and that oncologists and pulmonologists should be involved in treatment. For uncomplicated radiation pneumonitis, an equivalent to 60 mg oral prednisone per day, with consideration of gastroprotection, is a typical initial regimen. However, in this study, no consensus was achieved for dosing recommendation. Initial steroid dose should be administered for a duration of 2 weeks, followed by a gradual, weekly taper (equivalent to 10 mg prednisone decrease per week). For severe pneumonitis, IV methylprednisolone is recommended for 3 days prior to initiating oral corticosteroids. Final consensus statements included that the treatment of RP should be multidisciplinary, the uncertainty of whether pneumonitis is drug versus radiation-induced, and the importance risk stratification, especially in the scenario of interstitial lung disease. CONCLUSIONS: This Delphi study achieved consensus recommendations and provides practical guidance on diagnosis and management of RP.

Recommended first-line management of asymptomatic brain metastases from EGFR mutant and ALK positive non-small cell lung cancer varies significantly according to specialty: an international survey of clinical practice.

Background: The role for radiotherapy or surgery in the upfront management of brain metastases (BrM) in epidermal growth factor receptor mutant (EGFRm) or anaplastic lymphoma kinase translocation positive (ALK+) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is uncertain because of a lack of prospective evidence supporting tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) monotherapy. Further understanding of practice heterogeneity is necessary to guide collaborative efforts in establishing guideline recommendations. Methods: We conducted an international survey among medical (MO), clinical (CO), and radiation oncologists (RO), as well as neurosurgeons (NS), of treatment recommendations for asymptomatic BrM (in non-eloquent regions) EGFRm or ALK+ NSCLC patients according to specific clinical scenarios. We grouped and compared treatment recommendations according to specialty. Responses were summarized using counts and percentages and analyzed using the Fisher exact test. Results: A total of 449 surveys were included in the final analysis: 48 CO, 85 MO, 60 NS, and 256 RO. MO and CO were significantly more likely than RO and NS to recommend first-line TKI monotherapy, regardless of the number and/or size of asymptomatic BrM (in non-eloquent regions). Radiotherapy in addition to TKI as first-line management was preferred by all specialties for patients with ≥4 BrM. NS recommended surgical resection more often than other specialties for BrM measuring >2 cm. Conclusions: Recommendations for the management of BrM from EGFRm or ALK+ NSCLC vary significantly according to oncology sub-specialties. Development of multidisciplinary guidelines and further research on establishing optimal treatment strategies is warranted.

Recommended first-line management of brain metastases from melanoma: A multicenter survey of clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Radiotherapy (RT) and surgery (Sx) are effective in treating brain metastases. However, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have shown activity against asymptomatic melanoma brain metastases (MBM). BRAF/MEK inhibitors can be used to treat BRAF V600 mutation positive (BRAF+) MBM. METHOD: We conducted an international survey among experts from medical oncology (MO), clinical oncology (CO), radiation oncology (RO), and neurosurgery (NS) about treatment recommendations for patients with asymptomatic BRAF+ or BRAF mutation negative (BRAF-) MBM. Eighteen specific clinical scenarios were presented and a total of 267 responses were collected. Answers were grouped and compared using Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: In most MBM scenarios, survey respondents, regardless of specialty, favored RT in addition to systemic therapy. However, for patients with BRAF+ MBM, MO and CO were significantly more likely than RO and NS to recommend BRAF/MEK inhibitors alone, without the addition of RT, including the majority of MO (51%) for patients with 1-3 MBM, all <2 cm. Likewise, for BRAF- MBM, MO and CO more commonly recommended single or dual agent ICI only and dual agent ICI therapy alone was the most common recommendation from MO or CO for MBM <2 cm. When at least 1 of 3 MBM (BRAF+ or BRAF-) was >2 cm, upfront Sx was recommended by all groups with the exception that MO and RO recommended RT for BRAF- MBM. CONCLUSIONS: In most clinical settings involving asymptomatic MBM, experts recommended RT in addition to systemic therapy. However, recommendations varied significantly according to specialty, with MO and CO more commonly recommending dual systemic therapy alone for up to 9 BRAF- MBM <2 cm.

Current Landscape and Future Prospects of Radiation Sensitizers for Malignant Brain Tumors: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Radiation therapy (RT) is the cornerstone of management of malignant brain tumors, but its efficacy is limited in hypoxic tumors. Although numerous radiosensitizer compounds have been developed to enhance the effect of RT, progress has been stagnant. Through this systematic review, we provide an overview of radiosensitizers developed for malignant brain tumors, summarize their safety and efficacy, and evaluate areas for possible improvement. METHODS: Following PRISMA guidelines, PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Web of Science were searched using terminology pertaining to radiosensitizers for brain tumor RT. Articles reporting clinical evidence of nonantineoplastic radiosensitizers with RT for malignant central nervous system tumors were included. Data of interest were presumed mechanism of action, median overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and adverse events. RESULTS: Twenty-two unique radiosensitizers were identified. Only 2/22 agents (fluosol with oxygen, and efaproxiral) showed improvement in OS in patients with glioblastoma and brain metastasis, respectively. A larger study was not able to confirm the latter. Improved PFS was reported with use of metronidazole, sodium glycididazole, and chloroquine. There was a wide range of toxicities, which prompted change of schedule or complete discontinuation of 9 agents. CONCLUSIONS: Progress in radiosensitizers for malignant CNS tumors has been limited. Only 2 radiosensitizers have shown limited improvement in survival. Alternative strategies such as synthetic drug design, based on a mechanism of action that is independent of crossing the blood-brain barrier, may be necessary. Use of drug development strategies using new technologies to overcome past challenges is necessary.