Real world outcomes of combination and timing of immunotherapy with radiotherapy for melanoma with brain metastases.

INTRODUCTION: Immunotherapy (IT) and radiotherapy (RT) have improved overall survival in patients with melanoma with brain metastasis (MBM). We examined the real-world survival impact of IT and RT combination and timing strategies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From the facility-based National Cancer Database (NCDB) data set, 3008 cases of MBM were identified between 2011 and 2015. Six treatment cohorts were identified: stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) + IT, SRS alone, whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) + IT, WBRT alone, IT alone, and none. Concurrent therapy was defined as IT given within 28 days before or after RT; nonconcurrent defined as IT administered within 28-90 days of RT. The co-primary outcomes were propensity score-adjusted overall survival by treatment regimen and overall survival by RT and IT timing. RESULTS: Median overall survival (mOS) was performed for each treatment category; SRS +IT 15.77 m; (95%CI 12.13-21.29), SRS alone (9.33 m; 95%CI: 8.0-11.3), IT alone (7.29 m; 95%CI: 5.35-12.91), WBRT +IT (4.89 m; 95%CI: 3.65-5.92), No RT or IT (3.29 m; 95%CI: 2.96-3.75), and WBRT alone (3.12 m; 95%CI 2.79-3.52). By propensity score matching, mOS for SRS +IT (15.5 m; 95%CI: 11.5-20.2) was greater than SRS alone (10.1 m; 95%CI: 8.4-11.8) (p = 0.010), and median survival for WBRT +IT (4.6 m; 95%CI: 3.4-5.6) was greater than WBRT alone (2.9 m; 95%CI: 2.5-3.5) (p < 0.001). In the SRS +IT group, 24-month landmark survival was 47% (95%CI; 42-52) for concurrent versus 37% (95%CI; 30-44) for nonconcurrent (p = 0.40). CONCLUSION: Those who received IT in addition to WBRT and SRS experienced longer survival compared to RT modalities alone, while those receiving concurrent SRS and IT trended toward improved survival versus nonconcurrent therapy.

Proton stereotactic body radiation therapy for liver metastases-results of 5-year experience for 81 hepatic lesions.

BACKGROUND: To report on our institutional experience using Proton stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for patients with liver metastases. METHODS: All patients with liver metastases treated with Proton SBRT between September 2012 and December 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. Local control (LC) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method calculated from the time of completion of Proton SBRT. LC was defined according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) guidelines (version 1.1). Toxicity was graded according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0. RESULTS: Forty-six patients with 81 lesions were treated with Proton SBRT. The median age was 65.5 years old (range, 33-86 years) and the median follow up was 15 months (range, 1-54 months). The median size of the gross tumor volume (GTV) was 2.5 cm (range, 0.7-8.9 cm). Two or more lesions were treated in 56.5% of patients, with one patient receiving treatment to a total of five lesions. There were 37 lesions treated with a biologically effective dose (BED) ≤60, 9 lesions with a BED of 61-80, 22 lesions with a BED of 81-100, and 13 lesions with a BED >100. The 1-year and 2-year LC for all lesions was 92.5% (95% CI, 82.7% to 96.8%). The grade 1 and grade 2 toxicity rates were 37% and 6.5%, respectively. There were no grade 3 or higher toxicities and no cases of radiation-induced liver disease (RILD). CONCLUSIONS: Proton SBRT for the treatment of liver metastases has promising LC rates with the ability to safely treat multiple liver metastases. Accrual continues for our phase II trial treating liver metastases with Proton SBRT to 60 GyE (Gray equivalent) in 3 fractions.

A phase I trial of Proton stereotactic body radiation therapy for liver metastases.

BACKGROUND: A phase I trial to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of Proton stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for liver metastases in anticipation of a subsequent phase II study. METHODS: An institutional IRB approved phase I clinical trial was conducted. Eligible patients had 1-3 liver metastases measuring less than 5 cm, and no metastases location within 2 cm of the GI tract. Dose escalation was conducted with three dose cohorts. The low, intermediate, and high dose cohorts were planned to receive 36, 48, and 60 respectively to the internal target volume (ITV) in 3 fractions. At least 700 mL of normal liver had to receive <15. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) included acute grade 3 liver, intestinal or spinal cord toxicity or any grade 4 toxicity. The MTD is defined as the dose level below that which results in DLT in 2 or more of the 6 patients in the highest dose level cohort. RESULTS: Nine patients were enrolled (6 male, 3 female): median age 64 years (range, 33-77 years); median gross tumor volume (GTV) 11.1 mL (range, 2.14-89.3 mL); most common primary site, colorectal (5 patients). Four patients had multiple tumors. No patient experienced a DLT and dose was escalated to 60 in 3 fractions without reaching MTD. The only toxicity within 90 days of completion of treatment was one patient with a grade 1 skin hyperpigmentation without tenderness or desquamation. Two patients in the low dose cohort had local recurrence and repeat SBRT was done to previously treated lesions without any toxicities. CONCLUSIONS: Biologically ablative Proton SBRT doses are well tolerated in patients with limited liver metastases with no patients experiencing any grade 2+ acute toxicity. Results from this trial provide the grounds for an ongoing phase II Proton SBRT study of 60 over 3 fractions for liver metastases.