ABSTRACT
The American Radium Society (ARS) Central Nervous System (CNS) committee reviewed literature on epidermal growth factor receptor mutated (EGFRm) and ALK-fusion (ALK+) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) for the treatment of brain metastases (BrMs) from non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) to generate appropriate use guidelines addressing use of TKIs in conjunction with or in lieu of radiotherapy (RT). The panel developed three key questions to guide systematic review: can radiotherapy be deferred in patients receiving EGFR or ALK TKIs at (1) diagnosis or (2) recurrence? Should TKI be administered concurrently with RT (3)? Two literature searches were performed (May 2019 and December 2023). The panel developed 8 model cases and voted on treatment options using a 9-point scale, with 1-3, 4-6 and 7-9 corresponding to usually not appropriate, may be appropriate, and usually appropriate (respectively), per the UCLA/RAND Appropriateness Method. Consensus was achieved in only 4 treatment scenarios, all consistent with existing ARS-AUC guidelines for multiple BrM. The panel did not reach consensus that RT can be appropriately deferred in patients with BrM receiving CNS penetrant ALK or EGFR TKIs, though median scores indicated deferral may be appropriate under most circumstances. Whole brain RT with concurrent TKI generated broad disagreement except in cases with 2-4 BrM, where it was considered usually not appropriate. We identified no definitive studies dictating optimal sequencing of TKIs and RT for EGFRm and ALK+ BrM. Until such studies are completed, the committee hopes these cases guide decision- making in this complex clinical space.
Subject(s)
Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase , Brain Neoplasms , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung , ErbB Receptors , Lung Neoplasms , Mutation , Protein Kinase Inhibitors , Humans , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/genetics , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/pathology , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/drug therapy , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/therapy , Brain Neoplasms/secondary , Brain Neoplasms/genetics , Brain Neoplasms/therapy , Lung Neoplasms/genetics , Lung Neoplasms/pathology , Lung Neoplasms/drug therapy , Lung Neoplasms/therapy , ErbB Receptors/genetics , Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase/genetics , Protein Kinase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Practice Guidelines as Topic/standardsABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Treatment decisions for leptomeningeal disease (LMD) rely on patient risk stratification, since clinicians lack objective prognostic tools. The introduction of rare cell capture technology for identification of cerebrospinal fluid tumor cells (CSF-TCs), such as CNSide assay, improved the sensitivity of LMD diagnosis, but prognostic value is unknown. This study assesses the prognostic value of CSF-TC density in patients with LMD from solid tumors. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with newly diagnosed or previously treated LMD from a single institution who had CNSide assay testing for CSF-TCs from 2020 to 2023. Univariable and multivariable survival analyses were conducted with Cox proportional-hazards modeling. Maximally-selected rank statistics were used to determine an optimal cutpoint for CSF-TC density and survival. RESULTS: Of 31 patients, 29 had CSF-TCs detected on CNSide. Median (interquartile range [IQR]) CSF-TC density was 67.8 (4.7-639) TCs/mL. CSF cytology was positive in 16 of 29 patients with positive CNSide (CNSide diagnostic sensitivity = 93.5%, negative predictive value = 85.7%). Median (IQR) survival from time of CSF-TC detection was 176 (89-481) days. On univariable and multivariable analysis, CSF-TC density was significantly associated with survival. An optimal cutpoint for dichotomizing survival by CSF-TC density was 19.34 TCs/mL. The time-dependent sensitivity and specificity for survival using this stratification were 76% and 67% at 6 months and 65% and 67% at 1 year, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: CSF-TC density may carry prognostic value in patients with LMD from solid tumors. Integrating CSF-TC density into LMD patient risk-stratification may help guide treatment decisions.
Subject(s)
Meningeal Neoplasms , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Female , Male , Prognosis , Middle Aged , Meningeal Neoplasms/cerebrospinal fluid , Meningeal Neoplasms/mortality , Meningeal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Meningeal Neoplasms/pathology , Aged , Adult , Survival Rate , Follow-Up Studies , Neoplasms/cerebrospinal fluid , Neoplasms/mortality , Neoplasms/diagnosis , Neoplasms/pathology , Meningeal Carcinomatosis/cerebrospinal fluid , Meningeal Carcinomatosis/diagnosis , Meningeal Carcinomatosis/mortality , Cell CountABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Management of CNS involvement in leukemia may include craniospinal irradiation (CSI), though data on CSI efficacy are limited. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed leukemia patients who underwent CSI at our institution between 2009 and 2021 for CNS involvement. CNS local recurrence (CNS-LR), any recurrence, progression-free survival (PFS), CNS PFS, and overall survival (OS) were estimated. RESULTS: Of thirty-nine eligible patients treated with CSI, most were male (59%) and treated as young adults (median 31 years). The median dose was 18 Gy to the brain and 12 Gy to the spine. Twenty-five (64%) patients received CSI immediately prior to allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant, of which 21 (84%) underwent total body irradiation conditioning (median 12 Gy). Among 15 patients with CSF-positive disease immediately prior to CSI, all 14 assessed patients had pathologic clearance of blasts (CNS-response rate 100%) at a median of 23 days from CSI start. With a median follow-up of 48 months among survivors, 2-year PFS and OS were 32% (95% CI 18-48%) and 43% (95% CI 27-58%), respectively. Only 5 CNS relapses were noted (2-year CNS-LR 14% (95% CI 5-28%)), which occurred either concurrently or after a systemic relapse. Only systemic relapse after CSI was associated with higher risk of CNS-LR on univariate analysis. No grade 3 or higher acute toxicity was seen during CSI. CONCLUSION: CSI is a well-tolerated and effective treatment option for patients with CNS leukemia. Control of systemic disease after CSI may be important for CNS local control. CNS recurrence may reflect reseeding from the systemic space.
Subject(s)
Brain Neoplasms , Central Nervous System Neoplasms , Craniospinal Irradiation , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation , Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute , Young Adult , Humans , Male , Female , Brain Neoplasms/therapy , Craniospinal Irradiation/adverse effects , Retrospective Studies , Central Nervous System Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Central Nervous System Neoplasms/etiology , Recurrence , Cranial IrradiationABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: As novel systemic therapies allow patients to live longer with cancer, the risk of developing central nervous system (CNS) metastases increases and providers will more frequently encounter emergent presentation of brain metastases (BM) and leptomeningeal metastases (LM). Management of these metastases requires appropriate work-up and well-coordinated multidisciplinary care. We set out to perform a review of emergent radiotherapy (RT) for CNS metastases, specifically focusing on BM and LM. METHODS: We review the appropriate pathways for workup and initial management of BM and LM, while reviewing the literature supporting emergent treatment of these entities with surgery, systemic anti-cancer therapy, and RT. To inform this narrative review, literature searches in PubMed and Google Scholar were conducted, with preference given to articles employing modern RT techniques, when applicable. Due to the paucity of high-quality evidence for management of BM and LM in the emergent setting, discussion was supplemented by the authors' expert commentary. KEY CONTENT AND FINDINGS: This work highlights the importance of surgical evaluation, particularly for patients presenting with significant mass effect, hemorrhagic metastases, or increased intracranial pressure. We review the rare situations where emergent initiation of systemic anti-cancer therapy is indicated. When defining the role of RT, we review factors guiding selection of appropriate modality, treatment volume, and dose-fractionation. Generally, 2D- or 3D-conformal treatment techniques prescribed as 30 Gy in 10 fractions or 20 Gy in 5 fractions, should be employed in the emergent setting. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with BM and LM present from a diverse array of clinical situations, requiring well-coordinated multidisciplinary management, and there is a paucity of high-quality evidence guiding such management decisions. This narrative review aims to more thoroughly prepare providers for the challenging situation of emergent management of BM and LM.
Subject(s)
Brain Neoplasms , Meningeal Carcinomatosis , Humans , Meningeal Carcinomatosis/secondary , Brain Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Brain Neoplasms/secondary , BrainABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Historical reservations regarding stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) brain metastases include concerns for short-interval and diffuse central nervous system (CNS) progression, poor prognoses, and increased neurological mortality specific to SCLC histology. We compared SRS outcomes for SCLC and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) where SRS is well established. METHODS: Multicenter first-line SRS outcomes for SCLC and NSCLC from 2000 to 2022 were retrospectively collected (n = 892 SCLC, n = 4785 NSCLC). Data from the prospective Japanese Leksell Gamma Knife Society (JLGK0901) clinical trial of first-line SRS were analyzed as a comparison cohort (n = 98 SCLC, n = 814 NSCLC). Overall survival (OS) and CNS progression were analyzed using Cox proportional hazard and Fine-Gray models, respectively, with multivariable adjustment for cofactors including age, sex, performance status, year, extracranial disease status, and brain metastasis number and volume. Mutation-stratified analyses were performed in propensity score-matched retrospective cohorts of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) positive NSCLC, mutation-negative NSCLC, and SCLC. RESULTS: OS was superior for patients with NSCLC compared to SCLC in the retrospective dataset (median OS = 10.5 vs 8.6 months; P < .001) and in the JLGK0901 dataset. Hazard estimates for first CNS progression favoring NSCLC were similar in both datasets but reached statistical significance in the retrospective dataset only (multivariable hazard ratio = 0.82, 95% confidence interval = 0.73 to 0.92, P = .001). In the propensity score-matched cohorts, there were continued OS advantages for NSCLC patients (median OS = 23.7 [EGFR and ALK positive NSCLC] vs 13.6 [mutation-negative NSCLC] vs 10.4 months [SCLC], pairwise P values < 0.001), but no statistically significant differences in CNS progression were observed in the matched cohorts. Neurological mortality and number of lesions at CNS progression were similar for NSCLC and SCLC patients. Leptomeningeal progression was increased in patients with NSCLC compared to SCLC in the retrospective dataset only (multivariable hazard ratio = 1.61, 95% confidence interval = 1.14 to 2.26, P = .007). CONCLUSIONS: After SRS, SCLC histology was associated with shorter OS compared to NSCLC. CNS progression occurred earlier in SCLC patients overall but was similar in patients matched on baseline factors. SCLC was not associated with increased neurological mortality, number of lesions at CNS progression, or leptomeningeal progression compared to NSCLC. These findings may better inform clinical expectations and individualized decision making regarding SRS for SCLC patients.
Subject(s)
Brain Neoplasms , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung , Lung Neoplasms , Radiosurgery , Small Cell Lung Carcinoma , Humans , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/genetics , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/radiotherapy , Lung Neoplasms/pathology , Retrospective Studies , Prospective Studies , Small Cell Lung Carcinoma/genetics , Small Cell Lung Carcinoma/radiotherapy , Small Cell Lung Carcinoma/surgery , ErbB Receptors/genetics , Brain Neoplasms/genetics , Brain Neoplasms/radiotherapyABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to investigate United States (US) radiation oncology (RO) program directors' (PDs) attitudes and practices regarding racial/ethnic diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) to better understand potential effects on underrepresented in medicine (UIM) residents in RO. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A 28-item survey was developed using the validated Ethnic Harassment Experiences Scale and the Daily Life Experiences subscale, as well as input from DEI leaders in RO. The survey was institutional review board-approved and administered to RO PDs. PDs were provided with the American Association of Medical Colleges definition of UIM, that is, "Underrepresented in medicine means those racial and ethnic populations that are underrepresented in the medical profession relative to their numbers in the general population." Descriptive statistics were used in analysis. RESULTS: The response rate was 71% (64/90). Institutional Culture and Beliefs: 42% responded that they had a department DEI director. A minority (17%, nâ¯=â¯11) agreed "I believe that people from UIM backgrounds have equal access to quality tertiary education in the US." The majority (97%, nâ¯=â¯62) agreed "My program values residents from UIM backgrounds." Support and Resources: The majority (78%, nâ¯=â¯50) agreed "My program has resources in place to assist/provide support for resident physicians from UIM backgrounds." Interview and Recruitment: Most PDs (53%) had not taken part in activities aimed at recruiting UIM residents and 17% had interviewed no UIM applicants in the past 5 years for residency. Resident Experiences of Racism: 17% (nâ¯=â¯11) agreed "UIM residents in my program have reported incidents of racism to me," and 28% (nâ¯=â¯18) agreed "I believe that UIM residents in my program have been treated differently because of their race/ethnicity by faculty, staff, coresidents or patients." CONCLUSIONS: Most PDs reported that they did not believe that UIM residents were treated differently in their department because of their race/ethnicity, and only a minority had received reports of racial discrimination experienced by residents. These data contrast resident experiences and suggest a disconnect between DEI perceptions and resident experiences among US RO PDs that should be addressed through increased programmatic action and evaluation.
Subject(s)
Internship and Residency , Medicine , Radiation Oncology , Humans , United States , Radiation Oncology/education , Attitude , Minority GroupsABSTRACT
PURPOSE: In this study, radiation oncology residents were surveyed on perceptions of diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging in their residency training programs. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A 23-item survey was developed by the Association of Residents in Radiation Oncology Equity and Inclusion Subcommittee resident members and faculty advisors. The survey was divided into 4 sections: institutional culture, support and resources, interview and recruitment, and experiences of bias. The survey was sent individually to residents from all Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited radiation oncology programs. RESULTS: The survey was issued to 757 residents. A total of 319 residents completed the survey, for a response rate of 42%. All postgraduate years and geographic regions were represented. Significant racial, ethnic, and gender differences were present in survey response patterns. White residents (94%, 164 of 174) and male residents (96%, 186 of 194) were more likely to strongly agree/agree that they were treated with respect by their colleagues and their coworkers than other racial groups (P < .005) or gender groups (P < .008). Only 3% (5 of 174) of White residents strongly agreed/agreed that they were treated unfairly because of their race/ethnicity, while 31% (5 of 16) of Black residents and 10% (9 of 94) of Asian residents strongly agreed/agreed (P < .0001). Similarly, Hispanic residents were more likely to strongly agree/agree (24%, 5 of 21) than non-Hispanic residents (7%, 20 of 298) (Pâ¯=â¯.003). Regarding mentorship, there were no differences by gender or ethnicity. There were differences by race in residents reporting that they had a supportive mentor (Pâ¯=â¯.022), with 89% (154 of 174) of White residents who strongly agreed/agreed, 88% (14 of 16) of Black residents, and 91% of Asian residents (86 of 94). CONCLUSIONS: This survey reveals that experiences of support, mentorship, inclusion, and bias vary significantly among radiation oncology residents based on race, ethnicity, and gender. Radiation oncology has opportunity for growth to ensure an equitable experience for all residents.
Subject(s)
Internship and Residency , Radiation Oncology , Humans , Male , Radiation Oncology/education , Education, Medical, Graduate , Surveys and Questionnaires , MentorsABSTRACT
As a result of treatment and diagnosis, adults with primary or metastatic brain tumors experience comorbidities that impacts their health and well-being. The Children's Oncology Group has guideline recommendations for childhood survivors of brain tumors; however, guidelines for monitoring long-term sequela among adult brain tumor survivors are lacking. The purpose of this review is to present the screening recommendations for the long-term complications after brain tumor treatment from a multidisciplinary panel of healthcare professionals. Chronic complications identified include cognitive dysfunction, vasculopathy, endocrinopathy, ophthalmic, ototoxicity, physical disability, sleep disturbance, mood disorder, unemployment, financial toxicity, and secondary malignancy. We invited specialists across disciplines to perform a literature search and provide expert recommendations for surveillance for long-term complications for adult brain tumor survivors. The Brain Tumor Center Survivorship Committee recommends routine screening using laboratory testing, subjective assessment of symptoms, and objective evaluations to appropriately monitor the complications of brain tumor treatments. Effective monitoring and treatment should involve collaboration with primary care providers and may require referral to other specialties and support services to provide patient-centered care during neuro-oncology survivorship. Further research is necessary to document the incidence and prevalence of medical complications as well as evaluate the efficacy of screening and neuro-oncology survivorship programs.
ABSTRACT
Objective: To provide benchmarks for further studies of solitary fibrous tumor/hemangiopericytoma (SFT/HPC) of the central nervous system (CNS), we investigated the association of baseline demographic, clinico-pathologic, and treatment factors with outcomes in those treated at our center. Methods: We conducted a retrospective, cohort analysis of patients treated for SFT/HPC at the University of Washington 1990-2020. Kaplan-Meier and univariable Cox analyses assessed relationships between baseline variables and local or global CNS recurrence, extraneural recurrence, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: Among 34 eligible patients, median duration of follow-up was 79 months (range 13-318 months). Local and global CNS recurrence occurred at a median of 81 m (95% CI 48-151) and 81 m (95% CI 47-112), respectively. Extraneural metastases occurred at a median 248 m (95% CI 180-Not Reached) and only in grade 3 tumors. Median PFS and OS were 76 months (95% CI: 47-109 months) and 210 months (95% CI 131-306 months), respectively. Univariable Cox analyses showed that age at diagnosis was associated with local (p = 0.01) and global CNS relapse (p = 0.01), and PFS (p = 0.03). Gross total resection was associated with decreased local or global CNS relapse (p = 0.02) and improved PFS (p = 0.03); peri-operative radiation was associated with decreased local CNS relapse (p = 0.02). Conclusion: Following microsurgical resection of SFT/HPC, CNS relapse is common and associated with age, extent of resection, and adjuvant radiation. Extraneural relapse occurs in some patients. Delayed time-to-initial relapse justifies prolonged surveillance, but optimal approaches have not been defined.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for adults with isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-mutant grade 2 and grade 3 diffuse glioma, as classified in the 2021 World Health Organization (WHO) Classification of Tumours. It includes indications for radiation therapy (RT), advanced RT techniques, and clinical management of adverse effects. METHODS: The American Society for Radiation Oncology convened a multidisciplinary task force to address 4 key questions focused on the RT management of patients with IDH-mutant grade 2 and grade 3 diffuse glioma. Recommendations were based on a systematic literature review and created using a predefined consensus-building methodology and system for grading evidence quality and recommendation strength. RESULTS: A strong recommendation for close surveillance alone was made for patients with oligodendroglioma, IDH-mutant, 1p/19q codeleted, WHO grade 2 after gross total resection without high-risk features. For oligodendroglioma, WHO grade 2 with any high-risk features, adjuvant RT was conditionally recommended. However, adjuvant RT was strongly recommended for oligodendroglioma, WHO grade 3. A conditional recommendation for close surveillance alone was made for astrocytoma, IDH-mutant, WHO grade 2 after gross total resection without high-risk features. Adjuvant RT was conditionally recommended for astrocytoma, WHO grade 2, with any high-risk features and strongly recommended for astrocytoma, WHO grade 3. Dose recommendations varied based on histology and grade. Given known adverse long-term effects of RT, consideration for advanced techniques such as intensity modulated radiation therapy/volumetric modulated arc therapy or proton therapy were given as strong and conditional recommendations, respectively. Finally, based on expert opinion, the guideline recommends assessment, surveillance, and management for toxicity management. CONCLUSIONS: Based on published data, the American Society for Radiation Oncology task force has proposed recommendations to inform the management of adults with IDH-mutant grade 2 and grade 3 diffuse glioma as defined by WHO 2021 classification, based on the highest quality published data, and best translated by our task force of subject matter experts.
Subject(s)
Astrocytoma , Brain Neoplasms , Glioma , Lymphoma, Follicular , Oligodendroglioma , Adult , Brain Neoplasms/genetics , Brain Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Glioma/genetics , Glioma/radiotherapy , Humans , World Health OrganizationABSTRACT
Brain metastases are a challenging manifestation of renal cell carcinoma. We have a limited understanding of brain metastasis tumor and immune biology, drivers of resistance to systemic treatment, and their overall poor prognosis. Current data support a multimodal treatment strategy with radiation treatment and/or surgery. Nonetheless, the optimal approach for the management of brain metastases from renal cell carcinoma remains unclear. To improve patient care, the authors sought to standardize practical management strategies. They performed an unstructured literature review and elaborated on the current management strategies through an international group of experts from different disciplines assembled via the network of the International Kidney Cancer Coalition. Experts from different disciplines were administered a survey to answer questions related to current challenges and unmet patient needs. On the basis of the integrated approach of literature review and survey study results, the authors built algorithms for the management of single and multiple brain metastases in patients with renal cell carcinoma. The literature review, consensus statements, and algorithms presented in this report can serve as a framework guiding treatment decisions for patients. CA Cancer J Clin. 2022;72:454-489.
Subject(s)
Brain Neoplasms , Carcinoma, Renal Cell , Kidney Neoplasms , Brain Neoplasms/therapy , Carcinoma, Renal Cell/pathology , Carcinoma, Renal Cell/therapy , Combined Modality Therapy , Humans , Kidney Neoplasms/pathology , Kidney Neoplasms/therapyABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Leptomeningeal (LM) disease occurs in 9% to 10% of EGFR mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cases. The natural history and optimal systemic treatment strategies for this disease are not well-characterized, particularly in the era of osimertinib. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified 54 patients with EGFR mutated NSCLC and LM disease diagnosed between January 3, 2000 to March 31, 2020 and treated at an academic oncology practice in Seattle, Washington. We abstracted demographic, tumor, treatment, and outcome data from the electronic medical record. Univariate Cox models were run to evaluate the association between post-LM disease systemic therapy and overall survival. Differences in LM disease natural history and healthcare utilization between groups were assessed using Student's t test or a chi-squared test. RESULTS: Patients that received osimertinib prior to LM disease had a longer median time to LM disease diagnosis and trended toward better performance status than those that did not. Patients that received any post-LM disease systemic therapy had a lower risk of death relative to those that did not (HR 0.17, P < .001), with a suggestion that osimertinib-containing regimens result in longer median overall survival. Emergency department, hospital and hospice utilization were not associated with receipt of post-LM disease systemic therapy. CONCLUSION: Prior exposure to osimertinib appears to favorably influence the natural history of LM disease. Any systemic therapy after LM disease diagnosis is associated with longer survival and does not increase healthcare utilization. Additional research is needed to assess whether an osimertinib-containing regimen confers a survival benefit after LM disease diagnosis among patients who received prior osimertinib.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung , Lung Neoplasms , Meningeal Carcinomatosis , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/drug therapy , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/genetics , ErbB Receptors/genetics , Humans , Lung Neoplasms/drug therapy , Lung Neoplasms/genetics , Meningeal Carcinomatosis/drug therapy , Meningeal Carcinomatosis/genetics , Mutation/genetics , Protein Kinase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Striking disparities in access to radiation therapy (RT) exist, especially among racial and ethnic-minority patients. We analyzed census block group data to evaluate differences in travel distance to RT as a function of race and ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and rurality. METHODS: The Directory of Radiotherapy Centers provided the addresses of facilities containing linear accelerators for RT. We classified block groups as majority (≥ 50%) American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN), black, white, Asian, no single racial majority, or Hispanic regardless of race. We used the Area Deprivation Index to classify deprivation and Rural-Urban Commuting Area codes to classify rurality. Generalized linear mixed models tested associations between these factors and distance to nearest RT facility. RESULTS: Median distance to nearest RT facility was 72 miles in AI/AN-majority block groups, but 4 to 7 miles in block groups with non-AI/AN majorities. Multivariable models estimated that travel distances in AI/AN-majority block groups were 39 to 41 miles longer than in areas with non-AI/AN majorities. Travel distance was 1.3 miles longer in the more deprived areas versus less deprived areas and 16 to 32 miles longer in micropolitan, small town, and rural areas versus metropolitan areas. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer patients in block groups with AI/AN-majority populations, nonmetropolitan location, and low socioeconomic status experience substantial travel disparities in access to RT. Future research with more granular community- and individual-level data should explore the many other known barriers to access to cancer care and their relationship to the barriers posed by distance to RT care.
Subject(s)
Ethnicity , Humans , United States , Healthcare Disparities , Health Services Accessibility , Rural PopulationABSTRACT
Postoperative management of lower grade gliomas (grade 2 and 3) is heterogeneous. The American Radium Society's brain malignancies panel systematically reviewed and evaluated the literature to develop consensus guidelines addressing timing of postoperative therapy, monotherapy versus combined modality therapy, type of chemotherapy used with radiotherapy, and radiotherapy dose. Thirty-six studies were included. Using consensus methodology (modified Delphi), the panel voted upon representative case variants using a 9-point appropriateness scale to address key questions. Voting results were collated to develop summarized recommendations. Following gross-total surgical resection, close surveillance is appropriate for well-selected grade 2, IDH-mutant oligodendrogliomas or astrocytomas with low-risk features. For grade 2 gliomas with high-risk features or any grade 3 glioma, immediate adjuvant therapy is recommended. When postoperative therapy is administered, radiation and planned chemotherapy is strongly recommended over monotherapy. For grade 2 and 3 IDH-mutant oligodendrogliomas and astrocytomas, either adjunctive PCV (procarbazine, lomustine, vincristine) or temozolomide is appropriate. For grade 3 IDH-mutant astrocytomas, radiotherapy followed by temozolomide is strongly recommended. The recommended radiotherapy dose for grade 2 gliomas is 45-54 Gy/1.8-2.0 Gy, and for grade 3 gliomas is 59.4-60 Gy/1.8-2.0 Gy. While multiple appropriate treatment options exist, these consensus recommendations provide an evidence-based framework to approach postoperative management of lower grade gliomas.
Subject(s)
Astrocytoma , Brain Neoplasms , Glioma , Oligodendroglioma , Radium , Astrocytoma/drug therapy , Brain Neoplasms/pathology , Glioma/drug therapy , Glioma/radiotherapy , Humans , Oligodendroglioma/drug therapy , Radium/therapeutic use , Temozolomide/therapeutic useABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Craniospinal irradiation (CSI) improves clinical outcomes at the cost of long-term neuroendocrine and cognitive sequelae. The purpose of this pilot study was to determine whether hypothalamic-pituitary axis (HPA) and hippocampus avoidance (HPA-HA) with intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) can potentially reduce this morbidity compared with standard x-ray CSI. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 10 patients with medulloblastoma (mean, 7 years; range, 4-14 years). Target volumes and organs at risk were delineated as per our local protocol and the ACNS0331 atlas. An experienced neuroradiologist verified the HPA and hippocampus contours. The primary objective was CSI and boost clinical target volume (CTV) covering 95% of the volume (D95) > 99% coverage with robustness. Described proton therapy doses in grays are prescribed using a biological effectiveness relative to photon therapy of 1.1. The combined prescribed dose in the boost target was 54 Gy. Secondary objectives included the HPA and hippocampus composite average dose (Dmean ≤ 18 Gy). For each patient, volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT) and tomotherapy (TOMO) plans existed previously, and a new plan was generated with 3 cranial and 1 or 2 spinal beams for pencil-beam scanning delivery. Statistical comparison was performed with 1-way analysis of variance. RESULTS: Compared with standard CSI, HPA-HA CSI had statistically significant decreases in the composite doses received by the HPA (32.2 versus 17.9 Gy; P < .001) and hippocampi (39.8 versus 22.8 Gy; P < .001). The composite HPA Dmean was lower in IMPT plans (17.9 Gy) compared with that of VMAT (21.8 Gy) and TOMO (21.2 Gy) plans (P = .05). Hippocampi composite Dmean was also lower in IMPT plans (21 Gy) compared with that of VMAT (27.5 Gy) and TOMO (27.2 Gy) plans (P = .02). The IMPT CTV D95 coverage was lower in IMPT plans (52.8 Gy) compared with that of VMAT (54.6 Gy) and TOMO (54.6 Gy) plans (P < .001) The spared mean volume was only 1.35% (19.8 cm3) of the whole-brain CTV volume (1476 cm3). CONCLUSION: We found that IMPT has the strong potential to reduce the dose to the HPA and hippocampus, compared with standard x-ray CSI while maintaining target coverage. A prospective clinical trial is required to establish the safety, efficacy, and toxicity of this novel CSI approach.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Racial and ethnic minorities in the state of Washington experience higher cancer mortality relative to whites. We sought to characterize differences in travel distance to radiation therapy (RT) facilities in Washington by race and ethnicity with a special focus on non-Hispanic American Indians and Alaska Natives as a contributor to limited access and cancer disparities. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Geocoded mortality data from Washington Department of Health (2011-2018) were used to identify decedents with mortality related to all-causes, all cancers, and cancers likely requiring access to RT. This was determined from optimal RT usage estimates by diagnosis. RT facility locations were ascertained from the Directory of Radiation Therapy Centers and confirmed. Distance from decedents' address listed on death certificates to nearest RT facility was calculated. Generalized mixed models were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: We identified 418,754 deaths; 109,134 were cancer-related, 60,973 likely required RT. Among decedents with cancers likely requiring RT, non-Hispanic American Indians and Alaska Natives decedents would have had to travel 1.16 times (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09-1.24) farther from their residences to reach the nearest treatment facility compared with non-Hispanic whites. This association existed in metro counties but was more pronounced in nonmetro counties (1.39 times farther; 95% CI, 1.22-1.58). In addition, Hispanics would have had to travel 1.11 times farther (95% CI, 1.06-1.16) to reach the nearest facility compared with non-Hispanic whites, primarily due to differences in urban counties. Decedents in nonmetro counties lived on average 35 miles (SD = 29) from RT centers and non-Hispanic American Indians and Alaska Natives in nonmetro counties 53 miles (SD = 38). Compared with non-Hispanic white decedents, those who were non-Hispanic black, non-Hispanic Asian, and non-Hispanic Native Hawaiian decedents lived closer to RT facilities. CONCLUSIONS: We observed significant disparities in access to RT facilities in Washington, specifically for non-Hispanic American Indians and Alaska Natives and rural decedents. The findings call for initiatives to improve access to critical cancer treatment services for these underserved populations with known disparities in cancer deaths.
Subject(s)
Indians, North American , Hispanic or Latino , Humans , Rural Population , United States , Washington/epidemiologyABSTRACT
The purpose of our study is to assess the impact of COVID-19 on the clinical responsibilities, training, and wellness of US radiation oncology residents. An anonymous cross-sectional survey was sent to all 91 radiation oncology residency programs in the USA. The survey included questions related to demographics, changes in clinical duties and training, job prospects, and wellness indicators. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate factors associated with residents endorsing high satisfaction with their departments' response to COVID-19. A total of 96 residents completed the survey from 67 US radiation oncology programs. In the multivariate logistic regression model, remote contouring (OR: 3.91 (95% CI: 1.11, 13.80), p = 0.03) and belief that one will be adequately trained to independently practice after completing residency (OR: 4.68 (1.12, 19.47), p = 0.03) were significantly associated with high resident satisfaction with their department's response to COVID-19. Most residents indicated that hypofractionation was encouraged to a greater extent (n = 79, 82.3%), patients were triaged by disease risk (n = 67, 69.8%), and most agreed/strongly agreed that they have been provided with adequate personal protective equipment (PPE) (n = 85, 88.5%). The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the training and wellness of radiation oncology residents. Our analysis suggests that radiation oncology programs might increase resident satisfaction with their department's response to COVID-19 by enabling remote contouring and working with residents to identity and remedy possible concerns regarding their ability to independently practice post residency.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Internship and Residency , Radiation Oncology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Radiation Oncology/education , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Radiation therapy is often used to treat meningioma with adverse features or when unresectable. Proton therapy has advantages over photon therapy in reducing integral dose to the brain. This study compared the incidence of radiological and clinical adverse events after photon versus proton therapy in the treatment of meningioma. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted on patients with meningioma treated with proton or photon therapy at two high-volume tertiary cancer centers. Patients with a history of prior radiation therapy (RT) or less than 3 months of follow-up were excluded. Post-RT imaging changes were categorized into abnormal T2 signal intensities (T2 changes) or abnormal T1 post-contrast and T2 signal intensities (T1c+T2 changes) on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Clinical outcomes of adverse events and survival were compared between the proton and photon therapies. RESULTS: Among the total of 77 patients, 38 patients received proton therapy and 39 patients received photon therapy. The median age at diagnosis was 55 years and median follow-up was 2.2 years. No significant differences in symptomatic adverse events were observed between the two groups: grade ≥ 2 adverse events were seen in 4 (10.5%) patients in the proton group and 3 (7.7%) patients in the photon group (p = 0.67). The 2-year cumulative incidences of T2 changes were 38.3% after proton therapy and 47.7% after photon therapy (p = 0.53) and the 2-year cumulative incidences of T1c+T2 changes were 26.8% after proton therapy and 5.3% after photon therapy (p = 0.02). One patient experienced grade ≥ 4 adverse event in each group (p = 0.99). Estimated 2-year progression-free survival was 79.5% (proton therapy 76.0% vs. photon therapy 81.3%, p = 0.66) and 2-year overall survival was 89.7% (proton therapy 86.6% vs. photon therapy 89.3%, p = 0.65). CONCLUSIONS: Following RT, high rates of T2 changes were seen in meningioma patients regardless of treatment modality. Proton therapy was associated with significantly higher rates of T1c+T2 changes compared with photon therapy, but severe adverse events were uncommon in both groups and survival outcomes were comparable between the two groups. Future studies will aim at correlating the MRI changes with models that can be incorporated into RT planning to avoid toxicity.