Anal Adenocarcinoma Treated in the Era of Total Neoadjuvant Therapy and Nonoperative Management.

BACKGROUND: Anal adenocarcinoma bears a treatment strategy unique to other anal cancers. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe oncologic outcomes of total neoadjuvant therapy followed by watch-and-wait approach for anal adenocarcinoma. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at a comprehensive cancer center. PATIENTS: Patients with anal adenocarcinoma treated between 2004 and 2019 were selected. INTERVENTIONS: Fifty-four patients received neoadjuvant therapy and were divided into 2 groups according to their treatment strategy: total neoadjuvant therapy versus single neoadjuvant modality therapy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Organ preservation, tumor regrowth, local failure, distant metastasis rates, recurrence-free survival, and overall survival. RESULTS: This study included 70 patients with anal adenocarcinoma. Fifty-four patients (77%) received neoadjuvant therapy, of whom 30 (42%) received total neoadjuvant therapy and 24 (34%) received single neoadjuvant modality. Twenty-three (33%) patients achieved complete clinical response and were managed by watch-and-wait approach. The proportion of patients able to continue to watch-and-wait approach was higher after receiving total neoadjuvant therapy (60%) compared with single neoadjuvant modality therapy (20%; p = 0.004). A tumor regrowth rate of 22% was observed in the total neoadjuvant therapy group. The 5-year overall survival rate was 70% (95% CI, 59%-83%), including 61% (95% CI, 42%-88%) for the total neoadjuvant therapy and 65% (95% CI, 48%-88%) for the single neoadjuvant modality groups. Colostomy was avoided in 50% of patients who received total neoadjuvant therapy and 83% of watch-and-wait patients. Five-year recurrence-free survival rates of 55% (95% CI, 39%-79%) and 30% (95% CI, 15%-58%) were observed in the total neoadjuvant therapy and single neoadjuvant modality groups. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective nature. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first report in the literature describing the safety and feasibility of nonoperative management for anal adenocarcinoma. Anal adenocarcinoma treated with total neoadjuvant therapy and nonoperative management achieve regrowth rates comparable to those observed in rectal cancer, with oncologic outcomes similar to those of traditional treatment strategies. See Video Abstract . ADENOCARCINOMA ANAL TRATADO EN LA ERA DE LA TERAPIA NEOADYUVANTE TOTAL Y EL TRATAMIENTO NO QUIRRGICO: ANTECEDENTES:El adenocarcinoma anal conlleva una estrategia de tratamiento único para otros cánceres anales.OBJETIVO:Describir los resultados oncológicos de la terapia neoadyuvante total seguida de observar y esperar en adenocarcinoma anal.DISEÑO:Análisis retrospectivo.AJUSTE:Este estudio se llevó a cabo en un centro oncológico integral.PACIENTES:Se seleccionaron pacientes con adenocarcinoma anal tratados entre 2004-2019.INTERVENCIONES:Cincuenta y cuatro pacientes recibieron terapia neoadyuvante y se dividieron en dos grupos según su estrategia de tratamiento: terapia neoadyuvante total versus terapia de modalidad neoadyuvante única.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Preservación de órganos, recurrencia tumoral, falla local, tasas de metástasis a distancia, libre de recurrencia y supervivencia general.RESULTADOS:El estudio incluyó a 70 pacientes con adenocarcinoma anal. Cincuenta y cuatro pacientes (77%) recibieron terapia neoadyuvante, de los cuales 30 (42%) recibieron terapia neoadyuvante total y 24 (34%) recibieron modalidad neoadyuvante única. Veintitrés (33%) pacientes presentaron una respuesta clínica completa y fueron tratados con vigilancia y espera. La proporción de pacientes capaces de continuar en observar y esperar fue mayor después de recibir terapia neoadyuvante total (60%) en comparación con la terapia de modalidad neoadyuvante única (20%) ( p = 0,004). Se observó una tasa de recurrencia tumoral del 22% en el grupo de terapia neoadyuvante total. La tasa de supervivencia general a 5 años fue del 70% (IC95% 59%-83 %), incluido el 61% (IC95% 42%-88%) para la terapia neoadyuvante total y el 65% (IC95% 48%-88%) para grupos de modalidad neoadyuvante única. Se evitó la colostomía en el 50% de los pacientes que recibieron terapia neoadyuvante total y el 83% de los pacientes en observar y esperar. Se observaron tasas de supervivencia libre de recurrencia a cinco años del 55% (IC95% 39%-79%) y del 30% (IC95% 15%-58%) en los grupos de terapia neoadyuvante total y modalidad neoadyuvante única, respectivamente.LIMITACIONES:Diseño retrospectivo.CONCLUSIONES:Este es el primer informe en la literatura que describe la seguridad y viabilidad del tratamiento no quirúrgico del adenocarcinoma anal. El adenocarcinoma anal tratado con terapia neoadyuvante total y manejo no quirúrgico logra tasas de recurrencia comparables a las observadas en el cáncer de recto, con resultados oncológicos similares a las estrategias de tratamientos tradicionales. (Traducción-Dr. Fidel Ruiz Healy ).

Time to administration of stereotactic radiosurgery to the cavity after surgery for brain metastases: a real-world analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Publications on adjuvant stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) are largely limited to patients completing SRS within a specified time frame. The authors assessed real-world local recurrence (LR) for all brain metastasis (BM) patients referred for SRS and identified predictors of SRS timing. METHODS: The authors retrospectively identified BM patients undergoing resection and referred for SRS between 2012 and 2018. Patients were categorized by time to SRS, as follows: 1) ≤ 4 weeks, 2) > 4-8 weeks, 3) > 8 weeks, and 4) never completed. The relationships between timing of SRS and LR, LR-free survival (LRFS), and survival were investigated, as well as predictors of and reasons for specific SRS timing. RESULTS: In a cohort of 159 patients, the median age at resection was 64.0 years, 56.5% of patients were female, and 57.2% were in recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) class II. The median preoperative tumor diameter was 2.9 cm, and gross-total resection was achieved in 83.0% of patients. All patients were referred for SRS, but 20 (12.6%) did not receive it. The LR rate was 22.6%, and the time to SRS was correlated with the LR rate: 2.3% for patients receiving SRS at ≤ 4 weeks postoperatively, 14.5% for SRS at > 4-8 weeks (p = 0.03), and 48.5% for SRS at > 8 weeks (p < 0.001). No LR difference was seen between patients whose SRS was delayed by > 8 weeks and those who never completed SRS (48.5% vs 50.0%; p = 0.91). A similar relationship emerged between time to SRS and LRFS (p < 0.01). Non-small cell lung cancer pathology (p = 0.04), earlier year of treatment (p < 0.01), and interval from brain MRI to SRS (p < 0.01) were associated with longer intervals to SRS. The rates of receipt of systemic therapy also differed significantly between patients by category of time to SRS (p = 0.02). The most common reasons for intervals of > 4-8 weeks were logistic, whereas longer delays or no SRS were caused by management of systemic disease or comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: Available data on LR rates after adjuvant SRS are often obtained from carefully preselected patients receiving timely treatment, whereas significantly less information is available on the efficacy of adjuvant SRS in patients treated under "real-world" conditions. Management of these patients may merit reconsideration, particularly when SRS is not delivered within ≤ 4 weeks of resection. The results of this study indicate that a substantial number of patients referred for SRS either never receive it or are treated > 8 weeks postoperatively, at which time the SRS-treated patients have an LR risk equivalent to that of patients who never received SRS. Increased attention to the reasons for prolonged intervals from surgery to SRS and strategies for reducing them is needed to optimize treatment. For patients likely to experience delays, other radiotherapy techniques may be considered.

[68Ga]-DOTATATE PET/MRI as an adjunct imaging modality for radiation treatment planning of meningiomas.

BACKGROUND: Meningiomas express high levels of somatostatin receptor 2 (SSTR2). SSTR2-targeted PET imaging with [68Ga]-DOTATATE can aid with distinguishing residual meningioma from reactive changes in the postoperative setting. We present initial dosimetric analyses, acute events, and local control data utilizing [68Ga]-DOTATATE PET/MRI-assisted target delineation for prospectively-treated intermediate-risk meningiomas. METHODS: Twenty-nine patients underwent DOTATATE PET/MRI meningioma evaluation in 2019. Eight patients with 9 postoperative meningiomas met RTOG 0539 intermediate-risk criteria (recurrent WHO grade I, 1/9; WHO grade II, 8/9). Target volumes were created using DOTATATE PET/MRI to determine residual disease and received a nominal dose of 35.0 Gy over 5 fractions. For comparison, cases were recontoured and planned with MRI alone per RTOG 0539 guidelines. Mean and maximum equivalent 2 Gy doses were generated for target volumes and organs at risk (OAR) within 1 cm of the PTV and compared using Wilcoxon matched pairs signed rank test. RESULTS: DOTATATE PET/MRI-guided planning significantly reduced mean PTV (11.12 cm3 compared to 71.39 cm3 based on MRI alone, P < .05) and mean and max dose to the whole brain, optic nerves, and scalp. PET/MRI plans resulted in at least 50% reduction of mean and max doses to the lens, eyes, chiasm, cochlea, brainstem, and hippocampi. One patient experienced focal alopecia. There were no local recurrences at 6 months. CONCLUSION: Incorporating DOTATATE-PET/MRI for postoperative target delineation in patients with intermediate-risk intracranial meningiomas results in PTV reduction and decreased OAR dose. Our findings warrant larger studies evaluating DOTATATE-PET/MRI in the radiotherapeutic planning of postoperative meningiomas.

Timing of Adjuvant Fractionated Stereotactic Radiosurgery Affects Local Control of Resected Brain Metastases.

PURPOSE: For resected brain metastases (BMs), stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is often offered to minimize local recurrence (LR). Although the aim is to deliver SRS within a few weeks of surgery, a variety of socioeconomic, medical, and procedural issues can cause delays. We evaluated the relationship between timing of postoperative SRS and LR. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We retrospectively identified a consecutive series of patients with BM managed with resection and SRS or fractionated SRS at our institution from 2012 to 2018. We assessed the correlation of time to SRS and other demographic, disease, and treatment variables with LR, local recurrence-free survival, distant recurrence, distant recurrence-free survival, and overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 133 patients met inclusion criteria. The median age was 64.5 years. Approximately half of patients had a single BM, and median BM size was 2.9 cm. Gross total resection was achieved in 111 patients (83.5%), and more than 90% of patients received fractionated SRS. The median time to SRS was 37.0 days, and the LR rate was 16.4%. Time to SRS was predictive of LR. The median time from surgery to SRS was 34.0 days for patients without LR versus 61.0 days for those with LR (P < .01). The LR rate was 2.3% with SRS administered ≤4 weeks postoperatively, compared with 23.6% if SRS was administered >4 weeks postoperatively (P < .01). Local recurrence-free survival was also improved for patients who underwent SRS at ≤4 weeks (P = .02). Delayed SRS was also predictive of distant recurrence (P = .02) but not overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective study, the strongest predictor of LR after postoperative SRS for BM was time to SRS, and a cutoff of 4 weeks was a reliable predictor of recurrence. These findings merit investigation in a prospective, randomized trial.