The American Brachytherapy Society consensus statement for permanent implant brachytherapy using Yttrium-90 microsphere radioembolization for liver tumors.

PURPOSE: To develop a multidisciplinary consensus for high quality multidisciplinary implementation of brachytherapy using Yttrium-90 (90Y) microspheres transarterial radioembolization (90Y TARE) for primary and metastatic cancers in the liver. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Members of the American Brachytherapy Society (ABS) and colleagues with multidisciplinary expertise in liver tumor therapy formulated guidelines for 90Y TARE for unresectable primary liver malignancies and unresectable metastatic cancer to the liver. The consensus is provided on the most recent literature and clinical experience. RESULTS: The ABS strongly recommends the use of 90Y microsphere brachytherapy for the definitive/palliative treatment of unresectable liver cancer when recommended by the multidisciplinary team. A quality management program must be implemented at the start of 90Y TARE program development and follow-up data should be tracked for efficacy and toxicity. Patient-specific dosimetry optimized for treatment intent is recommended when conducting 90Y TARE. Implementation in patients on systemic therapy should account for factors that may enhance treatment related toxicity without delaying treatment inappropriately. Further management and salvage therapy options including retreatment with 90Y TARE should be carefully considered. CONCLUSIONS: ABS consensus for implementing a safe 90Y TARE program for liver cancer in the multidisciplinary setting is presented. It builds on previous guidelines to include recommendations for appropriate implementation based on current literature and practices in experienced centers. Practitioners and cooperative groups are encouraged to use this document as a guide to formulate their clinical practices and to adopt the most recent dose reporting policies that are critical for a unified outcome analysis of future effectiveness studies.

Epidemiology of liver metastases.

AIMS: The objectives of this study were to (1) characterize the epidemiology of liver metastases at the time of primary cancer diagnosis (synchronous liver metastases), (2) characterize the incidence trends of synchronous liver metastases from 2010-2015 and (3) assess survival of patients with synchronous liver metastases. METHODS: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database from 2010 to 2015 was queried to obtain cases of patients with liver metastases at the time of primary cancer diagnosis. The primary cancers with an incidence rate of liver metastasis >0.1 are presented in this analysis. RESULTS: Among 2.4 million cancer patients, 5.14 % of cancer patients presented with synchronous liver metastases. The most common primary site was breast cancers for younger women (ages 20-50), and colorectal cancers for younger men. As patients get older, a more heterogenous population of the top cancers with liver metastases emerges including esophageal, stomach, small intestine, melanoma, and bladder cancer in addition to the large proportion of lung, pancreatic, and colorectal cancers. The 1-year survival of all patients with liver metastases was 15.1 %, compared to 24.0 % in those with non-hepatic metastases. Regression analysis showed that the presence of liver metastasis was associated with reduced survival, particularly in patients with cancers of the testis, prostate, breast, and anus, and in those with melanoma. CONCLUSIONS: The most common primary sites for patients with liver metastases varied based on age at diagnosis. Survival for patients with liver metastasis was significantly decreased as compared to patients without liver metastasis.

Conventionally fractionated radiation therapy versus stereotactic body radiation therapy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (CRiSP): An international systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The goal of this study was to characterize the efficacy and safety of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) versus conventionally fractionated radiation therapy with concurrent chemotherapy (CFRT) for the definitive treatment of locally advanced pancreatic cancer. The primary outcome measure was efficacy, defined by 2-year overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes were incidence of any grade 3/4 toxicity and 1-year OS. METHODS: A PICOS/PRISMA/MOOSE selection protocol was used to identify eligible studies. Inclusion criteria were: 1) patients diagnosed with locally advanced N0-1 M0 pancreatic cancer; 2) CFRT 1.8 to 2.0 Gy/fraction with chemotherapy per protocol or SBRT ≥5 Gy/fraction in ≤5 fractions; 3) either no control group or another definitive chemotherapy or radiation therapy arm; 4) at least 1 of the outcome measures reported; and 5) single or multi-arm phase 2/3 prospective study for CFRT and/or phase 1/2 or retrospective study for SBRT. Neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant chemotherapy was prescribed per protocol specifications. Weighted random effects meta-analyses were conducted using the DerSimonian and Laird method to characterize summary effect sizes for each outcome. RESULTS: A total of 470 studies were initially screened; of these, 9 studies assessed SBRT and 11 studies assessed CFRT. For SBRT, the median dose was 30 Gy, and the most common regimen was 30 Gy/5 fractions. For CFRT, doses ranged from 45 to 54 Gy in 1.8- to 2.0-Gy fractions, with the majority of studies delivering 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions with concurrent gemcitabine. The random effects estimate for 2-year OS was 26.9% (95% CI, 20.6%-33.6%) for SBRT versus 13.7% (95% CI, 8.9%-19.3%) for CFRT and was statistically significant in favor of SBRT. The random effects estimate for 1-year OS was 53.7% (95% CI, 39.3%-67.9%) for SBRT versus 49.3% (95% CI, 39.3%-59.4%) for CFRT, and was not statistically significant. The random effects estimate for acute grade 3/4 toxicity was 5.6% (95% CI, 0.0%-20.0%) for SBRT versus 37.7% (95% CI, 24.0%-52.5%) for CFRT and was statistically significant in favor of SBRT. The random effects estimate for late grade 3/4 toxicity was 9.0% for SBRT (95% CI, 3.3%-17.1%) versus 10.1% (95% CI, 1.8%-23.8%) for CFRT, which was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that SBRT for LAPC may result in a modest improvement in 2-year OS with decreased rates of acute grade 3/4 toxicity and no change in 1-year-OS or late toxicity. Further study into the use of stereotactic body radiation therapy for these patients is needed.

Reducing the Toxicity of Radiotherapy for Pancreatic Cancer With Magnetic Resonance-guided Radiotherapy.

Pancreatic cancer is a highly fatal malignancy for which surgery is currently considered to be the only curative treatment. However, less than a quarter of patients have disease amenable to definitive surgical resection. Local treatment with radiation therapy is a promising alternative to surgery for those patients with unresectable disease. However, conventional radiation techniques with computed tomography (CT)-guided therapy have yielded disappointing results due to the inability to deliver ablative doses of ionizing radiation, while sparing the radiosensitive adjacent organs at risk. Magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) has emerged as an alternative to CT-guided radiation treatment which allows for the delivery of higher doses of radiation with low toxicity to surrounding structures. Further study into the use of MRgRT and dose escalation for locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer is needed.

Selective Internal Radiation Therapy in the Multidisciplinary Management of Liver Metastases From Colorectal Carcinoma.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the fourth most common cancer in the United States. Most patients diagnosed with CRC will eventually develop metastases. The liver is the most common site of metastases from CRC and liver metastases are the most common cause of death for patients with CRC. Selective internal radiotherapy (SIRT) using yttrium 90 microspheres has emerged as a safe and effective treatment modality for controlling hepatic tumor burden in inoperable patients with liver-only or liver-predominant metastatic CRC. This article serves to review the available data on SIRT in the treatment of liver metastases from CRC in the salvage and first-line setting. Recently published phase III randomized data showing a significant improvement in liver progression-free survival from the addition of SIRT to standard chemotherapy in the first-line setting, while demonstrating no significant improvement in overall survival, will be reviewed. In addition, the present article examines the role of SIRT in the management of CRC liver metastases from right-sided colon cancers in which SIRT has been shown to improve overall survival when combined with chemotherapy in the first-line setting and explores appropriate patient selection for future studies.

Effect of Primary Tumor Side on Survival Outcomes in Untreated Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer When Selective Internal Radiation Therapy Is Added to Chemotherapy: Combined Analysis of Two Randomized Controlled Studies.

BACKGROUND: The primary tumor side is emerging as a major prognostic factor for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We examined the survival data from 2 randomized studies to determine whether the outcomes differ between patients with mCRC with right-sided primary (RSP) tumors and those with left-sided primary (LSP) tumors after selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) plus mFOLFOX6 (folinic acid [leucovorin], 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin) chemotherapy, versus chemotherapy alone. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Separate and combined analyses were performed on the data from the SIRFLOX and FOXFIRE global trials, which compared chemotherapy plus SIRT with chemotherapy alone for patients with mCRC liver metastases. The primary tumor side data were prospectively collected. The principal outcome measure was overall survival (OS) stratified by treatment and primary tumor side. RESULTS: In the combined analysis of all 739 patients enrolled, SIRT had no effect on OS (median OS, 24.3 vs. 24.6 months; hazard ratio [HR], 1.021; P = .810). For the 179 patients (24.2%) with a RSP tumor, OS was improved with the addition of SIRT (median, 22.0 vs. 17.1 months HR, 0.641; P = .008). The addition of SIRT was not associated with a significant difference in OS among the 540 patients with a LSP tumor (median, 24.6 vs. 26.6 months; HR, 1.120; P = .264). A test of treatment interaction by primary tumor side was statistically significant for RSP and SIRT (P = .002). CONCLUSION: The addition of SIRT for patients with RSP tumors, but not for those with LSP tumors, was associated with a statistically and clinically significant OS gain.

First-line selective internal radiotherapy plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in patients with liver metastases from colorectal cancer (FOXFIRE, SIRFLOX, and FOXFIRE-Global): a combined analysis of three multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trials.

BACKGROUND: Data suggest selective internal radiotherapy (SIRT) in third-line or subsequent therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer has clinical benefit in patients with colorectal liver metastases with liver-dominant disease after chemotherapy. The FOXFIRE, SIRFLOX, and FOXFIRE-Global randomised studies evaluated the efficacy of combining first-line chemotherapy with SIRT using yttrium-90 resin microspheres in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer with liver metastases. The studies were designed for combined analysis of overall survival. METHODS: FOXFIRE, SIRFLOX, and FOXFIRE-Global were randomised, phase 3 trials done in hospitals and specialist liver centres in 14 countries worldwide (Australia, Belgium, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, New Zealand, Portugal, South Korea, Singapore, Spain, Taiwan, the UK, and the USA). Chemotherapy-naive patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (WHO performance status 0 or 1) with liver metastases not suitable for curative resection or ablation were randomly assigned (1:1) to either oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy (FOLFOX: leucovorin, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin) or FOLFOX plus single treatment SIRT concurrent with cycle 1 or 2 of chemotherapy. In FOXFIRE, FOLFOX chemotherapy was OxMdG (oxaliplatin modified de Gramont chemotherapy; 85 mg/m2 oxaliplatin infusion over 2 h, L-leucovorin 175 mg or D,L-leucovorin 350 mg infusion over 2 h, and 400 mg/m2 bolus fluorouracil followed by a 2400 mg/m2 continuous fluorouracil infusion over 46 h). In SIRFLOX and FOXFIRE-Global, FOLFOX chemotherapy was modified FOLFOX6 (85 mg/m2 oxaliplatin infusion over 2 h, 200 mg leucovorin, and 400 mg/m2 bolus fluorouracil followed by a 2400 mg/m2 continuous fluorouracil infusion over 46 h). Randomisation was done by central minimisation with four factors: presence of extrahepatic metastases, tumour involvement of the liver, planned use of a biological agent, and investigational centre. Participants and investigators were not masked to treatment. The primary endpoint was overall survival, analysed in the intention-to-treat population, using a two-stage meta-analysis of pooled individual patient data. All three trials have completed 2 years of follow-up. FOXFIRE is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN83867919. SIRFLOX and FOXFIRE-Global are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT00724503 (SIRFLOX) and NCT01721954 (FOXFIRE-Global). FINDINGS: Between Oct 11, 2006, and Dec 23, 2014, 549 patients were randomly assigned to FOLFOX alone and 554 patients were assigned FOLFOX plus SIRT. Median follow-up was 43·3 months (IQR 31·6-58·4). There were 411 (75%) deaths in 549 patients in the FOLFOX alone group and 433 (78%) deaths in 554 patients in the FOLFOX plus SIRT group. There was no difference in overall survival (hazard ratio [HR] 1·04, 95% CI 0·90-1·19; p=0·61). The median survival time in the FOLFOX plus SIRT group was 22·6 months (95% CI 21·0-24·5) compared with 23·3 months (21·8-24·7) in the FOLFOX alone group. In the safety population containing patients who received at least one dose of study treatment, as treated, the most common grade 3-4 adverse event was neutropenia (137 [24%] of 571 patients receiving FOLFOX alone vs 186 (37%) of 507 patients receiving FOLFOX plus SIRT). Serious adverse events of any grade occurred in 244 (43%) of 571 patients receiving FOLFOX alone and 274 (54%) of 507 patients receiving FOLFOX plus SIRT. 10 patients in the FOLFOX plus SIRT group and 11 patients in the FOLFOX alone group died due to an adverse event; eight treatment-related deaths occurred in the FOLFOX plus SIRT group and three treatment-related deaths occurred in the FOLFOX alone group. INTERPRETATION: Addition of SIRT to first-line FOLFOX chemotherapy for patients with liver-only and liver-dominant metastatic colorectal cancer did not improve overall survival compared with that for FOLFOX alone. Therefore, early use of SIRT in combination with chemotherapy in unselected patients with metastatic colorectal cancer cannot be recommended. To further define the role of SIRT in metastatic colorectal cancer, careful patient selection and studies investigating the role of SIRT as consolidation therapy after chemotherapy are needed. FUNDING: Bobby Moore Fund of Cancer Research UK, Sirtex Medical.

Baseline hemoglobin and liver function predict tolerability and overall survival of patients receiving radioembolization for chemotherapy-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with liver metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) often benefit from receiving 90Y-microsphere radioembolization (RE) administered via the hepatic arteries. Prior to delivery of liver-directed radiation, standard laboratory tests may assist in improving outcome by identifying correctable pre-radiation abnormalities. METHODS: A database containing retrospective review of consecutively treated patients of mCRC from July 2002 to December 2011 at 11 US institutions was used. Data collected included background characteristics, prior chemotherapy, surgery/ablation, radiotherapy, vascular procedures, 90Y treatment, subsequent adverse events and survival. Kaplan-Meier estimates compared the survival of patients across lines of chemotherapy. The following values were obtained within 10 days prior to each RE treatment: haemoglobin (HGB), albumin, alkaline phosphatase (Alk phosph), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine transaminase (ALT), total bilirubin and creatinine. Common Terminology Criteria Adverse Events (CTCAEs) 3.0 grade was assigned to each parameter and analysed for impact on survival by line of chemotherapy. Consensus Guidelines were used to categorize the parameter grades as either within or outside guidelines for treatment. RESULTS: A total of 606 patients (370 male; 236 female) were studied with a median follow-up was 8.5 mo. (IQR 4.3-15.6) after RE. Fewer than 11% of patients were treated outside recommended RE guidelines, with albumin being the most common, 10.5% grade 2 (<3-2.0 g/dL) at time of RE. All seven parameters showed statistically significant decreased median survivals with any grade >0 (P<0.001) across all lines of prior chemotherapy. Compared to grade 0, grade 2 albumin decreased overall survival 67%; for grade 2 total bilirubin a 63% drop occurred, and grade 1 HGB resulted in 66% lower median survival. CONCLUSIONS: Review of pre-RE laboratory parameters may aid in improving median survivals if correctable grade >0 values are addressed prior to radiation delivery. HGB <10 g/dL is a well-known negative factor in radiation response and is easily corrected. Improving other parameters is more challenging. These efforts are important in optimizing treatment response to liver radiotherapy.

Hepatopulmonary Shunting: A Prognostic Indicator of Survival in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Adenocarcinoma Treated with 90Y Radioembolization.

Purpose To determine if high lung shunt fraction (LSF) is an independent prognostic indicator of poor survival in patients who undergo yttrium 90 radioembolization for unresectable liver-dominant metastatic colorectal cancer. Materials and Methods Retrospective data were analyzed from 606 patients (62% men; mean age, 62 years) who underwent radioembolization to treat liver metastases from colorectal adenocarcinoma between July 2002 and December 2011 at 11 U.S. centers. Institutional review board exemptions were granted prior to the collection of data at each site. Overall survival was estimated by using Kaplan-Meier survival and univariate Cox proportional hazards models to examine the effect of LSF on survival and to compare this to other potential prognostic indicators. Multivariate analysis was also performed to determine whether LSF is an independent risk factor for poor survival. Results LSF higher than 10% was predictive of significantly decreased survival (median, 6.9 months vs 10.0 months; hazard ratio, 1.60; P < .001) and demonstrated a mild but significant correlation to serum carcinoembryonic antigen levels and tumor-to-liver volume ratio (Pearson correlation coefficients, 0.105 and 0.113, respectively; P < .05). A progressive decrease in survival was observed as LSF increased from less than 5% to more than 20% (P < .05). LSF did not correlate with the presence of extrahepatic metastases or prior administration of bevacizumab. Conclusion Increased LSF is an independent prognostic indicator of worse survival in patients undergoing radioembolization for liver-dominant metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma. High LSF correlates poorly to other potential markers of tumor size, such as tumor-to-liver volume ratio or serum carcinoembryonic antigen level, and does not correlate to the presence of extrahepatic metastases. © RSNA, 2016 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Prognostic significance of neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio and platelet-lymphocyte ratio in patients treated with selective internal radiation therapy.

BACKGROUND: Elevated neutrophil-to-lymphocyte (NLR) and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratios (PLR) may represent markers of a suboptimal host immune response to cancer and have been shown to correlate with prognosis in multiple tumor types across different treatment modalities, including radiation therapy. Limited data suggest that NLR may predict for survival and disease control in patients receiving selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT). The correlation between clinical outcomes and change in NLR and PLR after SIRT has not been evaluated. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 339 consecutive patients with primary (n=37) or metastatic (n=79) liver cancer treated with SIRT from 2006 to 2014. Complete blood counts with differential were available for 116 patients both before and after (median, 29 and 20 days, respectively) SIRT. Survival and progression were calculated from date of initial SIRT. Patient and tumor characteristics evaluated for ability to predict overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) included pre- and post-treatment neutrophil, platelet, and lymphocyte counts (LCs), as well as NLR, PLR, and relative change in NLR and PLR. Cutoff values were determined for variables that were significant on multivariate analysis (MVA) for OS and/or PFS. RESULTS: Median follow-up of surviving patients was 12 months. Median OS was 8 months from SIRT and 20 months from date of liver metastasis diagnosis. Significant factors on univariate analysis (UVA) for both lower OS and PFS included higher post-treatment neutrophil count (NC), higher post-treatment NLR, higher liver tumor volume, higher percentage liver tumor burden, and worse Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status. Significant factors on MVA for lower OS and PFS were ECOG performance status ≥2, higher liver tumor volume, higher pretreatment PLR, and increase in PLR after SIRT. Post-treatment increase in PLR >3-fold was the most predictive early marker for increased risk of death when compared with those whose PLR did not increase or increased <3-fold. Pretreatment PLR >78 was the most predictive serum marker associated with improved OS prior to therapy. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest study to evaluate the association between NLR and PLR with clinical outcomes in patients receiving SIRT, with results that confirm that pre- and/or post-treatment NLR and/or PLR are predictive of clinical outcomes. The largest increase in risk of death as well as local and extrahepatic disease progression was related to change in PLR, a datum not well reported in the literature. The impact of SIRT on blood count changes and the underlying implications of these ratios should be further characterized in a prospective study.

SIRFLOX: Randomized Phase III Trial Comparing First-Line mFOLFOX6 (Plus or Minus Bevacizumab) Versus mFOLFOX6 (Plus or Minus Bevacizumab) Plus Selective Internal Radiation Therapy in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

PURPOSE: SIRFLOX was a randomized, multicenter trial designed to assess the efficacy and safety of adding selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) using yttrium-90 resin microspheres to standard fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX)-based chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Chemotherapy-naïve patients with liver metastases plus or minus limited extrahepatic metastases were randomly assigned to receive either modified FOLFOX (mFOLFOX6; control) or mFOLFOX6 plus SIRT (SIRT) plus or minus bevacizumab. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) at any site as assessed by independent centralized radiology review blinded to study arm. RESULTS: Between October 2006 and April 2013, 530 patients were randomly assigned to treatment (control, 263; SIRT, 267). Median PFS at any site was 10.2 v 10.7 months in control versus SIRT (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.12; P = .43). Median PFS in the liver by competing risk analysis was 12.6 v 20.5 months in control versus SIRT (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.90; P = .002). Objective response rates (ORRs) at any site were similar (68.1% v 76.4% in control v SIRT; P = .113). ORR in the liver was improved with the addition of SIRT (68.8% v 78.7% in control v SIRT; P = .042). Grade ≥ 3 adverse events, including recognized SIRT-related effects, were reported in 73.4% and 85.4% of patients in control versus SIRT. CONCLUSION: The addition of SIRT to FOLFOX-based first-line chemotherapy in patients with liver-dominant or liver-only metastatic colorectal cancer did not improve PFS at any site but significantly delayed disease progression in the liver. The safety profile was as expected and was consistent with previous studies.

Pretreatment tumor volume as a prognostic factor in metastatic colorectal cancer treated with selective internal radiation to the liver using yttrium-90 resin microspheres.

BACKGROUND: Yttrium-90 (90Y)-resin microspheres can prolong intrahepatic disease control and improve overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). Prognostic factors for improved outcomes in patients undergoing selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) have been studied, but the relationship between pre-SIRT liver tumor volume and outcomes has not well described. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of patients with metastatic CRC who were treated at our institution with 90Y-resin microspheres. Each patient underwent either MR or CT imaging of the liver with intravenous (IV) contrast before and within ~2-3 months after SIRT. Imaging data were transferred into our treatment planning system. Each metastatic liver lesion was contoured, and the volume of each lesion was summed to determine the total liver tumor volume at a given time point. We evaluated whether pretreatment liver tumor volume was related to OS. We also evaluated the relationship between pre-SIRT tumor volume and radiographic treatment response by either unidimensional Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) or three-dimensional volumetric criteria. RESULTS: We included 60 patients with a median age of 59 years (range, 38-97 years); 60% of patients received sequential lobar treatment. The median number of chemotherapy cycles received prior to SIRT was 2. Median follow-up from first SIRT was 8.9 months. Pre- and post-SIRT tumor volumes were primarily calculated on CT (87%). The median pre-SIRT tumor volume was 77 cc (range, 4.5-2,170.4 cc). The median intervals between the first SIRT and the first, second, and third follow-up scans were 2.2, 4.4, and 7.7 months, respectively. No patient experienced a radiographic complete response. Pretreatment volume was a significant predictor for estimating the odds of a patient having stable disease or partial response using volumetric response criteria at first (P=0.016), second (P=0.023), and third (P=0.015) follow-ups. For each unit increase in log volume, a patient's odds of having a stable or partial response were 0.57, 0.63, and 0.61 times as likely at first, second, and third follow-up, respectively. OS was not significantly associated with pretreatment tumor volume. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with metastatic CRC with larger overall pretreatment liver tumor volumes, regardless of number of individual liver lesions, are less likely to have radiographic evidence of stable disease or partial response following SIRT using volumetric response criteria. However, pretreatment volume was not significantly associated with OS, and thus SIRT should be considered for patients with larger pretreatment volumetric tumor burden.

Safety and Efficacy of Radioembolization in Elderly (≥ 70 Years) and Younger Patients With Unresectable Liver-Dominant Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The effects of advancing age on clinical outcomes after radioembolization (RE) in patients with unresectable liver-dominant metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) are largely unknown. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study was a retrospective analysis of 160 elderly (≥ 70 years) and 446 younger (< 70 years) consecutive patients from 11 US centers who received RE using ytrrium-90 ((90)Y) resin microspheres ((90)Y radioembolization [(90)Y-RE]) between July 2002 and December 2011. A further analysis was conducted in 98 very elderly patients (≥ 75 years). Statistical analyses of safety, tolerability, and overall survival were conducted. RESULTS: Mean ages (± standard deviation) in the younger (< 70 years), elderly (≥ 70 years), and very elderly (≥ 75 years) cohorts were 55.9 ± 9.4 years, 77.2 ± 4.8 years, and 80.2 ± 3.8 years, respectively. Overall survival was similar between elderly and younger patients: 9.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.0-12.1) and 9.7 months (95% CI, 9.0-11.4) (P = .335). There were no differences between cohorts for any grade adverse events (P = .433) or grade 3+ events (P = .482). Analysis of patients ≥ 75 years and < 75 years confirmed similar overall survival (median, 9.3 months vs. 9.6 months, respectively; P = .987) and grade 3+ events (P = .398) or any adverse event (P = .158) within 90 days of RE. CONCLUSION: For patients with unresectable liver-dominant mCRC who meet eligibility criteria for RE, (90)Y-RE microspheres appear to be effective and well-tolerated, regardless of age. Criteria for selecting patients for RE should not include age for exclusion from this potentially beneficial intervention.

Hepatic imaging response to radioembolization with yttrium-90-labeled resin microspheres for tumor progression during systemic chemotherapy in patients with colorectal liver metastases.

BACKGROUND: To assess response and the impact of imaging artifacts following radioembolization with yttrium-90-labeled resin microspheres ((90)Y-RE) based on the findings from a central independent review of patients with liver-dominant metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). METHODS: Patients with mCRC who received (90)Y-RE (SIR-Spheres(®); Sirtex Medical, Sydney, Australia) at nine US institutions between July 2002 and December 2011 were included in the analysis. Tumor response was assessed at baseline and 3 months using either the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.0 or 1.1. For each lesion, known artifacts affecting the interpretation of response (peri-tumoral edema and necrosis) were documented. Survivals (Kaplan-Meier analyses) were compared in responders [partial response (PR)] and non-responders [stable (SD) or progressive disease (PD)]. RESULTS: Overall, 195 patients (mean age 62 years) received (90)Y-RE after a median of 2 (range, 1-6) lines of prior chemotherapy. Using RECIST 1.0 and RECIST 1.1, 7.6% and 6.9% of patients were partial responders, 47.3% and 48.1% had SD, and 55.0% and 55.0% PD, respectively. RECIST 1.0 and RECIST 1.1 showed excellent agreement {Kappa =0.915 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.856-0.975]}. Peri-tumoral edema was documented in 32.8%, necrosis in 48.1% and both in 57.3% of cases (using RECIST 1.0). Although baseline characteristics were similar in responders and non-responders (P>0.05), responders survived significantly longer in an analysis according to RECIST 1.0: PR median (95% CI) 25.2 (range, 9.2-49.4) months vs. SD 15.8 (range, 9.3-21.1) months vs. PD 7.1 (range, 6.0-9.5) months (P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: RECIST 1.0 and RECIST 1.1 imaging responses provide equivalent interpretations in the assessment of hepatic tumors following (90)Y-RE. Radiologic lesion responses at 3 months must be interpreted with caution due to the significant proportion of patients with peri-tumoral edema and necrosis, which may lead to an under-estimation of PR/SD. Nevertheless, 3-month radiologic responses were predictive of prolonged survival.

Contribution of Dual Oxidase 2 (DUOX2) to Hyper-Radiosensitivity in Human Gastric Cancer Cells.

Whole-abdominal radiotherapy (WART) is a primary method for managing gastrointestinal cancers that have disseminated into intra-abdominal tissues. While effective, this approach is limited because of the increased toxicity to normal tissue associated with combined WART and full-dose chemotherapy regimens. Recent studies have demonstrated a survival advantage in a novel treatment paradigm that allows for the safe use of full-dose systemic chemotherapy in combination with low-dose fractionated radiotherapy (LDFRT). Traditionally, radiation doses greater than 120 cGy have been used in radiotherapy because lower doses were thought to be ineffective for tumor therapy. However, we now know that LDFRT can produce hyper-radiosensitivity (HRS), a phenomenon where cells undergo apoptosis at radiation doses as low as 15 cGy, in a number of proliferating cells. The objectives of our current study were to determine whether LDFRT can induce HRS in gastrointestinal cancer cells and to identify biomarkers of chemopotentiation by LDFRT. Our data indicate that three consecutive daily fractions of 15 cGy produced HRS in gastric cancer cells and potentiated a modified regimen of docetaxel, cisplatin and 5'-fluorouracil (mDCF). Colony survival assays indicated that 15 cGy was sufficient to kill 90% of the cells when LDFRT was combined with mDCF whereas a dose almost 10 times higher (135 cGy) was needed to achieve the same rate when using conventional radiotherapy alone. RT(2) PCR Profiler™ array analysis indicated that this combined regimen upregulated dual oxidase 2 (DUOX2), an enzyme functioning in the production of hydrogen peroxide, without upregulating genes involved in DNA repair. Moreover, downregulation of DUOX2 increased radioresistance at every radiation dose tested. In addition, our data indicate that reactive oxygen species (ROS) increase up to 3.5-fold in cells exposed to LDFRT and mDCF. Furthermore, inhibition of NADPH oxidase abrogated the killing efficiency of this combined regimen. Taken together these data suggest that chemopotentiation by LDFRT in gastric cancer cells may be due, at least in part, to increased ROS production (DUOX2) without upregulation of the DNA repair machinery. These data thus provide a rationale for further explorations of potential clinical applications of LDFRT, such as in WART, as a chemopotentiator for advanced and metastatic gastric cancers.

Multicenter evaluation of the safety and efficacy of radioembolization in patients with unresectable colorectal liver metastases selected as candidates for (90)Y resin microspheres.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic colorectal cancer liver metastases Outcomes after RadioEmbolization (MORE) was an investigator-initiated case-control study to assess the experience of 11 US centers who treated liver-dominant metastases from colorectal cancer (mCRC) using radioembolization [selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT)] with yttrium-90-((90)Y)-labeled resin microspheres. METHODS: Data from 606 consecutive patients who received radioembolization between July 2002 and December 2011 were collected by an independent research organization. Adverse events (AEs) and survival were compared across lines of treatment using Fisher's exact test and Kaplan-Meier estimates, respectively. RESULTS: Patients received a median of 2 (range, 0-6) lines of prior chemotherapy; 35.1% had limited extrahepatic metastases. Median tumor-to-liver ratio and -activity administered at first procedure were 15% and 1.17 GBq, respectively. Hospital stay was <24 hours in 97.8% cases. Common grade ≥3 AEs over 184 days follow-up were: abdominal pain (6.1%), fatigue (5.5%), hyperbilirubinemia (5.4%), ascites (3.6%) and gastrointestinal ulceration (1.7%). There was no statistical difference in AEs across treatment lines (P>0.05). Median survivals [95% confidence interval (CI)] following radioembolization as a 2(nd)-line, 3(rd)-line, or 4(th)-plus line were 13.0 (range, 10.5-14.6), 9.0 (range, 7.8-11.0), and 8.1 (range, 6.4-9.3) months, respectively; and significantly prolonged in patients with ECOG 0 vs. ≥1 (P=0.009). Statistically significant independent variables for survival at radioembolization were: disease stage [extrahepatic metastases, extent of liver involvement (tumor-to-treated-liver ratio)], liver function (uncontrolled ascites, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, aspartate transaminase), leukocytes, and prior chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Radioembolization appears to have a favorable risk/benefit profile, even among mCRC patients who had received ≥3 prior lines of chemotherapy.

Multi-institutional pooled analysis on adjuvant chemoradiation in pancreatic cancer.

PURPOSE: To determine the impact of chemoradiation therapy (CRT) on overall survival (OS) after resection of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A multicenter retrospective review of 955 consecutive patients who underwent complete resection with macroscopically negative margins (R0-1) for invasive carcinoma (T1-4; N0-1; M0) of the pancreas was performed. Exclusion criteria included metastatic or unresectable disease at surgery, macroscopic residual disease (R2), treatment with intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT), and a histological diagnosis of no ductal carcinoma, or postoperative death (within 60 days of surgery). In all, 623 patients received postoperative radiation therapy (RT), 575 patients received concurrent chemotherapy (CT), and 462 patients received adjuvant CT. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 21.0 months. Median OS after adjuvant CRT was 39.9 versus 24.8 months after no adjuvant CRT (P<.001) and 27.8 months after CT alone (P<.001). Five-year OS was 41.2% versus 24.8% with and without postoperative CRT, respectively. The positive impact of CRT was confirmed by multivariate analysis (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.72; confidence interval [CI], 0.60-0.87; P=.001). Adverse prognostic factors identified by multivariate analysis included the following: R1 resection (HR = 1.17; CI = 1.07-1.28; P<.001), higher pT stage (HR = 1.23; CI = 1.11-1.37; P<.001), positive lymph nodes (HR = 1.27; CI = 1.15-1.41; P<.001), and tumor diameter >20 mm (HR = 1.14; CI = 1.05-1.23; P=.002). Multivariate analysis also showed a better prognosis in patients treated in centers with >10 pancreatic resections per year (HR = 0.87; CI = 0.78-0.97; P=.014) CONCLUSION: This study represents the largest comparative study on adjuvant therapy in patients after resection of carcinoma of the pancreas. Overall survival was better in patients who received adjuvant CRT.

Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy (SABR): Impact on the Immune System and Potential for Future Therapeutic Modulation.

Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) has been demonstrated to provide excellent local control in several malignancies. Recent reports have suggested that this ablative dose may impact disease outside of the radiated area. Furthermore, these studies have implicated immune modulation as the primary mechanism of disease response outside the irradiated area. More specifically, T-cell stimulation and tumor necrosis factor-α modulation following high dose irradiation have been suggested as the responsible components of this phenomenon. In addition, the "abscopal effect" may play a role in disease response outside of the radiated area. We review the current literature regarding the effects of ablative radiation therapy, the potential for immune modulation from it, and the mechanisms of the distant effects it elicits.

Protons offer reduced normal-tissue exposure for patients receiving postoperative radiotherapy for resected pancreatic head cancer.

PURPOSE: To determine the potential role for adjuvant proton-based radiotherapy (PT) for resected pancreatic head cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between June 2008 and November 2008, 8 consecutive patients with resected pancreatic head cancers underwent optimized intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) treatment planning. IMRT plans used between 10 and 18 fields and delivered 45 Gy to the initial planning target volume (PTV) and a 5.4 Gy boost to a reduced PTV. PTVs were defined according to the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9704 radiotherapy guidelines. Ninety-five percent of PTVs received 100% of the target dose and 100% of the PTVs received 95% of the target dose. Normal tissue constraints were as follows: right kidney V18 Gy to <70%; left kidney V18 Gy to <30%; small bowel/stomach V20 Gy to <50%, V45 Gy to <15%, V50 Gy to <10%, and V54 Gy to <5%; liver V30 Gy to <60%; and spinal cord maximum to 46 Gy. Optimized two- to three-field three-dimensional conformal proton plans were retrospectively generated on the same patients. The team generating the proton plans was blinded to the dose distributions achieved by the IMRT plans. The IMRT and proton plans were then compared. A Wilcoxon paired t-test was performed to compare various dosimetric points between the two plans for each patient. RESULTS: All proton plans met all normal tissue constraints and were isoeffective with the corresponding IMRT plans in terms of PTV coverage. The proton plans offered significantly reduced normal-tissue exposure over the IMRT plans with respect to the following: median small bowel V20 Gy, 15.4% with protons versus 47.0% with IMRT (p = 0.0156); median gastric V20 Gy, 2.3% with protons versus 20.0% with IMRT (p = 0.0313); and median right kidney V18 Gy, 27.3% with protons versus 50.5% with IMRT (p = 0.0156). CONCLUSIONS: By reducing small bowel and stomach exposure, protons have the potential to reduce the acute and late toxicities of postoperative chemoradiation in this setting.