Radiation and Systemic Therapy for Limited-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

Progress in the overall treatment of small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) has moved at a slower pace than non-small-cell lung cancer. In fact, the standard treatment regimen for limited stage SCLC has not appreciably shifted in more than 20 years, consisting of four to six cycles of cisplatin and etoposide chemotherapy concurrent with thoracic radiotherapy (TRT) followed by prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) for responsive disease. Nevertheless, long-term outcomes have improved with median survival approaching 25-30 months, and approximately one third of patients now survive 5 years. This is likely attributable in part to improvements in staging, including use of brain magnetic resonance imaging and fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography imaging, advances in radiation treatment planning, and supportive care. The CONVERT and CALGB 30610 phase III trials failed to demonstrate a survival advantage for high-dose, once-daily TRT compared with standard 45 Gy twice-daily TRT, although high-dose, once-daily TRT remains common in practice. A phase III comparison of high-dose 60 Gy twice-daily TRT versus 45 Gy twice-daily TRT aims to confirm the provocative outcomes reported with 60 Gy twice daily in the phase II setting. Efforts over time have shifted from intensifying PCI, to attempting to reduce treatment-related neurotoxicity, to more recently questioning whether careful magnetic resonance imaging surveillance may obviate the routine need for PCI. The addition of immunotherapy has resulted in mixed success in extensive-stage SCLC with modest benefit observed with programmed death-ligand 1 inhibitors, and several ongoing trials assess programmed death-ligand 1 inhibition concurrent or adjuvant to chemoradiotherapy in limited-stage SCLC. Major advances in future treatment will likely depend on a better understanding and exploiting of molecular characteristics of SCLC with increasing personalization of therapy.

Managing Central Nervous System Spread of Lung Cancer: The State of the Art.

Brain metastases (BrM) are common in both non-small-cell lung cancer and small-cell lung cancer. Substantial progress in BrM management has occurred in the past decade related to advances in both radiation and medical oncology. Recent and ongoing radiation trials have focused on increasing the candidacy for focal therapy of BrM with stereotactic radiosurgery; reducing the toxicity and improving patient selection for whole brain radiotherapy; and, in small-cell lung cancer, evaluating brain magnetic resonance imaging surveillance without prophylactic cranial irradiation, hippocampal avoidance in prophylactic cranial irradiation and whole brain radiotherapy, and the role of upfront stereotactic radiosurgery for BrM. In medical oncology, the development of multiple tyrosine kinase inhibitors with encouraging CNS activity and emerging data on the CNS activity of immune checkpoint inhibitors in some patients have opened the door to novel systemic and multidisciplinary treatment strategies for the management of BrM. Future research will focus on more robust characterizations of the CNS activity of targeted therapy and immunotherapies, as well as optimal integration and patient selection for multidisciplinary strategies involving CNS-active drugs, radiation therapy, and CNS surveillance.

Therapeutic effect of osimertinib plus cranial radiotherapy compared to osimertinib alone in NSCLC patients with EGFR-activating mutations and brain metastases: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: The study aimed to compare the efficacy of osimertinib plus cranial radiotherapy (RT) with osimertinib alone in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients harboring epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations and brain metastases (BMs). METHODS: The clinical data of advanced NSCLC patients with BMs who received osimertinib were retrospectively collected. The patients were assigned to one of the two groups according to the therapeutic modality used: the osimertinib monotherapy group or the osimertinib plus RT group. RESULTS: This was a retrospective study and 61 patients were included from December 2015 to August 2020. Forty patients received osimertinib monotherapy, and twenty-one patients received osimertinib plus RT. Radiotherapy included whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT, n = 14), WBRT with simultaneous integrated boost (WBRT-SIB, n = 5) and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS, n = 2). The median number of prior systemic therapies in the two groups was one. Intracranial and systemic ORR and DCR were not significantly different between the two groups. No difference in iPFS was observed between the two groups (median iPFS: 16.67 vs. 13.50 months, P = 0.836). The median OS was 29.20 months in the osimertinib plus RT group compared with 26.13 months in the osimertinib group (HR = 0.895, P = 0.826). In the L858R mutational subgroup of 31 patients, the osimertinib plus RT group had a longer OS (P = 0.046). In the exon 19 deletion mutational subgroup of 30 patients, OS in the osimertinib alone group was longer than that in the osimertinib plus RT group (P = 0.011). The incidence of any-grade adverse events was not significantly different between the osimertinib plus RT group and the osimertinib alone group (47.6% vs. 32.5%, P = 0.762). However, six patients (28.5%) experienced leukoencephalopathy in the osimertinib plus RT group, and 50% (3/6) of the leukoencephalopathy was greater than or equal to grade 3. CONCLUSION: The therapeutic effect of osimertinib with RT was similar to that of osimertinib alone in EGFR-positive NSCLC patients with BM. However, for patients with the L858R mutation, osimertinib plus RT could provide more benefit than osimertinib alone.

Randomized Phase III Trial of Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation With or Without Hippocampal Avoidance for Small-Cell Lung Cancer (PREMER): A GICOR-GOECP-SEOR Study.

PURPOSE: Radiation dose received by the neural stem cells of the hippocampus during whole-brain radiotherapy has been associated with neurocognitive decline. The key concern using hippocampal avoidance-prophylactic cranial irradiation (HA-PCI) in patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) is the incidence of brain metastasis within the hippocampal avoidance zone. METHODS: This phase III trial enrolled 150 patients with SCLC (71.3% with limited disease) to standard prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI; 25 Gy in 10 fractions) or HA-PCI. The primary objective was the delayed free recall (DFR) on the Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test (FCSRT) at 3 months; a decrease of 3 points or greater from baseline was considered a decline. Secondary end points included other FCSRT scores, quality of life (QoL), evaluation of the incidence and location of brain metastases, and overall survival (OS). Data were recorded at baseline, and 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after PCI. RESULTS: Participants' baseline characteristics were well balanced between the two groups. The median follow-up time for living patients was 40.4 months. Decline on DFR from baseline to 3 months was lower in the HA-PCI arm (5.8%) compared with the PCI arm (23.5%; odds ratio, 5; 95% CI, 1.57 to 15.86; P = .003). Analysis of all FCSRT scores showed a decline on the total recall (TR; 8.7% v 20.6%) at 3 months; DFR (11.1% v 33.3%), TR (20.3% v 38.9%), and total free recall (14.8% v 31.5%) at 6 months, and TR (14.2% v 47.6%) at 24 months. The incidence of brain metastases, OS, and QoL were not significantly different. CONCLUSION: Sparing the hippocampus during PCI better preserves cognitive function in patients with SCLC. No differences were observed with regard to brain failure, OS, and QoL compared with standard PCI.

Single institutional outcomes of whole brain radiotherapy for metastatic melanoma brain metastases.

BACKGROUND: The management of melanoma with brain metastases (MBM) is increasingly complex, especially given recent improvements in targeted agents, immunotherapy, and radiotherapy. Whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) is a longstanding radiotherapy technique for which reported patient outcomes and experiences are limited. We sought to report our institutional outcomes for MBM patients receiving WBRT and assess whether other clinical factors impact prognosis. METHODS: A retrospective review of a single institution database was performed. Patients diagnosed with MBM from 2000 to 2018 treated with WBRT, with or without other systemic treatments, were included. Post-WBRT brain MRI scans were assessed at timed intervals for radiographic response. Clinical and treatment variables associated with overall survival (OS), distant failure-free survival (DFFS), local failure-free survival (LFFS), and progression-free survival (PFS) were assessed. Data on radiation-induced side effects, including radionecrosis, hemorrhage, and memory deficits, was also captured. RESULTS: 63 patients with MBM were ultimately included in our study. 69% of patients had 5 or more brain metastases at the time of WBRT, and 68% had extracranial disease. The median dose of WBRT was 30 Gy over 10 fractions. Median follow-up was 4.0 months. Patients receiving WBRT had a median OS of 7.0 months, median PFS of 2.2 months, median DFFS of 6.1 months, and median LFFS of 4.9 months. Performance status correlated with OS on both univariate and multivariable analysis. BRAF inhibitor was the only systemic therapy to significantly impact OS on univariate analysis (HR 0.24, 95% CI 0.07-0.79, p = 0.019), and this effect extended to multivariable analysis as well. Post-WBRT intralesional hemorrhage decreased DFFS on both univariate and multivariable analysis. Of patients with post-treatment brain scans available, there was a 16% rate of radionecrosis, 32% rate of hemorrhage, and 19% rate of memory deficits. CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes for MBM patients receiving WBRT indicate that WBRT remains an effective treatment strategy to control intracranial disease. Treatment-related toxicities such as intralesional hemorrhage, necrosis, or neurocognitive side effects are limited. With continued innovations in WBRT technique and systemic therapy development, MBM outcomes may continue to improve. Further trials should evaluate the role of WBRT in the modern context.

Regional deep hyperthermia in combination with whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) in poor prognosis patients with brain metastases

Purpose The aim of this study is to assess for the first time, the role of regional deep hyperthermia in combination with radiotherapy and systemic therapy in patients with poor prognosis of brain metastases (GPI ≤ 2.5). Methods Patients with confirmed cerebral metastases and classified as GPI score ≤ 2.5 were included in this prospective study. Pretreatment stratification was defined as patients with 0–1 GPI score (Group A) and patients with 1.5–2.5 GPI score (Group B). HT was applied twice a week, 60 min per session, during RT by regional capacitive device (HY-DEEP 600WM system) at 13.56 MHz radiofrequency. Results Between June 2015 and June 2017, 15 patients and a total of 49 brain metastases were included in the protocol. All patients received all HT sessions as planned. RT and systemic therapy were also completed as prescribed. Tolerance to treatment was excellent and no toxicity was registered. Patients with HT effective treatment time longer than the median (W90time > 88%) showed better actuarial PFS at 6 and 12 months (100% and 66.7%, respectively) compared to those with less HT effective treatment time (50% and 0%, respectively) (p < 0.031). Median OS was 6 months (range 1–36 months). Stratification by GPI score showed a median OS of 3 months (CI 95% 2.49–3.51) in Group A and 8.0 months (CI 95% 5.15–10.41) in Group B (p = 0.035). Conclusions Regional hyperthermia is a feasible and safe technique to be used in combination with RT in brain metastases patients, improving PFS and survival in poor prognostic brain metastasis patients (AU)

Regional deep hyperthermia in combination with whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) in poor prognosis patients with brain metastases.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to assess for the first time, the role of regional deep hyperthermia in combination with radiotherapy and systemic therapy in patients with poor prognosis of brain metastases (GPI ≤ 2.5). METHODS: Patients with confirmed cerebral metastases and classified as GPI score ≤ 2.5 were included in this prospective study. Pretreatment stratification was defined as patients with 0-1 GPI score (Group A) and patients with 1.5-2.5 GPI score (Group B). HT was applied twice a week, 60 min per session, during RT by regional capacitive device (HY-DEEP 600WM system) at 13.56 MHz radiofrequency. RESULTS: Between June 2015 and June 2017, 15 patients and a total of 49 brain metastases were included in the protocol. All patients received all HT sessions as planned. RT and systemic therapy were also completed as prescribed. Tolerance to treatment was excellent and no toxicity was registered. Patients with HT effective treatment time longer than the median (W90time > 88%) showed better actuarial PFS at 6 and 12 months (100% and 66.7%, respectively) compared to those with less HT effective treatment time (50% and 0%, respectively) (p < 0.031). Median OS was 6 months (range 1-36 months). Stratification by GPI score showed a median OS of 3 months (CI 95% 2.49-3.51) in Group A and 8.0 months (CI 95% 5.15-10.41) in Group B (p = 0.035). CONCLUSIONS: Regional hyperthermia is a feasible and safe technique to be used in combination with RT in brain metastases patients, improving PFS and survival in poor prognostic brain metastasis patients.

Type and timing of systemic therapy use predict overall survival for patients with brain metastases treated with radiation therapy.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to investigate whether systemic therapy (ST) use surrounding radiation therapy (RT) predicts overall survival (OS) after RT for patients with brain metastases (BMs). METHODS: Provincial RT and pharmacy databases were used to review all adult patients in British Columbia, Canada, who received a first course of RT for BMs between 2012 and 2016 (n = 3095). Multivariate analysis on a randomly selected subset was used to develop an OS nomogram. RESULTS: In comparison to the 2096 non-recipients of ST after RT, the median OS of the 999 recipients of ST after RT was 5.0 (95% Confidence interval (CI) 4.1-6.0) months longer (p < 0.0001). Some types of ST after RT were independently predictive of OS: targeted therapy (hazard ratio (HR) 0.42, CI 0.37-0.48), hormone therapy (HR 0.45, CI 0.36-0.55), cytotoxic chemotherapy (HR 0.71, CI 0.64-0.79), and immunotherapy (HR 0.64, CI 0.37-1.06). Patients who discontinued ST after RT had 0.9 (CI 0.3-1.4) months shorter median OS than patients who received no ST before or after RT (p < 0.0001). In the multivariate analysis of the 220-patient subset, established prognostic variables (extracranial disease, performance status, age, cancer diagnosis, and number of BMs), and the novel variables "ST before RT" and "Type of ST after RT" independently predicted OS. The nomogram predicted 6- and 12-month OS probability and median OS (bootstrap-corrected Harrell's Concordance Index = 0.70). CONCLUSIONS: The type and timing of ST use surrounding RT predict OS for patients with BMs.

Clinical features of head and neck cancer patients with brain metastases: A retrospective study of 88 cases.

OBJECTIVES: Brain metastases (BM) arising from head and neck cancer (HNC) are rare and not well characterized. This study aims to describe the clinicopathological features, treatments, prognostic factors, and survival in HNC patients with BM. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Non-thyroid HNC patients referred to BC Cancer from 1998 to 2016 were retrospectively reviewed for BM. The Kaplan-Meier method, log-rank test, and Cox regression analysis were used to assess post-BM survival and prognostic factors. RESULTS: Out of 9432 HNC patients, 88 patients developed BM (0.9%, median follow-up 3.4 years). On average, the BM were diagnosed 18.5 months after the primary diagnosis and tended to arise after distant metastases to extracranial sites (85%) such as the lungs (78%). At BM presentation, 84% were symptomatic and two thirds had a poor performance status (ECOG ≥ 2, 68%). The median post-BM survival was 2.5 months (95% CI 2.1-3.3 months). On multivariable analysis, management of BM with radiotherapy (RT) alone (3.3 months, 95% CI 2.3-4.6, p = 0.005) and RT with surgery (4.4 months, 95% CI 2.8-6.9, p < 0.001) was associated with longer survival compared to best supportive care alone (1.4 months, 95% CI 1.0-2.0 months). Age, sex, performance status, sub-localization of the primary HNC, presence of extracranial metastases, and number of intracranial metastases were not associated with post-BM survival (all p ≥ 0.05). CONCLUSION: This is the largest study to date in BM from HNC. BM occur late in the course of HNC and carry a poor prognosis. Treatment with intracranial radiotherapy both with and without surgery was associated with improved survival.

Intracranial disease control for EGFR-mutant and ALK-rearranged lung cancer with large volume or symptomatic brain metastases.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S): Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are commonly employed for patients with brain metastases from lung cancer and specific driver mutations. We sought to identify the correlation between intracranial tumor burden and outcomes in patients with brain metastases treated with TKIs. MATERIALS/METHODS: We identified and retrospectively reviewed cases of EGFR-mutant or ALK-rearranged lung cancer with brain metastases at any time during their cancer course. Clinical characteristics and treatment information were abstracted from the medical records. Brain metastases were contoured to calculate total volume of disease at diagnosis and after initial therapy. High intracranial burden was defined as either > 10 brain metastases, volume of brain metastases > 15 cc, or largest lesion > 3 cm. Intracranial response was determined according to Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria on the patient level. We determined the correlation between clinical and imaging characteristics and intracranial progression free survival (IC-PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Fifty-seven patients with EGFR (n = 49) and ALK (n = 8) alterations were identified. Median follow-up from initial brain metastasis diagnosis was 17 months. Neurological symptoms were present in 54% at brain metastasis diagnosis. For those receiving TKIs alone or TKIs with radiation, at least a partial intracranial response (≥ 65% volume reduction) at 3 months from starting therapy was achieved in 94% and 58%. Progressive intracranial disease at 3 months occurred in 6.3% and 8.3%. Patients with high intracranial burden (n = 21) had a median 17 brain metastases, 6.5 cc volume, and 1.9 cm maximal tumor diameter. Median IC-PFS and OS for patients with high intracranial burden was 13.9 and 35.4 months. Patients with high intracranial burden and neurological symptoms at diagnosis had similar IC-PFS and OS compared to those with low burden and absence of neurological symptoms (p > 0.05 for each). CONCLUSION: Most patients receiving TKIs as part of their initial therapy achieve an early and durable volumetric intracranial response, irrespective of presenting disease burden or neurologic symptoms.

Comparison of Surgical Resection and Stereotactic Radiosurgery in the Initial Treatment of Brain Metastasis.

BACKGROUND: Brain metastasis (BM) is the most common brain malignancy and a common cause of death in cancer patients. However, the relative outcome-related advantages and disadvantages of surgical resection (SR) and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) in the initial treatment of BM are controversial. METHOD: We systematically reviewed the English language literature up to March 2020 to compare the efficacy of SR and SRS in the initial treatment of BM. We identified cohort studies from the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and EMBASE databases and conducted a meta-analysis following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Twenty cohort studies involving 1,809 patients were included. Local control did not significantly differ between the SR and SRS groups overall (hazard ratio [HR] 1.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.64-1.64, p = 0.92; I2 = 54%, p = 0.03) or in subgroup analyses of SR plus SRS vs. SRS alone, SR plus whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) versus SRS plus WBRT, or SR plus WBRT versus SRS alone. Distant intracranial control did not significantly differ between the SR and SRS groups overall (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.38-1.60, p = 0.49; I2 = 61%, p = 0.03) or in subgroup analyses of SR plus SRS versus SRS alone or SR plus WBRT versus SRS alone. In addition, overall survival (OS) did not significantly differ in the SR and SRS groups (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.65-1.27, p = 0.57; I2 = 47%, p = 0.09) or in subgroup analyses of SR plus SRS versus SRS alone, SR plus WBRT versus SRS alone or SR plus WBRT versus SRS plus WBRT. CONCLUSION: Initial treatment of BM with SRS may offer comparable local and distant intracranial control to SR in patients with single or solitary BM. OS did not significantly differ between the SR and SRS groups in people with single or solitary BM.

Whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) for leptomeningeal metastasis from NSCLC in the era of targeted therapy: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Leptomeningeal metastasis (LM) is a rare but detrimental complication in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Although whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) is used to eliminating cancer cells or microscopic foci, it is becoming less favorable due to the concerns over neurocognitive toxicity. This study aimed to re-evaluate the role of WBRT in the setting of modern targeted therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From December 2014 to March 2019, 80 NSCLC patients with cytologically and/or radiologically proven LM diagnosis were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: The median OS (mOS) after diagnosis of LM was 8.0 (95%CI: 4.4 to 11.6) months, and the one-year OS was 39.4%. The mOS for EGFR-mutated LM patients was 12.6 (3.0 to 22.2) months versus only 4.1 (2.8 to 5.4) for patients with wild-type EGFR (P < 0.001). Younger patients (< 53.5 yrs.) appeared to have a better OS than older patients (≥53.5 yrs.) (12.6 vs. 6.1, P = 0.041). No survival benefits were found in EGFR-mutated patients who received WBRT (P = 0.490). In contrast, mOS was significantly prolonged in wild-type EGFR patients with WBRT versus non-WBRT (mOS: 8.0 vs. 2.1, P = 0.002). Multivariate analysis indicated that WBRT (P = 0.025) and younger age (P = 0.048) were independent prognostic factors that predicted prolonged survival for wild-type EGFR LM patients from NSCLC. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated that WBRT has clear survival advantages for patients with wild-type EGFR, and molecular biological stratification of LM patients for WBRT is highly recommended.

Survival outcomes in an older US population with advanced melanoma and central nervous system metastases: SEER-Medicare analysis.

BACKGROUND: Central nervous system (CNS) metastasis is common in advanced melanoma patients. New treatment options have improved overall prognosis, but information is lacking for patients with CNS metastases. We investigated treatment patterns and survival outcomes in older melanoma patients with and without CNS metastases. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of SEER-Medicare, a population-based linked database, was undertaken in patients aged > 65 years with advanced melanoma diagnosed from 2004 to 2011 and followed until 2013. RESULTS: A total of 2522 patients were included. CNS metastases were present in 24.8% of patients at initial metastatic diagnosis; 16.5% developed CNS metastases during follow-up. Chemotherapy was the most common treatment regardless of CNS metastases. Overall survival (OS) was better for patients without CNS metastases (median, 9.5 months; 95% confidence interval [CI], 8.8-10.2) vs patients with CNS metastases (3.63 months; 95% CI, 3.4-3.9). Among patients with CNS metastases, median OS for targeted therapy, immunotherapy, and chemotherapy was 6 (95% CI, 2.5-9.6), 5.5 (95% CI, 3.8-7.5), and 4.5 (95% CI, 3.8-5.4) months, respectively, vs 2.4 (95% CI, 2.1-2.7) and 2.1 (95% CI, 1.8-2.7) months for local radiotherapy and no treatment, respectively. Stereotactic radiosurgery demonstrated higher OS vs whole-brain radiation therapy (median, 4.98 [95% CI, 3.5-7.5] vs 2.4 [95% CI, 2.1-2.7] months). CONCLUSION: Patients with CNS metastases from melanoma remain a population with high unmet medical need despite recent advances in treatment. Systemic treatments (eg, BRAF-targeted therapy and immunotherapy) and stereotactic radiosurgery demonstrated meaningful but modest improvements in OS. Further explorations of combinations of radiotherapy, BRAF-targeted therapies, and immunotherapies are needed.

Melanoma brain metastases: is it time to eliminate radiotherapy?

PURPOSE: Immunotherapy has demonstrated efficacy in treatment of intracranial metastasis from melanoma, calling into question the role of intracranial radiotherapy (RT). Herein, we assessed the utilization patterns of intracranial RT in patients with melanoma brain metastasis and compared outcomes in patients treated with immunotherapy alone versus immunotherapy in addition to intracranial RT. METHODS: We queried the National Cancer Database (NCDB) for patients with melanoma brain metastases treated with immunotherapy and intracranial RT or immunotherapy alone. Multivariable logistic regression identified variables associated with increased likelihood of receiving immunotherapy alone. Multivariable Cox regression was used to identify co-variates predictive of overall survival (OS). Propensity matching was used to account for indication bias. RESULTS: We identified 528 and 142 patients that were treated with combination therapy and immunotherapy alone, respectively. Patients with lower comorbidity score were more likely to receive immunotherapy alone. Extracranial disease and treatment at a non-academic center were associated with worse OS. Median OS for all patients was 11.0 months. Treatment with stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) in addition to immunotherapy was superior to immunotherapy alone, median OS of 19.0 versus 11.5 months (p = 0.006). Whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) in combination with immunotherapy performed worse than immunotherapy alone, median OS of 7.7 versus 11.5 months (p = 0.0255). CONCLUSIONS: For melanoma patients requiring WBRT, immunotherapy alone may be reasonable in asymptomatic patients. For those eligible for SRS, combination therapy may provide better outcomes. Results of ongoing prospective studies will help provide guidance regarding the use of radioimmunotherapy in this population.

Diagnostic delay and outcome in immunocompetent patients with primary central nervous system lymphoma in Spain: a multicentric study.

INTRODUCTION: To assess the management of immunocompetent patients with primary central nervous system lymphomas (PCNSL) in Spain. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 327 immunocompetent patients with histologically confirmed PCNSL diagnosed between 2005 and 2014 in 27 Spanish hospitals. RESULTS: Median age was 64 years (range: 19-84; 33% ≥ 70 years), 54% were men, and 59% had a performance status (PS) ≥ 2 at diagnosis. Median delay to diagnosis was 47 days (IQR 24-81). Diagnostic delay > 47 days was associated with PS ≥ 2 (OR 1.99; 95% CI 1.13-3.50; p = 0.016) and treatment with corticosteroids (OR 2.47; 95% CI 1.14-5.40; p = 0.023), and it did not improve over the years. Patients treated with corticosteroids (62%) had a higher risk of additional biopsies (11.7% vs 4.0%, p = 0.04) but corticosteroids withdrawal before surgery did not reduce this risk and increased the diagnostic delay (64 vs 40 days, p = 0.04). Median overall survival (OS) was 8.9 months [95% CI 5.9-11.7] for the whole series, including 52 (16%) patients that were not treated, and 14.1 months (95%CI 7.7-20.5) for the 240 (73.4%) patients that received high-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX)-based chemotherapy. Median OS was shorter in patients ≥ 70 years (4.1 vs. 13.4 months; p < 0.0001). Multivariate analysis identified age ≥ 65 years, PS ≥ 2, no treatment, and cognitive/psychiatric symptoms at diagnosis as independent predictors of short survival. CONCLUSIONS: Corticosteroids withdrawal before surgery does not decrease the risk of a negative biopsy but delays diagnosis. In this community-based study, only 73.4% of patients could receive HD-MTX-based chemotherapy and OS remains poor, particularly in elderly patients ≥ 70 years.

External beam radiation dose escalation for high grade glioma.

BACKGROUND: This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review published in Issue 8, 2016. High grade glioma (HGG) is a rapidly growing brain tumour in the supporting cells of the nervous system, with several subtypes such as glioblastoma (grade IV astrocytoma), anaplastic (grade III) astrocytoma and anaplastic (grade III) oligodendroglioma. Studies have investigated the best strategy to give radiation to people with HGG. Conventional fractionated radiotherapy involves giving a daily radiation dose (called a fraction) of 180 cGy to 200 cGy. Hypofractionated radiotherapy uses higher daily doses, which reduces the overall number of fractions and treatment time. Hyperfractionated radiotherapy which uses a lower daily dose with a greater number of fractions and multiple fractions per day to deliver a total dose at least equivalent to external beam daily conventionally fractionated radiotherapy in the same time frame. The aim is to reduce the potential for late toxicity. Accelerated radiotherapy (dose escalation) refers to the delivery of multiple fractions per day using daily doses of radiation consistent with external beam daily conventionally fractionated radiotherapy doses. The aim is to reduce the overall treatment time; typically, two or three fractions per day may be delivered with a six to eight hour gap between fractions. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of postoperative external beam radiation dose escalation in adults with HGG. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE Ovid and Embase Ovid to August 2019 for relevant randomised phase III trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included adults with a pathological diagnosis of HGG randomised to the following external beam radiation regimens: daily conventionally fractionated radiotherapy versus no radiotherapy; hypofractionated radiotherapy versus daily conventionally fractionated radiotherapy; hyperfractionated radiotherapy versus daily conventionally fractionated radiotherapy or accelerated radiotherapy versus daily conventionally fractionated radiotherapy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The primary outcomes were overall survival and adverse effects. The secondary outcomes were progression free survival and quality of life. We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: Since the last version of this review, we identified no new relevant trials for inclusion. We included 11 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with 2062 participants and 1537 in the relevant arms for this review. There was an overall survival benefit for people with HGG receiving postoperative radiotherapy compared to the participants receiving postoperative supportive care. For the four pooled RCTs (397 participants), the overall hazard ratio (HR) for survival was 2.01 favouring postoperative radiotherapy (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.58 to 2.55; P < 0.00001; moderate-certainty evidence). Although these trials may not have completely reported adverse effects, they did not note any significant toxicity attributable to radiation. Progression free survival and quality of life could not be pooled due to lack of data. Overall survival was similar between hypofractionated and conventional radiotherapy in five trials (943 participants), where the HR was 0.95 (95% CI 0.78 to 1.17; P = 0.63; very low-certainty evidence. The trials reported that hypofractionated and conventional radiotherapy were well tolerated with mild acute adverse effects. These trials only reported one participant in the hypofractionated arm developing symptomatic radiation necrosis that required surgery. Progression free survival and quality of life could not be pooled due to the lack of data. Overall survival was similar between hypofractionated and conventional radiotherapy in the subset of two trials (293 participants) which included participants aged 60 years and older with glioblastoma. For this category, the HR was 1.16 (95% CI 0.92 to 1.46; P = 0.21; high-certainty evidence). There were two trials which compared hyperfractionated radiotherapy versus conventional radiation and one trial which compared accelerated radiotherapy versus conventional radiation. However, the results could not be pooled. The conventionally fractionated radiotherapy regimens were 4500 cGy to 6000 cGy given in 180 cGy to 200 cGy daily fractions, over five to six weeks. All trials generally included participants with World Health Organization (WHO) performance status from 0 to 2 and Karnofsky performance status of 50 and higher. The risk of selection bias was generally low among these RCTs. The number of participants lost to follow-up for the outcome of overall survival was low. Attrition, performance, detection and reporting bias for the outcome of overall survival was low. There was unclear attrition, performance, detection and reporting bias relating to the outcomes of adverse effects, progression free survival and quality of life. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative conventional daily radiotherapy probably improves survival for adults with good performance status and HGG compared to no postoperative radiotherapy. Hypofractionated radiotherapy has similar efficacy for survival compared to conventional radiotherapy, particularly for individuals aged 60 years and older with glioblastoma. There are insufficient data regarding hyperfractionation versus conventionally fractionated radiation (without chemotherapy) and for accelerated radiation versus conventionally fractionated radiation (without chemotherapy). There are HGG subsets who have poor prognosis even with treatment (e.g. glioblastoma histology, older age and poor performance status). These HGG individuals with poor prognosis have generally been excluded from randomised trials based on poor performance status. No randomised trial has compared comfort measures or best supportive care with an active intervention using radiotherapy or chemotherapy in these people with poor prognosis. Since the last version of this review, we found no new relevant studies. The search identified three new trials, but all were excluded as none had a conventionally fractionated radiotherapy arm.

Whole brain radiotherapy improves survival outcomes in primary CNS lymphoma patients ineligible for systemic therapy.

PURPOSE: Primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) is a very rare type of malignancy with a poor prognosis. The role of whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) in PCNSL has been questioned due to the significant neurotoxicity and lack of convincing data for survival benefit. Even its role in a palliative setting remains to be clearly elucidated. Our study aims to investigate the benefit of WBRT in patients who are ineligible for systemic therapy. METHODS: A single-institution retrospective study was conducted on patients diagnosed with PCNSL between 2002 and 2017. Patients were excluded if they received systemic therapy or focal radiation only. Data on patient demographics and WBRT were collected and correlated with clinical outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 48 patients were selected for analysis, among which 31 (64.6%) patients received WBRT and 17 (35.4%) patients received supportive care only. Patient baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups. Median overall survival (OS) was 4.3 months among the entire cohort. WBRT was associated with improved median OS (8.0 months, range 1.4-62.3 months) compared with supportive care only (3.3 months, range 0.7-18.3 months) (HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.20-0.75, p = 0.005). Among patients who received WBRT, higher radiation dose to the whole brain was not associated with survival (p = 0.10), but higher radiation dose to the gross tumor was associated with improved survival (p = 0.007). CONCLUSION: Patients with PCNSL who are ineligible for systemic therapy may still benefit from WBRT with improvement in survival, compared with the best supportive care. Dose escalation through the addition of a gross tumor boost in these patients was associated with improved overall survival. Further studies in the prospective setting are necessary to confirm the findings from the study.

Does surgically resected small-cell lung cancer without lymph node involvement benefit from prophylactic cranial irradiation?

BACKGROUND: It has previously been demonstrated that surgically resected small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients could benefit from prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI). However, PCI in patients without lymph node involvement remains controversial. This study includes a larger sample size to evaluate the benefit of PCI therapy in this specific population. METHODS: The records of surgically resected SCLC patients without lymph node involvement (N0M0) in Shanghai Chest Hospital were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: Between January 2006 and May 2017, a total of 146 cases of surgically resected SCLC without lymph node involvement were included. A total of 46 patients received PCI therapy and 100 patients received no therapy. During the observation period, 12.0% (12/100) of the patients who did not receive PCI therapy developed brain metastases while 10.9% (5/46) of patients who received PCI therapy developed brain metastases. With regard to time to recurrence, no significant difference was observed among the groups (P = 0.798). Moreover, there was no significant difference in either the overall survival benefit (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.84, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.49-1.45, P = 0.532) or disease-free survival rate (HR = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.52-1.75, P = 0.864). CONCLUSIONS: The evidence obtained does not support PCI therapy in the management of surgically resected SCLC with no lymph node involvement. KEY POINTS: Prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) remains controversial for resected small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) without lymph node involvement. In this study, the results indicated that PCI does not reduce the risk of cerebral recurrence of resected p-T1-2N0M0 SCLC. This is the largest sample size study focused on PCI in resected p-T1-2N0M0 SCLC. Future revised versions of the guidelines should address this issue.

Analysis of Survival of Patients with Brain Metastases According to Prognostic Indexes and Treatment Strategies.

AIM: To retrospectively evaluate the overall survival (OS) of patients with brain metastases (BMs) who had been treated with whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) and Gamma Knife (GK) according to prognostic factors and prognostic index scores. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study included 91 patients with BMs who had been treated with WBRT and/or GK between 2014 and 2017. The patients with BMs were retrospectively evaluated regarding age, sex, Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS), recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) class, basic score for BM (BS-BM), Graded Prognostic Assessment (DS-GPA) index, primary tumour type, extracranial metastases, primary tumour control, number of BMs, and brain metastasectomy. A univariate analysis of the OS was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method, supplemented by the log-rank test. We also applied a multivariate survival analysis using the Cox regression model. RESULTS: The median OS for all patients with BMs was 6 months. Meanwhile, the median OSs for those with WBRT, GK, and WBRT-GK treatment were 6, 4, and 15 months, respectively (p=0.00). In the multivariate analysis, the female sex (p=0.030), brain metastasectomy (p=0.047), treatment with WBRT-GK (p=0.001), and the controlled primary tumour (p=0.007) significantly correlated with the OS. Furthermore, the BS-BM (p=0.022) was closely related with the OS compared to the RPA and DS-GPA in the multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: The BS-BM was found to better predict the survival of patients with BMs according to the prognostic index scores in the multivariate analysis. Thus, our data suggest that the BS-BM is the most appropriate prognostic index.

Whole Brain Radiotherapy Versus Stereotactic Radiosurgery in Poor-Prognosis Patients with One to 10 Brain Metastases: A Randomised Feasibility Study.

AIMS: A significant proportion of patients with brain metastases have a poor prognosis, with a life expectancy of 3-6 months. To determine the optimal radiotherapeutic strategy for brain metastases in this population, we conducted a randomised feasibility study of whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) versus stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with a life expectancy of 3-6 months and between one and 10 brain metastases with a diameter ≤4 cm were enrolled at six Canadian cancer centres. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either WBRT (20 Gy in five fractions) or SRS (15 Gy in one fraction). The primary end point was the rate of accrual per month. Secondary feasibility and clinical end points included the ratio of accrued subjects to screened subjects. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (number NCT02220491). RESULTS: In total, 210 patients were screened to enrol 22 patients into the trial; 20 patients were randomised between the two arms. Two patients did not receive treatment because one patient died and another patient withdrew consent after being enrolled. Patients were accrued between January 2015 and November 2017; the accrual rate was 0.63 patients/month. The most common reasons for exclusion were anticipated median survival outside the required range (n = 40), baseline Karnofsky Performance Score below 70 (n = 28) and more than 10 brain metastases (n = 28). The median follow-up was 7.0 months and the median survival was 7.0 months for all patients in the trial. The median intracranial progression-free survival was 1.8 months in the SRS arm and 9.2 months in the WBRT arm. There were five grade 3+ toxicities in the SRS arm and one grade 3+ toxicity in the WBRT arm; no grade 5 toxicities were observed. The cumulative rates of retreatment were 40% in the SRS arm and 40% in the WBRT arm. CONCLUSIONS: A randomised trial evaluating WBRT versus SRS in patients with one to 10 metastases and a poor prognosis is feasible. A slower than expected accrual rate and difficulties with accurate prognostication were identified as issues in this feasibility study. A larger phase III randomised trial is planned to determine the optimal treatment in this patient population.