A phase II randomized placebo-controlled double-blind study of salvage radiation therapy plus placebo versus SRT plus enzalutamide with high-risk PSA-recurrent prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy (SALV-ENZA).

BACKGROUND: In men with a rising PSA following radical prostatectomy, salvage radiation therapy (SRT) offers a second chance for cure. Hormonal therapy can be combined with SRT in order to increase prostate tumor control, albeit with associated higher rates of treatment side effects. This trial studies the effectiveness of SRT combined with hormonal therapy using a more potent anti-androgen with a favorable side effect profile. Enzalutamide, a next generation selective androgen receptor antagonist, is approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) where it has been shown to improve overall survival in combination with androgen deprivation therapy. The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of combination SRT and enzalutamide for freedom-from-PSA-progression. Secondary objectives include time to local recurrence within the radiation field, metastasis-free survival and safety as determined by frequency and severity of adverse events. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a randomized, double-blind, phase II, prospective, multicenter study in adult males with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer following radical prostatectomy. Following registration, enzalutamide 160 mg or placebo by mouth (PO) once daily will be administered for 6 months. Following two months of study drug, external beam radiotherapy to 66.6-70.2 Gray (Gy) will be administered to the prostate bed over 7-8 weeks while continuing daily placebo/enzalutamide. This is followed by two additional months of placebo/enzalutamide. DISCUSSION: The SALV-ENZA trial is the first phase II placebo-controlled double-blinded randomized study to test SRT in combination with a next generation androgen receptor antagonist in men with high-risk recurrent prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. The primary hypothesis of this study is that clinical outcomes will be improved by the addition of enzalutamide compared to standard-of-care SRT alone and pave the path for phase III evaluation of this combination. TRIAL REGISTRATIONS: ClinicaltTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02203695 Date of Registration: 06/16/2014. Date of First Participant Enrollment: 04/16/2015.

Retrospective Review of Postpartum Lithium Use Including During Lactation.

Introduction: Lithium remains a gold standard treatment for bipolar disorder including during peripartum. Historically, guidelines advised against breastfeeding while taking lithium though recent data suggest it is acceptable for a healthy infant. Lack of awareness of acceptability contributes to decreased patient and clinician comfort and low breastfeeding rates. We report current breastfeeding rates, monitoring practices, and infant outcomes with lithium exposure in breastmilk at our institution. Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted at a single academic medical center using records from 2013 to 2023. Electronic medical records were queried to identify patients prescribed lithium postpartum. Data were collected on timing of lithium initiation, lithium dose and concentration, breastfeeding status, and infant outcomes. Results: A total of 18 cases of lithium use in the postpartum period were identified. A total of 39% (n = 7) of patients taking lithium postpartum breastfed. Most patients, 61% (n = 11), initiated lithium prior to pregnancy, 11% (n = 2) initiated during pregnancy and 27% (n = 5) started postpartum. Four infant charts were reviewed with no reports of adverse events. Of these infants, average maternal lithium dose was 750 mg daily, with an average maternal serum lithium concentration of 0.62 mmol/L and average infant serum lithium concentration of 0.16 mmol/L. Conclusion: Our data demonstrate most patients using lithium postpartum have been taking lithium long-term and are not breastfeeding. Lithium exposure in breastmilk appears to be tolerated by healthy infants. There is a need for ongoing research and education on acceptability and infant monitoring recommendations to support patients who would like to breastfeed while on lithium.

Re-irradiation for malignant glioma: Toward patient selection and defining treatment parameters for salvage.

PURPOSE: Reirradiation for recurrent glioma remains controversial without knowledge of optimal patient selection, dose, fractionation, and normal tissue tolerances. We retrospectively evaluated outcomes and toxicity after conventionally fractionated reirradiation for recurrent high-grade glioma, along with the impact of concurrent chemotherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We conducted a retrospective review of patients reirradiated for high-grade glioma recurrence between 2007 and 2016 (including patients with initial low-grade glioma). Outcome metrics included overall survival (OS), prognostic factors for survival, and treatment-related toxicity. RESULTS: Patients (n = 118; median age 47 years; median Karnofsky performance status score: 80) were re-treated at a median of 28 months (range, 5-214 months) after initial radiation therapy. The median reirradiation dose was 41.4 Gy (range, 12.6-54.0 Gy) to a median lesion volume of 202 cm3 (range, 20-901 cm3). The median cumulative (initial radiation and reirradiation combined) potential maximum brainstem dose was 76.9 Gy (range, 5.0-108.3 Gy) and optic apparatus dose was 56.0 Gy (range, 4.5-90.9 Gy). Of the patients, 56% received concurrent temozolomide, 14%, bevacizumab, and 11%, temozolomide plus bevacizumab; 19% had no chemotherapy. The planned reirradiation was completed by 90% of patients. Median OS from the completion of reirradiation was 9.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 7.5-11.7 months) for all patients and 14.0, 11.5, and 6.7 months for patients with initial grade 2, 3, and 4 glioma, respectively. On multivariate analysis, better OS was observed with a >24-month interval between radiation treatments (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.3; 95% CI, 0.2-0.5; P < .001), reirradiation dose >41.4 Gy (HR: 0.6; 95% CI, 0.4-0.9; P = .03), and gross total resection before reirradiation (HR: 0.6, 95% CI, 0.3-0.9; P = .02). Radiation necrosis and grade ≥3 late neurotoxicity were both minimal (<5%). No symptomatic persistent brainstem or optic nerve/chiasm injury was identified. CONCLUSIONS: Salvage reirradiation, even at doses >41.4 Gy in conventional fractionation, along with chemotherapy, was safe and well tolerated with meaningful survival duration. These data provide information that may be useful in implementing safe reirradiation treatments for appropriately selected patients and guiding future studies to define optimal reirradiation doses, maximal safe doses to critical structures, and the role of systemic therapy.

Use of Stereotactic Radiosurgery in Elderly and Very Elderly Patients With Brain Metastases to Limit Toxicity Associated With Whole Brain Radiation Therapy.

PURPOSE: We evaluated the toxicity associated with stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) in elderly and very elderly patients with brain metastases, as the role of SRS in geriatric patients who would traditionally receive WBRT is unclear. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We conducted a retrospective review of elderly patients (aged 70-79 years) and very elderly patients (aged ≥80 years) with brain metastases who underwent RT from 2010 to 2015 at Johns Hopkins Hospital. Patients received either upfront WBRT or SRS for metastatic solid malignancies, excluding small cell lung cancer. Acute central nervous system toxicity within 3 months of RT was graded using the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group acute radiation central nervous system morbidity scale. The toxicity data between age groups and treatment modalities were analyzed using Fisher's exact test and multivariate logistic regression analysis. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to estimate the median overall survival, and the Cox proportion hazard model was used for multivariate analysis. RESULTS: A total of 811 brain metastases received RT in 119 geriatric patients. The median overall survival from the diagnosis of brain metastases was 4.3 months for the patients undergoing WBRT and 14.4 months for the patients undergoing SRS. On multivariate analysis, WBRT was associated with worse overall survival in this cohort of geriatric patients (odds ratio [OR] 3.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.9-7.0, P<.0001) and age ≥80 years was not. WBRT was associated with significantly greater rates of any grade 1 to 4 toxicity (OR 7.5, 95% CI 1.6-33.3, P=.009) and grade 2 to 4 toxicity (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.0-8.1, P=.047) on multivariate analysis. Elderly and very elderly patients did not have significantly different statistically acute toxicity rates when stratified by age. CONCLUSION: WBRT was associated with increased toxicity compared with SRS in elderly and very elderly patients with brain metastases. SRS, rather than WBRT, should be prospectively evaluated in geriatric patients with the goal of minimizing treatment-related toxicity.

Prospective Study of Hippocampal-Sparing Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation in Limited-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: To prospectively evaluate cognitive function and intracranial failure patterns after hippocampal-sparing prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) for limited-stage small cell lung cancer (SCLC). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Adults with limited-stage SCLC, achieving a complete response to chemoradiotherapy and no brain metastases, were eligible. Patients received PCI 25 Gy/10 fractions, with a mean hippocampal dose limited to <8 Gy and ≥90% of the brain receiving 90% of the prescription. A diverse battery of neuropsychological testing was performed at baseline and 6 and 12 months after PCI. Brain MRI scans were performed at baseline and 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. The primary endpoint was memory measured by the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised Delayed Recall at 6 months after PCI. The 25-Gy arm of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group protocol 0212 was used as a reference of potential efficacy. Development of intracranial metastases was recorded. Overall survival and progression-free survival were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Eight men and 12 women with a median age of 61 years enrolled. Two-year overall survival was 88% (95% confidence interval 68%-100%). There was no significant decline in performance between baseline and 6 or 12 months for any of the tests. The association between baseline intelligence quotient and change in performance on testing was not significant. Magnetic resonance imaging revealed asymptomatic brain metastases at a cumulative rate of 20%, with no concurrent extracranial progression. Two patients developed a metastasis in the under-dosed region. Neither involved the dentate gyrus, but 1 involved the avoidance region. Both patients concurrently developed additional metastasis in fully treated brain regions. There were 2 neurologic deaths. CONCLUSIONS: This prospective study suggests a potential benefit of hippocampal sparing in limiting the neuropsychological sequelae of brain radiation, but with a risk of failures in the spared region. These data strongly support continued enrollment on ongoing cooperative group randomized trials. Clinical Trials registration number: NCT01797159.

A rare case of esophageal metastasis from pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a case report and literature review.

PURPOSE: We report a very unique case of an esophageal metastasis from a pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) primary. METHODS: After obtaining consent from the patient, all relevant records of the case were obtained and retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: At presentation, the patient was diagnosed with synchronous pancreatic and esophageal cancer. He received six months of neoadjuvant therapy including FOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) to the pancreatic tumor followed by a combined pancreaticoduodenectomy and Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. Review of the final esophageal specimen revealed normal overlying squamous mucosa with an underlying focus of metastatic PDAC. The patient remains alive with no evidence of disease 17 months from surgery and 25 months from diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Differentiating an esophageal metastasis from a PDAC primary versus a synchronous esophageal carcinoma is very difficult despite state-of-the-art diagnostic techniques performed at a high-volume tertiary cancer center. Extensive evaluation and continued follow-up of PDAC patients presenting with a synchronous esophageal lesion in a multidisciplinary setting may help ensure efficient and accurate management. In our case, neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX and SBRT to the primary PDAC tumor followed by surgery has been an effective approach for this patient.

Stereotactic Radiosurgery: Treatment of Brain Metastasis Without Interruption of Systemic Therapy.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the prevalence, outcomes, and toxicities of concurrent delivery of systemic therapy with stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for treatment of brain metastases. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We conducted a retrospective review of 193 patients treated at our institution with SRS without prior whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT) for brain metastases between 2009 and 2014. Outcome metrics included administration of concurrent systemic therapy, myelosuppression, neurotoxicity, and survival. RESULTS: One hundred ninety-three patients with a median age of 61 years underwent a total of 291 SRS treatments. Thirty-seven percent of SRS treatments were delivered concurrently with systemic therapy, of which 46% were with conventional myelosuppressive chemotherapy, and 54% with targeted and immune therapy agents. Myelosuppression was minimal after treatment with both systemic therapy and SRS, with 14% grade 3-4 toxicity for lymphopenia and 4-9% for leukopenia, neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia. Neurotoxicity was also minimal after combined therapy, with no grade 4 and <5% grade 3 toxicity, 34% dexamethasone requirement, and 4% radiation necrosis, all similar to treatments with SRS alone. Median overall survival was similar after SRS alone (14.4 months) versus SRS with systemic therapy (12.9 months). In patients with a new diagnosis of primary cancer with brain metastasis, early treatment with concurrent systemic therapy and SRS correlated with improved survival versus SRS alone (41.6 vs 21.5 months, P<.05). CONCLUSIONS: Systemic therapy can be safely given concurrently with SRS for brain metastases: our results suggest minimal myelosuppression and neurotoxicity. Concurrent therapy is an attractive option for patients who have both intracranial and extracranial metastatic disease and may be particularly beneficial in patients with a new diagnosis of primary cancer with brain metastasis.

The strategy of repeat stereotactic radiosurgery without whole brain radiation treatment for new brain metastases: Outcomes and implications for follow-up monitoring.

PURPOSE: Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is widely used to treat brain metastases in place of whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT), with the goal of reducing treatment toxicity balanced against the risk of developing new metastases. We evaluated outcomes of repeated courses of SRS in the management of new brain metastases as an alternative to salvage WBRT. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We conducted a single-institution retrospective review of 239 patients treated with SRS without WBRT for brain metastases from 2004 to 2014. Eighty-six patients received at least 2 courses of SRS for new brain metastases. Outcome metrics included survival, development of symptomatic new brain metastases, neurologic symptoms at death or last follow-up, and ultimate WBRT. RESULTS: Eighty-six patients (median age, 59 years) underwent a median of 2 courses of SRS (range, 2-6), with a median of 2 lesions treated initially and on retreatment. The median interval between SRS treatments was 5.8 months (range, 1.2-69.1). New brain metastases after initial radiosurgery were detected by routine imaging in 87% of cases. Median overall survival from repeat SRS was 13.0 months (range, 0.3-64.5) and from initial brain metastasis diagnosis 25.0 months (range, 2.0-68.1). On multivariate analysis, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1 (hazard ratio [HR], 0.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.15-0.90; P=.029), controlled extracranial disease (HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.13-0.94; P=.038), and interval between initial and second SRS >6 months (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.25-0.96; P=.037) correlated with improved overall survival from brain metastasis diagnosis. A total of 24.7% of patients had symptomatic intracranial metastatic disease at death or last follow-up, and 26.7% ultimately received WBRT. CONCLUSION: Repeated SRS is a reasonable option for patients with new brain metastases, as our results suggest favorable survival outcomes with this approach. New lesions infrequently caused neurologic symptoms before routine imaging detection, and a minority of patients had symptomatic intracranial disease at death or last follow-up.