Dosimetric Analyses of the Three Radiation Techniques Used in the EORTC 22922/10925 IM-MS Breast Cancer Trial.

PURPOSE: The aim of the current study is to compare the dosimetry of 3 radiation therapy (RT) techniques used in the EORTC 22922/10925 trial for irradiating the internal mammary (IM) and medial supraclavicular nodes (MS) using a treatment planning system available nowadays for dose calculation. METHODS: We performed a retrospective dosimetry analysis of anonymised data; thus, ethics approval was not required. Ten cases of left-sided breast were randomly selected for RT planning to a total dose of 50 Gy in 25 fractions. The treatment planning was done according to the trial's protocol and under the supervision of the EORTC trial's coordinators. Doses to planning target volumes (PTV) and to organs at risk (OARs) are reported. Data is presented in descriptive statistics. RESULTS: A total of 10 cases and 40 treatment plans (4 plans per case: standard-plan A, modified standard-plan B, individualised-plan C and breast-only-plan D). For all planning techniques, the mean dose to the PTV of the left breast (plan A-D) and the PTV-MS (plan A-C) exceeded 95% of the prescribed dose (>47.5 Gy). The individualised technique (plan C) had a lower coverage for PTV-IM, with a mean of 87% of the prescribed dose compared to ∼102% for plans A and B. The dose to OARs varied between techniques, with the mean heart dose being higher in the standard and modified standard techniques (18.3 and 16.6 Gy, respectively) compared to the individualised technique (9.5 Gy). CONCLUSIONS: The 3 RT techniques used in the trial varied in target coverage and OARs dose. Our results may help to understand the observed larger absolute benefit of individualised IM-MS treatment planning in terms of breast cancer outcomes.

Quality assurance of radiotherapy in the ongoing EORTC 1420 "Best of" trial for early stage oropharyngeal, supraglottic and hypopharyngeal carcinoma: results of the benchmark case procedure.

INTRODUCTION: The current phase III EORTC 1420 Best-of trial (NCT02984410) compares the swallowing function after transoral surgery versus intensity modulated radiotherapy (RT) in patients with early-stage carcinoma of the oropharynx, supraglottis and hypopharynx. We report the analysis of the Benchmark Case (BC) procedures before patient recruitment with special attention to dysphagia/aspiration related structures (DARS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Submitted RT volumes and plans from participating centers were analyzed and compared against the gold-standard expert delineations and dose distributions. Descriptive analysis of protocol deviations was conducted. Mean Sorensen-Dice similarity index (mDSI) and Hausdorff distance (mHD) were applied to evaluate the inter-observer variability (IOV). RESULTS: 65% (23/35) of the institutions needed more than one submission to achieve Quality assurance (RTQA) clearance. OAR volume delineations were the cause for rejection in 53% (40/76) of cases. IOV could be improved in 5 out of 12 OARs by more than 10 mm after resubmission (mHD). Despite this, final IOV for critical OARs in delineation remained significant among DARS by choosing an aleatory threshold of 0.7 (mDSI) and 15 mm (mHD). CONCLUSIONS: This is to our knowledge the largest BC analysis among Head and neck RTQA programs performed in the framework of a prospective trial. Benchmarking identified non-common OARs and target delineations errors as the main source of deviations and IOV could be reduced in a significant number of cases after this process. Due to the substantial resources involved with benchmarking, future benchmark analyses should assess fully the impact on patients' clinical outcome.

Independent external validation using the EORTC HNCG-ROG 1219 DAHANCA trial data of NTCP models for acute oral mucositis.

PURPOSE: To externally validate previously published Normal Tissue Complication Probability (NTCP) models developed by separate teams for grade 3 oral mucositis (g3OM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two models were validated: a logistic model, based on 144 head and neck cancer (HNC) patients receiving induction chemotherapy followed by chemo-IMRT; a multivariable logistic model for prediction of g3OM for 253 patients receiving radical treatment for the head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). The EORTC HNCG-ROG 1219 DAHANCA trial dataset, consisting of 169 patients was used as the validation cohort. This cohort was treated with accelerated fractionated chemo-IMRT, with/without the hypoxic radiosensitizer Nimorazole for HNSCC. External validity was assessed using the scaled Brier score. Calibration was assessed in terms of calibration curves as well as measures of mean and weak calibration. Hosmer-Lemeshow was used for goodness-of-fit test. Discrimination was calculated using the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC-ROC). RESULTS: The prevalence of g3OM in the validation cohort (35.5%) was similar to that of two development cohorts, i.e. 38.7% and 31.9% for Bhide logistic and Otter multivariable logistic models respectively. The scaled Brier scores showed good overall model performance. Perfect calibration was observed in the prevalence range of 20% to 40%. AUC-ROC was acceptable in external validation (0.67). The Hosmer-Lemeshow test showed good agreement between predicted and observed outcomes for two models. CONCLUSION: The NTCP models were validated and lead to valid predictions in a wide range of diverse treatment techniques and patient characteristics, also when Nimorazole is added as hypoxic radiosensitizer.

Personalized biomarker-based treatment strategy for patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: EORTC position and approach.

The molecular landscape of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and the neck (SCCHN) has been characterized and actionable or targetable genomic alterations have been identified. However, targeted therapies have very limited activity in unselected SCCHN, and the current treatment strategy is still based on tumor location and disease stage and not on tumor biology. Trying to select upfront the patients who will benefit from a specific treatment might be a way to improve patients' outcome. With the objective of optimizing the activity of targeted therapies and immunotherapy, we have designed an umbrella biomarker-driven study dedicated to recurrent and/or metastatic SCCHN patients (EORTC-1559-HNCG, NCT03088059). In this article, we review not only the different trial designs for biomarker-driven studies with their respective advantages and opportunities but also the potential pitfalls that led to the design of the EORTC-1559-HNCG protocol. We also discuss the scientific and logistic challenges of biomarker-driven trials.

Activity and safety of afatinib in a window preoperative EORTC study in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN).

Background: To investigate the activity and safety of afatinib in the preoperative treatment of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN). Patients and methods: This study was an open-label, randomized, multicenter, phase II window of opportunity trial. Treatment-naïve SCCHN patients selected for primary curative surgery were randomized (5 : 1 ratio) to receive afatinib during 14 days (day -15 until day -1) before surgery (day 0) or no treatment. Tumor biopsies, 2-[fluorine-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were carried out at diagnosis and just before surgery. The primary end point was metabolic FDG-PET response (according to EORTC guidelines). Other end points included response assessment based on the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1, dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE)-MRI, diffusion weighted (DW)-MRI, safety, and translational research (TR). Results: Thirty patients were randomized: 25 to afatinib and 5 to control arm. Of the 23 eligible patients randomized to afatinib, 16 (70%; 95% CI: 47% to 87%) patients had a partial metabolic FDG-PET response (PMR). Five patients (22%; 95% CI: 8% to 44%) showed a partial response by RECISTv1.1. Responses assessed via DCE-MRI and DWI-MRI did not show a strong association with PMR or RECIST. One patient discontinued afatinib after 11 days for grade 3 diarrhea with subsequent renal failure and 24 days delay in surgery. No grade 4 toxicities or surgical comorbidities related to afatinib were reported. TR results indicated that PMR was more frequent in the tumors with high Cluster3-hypoxia score expression and with TP53 wild type. Conclusion: Afatinib given for 2 weeks to newly diagnosed SCCHN patients induces a high rate of FDG-PET partial metabolic response and partial response according to RECISTv1.1. Afatinib can be safely administered before surgery. Although exploratory, the hypoxic gene signature needs further investigations as a predictive biomarker of afatinib activity. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01538381.

TPF plus cetuximab induction chemotherapy followed by biochemoradiation with weekly cetuximab plus weekly cisplatin or carboplatin: a randomized phase II EORTC trial.

BACKGROUND: Our aim was to test the safety of cetuximab added to chemoradiation with either cisplatin or carboplatin after prior induction chemotherapy. METHODS: Patients with stage III/IV unresectable, squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck received up to four cycles of TPF-E (cisplatin and docetaxel 75 mg/m2 on day 1 followed by 5-FU 750 mg/m2/day as a continuous infusion on days 1-5 plus cetuximab at a loading dose of 400 mg/m2 followed by a weekly dose of 250 mg/m2), with prophylactic antibiotics but no growth factors. Patients not progressing after four cycles of TPF-E were randomly assigned to radiotherapy (70 Gy over 7 weeks in 2 Gy fractions) and weekly cetuximab with either weekly cisplatin 40 mg/m2 or carboplatin, AUC of 1.5 mg/ml/min. Primary endpoint was feasibility. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients were recruited. One patient did not start TPF (hypersensitivity reaction during the cetuximab loading dose). Induction TPF-E was discontinued in 12 patients due to toxicity (6 patients), medical decision (2), death (1), patient refusal (1), protocol violation (1), co-morbidity (1). Three further patients were not randomized [progressive disease (1), protocol violation (1), toxicity and co-morbidity (1)]. Of particular interest are three patients who suffered from bowel perforation, one patient who died as results of pneumonia and septic shock, and a second patient who was found dead at home 12 days after starting TPF-E (cause of death unknown). Weekly cisplatin and carboplatin was stopped early in seven and four patients, respectively. Radiotherapy was stopped in two patients with cisplatin and interrupted in one patient with cisplatin and four patients with carboplatin. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of cetuximab to full dose TPF induction chemotherapy led to unacceptable complications and premature closing of the study. Only 34 out of 46 patients completed four cycles of TPF-E and only 30 started biochemoradiation.

Evaluation of the impact of tumor HPV status on outcome in patients with locally advanced unresectable head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) receiving cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil with or without docetaxel: a subset analysis of EORTC 24971 study.

BACKGROUND: EORTC 24971 was a phase III trial demonstrating superiority of induction regimen TPF (docetaxel, cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil) over PF (cisplatin/5-fluorouracil), in terms of progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in locoregionally advanced unresectable head and neck squamous cell carcinomas. We conducted a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data aiming to evaluate whether only HPV(-) patients (pts) benefit from adding docetaxel to PF, in which case deintensifying induction treatment in HPV(+) pts could be considered. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Pretherapy tumor biopsies (blocks or slides) were assessed for high-risk HPV by p16 immunohistochemistry, PCR and quantitative PCR. HPV-DNA+ and/or p16+ tumors were subjected to in situ hybridization (ISH) and HPV E6 oncogene expression qRT-PCR analysis. Primary and secondary objectives were to evaluate the value of HPV/p16 status as predictive factor of treatment benefit in terms of PFS and OS. The predictive effect was analyzed based on the model used in the primary analysis of the study with the addition of a treatment by marker interaction term and tested at two-sided 5% significance level. RESULTS: Of 358, 119 pts had available tumor samples and 58 of them had oropharyngeal cancer. Median follow-up was 8.7 years. Sixteen of 119 (14%) evaluable samples were p16+ and 20 of 79 (25%) evaluable tumors were HPV-DNA+. 13 of 40 pts (33%) assessed with HPV-DNA ISH and 12 of 28 pts (43%) assessed for HPV E6 mRNA were positive. The preplanned analysis showed no statistical evidence of predictive value of HPV/p16 status for PFS (P = 0.287) or OS (P = 0.118). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of HPV positivity was low in the subset of EORTC 24971 pts analyzed. In this analysis only powered to detect a large treatment by marker interaction, there was no statistical evidence that treatment effect found overall was different in magnitude in HPV(+) or HPV(-) pts. These results do not justify selection of TPF versus PF according to HPV status.

International Working Group consensus response evaluation criteria in lymphoma (RECIL 2017).

In recent years, the number of approved and investigational agents that can be safely administered for the treatment of lymphoma patients for a prolonged period of time has substantially increased. Many of these novel agents are evaluated in early-phase clinical trials in patients with a wide range of malignancies, including solid tumors and lymphoma. Furthermore, with the advances in genome sequencing, new "basket" clinical trial designs have emerged that select patients based on the presence of specific genetic alterations across different types of solid tumors and lymphoma. The standard response criteria currently in use for lymphoma are the Lugano Criteria which are based on [18F]2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography or bidimensional tumor measurements on computerized tomography scans. These differ from the RECIST criteria used in solid tumors, which use unidimensional measurements. The RECIL group hypothesized that single-dimension measurement could be used to assess response to therapy in lymphoma patients, producing results similar to the standard criteria. We tested this hypothesis by analyzing 47 828 imaging measurements from 2983 individual adult and pediatric lymphoma patients enrolled on 10 multicenter clinical trials and developed new lymphoma response criteria (RECIL 2017). We demonstrate that assessment of tumor burden in lymphoma clinical trials can use the sum of longest diameters of a maximum of three target lesions. Furthermore, we introduced a new provisional category of a minor response. We also clarified response assessment in patients receiving novel immune therapy and targeted agents that generate unique imaging situations.

Long-term update of the 24954 EORTC phase III trial on larynx preservation.

The long-term results of the EORTC 24954 trial comparing sequential versus alternating chemotherapy and radiotherapy (RT) for patients with locally advanced laryngeal and hypopharyngeal cancer are reported. From 1996 to 2004, 450 patients were randomly assigned (1-1) to a sequential arm (SA = induction cisplatin-5fluorouracil followed by a 70Gy-RT for the responders or a total laryngectomy and post-operative RT for the non-responders) and an alternating arm (AA = cisplatin-5fluorouracil alternated with three 2-week courses of 20 Gy-RT for a total dose of 60 Gy). Median follow-up was 10.2 years. Ten-year survival with functional larynx (primary end-point) and overall survival were similar in both arms (18.7% and 33.6% in SA versus 18.3% and 31.6% in AA). Late toxicity was also similar; however, a trend for higher larynx preservation and better laryngeal function was observed in AA.

EORTC workshop on clinical trial methodology in older individuals with a diagnosis of solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: Due to the aging of the population, the number of older patients diagnosed with a malignant disease is increasing. A multidisciplinary approach to the senior adult cancer patient is mandatory, to assure optimal diagnosis and therapeutic management. DESIGN: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) has currently defined senior adult oncology as one of its priorities and has established an active Elderly Task Force (ETF). Under the auspices of the EORTC, the ETF organized a workshop on clinical trial methodology in older cancer patients and in this article, we present the conclusions of this workshop. RESULTS: Besides the 'classical' efficacy end points, quality of life, functional status and independence of the patient should be assessed in clinical trials in older patients. The participants of the workshop agreed on the use of a minimum dataset for the assessment of global health and functional status in older cancer patients. The panel also recommended that optimization of collaboration with pharmaceutical industry requires reporting of age-related data (subgroup analyses of clinical trials, age-related pooled analyses and obligatory post-marketing studies in vulnerable and frail older patients). CONCLUSION: The identification of proper clinical outcomes and the validation of geriatric screening tools are needed for conducting sound and comparable clinical trials.

EORTC elderly task force position paper: approach to the older cancer patient.

As a result of an increasing life expectancy, the incidence of cancer cases diagnosed in the older population is rising. Indeed, cancer incidence is 11-fold higher in persons over the age of 65 than in younger ones. Despite this high incidence of cancer in older patients, solid data regarding the most appropriate approach and best treatment for older cancer patients are still lacking, mostly due to under-representation of these patients in prospective clinical trials. The clinical behaviour of common malignant diseases, e.g. breast, ovarian and lung cancers, lymphomas and acute leukaemias, may be different in older patients because of intrinsic variation of the neoplastic cells and the ability of the tumour host to support neoplastic growth. The decision to treat or not these patients should be based on patients' functional age rather than the chronological age. Assessment of patients' functional age includes the evaluation of health, functional status, nutrition, cognition and the psychosocial and economic context. The purpose of this paper is to focus on the influence of age on cancer presentation and cancer management in older cancer patients and to provide suggestions on clinical trial development and methodology in this population.