Treatment of Oligometastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: An ASTRO/ESTRO Clinical Practice Guideline.

PURPOSE: This joint guideline by American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) and the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) was initiated to review evidence and provide recommendations regarding the use of local therapy in the management of extracranial oligometastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Local therapy is defined as the comprehensive treatment of all known cancer-primary tumor, regional nodal metastases, and metastases-with definitive intent. METHODS: ASTRO and ESTRO convened a task force to address 5 key questions focused on the use of local (radiation, surgery, other ablative methods) and systemic therapy in the management of oligometastatic NSCLC. The questions address clinical scenarios for using local therapy, sequencing and timing when integrating local with systemic therapies, radiation techniques critical for oligometastatic disease targeting and treatment delivery, and the role of local therapy for oligoprogression or recurrent disease. Recommendations were based on a systematic literature review and created using ASTRO guidelines methodology. RESULTS: Based on the lack of significant randomized phase 3 trials, a patient-centered, multidisciplinary approach was strongly recommended for all decision-making regarding potential treatment. Integration of definitive local therapy was only relevant if technically feasible and clinically safe to all disease sites, defined as 5 or fewer distinct sites. Conditional recommendations were given for definitive local therapies in synchronous, metachronous, oligopersistent, and oligoprogressive conditions for extracranial disease. Radiation and surgery were the only primary definitive local therapy modalities recommended for use in the management of patients with oligometastatic disease, with indications provided for choosing one over the other. Sequencing recommendations were provided for systemic and local therapy integration. Finally, multiple recommendations were provided for the optimal technical use of hypofractionated radiation or stereotactic body radiation therapy as definitive local therapy, including dose and fractionation. CONCLUSIONS: Presently, data regarding clinical benefits of local therapy on overall and other survival outcomes is still sparse for oligometastatic NSCLC. However, with rapidly evolving data being generated supporting local therapy in oligometastatic NSCLC, this guideline attempted to frame recommendations as a function of the quality of data available to make decisions in a multidisciplinary approach incorporating patient goals and tolerances.

Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for operable stage I non-small-cell lung cancer (revised STARS): long-term results of a single-arm, prospective trial with prespecified comparison to surgery.

BACKGROUND: A previous pooled analysis of the STARS and ROSEL trials showed higher survival after stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) than with surgery for operable early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but that analysis had notable limitations. This study reports long-term results of the revised STARS trial, in which the SABR group was re-accrued with a larger sample size, along with a protocol-specified propensity-matched comparison with a prospectively registered, contemporary institutional cohort of patients who underwent video-assisted thoracoscopic surgical lobectomy with mediastinal lymph node dissection (VATS L-MLND). METHODS: This single-arm prospective trial was done at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (Houston, TX, USA) and enrolled patients aged 18 years or older with a Zubrod performance status of 0-2, newly diagnosed and histologically confirmed NSCLC with N0M0 disease (squamous cell, adenocarcinoma, large cell, or NSCLC not otherwise specified), and a tumour diameter of 3 cm or less. This trial did not include patients from the previous pooled analysis. SABR dosing was 54 Gy in three fractions (for peripheral lesions) or 50 Gy in four fractions (for central tumours; simultaneous integrated boost to gross tumour totalling 60 Gy). The primary endpoint was the 3-year overall survival. For the propensity-matching analysis, we used a surgical cohort from the MD Anderson Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery's prospectively registered, institutional review board-approved database of all patients with clinical stage I NSCLC who underwent VATS L-MLND during the period of enrolment in this trial. Non-inferiority could be claimed if the 3-year overall survival rate after SABR was lower than that after VATS L-MLND by 12% or less and the upper bound of the 95% CI of the hazard ratio (HR) was less than 1·965. Propensity matching consisted of determining a propensity score using a multivariable logistic regression model including several covariates (age, tumour size, histology, performance status, and the interaction of age and sex); based on the propensity scores, one patient in the SABR group was randomly matched with one patient in the VATS L-MLND group using a 5:1 digit greedy match algorithm. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02357992. FINDINGS: Between Sept 1, 2015, and Jan 31, 2017, 80 patients were enrolled and included in efficacy and safety analyses. Median follow-up time was 5·1 years (IQR 3·9-5·8). Overall survival was 91% (95% CI 85-98) at 3 years and 87% (79-95) at 5 years. SABR was tolerated well, with no grade 4-5 toxicity and one (1%) case each of grade 3 dyspnoea, grade 2 pneumonitis, and grade 2 lung fibrosis. No serious adverse events were recorded. Overall survival in the propensity-matched VATS L-MLND cohort was 91% (95% CI 85-98) at 3 years and 84% (76-93) at 5 years. Non-inferiority was claimed since the 3-year overall survival after SABR was not lower than that observed in the VATS L-MLND group. There was no significant difference in overall survival between the two patient cohorts (hazard ratio 0·86 [95% CI 0·45-1·65], p=0·65) from a multivariable analysis. INTERPRETATION: Long-term survival after SABR is non-inferior to VATS L-MLND for operable stage IA NSCLC. SABR remains promising for such cases but multidisciplinary management is strongly recommended. FUNDING: Varian Medical Systems and US National Cancer Institute (National Institutes of Health).

Prognosis of severe lymphopenia after postoperative radiotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer: Results of a long-term follow up study.

PURPOSE: To investigate the incidence and prognosis of severe radiation-induced lymphopenia (sRIL) after postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) for resected NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 1998 and 2017, 170 patients treated with PORT for NSCLC were retrospectively reviewed. Lymphopenia was divided into tertiles with severe lymphopenia defined as absolute lymphocyte counts (ALC) < 0.37 × 103/ul. RESULTS: sRIL was observed in 32.3% of patients. Multivariable logistic regression analysis indicated sRIL was associated with planning target volume radiation fraction numbers (OR 1.09, p = 0.005) and total lung mean dose (OR 1.12, p = 0.006). With a median follow-up time of 12.2 years, the median progression-free survival and overall survival were 14.8 months and 28.4 months respectively in patients with sRIL, vs. 21.7 months (p = 0.008) and 48.3 months (p = 0.01) respectively in patients without sRIL. Multivariable analyses indicated sRIL significantly decreased OS (HR 1.95, p < 0.01). Since PORT for stage I-II NSCLC was done largely for positive margins, which may confound the contribution of severe RIL, we analyzed stage III separately and found that sRIL also significantly decreased OS (HR 1.88, p = 0.004) in multivariable analysis. CONCLUSION: For this long-term outcome study, severe RIL correlated with total lung mean dose and radiation fractionation numbers, and was a strong prognostic factor for poor survival in PORT patients, particularly in patients with stage III NSCLC, highlighting the importance of an intact immune system for post-radiation immunologic disease surveillance.

High-Flow Nasal Cannula Therapy for Exertional Dyspnea in Patients with Cancer: A Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Exertional dyspnea is common in patients with cancer and limits their function. The impact of high-flow nasal cannula on exertional dyspnea in nonhypoxemic patients is unclear. In this double-blind, parallel-group, randomized trial, we assessed the effect of flow rate (high vs. low) and gas (oxygen vs. air) on exertional dyspnea in nonhypoxemic patients with cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with cancer with oxygen saturation >90% at rest and exertion completed incremental and constant work (80% maximal) cycle ergometry while breathing low-flow air at 2 L/minute. They were then randomized to receive high-flow oxygen, high-flow air, low-flow oxygen, or low-flow air while performing symptom-limited endurance cycle ergometry at 80% maximal. The primary outcome was modified 0-10 Borg dyspnea intensity scale at isotime. Secondary outcomes included dyspnea unpleasantness, exercise time, and adverse events. RESULTS: Seventy-four patients were enrolled, and 44 completed the study (mean age 63; 41% female). Compared with low-flow air at baseline, dyspnea intensity was significantly lower at isotime with high-flow oxygen (mean change, -1.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.1, -0.12) and low-flow oxygen (-1.83; 95% CI, -2.7, -0.9), but not high-flow air (-0.2; 95% CI, -0.97, 0.6) or low-flow air (-0.5; 95% CI, -1.3, 0.4). Compared with low-flow air, high-flow oxygen also resulted in significantly longer exercise time (difference + 2.5 minutes, p = .009), but not low-flow oxygen (+0.39 minutes, p = .65) or high-flow air (+0.63 minutes, p = .48). The interventions were well tolerated without significant adverse effects. CONCLUSION: Our preliminary findings support that high-flow oxygen improved both exertional dyspnea and exercise duration in nonhypoxemic patients with cancer. (ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02357134). IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: In this four-arm, double-blind, randomized clinical trial examining the role of high-flow nasal cannula on exertional dyspnea in patients with cancer without hypoxemia, high-flow oxygen, but not high-flow air, resulted in significantly lower dyspnea scores and longer exercise time. High-flow oxygen delivered by high-flow nasal cannula devices may improve clinically relevant outcomes even in patients without hypoxemia.

Phase 1/2 Trial of Pembrolizumab and Concurrent Chemoradiation Therapy for Limited-Stage SCLC.

INTRODUCTION: Few advancements in treating limited-stage SCLC (LS-SCLC) have been made in decades. We report here a phase 1/2 trial of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and pembrolizumab. METHODS: This single-center, open-label phase 1/2 study recruited adults with LS-SCLC or other neuroendocrine tumors and good performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group ≤ 2). The primary end point was safety, as assessed by dose-limiting toxicities. Concurrent CRT consisted of etoposide and a platin with 45 Gy radiotherapy (30 twice daily). Prophylactic cranial irradiation (25 Gy, 10 fractions) was given at the physician's discretion. Pembrolizumab was started concurrently with CRT and continued for up to 16 cycles. The phase 1 portion consisted of a 3 + 3 design. Toxicity was assessed with Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0. Secondary outcomes were progression-free survival, overall survival, and tumor response as measured by the immune-related response criteria. RESULTS: A total of 45 patients were screened, and 40 were enrolled. All completed radiation therapy and received greater than or equal to one cycle of pembrolizumab. A total of 27 (61%) received percutaneous coronary intervention. One dose-limiting toxicity was observed in the phase 1 portion. There were no grade 5 toxicities, but there were three grade 4 events (two neutropenia, one respiratory failure). Pneumonitis rate was 15% (three grade 2 and three grade 3). All 17 esophagitis events (42.5%) were grades 1 to 2. At median follow-up time of 23.1 months, the median progression-free survival time was 19.7 months (95% confidence interval: 8.8‒30.5) and the median overall survival time was 39.5 months (95% confidence interval: 8.0‒71.0). CONCLUSION: Concurrent CRT and pembrolizumab for LS-SCLC was well tolerated and yielded favorable outcomes, providing a basis for randomized studies.

Mitigating the impact of COVID-19 on oncology: Clinical and operational lessons from a prospective radiation oncology cohort tested for COVID-19.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic warrants operational initiatives to minimize transmission, particularly among cancer patients who are thought to be at high-risk. Within our department, a multidisciplinary tracer team prospectively monitored all patients under investigation, tracking their test status, treatment delays, clinical outcomes, employee exposures, and quarantines. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospective cohort tested for SARS-COV-2 infection over 35 consecutive days of the early pandemic (03/19/2020-04/22/2020). RESULTS: A total of 121 Radiation Oncology patients underwent RT-PCR testing during this timeframe. Of the 7 (6%) confirmed-positive cases, 6 patients were admitted (4 warranting intensive care), and 2 died from acute respiratory distress syndrome. Radiotherapy was deferred or interrupted for 40 patients awaiting testing. As the median turnaround time for RT-PCR testing decreased from 1.5 (IQR: 1-4) to ≤1-day (P < 0.001), the median treatment delay also decreased from 3.5 (IQR: 1.75-5) to 1 business day (IQR: 1-2) [P < 0.001]. Each patient was an exposure risk to a median of 5 employees (IQR: 3-6.5) through prolonged close contact. During this timeframe, 39 care-team members were quarantined for a median of 3 days (IQR: 2-11), with a peak of 17 employees simultaneously quarantined. Following implementation of a "dual PPE policy," newly quarantined employees decreased from 2.9 to 0.5 per day. CONCLUSION: The severe adverse events noted among these confirmed-positive cases support the notion that cancer patients are vulnerable to COVID-19. Active tracking, rapid diagnosis, and aggressive source control can mitigate the adverse effects on treatment delays, workforce incapacitation, and ideally outcomes.

Thoracic Radiation Oncology Clinical Trial Accrual and Reasons for Nonenrollment: Results of a Large, Prospective, Multiyear Analysis.

PURPOSE: Clinical trials are considered the gold standard in evidence-based medicine, yet few patients with cancer ultimately enroll. Here we examine patients screened for thoracic radiation oncology clinical trials to better understand enrollment trends. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A prospective database tracking screening and enrollment for patients referred for thoracic radiation oncology consultation at our institution from 2016 to 2019 was evaluated. Proportional enrollment rates, patient and disease characteristics, self-reported socioeconomic factors, and reasons for ineligibility or nonenrollment across 17 radiation therapy trials were compared. RESULTS: Enrollment data on 2372 patients were available for analysis. Of these patients, 40.0% (949) were deemed "not eligible" (NE) for any trial or were unwilling to be further screened. Reasons for ineligibility included stage (44%), histology (13%), radiation therapy not indicated (12%), patient decision (7%), and enrollment in a competing medical or surgical oncology trial (5%). The remaining 60.0% (1423) were "potentially eligible" (PE) for one or more trials. Most had non-small cell lung cancer (71%) or esophageal cancer (16%), and there were significantly fewer stage IV PE (29%) versus NE (49%) patients (P < .0001). Of 2372 patients, 281 (11.9%) enrolled. Notable reasons for nonenrollment were inclusion and exclusion criteria (58%), patients declining enrollment (14%), and physician decision (5%). The proportion of white patients was higher in the PE versus NE group (82.5% vs 75.8%; P < .001). Additionally, white race (87.9% vs 81.2%; P = .008), English language preference (96.4% vs 92.9%; P = .032), and non-Hispanic/Latino ethnicity (94.0% vs 90.1%; P = .042) were significantly different in enrolled versus nonenrolled PE patients. CONCLUSIONS: Only 12% of patients screened for radiation therapy trials ultimately enrolled, and more than two-thirds had no trial available or were found ineligible. In addition, 19% of potential eligible patients did not enroll because the patient or physician declined. Future trials may benefit from pragmatic designs with more inclusive enrollment criteria and multidisciplinary engagement of referring providers.

Randomized Phase IIB Trial of Proton Beam Therapy Versus Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy for Locally Advanced Esophageal Cancer.

PURPOSE: Whether dosimetric advantages of proton beam therapy (PBT) translate to improved clinical outcomes compared with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) remains unclear. This randomized trial compared total toxicity burden (TTB) and progression-free survival (PFS) between these modalities for esophageal cancer. METHODS: This phase IIB trial randomly assigned patients to PBT or IMRT (50.4 Gy), stratified for histology, resectability, induction chemotherapy, and stage. The prespecified coprimary end points were TTB and PFS. TTB, a composite score of 11 distinct adverse events (AEs), including common toxicities as well as postoperative complications (POCs) in operated patients, quantified the extent of AE severity experienced over the duration of 1 year following treatment. The trial was conducted using Bayesian group sequential design with three planned interim analyses at 33%, 50%, and 67% of expected accrual (adjusted for follow-up). RESULTS: This trial (commenced April 2012) was approved for closure and analysis upon activation of NRG-GI006 in March 2019, which occurred immediately prior to the planned 67% interim analysis. Altogether, 145 patients were randomly assigned (72 IMRT, 73 PBT), and 107 patients (61 IMRT, 46 PBT) were evaluable. Median follow-up was 44.1 months. Fifty-one patients (30 IMRT, 21 PBT) underwent esophagectomy; 80% of PBT was passive scattering. The posterior mean TTB was 2.3 times higher for IMRT (39.9; 95% highest posterior density interval, 26.2-54.9) than PBT (17.4; 10.5-25.0). The mean POC score was 7.6 times higher for IMRT (19.1; 7.3-32.3) versus PBT (2.5; 0.3-5.2). The posterior probability that mean TTB was lower for PBT compared with IMRT was 0.9989, which exceeded the trial's stopping boundary of 0.9942 at the 67% interim analysis. The 3-year PFS rate (50.8% v 51.2%) and 3-year overall survival rates (44.5% v 44.5%) were similar. CONCLUSION: For locally advanced esophageal cancer, PBT reduced the risk and severity of AEs compared with IMRT while maintaining similar PFS.

Metabolic Responses to Metformin in Inoperable Early-stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Treated With Stereotactic Radiotherapy: Results of a Randomized Phase II Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Metformin reduces glucose uptake in physiologic tissues and has been shown to affect non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) metabolism. We hypothesized that positron emission tomography (PET) scans could detect the impact of metformin on glucose uptake in NSCLC and we sought to test this hypothesis in a prospective clinical trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A single-blinded phase II clinical trial was performed with subjects randomized 6:1 to 3 to 4 weeks of metformin versus placebo for inoperable early-stage NSCLC. PET scans were performed at baseline, mid-treatment (after 2 wk study medication), and 6 months postradiation. The primary endpoint of the trial was tumor metabolic response to metformin by PERCIST before definitive radiation. Stereotactic body radiotherapy to 50 Gy in 4 fractions was used for peripheral tumors and 70 Gy in 10 fractions for central tumors. RESULTS: There were 14 subjects randomized to the metformin and 1 to placebo. Histologies were 60% adenocarcinoma, 33.3% squamous cell carcinoma, and 6.7% poorly differentiated carcinoma. At mid-treatment PET scan, 57% of subjects randomized to metformin met PERCIST criteria for metabolic response, of which 75% had progressive metabolic disease and 25% had partial metabolic response, whereas the placebo subject had stable metabolic disease. At 6 months, the metformin arm had 69% complete metabolic response, 23% partial metabolic response and 1 progressive metabolic disease, and the subject treated with placebo had a complete metabolic response. There were no CTCAE grade ≥3 toxicities. CONCLUSIONS: Despite low accrual, majority of subjects treated with metformin had metabolic responses by PERCIST criteria on PET imaging. Contrary to the effect of metformin on most physiologic tissues, most tumors had increased metabolic activity in response to metformin.

Phase I Trial of Pembrolizumab and Radiation Therapy after Induction Chemotherapy for Extensive-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer.

INTRUDUCTION: Radiation and immunotherapy have separately been shown to confer survival advantages to patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ESCLC), but failure rates remain high and combination therapy has been understudied. In this single-arm phase I trial (NCT02402920), we assessed the safety of combining pembrolizumab with thoracic radiotherapy (TRT) after induction chemotherapy for SCLC. METHODS: Patients with ESCLC who had completed chemotherapy received TRT with pembrolizumab. The maximum tolerated dose of pembrolizumab was assessed by 3+3 dose-escalation; doses began at 100 mg and increased in 50 mg increments to 200 mg. Pembrolizumab was given every 3 weeks for up to 16 cycles; TRT was prescribed as 45 Gy in 15 daily fractions. Toxicity was evaluated with the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.0. The primary endpoint was safety of the combined therapy based on the incidence of dose-limiting toxicity in the 35 days following initiation of treatment. RESULTS: Thirty-eight patients with ESCLC (median age 65 years, range: 37-79 years) were enrolled from September 2015 through September 2017; 33 received per-protocol treatment, and all tolerated pembrolizumab at 100 to 200 mg with no dose-limiting toxicity in the 35-day window. There were no grade 4-5 toxicities; 2 (6%) patients experienced grade 3 events (n = 1 rash, n = 1 asthenia/paresthesia/autoimmune disorder) that were unlikely/doubtfully related to protocol therapy. The median follow-up time was 7.3 months (range: 1-13 months); median progression-free and overall survival times were 6.1 months (95% confidence interval: 4.1-8.1) and 8.4 months (95% confidence interval: 6.7-10.1). CONCLUSIONS: Concurrent pembrolizumab-TRT was tolerated well with few high-grade adverse events in the short-term; progression-free and overall survival rates are difficult to interpret due to heterogeneity in eligibility criteria (e.g., enrolling progressors on induction chemotherapy). Although randomized studies have shown benefits to TRT alone and immunotherapy alone, the safety of the combined regimen supports further investigation as a foundational approach for future prospective studies.

Phase II Trial of Concurrent Atezolizumab With Chemoradiation for Unresectable NSCLC.

INTRODUCTION: Consolidation durvalumab after chemoradiation (CRT) is the current standard of care for locally advanced NSCLC. We hypothesized that adding immunotherapy concurrently with CRT (cCRT) would increase efficacy without additive toxicity. METHODS: This phase II study was conducted in two parts. Part 1 (n = 10) involved administration of conventionally fractionated CRT followed by consolidation chemotherapy (atezolizumab [two cycles] and maintenance atezolizumab up to 1 y). Part 2 (n = 30) involved administration of cCRT with atezolizumab followed by the same consolidation and maintenance therapies as in part 1. Programmed cell death ligand-1 staining cutoffs (1% or 50%) using Dako 22C3 immunohistochemistry were correlated with clinical outcomes. RESULTS: The overall toxicities for part 1/2 were overall adverse events of grade 3 and above of 80%/80%; immune-related adverse events of grade 3 and above of 30%/20%; and pneumonitis of grade 2 and above of 10%/16%, respectively. In part 1, for preliminary efficacy results, with a median follow-up of 22.5 months, the median progression-free survival was 18.6 months, and the overall survival was 22.8 months. In part 2, with a median follow-up time of 15.1 months, the median progression-free survival was 13.2 months, and the overall survival was not reached. There was no difference in cancer recurrence regardless of programmed cell death ligand-1 status. CONCLUSIONS: Atezolizumab with cCRT is safe and feasible and has no added toxicities compared with historical rates.

Clinical outcomes after intensity-modulated proton therapy with concurrent chemotherapy for inoperable non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND & PURPOSE: We report disease control, survival, and toxicity in patients with advanced inoperable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receiving concurrent chemotherapy and intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) at a single institution. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All patients were treated with IMPT with concurrent chemotherapy. Endpoints assessed were local, regional, and distant control, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Fifty-one patients were enrolled with a median follow-up time of 23.0 months; 39 (76%) were treated with a simultaneous integrated boost to the gross tumor volume (GTV). The median GTV dose was 67.3 CGE and the median CTV dose was 60.0 CGE. Median OS and DFS times were 33.9 months and 12.6 months. The 3-year local control rate was 78.3%. Treatment was well tolerated, with a grade 3 toxicity rate of 18% (9 events: 4 esophagitis, 3 dermatitis, 1 esophageal stricture, and 1 fatigue) and no grade 4 or 5 toxicity. The most common grade 2 toxic effects were esophagitis (22 [43%]), dermatitis (16 [31%]), pain (15 [29%]), and fatigue (14 [27%]). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of inoperable NSCLC with IMPT and concurrent chemotherapy achieves excellent disease control with tolerable toxicity.

Single-Fraction Stereotactic vs Conventional Multifraction Radiotherapy for Pain Relief in Patients With Predominantly Nonspine Bone Metastases: A Randomized Phase 2 Trial.

Importance: Consensus is lacking as to the optimal radiotherapy dose and fractionation schedule for treating bone metastases. Objective: To assess the relative efficacy of high-dose, single-fraction stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) vs standard multifraction radiotherapy (MFRT) for alleviation of pain in patients with mostly nonspine bone metastases. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective, randomized, single-institution phase 2 noninferiority trial conducted at a tertiary cancer care center enrolled 160 patients with radiologically confirmed painful bone metastases from September 19, 2014, through June 19, 2018. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either single-fraction SBRT (12 Gy for ≥4-cm lesions or 16 Gy for <4-cm lesions) or MFRT to 30 Gy in 10 fractions. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was pain response, defined by international consensus criteria as a combination of pain score and analgesic use (daily morphine-equivalent dose). Pain failure (ie, lack of response) was defined as worsening pain score (≥2 points on a 0-to-10 scale), an increase in morphine-equivalent opioid dose of 50% or more, reirradiation, or pathologic fracture. We hypothesized that SBRT was noninferior to MFRT. Results: In this phase 2 noninferiority trial of 96 men and 64 women (mean [SD] age, 62.4 [10.4] years), 81 patients received SBRT and 79 received MFRT. Among evaluable patients who received treatment per protocol, the single-fraction group had more pain responders than the MFRT group (complete response + partial response) at 2 weeks (34 of 55 [62%] vs 19 of 52 [36%]) (P = .01), 3 months (31 of 43 [72%] vs 17 of 35 [49%]) (P = .03), and 9 months (17 of 22 [77%] vs 12 of 26 [46%]) (P = .03). No differences were found in treatment-related toxic effects or quality-of-life scores after SBRT vs MFRT; local control rates at 1 and 2 years were higher in patients receiving single-fraction SBRT. Conclusions and Relevance: Delivering high-dose, single-fraction SBRT seems to be an effective treatment option for patients with painful bone metastases. Among evaluable patients, SBRT had higher rates of pain response (complete response + partial response) than did MFRT and thus should be considered for patients expected to have relatively long survival. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02163226.

Nomograms incorporating genetic variants in BMP/Smad4/Hamp pathway to predict disease outcomes after definitive radiotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer.

Hepcidin is crucial in regulating iron metabolism, and increased serum levels were strongly linked with poor outcomes in various malignancies. Thus, we investigated if genetic variants in the BMP/Smad4/Hamp hepcidin-regulating pathway were associated with outcomes in patients receiving definitive radiotherapy for NSCLC. Subjects were 664 NSCLC patients who received ≥60 Gy radiotherapy for NSCLC retrospectively identified from a single-institution database. Potentially, functional and tagging single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of BMP2 (rs170986, rs1979855, rs1980499, rs235768, and rs3178250), BMP4 (rs17563, rs4898820, and rs762642), Smad4 (rs12456284), and Hamp (rs1882694, rs10402233, rs10421768, and rs12971321) were genotyped by TaqMan real-time polymerase chain reaction. Cox proportional hazard's analyses were used to assess potential influences of SNPs on overall survival (OS), local-regional progression-free survival (LRPFS), progression-free survival (PFS), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS). Nomogram of each endpoint model was developed using R project. The median patient age was 66 years. Most (488 [73.2%]) had stage III NSCLC. Age, disease stage, receipt of concurrent chemotherapy, and gross tumor volume were independent factors of OS. Hamp rs1882694 AC/CC genotypes were associated with poor OS, LRPFS, PFS, and DMFS in multivariate analyses. Besides, BMP2 rs1979855, rs3178250, and rs1980499 associated with PFS; Hamp rs10402233 and BMP2 rs1979855 associated with LRPFS; BMP2 rs3178250 associated with DMFS after adjustment for clinical factors. After adding SNPs to each model, all the likelihood ratios were increased; the nomograms were improved significantly to predict LRPFS (P < 0.001) and PFS (P < 0.001), and marginally to predict OS (P = 0.056) and DM (P = 0.057). Our nomograms incorporating significant SNPs in the BMP/Smad4/Hamp hepcidin-regulating pathway could improve the prediction of outcomes in patients given definitive radiotherapy for NSCLC. Intensified follow-ups would be recommended for patients with unfavorable outcomes identified in nomograms. Due to the rapid developments of targeted therapies and immunotherapies for NSCLC, it is necessary to further validate our findings in patients receiving such treatments.

Phase 2 Study of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy and Stereotactic Body Proton Therapy for High-Risk, Medically Inoperable, Early-Stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: To report the feasibility of conducting a randomized study to compare the toxicity and efficacy of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) versus stereotactic body proton therapy (SBPT) for high-risk, medically inoperable, early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with medically inoperable NSCLC with high-risk features (centrally located or <5 cm T3 tumor or isolated lung parenchymal recurrences) were randomly assigned to SBRT or SBPT. Radiation dose was 50 Gy(relative biological effectiveness [RBE]) in 4 12.5-Gy(RBE) fractions prescribed to the planning target volume. Stereotactic body radiation therapy was given using 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy or intensity modulated radiation therapy, and SBPT was given using passive scattering. Consistency in patient setup was ensured with on-board cone beam computed tomography for the SBRT group and with orthogonal X rays for the SBPT group. RESULTS: The study closed early owing to poor accrual, largely because of insurance coverage and lack of volumetric imaging in the SBPT group. Ultimately, 21 patients were enrolled, and 19 patients who received 50 Gy in 4 fractions were included for analysis (9 SBRT, 10 SBPT). At a median follow-up time of 32 months, median overall survival time was 28 months in the SBRT group and not reached in the SBPT group. Three-year overall survival was 27.8% and 90%, 3-year local control was 87.5% (8 of 9) and 90.0% (9 of 10), and 3-year regional control was 47.6% (5 of 9) and 90% (9 of 10) in the SBRT and SBPT groups, respectively. One patient in the SBPT group developed grade 3 skin fibrosis. No patients experienced grade 4/5 toxicity. CONCLUSION: Poor accrual, due to lack of volumetric imaging and insurance coverage for proton therapy, led to early closure of the trial and precluded accurate assessment of efficacy and toxicity. Comparable maturity of 2 radiation therapy modalities, particularly on-board imaging, and better insurance coverage for SBPT should be considered for future studies.

Patient-reported lung symptoms as an early signal of impending radiation pneumonitis in patients with non-small cell lung cancer treated with chemoradiation: an observational study.

PURPOSE: Clinician ratings of concurrent chemoradiation (CRT)-induced radiation pneumonitis (RP) in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are based on both imaging and patient-reported lung symptoms. We compared the value of patient-reported outcomes versus normal-lung uptake of 18F-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose in positron emission computed tomography (FDG PET/CT) during the last week of treatment, for indicating the development of grade ≥ 2 RP within 4 months of CRT completion. METHODS: 132 patients with NSCLC-reported RP-related symptoms (coughing, shortness of breath) repeatedly using the validated MD Anderson Symptom Inventory lung cancer module. Of these patients, 68 had FDG PET/CT scans that were analyzed for normal-lung mean standardized FDG uptake values (SUVmean) before, during, and up to 4 months after CRT. Clinicians rated RP using CTCAE version 3. Logistic regression models examined potential predictors for developing CTCAE RP ≥ 2. RESULTS: For the entire sample, patient-rated RP-related symptoms during the last week of CRT correlated with clinically meaningful CTCAE RP ≥ 2 post-CRT (OR 2.74, 95% CI 1.25-5.99, P = 0.012), controlled for sex, age, mean lung radiation dose, comorbidity, and baseline symptoms. Moderate/severe patient-rated RP-related symptom score (≥ 4 on a 0-10 scale, P = 0.001) and normal-lung FDG uptake (SUVmean > 0.78, P = 0.002) in last week of CRT were equally strong predictors of post-CRT CTCAE RP ≥ 2 (C-index = 0.78, 0.77). CONCLUSIONS: During the last week of CRT, routine assessment of moderate-to-severe RP-related symptoms provides a simple way to identify patients with NSCLC who may be at risk for developing significant post-CRT RP, especially when PET/CT images of normal-lung FDG uptake are not available.

Association of Long-term Outcomes and Survival With Multidisciplinary Salvage Treatment for Local and Regional Recurrence After Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy for Early-Stage Lung Cancer.

Importance: Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) is first-line treatment for patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who cannot undergo surgery. However, up to 1 in 6 such patients will develop isolated local recurrence (iLR) or isolated regional recurrence (iRR). Little is known about outcomes when disease recurs after SABR, or about optimal management strategies for such recurrences. Objective: To characterize long-term outcomes for patients with iLR or iRR after SABR for early-stage NSCLC with the aim of informing treatment decision making for these patients with potentially curable disease. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study, a retrospective review was conducted of 912 patients prospectively enrolled in an institutional database at a tertiary cancer center from January 1, 2004, through December 31, 2014. Main Outcomes and Measures: Overall survival, progression-free survival, recurrence patterns, demographics, salvage techniques, patterns of salvage failure, and toxic effects. Results: Of the 912 patients in the study (456 women and 456 men; median age, 72 years [range, 46-91 years]), 756 (82.9%) had T1 tumors at initial diagnosis; 502 tumors (55.0%) were adenocarcinomas and 309 tumors (33.9%) were squamous cell carcinomas. Of 912 patients with early-stage I to II NSCLC who received definitive SABR (50 Gy in 4 fractions or 70 Gy in 10 fractions), 102 developed isolated recurrence (49 with iLR and 53 with iRR), and 658 had no recurrence. Median times to recurrence after SABR were 14.5 months (range, 1.5-60.8 months) for iLR and 9.0 months (range, 1.9-70.7 months) for iRR; 39 of 49 patients (79.6%) with iLR and 48 of 53 patients (90.6%) with iRR underwent salvage with reirradiation, surgery, thermal ablation, or chemotherapy. Median follow-up times for patients with iLR or iRR were 57.2 months (interquartile range, 37.7-87.6 months) from initial SABR and 38.5 months (interquartile range, 19.9-69.3 months) from recurrence. Rates of overall survival at 5 years from initial SABR were no different between patients with iLR and salvage treatment (57.9%) and patients with no recurrence (54.9%; hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.56-1.43; P = .65) but were lower for patients with iRR and salvage treatment (31.1%; hazard ratio, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.00-2.34; P = .049). Patients receiving salvage treatment had longer overall survival than patients who did not (median, 37 vs 7 months after recurrence; hazard ratio, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.09-0.66; P = .006). Twenty-four of 87 patients (27.6%) who received salvage treatment for iLR or iRR subsequently developed distant metastases. No patient experienced grade 5 toxic effects after salvage treatment. Conclusions and Relevance: Life expectancy after salvage treatment for iLR was similar to that for patients without recurrence, but survival after salvage treatment for iRR was similar to that of patients with stage III NSCLC. Patients who received salvage treatment had significantly improved survival. Because salvage treatment for iLR or iRR was based on a consistent multidisciplinary approach, this may help in clinical decision making.

Simultaneous Integrated Boost for Radiation Dose Escalation to the Gross Tumor Volume With Intensity Modulated (Photon) Radiation Therapy or Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy and Concurrent Chemotherapy for Stage II to III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Phase 1 Study.

PURPOSE: To establish, in the phase 1 portion of a prospective phase 1/2 study, the maximum tolerated dose of image guided intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or proton therapy (IMPT), both with a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB), for patients with stage II to IIIB non-small cell lung cancer receiving concurrent chemoradiation therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients had pathologically proven non-small cell lung cancer, either unresectable stage II to IIIB disease or recurrent disease after surgical resection, and could tolerate concurrent chemoradiation. Radiation doses were selectively escalated to the SIB volume (internal gross tumor volume + 5-mm margin), and the dose to the planning target volume (internal gross tumor volume + 8-mm margin for clinical target volume + 5 mm) was kept at 60 Gy [cobalt gray equivalent (CGE)] over 30 fractions. Patients were randomized between the IMRT and IMPT groups if slots were available on the treatment machines for both groups. Otherwise, patients were allocated to IMRT or IMPT, whichever had an open treatment slot on the machine without randomization. RESULTS: Fifteen patients (6 IMRT, 9 IMPT) were enrolled. The highest doses to the SIB were 72 Gy in the IMRT group and 78 Gy(CGE) in the IMPT group. Nine patients (6 IMRT, 3 IMPT) received an SIB dose of 72 Gy(CGE) [biologically effective dose = 89.3 Gy(CGE)], and 6 patients (IMPT) received an SIB dose of 78 Gy(CGE) [biologically effective dose = 98.3 Gy(CGE)]. Dose-limiting (grade ≥3) toxicity (esophagitis) developed in 1 of the 9 patients given 72 Gy(CGE) SIB. Grade ≥3 pneumonitis developed in 2 of the 6 patients treated to 78 Gy(CGE) IMPT SIB: 1 (grade 3) at 3 months after treatment and the other (grade 5, possibly related to treatment) at 2 months after treatment. Only 1 patient developed a marginal tumor recurrence with a median follow-up of 25 months (range, 4.3-47.4 months). CONCLUSIONS: We recommend that an SIB dose of 72 Gy(CGE) be used as the highest SIB dose for the planned randomized phase 2 study.

Comparative Outcomes After Definitive Chemoradiotherapy Using Proton Beam Therapy Versus Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy for Esophageal Cancer: A Retrospective, Single-Institutional Analysis.

PURPOSE: To compare clinical outcomes between proton beam therapy (PBT) and intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in patients with esophageal cancer (EC) treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy (CRT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: From 2007 through 2014, 343 EC patients who received definitive CRT with either PBT (n=132) or IMRT (n=211) were retrospectively analyzed. Survival, recurrence, and treatment toxicity were compared between groups. A Cox proportional hazards regression model was performed to test the association between patient/treatment variables and survival. RESULTS: Patient/treatment variables were overall well balanced, except for age and race. Compared with IMRT, PBT had significantly better overall survival (OS; P=.011), progression-free survival (PFS; P=.001), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS; P=.031), as well as marginally better locoregional failure-free survival (LRFFS; P=.075). No significant differences in rates of treatment-related toxicities were observed between groups. On multivariate analysis, IMRT had worse OS (hazard ratio [HR] 1.454; P=.01), PFS (HR 1.562; P=.001), and LRFFS (HR 1.461; P=.041) than PBT. Subgroup analysis by clinical stage revealed considerably higher 5-year OS (34.6% vs 25.0%, P=.038) and PFS rates (33.5% vs 13.2%, P=.005) in the PBT group for patients with stage III disease. However, no significant intergroup differences in survival were identified for stage I/II patients. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with IMRT, PBT might be associated with improved OS, PFS, and LRFFS, especially in EC patients with locally advanced disease. These results need confirmation by prospective studies.

Incidence of Second Malignancy after Successful Treatment of Limited-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer and Its Effects on Survival.

INTRODUCTION: Extended survival outcomes from improved treatments for patients with cancer come with an increased risk for development of a metachronous second malignancy (MSM). We evaluated the incidence of MSM after successful treatment of SCLC and compared survival between patients with SCLC in whom MSM developed and those in whom it did not. METHODS: Selection criteria were a diagnosis of limited-stage SCLC and receipt of at least 45 Gy of radiotherapy and chemotherapy at a single institution in 1985-2012. MSM was defined as a tumor of a different histologic type than the primary that appeared more than 2 years after the diagnosis of SCLC. RESULTS: Of 704 patients identified, 32 were excluded for lack of follow-up, 48 for having SCLC as MSM after treatment of another type of cancer, 37 for nonmelanoma skin cancer as MSM, and 46 for MSM within 2 years after SCLC diagnosis. Of the remaining 541 patients, 346 had recurrent SCLC, 180 had no second malignancy and no recurrence, and 15 (2.8%) had MSM (13 in a lung [eight adenocarcinomas and five squamous cell carcinomas], one sarcoma, and one acute myeloid leukemia). All 15 patients with MSM achieved complete response to the SCLC treatment. Overall survival was longer for patients with MSM than for patients with no other malignancies and no recurrence, with 10-year rates of 61.9% (95% confidence interval: 30.0%-82.6%) and 29.9% (95% confidence interval: 21.5%-38.6%), respectively (p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term survivors after treatment for SCLC should be made aware of the risk for MSM and the necessity of follow-up.