1
|
Abdallah M, Voland R, Decamp M, Flickinger J, Pacioles T, Jamil M, Silbermins D, Shenouda M, Valsecchi M, Bir A, Shweihat Y, Bastidas J, Chowdhury N, Kachynski Y, Eldib H, Wright T, Mahdi A, Al-Nusair J, Nwanwene K, Varlotto J. Evaluation of Anti-Angiogenic Therapy Combined with Immunotherapy and Chemotherapy as a Strategy to Treat Locally Advanced and Metastatic Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:4207. [PMID: 39766108 PMCID: PMC11674749 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16244207] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/31/2024] [Revised: 11/23/2024] [Accepted: 12/10/2024] [Indexed: 01/11/2025] Open
Abstract
Immunotherapy has made recent improvements in disease-free survival (DFS) and/or overall survival (OS) in all stages of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Here, we review the tumor microenvironment and its immunosuppressive effects and discuss how anti-angiogenic therapies may potentiate the anti-carcinogenic effects of immunotherapy. We also review all the past literature and discuss strategies of combining anti-angiogenic therapy and immunotherapy +/- chemotherapy and hypothesize how we can use this strategy for non-small-cell lung cancer in metastatic previously untreated/previously treated settings in previously treated EGFR-mutated NSCLC for the upfront treatment of brain metastases prior to radiation therapy and for the incorporation of this strategy into stage III unresectable disease. We assert the use of anti-angiogenic therapy and immunotherapy when combined appropriately with chemotherapy and radiotherapy has the potential to increase the long-term survivals in both the stage III and metastatic setting so that we can now consider more patients to experience curative treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mahmoud Abdallah
- Department of Oncology, Edwards Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Marshall University, Huntington, WV 25701, USA; (M.A.); (T.P.); (M.J.); (D.S.); (M.S.); (M.V.); (A.B.); (Y.S.); (J.B.); (N.C.); (Y.K.); (H.E.); (K.N.)
| | - Rick Voland
- Department of Ophthalmology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53705, USA;
| | - Malcolm Decamp
- Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI 53726, USA;
| | - John Flickinger
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA 15219, USA;
| | - Toni Pacioles
- Department of Oncology, Edwards Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Marshall University, Huntington, WV 25701, USA; (M.A.); (T.P.); (M.J.); (D.S.); (M.S.); (M.V.); (A.B.); (Y.S.); (J.B.); (N.C.); (Y.K.); (H.E.); (K.N.)
| | - Muhammad Jamil
- Department of Oncology, Edwards Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Marshall University, Huntington, WV 25701, USA; (M.A.); (T.P.); (M.J.); (D.S.); (M.S.); (M.V.); (A.B.); (Y.S.); (J.B.); (N.C.); (Y.K.); (H.E.); (K.N.)
| | - Damian Silbermins
- Department of Oncology, Edwards Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Marshall University, Huntington, WV 25701, USA; (M.A.); (T.P.); (M.J.); (D.S.); (M.S.); (M.V.); (A.B.); (Y.S.); (J.B.); (N.C.); (Y.K.); (H.E.); (K.N.)
| | - Mina Shenouda
- Department of Oncology, Edwards Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Marshall University, Huntington, WV 25701, USA; (M.A.); (T.P.); (M.J.); (D.S.); (M.S.); (M.V.); (A.B.); (Y.S.); (J.B.); (N.C.); (Y.K.); (H.E.); (K.N.)
| | - Matias Valsecchi
- Department of Oncology, Edwards Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Marshall University, Huntington, WV 25701, USA; (M.A.); (T.P.); (M.J.); (D.S.); (M.S.); (M.V.); (A.B.); (Y.S.); (J.B.); (N.C.); (Y.K.); (H.E.); (K.N.)
| | - Arvinder Bir
- Department of Oncology, Edwards Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Marshall University, Huntington, WV 25701, USA; (M.A.); (T.P.); (M.J.); (D.S.); (M.S.); (M.V.); (A.B.); (Y.S.); (J.B.); (N.C.); (Y.K.); (H.E.); (K.N.)
| | - Yousef Shweihat
- Department of Oncology, Edwards Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Marshall University, Huntington, WV 25701, USA; (M.A.); (T.P.); (M.J.); (D.S.); (M.S.); (M.V.); (A.B.); (Y.S.); (J.B.); (N.C.); (Y.K.); (H.E.); (K.N.)
| | - Juan Bastidas
- Department of Oncology, Edwards Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Marshall University, Huntington, WV 25701, USA; (M.A.); (T.P.); (M.J.); (D.S.); (M.S.); (M.V.); (A.B.); (Y.S.); (J.B.); (N.C.); (Y.K.); (H.E.); (K.N.)
| | - Nepal Chowdhury
- Department of Oncology, Edwards Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Marshall University, Huntington, WV 25701, USA; (M.A.); (T.P.); (M.J.); (D.S.); (M.S.); (M.V.); (A.B.); (Y.S.); (J.B.); (N.C.); (Y.K.); (H.E.); (K.N.)
| | - Yury Kachynski
- Department of Oncology, Edwards Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Marshall University, Huntington, WV 25701, USA; (M.A.); (T.P.); (M.J.); (D.S.); (M.S.); (M.V.); (A.B.); (Y.S.); (J.B.); (N.C.); (Y.K.); (H.E.); (K.N.)
| | - Howide Eldib
- Department of Oncology, Edwards Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Marshall University, Huntington, WV 25701, USA; (M.A.); (T.P.); (M.J.); (D.S.); (M.S.); (M.V.); (A.B.); (Y.S.); (J.B.); (N.C.); (Y.K.); (H.E.); (K.N.)
| | - Thomas Wright
- Department of Internal Medicine, Marshall Health, Huntington, WV 25701, USA; (T.W.); (A.M.); (J.A.-N.)
| | - Ahmad Mahdi
- Department of Internal Medicine, Marshall Health, Huntington, WV 25701, USA; (T.W.); (A.M.); (J.A.-N.)
| | - Jowan Al-Nusair
- Department of Internal Medicine, Marshall Health, Huntington, WV 25701, USA; (T.W.); (A.M.); (J.A.-N.)
| | - Kemnasom Nwanwene
- Department of Oncology, Edwards Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Marshall University, Huntington, WV 25701, USA; (M.A.); (T.P.); (M.J.); (D.S.); (M.S.); (M.V.); (A.B.); (Y.S.); (J.B.); (N.C.); (Y.K.); (H.E.); (K.N.)
| | - John Varlotto
- Department of Oncology, Edwards Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Marshall University, Huntington, WV 25701, USA; (M.A.); (T.P.); (M.J.); (D.S.); (M.S.); (M.V.); (A.B.); (Y.S.); (J.B.); (N.C.); (Y.K.); (H.E.); (K.N.)
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Edwards DM, Kim MM. Effective Personalization of Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Brain Metastases in the Modern Era: Opportunities for Innovation. Cancer J 2024; 30:393-400. [PMID: 39589471 DOI: 10.1097/ppo.0000000000000754] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/27/2024]
Abstract
ABSTRACT As survival rates improve for patients with metastatic disease, more patients are requiring complex treatment for brain metastases. Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is a conformal radiotherapy technique that allows high ablative dose to be delivered to a specific target and is a standard effective local therapy for the treatment of patients with limited brain metastases. This review highlights the current landscape of SRS treatment in the context of modern therapeutic advances and identifies new research frontiers to personalize SRS and maximize the therapeutic ratio.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Donna M Edwards
- From the Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Zhou F, Jiang L, Sun X, Wang Z, Feng J, Liu M, Ma Z. Surgery of enlarging lesions after stereotactic radiosurgery for brain metastases in patients with non-small cell lung cancer with oncogenic driver mutations frequently reveals radiation necrosis: case series and review. APMIS 2024; 132:375-381. [PMID: 38466886 DOI: 10.1111/apm.13402] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/21/2023] [Accepted: 03/04/2024] [Indexed: 03/13/2024]
Abstract
In brain metastases, radiation necrosis (RN) is a complication that arises after single or multiple fractionated stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS/FSRS), which is challenging to distinguish from local recurrence (LR). Studies have shown increased RN incidence rates in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with oncogenic driver mutations (ODMs) or receiving tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). This study investigated enlarging brain lesions following SRS/FSRS, for which additional surgeries were performed to distinguish between RN and LR. We investigated seven NSCLC patients with ODMs undergoing SRS/FSRS for BM and undergoing surgery for suspicion of LR on MRI imaging. Descriptive statistics were performed. Among the seven patients, six were EGFR+, while one was ALK+. The median irradiation dose was 30 Gy (range, 20-35 Gy). The median time to develop RN after SRS/FSRS was 11.1 months (range: 6.3-31.2 months). Moreover, gradually enlarging lesions were found in all patients after 6 months post-SRS/FSR. Brain radiation necrosis was pathologically confirmed in all the patients. RN should be suspected in NSCLC patients when lesions keep enlarging after 6 months post-SRS/FSRS, especially for patients with ODMs and receiving TKIs. Further, this case series indicates that further dose reduction might be necessary to avoid RN for such patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fang Zhou
- Departments of Radiotherapy, The Affiliated Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital of Qingdao University, Yantai, China
| | - Leilei Jiang
- Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Peking University, Beijing, China
| | - Xuankai Sun
- Departments of Radiotherapy, The Affiliated Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital of Qingdao University, Yantai, China
| | - Zhen Wang
- Departments of Radiotherapy, The Affiliated Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital of Qingdao University, Yantai, China
| | - Jialin Feng
- Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Peking University, Beijing, China
| | - Ming Liu
- Departments of Radiotherapy, The Affiliated Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital of Qingdao University, Yantai, China
| | - Zhao Ma
- Departments of Radiotherapy, The Affiliated Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital of Qingdao University, Yantai, China
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Ene CI, Abi Faraj C, Beckham TH, Weinberg JS, Andersen CR, Haider AS, Rao G, Ferguson SD, Alvarez-Brenkenridge CA, Kim BYS, Heimberger AB, McCutcheon IE, Prabhu SS, Wang CM, Ghia AJ, McGovern SL, Chung C, McAleer MF, Tom MC, Perni S, Swanson TA, Yeboa DN, Briere TM, Huse JT, Fuller GN, Lang FF, Li J, Suki D, Sawaya RE. Response of treatment-naive brain metastases to stereotactic radiosurgery. Nat Commun 2024; 15:3728. [PMID: 38697991 PMCID: PMC11066027 DOI: 10.1038/s41467-024-47998-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/25/2023] [Accepted: 04/15/2024] [Indexed: 05/05/2024] Open
Abstract
With improvements in survival for patients with metastatic cancer, long-term local control of brain metastases has become an increasingly important clinical priority. While consensus guidelines recommend surgery followed by stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for lesions >3 cm, smaller lesions (≤3 cm) treated with SRS alone elicit variable responses. To determine factors influencing this variable response to SRS, we analyzed outcomes of brain metastases ≤3 cm diameter in patients with no prior systemic therapy treated with frame-based single-fraction SRS. Following SRS, 259 out of 1733 (15%) treated lesions demonstrated MRI findings concerning for local treatment failure (LTF), of which 202 /1733 (12%) demonstrated LTF and 54/1733 (3%) had an adverse radiation effect. Multivariate analysis demonstrated tumor size (>1.5 cm) and melanoma histology were associated with higher LTF rates. Our results demonstrate that brain metastases ≤3 cm are not uniformly responsive to SRS and suggest that prospective studies to evaluate the effect of SRS alone or in combination with surgery on brain metastases ≤3 cm matched by tumor size and histology are warranted. These studies will help establish multi-disciplinary treatment guidelines that improve local control while minimizing radiation necrosis during treatment of brain metastasis ≤3 cm.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chibawanye I Ene
- Department of Neurosurgery, The University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
| | - Christina Abi Faraj
- Department of Neurosurgery, The University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Thomas H Beckham
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Jeffrey S Weinberg
- Department of Neurosurgery, The University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Clark R Andersen
- Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Ali S Haider
- Department of Neurosurgery, The University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Ganesh Rao
- Department of Neurosurgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Sherise D Ferguson
- Department of Neurosurgery, The University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | | | - Betty Y S Kim
- Department of Neurosurgery, The University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Amy B Heimberger
- Department of Neurological Surgery, Malnati Brain Tumor Institute of the Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Ian E McCutcheon
- Department of Neurosurgery, The University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Sujit S Prabhu
- Department of Neurosurgery, The University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Chenyang Michael Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Amol J Ghia
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Susan L McGovern
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Caroline Chung
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Mary Frances McAleer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Martin C Tom
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Subha Perni
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Todd A Swanson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Debra N Yeboa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Tina M Briere
- Department of Radiation Physics, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Jason T Huse
- Department of Pathology, The University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Gregory N Fuller
- Department of Pathology, The University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Frederick F Lang
- Department of Neurosurgery, The University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Jing Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Dima Suki
- Department of Neurosurgery, The University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Raymond E Sawaya
- Faculty of Medicine and Medical Affairs, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Zhu Y, Zhou M, Li C, Kong W, Hu Y. Gastric cancer with brain metastasis: from molecular characteristics and treatment. Front Oncol 2024; 14:1310325. [PMID: 38577333 PMCID: PMC10991736 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1310325] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/11/2023] [Accepted: 03/12/2024] [Indexed: 04/06/2024] Open
Abstract
Gastric cancer is one of the cancers with increasing incidence and ranks fourth globally among the most frequent causes of cancer-related mortality. Early gastric cancer is often asymptomatic or presents with atypical symptoms, and the majority of patients present with advanced disease upon diagnosis. Brain metastases are present in approximately 1% of gastric cancer patients at the time of diagnosis, which significantly contributed to the overall mortality of the disease worldwide. Conventional therapies for patients with brain metastases remain limited and the median overall survival of patients is only 8 months in advanced cases. Recent studies have improved our understanding of the molecular mechanisms underlying gastric cancer brain metastases, and immunotherapy has become an important treatment option in combination with radiotherapy, chemotherapy, targeted therapy and surgery. This review aims to provide insight into the cellular processes involved in gastric cancer brain metastases, discuss diagnostic approaches, evaluate the integration of immune checkpoint inhibitors into treatment and prognosis, and explore the predictive value of biomarkers in immunotherapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yingze Zhu
- Department of Oncology, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin, China
| | - Miao Zhou
- Department of Oncology, Tang Shan Central Hospital, Tangshan, China
| | - Congling Li
- School of Clinical Medicine, Affiliated Hospital, North China University of Science and Technology, Tangshan, China
| | - Wenyue Kong
- School of Clinical Medicine, Affiliated Hospital, North China University of Science and Technology, Tangshan, China
| | - Yuning Hu
- School of Clinical Medicine, Affiliated Hospital, North China University of Science and Technology, Tangshan, China
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Royal-Preyra B. The Impact of Immune Checkpoint Inhibition on the Risk of Radiation Necrosis Following Stereotactic Radiotherapy for Metastatic Brain Cancer. Cureus 2023; 15:e51381. [PMID: 38161546 PMCID: PMC10757743 DOI: 10.7759/cureus.51381] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 12/30/2023] [Indexed: 01/03/2024] Open
Abstract
Purpose/objective Forty percent of cancer patients develop brain metastases (BM) and are often treated with stereotactic radiation (SRS/SRT). Checkpoint inhibitor (CI) use is suspected of increasing the risk of radiation necrosis (RN). Our aim is to determine whether treatment with CI is associated with an increased risk of RN in BM patients treated with SRS/SRT. Methods We retrospectively identified the medical records of BM patients treated with SRS/SRT between 1/2017 and 12/2021 using an institutional database. RN was defined by MRI imaging read by neuroradiologists and/or surgical pathology. V12GY of patients with and without RN was compared using the Mann-Whitney test. The chi-square test was used to see if RN was associated with CI use, histology, particular CI agent used, > 1 course SRS/SRT, SRS/SRT dose, chemotherapy, whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT), age, or sex. Results Two hundred and fifty-nine patients treated with 455 courses of SRS/SRT were analyzed. The most common primary histologies were lung 56% (N=146), breast 14% (N= 37), melanoma 9% (N=24), and renal cancer 7% (N=18). A total of 53.8% (N = no. of patients) were treated with CI. The overall rate of any RN was 21.8% (N=27) in the CI group compared to 14.8% (N=141) in the non-CI group (p=0.174). Mean V12Gy was 15.525 cc and 9.419 cc in patients with and without RN (p=0.02768). Mean number of SRS/SRT courses was 2 and 1.53 for patients with and without RN, and >1 course of SRS/SRT was a predictor of RN (p <0.01). Other features analyzed were not significant. Conclusion RN was higher in the BM patients treated with SRS/SRT receiving CI compared to non-CI patients (21.8%, N=27, versus 14.6%, N= 16), but failed to reach statistical significance. V12Gy and > 1 course of SRS/SRT was associated with RN. Caution should be taken in treating patients with SRS/SRT and CI there might be an increased risk of RN.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ben Royal-Preyra
- Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Affilié Universitaire Regional, Trois-Rivières, CAN
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Li H, Zhao Y, Ma T, Shao H, Wang T, Jin S, Liu Z. Radiotherapy for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer in the immunotherapy era. Front Immunol 2023; 14:1132482. [PMID: 37701437 PMCID: PMC10493776 DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1132482] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/30/2022] [Accepted: 08/01/2023] [Indexed: 09/14/2023] Open
Abstract
Currently, chemoimmunotherapy is the first-line treatment for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). However, only 0.8%-2.5% of the patients presented complete response after chemoimmunotherapy. Considering that ES-SCLC is highly sensitive to radiotherapy, the addition of radiotherapy after first-line treatment for ES-SCLC could further improve local control, which may be beneficial for patients' survival. Prior studies have shown that consolidative thoracic radiotherapy (cTRT) can decrease disease progression and improve overall survival in patients with ES-SCLC who respond well to chemotherapy. However, the efficacy and safety of cTRT in the immunotherapy era remain unclear owing to a lack of prospective studies. Prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) has been shown to decrease brain metastasis (BM) and prolong survival in patients with limited-stage SCLC in previous reports. However, according to current guidelines, PCI is not commonly recommended for ES-SCLC. Immunotherapy has the potential to reduce the incidence of BM. Whether PCI can be replaced with regular magnetic resonance imaging surveillance for ES-SCLC in the era of immunotherapy remains controversial. Whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) is the standard treatment for BM in SCLC patients. Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) has shown promise in the treatment of limited BM. Considering the potential of immunotherapy to decrease BM, it is controversial whether SRS can replace WBRT for limited BM in the immunotherapy era. Additionally, with the addition of immunotherapy, the role of palliative radiotherapy may be weakened in patients with asymptomatic metastatic lesions. However, it is still indispensable and urgent for patients with obvious symptoms of metastatic disease, such as spinal cord compression, superior vena cava syndrome, lobar obstruction, and weight-bearing metastases, which may critically damage the quality of life and prognosis. To improve the outcome of ES-SCLC, we discuss the feasibility of radiotherapy, including cTRT, PCI, WBRT/SRS, and palliative radiotherapy with immunotherapy based on existing evidence, which may offer specific prospects for further randomized trials and clinical applications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Huanhuan Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China
| | - Yangzhi Zhao
- Department of Hematology, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China
| | - Tiangang Ma
- Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China
| | - Hao Shao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China
| | - Tiejun Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China
| | - Shunzi Jin
- NHC Key Laboratory of Radiobiology, Jilin University, Changchun, China
| | - Zhongshan Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Ji X, Wang L, Tan Y, Shang Y, Huo R, Fang C, Li C, Zhang L. Radionecrosis mimicking pseudo‑progression in a patient with lung cancer and brain metastasis following the combination of anti‑PD‑1 therapy and stereotactic radiosurgery: A case report. Oncol Lett 2023; 26:361. [PMID: 37545620 PMCID: PMC10398635 DOI: 10.3892/ol.2023.13947] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/05/2023] [Accepted: 06/22/2023] [Indexed: 08/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Brain metastases (BMs) usually develop in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. In addition to systemic therapy, radiation therapy and surgery, anti-programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) therapy is another promising clinical anticancer treatment modality. However, the optimal timing and drug-drug interactions of anti-PD-L1 therapy with other combined treatments remain to be elucidated. Treatment with anti-PD-L1 therapy is associated with an increased risk of radionecrosis (RN) regardless of tumor histology. The present study described a case of RN in a patient with lung adenocarcinoma and with BM who received anti-PD-L1 therapy. Before anti-PD-L1 treatment, the patient received whole brain radiotherapy. During durvalumab treatment, the intracranial metastases regressed. The progression of intracranial lesions 9 months later prompted a second-line of therapy with PD-L1 inhibitor durvalumab and stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT). Despite stereotactic irradiation, the lesions progressed further, leading to surgical resection. On examination, RN was detected, but there was no evidence of metastatic lung cancer. The aim of the present study was to present the longitudinal change in magnetic resonance imaging in RN following STR and anti-PD-L1 combined therapy. The atypical image of RN is conditionally important for making an accurate preoperative diagnosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xiaolin Ji
- Department of Neurosurgery, Clinical Medicine College, Affiliated Hospital of Hebei University, Hebei University, Baoding, Hebei 071000, P.R. China
| | - Luxuan Wang
- Department of Neurological Examination, Affiliated Hospital of Hebei University, Hebei University, Baoding, Hebei 071000, P.R. China
| | - Yanli Tan
- Department of Pathology, Affiliated Hospital of Hebei University, Hebei University, Baoding, Hebei 071000, P.R. China
| | - Yanhong Shang
- Department of Oncology, Affiliated Hospital of Hebei University, Hebei University, Baoding, Hebei 071000, P.R. China
| | - Ran Huo
- Department of Oncology, Affiliated Hospital of Hebei University, Hebei University, Baoding, Hebei 071000, P.R. China
| | - Chuan Fang
- Department of Neurosurgery, Clinical Medicine College, Affiliated Hospital of Hebei University, Hebei University, Baoding, Hebei 071000, P.R. China
- Postdoctoral Research Station of Neurosurgery, Affiliated Hospital of Hebei University, Hebei University, Baoding, Hebei 071000, P.R. China
| | - Chunhui Li
- Department of Neurosurgery, Clinical Medicine College, Affiliated Hospital of Hebei University, Hebei University, Baoding, Hebei 071000, P.R. China
| | - Lijian Zhang
- Department of Neurosurgery, Clinical Medicine College, Affiliated Hospital of Hebei University, Hebei University, Baoding, Hebei 071000, P.R. China
- Postdoctoral Research Station of Neurosurgery, Affiliated Hospital of Hebei University, Hebei University, Baoding, Hebei 071000, P.R. China
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Tijtgat J, Calliauw E, Dirven I, Vounckx M, Kamel R, Vanbinst AM, Everaert H, Seynaeve L, Van Den Berge D, Duerinck J, Neyns B. Low-Dose Bevacizumab for the Treatment of Focal Radiation Necrosis of the Brain (fRNB): A Single-Center Case Series. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:cancers15092560. [PMID: 37174026 PMCID: PMC10177060 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15092560] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/28/2023] [Revised: 04/17/2023] [Accepted: 04/27/2023] [Indexed: 05/15/2023] Open
Abstract
Focal radiation necrosis of the brain (fRNB) is a late adverse event that can occur following the treatment of benign or malignant brain lesions with stereotactic radiation therapy (SRT) or stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). Recent studies have shown that the incidence of fRNB is higher in cancer patients who received immune checkpoint inhibitors. The use of bevacizumab (BEV), a monoclonal antibody that targets the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), is an effective treatment for fRNB when given at a dose of 5-7.5 mg/kg every two weeks. In this single-center retrospective case series, we investigated the effectiveness of a low-dose regimen of BEV (400 mg loading dose followed by 100 mg every 4 weeks) in patients diagnosed with fRNB. A total of 13 patients were included in the study; twelve of them experienced improvement in their existing clinical symptoms, and all patients had a decrease in the volume of edema on MRI scans. No clinically significant treatment-related adverse effects were observed. Our preliminary findings suggest that this fixed low-dose regimen of BEV can be a well-tolerated and cost-effective alternative treatment option for patients diagnosed with fRNB, and it is deserving of further investigation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jens Tijtgat
- Department of Medical Oncology, UZ Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 101, 1090 Brussels, Belgium
| | - Evan Calliauw
- Department of Medical Oncology, UZ Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 101, 1090 Brussels, Belgium
| | - Iris Dirven
- Department of Medical Oncology, UZ Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 101, 1090 Brussels, Belgium
| | - Manon Vounckx
- Department of Medical Oncology, UZ Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 101, 1090 Brussels, Belgium
| | - Randa Kamel
- Department of Radiotherapy, UZ Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 101, 1090 Brussels, Belgium
| | - Anne Marie Vanbinst
- Department of Medical Imaging, UZ Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 101, 1090 Brussels, Belgium
| | - Hendrik Everaert
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, UZ Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 101, 1090 Brussels, Belgium
| | - Laura Seynaeve
- Department of Neurology, UZ Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 101, 1090 Brussels, Belgium
| | - Dirk Van Den Berge
- Department of Radiotherapy, UZ Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 101, 1090 Brussels, Belgium
| | - Johnny Duerinck
- Department of Neurosurgery, UZ Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 101, 1090 Brussels, Belgium
| | - Bart Neyns
- Department of Medical Oncology, UZ Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 101, 1090 Brussels, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Johannwerner L, Werner EM, Blanck O, Janssen S, Cremers F, Yu NY, Rades D. Radiation Necrosis Following Stereotactic Radiosurgery or Fractionated Stereotactic Radiotherapy with High Biologically Effective Doses for Large Brain Metastases. BIOLOGY 2023; 12:biology12050655. [PMID: 37237469 DOI: 10.3390/biology12050655] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/20/2023] [Revised: 04/24/2023] [Accepted: 04/26/2023] [Indexed: 05/28/2023]
Abstract
In Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 90-05, the maximum tolerated dose of single-fraction radiosurgery (SRS) for brain metastases of 21-30 mm was 18 Gy (biologically effective dose (BED) 45 Gy12). Since the patients in this study received prior brain irradiation, tolerable BED may be >45 Gy12 for de novo lesions. We investigated SRS and fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (FSRT) with a higher BED for radiotherapy-naive lesions. Patients receiving SRS (19-20 Gy) and patients treated with FSRT (30-48 Gy in 3-12 fractions) with BED > 49 Gy12 for up to 4 brain metastases were compared for grade ≥ 2 radiation necrosis (RN). In the entire cohort (169 patients with 218 lesions), 1-year and 2-year RN rates were 8% after SRS vs. 2% and 13% after FSRT (p = 0.73) in per-patient analyses, and 7% after SRS vs. 7% and 10% after FSRT (p = 0.59) in per-lesion analyses. For lesions ≤ 20 mm (137 patients with 185 lesions), the RN rates were 4% (SRS) vs. 0% and 15%, respectively, (FSRT) (p = 0.60) in per-patient analyses, and 3% (SRS) vs. 0% and 11%, respectively, (FSRT) (p = 0.80) in per-lesion analyses. For lesions > 20 mm (32 patients with 33 lesions), the RN rates were 50% (SRS) vs. 9% (FSRT) (p = 0.012) in both per-patient and per-lesion analyses. In the SRS group, a lesion size > 20 mm was significantly associated with RN; in the FSRT group, lesion size had no impact on RN. Given the limitations of this study, FSRT with BED > 49 Gy12 was associated with low RN risk and may be safer than SRS for brain metastases > 20 mm.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Leonie Johannwerner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Lubeck, 23562 Lubeck, Germany
| | - Elisa M Werner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Lubeck, 23562 Lubeck, Germany
| | - Oliver Blanck
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, 24105 Kiel, Germany
- Saphir Radiosurgery Center Northern Germany, 24105 Kiel, Germany
| | - Stefan Janssen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Lubeck, 23562 Lubeck, Germany
- Medical Practice for Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, 30161 Hannover, Germany
| | - Florian Cremers
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Lubeck, 23562 Lubeck, Germany
| | - Nathan Y Yu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ 85054, USA
| | - Dirk Rades
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Lubeck, 23562 Lubeck, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Guan H, Zhou Z, Hou X, Zhang F, Zhao J, Hu K. Safety and potential increased risk of toxicity of radiotherapy combined immunotherapy strategy. Asia Pac J Clin Oncol 2023; 19:35-50. [PMID: 35538049 DOI: 10.1111/ajco.13688] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/04/2021] [Revised: 09/14/2021] [Accepted: 09/23/2021] [Indexed: 01/20/2023]
Abstract
Accumulating interest has emerged in exploring the toxicity profiles of the combination strategy of radiotherapy (RT) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Much remains unknown regarding safety and the potential increased risk of toxicity of a combined treatment. ICI prolongs survival but can induce immune-related adverse events as well. To increase awareness of adverse effect and support immediate and successful management, we go over the literature on the safety of RT combined immunotherapy strategy. Representative evidence relevant to RT combined with ICI in the brain, lung, head and neck, and pelvic malignance was reviewed respectively. Given radiation doses and fractionation, the irradiated volume, the timing of RT, and ICI would significantly affect the safety and efficiency of ICI+RT combination therapy, and no consensus had been reached about how to arrange RT delivery in the combined contexture, we went over the available literature and tried to address these challenges including the timing of RT, optimal dose and fractionations, RT target and target volume, and potential biomarkers to predict toxicity. We found even though RT+ICI combination therapy might augment toxicities, the majority of patients experienced grade 4 or 5 AE are relatively rare and no significant difference could be found between combination group and monotherapy group. Sometimes the acute toxicity with ICI is much less predictable and often life threatening and in some can give rise to permanent effects. Clinicians across disciplines should be aware of these uncommon lethal complications induced by ICI+RT. Early recognition is the key to successful treatment, reversibility of organ dysfunction, and in some cases even prevention of fatal outcome. If recognized early, managed properly, and no fatal AE occurs, the development of irAE indicates a good prognosis. It should be noted that nothing is known about potential late effects because very few studies have 5-year follow-up. The nature of irAE is the attack of activated immune cells on normal tissues. The nature of RT-induced AE is the DNA damage on normal tissue, which is related with the dose delivered and volume irradiated and the tolerance of surrounding normal tissues. The immune-modulating effect of SBRT may augment the damage on normal tissues. To maximize the antitumor immune response, 8-12 Gy/fraction is preferred when conducting RT. The available clinical evidence suggest RT of this dose/fractionated strategy combined with ICI have a tolerable AE profile, which need further validation by more clinical trials in the future. The combination strategy of RT with anti-PD1/PDL1 anti-body is supposed to be concurrent or RT followed by anti-PD1/PDL1 antibody. Although RT and ipilimumab combination sequence is controversial, ipilimumab prior to or concurrent with RT might be proper, which need more clinical validation. Under the concept of immunological dose painting, SBRT work as a trigger of immune response. It has been observed that SBRT of partially radiated tumors combined with ICI could induce similar tumor control compared with total tumor irradiation. The side effects of RT may be mitigated potentially due to the reduction of irradiated volume. The antitumor efficiency and safety profile of immunological RT dose painting+ICI deserve further investigation. Clinical predictive factors for irAE risk remain unclear, and more investigation deserves to be conducted about the irAE prediction.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hui Guan
- Department of radiation oncology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, People's Republic of China
| | - Ziqi Zhou
- Department of radiation oncology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, People's Republic of China
| | - Xiaorong Hou
- Department of radiation oncology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, People's Republic of China
| | - Fuquan Zhang
- Department of radiation oncology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, People's Republic of China
| | - Jing Zhao
- Department of Oncology, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, People's Republic of China
| | - Ke Hu
- Department of radiation oncology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, People's Republic of China
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Hintelmann K, Petersen C, Borgmann K. Radiotherapeutic Strategies to Overcome Resistance of Breast Cancer Brain Metastases by Considering Immunogenic Aspects of Cancer Stem Cells. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 15:211. [PMID: 36612206 PMCID: PMC9818478 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15010211] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/01/2022] [Revised: 12/23/2022] [Accepted: 12/27/2022] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
Breast cancer is the most diagnosed cancer in women, and symptomatic brain metastases (BCBMs) occur in 15-20% of metastatic breast cancer cases. Despite technological advances in radiation therapy (RT), the prognosis of patients is limited. This has been attributed to radioresistant breast cancer stem cells (BCSCs), among other factors. The aim of this review article is to summarize the evidence of cancer-stem-cell-mediated radioresistance in brain metastases of breast cancer from radiobiologic and radiation oncologic perspectives to allow for the better interpretability of preclinical and clinical evidence and to facilitate its translation into new therapeutic strategies. To this end, the etiology of brain metastasis in breast cancer, its radiotherapeutic treatment options, resistance mechanisms in BCSCs, and effects of molecularly targeted therapies in combination with radiotherapy involving immune checkpoint inhibitors are described and classified. This is considered in the context of the central nervous system (CNS) as a particular metastatic niche involving the blood-brain barrier and the CNS immune system. The compilation of this existing knowledge serves to identify possible synergistic effects between systemic molecularly targeted therapies and ionizing radiation (IR) by considering both BCSCs' relevant resistance mechanisms and effects on normal tissue of the CNS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katharina Hintelmann
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, 20246 Hamburg, Germany
- Laboratory of Radiobiology and Experimental Radiooncology, Center of Oncology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, 20246 Hamburg, Germany
| | - Cordula Petersen
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, 20246 Hamburg, Germany
| | - Kerstin Borgmann
- Laboratory of Radiobiology and Experimental Radiooncology, Center of Oncology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, 20246 Hamburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
A Multi-Disciplinary Approach to Diagnosis and Treatment of Radionecrosis in Malignant Gliomas and Cerebral Metastases. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14246264. [PMID: 36551750 PMCID: PMC9777318 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14246264] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/16/2022] [Revised: 12/06/2022] [Accepted: 12/15/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Radiation necrosis represents a potentially devastating complication after radiation therapy in brain tumors. The establishment of the diagnosis and especially the differentiation from progression and pseudoprogression with its therapeutic implications requires interdisciplinary consent and monitoring. Herein, we want to provide an overview of the diagnostic modalities, therapeutic possibilities and an outlook on future developments to tackle this challenging topic. The aim of this report is to provide an overview of the current morphological, functional, metabolic and evolving imaging tools described in the literature in order to (I) identify the best criteria to distinguish radionecrosis from tumor recurrence after the radio-oncological treatment of malignant gliomas and cerebral metastases, (II) analyze the therapeutic possibilities and (III) give an outlook on future developments to tackle this challenging topic. Additionally, we provide the experience of a tertiary tumor center with this important issue in neuro-oncology and provide an institutional pathway dealing with this problem.
Collapse
|
14
|
Franklin C, Mohr P, Bluhm L, Grimmelmann I, Gutzmer R, Meier F, Garzarolli M, Weichenthal M, Pfoehler C, Herbst R, Terheyden P, Utikal J, Ulrich J, Debus D, Haferkamp S, Kaatz M, Forschner A, Leiter U, Nashan D, Kreuter A, Sachse M, Welzel J, Heinzerling L, Meiss F, Weishaupt C, Gambichler T, Weyandt G, Dippel E, Schatton K, Celik E, Trommer M, Helfrich I, Roesch A, Zimmer L, Livingstone E, Schadendorf D, Horn S, Ugurel S. Impact of radiotherapy and sequencing of systemic therapy on survival outcomes in melanoma patients with previously untreated brain metastasis: a multicenter DeCOG study on 450 patients from the prospective skin cancer registry ADOREG. J Immunother Cancer 2022; 10:jitc-2022-004509. [PMID: 35688555 PMCID: PMC9189852 DOI: 10.1136/jitc-2022-004509] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 04/04/2022] [Indexed: 11/03/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite of various therapeutic strategies, treatment of patients with melanoma brain metastasis (MBM) still is a major challenge. This study aimed at investigating the impact of type and sequence of immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) and targeted therapy (TT), radiotherapy, and surgery on the survival outcome of patients with MBM. METHOD We assessed data of 450 patients collected within the prospective multicenter real-world skin cancer registry ADOREG who were diagnosed with MBM before start of the first non-adjuvant systemic therapy. Study endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS Of 450 MBM patients, 175 (38.9%) received CTLA-4+PD-1 ICB, 161 (35.8%) PD-1 ICB, and 114 (25.3%) BRAF+MEK TT as first-line treatment. Additional to systemic therapy, 67.3% of the patients received radiotherapy (stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS); conventional radiotherapy (CRT)) and 24.4% had surgery of MBM. 199 patients (42.2%) received a second-line systemic therapy. Multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed the application of radiotherapy (HR for SRS: 0.213, 95% CI 0.094 to 0.485, p<0.001; HR for CRT: 0.424, 95% CI 0.210 to 0.855, p=0.016), maximal size of brain metastases (HR for MBM >1 cm: 1.977, 95% CI 1.117 to 3.500, p=0.019), age (HR for age >65 years: 1.802, 95% CI 1.016 to 3.197, p=0.044), and ECOG performance status (HR for ECOG ≥2: HR: 2.615, 95% CI 1.024 to 6.676, p=0.044) as independent prognostic factors of OS on first-line therapy. The type of first-line therapy (ICB vs TT) was not independently prognostic. As second-line therapy BRAF+MEK showed the best survival outcome compared with ICB and other therapies (HR for CTLA-4+PD-1 compared with BRAF+MEK: 13.964, 95% CI 3.6 to 54.4, p<0.001; for PD-1 vs BRAF+MEK: 4.587 95% CI 1.3 to 16.8, p=0.022 for OS). Regarding therapy sequencing, patients treated with ICB as first-line therapy and BRAF+MEK as second-line therapy showed an improved OS (HR for CTLA-4+PD-1 followed by BRAF+MEK: 0.370, 95% CI 0.157 to 0.934, p=0.035; HR for PD-1 followed by BRAF+MEK: 0.290, 95% CI 0.092 to 0.918, p=0.035) compared with patients starting with BRAF+MEK in first-line therapy. There was no significant survival difference when comparing first-line therapy with CTLA-4+PD-1 ICB with PD-1 ICB. CONCLUSIONS In patients with MBM, the addition of radiotherapy resulted in a favorable OS on systemic therapy. In BRAF-mutated MBM patients, ICB as first-line therapy and BRAF+MEK as second-line therapy were associated with a significantly prolonged OS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cindy Franklin
- Department of Dermatology and Venereology, University of Cologne, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Peter Mohr
- Department of Dermatology, Elbe Kliniken Buxtehude, Buxtehude, Germany
| | - Leonie Bluhm
- Department of Dermatology, Elbe Kliniken Buxtehude, Buxtehude, Germany
| | - Imke Grimmelmann
- Department of Dermatology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany
| | - Ralf Gutzmer
- Department of Dermatology, Muehlenkreiskliniken Minden and Ruhr University Bochum, Minden, Germany
| | - Friedegund Meier
- Skin Cancer Center at the University Cancer Centre Dresden and National Center for Tumor Diseases, Dresden, Germany; Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Dresden, Germany
| | - Marlene Garzarolli
- Skin Cancer Center at the University Cancer Centre Dresden and National Center for Tumor Diseases, Dresden, Germany; Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Dresden, Germany
| | - Michael Weichenthal
- Department of Dermatology, Skin Cancer Center, Schleswig-Holstein University Hospital, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Claudia Pfoehler
- Department of Dermatology, Saarland University Medical School, Homburg/Saar, Germany
| | - Rudolf Herbst
- Department of Dermatology, HELIOS Klinikum Erfurt, Erfurt, Germany
| | | | - Jochen Utikal
- Skin Cancer Unit, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Department of Dermatology, Venereology and Allergology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Ruprecht-Karl University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jens Ulrich
- Department of Dermatology and Skin Cancer Center, Harzklinikum Dorothea Christiane Erxleben, Quedlinburg, Germany
| | - Dirk Debus
- Department of Dermatology, Nuremberg General Hospital, Paracelsus Medical University, Nuremberg, Germany
| | - Sebastian Haferkamp
- Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany
| | - Martin Kaatz
- Department of Dermatology, SRH Wald-Klinikum Gera, Gera, Germany
| | - Andrea Forschner
- Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Ulrike Leiter
- Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Dorothee Nashan
- Department of Dermatology, Hospital of Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
| | - Alexander Kreuter
- Department of Dermatology, Venereology and Allergology, HELIOS St. Elisabeth Klinik Oberhausen, University Witten-Herdecke, Herdecke, Germany
| | - Michael Sachse
- Department of Dermatology, Klinikum Bremerhaven Reinkenheide, Bremerhaven, Germany
| | - Julia Welzel
- Department of Dermatology and Allergology, University Hospital Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany
| | - Lucie Heinzerling
- Department of Dermatology and Allergology, Ludwig-Maximilian University, München, Germany
| | - Frank Meiss
- Department of Dermatology and Venereology, Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany
| | - Carsten Weishaupt
- Department of Dermatology, University Hospital of Münster, Münster, Germany
| | - Thilo Gambichler
- Department of Dermatology, Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany
| | - Gerhard Weyandt
- Department of Dermatology and Allergology, Hospital Bayreuth, Bayreuth, Germany
| | - Edgar Dippel
- Department of Dermatology, Ludwigshafen Medical Center, Ludwigshafen, Germany
| | - Kerstin Schatton
- Department of Dermatology, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Eren Celik
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Cyberknife Center, University of Cologne, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Maike Trommer
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Cyberknife Center, University of Cologne, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Iris Helfrich
- Department of Dermatology, Venereology and Allergology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany and German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) partner site Essen/Düsseldorf, Essen, Germany
| | - Alexander Roesch
- Department of Dermatology, Venereology and Allergology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany and German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) partner site Essen/Düsseldorf, Essen, Germany
| | - Lisa Zimmer
- Department of Dermatology, Venereology and Allergology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany and German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) partner site Essen/Düsseldorf, Essen, Germany
| | - Elisabeth Livingstone
- Department of Dermatology, Venereology and Allergology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany and German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) partner site Essen/Düsseldorf, Essen, Germany
| | - Dirk Schadendorf
- Department of Dermatology, Venereology and Allergology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany and German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) partner site Essen/Düsseldorf, Essen, Germany
| | - Susanne Horn
- Department of Dermatology, Venereology and Allergology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany and German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) partner site Essen/Düsseldorf, Essen, Germany.,Rudolf-Schönheimer-Institute of Biochemistry, Medical Faculty of the University Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Selma Ugurel
- Department of Dermatology, Venereology and Allergology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany and German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) partner site Essen/Düsseldorf, Essen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Palumbo I, Pasqualetti F, Delishaj D, Gonnelli A, Aristei C, Borghesi S, Pirtoli L, Belgioia L, Arcangeli S. Integrating stereotactic radiotherapy and systemic therapies. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 2022; 27:310-317. [PMID: 36299395 PMCID: PMC9591045 DOI: 10.5603/rpor.a2022.0020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/01/2021] [Accepted: 01/16/2022] [Indexed: 12/03/2022] Open
Abstract
This paper focuses on stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT ) interactions with targeted therapies and immune system modulating agents because SRT inevitably interacts with them in the treatment of oligometastatic patients. Radiation oncologists need to be aware of the advantages and risks of these interactions which can, on one hand, enhance the effect of therapy or, on the other, potentiate reciprocal toxicities. To date, few prospective studies have evaluated the interactions of SRT with new-generation drugs and data are mainly based on retrospective experiences, which are often related to small sample sizes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Isabella Palumbo
- Radiation Oncology Section, University of Perugia and Perugia General Hospital, Perugia, Italy
| | - Francesco Pasqualetti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Pisana, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Durim Delishaj
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Pisana, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Alessandra Gonnelli
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Pisana, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Cynthia Aristei
- Radiation Oncology Section, University of Perugia and Perugia General Hospital, Perugia, Italy
| | - Simona Borghesi
- Radiation Oncology Unit of Arezzo-Valdarno, Azienda USL Toscana Sud Est, Italy
| | - Luigi Pirtoli
- Unit of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Siena, Siena, Italy
| | - Liliana Belgioia
- Radiation Oncology Department, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy
| | - Stefano Arcangeli
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Policlinico S. Gerardo and University of Milan Bicocca, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Najafi M, Jahanbakhshi A, Gomar M, Iotti C, Giaccherini L, Rezaie O, Cavallieri F, Deantonio L, Bardoscia L, Botti A, Sardaro A, Cozzi S, Ciammella P. State of the Art in Combination Immuno/Radiotherapy for Brain Metastases: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Curr Oncol 2022; 29:2995-3012. [PMID: 35621634 PMCID: PMC9139474 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol29050244] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/11/2022] [Revised: 04/03/2022] [Accepted: 04/17/2022] [Indexed: 01/10/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Common origins for brain metastases (BMs) are melanoma, lung, breast, and renal cell cancers. BMs account for a large share of morbidity and mortality caused by these cancers. The advent of new immunotherapeutic treatments has made a revolution in the treatment of cancer patients and particularly, as a new concept, if it is combined with radiotherapy, may lead to considerably longer survival. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the survival rate and toxicities of such a combination in brain metastases. METHODS To perform a systematic review of the literature until January 2021 using electronic databases such as PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase; the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to evaluate the quality of cohort studies. For data extraction, two reviewers extracted the data blindly and independently. Hazard ratio with 95% confidence interval (CI), fixed-effect model, and inverse-variance method was calculated. The meta-analysis has been evaluated with the statistical software Stata/MP v.16 (The fastest version of Stata). RESULTS In the first step, 494 studies were selected to review the abstracts, in the second step, the full texts of 86 studies were reviewed. Finally, 28 studies were selected consisting of 1465 patients. The addition of IT to RT in the treatment of brain metastasis from melanoma and non-small-cell lung carcinoma was associated with a 39% reduction in mortality rate and has prolonged overall survival, with an acceptable toxicity profile. The addition of IT to RT compared with RT alone has a hazard ratio of 0.39(95% CI 0.34-0.44). CONCLUSIONS A combination of immuno/radiotherapy (IR) for the treatment of patients with BMs from melanoma and non-small-cell lung carcinoma has prolonged overall survival and reduced mortality rate, with acceptable toxicity. In terms of timing, RT seems to have the best effect on the result when performed before or simultaneously with immunotherapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Masoumeh Najafi
- Skull Base Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran 1997667665, Iran;
| | - Amin Jahanbakhshi
- Stem Cell and Regenerative Medicine Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran 1997667665, Iran;
| | - Marzieh Gomar
- Radiation Oncology Research Center, Iran Cancer Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran 1416753955, Iran;
| | - Cinzia Iotti
- Radiation Therapy Unit, Azienda USL-IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, 42123 Reggio Emilia, Italy; (C.I.); (L.G.); (P.C.)
| | - Lucia Giaccherini
- Radiation Therapy Unit, Azienda USL-IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, 42123 Reggio Emilia, Italy; (C.I.); (L.G.); (P.C.)
| | - Omid Rezaie
- Hematology-Oncology Department, Jam Hospital, Tehran 1997667665, Iran;
| | - Francesco Cavallieri
- Neurology Unit, Neuromotor & Rehabilitation Department, Azienda USL-IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, 42123 Reggio Emilia, Italy;
| | - Letizia Deantonio
- Radiation Oncology Clinic, Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland (IOSI), 6500 Bellinzona, Switzerland;
| | - Lilia Bardoscia
- Radiation Oncology Unit, S. Luca Hospital, Healthcare Company Tuscany Nord Ovest, 55100 Lucca, Italy;
| | - Andrea Botti
- Medical Physics Unit, Azienda USL-IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, 42123 Reggio Emilia, Italy;
| | - Angela Sardaro
- Section of Radiology and Radiation Oncology, Interdisciplinary Department of Medicine, University of Bari “Aldo Moro”, 70124 Bari, Italy;
| | - Salvatore Cozzi
- Radiation Therapy Unit, Azienda USL-IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, 42123 Reggio Emilia, Italy; (C.I.); (L.G.); (P.C.)
| | - Patrizia Ciammella
- Radiation Therapy Unit, Azienda USL-IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, 42123 Reggio Emilia, Italy; (C.I.); (L.G.); (P.C.)
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Burke AM, Carrasquilla M, Jean WC, Collins BT, Anaizi AN, Atkins MB, Gibney GT, Collins SP. Volume of Disease as a Predictor for Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Melanoma Brain Metastases Treated With Stereotactic Radiosurgery and Immune Checkpoint Therapy. Front Oncol 2022; 11:794615. [PMID: 35096594 PMCID: PMC8789649 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.794615] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/13/2021] [Accepted: 12/15/2021] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose/Objectives Clinical trials of anti-Programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein (CTLA-4) therapies have demonstrated a clinical benefit with low rates of neurologic adverse events in patients with melanoma brain metastases (MBMs). While the combined effect of these immunotherapies (ITs) and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) has yielded impressive results with regard to local control (LC) and overall survival (OS), it has also been associated with increased rates of radiation necrosis (RN) compared to historical series of SRS alone. We retrospectively reviewed patients treated with IT in combination with SRS to report on predictors of clinical outcomes. Materials and Methods Patients were included if they had MBMs treated with SRS within 1 year of receiving anti-PD-1 and/or CTLA-4 therapy. Clinical outcomes including OS, LC, intracranial death (ID), and RN were correlated with type and timing of IT with SRS, radiation dose, total volume, and size and number of lesions treated. Results Twenty-nine patients with 171 MBMs were treated between May 2012 and May 2018. Patients had a median of 5 lesions treated (median volume of 6.5 cm3) over a median of 2 courses of SRS. The median dose was 21 Gy. Most patients were treated with ipilimumab (n = 13) or nivolumab-ipilimumab (n = 10). Most patients underwent SRS concurrently or within 3 months of receiving immunotherapy (n = 21). Two-year OS and LC were 54.4% and 85.5%, respectively. In addition, 14% of patients developed RN; however, only 4.7% of the total treated lesions developed RN. The median time to development of RN was 9.5 months. Patients with an aggregate tumor volume >6.5 cm3 were found to be at increased risk of ID (p = 0.05) and RN (p = 0.03). There was no difference in OS, ID, or RN with regard to type of IT, timing of SRS and IT, number of SRS courses, SRS dose, or number of cumulative lesions treated. Conclusions In our series, patients treated with SRS and IT for MBMs had excellent rates of OS and LC; however, patients with an aggregate tumor volume >6.5 cm3 were found to be at increased risk of ID and RN. Given the efficacy of combined anti-PD-1/CTLA-4 therapy for MBM management, further study of optimal selection criteria for the addition of SRS is warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aidan M Burke
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Brody School of Medicine, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC, United States
| | - Michael Carrasquilla
- Department of Radiation Medicine, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Walter C Jean
- George Washington University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Brian T Collins
- Department of Radiation Medicine, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Amjad N Anaizi
- Department of Neurosurgery, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Michael B Atkins
- Georgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Geoffrey T Gibney
- Georgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Sean P Collins
- Department of Radiation Medicine, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Current advances in immune checkpoint inhibitor combinations with radiation therapy or cryotherapy for breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2021; 191:229-241. [PMID: 34714450 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-021-06408-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/14/2021] [Accepted: 09/28/2021] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) has demonstrated clinically significant efficacy when combined with chemotherapy in triple negative breast cancer (TNBC). Although many patients derived benefit, others do not respond to immunotherapy, therefore relying upon innovative combinations to enhance response. Local therapies such as radiation therapy (RT) and cryotherapy are immunogenic and potentially optimize responses to immunotherapy. Strategies combining these therapies and ICI are actively under investigation. This review will describe the rationale for combining ICI with targeted local therapies in breast cancer. METHODS A literature search was performed to identify pre-clinical and clinical studies assessing ICI combined with RT or cryotherapy published as of August 2021 using PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov. RESULTS Published studies of ICI with RT and IPI have demonstrated safety and signals of early efficacy. CONCLUSION RT and cryotherapy are local therapies that can be integrated safely with ICI and has shown promise in early trials. Randomized phase II studies testing both of these approaches, such as P-RAD (NCT04443348) and ipilimumab/nivolumab/cryoablation for TNBC (NCT03546686) are current enrolling. The results of these studies are paramount as they will provide long term data on the safety and efficacy of these regimens.
Collapse
|
19
|
Choi S, Hong A, Wang T, Lo S, Chen B, Silva I, Kapoor R, Hsiao E, Fogarty GB, Carlino MS, Menzies AM, Long GV, Shivalingam BS. Risk of radiation necrosis after stereotactic radiosurgery for melanoma brain metastasis by anatomical location. Strahlenther Onkol 2021; 197:1104-1112. [PMID: 34114045 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-021-01798-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/30/2020] [Accepted: 05/03/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE In this retrospective study, we have explored the anatomical factors that lead to the development of radiation necrosis (RN) in the setting of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for melanoma brain metastases (MBM). METHODS Between 2014 and 2018, 137 patients underwent SRS for 311 MBM. Lesions were assessed according to anatomical zones: zone 1-peripheral grey-white matter junction and cortical mantle, zone 2-deep white matter, including tumours located at base of sulci, zone 3-tumours adjacent to ependymal lining or in deep locations such as brainstem, basal ganglia and thalamus. Other anatomical factors including lobes, medial-peripheral, supra or infratentorial locations were also recorded. RESULTS In all, 12.4% (n = 17) of patients and 6.1% (n = 20) of lesions developed RN, actuarial incidence of RN at 12 and 24 months was 10% and 14.2% respectively. Zone 2 lesions recorded the highest rate of development of RN (n = 7/19; 36%), zone 3 (N = 4/24; 16%) and zone 1 (n = 9/268; 3%). Five of 17 patients developed symptomatic RN and 7/17 patients underwent surgery for RN. CONCLUSION This study raises awareness of the increased likelihood of deep lesions particularly in white matter structures to develop RN after SRS. Further studies including larger cohorts would be useful in identifying statistical differences in the rate of development of RN in different anatomical zones.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Siujoon Choi
- Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Camperdown, NSW, Australia.
| | - Angela Hong
- Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Camperdown, NSW, Australia.,Chris O'Brien Lifehouse, Camperdown, NSW, Australia.,Melanoma Institute Australia, North Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Sydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia
| | - Tim Wang
- Melanoma Institute Australia, North Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Crown Princess Mary Cancer Centre, Westmead, NSW, Australia.,Sydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia
| | - Seringe Lo
- Melanoma Institute Australia, North Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Sydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia
| | - Bi Chen
- Melanoma Institute Australia, North Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Ines Silva
- Melanoma Institute Australia, North Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Rony Kapoor
- Melanoma Institute Australia, North Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Mater Hospital, North Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Edward Hsiao
- Melanoma Institute Australia, North Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, NSW, Australia
| | - Gerald B Fogarty
- Melanoma Institute Australia, North Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Mater Hospital, North Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Sydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia
| | - Matteo S Carlino
- Melanoma Institute Australia, North Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Crown Princess Mary Cancer Centre, Westmead, NSW, Australia.,Sydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia
| | - Alexander M Menzies
- Melanoma Institute Australia, North Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Mater Hospital, North Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, NSW, Australia.,Sydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia
| | - Georgina V Long
- Melanoma Institute Australia, North Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Mater Hospital, North Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, NSW, Australia.,Sydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia
| | - Brindha S Shivalingam
- Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Camperdown, NSW, Australia.,Chris O'Brien Lifehouse, Camperdown, NSW, Australia.,Melanoma Institute Australia, North Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Mater Hospital, North Sydney, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Vellayappan BA, McGranahan T, Graber J, Taylor L, Venur V, Ellenbogen R, Sloan AE, Redmond KJ, Foote M, Chao ST, Suh JH, Chang EL, Sahgal A, Lo SS. Radiation Necrosis from Stereotactic Radiosurgery-How Do We Mitigate? Curr Treat Options Oncol 2021; 22:57. [PMID: 34097171 DOI: 10.1007/s11864-021-00854-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 03/31/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
OPINION STATEMENT Intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is an effective and convenient treatment for many brain conditions. Data regarding safety come mostly from retrospective single institutional studies and a small number of prospective studies. Variations in target delineation, treatment delivery, imaging follow-up protocols and dose prescription limit the interpretation of this data. There has been much clinical focus on radiation necrosis (RN) in particular, as it is being increasingly recognized on follow-up imaging. Symptomatic RN may be treated with medical therapy (such as corticosteroids and bevacizumab) with surgical resection being reserved for refractory patients. Nevertheless, RN remains a challenging condition to manage, and therefore upfront patient selection for SRS remains critical to provide complication-free control. Mitigation strategies need to be considered in situations where the baseline risk of RN is expected to be high-such as large target volume or re-irradiation. These may involve reduction in the prescribed dose or hypofractionated stereotactic radiation therapy (HSRT). Recently published guidelines and international meta-analysis report the benefit of HSRT in larger lesions, without compromising control rates. However, careful attention to planning parameters and SRS techniques still need to be adhered, even with HSRT. In cases where the risk is deemed to be high despite mitigation, a combination approach of surgery with or without post-operative radiation should be considered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Balamurugan A Vellayappan
- Department of Radiation oncology, National University Cancer Institute, 1E Kent Ridge Road, Level 7 Tower block, Singapore, 119228, Singapore.
| | - Tresa McGranahan
- Department of Neurology, Alvord Brain Tumor Center, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
- Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Jerome Graber
- Department of Neurology, Alvord Brain Tumor Center, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
- Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Lynne Taylor
- Department of Neurology, Alvord Brain Tumor Center, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
- Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Vyshak Venur
- Department of Neurology, Alvord Brain Tumor Center, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
- Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Richard Ellenbogen
- Department of Neurology, Alvord Brain Tumor Center, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
- Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Andrew E Sloan
- Department of Neurological Surgery, Seidman Cancer Center and University Hospitals of Cleveland, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Kristin J Redmond
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Matthew Foote
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Samuel T Chao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rose Ella Burkhardt Brain Tumor and Neuro-oncology Center, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - John H Suh
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rose Ella Burkhardt Brain Tumor and Neuro-oncology Center, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Eric L Chang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Southern California, Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Arjun Sahgal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Simon S Lo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Williamson CW, Sherer MV, Zamarin D, Sharabi AB, Dyer BA, Mell LK, Mayadev J. Immunotherapy and radiation therapy sequencing: State of the data on timing, efficacy, and safety. Cancer 2021; 127:1553-1567. [PMID: 33620731 PMCID: PMC9376883 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.33424] [Citation(s) in RCA: 37] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/05/2020] [Revised: 11/16/2020] [Accepted: 11/17/2020] [Indexed: 01/14/2023]
Abstract
Radiation therapy exerts a tumoricidal local effect as well as both local and systemic immunomodulation. Immune checkpoint blockade has become a widely used treatment modality across cancer types with a rapidly growing list of agents and US Food and Drug Administration-approved indications. Moreover, there may be synergy between radiation therapy and immune checkpoint blockade. Various strategies have been used, but the optimal sequencing of these therapies is unclear. In this review, the authors discuss the major mechanisms of available immune checkpoint inhibitors and explore the available preclinical and clinical evidence regarding treatment sequencing. They also review safety considerations and conclude with possible future directions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Casey W Williamson
- Department of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA
| | - Michael V Sherer
- Department of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA
| | - Dmitriy Zamarin
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
| | - Andrew B Sharabi
- Department of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA
| | - Brandon A Dyer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington Medical Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Loren K Mell
- Department of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA
| | - Jyoti Mayadev
- Department of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Tawbi HA, Forsyth PA, Hodi FS, Lao CD, Moschos SJ, Hamid O, Atkins MB, Lewis K, Thomas RP, Glaspy JA, Jang S, Algazi AP, Khushalani NI, Postow MA, Pavlick AC, Ernstoff MS, Reardon DA, Puzanov I, Kudchadkar RR, Tarhini AA, Sumbul A, Rizzo JI, Margolin KA. Safety and Efficacy of the Combination of Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab in Patients With Melanoma and Asymptomatic or Symptomatic Brain Metastases (CheckMate 204). Neuro Oncol 2021; 23:1961-1973. [PMID: 33880555 PMCID: PMC8563325 DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/noab094] [Citation(s) in RCA: 60] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Background In patients with melanoma and asymptomatic brain metastases (MBM), nivolumab plus ipilimumab provided an intracranial response rate of 55%. Here, we present the first report for patients who were symptomatic and/or required corticosteroids and updated data for asymptomatic patients. Methods Patients with measurable MBM, 0.5-3.0 cm, were enrolled into Cohort A (asymptomatic) or Cohort B (stable neurologic symptoms and/or receiving corticosteroids). Nivolumab, 1 mg/kg, and ipilimumab, 3 mg/kg, were given intravenously every 3 weeks ×4, followed by nivolumab, 3 mg/kg, every 2 weeks until progression, unacceptable toxicity, or 24 months. The primary endpoint was intracranial clinical benefit rate (CBR; complete response [CR], partial response [PR], or stable disease ≥6 months). Results Symptomatic patients (N = 18) received a median of one nivolumab and ipilimumab combination dose and had an intracranial CBR of 22.2%. Two of 12 patients on corticosteroids had CR; 2 responded among the 6 not on corticosteroids. Median intracranial progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 1.2 and 8.7 months, respectively. In contrast, with 20.6 months of follow-up, we confirmed an intracranial CBR of 58.4% in asymptomatic patients (N = 101); median duration of response, PFS, and OS were not reached. No new safety signals were observed. Conclusions Nivolumab plus ipilimumab provides durable clinical benefit for asymptomatic patients with MBM and should be considered for first-line therapy. This regimen has limited activity in MBM patients with neurologic symptoms and/or requiring corticosteroids, supporting the need for alternative approaches and methods to reduce the dependency on corticosteroids. Clinical trial registration. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02320058.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hussein A Tawbi
- Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology, Division of Cancer Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Peter A Forsyth
- Department of Neuro-Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL
| | - F Stephen Hodi
- Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA
| | | | - Stergios J Moschos
- Division of Hematology & Oncology, The University of North Carolina Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - Omid Hamid
- Department of Translational Research & Immunotherapy, The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, A Cedars-Sinai Affilliate, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Michael B Atkins
- Department of Medical Oncology,Georgetown-Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington DC
| | - Karl Lewis
- Department of Medical Oncology, University of Colorado Comprehensive Cancer Center, Aurora, CO
| | - Reena P Thomas
- Department of Neurology, Stanford University Cancer Center, Stanford, CA
| | - John A Glaspy
- Department of Medicine, Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Sekwon Jang
- Department of Medicine, Inova Schar Cancer Institute, Virginia Commonwealth University, Fairfax, VA
| | - Alain P Algazi
- Department of Hematology & Oncology, Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, San Francisco, CA
| | - Nikhil I Khushalani
- Department of Cutaneous Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, Tampa, FL
| | - Michael A Postow
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Anna C Pavlick
- Department of Medical Oncology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY
| | - Marc S Ernstoff
- Department of Immuno-Oncology, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD
| | - David A Reardon
- Center for Neuro-Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA
| | - Igor Puzanov
- Department of Medical Oncology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY
| | - Ragini R Kudchadkar
- Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University, Atlanta, GA
| | - Ahmad A Tarhini
- Department of Cutaneous Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, Tampa, FL
| | - Anne Sumbul
- Biostatistics, Bristol Myers Squibb Company, Princeton, NJ
| | - Jasmine I Rizzo
- Oncology Clinical Development, Bristol Myers Squibb Company, Princeton, NJ
| | - Kim A Margolin
- Department of Medical Oncology, City of Hope, Duarte, CA
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Evaluation of practical experiences of German speaking radiation oncologists in combining radiation therapy with checkpoint blockade. Sci Rep 2021; 11:7624. [PMID: 33828117 PMCID: PMC8027172 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-86863-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/16/2021] [Accepted: 03/22/2021] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
The results of this survey reveal current clinical practice in the handling of combined radioimmunotherapy with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (RT + ICI). We aim to provide a basis to open a discussion for clinical application of RT + ICI by analyzation of experts’ assessment. We conducted a survey with 24 items with a focus on side effects of RT + ICI, common practice of scheduling and handling of adverse events. After pilot testing by radiation oncology experts the link to the online survey was sent to all members of the German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO). In total, 51 radiation oncologists completed the questionnaire. Pulmonary toxicity under RT + ICI with ICIs was reported most frequently. Consensus was observed for bone and soft tissue RT of the limbs in favor for no interruption of ICIs. For cranial RT half of the participants do not suspend ICIs during normofractionated radiotherapy (nfRT) or stereotactic hypofractionated RT (SRT). More participants pause ICIs for central than for peripheral thoracic region. Maintenance therapy with ICIs is mostly not interrupted prior to RT. For management of RT associated pneumonitis under durvalumab the majority of 86.3% suggest corticosteroid therapy and 76.5% would postpone the next cycle of ICI therapy. The here obtained assessment and experiences by radiation oncologists reveal a large variability in practical handling of combined RT + ICI. Until scientific evidence is available a discussion for current clinical application of RT + ICI should be triggered. Interdisciplinary consensus guidelines with practical recommendations are required.
Collapse
|
24
|
Wilkins A, Ost P, Sundahl N. Is There a Benefit of Combining Immunotherapy and Radiotherapy in Bladder Cancer? Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2021; 33:407-414. [PMID: 33726945 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2021.02.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/01/2021] [Revised: 02/10/2021] [Accepted: 02/25/2021] [Indexed: 01/13/2023]
Abstract
Immune checkpoint inhibitors have transformed the management of patients with metastatic urothelial cancer, by leading to long-term response and prolongation of survival in a subset of patients. Unfortunately, only one in five patients with metastatic urothelial cancer responds to anti-programmed death ligand-1 ([AQ1]anti-PD-1) monotherapy. Preclinical and early clinical evidence indicates that radiotherapy not only acts locally, but also exerts systemic anti-tumour effects by modulating the immune system. It is hypothesised that combining checkpoint inhibitors with radiotherapy might enhance an anti-tumour immune response and increase response rates. So far, a handful of early phase clinical trials have been performed seeking to answer this question in urothelial cancer patients. The current review summarises the available preclinical and clinical evidence on radiotherapy/immunotherapy combinations in locally advanced and metastatic bladder cancer and suggests future avenues worthy of exploration.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Wilkins
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - P Ost
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Experimental Cancer Research, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - N Sundahl
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; Department of Radiation Oncology and Experimental Cancer Research, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Travis RL, Marcrom SR, Brown MH, Patel MP, Markert JM, Riley KO, Conry R, Willey CD, Bredel M, Fiveash JB. Control and Toxicity in Melanoma Versus Other Brain Metastases in Response to Combined Radiosurgery and PD-(L)1 Immune Checkpoint Inhibition. Adv Radiat Oncol 2021; 6:100561. [PMID: 33665483 PMCID: PMC7897762 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2020.08.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/23/2020] [Revised: 07/11/2020] [Accepted: 08/26/2020] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Prior studies have mixed conclusions about the efficacy and central nervous system (CNS) toxicity profile of combining radiosurgery with anti-programed cell death 1 (PD-1) immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) for brain metastases. This study evaluates the safety and efficacy of combined radiosurgery and anti-PD-1 ICI for melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and renal cell carcinoma (RCC) brain metastases (BM). Methods and Materials Forty-one patients with 153 radiation naïve melanoma BM and 33 patients with 118 BM of NSCLC and RCC origin from 2014 through 2019 received radiosurgery and either anti PD-1 receptor inhibition or anti PD-L1 inhibition targeting the PD-1 ligand with less than 4 months separating either therapy. Similar to Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9005, high-grade CNS toxicity was defined as irreversible grade 3 or any grade 4/5 neurologic event. Salvage resection revealing necrosis and viable tumor was considered grade 4 toxicity and local failure. An increase in greatest cross-sectional diameter of 25% on contrasted magnetic resonance imaging was designated as a local failure. Results Median follow-up was 10 months (range, 1-41 months). Local control was estimated to be 90.3% at 1 year. Distant control was 38.8% at 1 year, and neither local nor distant control were significantly influenced by limiting steroids to the day of treatment (P = .55, .52 respectively). One-year freedom from high-grade toxicity was 90.4% for patients and 94.6% for tumors. Though melanoma accounted for 41 (55%) patients and 153 (56%) tumors, it accounted for all high-grade toxicities (P = .03). These patients had some combination of high tumor burden, aggressive steroid taper, and treatment with ipilimumab. Conclusions Stereotactic radiosurgery combined with anti-PD-1 ICI appears to result in a high rate of local tumor control and a low rate of high-grade CNS toxicity, comparable to historical series with radiosurgery alone. High-grade toxicity is more likely in melanoma than RCC and NSCLC. Coming prospective studies will shed light on further questions about treatment timing, steroids, and response.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Roman L Travis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama
| | - Samuel R Marcrom
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama
| | - Matthew H Brown
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama
| | - Mayank P Patel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama
| | - James M Markert
- Department of Neurosurgery, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama
| | - Kristen O Riley
- Department of Neurosurgery, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama
| | - Robert Conry
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama
| | - Christopher D Willey
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama
| | - Markus Bredel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama
| | - John B Fiveash
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Liu L, Chen W, Zhang R, Wang Y, Liu P, Lian X, Zhang F, Wang Y, Ma W. Radiotherapy in combination with systemic therapies for brain metastases: current status and progress. Cancer Biol Med 2020; 17:910-922. [PMID: 33299643 PMCID: PMC7721093 DOI: 10.20892/j.issn.2095-3941.2020.0109] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/20/2020] [Accepted: 07/09/2020] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Brain metastases (BMs) are the most common cause of intracranial neoplasms in adults with poor prognosis. Most BMs originate from lung cancer, breast cancer, or melanoma. Radiotherapy (RT), including whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) and stereotactic radiation surgery (SRS), has been widely explored and is considered a mainstay anticancer treatment for BMs. Over the past decade, the advent of novel systemic therapies has revolutionized the treatment of BMs. In this context, there is a strong rationale for using a combination of treatments based on RT, with the aim of achieving both local disease control and extracranial disease control. This review focuses on describing the latest progress in RT as well as the synergistic effects of the optimal combinations of RT and systemic treatment modalities for BMs, to provide perspectives on current treatments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lei Liu
- Department of Neurosurgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100730, China
| | - Wanqi Chen
- Department of Neurosurgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100730, China
| | - Ruopeng Zhang
- Department of Neurosurgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100730, China
| | - Yuekun Wang
- Department of Neurosurgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100730, China
| | - Penghao Liu
- Department of Neurosurgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100730, China
| | - Xin Lian
- Department of Radiotherapy, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100730, China
| | - Fuquan Zhang
- Department of Radiotherapy, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100730, China
| | - Yu Wang
- Department of Neurosurgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100730, China
| | - Wenbin Ma
- Department of Neurosurgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100730, China
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Kim PH, Suh CH, Kim HS, Kim KW, Kim DY, Aizer AA, Rahman R, Guenette JP, Huang RY. Immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy may increase the incidence of treatment-related necrosis after stereotactic radiosurgery for brain metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Radiol 2020; 31:4114-4129. [PMID: 33241519 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-020-07514-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/03/2020] [Revised: 09/28/2020] [Accepted: 11/12/2020] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To compare the incidence of treatment-related necrosis between combination SRS+ICI therapy and SRS therapy alone in patients with brain metastases from melanoma and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS A systematic literature search of Ovid-MEDLINE and EMBASE was performed up to August 10, 2020. The difference in the pooled incidence of treatment-related necrosis after SRS+ICI or SRS alone was evaluated. The cumulative incidence of treatment-related necrosis at the specific time point after the treatment was calculated and plotted. Subgroup and meta-regression analyses were additionally performed. RESULTS Sixteen studies (14 on melanoma, 2 on NSCLC) were included. In NSCLC brain metastasis, the reported incidences of treatment-related necrosis in SRS+ICI and SRS alone ranged 2.9-3.4% and 0-2.9%, respectively. Meta-analysis was conducted including 14 studies on melanoma brain metastasis. The incidence of treatment-related necrosis was higher in SRS+ICI than SRS alone (16.0% vs. 6.5%; p = 0.065; OR, 2.35). The incidence showed rapid increase until 12 months after the SRS when combined with ICI therapy (14%; 95% CI, 8-22%) and its pace of increase slowed thereafter. Histopathologic diagnosis as the reference standard for treatment-related necrosis and inclusion of only symptomatic cases were the source of heterogeneity in SRS+ICI. CONCLUSIONS Treatment-related necrosis tended to occur 2.4 times more frequently in the setting of combination SRS+ICI therapy compared with SRS alone in melanoma brain metastasis showing high cumulative incidence within the first year. Treatment-related necrosis should be considered when SRS+ICI combination therapy is used for melanoma brain metastasis, especially in the first year. KEY POINTS • Treatment-related necrosis occurred 2.4 times more frequently in the setting of combination SRS+ICI therapy compared with SRS alone in melanoma brain metastasis. • Treatment-related necrosis more frequently occurred in brain metastases from melanoma than NSCLC. • Reference standard for treatment-related necrosis and inclusion of only symptomatic treatment-related necrosis were a significant source of heterogeneity, indicating varying definitions of treatment-related necrosis in the literature need to be unified.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pyeong Hwa Kim
- Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Olympic-ro 33, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea
| | - Chong Hyun Suh
- Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Olympic-ro 33, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea.
| | - Ho Sung Kim
- Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Olympic-ro 33, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea
| | - Kyung Won Kim
- Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Olympic-ro 33, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea
| | - Dong Yeong Kim
- Department of Quarantine, Incheon Airport National Quarantine Station, Incheon, Republic of Korea
| | - Ayal A Aizer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, 02115, USA
| | - Rifaquat Rahman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, 02115, USA
| | - Jeffrey P Guenette
- Division of Neuroradiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA
| | - Raymond Y Huang
- Division of Neuroradiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Winter SF, Loebel F, Loeffler J, Batchelor TT, Martinez-Lage M, Vajkoczy P, Dietrich J. Treatment-induced brain tissue necrosis: a clinical challenge in neuro-oncology. Neuro Oncol 2020; 21:1118-1130. [PMID: 30828724 DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/noz048] [Citation(s) in RCA: 45] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/19/2018] [Revised: 12/04/2018] [Accepted: 02/25/2019] [Indexed: 12/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Cancer therapy-induced adverse effects on the brain are a major challenge in neuro-oncology. Brain tissue necrosis (treatment necrosis [TN]) as a consequence of brain directed cancer therapy remains an insufficiently characterized condition with diagnostic and therapeutic difficulties and is frequently associated with significant patient morbidity. A better understanding of the underlying mechanisms, improvement of diagnostic tools, development of preventive strategies, and implementation of evidence-based therapeutic practices are pivotal to improve patient management. In this comprehensive review, we address existing challenges associated with current TN-related clinical and research practices and highlight unanswered questions and areas in need of further research with the ultimate goal to improve management of patients affected by this important neuro-oncological condition.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sebastian F Winter
- MGH Cancer Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.,Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.,Department of Neurosurgery, Charité‒Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
| | - Franziska Loebel
- Department of Neurosurgery, Charité‒Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
| | - Jay Loeffler
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Tracy T Batchelor
- MGH Cancer Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.,Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Maria Martinez-Lage
- C S Kubik Laboratory for Neuropathology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Peter Vajkoczy
- Department of Neurosurgery, Charité‒Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
| | - Jorg Dietrich
- MGH Cancer Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.,Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Risk of radiation necrosis after hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (HFSRT) for brain metastases: a single center retrospective study. J Neurooncol 2020; 149:447-453. [DOI: 10.1007/s11060-020-03628-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/07/2020] [Accepted: 09/18/2020] [Indexed: 01/11/2023]
|
30
|
Galldiks N, Abdulla DSY, Scheffler M, Wolpert F, Werner JM, Hüllner M, Stoffels G, Schweinsberg V, Schlaak M, Kreuzberg N, Landsberg J, Lohmann P, Ceccon G, Baues C, Trommer M, Celik E, Ruge MI, Kocher M, Marnitz S, Fink GR, Tonn JC, Weller M, Langen KJ, Wolf J, Mauch C. Treatment Monitoring of Immunotherapy and Targeted Therapy Using 18F-FET PET in Patients with Melanoma and Lung Cancer Brain Metastases: Initial Experiences. J Nucl Med 2020; 62:464-470. [PMID: 32887757 DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.120.248278] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/27/2020] [Accepted: 07/30/2020] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
We investigated the value of O-(2-18F-fluoroethyl)-l-tyrosine (18F-FET) PET for treatment monitoring of immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) or targeted therapy (TT) alone or in combination with radiotherapy in patients with brain metastasis (BM) since contrast-enhanced MRI often remains inconclusive. Methods: We retrospectively identified 40 patients with 107 BMs secondary to melanoma (n = 29 with 75 BMs) or non-small cell lung cancer (n = 11 with 32 BMs) treated with ICI or TT who had 18F-FET PET (n = 60 scans) for treatment monitoring from 2015 to 2019. Most patients (n = 37; 92.5%) had radiotherapy during the course of the disease. In 27 patients, 18F-FET PET was used to differentiate treatment-related changes from BM relapse after ICI or TT. In 13 patients, 18F-FET PET was performed for response assessment to ICI or TT using baseline and follow-up scans (median time between scans, 4.2 mo). In all lesions, static and dynamic 18F-FET PET parameters were obtained (i.e., mean tumor-to-brain ratios [TBR], time-to-peak values). Diagnostic accuracies of PET parameters were evaluated by receiver-operating-characteristic analyses using the clinical follow-up or neuropathologic findings as a reference. Results: A TBR threshold of 1.95 differentiated BM relapse from treatment-related changes with an accuracy of 85% (P = 0.003). Metabolic responders to ICI or TT on 18F-FET PET had a significantly longer stable follow-up (threshold of TBR reduction relative to baseline, ≥10%; accuracy, 82%; P = 0.004). Furthermore, at follow-up, time to peak in metabolic responders increased significantly (P = 0.019). Conclusion: 18F-FET PET may add valuable information for treatment monitoring in BM patients treated with ICI or TT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Norbert Galldiks
- Department of Neurology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany .,Center of Integrated Oncology, Universities of Aachen, Bonn, Cologne, and Duesseldorf, Germany.,Institute of Neuroscience and Medicine (INM-3, -4), Research Center Juelich, Juelich, Germany
| | - Diana S Y Abdulla
- Center of Integrated Oncology, Universities of Aachen, Bonn, Cologne, and Duesseldorf, Germany.,Lung Cancer Group, Department I of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Matthias Scheffler
- Center of Integrated Oncology, Universities of Aachen, Bonn, Cologne, and Duesseldorf, Germany.,Lung Cancer Group, Department I of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Fabian Wolpert
- Department of Neurology and Brain Tumor Center, University Hospital and University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Jan-Michael Werner
- Department of Neurology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Martin Hüllner
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital and University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Gabriele Stoffels
- Institute of Neuroscience and Medicine (INM-3, -4), Research Center Juelich, Juelich, Germany
| | - Viola Schweinsberg
- Center of Integrated Oncology, Universities of Aachen, Bonn, Cologne, and Duesseldorf, Germany.,Department of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Max Schlaak
- Center of Integrated Oncology, Universities of Aachen, Bonn, Cologne, and Duesseldorf, Germany.,Department of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Nicole Kreuzberg
- Center of Integrated Oncology, Universities of Aachen, Bonn, Cologne, and Duesseldorf, Germany.,Department of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Jennifer Landsberg
- Center of Integrated Oncology, Universities of Aachen, Bonn, Cologne, and Duesseldorf, Germany.,Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - Philipp Lohmann
- Institute of Neuroscience and Medicine (INM-3, -4), Research Center Juelich, Juelich, Germany.,Department of Stereotaxy and Functional Neurosurgery, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Garry Ceccon
- Department of Neurology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Christian Baues
- Center of Integrated Oncology, Universities of Aachen, Bonn, Cologne, and Duesseldorf, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Maike Trommer
- Center of Integrated Oncology, Universities of Aachen, Bonn, Cologne, and Duesseldorf, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Eren Celik
- Center of Integrated Oncology, Universities of Aachen, Bonn, Cologne, and Duesseldorf, Germany.,Department of Stereotaxy and Functional Neurosurgery, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Maximilian I Ruge
- Center of Integrated Oncology, Universities of Aachen, Bonn, Cologne, and Duesseldorf, Germany.,Department of Stereotaxy and Functional Neurosurgery, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Martin Kocher
- Institute of Neuroscience and Medicine (INM-3, -4), Research Center Juelich, Juelich, Germany.,Department of Stereotaxy and Functional Neurosurgery, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Simone Marnitz
- Center of Integrated Oncology, Universities of Aachen, Bonn, Cologne, and Duesseldorf, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Gereon R Fink
- Department of Neurology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.,Institute of Neuroscience and Medicine (INM-3, -4), Research Center Juelich, Juelich, Germany
| | - Jörg-Christian Tonn
- Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital LMU Munich, Munich, Germany; and
| | - Michael Weller
- Department of Neurology and Brain Tumor Center, University Hospital and University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Karl-Josef Langen
- Institute of Neuroscience and Medicine (INM-3, -4), Research Center Juelich, Juelich, Germany.,Department of Nuclear Medicine, RWTH University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| | - Jürgen Wolf
- Center of Integrated Oncology, Universities of Aachen, Bonn, Cologne, and Duesseldorf, Germany.,Lung Cancer Group, Department I of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Cornelia Mauch
- Center of Integrated Oncology, Universities of Aachen, Bonn, Cologne, and Duesseldorf, Germany.,Department of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Voronova V, Lebedeva S, Sekacheva M, Helmlinger G, Peskov K. Quantification of Scheduling Impact on Safety and Efficacy Outcomes of Brain Metastasis Radio- and Immuno-Therapies: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Front Oncol 2020; 10:1609. [PMID: 32984027 PMCID: PMC7492564 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2020.01609] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/18/2020] [Accepted: 07/24/2020] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Objectives: The goal of this quantitative research was to evaluate the impact of various factors (e.g., scheduling or radiotherapy (RT) type) on outcomes for RT vs. RT in combination with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), in the treatment of brain metastases, via a meta-analysis. Methods: Clinical studies with at least one ICI+RT treatment combination arm with brain metastasis patients were identified via a systematic literature search. Data on 1-year overall survival (OS), 1-year local control (LC) and radionecrosis rate (RNR) were extracted; for combination studies which included an RT monotherapy arm, odds ratios (OR) for the aforementioned endpoints were additionally calculated and analyzed. Mixed-effects meta-analysis models were tested to evaluate impact on outcome, for different factors such as combination treatment scheduling and the type of ICI or RT used. Results: 40 studies representing a total of 4,359 patients were identified. Higher 1-year OS was observed in ICI and RT combination vs. RT alone, with corresponding incidence rates of 59% [95% CI: 54-63%] vs. 32% [95% CI: 25-39%] (P < 0.001). Concurrent ICI and RT treatment was associated with significantly higher 1-year OS vs. sequential combinations: 68% [95% CI: 60-75%] vs. 54% [95% CI: 47-61%]. No statistically significant differences were observed in 1-year LC and RNR, when comparing combinations vs. RT monotherapies, with 1-year LC rates of 68% [95% CI: 40-90%] vs. 72% [95% CI: 63-80%] (P = 0.73) and RNR rates of 6% [95% CI: 2-13%] vs. 9% [95% CI: 5-14%] (P = 0.37). Conclusions: A comprehensive, study-level meta-analysis of brain metastasis disease treatments suggest that combinations of RT and ICI result in higher OS, yet comparable neurotoxicity profiles vs. RT alone, with a superiority of concurrent vs. sequential combination regimens. A similar meta-analysis using patient-level data from past trials, as well as future prospective randomized trials would help confirming these findings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Svetlana Lebedeva
- Institute of Pharmacy, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia
| | - Marina Sekacheva
- Computational Oncology Group, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia
| | - Gabriel Helmlinger
- Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, Obsidian Therapeutics, Cambridge, MA, United States
| | - Kirill Peskov
- M&S Decisions LLC, Moscow, Russia
- Computational Oncology Group, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Wu A, Jin MC, Meola A, Wong HN, Chang SD. Efficacy and toxicity of particle radiotherapy in WHO grade II and grade III meningiomas: a systematic review. Neurosurg Focus 2020; 46:E12. [PMID: 31153145 DOI: 10.3171/2019.3.focus1967] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/01/2019] [Accepted: 03/25/2019] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVEAdjuvant radiotherapy has become a common addition to the management of high-grade meningiomas, as immediate treatment with radiation following resection has been associated with significantly improved outcomes. Recent investigations into particle therapy have expanded into the management of high-risk meningiomas. Here, the authors systematically review studies on the efficacy and utility of particle-based radiotherapy in the management of high-grade meningioma.METHODSA literature search was developed by first defining the population, intervention, comparison, outcomes, and study design (PICOS). A search strategy was designed for each of three electronic databases: PubMed, Embase, and Scopus. Data extraction was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Outcomes of interest included local disease control, overall survival, and toxicity, which were compared with historical data on photon-based therapies.RESULTSEleven retrospective studies including 240 patients with atypical (WHO grade II) and anaplastic (WHO grade III) meningioma undergoing particle radiation therapy were identified. Five of the 11 studies included in this systematic review focused specifically on WHO grade II and III meningiomas; the others also included WHO grade I meningioma. Across all of the studies, the median follow-up ranged from 6 to 145 months. Local control rates for high-grade meningiomas ranged from 46.7% to 86% by the last follow-up or at 5 years. Overall survival rates ranged from 0% to 100% with better prognoses for atypical than for malignant meningiomas. Radiation necrosis was the most common adverse effect of treatment, occurring in 3.9% of specified cases.CONCLUSIONSDespite the lack of randomized prospective trials, this review of existing retrospective studies suggests that particle therapy, whether an adjuvant or a stand-alone treatment, confers survival benefit with a relatively low risk for severe treatment-derived toxicity compared to standard photon-based therapy. However, additional controlled studies are needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adela Wu
- 1Department of Neurosurgery, Stanford Health Care, Palo Alto
| | - Michael C Jin
- 2Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford; and
| | - Antonio Meola
- 1Department of Neurosurgery, Stanford Health Care, Palo Alto
| | - Hong-Nei Wong
- 3Lane Medical Library, Stanford Medicine, Palo Alto, California
| | - Steven D Chang
- 1Department of Neurosurgery, Stanford Health Care, Palo Alto
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Lee D, Riestenberg RA, Haskell-Mendoza A, Bloch O. Brain Metastasis Recurrence Versus Radiation Necrosis: Evaluation and Treatment. Neurosurg Clin N Am 2020; 31:575-587. [PMID: 32921353 DOI: 10.1016/j.nec.2020.06.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
Radiation necrosis (RN) occurs in 5% to 25% of patients with brain metastases treated with stereotactic radiosurgery. RN must be distinguished from recurrent tumor to determine appropriate treatment. Stereotactic biopsy remains the gold standard for identifying RN. Initial treatment of RN often involves management of edema using corticosteroids, antiangiogenic therapies, and hyperbaric oxygen therapy. For refractory symptoms, surgical resection can be considered. Minimally invasive stereotactic laser ablation has the benefit of providing tissue diagnosis and treating RN or recurrent tumor with similar efficacy. Laser ablation should be considered for lesions in need of intervention where the diagnosis requires tissue confirmation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dennis Lee
- Department of Neurological Surgery, University of California Davis, 4860 Y Street, Suite 3740, Sacramento, CA 95817, USA
| | - Robert A Riestenberg
- Department of Neurological Surgery, University of California Davis, 4860 Y Street, Suite 3740, Sacramento, CA 95817, USA
| | - Aden Haskell-Mendoza
- Department of Neurological Surgery, University of California Davis, 4860 Y Street, Suite 3740, Sacramento, CA 95817, USA
| | - Orin Bloch
- Department of Neurological Surgery, University of California, Davis School of Medicine, University of California Davis, 4860 Y Street, Suite 3740, Sacramento, CA 95817, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Joly F, Castel H, Tron L, Lange M, Vardy J. Potential Effect of Immunotherapy Agents on Cognitive Function in Cancer Patients. J Natl Cancer Inst 2020; 112:123-127. [PMID: 31504664 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djz168] [Citation(s) in RCA: 43] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/25/2019] [Revised: 08/02/2019] [Accepted: 08/14/2019] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
A paradigm shift is occurring in cancer therapy, where instead of targeting tumor cells, immunotherapy agents (IA) target the immune system to overcome cancer tolerance and to stimulate an antitumor immune response. IA using immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) or chimeric antigen receptor T-cells have emerged as the most encouraging approaches to treat cancer patients. CPI are reported to induce moderate-to-severe neurologic immune-related adverse events in less than 1% of patients, whereas chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy is associated with frequent neurological toxicities that can be severe or even fatal. Cognitive difficulties have been described following chemotherapy and targeted therapy, but not specifically explored in patients receiving IA. The aim of this review is to establish a picture of the first published studies suggesting some biological and physiopathological effects of IA on cognitive functions among cancer patients. The first results originate from a preclinical study evaluating the role of CPI associated with peripheral radiation on cognitive dysfunction and the recent discovery of the central nervous lymphatic system allowing leukocytes to penetrate the central nervous system. Evaluating possible side effects of IA on cognitive function will be an important challenge for future clinical trials and for better understanding the underlying mechanisms through preclinical animal models.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Florence Joly
- Clinical Research Department, Centre François Baclesse, Caen, France.,Normandie University, UNICAEN, INSERM, ANTICIPE, Caen, France.,Cancer and Cognition Platform, Ligue Nationale contre le Cancer, Caen, France.,University Hospital of Caen, Caen, France
| | - Hélène Castel
- Cancer and Cognition Platform, Ligue Nationale contre le Cancer, Caen, France.,Normandie Univ, UNIROUEN, INSERM U1239, DC2N, Rouen, France.,Institute for Research and Innovation in Biomedicine, Rouen, France
| | - Laure Tron
- Normandie University, UNICAEN, INSERM, ANTICIPE, Caen, France.,Cancer and Cognition Platform, Ligue Nationale contre le Cancer, Caen, France.,University Hospital of Caen, Caen, France
| | - Marie Lange
- Clinical Research Department, Centre François Baclesse, Caen, France.,Normandie University, UNICAEN, INSERM, ANTICIPE, Caen, France.,Cancer and Cognition Platform, Ligue Nationale contre le Cancer, Caen, France
| | - Janette Vardy
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.,Concord Cancer Centre, Concord Hospital, Concord, New South Wales, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Acute neurological adverse events during immune checkpoint inhibition therapy in patients with melanoma brain metastases. Melanoma Res 2020; 29:516-521. [PMID: 30870272 DOI: 10.1097/cmr.0000000000000597] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
The common adverse effects of immune checkpoint blockade therapy are well recognised. However, neurological adverse effects of checkpoint inhibitor therapy are less widely appreciated, and their clinical management remains challenging. Therefore, we report our experience of managing acute, life-threatening neurological toxicity during immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. Five male patients with stage IV melanoma underwent anti-programmed cell death protein 1 therapy (monotherapy or combination therapy with anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 antibodies) and developed severe neurological symptoms and signs including headache, hemiparesis and dysarthria. The initial diagnosis of brain metastases actually occurred after initiation of checkpoint inhibitor therapy in three of the patients, whereas two patients had pre-existing central nervous metastases and developed cerebral oedema and haemorrhage during immunotherapy. A rapidly fatal outcome occurred in two patients treated with immunotherapy following the development of BRAF-inhibitor and MEK-inhibitor resistance. Four of the patients died owing to neurological complications, and one achieved a complete cerebral response. Immunotherapy and tumour progression can both result in the development of neurological symptoms and signs, making it difficult to determine causality. However, the temporal relationship between the development of neurological symptoms and the first administration of therapy means that patients should be closely monitored for the development of neurological sequelae, which may even herald the presence of occult brain metastases. The decision on whether to continue immunotherapy must balance the risks of symptom - versus disease progression. However, in our case series, it is encouraging to note that the initial acute neurological symptoms were often transient. Nevertheless, pretherapeutic brain imaging to exclude occult brain metastases and stratify the risk of intracerebral oedema and haemorrhage should be considered.
Collapse
|
36
|
Stereotactic radiosurgery combined with anti-PD1 for the management of melanoma brain metastases: A retrospective study of safety and efficacy. Eur J Cancer 2020; 135:52-61. [PMID: 32535348 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2020.04.028] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/09/2019] [Revised: 02/07/2020] [Accepted: 04/07/2020] [Indexed: 01/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Brain metastases can be effectively treated with stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). Immune checkpoint inhibitors are now pivotal in metastatic melanoma care, but some concerns have emerged regarding the safety of their combination with radiation therapy. METHODS We present a retrospective analysis of a cohort of patients treated by anti-PD1 and SRS as a sole modality of radiation therapy (no whole brain radiation therapy at any time) in a single institution. We included patients on anti-PD1 at the time of SRS or patients who started anti-PD1 within a maximum period of 3 months following SRS and were treated at least one year before the analysis. Clinical and serial imaging data were reviewed to determine the efficacy and the rate of adverse radiation effectss of the combination. RESULTS A total of 50 patients were included. SRS targeted 1, 2 to 3 and >3 brain metastases in 17, 16 and 17 patients, respectively. Two patients died before the first evaluation. Nine patients presented with an increase in peritumoral oedema, three with intracranial haemorrhage and one patient with both oedema and haemorrhage. Median follow-up was 38.89 months (interquartile range 24.43; 45.28). Median overall survival from SRS was 16.62 months with 1-, 2- and 3-year rates of 60%, 40% and 35%, respectively. Median brain-Progression Free Survival was 13.2 months with 1, 2 and 3-year rates of 62.1%, 49.7% and 49.7%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS This real-world cohort of patients treated with a homogeneous strategy combining upfront stereotactic radiosurgery and anti-PD1 shows remarkable survival rates and does not reveal unexpected toxicity.
Collapse
|
37
|
Gatterbauer B, Hirschmann D, Eberherr N, Untersteiner H, Cho A, Shaltout A, Göbl P, Fitschek F, Dorfer C, Wolfsberger S, Kasprian G, Höller C, Frischer JM. Toxicity and efficacy of Gamma Knife radiosurgery for brain metastases in melanoma patients treated with immunotherapy or targeted therapy-A retrospective cohort study. Cancer Med 2020; 9:4026-4036. [PMID: 32249551 PMCID: PMC7286469 DOI: 10.1002/cam4.3021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/19/2019] [Revised: 02/28/2020] [Accepted: 03/02/2020] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Few safety data of concurrent stereotactic radiosurgery and targeted therapy (TT) or immunotherapy (IT) are available. The aim of the study was to evaluate the outcome of melanoma patients with brain metastases (MBM) after Gamma Knife Radiosurgery (GKRS) in relation to IT/TT. Methods We evaluated 182 MBM patients, who were treated with GKRS in the modern radiosurgical and oncological era. Results The median time between the initial melanoma diagnosis and occurrence of MBM was 2.4 years. The median overall survival time was 5.4 years after melanoma diagnosis. The estimated median survival after the initial diagnosis of MBM was 1.0 year (95% CI = 0.7‐1.2 years). Patients treated with anti‐PD‐1 or a combination of anti‐CTLA‐4/PD‐1 showed a significantly longer survival after first GKRS compared to all other forms of treatment. In addition, patients treated with anti‐PD‐1, anti‐CTLA‐4, or a combination of anti‐CTLA‐4/PD‐1 showed a significantly longer time to new MBM after GKRS1 compared to patients treated with other forms and combinations of the oncological therapy. The occurrence of hemorrhage or radiation reaction/necrosis after GKRS did not show any statistically significant differences in relation to IT/TT. Conclusion In MBM patients, complications after GKRS are not significantly increased if IT/TT treatment is performed at the time of or after radiosurgery. Further, a clear benefit in distant control and survival is seen in MBM patients treated with GKRS and checkpoint inhibitors. Thus, concomitant treatment of MBM with GKRS and IT/TT seems to be a safe and powerful treatment option although further prospective studies should be conducted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Dorian Hirschmann
- Department of Neurosurgery, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Nadine Eberherr
- Department of Neurosurgery, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | | | | | - Abdallah Shaltout
- Department of Neurosurgery, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Philipp Göbl
- Department of Neurosurgery, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Fabian Fitschek
- Department of Neurosurgery, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Christian Dorfer
- Department of Neurosurgery, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | | | - Gregor Kasprian
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Christoph Höller
- Department of Dermatology, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Josa M Frischer
- Department of Neurosurgery, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Su Z, Zhou L, Xue J, Lu Y. Integration of stereotactic radiosurgery or whole brain radiation therapy with immunotherapy for treatment of brain metastases. Chin J Cancer Res 2020; 32:448-466. [PMID: 32963458 PMCID: PMC7491544 DOI: 10.21147/j.issn.1000-9604.2020.04.03] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Abstract
The prognosis of brain metastases (BM) is traditionally poor. BM are mainly treated by local radiotherapy, including stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) or whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT). Recently, immunotherapy (i.e., immune checkpoint inhibitors, ICI) has demonstrated a survival advantage in multiple malignancies commonly associated with BM. Individually, radiotherapy and ICI both treat BM efficiently; hence, their combination seems logical. In this review, we summarize the existing preclinical and clinical evidence that supports the applicability of radiotherapy as a sensitizer of ICI for BM. Further, we discuss the optimal timing at which radiotherapy and ICI should be administered and review the safety of the combination therapy. Data from a few clinical studies suggest that combining SRS or WBRT with ICI simultaneously rather than consecutively potentially enhances brain abscopal-like responses and survival. However, there is a lack of conclusion about the definition of "simultaneous"; the cumulative toxic effect of the combined therapies also requires further study. Thus, ongoing and planned prospective trials are needed to further explore and validate the effect, safety, and optimal timing of the combination of immunotherapy with radiotherapy for patients with BM.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zhou Su
- Department of Thoracic Oncology, Cancer Center and State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China.,Department of Oncology, Sichuan Mianyang 404 Hospital, Mianyang 621000, China
| | - Lin Zhou
- Department of Thoracic Oncology, Cancer Center and State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China
| | - Jianxin Xue
- Department of Thoracic Oncology, Cancer Center and State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China
| | - You Lu
- Department of Thoracic Oncology, Cancer Center and State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Munshi A. Brain radionecrosis in the present multiagent systemic therapy era: Time to redefine brain radiotherapy tolerance? CANCER RESEARCH, STATISTICS, AND TREATMENT 2020. [DOI: 10.4103/crst.crst_63_20] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/04/2022] Open
|
40
|
van Opijnen MP, Dirven L, Coremans IEM, Taphoorn MJB, Kapiteijn EHW. The impact of current treatment modalities on the outcomes of patients with melanoma brain metastases: A systematic review. Int J Cancer 2019; 146:1479-1489. [PMID: 31583684 PMCID: PMC7004107 DOI: 10.1002/ijc.32696] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/16/2019] [Revised: 08/30/2019] [Accepted: 09/11/2019] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
Patients with melanoma brain metastases (MBM) still have a very poor prognosis. Several treatment modalities have been investigated in an attempt to improve the management of MBM. This review aimed to evaluate the impact of current treatments for MBM on patient‐ and tumor‐related outcomes, and to provide treatment recommendations for this patient population. A literature search in the databases PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane was conducted up to January 8, 2019. Original articles published since 2010 describing patient‐ and tumor‐related outcomes of adult MBM patients treated with clearly defined systemic therapy were included. Information on basic trial demographics, treatment under investigation and outcomes (overall and progression‐free survival, local and distant control and toxicity) were extracted. We identified 96 eligible articles, comprising 95 studies. A large variety of treatment options for MBM were investigated, either used alone or as combined modality therapy. Combined modality therapy was investigated in 71% of the studies and resulted in increased survival and better distant/local control than monotherapy, especially with targeted therapy or immunotherapy. However, neurotoxic side‐effects also occurred more frequently. Timing appeared to be an important determinant, with the best results when radiotherapy was given before or during systemic therapy. Improved tumor control and prolonged survival can be achieved by combining radiotherapy with immunotherapy or targeted therapy. However, more randomized controlled trials or prospective studies are warranted to generate proper evidence that can be used to change the standard of care for patients with MBM.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mark P van Opijnen
- Department of Medical Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Linda Dirven
- Department of Neurology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.,Department of Neurology, Haaglanden Medical Center, The Hague, The Netherlands.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, The Netherlands
| | - Ida E M Coremans
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, The Netherlands
| | - Martin J B Taphoorn
- Department of Neurology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.,Department of Neurology, Haaglanden Medical Center, The Hague, The Netherlands
| | - Ellen H W Kapiteijn
- Leiden University Medical Center, Department of Clinical Oncology, Leiden, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Petrelli F, De Stefani A, Trevisan F, Parati C, Inno A, Merelli B, Ghidini M, Bruschieri L, Vitali E, Cabiddu M, Borgonovo K, Ghilardi M, Barni S, Ghidini A. Combination of radiotherapy and immunotherapy for brain metastases: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2019; 144:102830. [PMID: 31733443 DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2019.102830] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/22/2018] [Revised: 06/15/2019] [Accepted: 10/26/2019] [Indexed: 01/15/2023] Open
Abstract
Radiotherapy (RT) represents a mainstay in the treatment of brain metastases (BMs) from solid tumors. Immunotherapy (IT) has improved survival of metastatic cancer patients across many tumor types. The combination of RT and IT for the treatment of BMs has a strong rationale, but data on efficacy and safety of this combination is still limited. A systematic search of PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and EMBASE was conducted. 33 studies were included for a total of 1520 patients, most of them with melanoma (87%). Median pooled OS was 15.9 months (95%CI 13.9-18.1). One- and 2-year OS rates were 55.2% (95% CI 49.3-60.9) and 35.7% (95% CI 30.4-41.3), respectively. Addition of IT to RT was associated with improved OS (HR = 0.54, 95%CI 0.44-0.67; P < 0.001). For patients with BMs from solid tumors, addition of concurrent IT to brain RT is able to increase survival and provide long term control.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fausto Petrelli
- Oncology Unit, ASST Bergamo Ovest, Piazzale Ospedale 1, 24047, Treviglio, BG, Italy.
| | - Agostina De Stefani
- Radiotherapy Unit, ASST Bergamo Ovest, Piazzale Ospedale 1, 24047, Treviglio, BG, Italy
| | - Francesca Trevisan
- Radiotherapy Unit, ASST Bergamo Ovest, Piazzale Ospedale 1, 24047, Treviglio, BG, Italy
| | - Chiara Parati
- Oncology Unit, ASST Bergamo Ovest, Piazzale Ospedale 1, 24047, Treviglio, BG, Italy
| | - Alessandro Inno
- Oncology Unit, Ospedale Sacro Cuore don Calabria Cancer Care Center, Via Don A. Sempreboni 5, 37024, Negrar, VR, Italy
| | - Barbara Merelli
- Oncology Unit, ASST Papa Giovanni XXIII, Piazza Oms 1, 24127, Bergamo, Italy
| | - Michele Ghidini
- Oncology Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda, Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Viale F. Sforza 28, 20122, Milano, Italy
| | - Lorenza Bruschieri
- Radiotherapy Unit, ASST Bergamo Ovest, Piazzale Ospedale 1, 24047, Treviglio, BG, Italy
| | - Elisabetta Vitali
- Radiotherapy Unit, ASST Bergamo Ovest, Piazzale Ospedale 1, 24047, Treviglio, BG, Italy
| | - Mary Cabiddu
- Oncology Unit, ASST Bergamo Ovest, Piazzale Ospedale 1, 24047, Treviglio, BG, Italy
| | - Karen Borgonovo
- Oncology Unit, ASST Bergamo Ovest, Piazzale Ospedale 1, 24047, Treviglio, BG, Italy
| | - Mara Ghilardi
- Oncology Unit, ASST Bergamo Ovest, Piazzale Ospedale 1, 24047, Treviglio, BG, Italy
| | - Sandro Barni
- Oncology Unit, ASST Bergamo Ovest, Piazzale Ospedale 1, 24047, Treviglio, BG, Italy
| | - Antonio Ghidini
- Oncology Unit, Casa di Cura Igea, Via Marcona 69, 20144, Milano, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Tabrizi S, McDuff S, Ho AY. Combining Radiation Therapy with Immune Checkpoint Blockadein Breast Cancer. CURRENT BREAST CANCER REPORTS 2019. [DOI: 10.1007/s12609-019-00327-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
|
43
|
Schvartsman G, Ma J, Bassett RL, Haydu LE, Amaria RN, Hwu P, Wong MK, Hwu WJ, Diab A, Patel SP, Davies MA, Hamerschlak N, Tawbi HAH, Glitza Oliva IC. Incidence, patterns of progression, and outcomes of preexisting and newly discovered brain metastases during treatment with anti-PD-1 in patients with metastatic melanoma. Cancer 2019; 125:4193-4202. [PMID: 31398264 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.32454] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/29/2019] [Revised: 06/06/2019] [Accepted: 07/12/2019] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Melanoma brain metastases (MBM) occur in up to 50% of patients with metastatic melanoma (MM) and represent a frequent site of systemic treatment failure for targeted therapies. However, to the authors' knowledge, little is known regarding the incidence, patterns of disease progression, and outcomes of MBM in patients treated with anti-PD-1 immunotherapy. METHODS A total of 320 patients with MM who were treated with anti-PD-1 at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston were reviewed. Analyses were performed to identify factors associated with brain metastasis-free survival and overall survival (OS) using Cox regression models. RESULTS The median age of the patients was 63.3 years. OS from the initiation of anti-PD-1 therapy was not significantly different between patients without MBM prior to anti-PD-1 compared with patients with prior MBM (P = .359). Among patients without prior MBM, 21 patients (8.6%) developed MBM during anti-PD-1 therapy, 12 of whom (4.9%) presented with disease progression in the central nervous system (CNS) only. Developing MBM during or after therapy with anti-PD-1 (hazard ratio, 4.70; 95% CI, 3.18-6.93) was associated with shorter OS. Among patients with MBM prior to anti-PD-1 treatment, 15 (20.0%) progressed in the CNS only and 19 (25.3%) progressed both intracranially and extracranially; at the time of the last data cutoff, 27 patients (36.0%) had not developed disease progression. Radiation necrosis occurred in 11.3% of patients (7 of 62 patients) in the group with a prior MBM who received stereotactic radiosurgery. CONCLUSIONS Anti-PD-1 therapy may change the natural history of patients with preexisting MBM. However, CNS failure during treatment with anti-PD-1 is predictive of a worse prognosis compared with extracranial progression. The results of the current study support the activity of anti-PD-1 in patients with MBM, although routine CNS imaging during therapy is warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gustavo Schvartsman
- Department of Hematology/Oncology, Albert Einstein Israeli Hospital, Sao Paulo, Brazil
| | - Junsheng Ma
- Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Roland L Bassett
- Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Lauren E Haydu
- Department of Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Rodabe Navroze Amaria
- Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Patrick Hwu
- Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Michael K Wong
- Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Wen-Jen Hwu
- Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Adi Diab
- Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Sapna Pradyuman Patel
- Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Michael A Davies
- Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Nelson Hamerschlak
- Department of Hematology/Oncology, Albert Einstein Israeli Hospital, Sao Paulo, Brazil
| | - Hussein Abdul-Hassan Tawbi
- Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Isabella C Glitza Oliva
- Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Schvartsman G, Taranto P, Glitza IC, Agarwala SS, Atkins MB, Buzaid AC. Management of metastatic cutaneous melanoma: updates in clinical practice. Ther Adv Med Oncol 2019; 11:1758835919851663. [PMID: 31205512 PMCID: PMC6535734 DOI: 10.1177/1758835919851663] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/11/2019] [Accepted: 04/29/2019] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
In recent years, several drugs have been approved for the treatment of patients with metastatic cutaneous melanoma, completely reshaping the landscape of this aggressive disease. Immune therapy with cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 and programmed cell death-1 inhibitors yielded significant and durable responses, achieving long-term disease control in up to 40% of the patients. BRAF inhibitors (BRAFi), in combination with MEK inhibitors, also resulted in improved overall survival compared with single-agent BRAFi in patients with BRAFV600-mutated metastatic melanoma. The optimized sequencing and duration of treatment, however, is yet to be found. In this article, we thoroughly review current data and discuss how to best sequence the various treatment modalities available at present, based on four distinct clinical presentations commonly seen in clinic. In addition, we review treatment options beyond checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapy, which may be required by patients failing such effective treatments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gustavo Schvartsman
- Centro de Oncologia e Hematologia - Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, 627 Albert Einstein Avenue, São Paulo, SP 05653-120, Brazil
| | - Patricia Taranto
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
| | - Isabella C Glitza
- Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology, The University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Sanjiv S Agarwala
- Department of Hematology and Oncology, and Temple University, Easton, PA, USA
| | - Michael B Atkins
- Department of Oncology, Georgetown University School of Medicine, Georgetown-Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Antonio C Buzaid
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, SP, Brazila and Department of Medical Oncology, A Beneficência Portuguesa de São Paulo - BP, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Hwang WL, Pike LRG, Royce TJ, Mahal BA, Loeffler JS. Safety of combining radiotherapy with immune-checkpoint inhibition. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2019; 15:477-494. [PMID: 29872177 DOI: 10.1038/s41571-018-0046-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 207] [Impact Index Per Article: 34.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
Immune-checkpoint inhibitors targeting cytotoxic T- lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4), programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1), or programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 (PD-L1) have transformed the care of patients with a wide range of advanced-stage malignancies. More than half of these patients will also have an indication for treatment with radiotherapy. The effects of both radiotherapy and immune-checkpoint inhibition (ICI) involve a complex interplay with the innate and adaptive immune systems, and accumulating evidence suggests that, under certain circumstances, the effects of radiotherapy synergize with those of ICI to augment the antitumour responses typically observed with either modality alone and thus improve clinical outcomes. However, the mechanisms by which radiotherapy and immune-checkpoint inhibitors synergistically modulate the immune response might also affect both the type and severity of treatment-related toxicities. Moreover, in patients receiving immune-checkpoint inhibitors, the development of immune-related adverse events has been linked with superior treatment responses and patient survival durations, suggesting a relationship between the antitumour and adverse autoimmune effects of these agents. In this Review, we discuss the emerging data on toxicity profiles related to immune-checkpoint inhibitors and radiotherapy, both separately and in combination, their potential mechanisms, and the approaches to managing these toxicities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- William L Hwang
- Harvard Radiation Oncology Program, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Luke R G Pike
- Harvard Radiation Oncology Program, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Trevor J Royce
- Harvard Radiation Oncology Program, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Brandon A Mahal
- Harvard Radiation Oncology Program, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Jay S Loeffler
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. .,Department of Neurosurgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Fischer GM, Jalali A, Kircher DA, Lee WC, McQuade JL, Haydu LE, Joon AY, Reuben A, de Macedo MP, Carapeto FCL, Yang C, Srivastava A, Ambati CR, Sreekumar A, Hudgens CW, Knighton B, Deng W, Ferguson SD, Tawbi HA, Glitza IC, Gershenwald JE, Vashisht Gopal YN, Hwu P, Huse JT, Wargo JA, Futreal PA, Putluri N, Lazar AJ, DeBerardinis RJ, Marszalek JR, Zhang J, Holmen SL, Tetzlaff MT, Davies MA. Molecular Profiling Reveals Unique Immune and Metabolic Features of Melanoma Brain Metastases. Cancer Discov 2019; 9:628-645. [PMID: 30787016 PMCID: PMC6497554 DOI: 10.1158/2159-8290.cd-18-1489] [Citation(s) in RCA: 226] [Impact Index Per Article: 37.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/20/2018] [Revised: 02/08/2019] [Accepted: 02/12/2019] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
There is a critical need to improve our understanding of the pathogenesis of melanoma brain metastases (MBM). Thus, we performed RNA sequencing on 88 resected MBMs and 42 patient-matched extracranial metastases; tumors with sufficient tissue also underwent whole-exome sequencing, T-cell receptor sequencing, and IHC. MBMs demonstrated heterogeneity of immune infiltrates that correlated with prior radiation and post-craniotomy survival. Comparison with patient-matched extracranial metastases identified significant immunosuppression and enrichment of oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS) in MBMs. Gene-expression analysis of intracranial and subcutaneous xenografts, and a spontaneous MBM model, confirmed increased OXPHOS gene expression in MBMs, which was also detected by direct metabolite profiling and [U-13C]-glucose tracing in vivo. IACS-010759, an OXPHOS inhibitor currently in early-phase clinical trials, improved survival of mice bearing MAPK inhibitor-resistant intracranial melanoma xenografts and inhibited MBM formation in the spontaneous MBM model. The results provide new insights into the pathogenesis and therapeutic resistance of MBMs. SIGNIFICANCE: Improving our understanding of the pathogenesis of MBMs will facilitate the rational development and prioritization of new therapeutic strategies. This study reports the most comprehensive molecular profiling of patient-matched MBMs and extracranial metastases to date. The data provide new insights into MBM biology and therapeutic resistance.See related commentary by Egelston and Margolin, p. 581.This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 565.
Collapse
MESH Headings
- Animals
- Biomarkers, Tumor/genetics
- Biomarkers, Tumor/immunology
- Biomarkers, Tumor/metabolism
- Brain Neoplasms/drug therapy
- Brain Neoplasms/immunology
- Brain Neoplasms/metabolism
- Brain Neoplasms/secondary
- Cohort Studies
- Disease Models, Animal
- Female
- Gene Expression Profiling
- Gene Expression Regulation, Neoplastic
- Humans
- Lymphocytes, Tumor-Infiltrating/immunology
- Melanoma/drug therapy
- Melanoma/immunology
- Melanoma/metabolism
- Melanoma/pathology
- Metabolic Flux Analysis
- Metabolome
- Mice
- Mice, Inbred C57BL
- Mice, Nude
- Oxidative Phosphorylation
- Sequence Analysis, RNA/methods
- Tumor Cells, Cultured
- Xenograft Model Antitumor Assays
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Grant M Fischer
- Department of Cancer Biology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
- Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
- Department of Translational Molecular Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Ali Jalali
- Department of Neurosurgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
| | - David A Kircher
- Department of Oncological Sciences, University of Utah Health Sciences Center, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Won-Chul Lee
- Department of Genomic Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Jennifer L McQuade
- Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Lauren E Haydu
- Department of Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Aron Y Joon
- Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Alexandre Reuben
- Department of Thoracic/Head and Neck Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | | | - Fernando C L Carapeto
- Department of Translational Molecular Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Chendong Yang
- Children's Medical Research Institute, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | - Anuj Srivastava
- Department of Computational Sciences, The Jackson Lab for Genomic Medicine, Farmington, Connecticut
| | - Chandrashekar R Ambati
- Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
- Advanced Technology Core, Alkek Center for Molecular Discovery, Dan L. Duncan Cancer Center, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
| | - Arun Sreekumar
- Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
- Advanced Technology Core, Alkek Center for Molecular Discovery, Dan L. Duncan Cancer Center, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
| | - Courtney W Hudgens
- Department of Translational Molecular Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Barbara Knighton
- Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Wanleng Deng
- Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Sherise D Ferguson
- Department of Neurosurgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Hussein A Tawbi
- Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Isabella C Glitza
- Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Jeffrey E Gershenwald
- Department of Cancer Biology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
- Department of Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Y N Vashisht Gopal
- Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
- Department of Translational Molecular Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Patrick Hwu
- Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Jason T Huse
- Department of Translational Molecular Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
- Department of Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Jennifer A Wargo
- Department of Genomic Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
- Department of Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - P Andrew Futreal
- Department of Genomic Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Nagireddy Putluri
- Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
- Advanced Technology Core, Alkek Center for Molecular Discovery, Dan L. Duncan Cancer Center, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
| | - Alexander J Lazar
- Department of Translational Molecular Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
- Department of Genomic Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
- Department of Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Ralph J DeBerardinis
- Children's Medical Research Institute, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
- Howard Hughes Medical Institute, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | - Joseph R Marszalek
- Institute for Applied Cancer Science, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Jianjun Zhang
- Department of Genomic Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Sheri L Holmen
- Department of Oncological Sciences, University of Utah Health Sciences Center, Salt Lake City, Utah
- Department of Surgery, University of Utah Health Sciences Center, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Michael T Tetzlaff
- Department of Translational Molecular Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
- Department of Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Michael A Davies
- Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
- Department of Translational Molecular Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
- Department of Systems Biology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Menon H, Ramapriyan R, Cushman TR, Verma V, Kim HH, Schoenhals JE, Atalar C, Selek U, Chun SG, Chang JY, Barsoumian HB, Nguyen QN, Altan M, Cortez MA, Hahn SM, Welsh JW. Role of Radiation Therapy in Modulation of the Tumor Stroma and Microenvironment. Front Immunol 2019; 10:193. [PMID: 30828330 PMCID: PMC6384252 DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2019.00193] [Citation(s) in RCA: 112] [Impact Index Per Article: 18.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/25/2018] [Accepted: 01/23/2019] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
In recent decades, there has been substantial growth in our understanding of the immune system and its role in tumor growth and overall survival. A central finding has been the cross-talk between tumor cells and the surrounding environment or stroma. This tumor stroma, comprised of various cells, and extracellular matrix (ECM), has been shown to aid in suppressing host immune responses against tumor cells. Through immunosuppressive cytokine secretion, metabolic alterations, and other mechanisms, the tumor stroma provides a complex network of safeguards for tumor proliferation. With recent advances in more effective, localized treatment, radiation therapy (XRT) has allowed for strategies that can effectively alter and ablate tumor stromal tissue. This includes promoting immunogenic cell death through tumor antigen release to increasing immune cell trafficking, XRT has a unique advantage against the tumoral immune evasion mechanisms that are orchestrated by stromal cells. Current studies are underway to elucidate pathways within the tumor stroma as potential targets for immunotherapy and chemoradiation. This review summarizes the effects of tumor stroma in tumor immune evasion, explains how XRT may help overcome these effects, with potential combinatorial approaches for future treatment modalities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hari Menon
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Rishab Ramapriyan
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Taylor R. Cushman
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Vivek Verma
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Allegheny General Hospital, Pittsburgh, PA, United States
| | - Hans H. Kim
- Department of Radiation Medicine, School of Medicine, Oregon Health and Sciences University, Portland, OR, United States
| | | | - Cemre Atalar
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Ugur Selek
- Department of Radiation Oncology, School of Medicine, Koç University, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Stephen G. Chun
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Joe Y. Chang
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Hampartsoum B. Barsoumian
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Quynh-Nhu Nguyen
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Mehmet Altan
- Thoracic/Head and Neck Medical Oncology, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Maria A. Cortez
- Experimental Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Stephen M. Hahn
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - James W. Welsh
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Rauschenberg R, Bruns J, Brütting J, Daubner D, Lohaus F, Zimmer L, Forschner A, Zips D, Hassel JC, Berking C, Kaehler KC, Utikal J, Gutzmer R, Terheyden P, Meiss F, Rafei-Shamsabadi D, Kiecker F, Debus D, Dabrowski E, Arnold A, Garzarolli M, Kuske M, Beissert S, Löck S, Linn J, Troost EGC, Meier F. Impact of radiation, systemic therapy and treatment sequencing on survival of patients with melanoma brain metastases. Eur J Cancer 2019; 110:11-20. [PMID: 30739835 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2018.12.023] [Citation(s) in RCA: 40] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/24/2018] [Revised: 12/01/2018] [Accepted: 12/22/2018] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Combining stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and active systemic therapies (STs) achieved favourable survival outcomes in patients with melanoma brain metastases (MBMs) in retrospective analyses. However, several aspects of this treatment strategy remain poorly understood. We report on the overall survival (OS) of patients with MBM treated with a combination of radiotherapy (RT) and ST as well as the impact of the v-Raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B (BRAF)-V600 mutation (BRAFmut) status, types of RT and ST and their sequence. PATIENTS AND METHODS Data of 208 patients treated with SRS or whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) and either immunotherapy (IT) or targeted therapy (TT) within a 6-week interval to RT were analysed retrospectively. OS was calculated from RT to death or last follow-up. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard analyses were performed to determine prognostic features associated with OS. RESULTS The median follow-up was 7.3 months. 139 patients received IT, 67 received TT and 2 received IT and TT within 6 weeks to RT (WBRT 45%; SRS 55%). One-year Kaplan-Meier OS rates were 69%, 65%, 33% and 18% (P < .001) for SRS with IT, SRS with TT, WBRT with IT and WBRT with TT, respectively. Patients with a BRAFmut receiving IT combined with RT experienced higher OS rates (88%, 65%, 50% and 18%). TT following RT or started before and continued thereafter was associated with improved median OS compared with TT solely before RT (12.2 [95% confidence interval {CI} 9.3-15.1]; 9.8 [95% CI 6.9-12.6] versus 5.1 [95% CI 2.7-7.5]; P = .03). CONCLUSION SRS and IT achieved the highest OS rates. A BRAFmut appears to be a favourable prognostic factor for OS. For the combination of RT and TT, the sequence appears to be crucial. Combinations of WBRT and ST achieved unprecedentedly high OS rates and warrant further studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ricarda Rauschenberg
- Skin Cancer Center at the University Cancer Centre, Department of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Johannes Bruns
- Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Julia Brütting
- Skin Cancer Center at the University Cancer Centre, Department of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Germany
| | - Dirk Daubner
- Institute of Neuroradiology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Fabian Lohaus
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
| | - Lisa Zimmer
- Department of Dermatology, University Hospital, University Duisburg-Essen, Germany & German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Andrea Forschner
- Skin Cancer Center, Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Daniel Zips
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Skin Cancer Center, CCC Tübingen-Stuttgart, University of Tübingen, Germany
| | - Jessica C Hassel
- Skin Cancer Center, Department of Dermatology and National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Carola Berking
- Skin Cancer Center, Department of Dermatology and Allergy, University Hospital Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Katharina C Kaehler
- Skin Cancer Center, Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Jochen Utikal
- Skin Cancer Unit, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany and Department of Dermatology, Venereology and Allergology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Ruprecht-Karl University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Ralf Gutzmer
- Skin Cancer Center Hannover, Department of Dermatology and Allergy, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany
| | - Patrik Terheyden
- Skin Cancer Center, Department of Dermatology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Frank Meiss
- Skin Cancer Center, Department of Dermatology and Venereology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - David Rafei-Shamsabadi
- Skin Cancer Center, Department of Dermatology and Venereology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Felix Kiecker
- Skin Cancer Center, Department of Dermatology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Dirk Debus
- Skin Cancer Center, Department of Dermatology, Paracelsus Medical University, General Hospital Nuremberg, Germany
| | - Evelyn Dabrowski
- Skin Cancer Center, Department of Dermatology, Ludwigshafen Medical Center, Ludwigshafen, Germany
| | - Andreas Arnold
- Skin Cancer Center, Department of Dermatology, Universitätsmedizin Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany
| | - Marlene Garzarolli
- Skin Cancer Center at the University Cancer Centre, Department of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Marvin Kuske
- Skin Cancer Center at the University Cancer Centre, Department of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Stefan Beissert
- Skin Cancer Center at the University Cancer Centre, Department of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Steffen Löck
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
| | - Jennifer Linn
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Esther G C Troost
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany; Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf (HZDR), Dresden, Germany
| | - Friedegund Meier
- Skin Cancer Center at the University Cancer Centre, Department of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
|
50
|
Wilke C, Grosshans D, Duman J, Brown P, Li J. Radiation-induced cognitive toxicity: pathophysiology and interventions to reduce toxicity in adults. Neuro Oncol 2019; 20:597-607. [PMID: 29045710 DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/nox195] [Citation(s) in RCA: 59] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Radiotherapy is ubiquitous in the treatment of patients with both primary brain tumors as well as disease which is metastatic to the brain. This therapy is not without cost, however, as cognitive decline is frequently associated with cranial radiation, particularly with whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT). The precise mechanisms responsible for radiation-induced morbidity remain incompletely understood and continue to be an active area of ongoing research. In this article, we review the hypothetical means by which cranial radiation induces cognitive decline as well as potential therapeutic approaches to prevent, minimize, or reverse treatment-induced cognitive deterioration. We additionally review advances in imaging modalities that can potentially be used to identify site-specific radiation-induced anatomic or functional changes in the brain and their correlation with clinical outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christopher Wilke
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas (C.W., D.G., J.L.); Department of Neuroscience, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas (J.D.); Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota (P.B.)
| | - David Grosshans
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas (C.W., D.G., J.L.); Department of Neuroscience, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas (J.D.); Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota (P.B.)
| | - Joseph Duman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas (C.W., D.G., J.L.); Department of Neuroscience, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas (J.D.); Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota (P.B.)
| | - Paul Brown
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas (C.W., D.G., J.L.); Department of Neuroscience, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas (J.D.); Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota (P.B.)
| | - Jing Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas (C.W., D.G., J.L.); Department of Neuroscience, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas (J.D.); Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota (P.B.)
| |
Collapse
|