1
|
Vera P, Thureau S, Le Tinier F, Chaumet-Riffaud P, Hapdey S, Kolesnikov-Gauthier H, Martin E, Berriolo-Riedinger A, Pourel N, Broglia JM, Boissellier P, Guillemard S, Salem N, Brenot-Rossi I, Le Péchoux C, Berthold C, Giroux-Leprieur E, Moreau D, Guillerm S, Benali K, Tessonnier L, Audigier-Valette C, Lerouge D, Quak E, Massabeau C, Courbon F, Moisson P, Larrouy A, Modzelewski R, Gouel P, Ghazzar N, Langlais A, Amour E, Zalcman G, Giraud P. Adaptive radiotherapy (up to 74 Gy) or standard radiotherapy (66 Gy) for patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer, according to [ 18F]FDG-PET tumour residual uptake at 42 Gy (RTEP7-IFCT-1402): a multicentre, randomised, controlled phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol 2024; 25:1176-1187. [PMID: 39134086 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(24)00320-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/14/2024] [Revised: 05/23/2024] [Accepted: 05/23/2024] [Indexed: 09/01/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Thoracic radiation intensification is debated in patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to assess the activity and safety of a boost radiotherapy dose up to 74 Gy in a functional sub-volume given according to on-treatment [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose ([18F]FDG)-PET results. METHODS In this multicentre, randomised, controlled non-comparative phase 2 trial, we recruited patients aged 18 years or older with inoperable stage III NSCLC without EGFR mutation or ALK rearrangement with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and who were affiliated with or a beneficiary of a social benefit system, with evaluable tumour or node lesions, preserved lung function, and who were amenable to curative-intent radiochemotherapy. Patients were randomly allocated using a central interactive web-response system in a non-masked method (1:1; minimisation method used [random factor of 0·8]; stratified by radiotherapy technique [intensity-modulated radiotherapy vs three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy] and by centre at which patients were treated) either to the experimental adaptive radiotherapy group A, in which only patients with positive residual metabolism on [18F]FDG-PET at 42 Gy received a boost radiotherapy (up to 74 Gy in 33 fractions), with all other patients receiving standard radiotherapy dosing (66 Gy in 33 fractions over 6·5 weeks), or to the standard radiotherapy group B (66 Gy in 33 fractions) over 6·5 weeks. All patients received two cycles of induction platinum-based chemotherapy cycles (paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 intravenously once every 3 weeks and carboplatin area under the curve [AUC]=6 once every 3 weeks, or cisplatin 80 mg/m2 intravenously once every 3 weeks and vinorelbine 30 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 and 60 mg/m2 orally [or 30 mg/m2 intravenously] on day 8 once every 3 weeks). Then they concomitantly received radiochemotherapy with platinum-based chemotherapy (three cycles for 8 weeks, with once per week paclitaxel 40 mg/m2 intravenously and carboplatin AUC=2 or cisplatin 80 mg/m2 intravenously and vinorelbine 20 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 and 40 mg/m2 orally (or 20 mg/m2 intravenously) on day 8 in 21-day cycles). The primary endpoint was the 15-month local control rate in the eligible patients who received at least one dose of concomitant radiochemotherapy. This RTEP7-IFCT-1402 trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02473133), and is ongoing. FINDINGS From Nov 12, 2015, to July 7, 2021, we randomly assigned 158 patients (47 [30%] women and 111 [70%] men) to either the boosted radiotherapy group A (81 [51%]) or to the standard radiotherapy group B (77 [49%)]. In group A, 80 (99%) patients received induction chemotherapy and 68 (84%) received radiochemotherapy, of whom 48 (71%) with residual uptake on [18F]FDG-PET after 42 Gy received a radiotherapy boost. In group B, all 77 patients received induction chemotherapy and 73 (95%) received radiochemotherapy. At the final analysis, the median follow-up for eligible patients who received radiochemotherapy (n=140) was 45·1 months (95% CI 39·3-48·3). The 15-month local control rate was 77·6% (95% CI 67·6-87·6%) in group A and 71·2% (95% CI 60·8-81·6%) in group B. Acute (within 90 days from radiochemotherapy initiation) grade 3-4 adverse events were observed in 20 (29%) of 68 patients in group A and 33 (45%) of 73 patients in group B, including serious adverse events in five (7%) patients in group A and ten (14%) patients in group B. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were febrile neutropenia (seven [10%] of 68 in group A vs 16 [22%] of 73 in group B), and anaemia (five [7%] vs nine [12%]). In the acute phase, two deaths (3%) occurred in group B (one due to a septic shock related to chemotherapy, and the other due to haemotypsia not related to study treatment), and no deaths occurred in group A. After 90 days, one additional treatment-unrelated death occurred in group A and two deaths events occurred in group B (one radiation pneumonitis and one pneumonia unrelated to treatment). INTERPRETATION A thoracic radiotherapy boost, based on interim [18F]FDG-PET, led to a meaningful local control rate with no difference in adverse events between the two groups in organs at risk, in contrast with previous attempts at thoracic radiation intensification, warranting a randomised phase 3 evaluation of such [18F]FDG-PET-guided radiotherapy dose adaptation in patients with stage III NSCLC. FUNDING Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique National 2014.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pierre Vera
- Nuclear Medicine Department and QuantIF LITIS (EA4108), Centre Henri Becquerel, Rouen, France.
| | - Sébastien Thureau
- Radiotherapy Department and QuantIF LITIS (EA4108), Centre Henri Becquerel, Rouen, France
| | | | | | - Sébastien Hapdey
- Nuclear Medicine Department and QuantIF LITIS (EA4108), Centre Henri Becquerel, Rouen, France
| | | | - Etienne Martin
- Radiotherapy Department, Centre Georges-François Leclerc, Dijon, France
| | | | - Nicolas Pourel
- Unité Fonctionnelle Onco-Thoracique, Institut du Cancer, Avignon, France
| | - Jean Marc Broglia
- Nuclear Medicine Deparment, Institut Sainte-Catherine, Avignon, France
| | - Pierre Boissellier
- Radiotherapy Department, Institut du Cancer de Montpellier, Montpellier, France
| | - Sophie Guillemard
- Nuclear Medicine Department, Institut du Cancer de Montpellier, Montpellier, France
| | - Naji Salem
- Radiotherapy Department, Institut Paoli-Calmettes, Marseille, France
| | | | | | - Céline Berthold
- Radiation Oncology Department, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - Etienne Giroux-Leprieur
- University Paris-Saclay, Department of Respiratory Diseases and Thoracic Oncology, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Ambroise Paré Hospital, Boulogne-Billancourt, France
| | - Damien Moreau
- Oncology Radiotherapy Department, Paris Cité University, European Hospital Georges-Pompidou, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France
| | - Sophie Guillerm
- Department of Radiation Therapy, Saint-Louis Hospital, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France
| | - Khadija Benali
- Nuclear Medicine Department, Hôpital Bichat-Claude Bernard, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris Nord, Paris, France
| | - Laurent Tessonnier
- Nuclear Medicine Department, Centre Intercommunal Sainte-Musse de Toulon-La Seyne-sur-mer, Toulon, France
| | | | | | - Elske Quak
- Nuclear Medicine Department, Centre Francois Baclesse, Caen, France
| | - Carole Massabeau
- Radiotherapy Department, Institut Claudius Regaud - Institut Universitaire du Cancer de Toulouse-Oncopole, Toulouse, France
| | - Frédéric Courbon
- Nuclear Medicine Department, Institut Claudius Regaud - Institut Universitaire du Cancer de Toulouse-Oncopole, Toulouse, France
| | - Patricia Moisson
- Radiotherapy Department, Hopital René Huguenin - Institut Curie, Saint-Cloud, France
| | - Anne Larrouy
- Radiotherapy Department, Centre de Cancerologie Paris Nord, Sarcelles, France
| | - Romain Modzelewski
- Nuclear Medicine Department and QuantIF LITIS (EA4108), Centre Henri Becquerel, Rouen, France
| | - Pierrick Gouel
- Nuclear Medicine Department and QuantIF LITIS (EA4108), Centre Henri Becquerel, Rouen, France
| | - Nadia Ghazzar
- Nuclear Medicine Department, Paris Cité University, European Hospital Georges-Pompidou - Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris Centre, Paris, France
| | - Alexandra Langlais
- Clinical Research Unit, Intergroupe Francophone de Cancérologie Thoracique, Paris, France
| | - Elodie Amour
- Clinical Research Unit, Intergroupe Francophone de Cancérologie Thoracique, Paris, France
| | - Gérard Zalcman
- Université Paris Cité, Thoracic Oncology Department, Centre d'Investigation Clinique Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale 1425, Hôpital Bichat-Claude Bernard, Institut du Cancer - Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris Nord, Paris, France
| | - Philippe Giraud
- Oncology Radiotherapy Department, Paris Cité University, European Hospital Georges-Pompidou, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
van Genugten EAJ, Weijers JAM, Heskamp S, Kneilling M, van den Heuvel MM, Piet B, Bussink J, Hendriks LEL, Aarntzen EHJG. Imaging the Rewired Metabolism in Lung Cancer in Relation to Immune Therapy. Front Oncol 2022; 11:786089. [PMID: 35070990 PMCID: PMC8779734 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.786089] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/30/2021] [Accepted: 12/10/2021] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Metabolic reprogramming is recognized as one of the hallmarks of cancer. Alterations in the micro-environmental metabolic characteristics are recognized as important tools for cancer cells to interact with the resident and infiltrating T-cells within this tumor microenvironment. Cancer-induced metabolic changes in the micro-environment also affect treatment outcomes. In particular, immune therapy efficacy might be blunted because of somatic mutation-driven metabolic determinants of lung cancer such as acidity and oxygenation status. Based on these observations, new onco-immunological treatment strategies increasingly include drugs that interfere with metabolic pathways that consequently affect the composition of the lung cancer tumor microenvironment (TME). Positron emission tomography (PET) imaging has developed a wide array of tracers targeting metabolic pathways, originally intended to improve cancer detection and staging. Paralleling the developments in understanding metabolic reprogramming in cancer cells, as well as its effects on stromal, immune, and endothelial cells, a wave of studies with additional imaging tracers has been published. These tracers are yet underexploited in the perspective of immune therapy. In this review, we provide an overview of currently available PET tracers for clinical studies and discuss their potential roles in the development of effective immune therapeutic strategies, with a focus on lung cancer. We report on ongoing efforts that include PET/CT to understand the outcomes of interactions between cancer cells and T-cells in the lung cancer microenvironment, and we identify areas of research which are yet unchartered. Thereby, we aim to provide a starting point for molecular imaging driven studies to understand and exploit metabolic features of lung cancer to optimize immune therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Evelien A J van Genugten
- Department of Medical Imaging, Radboud University Medical Centre (Radboudumc), Nijmegen, Netherlands
| | - Jetty A M Weijers
- Department of Medical Imaging, Radboud University Medical Centre (Radboudumc), Nijmegen, Netherlands
| | - Sandra Heskamp
- Department of Medical Imaging, Radboud University Medical Centre (Radboudumc), Nijmegen, Netherlands
| | - Manfred Kneilling
- Department of Preclinical Imaging and Radiopharmacy, Werner Siemens Imaging Center, Eberhard Karls University, Tuebingen, Germany.,Department of Dermatology, Eberhard Karls University, Tuebingen, Germany
| | | | - Berber Piet
- Department of Respiratory Diseases, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, Netherlands
| | - Johan Bussink
- Radiotherapy and OncoImmunology Laboratory, Department of Radiation Oncology, Radboudumc, Netherlands
| | - Lizza E L Hendriks
- Department of Pulmonary Diseases, GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre (UMC), Maastricht, Netherlands
| | - Erik H J G Aarntzen
- Department of Medical Imaging, Radboud University Medical Centre (Radboudumc), Nijmegen, Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Das SK, McGurk R, Miften M, Mutic S, Bowsher J, Bayouth J, Erdi Y, Mawlawi O, Boellaard R, Bowen SR, Xing L, Bradley J, Schoder H, Yin FF, Sullivan DC, Kinahan P. Task Group 174 Report: Utilization of [ 18 F]Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography ([ 18 F]FDG-PET) in Radiation Therapy. Med Phys 2019; 46:e706-e725. [PMID: 31230358 DOI: 10.1002/mp.13676] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/06/2019] [Revised: 04/30/2019] [Accepted: 06/06/2019] [Indexed: 02/03/2023] Open
Abstract
The use of positron emission tomography (PET) in radiation therapy (RT) is rapidly increasing in the areas of staging, segmentation, treatment planning, and response assessment. The most common radiotracer is 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose ([18 F]FDG), a glucose analog with demonstrated efficacy in cancer diagnosis and staging. However, diagnosis and RT planning are different endeavors with unique requirements, and very little literature is available for guiding physicists and clinicians in the utilization of [18 F]FDG-PET in RT. The two goals of this report are to educate and provide recommendations. The report provides background and education on current PET imaging systems, PET tracers, intensity quantification, and current utilization in RT (staging, segmentation, image registration, treatment planning, and therapy response assessment). Recommendations are provided on acceptance testing, annual and monthly quality assurance, scanning protocols to ensure consistency between interpatient scans and intrapatient longitudinal scans, reporting of patient and scan parameters in literature, requirements for incorporation of [18 F]FDG-PET in treatment planning systems, and image registration. The recommendations provided here are minimum requirements and are not meant to cover all aspects of the use of [18 F]FDG-PET for RT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shiva K Das
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Ross McGurk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Moyed Miften
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA
| | - Sasa Mutic
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - James Bowsher
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA
| | - John Bayouth
- Human Oncology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA
| | - Yusuf Erdi
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Osama Mawlawi
- Department of Imaging Physics, University of Texas, M D Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Ronald Boellaard
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Stephen R Bowen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Lei Xing
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Jeffrey Bradley
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - Heiko Schoder
- Molecular Imaging and Therapy Service, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Fang-Fang Yin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Daniel C Sullivan
- Department of Radiology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Paul Kinahan
- Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| |
Collapse
|