Workshop Report for Cancer Research: Defining the Shades of Gy: Utilizing the Biological Consequences of Radiotherapy in the Development of New Treatment Approaches-Meeting Viewpoint

Addressing challenges in low-income and middle-income countries through novel radiotherapy research opportunities

Although radiotherapy continues to evolve as a mainstay of the oncological armamentarium, research and innovation in radiotherapy in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) faces challenges. This third Series paper examines the current state of LMIC radiotherapy research and provides new data from a 2022 survey undertaken by the International Atomic Energy Agency and new data on funding. In the context of LMIC-related challenges and impediments, we explore several developments and advances-such as deep phenotyping, real-time targeting, and artificial intelligence-to flag specific opportunities with applicability and relevance for resource-constrained settings. Given the pressing nature of cancer in LMICs, we also highlight some best practices and address the broader need to develop the research workforce of the future. This Series paper thereby serves as a resource for radiation professionals.

Predictive Radiation Oncology - A New NCI-DOE Scientific Space and Community

With a widely attended virtual kickoff event on January 29, 2021, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and the Department of Energy (DOE) launched a series of 4 interactive, interdisciplinary workshops-and a final concluding "World Café" on March 29, 2021-focused on advancing computational approaches for predictive oncology in the clinical and research domains of radiation oncology. These events reflect 3,870 human hours of virtual engagement with representation from 8 DOE national laboratories and the Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research (FNL), 4 research institutes, 5 cancer centers, 17 medical schools and teaching hospitals, 5 companies, 5 federal agencies, 3 research centers, and 27 universities. Here we summarize the workshops by first describing the background for the workshops. Participants identified twelve key questions-and collaborative parallel ideas-as the focus of work going forward to advance the field. These were then used to define short-term and longer-term "Blue Sky" goals. In addition, the group determined key success factors for predictive oncology in the context of radiation oncology, if not the future of all of medicine. These are: cross-discipline collaboration, targeted talent development, development of mechanistic mathematical and computational models and tools, and access to high-quality multiscale data that bridges mechanisms to phenotype. The workshop participants reported feeling energized and highly motivated to pursue next steps together to address the unmet needs in radiation oncology specifically and in cancer research generally and that NCI and DOE project goals align at the convergence of radiation therapy and advanced computing.

Therapy-Induced Senescence: Opportunities to Improve Anticancer Therapy

Cellular senescence is an essential tumor suppressive mechanism that prevents the propagation of oncogenically activated, genetically unstable, and/or damaged cells. Induction of tumor cell senescence is also one of the underlying mechanisms by which cancer therapies exert antitumor activity. However, an increasing body of evidence from preclinical studies demonstrates that radiation and chemotherapy cause accumulation of senescent cells (SnCs) both in tumor and normal tissue. SnCs in tumors can, paradoxically, promote tumor relapse, metastasis, and resistance to therapy, in part, through expression of the senescence-associated secretory phenotype. In addition, SnCs in normal tissue can contribute to certain radiation- and chemotherapy-induced side effects. Because of its multiple roles, cellular senescence could serve as an important target in the fight against cancer. This commentary provides a summary of the discussion at the National Cancer Institute Workshop on Radiation, Senescence, and Cancer (August 10-11, 2020, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD) regarding the current status of senescence research, heterogeneity of therapy-induced senescence, current status of senotherapeutics and molecular biomarkers, a concept of "one-two punch" cancer therapy (consisting of therapeutics to induce tumor cell senescence followed by selective clearance of SnCs), and its integration with personalized adaptive tumor therapy. It also identifies key knowledge gaps and outlines future directions in this emerging field to improve treatment outcomes for cancer patients.

Novel Radiation Therapy Paradigms and Immunomodulation: Heresies and Hope

Radiation therapy benefits the majority of patients across the spectrum of cancer types. However, both local and distant tumor recurrences limit its clinical success. While departing from the established tenet of fractionation in clinical radiotherapy, ablative-intensity hypofractionated radiotherapy, especially stereotactic radiosurgery and stereotactic ablative radiotherapy, has emerged as an alternative paradigm achieving unprecedented rates of local tumor control. Direct tumor cell killing has been assumed to be the primary therapeutic mode of action of such ablative radiation. But with increasing recognition that tumor responses also depend on the immunostimulatory or immunosuppressive status of the tumor microenvironment, the immunologic effect of ablative radiotherapy is emerging as a key contributor to antitumor response. More recently, novel radiation modalities, such as spatially fractionated radiotherapy and ultrahigh dose rate FLASH irradiation, that venture even further from conventional paradigms have shown promise of increasing the therapeutic index of radiation therapy with the potential of immunomodulation. Here, we review the immunomodulatory impact of novel radiation therapy paradigms, heretofore considered radiobiological heresies, a deeper understanding of which is imperative to realizing fully their potential for more curative cancer therapy.

Normal Tissue Injury Induced by Photon and Proton Therapies: Gaps and Opportunities

Despite technological advances in radiation therapy (RT) and cancer treatment, patients still experience adverse effects. Proton therapy (PT) has emerged as a valuable RT modality that can improve treatment outcomes. Normal tissue injury is an important determinant of the outcome; therefore, for this review, we analyzed 2 databases: (1) clinical trials registered with ClinicalTrials.gov and (2) the literature on PT in PubMed, which shows a steady increase in the number of publications. Most studies in PT registered with ClinicalTrials.gov with results available are nonrandomized early phase studies with a relatively small number of patients enrolled. From the larger database of nonrandomized trials, we listed adverse events in specific organs/sites among patients with cancer who are treated with photons and protons to identify critical issues. The present data demonstrate dosimetric advantages of PT with favorable toxicity profiles and form the basis for comparative randomized prospective trials. A comparative analysis of 3 recently completed randomized trials for normal tissue toxicities suggests that for early stage non-small cell lung cancer, no meaningful comparison could be made between stereotactic body RT and stereotactic body PT due to low accrual (NCT01511081). In addition, for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer, a comparison of intensity modulated RTwith passive scattering PT (now largely replaced by spot-scanned intensity modulated PT), PT did not provide any benefit in normal tissue toxicity or locoregional failure over photon therapy. Finally, for locally advanced esophageal cancer, proton beam therapy provided a lower total toxicity burden but did not improve progression-free survival and quality of life (NCT01512589). The purpose of this review is to inform the limitations of current trials looking at protons and photons, considering that advances in technology, physics, and biology are a continuum, and to advocate for future trials geared toward accurate precision RT that need to be viewed as an iterative process in a defined path toward delivering optimal radiation treatment. A foundational understanding of the radiobiologic differences between protons and photons in tumor and normal tissue responses is fundamental to, and necessary for, determining the suitability of a given type of biologically optimized RT to a patient or cohort.

Overview and Lessons From the Preclinical Chemoradiotherapy Testing Consortium

PURPOSE

In the current molecular-targeted cancer treatment era, many new agents are being developed so that optimizing therapy with a combination of radiation and drugs is complex. The use of emerging laboratory technologies to further biological understanding of drug-radiation mechanisms of action will enhance the efficiency of the progression from preclinical studies to clinical trials. In 2017, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) solicited proposals through PAR 16-111 to conduct preclinical research combining targeted anticancer agents in the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program's portfolio with chemoradiation.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The Preclinical Chemo-Radiotherapy Testing Consortium (PCRTC) was formed with 4 U01 programs supported to generate validated high-quality preclinical data on the effects of molecular therapeutics when added to standard-of-care therapies with a concentration on cancers of the pancreas, lung, head and neck, gastrointestinal tract, and brain.

RESULTS

The PCRTC provides a rational basis for prioritizing NCI-supported investigational new drugs or agents most likely to have clinical activity with chemoradiotherapy and accelerate the pace at which combined modality treatments with greater efficacy are identified and incorporated into standard treatment practices.

CONCLUSIONS

Herein, we introduce and summarize the course of the PCRTC to date and report 3 preliminary observations from the consortium's work to date.

Moving Forward in the Next Decade: Radiation Oncology Sciences for Patient-Centered Cancer Care

In a time of rapid advances in science and technology, the opportunities for radiation oncology are undergoing transformational change. The linkage between and understanding of the physical dose and induced biological perturbations are opening entirely new areas of application. The ability to define anatomic extent of disease and the elucidation of the biology of metastases has brought a key role for radiation oncology for treating metastatic disease. That radiation can stimulate and suppress subpopulations of the immune response makes radiation a key participant in cancer immunotherapy. Targeted radiopharmaceutical therapy delivers radiation systemically with radionuclides and carrier molecules selected for their physical, chemical, and biochemical properties. Radiation oncology usage of “big data” and machine learning and artificial intelligence adds the opportunity to markedly change the workflow for clinical practice while physically targeting and adapting radiation fields in real time. Future precision targeting requires multidimensional understanding of the imaging, underlying biology, and anatomical relationship among tissues for radiation as spatial and temporal “focused biology.” Other means of energy delivery are available as are agents that can be activated by radiation with increasing ability to target treatments. With broad applicability of radiation in cancer treatment, radiation therapy is a necessity for effective cancer care, opening a career path for global health serving the medically underserved in geographically isolated populations as a substantial societal contribution addressing health disparities. Understanding risk and mitigation of radiation injury make it an important discipline for and beyond cancer care including energy policy, space exploration, national security, and global partnerships.

Radiation dose and fraction in immunotherapy: one-size regimen does not fit all settings, so how does one choose?

Recent evidence indicates that ionizing radiation can enhance immune responses to tumors. Advances in radiation delivery techniques allow hypofractionated delivery of conformal radiotherapy. Hypofractionation or other modifications of standard fractionation may improve radiation’s ability to promote immune responses to tumors. Other novel delivery options may also affect immune responses, including T-cell activation and tumor-antigen presentation changes. However, there is limited understanding of the immunological impact of hypofractionated and unique multifractionated radiotherapy regimens, as these observations are relatively recent. Hence, these differences in radiotherapy fractionation result in distinct immune-modulatory effects. Radiation oncologists and immunologists convened a virtual consensus discussion to identify current deficiencies, challenges, pitfalls and critical gaps when combining radiotherapy with immunotherapy and making recommendations to the field and advise National Cancer Institute on new directions and initiatives that will help further development of these two fields.

This commentary aims to raise the awareness of this complexity so that the need to study radiation dose, fractionation, type and volume is understood and valued by the immuno-oncology research community. Divergence of approaches and findings between preclinical studies and clinical trials highlights the need for evaluating the design of future clinical studies with particular emphasis on radiation dose and fractionation, immune biomarkers and selecting appropriate end points for combination radiation/immune modulator trials, recognizing that direct effect on the tumor and potential abscopal effect may well be different. Similarly, preclinical studies should be designed as much as possible to model the intended clinical setting. This article describes a conceptual framework for testing different radiation therapy regimens as separate models of how radiation itself functions as an immunomodulatory ‘drug’ to provide alternatives to the widely adopted ‘one-size-fits-all’ strategy of frequently used 8 Gy×3 regimens immunomodulation.

Radiation-induced Adaptive Response: New Potential for Cancer Treatment

Radiotherapy is highly effective due to its ability to physically focus the treatment to target the tumor while sparing normal tissue and its ability to be combined with systemic therapy. This systemic therapy can be utilized before radiotherapy as an adjuvant or induction treatment, during radiotherapy as a radiation "sensitizer," or following radiotherapy as a part of combined modality therapy. As part of a unique concept of using radiation as "focused biology," we investigated how tumors and normal tissues adapt to clinically relevant multifraction (MF) and single-dose (SD) radiation to observe whether the adaptations can induce susceptibility to cell killing by available drugs or by immune enhancement. We identified an adaptation occurring after MF (3 × 2 Gy) that induced cell killing when AKT-mTOR inhibitors were delivered following cessation of radiotherapy. In addition, we identified inducible changes in integrin expression 2 months following cessation of radiotherapy that differ between MF (1 Gy × 10) and SD (10 Gy) that remain targetable compared with preradiotherapy. Adaptation is reflected across different "omics" studies, and thus the range of possible molecular targets is not only broad but also time, dose, and schedule dependent. While much remains to be studied about the radiation adaptive response, radiation should be characterized by its molecular perturbations in addition to physical dose. Consideration of the adaptive effects should result in the design of a tailored radiotherapy treatment plan that accounts for specific molecular changes to be targeted as part of precision multimodality cancer treatment.

Sixteenth Annual Warren K. Sinclair Keynote Address: Frontiers in Medical Radiation Science

On the occasion of the 90 anniversary of National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) and its 55 anniversary since being Congressionally Chartered, the theme of "Providing Best Answers to Your Most Pressing Questions about Radiation" is most appropriate. The question proposed here is, "What are the new frontiers for the NCRP with its breadth of talent and expertise in the rapidly evolving era of precision medicine?" Three closely related themes are presented for new applications of radiation science for research and career opportunities: (1) introduction of the new concept of defining radiation dose in biological perturbations in addition to physical dose, particularly for cancer treatment; (2) assessment of early biomarkers of radiation injury for mass casualty exposure (biodosimetry) to guide triage and for clinical application to guide radiation therapy; and (3) proposal to expand opportunities for radiation professionals, including consideration of a new training program within NCRP's "Where are the radiation professionals?" initiative that trains radiation oncologists as molecular radiation epidemiologists.

Monte Carlo Processing on a Chip (MCoaC)-preliminary experiments toward the realization of optimal-hardware for TOPAS/Geant4 to drive discovery

Amongst the scientific frameworks powered by the Monte Carlo (MC) toolkit Geant4 (Agostinelli et al., 2003), the TOPAS (Tool for Particle Simulation) (Perl et al., 2012) is one. TOPAS focuses on providing ease of use, and has significant implementation in the radiation oncology space at present. TOPAS functionality extends across the full capacity of Geant4, is freely available to non-profit users, and is being extended into radiobiology via TOPAS-nBIO (Ramos-Mendez et al., 2018). A current "grand problem" in cancer therapy is to convert the dose of treatment from physical dose to biological dose, optimized ultimately to the individual context of administration of treatment. Biology MC calculations are some of the most complex and require significant computational resources. In order to enhance TOPAS's ability to become a critical tool to explore the definition and application of biological dose in radiation therapy, we chose to explore the use of Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA) chips to speedup the Geant4 calculations at the heart of TOPAS, because this approach called "Reconfigurable Computing" (RC), has proven able to produce significant (around 90x) (Sajish et al., 2012) speed increases in scientific computing. Here, we describe initial steps to port Geant4 and TOPAS to be used on FPGA. We provide performance analysis of the current TOPAS/Geant4 code from an RC implementation perspective. Baseline benchmarks are presented. Achievable performance figures of the subsections of the code on optimal hardware are presented; Aspects of practical implementation of "Monte Carlo on a chip" are also discussed.

Radiation-Drug Combinations to Improve Clinical Outcomes and Reduce Normal Tissue Toxicities: Current Challenges and New Approaches: Report of the Symposium Held at the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Radiation Research Society, 15-18 October 2017; Cancun, Mexico

The National Cancer Institute's (NCI) Radiation Research Program (RRP) is endeavoring to increase the relevance of preclinical research to improve outcomes of radiation therapy for cancer patients. These efforts include conducting symposia, workshops and educational sessions at annual meetings of professional societies, including the American Association of Physicists in Medicine, American Society of Radiation Oncology, Radiation Research Society (RRS), Radiosurgery Society, Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer and the American Association of Immunology. A symposium entitled "Radiation-Drug Combinations to Improve Clinical Outcomes and Reduce Normal Tissue Toxicities" was conducted by the NCI's RRP during the 63rd Annual Meeting of the RRS on October 16, 2017 in Cancun, Mexico. In this symposium, discussions were held to address the challenges in developing radiation-drug combinations, optimal approaches with scientific evidence to replace standard-of-care, approaches to reduce normal tissue toxicities and enhance post-treatment quality-of-life and recent advances in antibody-drug conjugates. The symposium included two broad overview talks followed by two talks illustrating examples of radiation-drug combinations under development. The overview talks identified the essential preclinical infrastructure necessary to accelerate progress in the development of evidence and important challenges in the translation of drug combinations to the clinic from the laboratory. Also addressed, in the example talks (in light of the suggested guidelines and identified challenges), were the development and translation of novel antibody drug conjugates as well as repurposing of drugs to improve efficacy and reduce normal tissue toxicities. Participation among a cross section of clinicians, scientists and scholars-in-training alike who work in this focused area highlighted the importance of continued discussions to identify and address complex challenges in this emerging area in radiation oncology.