1
|
Kamboj M, Bohlke K, Baptiste DM, Dunleavy K, Fueger A, Jones L, Kelkar AH, Law LY, LeFebvre KB, Ljungman P, Miller ED, Meyer LA, Moore HN, Soares HP, Taplitz RA, Woldetsadik ES, Kohn EC. Vaccination of Adults With Cancer: ASCO Guideline. J Clin Oncol 2024:JCO2400032. [PMID: 38498792 DOI: 10.1200/jco.24.00032] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/05/2024] [Accepted: 01/11/2024] [Indexed: 03/20/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To guide the vaccination of adults with solid tumors or hematologic malignancies. METHODS A systematic literature review identified systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and nonrandomized studies on the efficacy and safety of vaccines used by adults with cancer or their household contacts. This review builds on a 2013 guideline by the Infectious Disease Society of America. PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched from January 1, 2013, to February 16, 2023. ASCO convened an Expert Panel to review the evidence and formulate recommendations. RESULTS A total of 102 publications were included in the systematic review: 24 systematic reviews, 14 RCTs, and 64 nonrandomized studies. The largest body of evidence addressed COVID-19 vaccines. RECOMMENDATIONS The goal of vaccination is to limit the severity of infection and prevent infection where feasible. Optimizing vaccination status should be considered a key element in the care of patients with cancer. This approach includes the documentation of vaccination status at the time of the first patient visit; timely provision of recommended vaccines; and appropriate revaccination after hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation, chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy, or B-cell-depleting therapy. Active interaction and coordination among healthcare providers, including primary care practitioners, pharmacists, and nursing team members, are needed. Vaccination of household contacts will enhance protection for patients with cancer. Some vaccination and revaccination plans for patients with cancer may be affected by the underlying immune status and the anticancer therapy received. As a result, vaccine strategies may differ from the vaccine recommendations for the general healthy adult population vaccine.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mini Kamboj
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| | - Kari Bohlke
- American Society of Clinical Oncology, Alexandria, VA
| | | | - Kieron Dunleavy
- MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Georgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC
| | - Abbey Fueger
- The Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, Rye Brook, NY
| | - Lee Jones
- Fight Colorectal Cancer, Arlington, VA
| | - Amar H Kelkar
- Harvard Medical School, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA
| | | | | | - Per Ljungman
- Karolinska Comprehensive Cancer Center, Karolinska University Hospital Huddinge, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Eric D Miller
- The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Larissa A Meyer
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | | | - Heloisa P Soares
- Huntsman Cancer Institute at the University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT
| | | | | | - Elise C Kohn
- Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Romesser PB, Capdevila J, Garcia-Carbonero R, Philip T, Fernandez Martos C, Tuli R, Rodriguez-Gutierrez A, Kuipers M, Becker A, Coenen-Stass A, Sarholz B, You X, Miller ED. A Phase Ib Study of the DNA-PK Inhibitor Peposertib Combined with Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation in Patients with Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2024; 30:695-702. [PMID: 38051750 PMCID: PMC10870114 DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-23-1129] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/17/2023] [Revised: 07/31/2023] [Accepted: 12/01/2023] [Indexed: 12/07/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Peposertib-an orally administered DNA-dependent protein kinase inhibitor-has shown potent radiosensitization in preclinical models. This dose-escalation study (NCT03770689) aimed to define the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of peposertib plus capecitabine-based chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and assessed its safety and efficacy in locally advanced rectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients were treated for 5 to 5.5 weeks with 50- to 250-mg peposertib once daily, capecitabine 825 mg/m2 twice daily, and radiotherapy (RT), 5 days per week. Following clinical restaging (8 weeks after CRT completion), patients with clinical complete response (cCR) could opt for surveillance. Total mesorectal excision was recommended upon incomplete response (IR). RESULTS Nineteen patients were treated with peposertib at doses of 50 mg (n = 1), 100 mg, 150 mg, and 250 mg (n = 6 each). Dose-limiting toxicities occurred in one out of five (100 mg), one out of six (150 mg), and three out of six (250 mg) evaluable patients. Peposertib ≤150 mg once daily was tolerable in combination with CRT. After 8 weeks of treatment with peposertib and CRT, the cCR was 15.8% (n = 3). Among the three patients with cCR, two underwent surgery and had residual tumors. Among the 16 patients with IR, seven underwent surgery and had residual tumors; five of the remaining nine patients opted for consolidative chemotherapy. The combined cCR/pathologic complete response (pCR) rate was 5.3% (n = 1, 100 mg cohort). CONCLUSIONS Peposertib did not improve complete response rates at tolerable dose levels. The study was closed without declaring the MTD/RP2D.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Jaume Capdevila
- Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Vall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology (VHIO), IOB Quiron-Teknon, Barcelona, Spain
| | | | - Tony Philip
- Northwell Health Cancer Institute, Lake Success, New York
| | | | - Richard Tuli
- USF Health Morsani College of Medicine, Tampa, Florida
| | | | - Mirjam Kuipers
- The health care business of Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany
| | - Andreas Becker
- The health care business of Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany
| | | | | | | | - Eric D. Miller
- Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Hitchcock KE, Miller ED, Shi Q, Dixon JG, Gholami S, White SB, Wu C, Goulet CC, George M, Jee KW, Wright CL, Yaeger R, Shergill A, Hong TS, George TJ, O'Reilly EM, Meyerhardt JA, Romesser PB. Alliance for clinical trials in Oncology (Alliance) trial A022101/NRG-GI009: a pragmatic randomized phase III trial evaluating total ablative therapy for patients with limited metastatic colorectal cancer: evaluating radiation, ablation, and surgery (ERASur). BMC Cancer 2024; 24:201. [PMID: 38350888 PMCID: PMC10863118 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-024-11899-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/18/2023] [Accepted: 01/19/2024] [Indexed: 02/15/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND For patients with liver-confined metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), local therapy of isolated metastases has been associated with long-term progression-free and overall survival (OS). However, for patients with more advanced mCRC, including those with extrahepatic disease, the efficacy of local therapy is less clear although increasingly being used in clinical practice. Prospective studies to clarify the role of metastatic-directed therapies in patients with mCRC are needed. METHODS The Evaluating Radiation, Ablation, and Surgery (ERASur) A022101/NRG-GI009 trial is a randomized, National Cancer Institute-sponsored phase III study evaluating if the addition of metastatic-directed therapy to standard of care systemic therapy improves OS in patients with newly diagnosed limited mCRC. Eligible patients require a pathologic diagnosis of CRC, have BRAF wild-type and microsatellite stable disease, and have 4 or fewer sites of metastatic disease identified on baseline imaging. Liver-only metastatic disease is not permitted. All metastatic lesions must be amenable to total ablative therapy (TAT), which includes surgical resection, microwave ablation, and/or stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) with SABR required for at least one lesion. Patients without overt disease progression after 16-26 weeks of first-line systemic therapy will be randomized 1:1 to continuation of systemic therapy with or without TAT. The trial activated through the Cancer Trials Support Unit on January 10, 2023. The primary endpoint is OS. Secondary endpoints include event-free survival, adverse events profile, and time to local recurrence with exploratory biomarker analyses. This study requires a total of 346 evaluable patients to provide 80% power with a one-sided alpha of 0.05 to detect an improvement in OS from a median of 26 months in the control arm to 37 months in the experimental arm with a hazard ratio of 0.7. The trial uses a group sequential design with two interim analyses for futility. DISCUSSION The ERASur trial employs a pragmatic interventional design to test the efficacy and safety of adding multimodality TAT to standard of care systemic therapy in patients with limited mCRC. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05673148, registered December 21, 2022.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Qian Shi
- Alliance Statistics and Data Management Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Jesse G Dixon
- Alliance Statistics and Data Management Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | | | | | | | | | - Manju George
- COLONTOWN/PALTOWN Development Foundation, Crownsville, MD, USA
| | | | | | - Rona Yaeger
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, Box #22, 10065, New York, NY, USA
| | - Ardaman Shergill
- Alliance Protocol Operations Office, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
| | | | | | - Eileen M O'Reilly
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, Box #22, 10065, New York, NY, USA
| | | | - Paul B Romesser
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, Box #22, 10065, New York, NY, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Miller ED, Klamer BG, Cloyd JM, Pawlik TM, Williams TM, Hitchcock KE, Romesser PB, Mamon HJ, Ng K, Gholami S, Chang GJ, Anker CJ. Consideration of Metastasis-Directed Therapy for Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Expert Survey and Systematic Review. Clin Colorectal Cancer 2024:S1533-0028(24)00004-5. [PMID: 38365567 DOI: 10.1016/j.clcc.2024.01.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/21/2023] [Revised: 01/11/2024] [Accepted: 01/20/2024] [Indexed: 02/18/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND A survey of medical oncologists (MOs), radiation oncologists (ROs), and surgical oncologists (SOs) who are experts in the management of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) was conducted to identify factors used to consider metastasis-directed therapy (MDT). MATERIALS AND METHODS An online survey to assess clinical factors when weighing MDT in patients with mCRC was developed based on systematic review of the literature and integrated with clinical vignettes. Supporting evidence from the systematic review was included to aid in answering questions. RESULTS Among 75 experts on mCRC invited, 47 (response rate 62.7%) chose to participate including 16 MOs, 16 ROs, and 15 SOs. Most experts would not consider MDT in patients with 3 lesions in both the liver and lung regardless of distribution or timing of metastatic disease diagnosis (6 vs. 36 months after definitive treatment). Similarly, for patients with retroperitoneal lymph node and lung and liver involvement, most experts would not offer MDT regardless of timing of metastatic disease diagnosis. In general, SOs were willing to consider MDT in patients with more advanced disease, ROs were more willing to offer treatment regardless of metastatic site location, and MOs were the least likely to consider MDT. CONCLUSIONS Among experts caring for patients with mCRC, significant variation was noted among MOs, ROs, and SOs in the distribution and volume of metastatic disease for which MDT would be considered. This variability highlights differing opinions on management of these patients and underscores the need for well-designed prospective randomized trials to characterize the risks and potential benefits of MDT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eric D Miller
- Department of Radiation Oncology at the Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH.
| | - Brett G Klamer
- Center for Biostatistics, Department of Biomedical Informatics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH
| | - Jordan M Cloyd
- Department of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology at the Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Timothy M Pawlik
- Department of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology at the Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH
| | | | | | - Paul B Romesser
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Harvey J Mamon
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA
| | - Kimmie Ng
- Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA
| | - Sepideh Gholami
- Department of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, Northwell Health, New Hyde Park, NY
| | - George J Chang
- Department of Colon and Rectal Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Christopher J Anker
- Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Vermont Cancer Center, Burlington, VT
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Miller ED, Wu T, McKinley G, Slivnick J, Guha A, Mo X, Prasad R, Yildiz V, Diaz D, Merritt RE, Perry KA, Jin N, Hodge D, Poliner M, Chen S, Gambril J, Stock J, Wilbur J, Pierre-Charles J, Ghazi SM, Williams TM, Bazan JG, Addison D. Incident Atrial Fibrillation and Survival Outcomes in Esophageal Cancer following Radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024; 118:124-136. [PMID: 37574171 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.08.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/13/2023] [Revised: 06/29/2023] [Accepted: 08/05/2023] [Indexed: 08/15/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Radiation therapy (RT) associates with long-term cardiotoxicity. In preclinical models, RT exposure induces early cardiotoxic arrhythmias including atrial fibrillation (AF). Yet, whether this occurs in patients is unknown. METHODS AND MATERIALS Leveraging a large cohort of consecutive patients with esophageal cancer treated with thoracic RT from 2007 to 2019, we assessed incidence and outcomes of incident AF. Secondary outcomes included major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), defined as AF, heart failure, ventricular arrhythmias, and sudden death, by cardiac RT dose. We also assessed the relationship between AF development and progression-free and overall survival. Observed incident AF rates were compared with Framingham predicted rates, and absolute excess risks were estimated. Multivariate regression was used to define the relationship between clinical and RT measures, and outcomes. Differences in outcomes, by AF status, were also evaluated via 30-day landmark analysis. Furthermore, we assessed the effect of cardiac substructure RT dose (eg, left atrium, LA) on the risk of post RT-related outcomes. RESULTS Overall, from 238 RT treated patients with esophageal cancer, 21.4% developed incident AF, and 33% developed MACE with the majority (84%) of events occurring ≤2 years of RT initiation (median time to AF, 4.1 months). Cumulative incidence of AF and MACE at 1 year was 19.5%, and 25.7%, respectively; translating into an observed incident AF rate of 824 per 10,000 person-years, compared with the Framingham predicted rate of 92 (relative risk, 8.96; P < .001, absolute excess risk 732). Increasing LA dose strongly associated with incident AF (P = .001); and those with AF saw worse disease progression (hazard ratio, 1.54; P = .03). In multivariate models, outside of traditional cancer-related factors, increasing RT dose to the LA remained associated with worse overall survival. CONCLUSIONS Among patients with esophageal cancer, radiation therapy increases AF risk, and associates with worse long-term outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eric D Miller
- Department of Radiation Oncology at the Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio.
| | - Trudy Wu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, California
| | - Grant McKinley
- Cardio-Oncology Program, Division of Cardiology, The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Jeremy Slivnick
- Cardio-Oncology Program, Division of Cardiology, The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Avirup Guha
- Department of Medicine, Cardiology, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta, Georgia
| | - Xiaokui Mo
- Center for Biostatistics, Department of Biomedical Informatics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Rahul Prasad
- Department of Radiation Oncology at the Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Vedat Yildiz
- Center for Biostatistics, Department of Biomedical Informatics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Dayssy Diaz
- Department of Radiation Oncology at the Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Robert E Merritt
- Division of Thoracic Surgery at the Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Kyle A Perry
- Department of General Surgery at the Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Ning Jin
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology at the Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Dinah Hodge
- Cardio-Oncology Program, Division of Cardiology, The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Michael Poliner
- Cardio-Oncology Program, Division of Cardiology, The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Sunnia Chen
- Cardio-Oncology Program, Division of Cardiology, The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - John Gambril
- Cardio-Oncology Program, Division of Cardiology, The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - James Stock
- Cardio-Oncology Program, Division of Cardiology, The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Jameson Wilbur
- Cardio-Oncology Program, Division of Cardiology, The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Jovan Pierre-Charles
- Cardio-Oncology Program, Division of Cardiology, The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Sanam M Ghazi
- Cardio-Oncology Program, Division of Cardiology, The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | | | - Jose G Bazan
- Department of Radiation Oncology at the Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Daniel Addison
- Cardio-Oncology Program, Division of Cardiology, The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio; Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Hitchcock KE, Miller ED, Shi Q, Dixon JG, Gholami S, White SB, Wu C, Goulet CC, George M, Jee KW, Wright CL, Yaeger R, Shergill A, Hong TS, George TJ, O'Reilly EM, Meyerhardt JA, Romesser PB. Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology (Alliance) trial A022101/NRG-GI009: A pragmatic randomized phase III trial evaluating total ablative therapy for patients with limited metastatic colorectal cancer: evaluating radiation, ablation, and surgery (ERASur). Res Sq 2023:rs.3.rs-3773522. [PMID: 38196590 PMCID: PMC10775493 DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-3773522/v1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/11/2024]
Abstract
Background For patients with liver-confined metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), local therapy of isolated metastases has been associated with long-term progression-free and overall survival (OS). However, for patients with more advanced mCRC, including those with extrahepatic disease, the efficacy of local therapy is less clear although increasingly being used in clinical practice. Prospective studies to clarify the role of metastatic-directed therapies in patients with mCRC are needed. Methods The Evaluating Radiation, Ablation, and Surgery (ERASur) A022101/NRG-GI009 trial is a randomized, National Cancer Institute-sponsored phase III study evaluating if the addition of metastatic-directed therapy to standard of care systemic therapy improves OS in patients with newly diagnosed limited mCRC. Eligible patients require a pathologic diagnosis of CRC, have BRAF wild-type and microsatellite stable disease, and have 4 or fewer sites of metastatic disease identified on baseline imaging. Liver-only metastatic disease is not permitted. All metastatic lesions must be amenable to total ablative therapy (TAT), which includes surgical resection, microwave ablation, and/or stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) with SABR required for at least one lesion. Patients without overt disease progression after 16-26 weeks of first-line systemic therapy will be randomized 1:1 to continuation of systemic therapy with or without TAT. The trial activated through the Cancer Trials Support Unit on January 10, 2023. The primary endpoint is OS. Secondary endpoints include event-free survival, adverse events profile, and time to local recurrence with exploratory biomarker analyses. This study requires a total of 346 evaluable patients to provide 80% power with a one-sided alpha of 0.05 to detect an improvement in OS from a median of 26 months in the control arm to 37 months in the experimental arm with a hazard ratio of 0.7. The trial uses a group sequential design with two interim analyses for futility. Discussion The ERASur trial employs a pragmatic interventional design to test the efficacy and safety of adding multimodality TAT to standard of care systemic therapy in patients with limited mCRC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Qian Shi
- Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Miller ED, Hitchcock KE, Romesser PB. Oligometastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Review of Definitions and Patient Selection for Local Therapies. J Gastrointest Cancer 2023; 54:1116-1127. [PMID: 36652155 PMCID: PMC10352468 DOI: 10.1007/s12029-022-00900-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 12/15/2022] [Indexed: 01/19/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Nearly one-third of patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC) will ultimately develop metastatic disease. While a small percentage of patients can be considered for curative resection, more patients have limited disease that can be considered for local therapy. Challenges remain in defining oligometastatic CRC as well as developing treatment strategies guided by high level evidence. METHODS In this review, we present the challenges in defining oligometastatic CRC and summarize the current literature on treatment and outcomes of local therapy in patients with metastatic CRC. RESULTS For patients with liver- and/or lung-confined CRC metastases, surgical resection is the standard of care given the potential for long-term progression-free and overall survival. For patients with liver- or lung-confined disease not amenable to surgical resection, non-surgical local therapies, such as thermal ablation, hepatic arterial infusion pump (HAIP), or stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), should be considered. For patients with more advanced disease, such as lymph node or bony metastases, the role of metastasis-directed therapy is controversial. Emerging data suggests that SBRT to ablate all metastases can improve progression-free and overall survival. CONCLUSION Multidisciplinary management is critical for patients with metastatic CRC due to the complexity of their cases and the nuanced patient, tumor, biological, and anatomical factors that must be weighed when considering local therapy. High-quality prospective randomized data in CRC are needed to further clarify the role of local ablative therapy in patients with unresectable oligometastatic CRC with ongoing studies including the RESOLUTE trial (ACTRN12621001198819) and the upcoming NCTN ERASur trial (NCT05673148).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eric D Miller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, 460 W. 10Th Ave., Room A209, Columbus, OH, 43210, USA.
| | - Kathryn E Hitchcock
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida Health, Gainesville, FL, USA
| | - Paul B Romesser
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
- Early Drug Development Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Ritter AR, Miller ED. No Regrets About SABR for NETs. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023; 117:786. [PMID: 37838448 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.08.050] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/15/2023] [Accepted: 08/17/2023] [Indexed: 10/16/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Alex R Ritter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Eric D Miller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Nalin A, Pardo DAD, Pitter KL, Sim AJ, Ejaz A, Manne A, Wolfe AR, Williams TM, Bazan JG, Miller ED. Outcomes of Moderately Dose Escalated Hypofractionated Chemoradiation for Pancreatic Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023; 117:e328. [PMID: 37785161 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.06.2376] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/04/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S) A modestly hypofractionated course of chemoradiation (CRT) consisting of 36 Gy/15 fractions (F) concurrent with gemcitabine used in PREOPANC and phase II trials has become increasingly common for the treatment of borderline resectable (BR) and locally advanced (LA) pancreatic cancer (PC). Achieving an R0 resection remains a key prognostic factor in PC. We tested whether escalating dose beyond standard dosing (SD) of 36-39 Gy/15 F (or 50-54 Gy/25-30 F) would improve R0 resection rates and outcomes while respecting nearby organs at risk. MATERIALS/METHODS This was a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients at our institution from 2012-2022 with BR/LA PC treated with moderate dose escalated (MDE) (45 Gy/15 F, N = 45) or SD (36-39 Gy/15 F, N = 68 or 50-54 Gy/25-30 F, N = 25) CRT. For MDE, a 5 mm expansion from the duodenum, small bowel, and stomach was created (GI_PRV); PTV was cropped from this structure and prescribed 45 Gy/15 F. The primary endpoint was R0 resection rate with secondary endpoints of cumulative incidence of local progression (LP, recurrence after surgery/imaging progression if no surgery) with death as a competing risk (LP after occurrence of distant metastasis [DM] were still captured), cumulative incidence of DM, and overall survival (OS). Univariable and multivariable competing risks regression analyses were performed to determine the association between baseline covariates and LP. RESULTS We identified 45 patients treated with MDE and 93 treated with SD. Most patients presented with BR disease (55.6% MDE; 54.8% SD) and received neoadjuvant chemotherapy with FOLFIRINOX (98% MDE; 99% SD). All patients in the MDE group and 99% in the SD group received concurrent chemotherapy with gemcitabine used most often (96% MDE; 77% SD). Median follow-up was 17 m (IQR 13-27 m). Surgical resection rates were similar between groups (33.3% MDE vs. 39.8% SD, p = 0.46). Amongst patients that had surgery, R0 resection rates were non-significantly higher in the MDE group (73.3% vs. 47.4%, p = 0.09). Cumulative incidence of LP at 18 m was significantly lower in the MDE group (9.0% vs. 24.8%, p = 0.04). No difference in rates of DM (51.2% MDE vs. 59.6% SD, p = 0.92) or OS at 18 m (53.9% vs. 53.6%, p = 0.89) were observed. On multivariable analysis, MDE (HR = 0.39, p = 0.03) and pancreatic head location (HR = 0.51, p = 0.04) were the only factors independently associated with LP. Rates of grade 2+ gastrointestinal toxicity during CRT (20% MDE vs. 20.9% SD, p = 0.91) and ≤90 days of completing CRT (11.6% MDE vs. 14.8%, p = 0.62) were similar between groups, as were rates of grade 3+ hematologic toxicity (52.3% MDE vs. 41.3% SD, p = 0.23). CONCLUSION In this single institutional study, we found MDE is a simple, safe, and effective strategy associated with improved local control, higher R0 resection rates, and similar toxicity to SD CRT for patients with BR/LA PC. Further prospective data is needed to clarify the role of dose-escalated RT in the management of this lethal malignancy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Nalin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH
| | - D A Diaz Pardo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH
| | - K L Pitter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH
| | - A J Sim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH
| | - A Ejaz
- Division of Surgical Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH
| | - A Manne
- Department of Medical Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH
| | - A R Wolfe
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR
| | - T M Williams
- Department of Radiation Oncology, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA
| | - J G Bazan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA
| | - E D Miller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Romesser PB, Miller ED, Shi Q, Dixon JG, Gholami S, White S, Wu C, Goulet CC, Jee KW, Wright CL, Yaeger R, Shergill A, Hong TS, George TJ, O'Reilly E, Meyerhardt J, Hitchcock KE. Alliance A022101: A Pragmatic Randomized Phase III Trial Evaluating Total Ablative Therapy for Patients with Limited Metastatic Colorectal Cancer - Evaluating Radiation, Ablation and Surgery (ERASur). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023; 117:e335. [PMID: 37785178 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.06.2391] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/04/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S) For patients with oligometastatic colorectal cancer (CRC), aggressive local therapy of isolated metastases, particularly in the liver, has been associated with long-term progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) primarily based on retrospective evidence. However, in patients with limited metastatic CRC that is deemed inoperable or those with additional disease outside of the liver or lungs, the role of local ablative therapies, including microwave ablation (MWA) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), to render patients disease free is less clear. Further, despite the long history of treating oligometastatic CRC with local therapy, which is provider biased and not evidence based, questions remain regarding the benefit of extending the paradigm of metastatic directed therapy to patients with more extensive disease. This trial seeks to use a pragmatic multimodality approach that mirrors the current clinical dilemma. This study is designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of adding total ablative therapy (TAT) of all sites of disease to standard of care systemic treatment in those with limited metastatic CRC. MATERIALS/METHODS A022101 is a National Clinical Trials Network randomized phase III study planned to enroll 364 patients with newly diagnosed metastatic CRC (BRAF wild-type, microsatellite stable) with 4 or fewer sites of metastatic disease on baseline imaging. Liver-only metastatic disease is not permitted, and lesions must be amenable to any combination of surgical resection, MWA, and/or SBRT with SBRT required for at least one lesion. Patients receive first-line systemic therapy for 4-6 months and are then randomized 1:1, stratified by number of metastatic organ sites (1-2 vs. 3-4), timing of metastatic disease diagnosis (de novo vs. secondary), and presence of metastatic disease outside the liver and lungs in at least one site. Patients in Arm 1 will receive TAT which consists of treatment of all metastatic sites with SBRT ± MWA ± surgical resection followed by standard of care systemic therapy. Patients in Arm 2 will continue with standard of care systemic therapy alone. The primary endpoint is OS. Secondary endpoints include event-free survival, treatment-related toxicities, and local recurrence with exploratory biomarker analyses. The study needs 346 evaluable patients combined in the 2 arms to demonstrate an improvement in OS with a hazard ratio of 0.7 to provide 80% power with a one-sided alpha of 5%. The trial utilizes a group sequential design with two interim analyses (25% and 50% of events) for futility. RESULTS The trial activated in January 2023. CONCLUSION Recruitment is ongoing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- P B Romesser
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - E D Miller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Q Shi
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | | | - S Gholami
- University of California, Davis, Davis, CA
| | - S White
- Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI
| | - C Wu
- Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University, Atlanta, GA
| | | | - K W Jee
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | | | - R Yaeger
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - A Shergill
- The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States
| | - T S Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - T J George
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
| | - E O'Reilly
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | | | - K E Hitchcock
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Yang L, Miller ED, Shakya R, Na R, Hu A, Packard R, Williams TM. Investigation of ATR Inhibitor VX970 as a Radiosensitizer in Colorectal Cancer Cells. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023; 117:e271-e272. [PMID: 37785025 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.06.1239] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/04/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S) Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of combined cancer-related mortality in males and females in the U.S. Traditional treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer consists of neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy. Emerging data suggests that higher response rates can be achieved with total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) where delivery of all chemotherapy and radiation therapy (RT) occurs prior to surgery. In addition, for patients with a complete response to TNT, non-operative management (NOM) can be considered. However, despite the use of TNT, pathologic complete response rates remain below 40% and NOM is only achieved in approximately 50% of rectal cancer patients. A strong need remains for more active anti-cancer therapies in rectal cancer to both reduce pelvic recurrence and facilitate NOM. Here, we tested the hypothesis that inhibition of the ataxia telangiectasia and Rad3-related protein kinase (ATR), a critical regulator of cellular DNA damage response, could increase the sensitivity of CRC to RT. MATERIALS/METHODS VX970, a highly potent and selective ATR inhibitor, was investigated as a radiosensitizer in SW48 and LoVo CRC cell models. In vitro, IC50 of VX970 was assessed by alamarBlue cytotoxicity assay, while radiosensitivity was revealed by radiation clonogenic assays (0, 2, 4, 6, 8 Gy). ATR activity was determined by p-Chk1 using immunoblotting, and cell cycle distribution was analyzed by propidium iodide flow cytometry. CRC xenografts were generated using both LoVo and SW48 cells injected in the left flanks of athymic nude mice to explore the radiosensitizing effects of VX970 in vivo. Tumors were allowed to grow to 100-150 mm3, and the mice were randomized into multiple groups [vehicle alone, RT alone (10 Gy/5 fractions), VX970 alone, and VX970+RT]. Mouse weights and tumor size were measured three times weekly. Comparison of treatment groups was performed using the log-rank test with P<0.05 considered significant. RESULTS The IC50 concentrations of VX970 on SW48 and LoVo cells were about 500 and 100 nM, respectively. VX970 at doses of 3 nM did not alter the viability of CRC cells, but significantly sensitized CRC cells to radiotherapy (P<0.05), with DER of 1.43 and 1.59, respectively, in SW48 and LoVo cells. VX970 efficiently attenuated p-Chk1 expression and significantly abrogated radiation induced G2/M cell cycle arrest (P<0.05). In addition, VX970 in combination with radiotherapy significantly prolonged tumor growth delay of CRC xenografts compared to radiation alone (P<0.05), with minimal toxicity observed. CONCLUSION Inhibition of the ATR-Chk1 pathway by targeting ATR kinase with VX970 sensitizes CRC to radiotherapy in vitro and in vivo. Our findings support that ATR inhibition by VX970 is a promising new approach to improve the therapeutic ratio of radiotherapy for patients with CRC and warrants further clinical testing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L Yang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA
| | - E D Miller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | - R Shakya
- Target Validation Shared Resource, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH
| | - R Na
- Target Validation Shared Resource, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH
| | - A Hu
- The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | - R Packard
- The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | - T M Williams
- Department of Radiation Oncology, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Makary MS, Bozer J, Miller ED, Diaz DA, Rikabi A. Long-term Clinical Outcomes of Yttrium-90 Transarterial Radioembolization for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A 5-Year Institutional Experience. Acad Radiol 2023:S1076-6332(23)00357-4. [PMID: 37537129 DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2023.07.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/16/2023] [Revised: 07/08/2023] [Accepted: 07/09/2023] [Indexed: 08/05/2023]
Abstract
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES To examine the clinical outcomes of yttrium-90 (Y90) transarterial radioembolization (TARE) for primary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) through the evaluation of a 5-year institutional experience. MATERIALS AND METHODS This retrospective study evaluated 88 consecutive patients with primary HCC receiving Y90 TARE treatment at an academic medical center from 2017 to 2021. Disease distribution was bilobar in 60.2% of patients with an average lesion diameter of 5.0 ± 3.4 cm and Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B or C in 77% of the participants. Clinical outcomes were elucidated by examination of complications, liver function tests, biochemical response, and radiographic response. Objective response ratio (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS) were also calculated. RESULTS The mean administered Y90 radiation dose was 127.8 ± 20.2 Gy. No significant complications or LFT elevations occurred post-therapy. Of the 73.9% of patients with α-fetoprotein-producing tumors, 67.8% experienced a complete or partial biochemical response 1 month post-treatment. The ORR was 83.3% on 6-month imaging and PFS was 9.6 ± 8.5 months. Functional outcomes (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group) were maintained or improved in 79.6% and 76.1% of patients by 6 months and 1 year post-treatment, respectively. The mean survival was 14.7 ± 12.1 months. At 6 months post-treatment, 77.3% of patients were downstaged to or maintained Milan criteria, which was sustained for 74.4% and 70.0% of patients 1 year and 2 years after treatment, respectively. CONCLUSION Y90-TARE is a safe and effective therapy for primary HCC. Enduring outcomes further act as a realistic bridge to liver transplantation, with a majority of patients maintaining Milan criteria and preserving their functional status long term.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mina S Makary
- Division of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, 395 W 12th Avenue, 4th Floor, Columbus, OH 43210 (M.S.M., J.B., A.R.).
| | - Jordan Bozer
- Division of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, 395 W 12th Avenue, 4th Floor, Columbus, OH 43210 (M.S.M., J.B., A.R.)
| | - Eric D Miller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio (E.D.M., D.A.D.)
| | - Dayssy A Diaz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio (E.D.M., D.A.D.)
| | - Ali Rikabi
- Division of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, 395 W 12th Avenue, 4th Floor, Columbus, OH 43210 (M.S.M., J.B., A.R.)
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Facer BD, Cloyd JM, Manne A, Pitter KL, Diaz DA, Bazan JG, Miller ED. Treatment Patterns and Outcomes for Patients with Ampullary Carcinoma Who Do Not Undergo Surgery. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:3727. [PMID: 37509388 PMCID: PMC10378072 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15143727] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/14/2023] [Revised: 07/18/2023] [Accepted: 07/19/2023] [Indexed: 07/30/2023] Open
Abstract
Surgical resection is the standard of care for ampullary adenocarcinoma (AC). Many patients are ineligible due to comorbidities/advanced disease. Evidence for the optimal non-operative management of localized AC is lacking. We hypothesize that patients treated with chemotherapy (CT) and definitive radiation (DRT) will have superior survival (OS) compared to those treated with CT alone. We performed a retrospective review of the National Cancer Database from 2004 to 2017 to identify patients with non-metastatic AC and no surgical intervention. Patients were categorized as having received no treatment, palliative radiotherapy (PRT) alone, CT alone, CT + PRT, DRT alone, or CT + DRT. We utilized Kaplan-Meier analysis to determine OS and the log-rank test to compare survival curves. Among 2176 patients, treatment groups were: No treatment (71.2%), PRT alone (1.9%), CT alone (13.1%), CT + PRT (1.6%), DRT alone (2.4%), and CT + DRT (9.7%). One-year OS varied by treatment group, ranging from 35.1% (PRT alone) to 59.4% (CT + DRT). The one-year OS in a matched cohort was not significantly different between CT alone and CT + DRT (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.69-1.10, p = 0.87). Most patients with non-metastatic AC not treated with surgery do not receive any treatment. There is no difference in one-year OS between those undergoing CT alone and CT + DRT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Benjin D Facer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| | - Jordan M Cloyd
- Division of Surgical Oncology, The Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| | - Ashish Manne
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, The Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| | - Kenneth L Pitter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| | - Dayssy A Diaz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| | - Jose G Bazan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, CA 91010, USA
| | - Eric D Miller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Benson AB, Venook AP, Al-Hawary MM, Azad N, Chen YJ, Ciombor KK, Cohen S, Cooper HS, Deming D, Garrido-Laguna I, Grem JL, Hecht JR, Hoffe S, Hubbard J, Hunt S, Hussan H, Jeck W, Johung KL, Joseph N, Kirilcuk N, Krishnamurthi S, Maratt J, Messersmith WA, Meyerhardt J, Miller ED, Mulcahy MF, Nurkin S, Overman MJ, Parikh A, Patel H, Pedersen K, Saltz L, Schneider C, Shibata D, Skibber JM, Sofocleous CT, Stotsky-Himelfarb E, Tavakkoli A, Willett CG, Williams G, Algieri F, Gurski L, Stehman K. Anal Carcinoma, Version 2.2023, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2023; 21:653-677. [PMID: 37308125 DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2023.0030] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/14/2023]
Abstract
This discussion summarizes the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines for managing squamous cell anal carcinoma, which represents the most common histologic form of the disease. A multidisciplinary approach including physicians from gastroenterology, medical oncology, surgical oncology, radiation oncology, and radiology is necessary. Primary treatment of perianal cancer and anal canal cancer are similar and include chemoradiation in most cases. Follow-up clinical evaluations are recommended for all patients with anal carcinoma because additional curative-intent treatment is possible. Biopsy-proven evidence of locally recurrent or persistent disease after primary treatment may require surgical treatment. Systemic therapy is generally recommended for extrapelvic metastatic disease. Recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines for Anal Carcinoma include staging classification updates based on the 9th edition of the AJCC Staging System and updates to the systemic therapy recommendations based on new data that better define optimal treatment of patients with metastatic anal carcinoma.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Al B Benson
- Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University
| | - Alan P Venook
- UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center
| | | | - Nilofer Azad
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Steven Hunt
- Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Smitha Krishnamurthi
- Case Comprehensive Cancer Center/University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute
| | - Jennifer Maratt
- Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center
| | | | | | - Eric D Miller
- The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute
| | - Mary F Mulcahy
- Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University
| | | | | | | | | | - Katrina Pedersen
- Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Ritter AR, Miller ED. Intraoperative Radiation Therapy for Gastrointestinal Malignancies. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 2023; 32:537-552. [PMID: 37182991 DOI: 10.1016/j.soc.2023.02.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/07/2023]
Abstract
Despite improvements in definitive therapy, many patients with gastrointestinal malignancies experience local recurrences or have unresectable disease making subsequent management often challenging and morbid. Although higher doses of radiation may offer improved local control, the ability for dose escalation of external beam radiation therapy is often limited by adjacent radiosensitive structures. Intraoperative radiation therapy allows for additional radiotherapy to be delivered directly to the tumor or areas at highest risk for local recurrence while minimizing toxicity to adjacent structures, offering potentially improved outcomes for patients with unresectable disease or those with a high risk of local recurrence.
Collapse
|
16
|
Benson AB, Venook AP, Al-Hawary MM, Azad N, Chen YJ, Ciombor KK, Cohen S, Cooper HS, Deming D, Garrido-Laguna I, Grem JL, Gunn A, Hecht JR, Hoffe S, Hubbard J, Hunt S, Jeck W, Johung KL, Kirilcuk N, Krishnamurthi S, Maratt JK, Messersmith WA, Meyerhardt J, Miller ED, Mulcahy MF, Nurkin S, Overman MJ, Parikh A, Patel H, Pedersen K, Saltz L, Schneider C, Shibata D, Skibber JM, Sofocleous CT, Stotsky-Himelfarb E, Tavakkoli A, Willett CG, Gregory K, Gurski L. Rectal Cancer, Version 2.2022, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2022; 20:1139-1167. [DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2022.0051] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/05/2022]
Abstract
This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Rectal Cancer focuses on management of malignant polyps and resectable nonmetastatic rectal cancer because important updates have been made to these guidelines. These recent updates include redrawing the algorithms for stage II and III disease to reflect new data supporting the increasingly prominent role of total neoadjuvant therapy, expanded recommendations for short-course radiation therapy techniques, and new recommendations for a “watch-and-wait” nonoperative management technique for patients with cancer that shows a complete response to neoadjuvant therapy. The complete version of the NCCN Guidelines for Rectal Cancer, available online at NCCN.org, covers additional topics including risk assessment, pathology and staging, management of metastatic disease, posttreatment surveillance, treatment of recurrent disease, and survivorship.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Al B. Benson
- 1Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University
| | | | | | - Nilofer Azad
- 4The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Steven Hunt
- 16Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine
| | | | | | | | - Smitha Krishnamurthi
- 20Case Comprehensive Cancer Center/University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute
| | | | | | | | - Eric D. Miller
- 24The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute
| | - Mary F. Mulcahy
- 1Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University
| | | | | | | | | | - Katrina Pedersen
- 16Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Anna Tavakkoli
- 32UT Southwestern Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center; and
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
17
|
Abstract
Curative intent surgical resection of colorectal metastases to the liver and lungs in eligible patients results in improved disease control and prolonged overall survival with the potential for cure in a subset of patients. Additional ablative and local therapies for use in the liver, lungs, and other body sites have been developed with emerging data on the utility and toxicity of these treatments. Future studies should focus on identification of appropriate candidates for treatment and determining the optimal modality and timing of treatment accounting for both patient and disease factors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kathryn E Hitchcock
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida Health, Davis Cancer Pavilion, 1535 Gale Lemerand Drive, Gainesville, FL, USA
| | - Paul B Romesser
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, Box #22, New York, NY 10065, USA; Early Drug Development Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Eric D Miller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA; Department of Radiation Oncology, Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, 460 West 10th Avenue, Room A209, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Prasad RN, McIntyre M, Guha A, Carter RR, Yildiz VO, Paskett E, Lustberg M, Ruz P, Williams TM, Kola-Kehinde O, Miller ED, Addison D. Cardiovascular Event Reporting in Modern Cancer Radiation Therapy Trials. Adv Radiat Oncol 2022; 7:100888. [PMID: 35198835 PMCID: PMC8844682 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2021.100888] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/16/2021] [Accepted: 12/21/2021] [Indexed: 01/14/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in cancer survivors, particularly after chest radiation therapy (RT). However, the extent to which CVD events are consistently reported in contemporary prospective trials is unknown. Methods and Materials From 10 high-impact RT, oncology, and medicine journals, we identified all latter phase trials from 2000 to 2019 enrolling patients with breast, lung, lymphoma, mesothelioma, or esophageal cancer wherein chest-RT was delivered. The primary outcome was the report of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), defined as incident myocardial infarction, heart failure, coronary revascularization, arrhythmia, stroke, or CVD death across treatment arms. The secondary outcome was the report of any CVD event. Multivariable regression was used to identify factors associated with CVD reporting. Pooled annualized incidence rates of MACEs across RT trials were compared with contemporary population rates using relative risks (RRs). Results The 108 trials that met criteria enrolled 59,070 patients (mean age, 58.0 ± 10.2 years; 46.0% female), with 273,587 person-years of available follow-up. During a median follow-up of 48 months, 468 MACEs were reported (including 96 heart failures, 75 acute coronary syndrome, 1 revascularization, 94 arrhythmias, 28 strokes, and 20 CVD deaths; 307 occurred in the intervention arms vs 144 in the control arms; RR, 1.96; P < .001). Altogether, 50.0% of trials did not report MACEs, and 37.0% did not report any CVD. The overall weighted-trial incidence was 376 events per 100,000 person-years compared with 1408 events per 100,000 person-years in similar nontrial patients (RR, 0.27; P < .001). There were no RT factors associated with CVD reporting. Conclusion In contemporary chest RT–based clinical trials, reported CVD rates were lower than expected population rates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rahul N. Prasad
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Mark McIntyre
- Cardio-Oncology Program, Division of Cardiology, Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Avirup Guha
- Cardio-Oncology Program, Division of Cardiology, Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
- Harrington Heart and Vascular Institute, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Rebecca R. Carter
- Cardio-Oncology Program, Division of Cardiology, Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
- Center for the Advancement of Team Science, Analytics, and Systems Thinking (CATALYST), Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Vedat O. Yildiz
- Cardio-Oncology Program, Division of Cardiology, Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
- Center for Biostatistics, Department of Biomedical Informatics, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Electra Paskett
- Division of Cancer Control and Prevention, Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine and Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Maryam Lustberg
- Department of Breast Medical Oncology, Yale Cancer Center, New Haven, Connecticut
| | - Patrick Ruz
- Cardio-Oncology Program, Division of Cardiology, Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Terence M. Williams
- Department of Radiation Oncology, City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, California
| | - Onaopepo Kola-Kehinde
- Cardio-Oncology Program, Division of Cardiology, Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Eric D. Miller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Daniel Addison
- Cardio-Oncology Program, Division of Cardiology, Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
- Division of Cancer Control and Prevention, Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine and Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
- Corresponding author: Daniel Addison, MD
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Prasad RN, Miller ED, Addison D, Bazan JG. Lack of Cardiotoxicity Endpoints in Prospective Trials Involving Chest Radiation Therapy: A Review of Registered, Latter-Phase Studies. Front Oncol 2022; 12:808531. [PMID: 35223489 PMCID: PMC8863863 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.808531] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/03/2021] [Accepted: 01/20/2022] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Chest radiation therapy (RT) has been associated with increased cardiac morbidity and mortality in numerous studies including the landmark Darby study published in 2013 demonstrating a linear increase in cardiac mortality with increasing mean heart radiation dose. However, the extent to which cardiotoxicity has been incorporated as an endpoint in prospective RT studies remains unknown. METHODS We queried clincaltrials.gov to identify phase II/III trials in lung, esophageal, lymphoma, mesothelioma, thymoma, or breast cancer from 1/1/2006-2/1/2021 enrolling greater than 100 patients wherein chest RT was delivered in at least one treatment arm. The primary endpoint was the rate of inclusion of cardiotoxicity as a specific primary or secondary endpoint in the pre- (enrollment started prior to 1/1/2014) versus post-Darby era using the Chi-square test (p<0.05 considered significant). We also analyzed clinical trial factors associated with the inclusion of cardiotoxicity as an endpoint using logistic regression analysis. RESULTS In total, 1,822 trials were identified, of which 256 merited inclusion. 32% were for esophageal, 31% lung, 28% breast, and 7% lymphoma/thymoma/mesothelioma cancers, respectively. 5% (N=13) included cardiotoxicity as an endpoint: 6 breast cancer, 3 lung cancer, 3 esophageal cancer, and 1 lymphoma study. There was no difference in the inclusion of cardiotoxicity endpoints in the pre-Darby versus post-Darby era (3.9% vs. 5.9%, P=0.46). The greatest absolute increase in inclusion of cardiotoxicity as an endpoint was seen for lung cancer (0% vs. 6%, p=0.17) and breast cancer (5.7% vs. 10.8%, p=0.43) studies, though these increases remained statistically non-significant. We found no clinical trial factors associated with the inclusion of cardiotoxicity as an endpoint. CONCLUSIONS Among prospective trials involving chest RT, cardiotoxicity remains an uncommon endpoint despite its prevalence as a primary source of toxicity following treatment. In order to better characterize cardiac toxicities, future prospective studies involving chest RT should include cardiotoxicity endpoints.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rahul N. Prasad
- Department of Radiation Oncology at the Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, United States
| | - Eric D. Miller
- Department of Radiation Oncology at the Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, United States
| | - Daniel Addison
- Cardio-Oncology Program, Division of Cardiology, The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, OH, United States
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, United States
| | - Jose G. Bazan
- Department of Radiation Oncology at the Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, United States
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Wolfe AR, Chablani P, Siedow MR, Miller ED, Walston S, Kendra KL, Wuthrick E, Williams TM. BRAF mutation correlates with worse local-regional control following radiation therapy in patients with stage III melanoma. Radiat Oncol 2021; 16:181. [PMID: 34537078 PMCID: PMC8449455 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-021-01903-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/06/2021] [Accepted: 08/30/2021] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Background In patients with stage III melanoma, the use of adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) after lymph node dissection (LND) may be currently considered in selected high-risk patients to improve tumor control. Melanomas harbor BRAF mutations (BRAF+) in 40–50% of cases, the majority of which are on the V600E residue. This study sought to compare the clinical outcomes after RT between patients with BRAF+ and BRAF− melanoma. Methods This was a retrospective review of 105 Stage III melanoma patients treated at our institution with LND followed by adjuvant RT from 2006 to 2019. BRAF mutational status was determined on the primary skin or nodal tissue samples from all patients. We compared characteristics of the BRAF+ and BRAF− groups using Fisher’s exact test and Wilcoxon rank sum test and performed univariate and multivariate analysis using Kaplan–Meier estimates, log-rank tests, and Cox proportional hazards modeling with the clinical outcomes of local–regional lymph node control, distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), and overall survival (OS). Results Fifty-three (50%) patients harbored a BRAF mutation (92%, pV600E). BRAF+ patients were younger and had primary tumors more commonly found in the trunk vs head and neck compared to BRAF- patients (p < 0.05). The 5 year local–regional control in the BRAF + patients was 60% compared to 81% in the BRAF- patients (HR 4.5, 95% CI 1.3–15.5, p = 0.02). There were no significant differences in 5-year DMFS, RFS, and OS rates between the two BRAF patient groups. The presence of 4 or more positive LNs remained a significant prognostic factor for local–regional lymph node control, RFS, and OS in multivariate analysis. Conclusions Stage III melanoma patients with BRAF mutation treated with adjuvant RT had > 4 times increased risk of local recurrence or regional lymph node recurrence. These results could be useful for adjuvant RT consideration in lymph node positive melanoma patients and supports other data that BRAF mutation confers radiation resistance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adam R Wolfe
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, The Winthrop P. Rockefeller Cancer Institute, Little Rock, AR, USA
| | - Priyanka Chablani
- Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Michael R Siedow
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Eric D Miller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Steve Walston
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Kari L Kendra
- Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Evan Wuthrick
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - Terence M Williams
- Department of Radiation Oncology, City of Hope National Medical Center, 1500 E. Duarte Road, Duarte, CA, 91010, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Abstract
The clinical management of melanoma patients has been rapidly evolving with the introduction of new targeted immuno-oncology (IO) therapeutics. The current diagnostic paradigms for melanoma patients begins with the histopathologic confirmation of melanoma, initial staging of disease burden with imaging and surgical approaches, treatment monitoring during systemic cytotoxic chemotherapy or IO therapeutics, restaging after completion of adjuvant systemic, surgical, and/or external radiation therapy, and the detection of recurrent malignancy/metastatic disease following therapy. New and evolving imaging approaches with positron-emission tomography (PET) imaging technologies, imaging methodologies, image reconstruction, and image analytics will likely continue to improve tumor detection, tumor characterization, and diagnostic confidence, enabling novel precision nuclear medicine practices for managing melanoma patients. This review will examine current concepts and challenges with existing PET imaging diagnostics for melanoma patients and introduce exciting new opportunities for PET in the current era of IO therapeutics.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chadwick L Wright
- Department of Radiology, Wright Center of Innovation in Biomedical Imaging, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, 395 W. 12th Avenue, Suite 460, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
| | - Eric D Miller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, James Cancer Center, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, 460 W. 10th Avenue, 2nd Floor, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| | - Carlo Contreras
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, 2050 Kenny Road, Tower 4th Floor, Columbus, OH 43221, USA
| | - Michael V Knopp
- Department of Radiology, Wright Center of Innovation in Biomedical Imaging, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, 395 W. 12th Avenue, Suite 460, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Miller ED, Nalin AP, Diaz Pardo DA, Arnett AL, Huang E, Gasior AC, Malalur P, Chen HZ, Williams TM, Bazan JG. Disparate Use of Chemoradiation in Elderly Patients With Localized Anal Cancer. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2021; 20:644-652.e2. [PMID: 34111839 DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2020.7691] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/03/2020] [Accepted: 11/30/2020] [Indexed: 01/20/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The incidence of squamous cell carcinoma of the anus (SCCA) is increasing, particularly among the elderly (age ≥65 years). We sought to compare patterns of care for the treatment of SCCA in elderly versus nonelderly patients. METHODS Data for patients with stages I-III SCCA diagnosed from 2004 through 2015 were obtained from the National Cancer Database. Patients were categorized as having received standard-of-care (SOC) chemoradiation (CRT) with multiagent chemotherapy, non-SOC therapy, palliative therapy, or no treatment. Differences in treatment groups were tested using the chi-square test. We used logistic regression to identify predictors of SOC CRT and multiagent versus single-agent chemotherapy in patients receiving CRT. Propensity score matching was used to compare overall survival (OS) in elderly patients receiving multiagent versus single-agent chemotherapy for those receiving CRT. RESULTS We identified 9,156 elderly and 17,640 nonelderly patients. A lower proportion of elderly versus nonelderly patients (54.5% vs 65.0%; P<.0001) received SOC CRT than other treatments or no treatment. In multivariate analysis, elderly patients were 38% less likely than nonelderly patients to receive SOC CRT (odds ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.58-0.65; P<.0001). A higher proportion of the elderly were treated with single-agent versus multiagent chemotherapy (16.9% vs 11.8%; P<.0001), which resulted in a >1.5-fold increase in the likelihood of elderly patients receiving single-agent chemotherapy (odds ratio, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.39-1.66) in multivariate analysis. After propensity score matching, 3-year OS was higher in elderly patients who received CRT with multiagent versus single-agent chemotherapy (77.1% vs 67.5%; hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.68-0.89; P=.0002). CONCLUSIONS In this comprehensive study of patients with stages I-III SCCA, elderly patients were less likely than nonelderly patients to receive SOC CRT. The low proportion of elderly patients receiving SOC CRT with multiagent chemotherapy for localized anal cancer suggests that the optimal treatment approach for this vulnerable population remains undefined.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | - Emily Huang
- 2Department of Colon and Rectal Surgery, and
| | | | - Pannaga Malalur
- 3Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Hui-Zi Chen
- 3Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
23
|
Jabbour SK, Williams TM, Sayan M, Miller ED, Ajani JA, Chang AC, Coleman N, El-Rifai W, Haddock M, Ilson D, Jamorabo D, Kunos C, Lin S, Liu G, Prasanna PG, Rustgi AK, Wong R, Vikram B, Ahmed MM. Potential Molecular Targets in the Setting of Chemoradiation for Esophageal Malignancies. J Natl Cancer Inst 2021; 113:665-679. [PMID: 33351071 PMCID: PMC8600025 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djaa195] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/16/2020] [Revised: 10/03/2020] [Accepted: 11/30/2020] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Although the development of effective combined chemoradiation regimens for esophageal cancers has resulted in statistically significant survival benefits, the majority of patients treated with curative intent develop locoregional and/or distant relapse. Further improvements in disease control and survival will require the development of individualized therapy based on the knowledge of host and tumor genomics and potentially harnessing the host immune system. Although there are a number of gene targets that are amplified and proteins that are overexpressed in esophageal cancers, attempts to target several of these have not proven successful in unselected patients. Herein, we review our current state of knowledge regarding the molecular pathways implicated in esophageal carcinoma, and the available agents for targeting these pathways that may rationally be combined with standard chemoradiation, with the hope that this commentary will guide future efforts of novel combinations of therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Salma K Jabbour
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA
| | - Terence M Williams
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA, USA
| | - Mutlay Sayan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA
| | - Eric D Miller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Jaffer A Ajani
- Department of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Andrew C Chang
- Department of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
- Department of Surgery, Section of Thoracic Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Norman Coleman
- National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD, USA
| | - Wael El-Rifai
- Department of Surgery, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, FL, USA
- Department of Veterans Affairs, Miami Healthcare System, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Michael Haddock
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - David Ilson
- Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | | | - Charles Kunos
- Investigational Drug Branch, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD, USA
| | - Steven Lin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Geoffrey Liu
- Division of Medical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Canada
| | - Pataje G Prasanna
- Radiation Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD, USA
| | - Anil K Rustgi
- Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
| | - Rosemary Wong
- Radiation Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD, USA
| | - Bhadrasain Vikram
- Radiation Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD, USA
| | - Mansoor M Ahmed
- Radiation Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Abstract
This paper briefly introduces the Special Issue "The Psychological Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic." In doing so, it first outlines the initial call for papers and some of the general contours of the issue before then offering a terse summary of the larger themes offered in each of the six papers included in this volume. Some final summary remarks and larger suggestions for additional work in this area are also noted.
Collapse
|
25
|
Wolfe AR, Siedow M, Nalin A, DiCostanzo D, Miller ED, Diaz DA, Arnett A, Cloyd JM, Dillhoff M, Ejaz A, Tsung A, Williams TM. Increasing neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio following radiation is a poor prognostic factor and directly correlates with splenic radiation dose in pancreatic cancer. Radiother Oncol 2021; 158:207-214. [PMID: 33667588 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2021.02.035] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/13/2020] [Revised: 01/29/2021] [Accepted: 02/24/2021] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio has been correlated with clinical outcomes in many cancers. We investigated whether the delta-NLR (ΔNLR) following radiation therapy (RT) could predict achieving surgical resection and the overall survival (OS) of patients with borderline resectable (BRPC) and locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC), and whether the splenic radiation dose impacted ΔNLR. METHODS/MATERIALS 101 patients with biopsy-proven BRPC or LAPC who received induction chemotherapy followed by RT were retrospectively enrolled. Following contouring of spleens, dose-volume histograms (DVHs) for splenic dosimetric parameters were calculated. Pre- and post-RT complete blood counts (CBC) within two weeks were recorded. Delta (Δ) values were calculated by subtracting the post-RT value from the pre-RT value. Cox regression survival analysis for pre and postradiation CBC values and OS was performed. Receiver operating curves (ROC) were generated and optimal cutoff points for highest sensitivity and specificity were identified. Kaplan-Meier curves for OS were generated. RESULTS On univariate Cox regression analysis, the only significant CBC value associated with OS was ΔNLR (HR 1.06, CI 1.03-1.09, p < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, ΔNLR, age, and completed resection all significantly predicted for worse OS (p < 0.05). ΔNLR significantly predicted achieving surgical resection (p = 0.04) and the optimal cutoff point for ΔNLR was 2.5. Patients with ΔNLR < 2.5 had significantly longer OS (log rank p = 0.046). Spleen radiation dose parameters were all significantly higher in patients with a ΔNLR ≥ 2.5. Optimal radiation cutoff points to predict a ΔNLR ≥ 2.5 were splenic Dmean of 308 cGy and V5 of 10.3%. CONCLUSIONS Among patients with BRPC or LAPC who have received induction chemotherapy, elevated ΔNLR after RT significantly predicts worse OS and decreased odds of achieving resection. Furthermore, ΔNLR is correlated with higher splenic doses, suggesting the spleen may be an important organ at risk.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adam R Wolfe
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, United States
| | - Michael Siedow
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, United States
| | - Ansel Nalin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, United States
| | - Dominic DiCostanzo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, United States
| | - Eric D Miller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, United States
| | - Dayssy Alexandra Diaz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, United States
| | - Andrea Arnett
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, United States
| | - Jordan M Cloyd
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Ohio State University The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, United States
| | - Mary Dillhoff
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Ohio State University The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, United States
| | - Aslam Ejaz
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Ohio State University The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, United States
| | - Allan Tsung
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Ohio State University The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, United States
| | - Terence M Williams
- Department of Radiation Oncology, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA, United States.
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Benson AB, Venook AP, Al-Hawary MM, Arain MA, Chen YJ, Ciombor KK, Cohen S, Cooper HS, Deming D, Farkas L, Garrido-Laguna I, Grem JL, Gunn A, Hecht JR, Hoffe S, Hubbard J, Hunt S, Johung KL, Kirilcuk N, Krishnamurthi S, Messersmith WA, Meyerhardt J, Miller ED, Mulcahy MF, Nurkin S, Overman MJ, Parikh A, Patel H, Pedersen K, Saltz L, Schneider C, Shibata D, Skibber JM, Sofocleous CT, Stoffel EM, Stotsky-Himelfarb E, Willett CG, Gregory KM, Gurski LA. Colon Cancer, Version 2.2021, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2021; 19:329-359. [PMID: 33724754 DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2021.0012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 627] [Impact Index Per Article: 209.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
This selection from the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Colon Cancer focuses on systemic therapy options for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), because important updates have recently been made to this section. These updates include recommendations for first-line use of checkpoint inhibitors for mCRC, that is deficient mismatch repair/microsatellite instability-high, recommendations related to the use of biosimilars, and expanded recommendations for biomarker testing. The systemic therapy recommendations now include targeted therapy options for patients with mCRC that is HER2-amplified, or BRAF V600E mutation-positive. Treatment and management of nonmetastatic or resectable/ablatable metastatic disease are discussed in the complete version of the NCCN Guidelines for Colon Cancer available at NCCN.org. Additional topics covered in the complete version include risk assessment, staging, pathology, posttreatment surveillance, and survivorship.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Al B Benson
- Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University
| | - Alan P Venook
- UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center
| | | | | | | | | | - Stacey Cohen
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center/Seattle Cancer Care Alliance
| | | | | | - Linda Farkas
- UT Southwestern Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Steven Hunt
- Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine
| | | | | | - Smitha Krishnamurthi
- Case Comprehensive Cancer Center/University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute
| | | | | | - Eric D Miller
- The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute
| | - Mary F Mulcahy
- Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University
| | | | | | | | | | - Katrina Pedersen
- Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
27
|
Guo M, Beal EW, Miller ED, Williams TM, Tsung A, Dillhoff M, Ejaz A, Pawlik TM, Cloyd JM. Neoadjuvant therapy versus surgery first for ampullary carcinoma: A propensity score-matched analysis of the NCDB. J Surg Oncol 2021; 123:1558-1567. [PMID: 33596343 DOI: 10.1002/jso.26435] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/14/2020] [Accepted: 01/24/2021] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The role of neoadjuvant therapy (NT) for ampullary carcinoma (AC) has not been clearly established. METHODS Patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for AC between 2004 and 2016 were identified in the National Cancer Database. Overall survival (OS) was compared between those who received NT before resection and those who underwent surgery first (SF). Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed using age, pathologic T and N stage, and tumor differentiation. RESULTS Among 8688 patients with AC, 175 (2.0%) received NT before surgery. While patients who received NT were younger (p = .022) and more likely to have nodal metastasis (43.3% vs. 35.1%, p < .001), there was no difference in OS on univariate (43 vs. 33 months; hazard ratio [HR]: 1.10, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.88-1.37, p = .401) or multivariate (HR: 1.09, 95% CI: 0.88-1.36, p = .416) analysis between groups. After PSM, there remained no difference in OS between NT or SF groups on univariate (37 vs. 32 months; HR: 1.20, 95% CI: 0.87-1.64, p = .350) or multivariate (HR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.71-1.38, p = .943) analysis. CONCLUSION NT followed by surgery was not associated with improved survival outcomes compared with SF among patients with localized AC. While NT is an acceptable alternative for patients with advanced disease, SF should remain the standard of care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marissa Guo
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - Eliza W Beal
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - Eric D Miller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - Terence M Williams
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - Allan Tsung
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - Mary Dillhoff
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - Aslam Ejaz
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - Timothy M Pawlik
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - Jordan M Cloyd
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Kim L, Loccoh EC, Sanchez R, Ruz P, Anaba U, Williams TM, Slivnick J, Vallakati A, Baliga R, Ayan A, Miller ED, Addison D. Contemporary Understandings of Cardiovascular Disease After Cancer Radiotherapy: a Focus on Ischemic Heart Disease. Curr Cardiol Rep 2020; 22:151. [PMID: 32964267 DOI: 10.1007/s11886-020-01380-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW Radiation-induced cardiovascular disease, including coronary artery disease, is a well-known sequela of radiation therapy and represents a significant source of morbidity and mortality for cancer survivors. This review examines current literature and guidelines to care for this growing population of cancer survivors. RECENT FINDINGS The development of radiation-induced ischemic heart disease following radiation can lead even to early cardiotoxicities, inclusive of coronary artery disease, which limit cancer treatment outcomes. These coronary lesions tend to be diffuse, complex, and proximal. Early detection with multimodality imaging and targeted intervention is required to minimize these risks. Early awareness, detection, and management of radiation-induced cardiovascular disease are paramount as cancer survivorship continues to grow.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lisa Kim
- Cardio-Oncology Program, Division of Cardiology, The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Emefah C Loccoh
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Reynaldo Sanchez
- Cardio-Oncology Program, Division of Cardiology, The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Patrick Ruz
- Cardio-Oncology Program, Division of Cardiology, The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Uzoma Anaba
- Cardio-Oncology Program, Division of Cardiology, The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Terence M Williams
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Jeremy Slivnick
- Cardio-Oncology Program, Division of Cardiology, The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Ajay Vallakati
- Cardio-Oncology Program, Division of Cardiology, The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Ragavendra Baliga
- Cardio-Oncology Program, Division of Cardiology, The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Ahmet Ayan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Eric D Miller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Daniel Addison
- Cardio-Oncology Program, Division of Cardiology, The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA.
- Division of Cancer Control and Prevention, James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute at The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
- Division of Cardiology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Davis Heart and Lung Research Institute, 473 W. 12th Ave., Columbus, OH, 43210, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Affiliation(s)
- Eric D Miller
- Department of Psychology, Kent State University, East Liverpool, OH, United States
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Benson AB, Venook AP, Al-Hawary MM, Arain MA, Chen YJ, Ciombor KK, Cohen SA, Cooper HS, Deming DA, Garrido-Laguna I, Grem JL, Hoffe SE, Hubbard J, Hunt S, Kamel A, Kirilcuk N, Krishnamurthi S, Messersmith WA, Meyerhardt J, Miller ED, Mulcahy MF, Nurkin S, Overman MJ, Parikh A, Patel H, Pedersen KS, Saltz LB, Schneider C, Shibata D, Skibber JM, Sofocleous CT, Stoffel EM, Stotsky-Himelfarb E, Willett CG, Johnson-Chilla A, Gregory KM, Gurski LA. Small Bowel Adenocarcinoma, Version 1.2020, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2020; 17:1109-1133. [PMID: 31487687 DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2019.0043] [Citation(s) in RCA: 72] [Impact Index Per Article: 18.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
Small bowel adenocarcinoma (SBA) is a rare malignancy of the gastrointestinal tract that has increased in incidence across recent years. Often diagnosed at an advanced stage, outcomes for SBA are worse on average than for other related malignancies, including colorectal cancer. Due to the rarity of this disease, few studies have been done to direct optimal treatment, although recent data have shown that SBA responds to treatment differently than colorectal cancer, necessitating a separate approach to treatment. The NCCN Guidelines for Small Bowel Adenocarcinoma were created to establish an evidence-based standard of care for patients with SBA. These guidelines provide recommendations on the workup of suspected SBA, primary treatment options, adjuvant treatment, surveillance, and systemic therapy for metastatic disease. Additionally, principles of imaging and endoscopy, pathologic review, surgery, radiation therapy, and survivorship are described.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Al B Benson
- Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University
| | - Alan P Venook
- UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center
| | | | | | | | | | - Stacey A Cohen
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center/Seattle Cancer Care Alliance
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Steven Hunt
- Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine
| | | | | | - Smitha Krishnamurthi
- Case Comprehensive Cancer Center/University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute
| | | | | | - Eric D Miller
- The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute
| | - Mary F Mulcahy
- Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University
| | | | | | | | | | - Katrina S Pedersen
- Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
31
|
Sebastian NT, Miller ED, Yang X, Diaz DA, Tan Y, Dowell J, Spain J, Rikabi A, Elliott E, Knopp M, Williams TM. A Pilot Trial Evaluating Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy to Induce Hyperemia in Combination With Transarterial Chemoembolization for Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2020; 108:1276-1283. [PMID: 32712254 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.07.033] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/24/2019] [Revised: 07/12/2020] [Accepted: 07/17/2020] [Indexed: 01/14/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Despite the survival benefit of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), a majority of tumors recur, attributed to hypovascularity and treatment resistance. Preclinical studies show that moderate radiation doses induce changes in tumor permeability and perfusion, suggesting an opportunity for TACE sensitization by radiation. In this prospective phase 1 trial, we evaluated the feasibility, safety, tolerability, response, and functional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) changes associated with single-fraction stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) followed by TACE within 24 hours. METHODS AND MATERIALS Patients with HCC, 1 to 3 lesions, Childs-Pugh A/B liver function, and no major vascular invasion were enrolled. The primary objective was to establish the feasibility of single-dose SBRT (7.5 or 10 Gy) followed by TACE within 24 hours. Secondary endpoints included safety, tolerability, perfusional changes via functional MRI, overall response rate (ORR), clinical benefit rate (CBR), freedom from local progression, progression-free survival, and overall survival. RESULTS Sixteen patients were enrolled, and 13 received SBRT and TACE. Median follow-up was 15.3 months. Best overall ORR and CBR were 76.9% and 92.3%, respectively. The 1- and 3-month ORR was 76.9% and 69.2%, respectively, and 1- and 3-month CBR was 92.3% and 69.2%, respectively. Median overall survival, progression-free survival, and freedom from local progression were 14.0, 5.2, and 5.9 months, respectively. Crude rates of grade 1+ and grade 2+ toxicity were 85% and 38%, respectively. No grade 3 to 4 toxicities were recorded. One grade 5 toxicity occurred due to hemorrhage 4 days after TACE. On dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI, the transfer rate constant from blood plasma to extracellular extravascular space (kpe) increased within 6 hours post-SBRT but decreased by 24 hours. CONCLUSIONS We hypothesized a strategy of SBRT preceding TACE for the purpose of enhancing TACE delivery and efficacy and tested this strategy in a small pilot study. We found that single-dose SBRT followed by TACE within 24 hours is feasible and tolerable. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI revealed acute changes in tumor permeability/perfusion after SBRT. Additional studies are needed to establish the safety and efficacy of this combination and the effects of SBRT on the HCC microenvironment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nikhil T Sebastian
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Eric D Miller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Xiangyu Yang
- Department of Radiology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Dayssy Alexandra Diaz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Yubo Tan
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Joshua Dowell
- Department of Radiology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - James Spain
- Department of Radiology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Ali Rikabi
- Department of Radiology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Eric Elliott
- Department of Radiology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Michael Knopp
- Department of Radiology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Terence M Williams
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus, Ohio.
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Yang L, Shen C, Pettit CJ, Li T, Hu AJ, Miller ED, Zhang J, Lin SH, Williams TM. Wee1 Kinase Inhibitor AZD1775 Effectively Sensitizes Esophageal Cancer to Radiotherapy. Clin Cancer Res 2020; 26:3740-3750. [PMID: 32220892 PMCID: PMC7367716 DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-19-3373] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/14/2019] [Revised: 02/20/2020] [Accepted: 03/24/2020] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Esophageal cancer is a deadly malignancy with a 5-year survival rate of only 5% to 20%, which has remained unchanged for decades. Esophageal cancer possesses a high frequency of TP53 mutations leading to dysfunctional G1 cell-cycle checkpoint, which likely makes esophageal cancer cells highly reliant upon G2-M checkpoint for adaptation to DNA replication stress and DNA damage after radiation. We aim to explore whether targeting Wee1 kinase to abolish G2-M checkpoint sensitizes esophageal cancer cells to radiotherapy. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN Cell viability was assessed by cytotoxicity and colony-forming assays, cell-cycle distribution was analyzed by flow cytometry, and mitotic catastrophe was assessed by immunofluorescence staining. Human esophageal cancer xenografts were generated to explore the radiosensitizing effect of AZD1775 in vivo. RESULTS The IC50 concentrations of AZD1775 on esophageal cancer cell lines were between 300 and 600 nmol/L. AZD1775 (100 nmol/L) as monotherapy did not alter the viability of esophageal cancer cells, but significantly radiosensitized esophageal cancer cells. AZD1775 significantly abrogated radiation-induced G2-M phase arrest and attenuation of p-CDK1-Y15. Moreover, AZD1775 increased radiation-induced mitotic catastrophe, which was accompanied by increased γH2AX levels, and subsequently reduced survival after radiation. Importantly, AZD1775 in combination with radiotherapy resulted in marked tumor regression of esophageal cancer tumor xenografts. CONCLUSIONS Abrogation of G2-M checkpoint by targeting Wee1 kinase with AZD1775 sensitizes esophageal cancer cells to radiotherapy in vitro and in mouse xenografts. Our findings suggest that inhibition of Wee1 by AZD1775 is an effective strategy for radiosensitization in esophageal cancer and warrants clinical testing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Linlin Yang
- The Ohio State University Medical Center, Arthur G. James Comprehensive Cancer Center and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Changxian Shen
- The Ohio State University Medical Center, Arthur G. James Comprehensive Cancer Center and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Cory J Pettit
- The Ohio State University Medical Center, Arthur G. James Comprehensive Cancer Center and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Tianyun Li
- The Ohio State University Medical Center, Arthur G. James Comprehensive Cancer Center and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Andrew J Hu
- The Ohio State University Medical Center, Arthur G. James Comprehensive Cancer Center and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Eric D Miller
- The Ohio State University Medical Center, Arthur G. James Comprehensive Cancer Center and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Junran Zhang
- The Ohio State University Medical Center, Arthur G. James Comprehensive Cancer Center and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Steven H Lin
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Terence M Williams
- The Ohio State University Medical Center, Arthur G. James Comprehensive Cancer Center and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus, Ohio.
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Sebastian NT, Tan Y, Miller ED, Williams TM, Diaz DA. Surgery with and without adjuvant radiotherapy is associated with similar survival in T4 colon cancer. Colorectal Dis 2020; 22:779-789. [PMID: 31910314 DOI: 10.1111/codi.14953] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/19/2019] [Accepted: 11/29/2019] [Indexed: 01/11/2023]
Abstract
AIM There is little evidence regarding the role of adjuvant radiotherapy for colon cancer. Despite this, national consensus guidelines recommend consideration of radiation for patients with T4 colon cancer. Large comparative studies may be beneficial in clarifying the potential benefit of postoperative radiation for this cohort. METHOD We compared the overall survival between patients treated with surgery with and without adjuvant radiation using the National Cancer Database (NCDB) and the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER), as well as disease-specific survival using SEER. Cox proportional hazards models and propensity score matching were used to adjust for relevant confounders. RESULTS There were a total of 18 776 patients in the NCDB cohort and 9926 patients in the SEER cohort. After propensity score matching, there was no statistically significant difference in overall mortality between surgery with and without radiation in the NCDB [hazard ratio (HR) 1.11; 95% CI 0.93-1.31; P = 0.25] or in SEER (HR 1.20; 95% CI 0.84-1.72; P = 0.32). Additionally, using SEER, we found no statistically significant difference in disease-specific mortality between these two groups (HR 1.13; 95% CI 0.76-1.67; P = 0.54). CONCLUSION Using the NCDB and SEER, we found no statistically significant difference in overall survival or disease-specific survival between patients treated with and without adjuvant radiation. Further studies should evaluate the impact of adjuvant radiotherapy on local control and prevention of recurrence-related morbidity in patients with T4 colon cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- N T Sebastian
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - Y Tan
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - E D Miller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - T M Williams
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - D A Diaz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Benson AB, Venook AP, Al-Hawary MM, Arain MA, Chen YJ, Ciombor KK, Cohen S, Cooper HS, Deming D, Garrido-Laguna I, Grem JL, Gunn A, Hoffe S, Hubbard J, Hunt S, Kirilcuk N, Krishnamurthi S, Messersmith WA, Meyerhardt J, Miller ED, Mulcahy MF, Nurkin S, Overman MJ, Parikh A, Patel H, Pedersen K, Saltz L, Schneider C, Shibata D, Skibber JM, Sofocleous CT, Stoffel EM, Stotsky-Himelfarb E, Willett CG, Johnson-Chilla A, Gurski LA. NCCN Guidelines Insights: Rectal Cancer, Version 6.2020. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2020; 18:806-815. [PMID: 32634771 DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2020.0032] [Citation(s) in RCA: 268] [Impact Index Per Article: 67.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
The NCCN Guidelines for Rectal Cancer provide recommendations for the diagnosis, evaluation, treatment, and follow-up of patients with rectal cancer. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel discussion behind recent important updates to the guidelines. These updates include clarifying the definition of rectum and differentiating the rectum from the sigmoid colon; the total neoadjuvant therapy approach for localized rectal cancer; and biomarker-targeted therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer, with a focus on new treatment options for patients with BRAF V600E- or HER2 amplification-positive disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Al B Benson
- 1Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University
| | - Alan P Venook
- 2UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center
| | | | | | | | | | - Stacey Cohen
- 6Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center/Seattle Cancer Care Alliance
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Steven Hunt
- 14Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine
| | | | - Smitha Krishnamurthi
- 16Case Comprehensive Cancer Center/University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute
| | | | | | - Eric D Miller
- 19The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute
| | - Mary F Mulcahy
- 1Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University
| | | | | | | | | | - Katrina Pedersen
- 14Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
35
|
Affiliation(s)
- Eric D. Miller
- Department of Psychology, Kent State University, East Liverpool, Ohio, USA
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Wolfe AR, Prabhakar D, Yildiz VO, Cloyd JM, Dillhoff M, Abushahin L, Alexandra Diaz D, Miller ED, Chen W, Frankel WL, Noonan A, Williams TM. Neoadjuvant-modified FOLFIRINOX vs nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine for borderline resectable or locally advanced pancreatic cancer patients who achieved surgical resection. Cancer Med 2020; 9:4711-4723. [PMID: 32415696 PMCID: PMC7333854 DOI: 10.1002/cam4.3075] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/11/2019] [Revised: 04/02/2020] [Accepted: 04/05/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
We conducted an institutional study to compare the clinical and pathological efficacy between the neoadjuvant therapy (NAT)‐modified FOLFIRINOX (mFOLF) vs nanoparticle albumin–bound paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (nab‐P/G) for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) and locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) patients who completed resection. The study retrospectively enrolled patients with pathologically confirmed BRPC or LAPC from 2010 to 2018 at our institution. The survival rates were determined by the Kaplan‐Meier method and log‐rank test was used to test differences. Cox's proportional hazard model was used to assess survival with respect to covariates. Seventy‐two patients who completed at least two cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgical resection were included, with 52 (72.2%) patients receiving mFOLF and 20 (27.8%) receiving nab‐P/G. Patients treated with mFOLF had statistically higher rates of RECIST 1.1 partial or complete response (16/52 vs 1/20, P = .028). Additionally, mFOLF patients had greater pathological tumor size reduction, fewer positive lymph nodes, and higher treatment response grade compared to the nab‐P/G patients (all P < .05). The median overall survival was 33.3 months vs 27.1 months (P = .105), and distant metastasis‒free survival (DMFS) was 21.3 months vs 14.6 months (P = .042) in the mFOLF vs nab‐P/G groups, respectively. On multivariate analysis, mFOLF (hazard ratio, 0.428; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.186‐0.987) and abnormal postoperative CA 19‐9 (hazard ratio, 2.47; 95% CI, 1.06‐5.76) were associated with DMFS. Among patients with BRPC and LAPC who complete surgical resection, neoadjuvant mFOLF was associated with improved pathological and clinical outcomes compared with nab‐P/G.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adam R Wolfe
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ohio State University James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Dhivya Prabhakar
- Department of Medical Oncology, Ohio State University James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Vedat O Yildiz
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, Ohio State College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Jordan M Cloyd
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Ohio State University James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Mary Dillhoff
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Ohio State University James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Laith Abushahin
- Department of Medical Oncology, Ohio State University James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Dayssy Alexandra Diaz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ohio State University James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Eric D Miller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ohio State University James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Wei Chen
- Department of Pathology, Ohio State University James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Wendy L Frankel
- Department of Pathology, Ohio State University James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Anne Noonan
- Department of Medical Oncology, Ohio State University James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Terence M Williams
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ohio State University James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Miller ED. 2020 Reflections from a Mid-Career Academic Psychologist: Select Tips for Prospective Graduate Psychology Students. J Psychol 2020; 154:535-544. [PMID: 32412849 DOI: 10.1080/00223980.2020.1758607] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/24/2022] Open
Abstract
This paper provides some personal and academic reflections from a mid-career academic psychologist. In doing so, several select tips and suggestions are offered to prospective graduate psychology students, in particular. This paper strikes to encourage such students to seriously and thoughtfully consider why they wish to attend graduate school and some of the realistic possible negative consequences of doing so. Several select additional suggestions are noted for those students who ultimately decide to attend graduate school with a particular emphasis on the value and importance of forging a productive and collegial relationship with one's graduate mentor. Keywords: graduate school; mid-career; academia; psychology; mentorship.
Collapse
|
38
|
Affiliation(s)
- Eric D. Miller
- Psychology Department, Kent State University, East Liverpool, Ohio, USA
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Beckham TH, Barney C, Healy E, Wolfe AR, Branstetter A, Yaney A, Riaz N, McBride SM, Tsai CJ, Kang J, Yu Y, Chen L, Sherman E, Dunn L, Pfister DG, Tan J, Rupert R, Bonomi M, Zhang Z, Lobaugh SM, Grecula JC, Mitchell DL, Wobb JL, Miller ED, Blakaj DM, Diavolitsis VM, Lee N, Bhatt AD. Platinum-based regimens versus cetuximab in definitive chemoradiation for human papillomavirus-unrelated head and neck cancer. Int J Cancer 2019; 147:107-115. [PMID: 31609479 DOI: 10.1002/ijc.32736] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/29/2019] [Revised: 07/27/2019] [Accepted: 08/30/2019] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
For patients ineligible for cisplatin with definitive radiotherapy (CP-CRT) for locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (LA-HNSCC), concurrent cetuximab (C225-RT) is a popular substitute. Carboplatin-based chemoradiation (CB-CRT) is another option; however, relative efficacies of CP-CRT, CB-CRT and C225-RT are unclear, particularly in the human papillomavirus (HPV)-unrelated population. We identified 316 patients with stage III-IVB cancers of the oropharynx (24.7%), larynx (58.2%) and hypopharynx (17.1%) undergoing definitive C225-RT (N = 61), CB-CRT (N = 74) or CP-CRT (N = 181). Kaplan-Meier and cumulative incidence functions were generated to estimate overall survival (OS), locoregional failure (LRF) and distant metastasis (DM). Cox proportional hazards were used to determine the association of survival endpoints with clinical characteristics. Respectively, 3-year cumulative incidences for CP-CRT, CB-CRT and C225-RT were: LRF (0.19, 0.18 and 0.48, p ≤ 0.001), DM (0.17, 0.12 and 0.25, p = 0.32). Kaplan-Meier estimates for 3 year OS were: CP-CRT: 71%; CB-CRT: 59% and C225-RT: 54%; p = 0.0094. CP-CRT (hazard ratio [HR] 0.336; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.203-0.557, p < 0.01) and CB-CRT (HR 0.279; 95% CI 0.141-0.551, p < 0.01) were associated with reduced hazard for LRF on multivariable analysis. CP-CRT (HR 0.548; 95% CI 0.355-0.845, p < 0.01) and CB-CRT (HR 0.549; 95% CI 0.334-0.904, p = 0.02) were associated with a reduced hazard for death on multivariable analysis. Propensity matching confirmed reduced hazards with a combined CP/CB-CRT group compared to C225-RT for LRF: HR 0.384 (p = 0.018) and OS: HR 0.557 (p = 0.045) and CB-CRT group compared to C225-RT for LRF: HR 0.427 (p = 0.023). In conclusion, CB-CRT is an effective alternative to CP-CRT in HPV-unrelated LA-HNSCC with superior locoregional control and OS compared to C225-RT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas H Beckham
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Christian Barney
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH.,Methodist Health System, Omaha, NE
| | - Erin Healy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Adam R Wolfe
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Andrew Branstetter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Alexander Yaney
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Nadeem Riaz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Sean M McBride
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - C Jillian Tsai
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Julie Kang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Yao Yu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Linda Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Eric Sherman
- Department of Medical Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Lara Dunn
- Department of Medical Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - David G Pfister
- Department of Medical Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Jeremy Tan
- Department of Biostatistics, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Robert Rupert
- Division of Medical Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Marcelo Bonomi
- Division of Medical Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Zhigang Zhang
- Department of Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Omaha, NE
| | - Stephanie M Lobaugh
- Department of Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Omaha, NE
| | - John C Grecula
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Darrion L Mitchell
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Jessica L Wobb
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH.,Fort Hamilton Hospital, Kettering Medical Center, Hamilton, OH
| | - Eric D Miller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Dukagjin M Blakaj
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Virginia M Diavolitsis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH.,Riverside Radiation Oncology, OhioHealth, Columbus, OH
| | - Nancy Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Aashish D Bhatt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH.,UH Seidman Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Benson AB, Venook AP, Al-Hawary MM, Cederquist L, Chen YJ, Ciombor KK, Cohen S, Cooper HS, Deming D, Engstrom PF, Garrido-Laguna I, Grem JL, Grothey A, Hochster HS, Hoffe S, Hunt S, Kamel A, Kirilcuk N, Krishnamurthi S, Messersmith WA, Meyerhardt J, Miller ED, Mulcahy MF, Murphy JD, Nurkin S, Saltz L, Sharma S, Shibata D, Skibber JM, Sofocleous CT, Stoffel EM, Stotsky-Himelfarb E, Willett CG, Wuthrick E, Gregory KM, Freedman-Cass DA. NCCN Guidelines Insights: Colon Cancer, Version 2.2018. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2019; 16:359-369. [PMID: 29632055 PMCID: PMC10184502 DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2018.0021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 590] [Impact Index Per Article: 118.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
The NCCN Guidelines for Colon Cancer provide recommendations regarding diagnosis, pathologic staging, surgical management, perioperative treatment, surveillance, management of recurrent and metastatic disease, and survivorship. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the NCCN Colon Cancer Panel discussions for the 2018 update of the guidelines regarding risk stratification and adjuvant treatment for patients with stage III colon cancer, and treatment of BRAF V600E mutation-positive metastatic colorectal cancer with regimens containing vemurafenib.
Collapse
|
41
|
Sebastian NT, Tan Y, Miller ED, Williams TM, Noonan AM, Hays JL, Abdel-Misih S, Diaz DA. Association of Liver-Directed Local Therapy With Overall Survival in Adults With Metastatic Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma. JAMA Netw Open 2019; 2:e1911154. [PMID: 31517963 PMCID: PMC6745054 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.11154] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma is an aggressive hepatobiliary malignant neoplasm characterized by local progression and frequent metastasis. Definitive local therapy to the liver in the setting of metastatic intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma may improve overall survival. OBJECTIVE To compare the overall survival of patients with metastatic intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma treated with chemotherapy alone vs chemotherapy with definitive liver-directed local therapy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This cohort study used the National Cancer Database to identify 2201 patients with metastatic intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma diagnosed between January 2004 and December 2014 who received chemotherapy with or without hepatic surgery or external beam radiation to a dose 45 Gy or higher. Multiple imputation, Cox proportional hazards, propensity score matching, and landmark analysis were used to adjust for confounding variables. Analyses were performed between September 2018 and February 2019. EXPOSURES Chemotherapy alone and chemotherapy with liver-directed surgery or radiation. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Overall survival. RESULTS A total of 2201 patients (1131 [51.4%] male; median [interquartile range] age, 63 [55-71] years) who received chemotherapy alone (2097 [95.3%]) or chemotherapy with liver-directed local therapy (total, 104 [4.7%]; surgery, 76 [73.1%]; radiation, 28 [26.9%]) were identified. Patients treated with chemotherapy alone had larger median (interquartile range) primary tumor size (7.0 [4.4-10.0] cm vs 5.6 [4.0-8.3] cm; P = .048) and higher frequency of lung metastases (383 [25.9%] vs 7 [6.7%]; P = .004). Patients treated with liver-directed local therapy had higher frequency of distant lymph node metastases (34 [32.7%] vs 528 [25.2%]; P = .045). Liver-directed local therapy was associated with higher overall survival compared with chemotherapy alone on multivariable analysis (hazard ratio [HR], 0.60; 95% CI, 0.48-0.74; P < .001). A total of 208 patients treated with chemotherapy alone were propensity score matched with 104 patients treated with chemotherapy plus liver-directed local therapy. Liver-directed local therapy continued to be associated with higher overall survival (HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.44-0.74; P < .001), which persisted on landmark analysis at 3 months (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.47-0.79; log-rank P < .001), 6 months (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.50-0.92; log-rank P = .01), and 12 months (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.47-0.98; log-rank P = .04). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this study, the addition of hepatic surgery or irradiation to chemotherapy was associated with higher overall survival when compared with chemotherapy alone in patients with metastatic intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. These findings may be valuable given the paucity of available data for this disease and should be validated in an independent cohort or prospective study.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nikhil T. Sebastian
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center–Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus
| | - Yubo Tan
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus
| | - Eric D. Miller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center–Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus
| | - Terence M. Williams
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center–Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus
| | - Anne M. Noonan
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center–Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus
| | - John L. Hays
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center–Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus
| | - Sherif Abdel-Misih
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center–Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus
| | - Dayssy Alexandra Diaz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center–Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Miller ED. Review of The Psychological Journey to and from Loneliness: Development, Causes, and Effects of Social and Emotional Isolation. Journal of Loss and Trauma 2019. [DOI: 10.1080/15325024.2019.1642661] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
|
43
|
Akateh C, Black SM, Conteh L, Miller ED, Noonan A, Elliott E, Pawlik TM, Tsung A, Cloyd JM. Neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment strategies for hepatocellular carcinoma. World J Gastroenterol 2019; 25:3704-3721. [PMID: 31391767 PMCID: PMC6676544 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v25.i28.3704] [Citation(s) in RCA: 92] [Impact Index Per Article: 18.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/19/2019] [Revised: 06/13/2019] [Accepted: 06/22/2019] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common liver malignancy worldwide and a major cause of cancer-related mortality for which liver resection is an important curative-intent treatment option. However, many patients present with advanced disease and with underlying chronic liver disease and/or cirrhosis, limiting the proportion of patients who are surgical candidates. In addition, the development of recurrent or de novo cancers following surgical resection is common. These issues have led investigators to evaluate the benefit of neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment strategies aimed at improving resectability rates and decreasing recurrence rates. While high-level evidence to guide treatment decision making is lacking, recent advances in locoregional and systemic therapies, including antiviral treatment and immunotherapy, raise the prospect of novel approaches that may improve the outcomes of patients with HCC. In this review, we evaluate the evidence for various neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies and discuss opportunities for future clinical and translational research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Clifford Akateh
- Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH 43210, United States
| | - Sylvester M Black
- Division of Transplant Surgery, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH 43210, United States
| | - Lanla Conteh
- Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH 43210, United States
| | - Eric D Miller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH 43210, United States
| | - Anne Noonan
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH 43210, United States
| | - Eric Elliott
- Division of Diagnostic Radiology, Department of Radiology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH 43210, United States
| | - Timothy M Pawlik
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH 43210, United States
| | - Allan Tsung
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH 43210, United States
| | - Jordan M Cloyd
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH 43210, United States
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Sebastian NT, Tan Y, Miller ED, Williams TM, Alexandra Diaz D. Stereotactic body radiation therapy is associated with improved overall survival compared to chemoradiation or radioembolization in the treatment of unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2019; 19:66-71. [PMID: 31517072 PMCID: PMC6734105 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2019.07.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/09/2019] [Revised: 07/22/2019] [Accepted: 07/24/2019] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) is a highly lethal malignancy. For patients with locally advanced, unresectable disease, numerous liver-directed therapy options exist, including chemoradiation (CRT), stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), and transarterial radioembolization (TARE). There is no randomized data to inform clinicians regarding the optimal treatment modality. Method We used the National Cancer Database (NCDB) to study the overall survival (OS) of patients with ICC treated with CRT, SBRT, and TARE. We used Cox proportional hazards modeling and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to account for confounding variables. Results We identified 170 patients with unresected ICC treated with SBRT (n = 37), CRT (n = 61), or TARE (n = 72). SBRT was associated with higher OS compared to CRT (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.37; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.20-0.68; p = 0.001) and TARE (HR = 0.40; 95% CI 0.22-0.74; p = 0.003). On multivariable analysis, SBRT remained associated with higher OS compared to CRT (HR = 0.44; 95% CI 0.21-0.91; p = 0.028) and TARE (HR = 0.42; 95% CI 0.21-0.84; p = 0.014). After IPTW (Bonferroni-adjusted significance threshold, α = 0.017), SBRT again had a statistically significant association with higher OS compared to CRT (HR = 0.22; 95% CI 0.11-0.44; p < 0.0001) and was nominally associated TARE (HR = 0.58; 95% CI 0.37-0.91; p = 0.019). Conclusions We found SBRT is associated with higher OS when compared to CRT or TARE for the treatment of unresectable ICC. Due to the retrospective nature of the study and potential selection bias, these findings should be evaluated prospectively.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nikhil T Sebastian
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, 460 W. 10 Ave, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| | - Yubo Tan
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, 320 Lincoln Tower, 1800 Cannon Drive, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| | - Eric D Miller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, 460 W. 10 Ave, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| | - Terence M Williams
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, 460 W. 10 Ave, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| | - Dayssy Alexandra Diaz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, 460 W. 10 Ave, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Affiliation(s)
- Eric D. Miller
- Department of PsychologyKent State University East Liverpool Ohio
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Fabian D, Ayan A, DiCostanzo D, Barney CL, Aljabban J, Diaz DA, Miller ED, Wuthrick E, Williams TM, Bazan JG. Increasing Radiation Dose to the Thoracic Marrow Is Associated With Acute Hematologic Toxicities in Patients Receiving Chemoradiation for Esophageal Cancer. Front Oncol 2019; 9:147. [PMID: 30931257 PMCID: PMC6429979 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2019.00147] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2018] [Accepted: 02/21/2019] [Indexed: 12/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose: To test the hypothesis that increasing radiation dose to the thoracic marrow (TM) contributes to the development of hematologic toxicities (HT) in esophageal cancer (EC) patients receiving chemoradiation therapy (CRT). Methods: We identified EC cases treated with curative intent CRT at our institution from 2007 to 2016. The TM was contoured as the union of the vertebral bodies (VB) from T1-L1, the ribs from T1-L1, and the sternum. The TM-mean dose and the TM volume receiving at least 5–50 Gy (V5-V50) were collected. Grade ≥ 3 HT (HT3+) was the primary endpoint. Normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) was evaluated using the Lyman-Kutcher-Burman (LKB) model. Logistic regression was used to test associations between HT3+ and dosimetric parameters. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) are reported with p < 0.05 considered significant. Receiver operating characteristics analysis was used to determine optimal cut points. Results: We identified 137 EC cases, and most received concurrent carboplatin/paclitaxel (N = 83). Median radiation dose was 50.4 Gy (IQR = 50.4–50.4 Gy). The rate of HT3+ was 39.4%. Optimization of the LKB model yielded the results n = 0.70, m = 0.67, and TD50 = 20.1 Gy. The TM-V30 was most strongly associated with HT3+ and on multivariate analysis, patients with TM-V30 ≥ 14% had a 5.7-fold (95% CI 2.42–14.54, p < 0.001) increased odds of HT3+ in the entire cohort and a 4-fold (95% CI 1.54–11.11, p = 0.006) increased odds of HT3+ in the carboplatin/paclitaxel cohort compared to patients with TM-V30 < 14%. Radiation dose to the VB and rib sub-sites of the TM were also associated with HT3+, particularly VB-V40. Conclusion: We found that increasing TM radiation dose was associated with HT3+ in EC patients treated with CRT. Radiation dose to the VB and rib sub-sites were also associated with HT3+. These findings suggest that limiting radiation dose to the TM (or its sub-sites) may be sufficient to decrease HT3+, but further prospective evaluation of these results is needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Denise Fabian
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus, OH, United States
| | - Ahmet Ayan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus, OH, United States
| | - Dominic DiCostanzo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus, OH, United States
| | | | - Jihad Aljabban
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus, OH, United States
| | - Dayssy A Diaz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus, OH, United States
| | - Eric D Miller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus, OH, United States
| | - Evan Wuthrick
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa Bay, FL, United States
| | - Terence M Williams
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus, OH, United States
| | - Jose G Bazan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, Columbus, OH, United States
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Miller ED, Song F, Smith JD, Ayan AS, Mo X, Weldon M, Lu L, Campbell PG, Bhatt AD, Chakravarti A, Jacob NK. Plasma-based biomaterials for the treatment of cutaneous radiation injury. Wound Repair Regen 2018; 27:139-149. [PMID: 30576033 PMCID: PMC7261420 DOI: 10.1111/wrr.12691] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/12/2018] [Revised: 11/08/2018] [Accepted: 11/27/2018] [Indexed: 01/03/2023]
Abstract
Cutaneous wounds caused by an exposure to high doses of ionizing radiation remain a therapeutic challenge. While new experimental strategies for treatment are being developed, there are currently no off‐the‐shelf therapies for the treatment of cutaneous radiation injury that have been proven to promote repair of the damaged tissues. Plasma‐based biomaterials are biologically active biomaterials made from platelet enriched plasma, which can be made into both solid and semi‐solid forms, are inexpensive, and are available as off‐the‐shelf, nonrefrigerated products. In this study, the use of plasma‐based biomaterials for the mitigation of acute and late toxicity for cutaneous radiation injury was investigated using a mouse model. A 2‐cm diameter circle of the dorsal skin was irradiated with a single dose of 35 Gy followed by topical treatment with plasma‐based biomaterial or vehicle once daily for 5 weeks postirradiation. Weekly imaging demonstrated more complete wound resolution in the plasma‐based biomaterial vs. vehicle group which became statistically significant (p < 0.05) at weeks 12, 13, and 14 postmaximum wound area. Despite more complete wound healing, at 9 and 17 weeks postirradiation, there was no statistically significant difference in collagen deposition or skin thickness between the plasma‐based biomaterial and vehicle groups based on Masson trichrome staining nor was there a statistically significant difference in inflammatory or fibrosis‐related gene expression between the groups. Although significant improvement was not observed for late toxicity, plasma‐based biomaterials were effective at promoting wound closure, thus helping to mitigate acute toxicity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eric D Miller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Feifei Song
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Jason D Smith
- Engineering Research Accelerator, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.,Carmell Therapeutics, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
| | - Ahmet S Ayan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Xiaokui Mo
- Center for Biostatistics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Michael Weldon
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Lanchun Lu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Phil G Campbell
- Engineering Research Accelerator, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
| | - Aashish D Bhatt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Arnab Chakravarti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Naduparambil K Jacob
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Pollock RE, Payne JE, Rogers AD, Smith SM, Iwenofu OH, Valerio IL, Zomerlei TA, Howard JH, Dornbos D, Galgano MA, Goulart C, Mendel E, Miller ED, Xu-Welliver M, Martin DD, Haglund KE, Bupathi M, Chen JL, Yeager ND. Multidisciplinary sarcoma care. Curr Probl Surg 2018; 55:517-580. [PMID: 30526918 DOI: 10.1067/j.cpsurg.2018.10.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Raphael E Pollock
- The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH.
| | - Jason E Payne
- The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Alan D Rogers
- The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Stephen M Smith
- The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | - O Hans Iwenofu
- Department of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Ian L Valerio
- The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | | | | | - David Dornbos
- The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | | | | | - Ehud Mendel
- The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Eric D Miller
- The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | | | | | - Karl E Haglund
- The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | | | - James L Chen
- The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Nicholas D Yeager
- Nationwide Children's Hospital, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Miller ED, Fisher JL, Haglund KE, Grecula JC, Xu-Welliver M, Bertino EM, He K, Shields PG, Carbone DP, Williams TM, Otterson GA, Bazan JG. Identifying patterns of care for elderly patients with non-surgically treated stage III non-small cell lung cancer: an analysis of the national cancer database. Radiat Oncol 2018; 13:196. [PMID: 30290823 PMCID: PMC6173899 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-018-1142-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/16/2018] [Accepted: 09/26/2018] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Background To compare patterns of care for elderly patients versus non-elderly patients with non-surgically treated stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) using the National Cancer Database (NCDB). We hypothesize that elderly patients are less likely to receive curative treatments, including concurrent chemoradiation (CCRT), compared to non-elderly patients. Methods We identified patients from the NCDB between 2003 and 2014 with non-surgically treated stage III NSCLC. We defined elderly as ≥70 years old and non-elderly <70 years old. Treatment categories included: no treatment, palliative treatment (chemotherapy alone, radiation (RT) alone <59.4 Gy or chemoradiation (CRT) <59.4 Gy), or definitive treatment (RT alone ≥59.4 Gy or CRT ≥59.4 Gy). Differences in treatment between elderly and non-elderly were tested using the χ2 test. Results We identified 57,602 elderly and 55,928 non-elderly patients. More elderly patients received no treatment (24.5% vs. 13.2%, P < 0.0001) and the elderly were less likely to receive definitive treatment (48.5% vs. 56.3%, P < 0.0001). CCRT was delivered in a significantly smaller proportion of elderly vs. non-elderly patients (66.0% vs. 78.9%, P < 0.0001 in patients treated with definitive intent; 32.0% vs. 44.5%, P < 0.0001 in patients receiving any treatment; and 24.2% vs. 38.6%, P < 0.0001 amongst all patients). Conclusions In this large study of patients with non-surgically treated stage III NSCLC, elderly patients were less likely to receive any treatment or treatment with definitive intent compared to the non-elderly. The lack of use of concurrent or sequential chemotherapy in the elderly with stage III NSCLC suggests that the optimal treatment approach for this vulnerable population remains undefined. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13014-018-1142-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eric D Miller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, at the Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University, 460 W. 10th Avenue, Columbus, OH, 43210, USA
| | - James L Fisher
- College of Public Health, at the Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Karl E Haglund
- Department of Radiation Oncology, at the Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University, 460 W. 10th Avenue, Columbus, OH, 43210, USA
| | - John C Grecula
- Department of Radiation Oncology, at the Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University, 460 W. 10th Avenue, Columbus, OH, 43210, USA
| | - Meng Xu-Welliver
- Department of Radiation Oncology, at the Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University, 460 W. 10th Avenue, Columbus, OH, 43210, USA
| | - Erin M Bertino
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, at the Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Kai He
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, at the Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Peter G Shields
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, at the Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - David P Carbone
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, at the Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Terence M Williams
- Department of Radiation Oncology, at the Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University, 460 W. 10th Avenue, Columbus, OH, 43210, USA
| | - Gregory A Otterson
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, at the Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Jose G Bazan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, at the Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University, 460 W. 10th Avenue, Columbus, OH, 43210, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Aharonian F, Akamatsu H, Akimoto F, Allen SW, Angelini L, Audard M, Awaki H, Axelsson M, Bamba A, Bautz MW, Blandford R, Brenneman LW, Brown GV, Bulbul E, Cackett EM, Chernyakova M, Chiao MP, Coppi PS, Costantini E, De Plaa J, De Vries CP, Den Herder JW, Done C, Dotani T, Ebisawa K, Eckart ME, Enoto T, Ezoe Y, Fabian AC, Ferrigno C, Foster AR, Fujimoto R, Fukazawa Y, Furuzawa A, Galeazzi M, Gallo LC, Gandhi P, Giustini M, Goldwurm A, Gu L, Guainazzi M, Haba Y, Hagino K, Hamaguchi K, Harrus IM, Hatsukade I, Hayashi K, Hayashi T, Hayashida K, Hiraga JS, Hornschemeier A, Hoshino A, Hughes JP, Ichinohe Y, Iizuka R, Inoue H, Inoue Y, Ishida M, Ishikawa K, Ishisaki Y, Iwai M, Kaastra J, Kallman T, Kamae T, Kataoka J, Katsuda S, Kawai N, Kelley RL, Kilbourne CA, Kitaguchi T, Kitamoto S, Kitayama T, Kohmura T, Kokubun M, Koyama K, Koyama S, Kretschmar P, Krimm HA, Kubota A, Kunieda H, Laurent P, Lee SH, Leutenegger MA, Limousin OO, Loewenstein M, Long KS, Lumb D, Madejski G, Maeda Y, Maier D, Makishima K, Markevitch M, Matsumoto H, Matsushita K, Mccammon D, Mcnamara BR, Mehdipour M, Miller ED, Miller JM, Mineshige S, Mitsuda K, Mitsuishi I, Miyazawa T, Mizuno T, Mori H, Mori K, Mukai K, Murakami H, Mushotzky RF, Nakagawa T, Nakajima H, Nakamori T, Nakashima S, Nakazawa K, Nobukawa KK, Nobukawa M, Noda H, Odaka H, Ohashi T, Ohno M, Okajima T, Oshimizu K, Ota N, Ozaki M, Paerels F, Paltani S, Petre R, Pinto C, Porter FS, Pottschmidt K, Reynolds CS, Safi-Harb S, Saito S, Sakai K, Sasaki T, Sato G, Sato K, Sato R, Sawada M, Schartel N, Serlemtsos PJ, Seta H, Shidatsu M, Simionescu A, Smith RK, Soong Y, Stawarz Ł, Sugawara Y, Sugita S, Szymkowiak A, Tajima H, Takahashi H, Takahashi T, Takeda S, Takei Y, Tamagawa T, Tamura T, Tanaka T, Tanaka Y, Tanaka YT, Tashiro MS, Tawara Y, Terada Y, Terashima Y, Tombesi F, Tomida H, Tsuboi Y, Tsujimoto M, Tsunemi H, Tsuru TG, Uchida H, Uchiyama H, Uchiyama Y, Ueda S, Ueda Y, Uno S, Urry CM, Ursino E, Watanabe S, Werner N, Wilkins DR, Williams BJ, Yamada S, Yamaguchi H, Yamaoka K, Yamasaki NY, Yamauchi M, Yamauchi S, Yaqoob T, Yatsu Y, Yonetoku D, Zhuravleva I, Zoghbi A, Terasawa T, Sekido M, Takefuji K, Kawai E, Misawa H, Tsuchiya F, Yamazaki R, Kobayashi E, Kisaka S, Aoki T. Hitomi X-ray studies of Giant Radio Pulses from the Crab pulsar. Publ Astron Soc Jpn Nihon Tenmon Gakkai 2018; 70:10.1093/pasj/psx083. [PMID: 32020916 PMCID: PMC6999749 DOI: 10.1093/pasj/psx083] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/10/2023]
Abstract
To search for giant X-ray pulses correlated with the giant radio pulses (GRPs) from the Crab pulsar, we performed a simultaneous observation of the Crab pulsar with the X-ray satellite Hitomi in the 2 - 300 keV band and the Kashima NICT radio observatory in the 1.4 - 1.7 GHz band with a net exposure of about 2 ks on 25 March 2016, just before the loss of the Hitomi mission. The timing performance of the Hitomi instruments was confirmed to meet the timing requirement and about 1,000 and 100 GRPs were simultaneously observed at the main and inter-pulse phases, respectively, and we found no apparent correlation between the giant radio pulses and the X-ray emission in either the main or inter-pulse phases. All variations are within the 2 sigma fluctuations of the X-ray fluxes at the pulse peaks, and the 3 sigma upper limits of variations of main- or inter-pulse GRPs are 22% or 80% of the peak flux in a 0.20 phase width, respectively, in the 2 - 300 keV band. The values become 25% or 110% for main or inter-pulse GRPs, respectively, when the phase width is restricted into the 0.03 phase. Among the upper limits from the Hitomi satellite, those in the 4.5-10 keV and the 70-300 keV are obtained for the first time, and those in other bands are consistent with previous reports. Numerically, the upper limits of main- and inter-pulse GRPs in the 0.20 phase width are about (2.4 and 9.3) ×10-11 erg cm-2, respectively. No significant variability in pulse profiles implies that the GRPs originated from a local place within the magnetosphere and the number of photon-emitting particles temporally increases. However, the results do not statistically rule out variations correlated with the GRPs, because the possible X-ray enhancement may appear due to a > 0.02% brightening of the pulse-peak flux under such conditions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Felix Aharonian
- Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies, 31 Fitzwilliam Place, Dublin 2, Ireland
| | - Hiroki Akamatsu
- SRON Netherlands Institute for Space Research, Sorbonnelaan 2, 3584 CA Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Fumie Akimoto
- Institute for Space-Earth Environmental Research, Nagoya University, Furo-cho, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya, Aichi 464-8601
| | - Steven W. Allen
- Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology, Stanford University, 452 Lomita Mall, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
- Department of Physics, Stanford University, 382 Via Pueblo Mall, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
- SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, 2575 Sand Hill Road, Menlo Park, CA 94025, USA
| | - Lorella Angelini
- NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center, 8800 Greenbelt Road, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA
| | - Marc Audard
- Department of Astronomy, University of Geneva, ch. d’Écogia 16, CH-1290 Versoix, Switzerland
| | - Hisamitsu Awaki
- Department of Physics, Ehime University, Bunkyo-cho, Matsuyama, Ehime 790-8577
| | - Magnus Axelsson
- Department of Physics and Oskar Klein Center, Stockholm University, 106 91 Stockholm,Sweden
| | - Aya Bamba
- Department of Physics, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-0033
- Research Center for the Early Universe, School of Science, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-0033
| | - Marshall W. Bautz
- Kavli Institute for Astrophysics and Space Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA
| | - Roger Blandford
- Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology, Stanford University, 452 Lomita Mall, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
- Department of Physics, Stanford University, 382 Via Pueblo Mall, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
- SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, 2575 Sand Hill Road, Menlo Park, CA 94025, USA
| | - Laura W. Brenneman
- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, 60 Garden Street, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA
| | - Gregory V. Brown
- Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 7000 East Avenue, Livermore, CA 94550, USA
| | - Esra Bulbul
- Kavli Institute for Astrophysics and Space Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA
| | - Edward M. Cackett
- Department of Physics and Astronomy, Wayne State University, 666 W. Hancock St, Detroit,MI 48201, USA
| | - Maria Chernyakova
- Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies, 31 Fitzwilliam Place, Dublin 2, Ireland
| | - Meng P. Chiao
- NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center, 8800 Greenbelt Road, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA
| | - Paolo S. Coppi
- Department of Physics, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520-8120, USA
- Department of Astronomy, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520-8101, USA
| | - Elisa Costantini
- SRON Netherlands Institute for Space Research, Sorbonnelaan 2, 3584 CA Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Jelle De Plaa
- SRON Netherlands Institute for Space Research, Sorbonnelaan 2, 3584 CA Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Cor P. De Vries
- SRON Netherlands Institute for Space Research, Sorbonnelaan 2, 3584 CA Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Jan-Willem Den Herder
- SRON Netherlands Institute for Space Research, Sorbonnelaan 2, 3584 CA Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Chris Done
- Centre for Extragalactic Astronomy, Department of Physics, University of Durham, South Road, Durham, DH1 3LE, UK
| | - Tadayasu Dotani
- Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, 3-1-1 Yoshino-dai, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5210
| | - Ken Ebisawa
- Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, 3-1-1 Yoshino-dai, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5210
| | - Megan E. Eckart
- NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center, 8800 Greenbelt Road, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA
| | - Teruaki Enoto
- Department of Astronomy, Kyoto University, Kitashirakawa-Oiwake-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8502
- The Hakubi Center for Advanced Research, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8302
| | - Yuichiro Ezoe
- Department of Physics, Tokyo Metropolitan University, 1-1 Minami-Osawa, Hachioji, Tokyo 192-0397
| | - Andrew C. Fabian
- Institute of Astronomy, University of Cambridge, Madingley Road, Cambridge, CB3 0HA, UK
| | - Carlo Ferrigno
- Department of Astronomy, University of Geneva, ch. d’Écogia 16, CH-1290 Versoix, Switzerland
| | - Adam R. Foster
- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, 60 Garden Street, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA
| | - Ryuichi Fujimoto
- Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Kanazawa University, Kakuma-machi, Kanazawa, Ishikawa 920-1192
| | - Yasushi Fukazawa
- School of Science, Hiroshima University, 1-3-1 Kagamiyama, Higashi-Hiroshima 739-8526
| | | | - Massimiliano Galeazzi
- Physics Department, University of Miami, 1320 Campo Sano Dr., Coral Gables, FL 33146, USA
| | - Luigi C. Gallo
- Department of Astronomy and Physics, Saint Mary’s University, 923 Robie Street, Halifax, NS, B3H 3C3, Canada
| | - Poshak Gandhi
- Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton, SO17 1BJ, UK
| | - Margherita Giustini
- SRON Netherlands Institute for Space Research, Sorbonnelaan 2, 3584 CA Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Andrea Goldwurm
- Laboratoire APC, 10 rue Alice Domon et Léonie Duquet, 75013 Paris, France
- CEA Saclay, 91191 Gif sur Yvette, France
| | - Liyi Gu
- SRON Netherlands Institute for Space Research, Sorbonnelaan 2, 3584 CA Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Matteo Guainazzi
- European Space Research and Technology Center, Keplerlaan 1 2201 AZ Noordwijk, The Netherlands
| | - Yoshito Haba
- Department of Physics and Astronomy, Aichi University of Education, 1 Hirosawa,Igaya-cho, Kariya, Aichi 448-8543
| | - Kouichi Hagino
- Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, 3-1-1 Yoshino-dai, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5210
| | - Kenji Hamaguchi
- NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center, 8800 Greenbelt Road, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA
- Department of Physics, University of Maryland Baltimore County, 1000 Hilltop Circle,Baltimore, MD 21250, USA
| | - Ilana M. Harrus
- NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center, 8800 Greenbelt Road, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA
- Department of Physics, University of Maryland Baltimore County, 1000 Hilltop Circle,Baltimore, MD 21250, USA
| | - Isamu Hatsukade
- Department of Applied Physics and Electronic Engineering, University of Miyazaki, 1-1 Gakuen Kibanadai-Nishi, Miyazaki, 889-2192
| | - Katsuhiro Hayashi
- Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, 3-1-1 Yoshino-dai, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5210
| | - Takayuki Hayashi
- Department of Physics, Nagoya University, Furo-cho, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya, Aichi 464-8602
| | - Kiyoshi Hayashida
- Department of Earth and Space Science, Osaka University, 1-1 Machikaneyama-cho,Toyonaka, Osaka 560-0043
| | - Junko S. Hiraga
- Department of Physics, Kwansei Gakuin University, 2-1 Gakuen, Sanda, Hyogo 669-1337
| | - Ann Hornschemeier
- NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center, 8800 Greenbelt Road, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA
| | - Akio Hoshino
- Department of Physics, Rikkyo University, 3-34-1 Nishi-Ikebukuro, Toshima-ku, Tokyo 171-8501
| | - John P. Hughes
- Department of Physics and Astronomy, Rutgers University, 136 Frelinghuysen Road, Piscataway, NJ 08854, USA
| | - Yuto Ichinohe
- Department of Physics, Tokyo Metropolitan University, 1-1 Minami-Osawa, Hachioji, Tokyo 192-0397
| | - Ryo Iizuka
- Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, 3-1-1 Yoshino-dai, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5210
| | - Hajime Inoue
- Meisei University, 2-1-1 Hodokubo, Hino, Tokyo 191-8506
| | - Yoshiyuki Inoue
- Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, 3-1-1 Yoshino-dai, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5210
| | - Manabu Ishida
- Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, 3-1-1 Yoshino-dai, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5210
| | - Kumi Ishikawa
- Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, 3-1-1 Yoshino-dai, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5210
| | - Yoshitaka Ishisaki
- Department of Physics, Tokyo Metropolitan University, 1-1 Minami-Osawa, Hachioji, Tokyo 192-0397
| | - Masachika Iwai
- Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, 3-1-1 Yoshino-dai, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5210
| | - Jelle Kaastra
- SRON Netherlands Institute for Space Research, Sorbonnelaan 2, 3584 CA Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Leiden Observatory, Leiden University, PO Box 9513, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Tim Kallman
- NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center, 8800 Greenbelt Road, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA
| | - Tsuneyoshi Kamae
- Department of Physics, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-0033
| | - Jun Kataoka
- Research Institute for Science and Engineering, Waseda University, 3-4-1 Ohkubo, Shinjuku, Tokyo 169-8555
| | - Satoru Katsuda
- Department of Physics, Chuo University, 1-13-27 Kasuga, Bunkyo, Tokyo 112-8551
| | - Nobuyuki Kawai
- Department of Physics, Tokyo Institute of Technology, 2-12-1 Ookayama, Meguro-ku, Tokyo152-8550
| | - Richard L. Kelley
- NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center, 8800 Greenbelt Road, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA
| | | | - Takao Kitaguchi
- School of Science, Hiroshima University, 1-3-1 Kagamiyama, Higashi-Hiroshima 739-8526
| | - Shunji Kitamoto
- Department of Physics, Rikkyo University, 3-34-1 Nishi-Ikebukuro, Toshima-ku, Tokyo 171-8501
| | - Tetsu Kitayama
- Department of Physics, Toho University, 2-2-1 Miyama, Funabashi, Chiba 274-8510
| | - Takayoshi Kohmura
- Department of Physics, Tokyo University of Science, 2641 Yamazaki, Noda, Chiba, 278-8510
| | - Motohide Kokubun
- Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, 3-1-1 Yoshino-dai, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5210
| | - Katsuji Koyama
- Department of Physics, Kyoto University, Kitashirakawa-Oiwake-Cho, Sakyo, Kyoto 606-8502
| | - Shu Koyama
- Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, 3-1-1 Yoshino-dai, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5210
| | - Peter Kretschmar
- European Space Astronomy Center, Camino Bajo del Castillo, s/n., 28692 Villanueva de la Cañada, Madrid, Spain
| | - Hans A. Krimm
- Universities Space Research Association, 7178 Columbia Gateway Drive, Columbia, MD 21046, USA
- National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Blvd, Arlington, VA 22230, USA
| | - Aya Kubota
- Department of Electronic Information Systems, Shibaura Institute of Technology, 307 Fukasaku, Minuma-ku, Saitama, Saitama 337-8570
| | - Hideyo Kunieda
- Department of Physics, Nagoya University, Furo-cho, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya, Aichi 464-8602
| | - Philippe Laurent
- Laboratoire APC, 10 rue Alice Domon et Léonie Duquet, 75013 Paris, France
- CEA Saclay, 91191 Gif sur Yvette, France
| | - Shiu-Hang Lee
- Department of Astronomy, Kyoto University, Kitashirakawa-Oiwake-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8502
| | | | | | - Michael Loewenstein
- NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center, 8800 Greenbelt Road, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA
| | - Knox S. Long
- Space Telescope Science Institute, 3700 San Martin Drive, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA
| | - David Lumb
- European Space Research and Technology Center, Keplerlaan 1 2201 AZ Noordwijk, The Netherlands
| | - Greg Madejski
- Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology, Stanford University, 452 Lomita Mall, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
| | - Yoshitomo Maeda
- Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, 3-1-1 Yoshino-dai, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5210
| | - Daniel Maier
- Laboratoire APC, 10 rue Alice Domon et Léonie Duquet, 75013 Paris, France
- CEA Saclay, 91191 Gif sur Yvette, France
| | - Kazuo Makishima
- Institute of Physical and Chemical Research, 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198
| | - Maxim Markevitch
- NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center, 8800 Greenbelt Road, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA
| | - Hironori Matsumoto
- Department of Earth and Space Science, Osaka University, 1-1 Machikaneyama-cho,Toyonaka, Osaka 560-0043
| | - Kyoko Matsushita
- Department of Physics, Tokyo University of Science, 1-3 Kagurazaka, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 162-8601
| | - Dan Mccammon
- Department of Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706, USA
| | - Brian R. Mcnamara
- Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Waterloo, 200 University Avenue West, Waterloo, Ontario, N2L 3G1, Canada
| | - Missagh Mehdipour
- SRON Netherlands Institute for Space Research, Sorbonnelaan 2, 3584 CA Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Eric D. Miller
- Kavli Institute for Astrophysics and Space Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA
| | - Jon M. Miller
- Department of Astronomy, University of Michigan, 1085 South University Avenue, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA
| | - Shin Mineshige
- Department of Astronomy, Kyoto University, Kitashirakawa-Oiwake-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8502
| | - Kazuhisa Mitsuda
- Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, 3-1-1 Yoshino-dai, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5210
| | - Ikuyuki Mitsuishi
- Department of Physics, Nagoya University, Furo-cho, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya, Aichi 464-8602
| | - Takuya Miyazawa
- Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology Graduate University, 1919-1 Tancha, Onna-son Okinawa, 904-0495
| | - Tsunefumi Mizuno
- School of Science, Hiroshima University, 1-3-1 Kagamiyama, Higashi-Hiroshima 739-8526
| | - Hideyuki Mori
- NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center, 8800 Greenbelt Road, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA
| | - Koji Mori
- Department of Applied Physics and Electronic Engineering, University of Miyazaki, 1-1 Gakuen Kibanadai-Nishi, Miyazaki, 889-2192
| | - Koji Mukai
- NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center, 8800 Greenbelt Road, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA
- Department of Physics, University of Maryland Baltimore County, 1000 Hilltop Circle,Baltimore, MD 21250, USA
| | - Hiroshi Murakami
- Faculty of Liberal Arts, Tohoku Gakuin University, 2-1-1 Tenjinzawa, Izumi-ku, Sendai, Miyagi 981-3193
| | | | - Takao Nakagawa
- Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, 3-1-1 Yoshino-dai, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5210
| | - Hiroshi Nakajima
- Department of Earth and Space Science, Osaka University, 1-1 Machikaneyama-cho,Toyonaka, Osaka 560-0043
| | - Takeshi Nakamori
- Faculty of Science, Yamagata University, 1-4-12 Kojirakawa-machi, Yamagata, Yamagata 990-8560
| | - Shinya Nakashima
- Institute of Physical and Chemical Research, 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198
| | - Kazuhiro Nakazawa
- Department of Physics, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-0033
| | - Kumiko K. Nobukawa
- Department of Physics, Nara Women’s University, Kitauoyanishi-machi, Nara, Nara 630-8506
| | - Masayoshi Nobukawa
- Department of Teacher Training and School Education, Nara University of Education, Takabatake-cho, Nara, Nara 630-8528
| | - Hirofumi Noda
- Frontier Research Institute for Interdisciplinary Sciences, Tohoku University, 6-3 Aramakiazaaoba, Aoba-ku, Sendai, Miyagi 980-8578
- Astronomical Institute, Tohoku University, 6-3 Aramakiazaaoba, Aoba-ku, Sendai, Miyagi 980-8578
| | - Hirokazu Odaka
- SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, 2575 Sand Hill Road, Menlo Park, CA 94025, USA
| | - Takaya Ohashi
- Department of Physics, Tokyo Metropolitan University, 1-1 Minami-Osawa, Hachioji, Tokyo 192-0397
| | - Masanori Ohno
- School of Science, Hiroshima University, 1-3-1 Kagamiyama, Higashi-Hiroshima 739-8526
| | - Takashi Okajima
- NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center, 8800 Greenbelt Road, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA
| | - Kenya Oshimizu
- Department of Physics, Saitama University, 255 Shimo-Okubo, Sakura-ku, Saitama, 338-8570
| | - Naomi Ota
- Department of Physics, Nara Women’s University, Kitauoyanishi-machi, Nara, Nara 630-8506
| | - Masanobu Ozaki
- Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, 3-1-1 Yoshino-dai, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5210
| | - Frits Paerels
- Astrophysics Laboratory, Columbia University, 550 West 120th Street, New York, NY 10027, USA
| | - Stéphane Paltani
- Department of Astronomy, University of Geneva, ch. d’Écogia 16, CH-1290 Versoix, Switzerland
| | - Robert Petre
- NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center, 8800 Greenbelt Road, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA
| | - Ciro Pinto
- Institute of Astronomy, University of Cambridge, Madingley Road, Cambridge, CB3 0HA, UK
| | - Frederick S. Porter
- NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center, 8800 Greenbelt Road, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA
| | - Katja Pottschmidt
- NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center, 8800 Greenbelt Road, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA
- Department of Physics, University of Maryland Baltimore County, 1000 Hilltop Circle,Baltimore, MD 21250, USA
| | | | - Samar Safi-Harb
- Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB R3T 2N2, Canada
| | - Shinya Saito
- Department of Physics, Rikkyo University, 3-34-1 Nishi-Ikebukuro, Toshima-ku, Tokyo 171-8501
| | - Kazuhiro Sakai
- NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center, 8800 Greenbelt Road, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA
| | - Toru Sasaki
- Department of Physics, Tokyo University of Science, 1-3 Kagurazaka, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 162-8601
| | - Goro Sato
- Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, 3-1-1 Yoshino-dai, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5210
| | - Kosuke Sato
- Department of Physics, Tokyo University of Science, 1-3 Kagurazaka, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 162-8601
| | - Rie Sato
- Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, 3-1-1 Yoshino-dai, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5210
| | - Makoto Sawada
- Department of Physics and Mathematics, Aoyama Gakuin University, 5-10-1 Fuchinobe, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5258
| | - Norbert Schartel
- European Space Astronomy Center, Camino Bajo del Castillo, s/n., 28692 Villanueva de la Cañada, Madrid, Spain
| | - Peter J. Serlemtsos
- NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center, 8800 Greenbelt Road, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA
| | - Hiromi Seta
- Department of Physics, Tokyo Metropolitan University, 1-1 Minami-Osawa, Hachioji, Tokyo 192-0397
| | - Megumi Shidatsu
- Institute of Physical and Chemical Research, 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198
| | - Aurora Simionescu
- Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, 3-1-1 Yoshino-dai, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5210
| | - Randall K. Smith
- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, 60 Garden Street, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA
| | - Yang Soong
- NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center, 8800 Greenbelt Road, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA
| | - Łukasz Stawarz
- Astronomical Observatory of Jagiellonian University, ul. Orla 171, 30-244 Kraków, Poland
| | - Yasuharu Sugawara
- Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, 3-1-1 Yoshino-dai, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5210
| | - Satoshi Sugita
- Department of Physics, Tokyo Institute of Technology, 2-12-1 Ookayama, Meguro-ku, Tokyo152-8550
| | - Andrew Szymkowiak
- Department of Physics, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520-8120, USA
| | - Hiroyasu Tajima
- Institute for Space-Earth Environmental Research, Nagoya University, Furo-cho, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya, Aichi 464-8601
| | - Hiromitsu Takahashi
- School of Science, Hiroshima University, 1-3-1 Kagamiyama, Higashi-Hiroshima 739-8526
| | - Tadayuki Takahashi
- Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, 3-1-1 Yoshino-dai, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5210
| | - Shiníchiro Takeda
- Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology Graduate University, 1919-1 Tancha, Onna-son Okinawa, 904-0495
| | - Yoh Takei
- Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, 3-1-1 Yoshino-dai, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5210
| | - Toru Tamagawa
- Institute of Physical and Chemical Research, 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198
| | - Takayuki Tamura
- Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, 3-1-1 Yoshino-dai, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5210
| | - Takaaki Tanaka
- Department of Physics, Kyoto University, Kitashirakawa-Oiwake-Cho, Sakyo, Kyoto 606-8502
| | - Yasuo Tanaka
- Max Planck Institute for extraterrestrial Physics, Giessenbachstrasse 1, 85748 Garching , Germany
| | - Yasuyuki T. Tanaka
- School of Science, Hiroshima University, 1-3-1 Kagamiyama, Higashi-Hiroshima 739-8526
| | - Makoto S. Tashiro
- Department of Physics, Saitama University, 255 Shimo-Okubo, Sakura-ku, Saitama, 338-8570
| | - Yuzuru Tawara
- Department of Physics, Nagoya University, Furo-cho, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya, Aichi 464-8602
| | - Yukikatsu Terada
- Department of Physics, Saitama University, 255 Shimo-Okubo, Sakura-ku, Saitama, 338-8570
| | - Yuichi Terashima
- Department of Physics, Ehime University, Bunkyo-cho, Matsuyama, Ehime 790-8577
| | - Francesco Tombesi
- NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center, 8800 Greenbelt Road, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA
- Department of Astronomy, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA
| | - Hiroshi Tomida
- Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, 3-1-1 Yoshino-dai, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5210
| | - Yohko Tsuboi
- Department of Physics, Chuo University, 1-13-27 Kasuga, Bunkyo, Tokyo 112-8551
| | - Masahiro Tsujimoto
- Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, 3-1-1 Yoshino-dai, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5210
| | - Hiroshi Tsunemi
- Department of Earth and Space Science, Osaka University, 1-1 Machikaneyama-cho,Toyonaka, Osaka 560-0043
| | - Takeshi Go Tsuru
- Department of Physics, Kyoto University, Kitashirakawa-Oiwake-Cho, Sakyo, Kyoto 606-8502
| | - Hiroyuki Uchida
- Department of Physics, Kyoto University, Kitashirakawa-Oiwake-Cho, Sakyo, Kyoto 606-8502
| | - Hideki Uchiyama
- Faculty of Education, Shizuoka University, 836 Ohya, Suruga-ku, Shizuoka 422-8529
| | - Yasunobu Uchiyama
- Department of Physics, Rikkyo University, 3-34-1 Nishi-Ikebukuro, Toshima-ku, Tokyo 171-8501
| | - Shutaro Ueda
- Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, 3-1-1 Yoshino-dai, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5210
| | - Yoshihiro Ueda
- Department of Astronomy, Kyoto University, Kitashirakawa-Oiwake-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8502
| | - Shiníchiro Uno
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Nihon Fukushi University , 26-2 Higashi Haemi-cho, Handa,Aichi 475-0012
| | - C. Megan Urry
- Department of Physics, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520-8120, USA
| | - Eugenio Ursino
- Physics Department, University of Miami, 1320 Campo Sano Dr., Coral Gables, FL 33146, USA
| | - Shin Watanabe
- Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, 3-1-1 Yoshino-dai, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5210
| | - Norbert Werner
- School of Science, Hiroshima University, 1-3-1 Kagamiyama, Higashi-Hiroshima 739-8526
- MTA-Eötvös University Lendület Hot Universe Research Group, Pázmány Péter sétány 1/A, Budapest, 1117, Hungary
- Department of Theoretical Physics and Astrophysics, Faculty of Science, Masaryk University, Kotlářská 2, Brno, 611 37, Czech Republic
| | - Dan R. Wilkins
- Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology, Stanford University, 452 Lomita Mall, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
| | - Brian J. Williams
- Space Telescope Science Institute, 3700 San Martin Drive, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA
| | - Shinya Yamada
- Department of Physics, Tokyo Metropolitan University, 1-1 Minami-Osawa, Hachioji, Tokyo 192-0397
| | - Hiroya Yamaguchi
- NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center, 8800 Greenbelt Road, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA
| | - Kazutaka Yamaoka
- Institute for Space-Earth Environmental Research, Nagoya University, Furo-cho, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya, Aichi 464-8601
| | - Noriko Y. Yamasaki
- Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, 3-1-1 Yoshino-dai, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5210
| | - Makoto Yamauchi
- Department of Applied Physics and Electronic Engineering, University of Miyazaki, 1-1 Gakuen Kibanadai-Nishi, Miyazaki, 889-2192
| | - Shigeo Yamauchi
- Department of Physics, Nara Women’s University, Kitauoyanishi-machi, Nara, Nara 630-8506
| | - Tahir Yaqoob
- Department of Physics, University of Maryland Baltimore County, 1000 Hilltop Circle,Baltimore, MD 21250, USA
| | - Yoichi Yatsu
- Department of Physics, Tokyo Institute of Technology, 2-12-1 Ookayama, Meguro-ku, Tokyo152-8550
| | - Daisuke Yonetoku
- Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Kanazawa University, Kakuma-machi, Kanazawa, Ishikawa 920-1192
| | - Irina Zhuravleva
- Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology, Stanford University, 452 Lomita Mall, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
- Department of Physics, Stanford University, 382 Via Pueblo Mall, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
| | - Abderahmen Zoghbi
- Department of Astronomy, University of Michigan, 1085 South University Avenue, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA
| | - Toshio Terasawa
- Institute of Physical and Chemical Research, 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198
| | - Mamoru Sekido
- Kashima Space Technology Center, National Institute of Information and Communications Technology, Kashima, Ibaraki 314-8501
| | - Kazuhiro Takefuji
- Kashima Space Technology Center, National Institute of Information and Communications Technology, Kashima, Ibaraki 314-8501
| | - Eiji Kawai
- Kashima Space Technology Center, National Institute of Information and Communications Technology, Kashima, Ibaraki 314-8501
| | - Hiroaki Misawa
- Planetary Plasma and Atmospheric Research Center, Tohoku University, Sendai, Miyagi 980-8578
| | - Fuminori Tsuchiya
- Planetary Plasma and Atmospheric Research Center, Tohoku University, Sendai, Miyagi 980-8578
| | - Ryo Yamazaki
- Department of Physics and Mathematics, Aoyama Gakuin University, 5-10-1 Fuchinobe, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5258
| | - Eiji Kobayashi
- Department of Physics and Mathematics, Aoyama Gakuin University, 5-10-1 Fuchinobe, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5258
| | - Shota Kisaka
- Department of Physics and Mathematics, Aoyama Gakuin University, 5-10-1 Fuchinobe, Chuo-ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 252-5258
| | - Takahiro Aoki
- The Research Institute for Time Studies, Yamaguchi University, 1677-1 Yoshida, Yamaguchi 753-8511
| |
Collapse
|