Delphi consensus on stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for oligometastatic and oligoprogressive renal cell carcinoma-a European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology study endorsed by the European Association of Urology

The purpose of this European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) project, endorsed by the European Association of Urology, is to explore expert opinion on the management of patients with oligometastatic and oligoprogressive renal cell carcinoma by means of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) on extracranial metastases, with the aim of developing consensus recommendations for patient selection, treatment doses, and concurrent systemic therapy. A questionnaire on SABR in oligometastatic renal cell carcinoma was prepared by a core group and reviewed by a panel of ten prominent experts in the field. The Delphi consensus methodology was applied, sending three rounds of questionnaires to clinicians identified as key opinion leaders in the field. At the end of the third round, participants were able to find consensus on eight of the 37 questions. Specifically, panellists agreed to apply no restrictions regarding age (25 [100%) of 25) and primary renal cell carcinoma histology (23 [92%] of 25) for SABR candidates, on the upper threshold of three lesions to offer ablative treatment in patients with oligoprogression, and on the concomitant administration of immune checkpoint inhibitor. SABR was indicated as the treatment modality of choice for renal cell carcinoma bone oligometatasis (20 [80%] of 25) and for adrenal oligometastases 22 (88%). No consensus or major agreement was reached regarding the appropriate schedule, but the majority of the poll (54%-58%) retained the every-other-day schedule as the optimal choice for all the investigated sites. The current ESTRO Delphi consensus might provide useful direction for the application of SABR in oligometastatic renal cell carcinoma and highlight the key areas of ongoing debate, perhaps directing future research efforts to close knowledge gaps.

Effect of Pelvic External Beam Radiation Therapy on Bone Mineral Density: A Secondary Analysis of a Phase 3 Randomized Controlled Trial

PURPOSE

Pelvic radiation therapy may lead to decreased bone mineral density (BMD) and increased risk of fracture that could be of particular concern in patients with prostate cancer who also receive androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). We performed an exploratory analysis of a randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled trial to determine whether exposure to prior pelvic external beam radiation therapy (XRT) affects BMD and risk of fracture in patients with prostate cancer treated with ADT.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients with nonmetastatic prostate cancer aged ≥70 years or <70 years with low BMD (T-score < -1) or osteoporotic fracture who had been receiving ADT for ≥12 months were randomly assigned to receive densoumab or placebo every 6 months for 3 years. BMD was measured at baseline and at months 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, and 36. We applied multivariable linear mixed-effects models with an interaction term between the treatment arm and exposure to prior pelvic XRT to evaluate differential XRT effect on percent BMD change between the 2 treatment arms.

RESULTS

Among 1407 eligible patients, 31% (n = 447) received prior pelvic XRT. There was no significant difference in any clinical fractures among patients with (5.8%, 26 of 447) or without (5.2%, 50 of 960) prior pelvic XRT (P = .42). Prior pelvic XRT was associated with a significant (0.54%) improvement in BMD (95% CI, 0.05-1.02) in the placebo group and a nonsignificant (0.04%) decline in BMD (95% CI, -0.47 to -0.35) in the denosumab group (interaction P = .007). There was no significant difference in pelvic XRT effect on percent BMD change in the lumbar spine (P = .65) or total hip (P = .39) between the 2 treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS

We did not find sufficient evidence to suggest any detrimental effect of pelvic XRT on the treatment effect from denosumab on percent BMD change, with only an approximately 5% incidence of clinical fractures.

Impact of Clinical Trial Design on Recruitment of Racial and Ethnic Minorities

Knowledge related to how oncology treatment trial design influences enrollment of racial and ethnic minorities is limited. Rigorous identification of clinical trial design parameters that associate favorably with minority accrual provides educational opportunities for individuals interested in designing more representative treatment trials. We identified oncology trials with a minimum of 10 patients at an NCI-Designated Comprehensive Cancer Center from 2010 to 2021. We defined a study endpoint of racial and ethnic minority accrual greater than zero. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine whether co-variables predicted our study endpoint. P-values of less than 0.05 were considered significant. A total of 352 cancer trials met eligibility criteria. These studies enrolled a total of 7981 patients with a total of 926 racial and ethnic minorities leading to a median enrollment of 10%. Trials open in community sites (yes versus no) were more likely to have a minority patient (OR, 2.21; 95% CI, 1.02-4.96) as well as pilot/phase I studies compared to phase II/III (OR, 3.19; 95% CI, 1.34-8.26). Trials incorporating immunotherapy (yes versus no) were less likely to have a minority patient (OR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.23-0.94). Trials open in community sites as well as early phase treatment studies were more likely to accrue minority patients. However, studies including immunotherapy were less likely to accrue racial and ethnic minorities. Knowledge gained from our analysis may help individuals design oncology treatment trials that are representative of more diverse populations.

A population-based study of COVID-19 mortality risk in US cancer patients

BACKGROUND

In this study, we provide the largest analysis to date of a US-based cancer cohort to characterize death from COVID-19.

METHODS

A total of 4,020,669 patients across 15 subtypes living with cancer in 2020 and included in the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database were abstracted. We investigated prognostic factors for death due to COVID-19 using a cox proportional hazards model and calculated hazard ratios (HRs). Standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) were calculated using observed mortality counts from SEER and expected mortality based on U.S. mortality rates.

RESULTS

291,323 patients died, with 14,821 (5.1%) deaths attributed to COVID-19 infection. The COVID-19 disease-specific mortality rate was 11.81/10,000-persons years, and SMR of COVID-19 was 2.30 (95% CI: 2.26-2.34, p < .0001). COVID-19 ranked as the second leading cause of death following ischemic heart disease (5.2%) among 26 non-cancer causes of death. Patients who are older (80+ vs < =49 years old: HR 21.47, 95% CI: 19.34-23.83), male (vs female: HR 1.46, 95% CI: 1.40-1.51), unmarried (vs married: HR 1.47, 95% CI: 1.42-1.53), and Hispanic or Non-Hispanic African American (vs Non-Hispanic White: HR 2.04, 95% CI: 1.94-2.14 and HR 2.03, 95% CI: 1.94-2.14, respectively) were at greatest risk of COVID-19 mortality.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

We observed that people living with cancer are at two times greater risk of dying from COVID-19 compared to the general US population. This work may be used by physicians and public health officials in the creation of survivorship programs that mitigate the risk of COVID-19 mortality.

Exercise oncology clinical trials during treatments: a commentary to address the safety concerns of human subjects regulatory reviewers and committees

Exercise oncology clinical trials contribute to the advancement of our scientific knowledge and to the safety and care of patients diagnosed with cancer. Nevertheless, regulatory reviewers and committees may not be familiar with the well-documented long-term health benefits and safety of the regular practice of physical activity. Moreover, they may not see how the benefits outweigh the risks in the context where patients diagnosed with cancer are typically seen as vulnerable. Therefore, we would like to provide a purpose-built overview of exercise oncology clinical trials for members involved in institutional review committees, including the Scientific Review Committee (SRC), the Institutional Review Board (IRB), and the Data Safety Monitoring Committee (DSMC) to facilitate a greater understanding of the safety and benefits of physical activity during cancer treatments. Communication is key to improve the success of exercise oncology clinical trials, which are vital for patients diagnosed with cancer.

Major Complications and Adverse Events Related to Use of SpaceOAR Hydrogel for Prostate Cancer Radiotherapy

OBJECTIVE

To determine the prevalence and severity of SpaceOARTM-related adverse events using the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database.

METHODS

We analyzed SpaceOAR-related adverse event reports in the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database from January 2015 to May 2023. For each report, the event type, associated device and patient problems, event description, event timing, and event severity stratified by the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0 (CTCAE) grading system were recorded.

RESULTS

From 2015 to 2022, 206,619 SpaceOAR devices were sold. From January 2015 to May 2023, we identified 981 reports describing 990 SpaceOAR-related adverse events. Malfunctions were the most common event type (N=626), followed by patient injuries (N=350) with few reported deaths (N=5). Device positioning problems were the most frequent device issue (N=686). Pain was the most reported patient problem (N=216). Abscesses and fistulas related to the device were each reported in 91 events. A noteworthy portion of relevant adverse events occurred before the initiation of radiation (N=35, 22.4%), suggesting the device, rather than the radiation, was responsible. In total, 470 (50.2%) and 344 (36.7%) of the adverse events were CTCAE grade 1 and 2, respectively. There were 123 (13.1%) events that were CTCAE grade ≥ 3.

CONCLUSION

We identified multiple reports of SpaceOAR-related adverse events, many of which are more serious than have been reported in clinical trials. While SpaceOAR use is common, suggesting these events are rare, these data highlight the need for continued postmarket surveillance.

Artificial intelligence applications in prostate cancer

Artificial intelligence (AI) applications have enabled remarkable advancements in healthcare delivery. These AI tools are often aimed to improve accuracy and efficiency of histopathology assessment and diagnostic imaging interpretation, risk stratification (i.e., prognostication), and prediction of therapeutic benefit for personalized treatment recommendations. To date, multiple AI algorithms have been explored for prostate cancer to address automation of clinical workflow, integration of data from multiple domains in the decision-making process, and the generation of diagnostic, prognostic, and predictive biomarkers. While many studies remain within the pre-clinical space or lack validation, the last few years have witnessed the emergence of robust AI-based biomarkers validated on thousands of patients, and the prospective deployment of clinically-integrated workflows for automated radiation therapy design. To advance the field forward, multi-institutional and multi-disciplinary collaborations are needed in order to prospectively implement interoperable and accountable AI technology routinely in clinic.

Estimating the risk of brain metastasis for patients newly diagnosed with cancer

BACKGROUND

Brain metastases (BM) affect clinical management and prognosis but limited resources exist to estimate BM risk in newly diagnosed cancer patients. Additionally, guidelines for brain MRI screening are limited. We aimed to develop and validate models to predict risk of BM at diagnosis for the most common cancer types that spread to the brain.

METHODS

Breast cancer, melanoma, kidney cancer, colorectal cancer (CRC), small cell lung cancer (SCLC), and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) data were extracted from the National Cancer Database to evaluate for the variables associated with the presence of BM at diagnosis. Multivariable logistic regression (LR) models were developed and performance was evaluated with Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve (AUC) and random-split training and testing datasets. Nomograms and a Webtool were created for each cancer type.

RESULTS

We identify 4,828,305 patients from 2010-2018 (2,095,339 breast cancer, 472,611 melanoma, 407,627 kidney cancer, 627,090 CRC, 164,864 SCLC, and 1,060,774 NSCLC). The proportion of patients with BM at diagnosis is 0.3%, 1.5%, 1.3%, 0.3%, 16.0%, and 10.3% for breast cancer, melanoma, kidney cancer, CRC, SCLC, and NSCLC, respectively. The average AUC over 100 random splitting for the LR models is 0.9534 for breast cancer, 0.9420 for melanoma, 0.8785 for CRC, 0.9054 for kidney cancer, 0.7759 for NSCLC, and 0.6180 for SCLC.

CONCLUSIONS

We develop accurate models that predict the BM risk at diagnosis for multiple cancer types. The nomograms and Webtool may aid clinicians in considering brain MRI at the time of initial cancer diagnosis.

Causes of death among people living with metastatic cancer

Studying survivorship and causes of death in patients with advanced or metastatic cancer remains an important task. We characterize the causes of death among patients with metastatic cancer, across 13 cancer types and 25 non-cancer causes and predict the risk of death after diagnosis from the diagnosed cancer versus other causes (e.g., stroke, heart disease, etc.). Among 1,030,937 US (1992-2019) metastatic cancer survivors, 82.6% of patients (n = 688,529) died due to the diagnosed cancer, while 17.4% (n = 145,006) died of competing causes. Patients with lung, pancreas, esophagus, and stomach tumors are the most likely to die of their metastatic cancer, while those with prostate and breast cancer have the lowest likelihood. The median survival time among patients living with metastases is 10 months; our Fine and Gray competing risk model predicts 1 year survival with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.754 (95% CI [0.754, 0.754]). Leading non-cancer deaths are heart disease (32.4%), chronic obstructive and pulmonary disease (7.9%), cerebrovascular disease (6.1%), and infection (4.1%).

Evaluating an Academic Radiation Oncology Position

What are the factors that physicians could consider in an academic radiation oncology practice job offer? In this minireview, we discuss how prospective academic faculty could evaluate the "big 3" domains: (1) the compensation, including the direct and indirect payments; (2) the daily job, including aspects of the clinic, research, and education; and (3) the location, including geography, atmosphere, environment, and culture. If a prospective academic radiation oncologist believes that the academic practice is "great" in at least 2 of the 3 and "good" in the remaining 1, then they should likely sign the contract.

Comparison of partial-breast irradiation and intraoperative radiation to whole-breast irradiation in early-stage breast cancer patients: a Kaplan-Meier-derived patient data meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Partial breast irradiation (PBI) and intraoperative radiation (IORT) represent alternatives to whole breast irradiation (WBI) following breast conserving surgery. However, data is mixed regarding outcomes. We therefore performed a pooled analysis of Kaplan-Meier-derived patient data from randomized trials to evaluate the hypothesis that PBI and IORT have comparable long-term rates of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence as WBI.

METHODS

In February, 2023, PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Central were systematically searched for randomized phase 3 trials of early-stage breast cancer patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery with PBI or IORT as compared to WBI. Time-to-event outcomes of interest included ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR), overall survival (OS) and distant disease-free survival (DDFS). Statistical analysis was performed with R Statistical Software.

RESULTS

Eleven randomized trials comprising 15,460 patients were included; 7,675 (49.6%) patients were treated with standard or moderately hypofractionated WBI, 5,413 (35%) with PBI and 2,372 (15.3%) with IORT. Median follow-up was 9 years. PBI demonstrated comparable IBTR risk compared with WBI (HR 1.20; 95% CI 0.95-1.52; p = 0.12) with no differences in OS (HR 1.02; 95% CI 0.90-1.16; p = 0.70) or DDFS (HR 1.15; 95% CI 0.81-1.64; p = 0.43). In contrast, patients treated with IORT had a higher IBTR risk (HR 1.46; 95% CI 1.23-1.72; p < 0.01) compared with WBI with no difference in OS (HR 0.98; 95% CI 0.84-1.14; p = 0.81) or DDFS (HR 0.91; 95% CI 0.76-1.09; p = 0.31).

CONCLUSION

For patients with early-stage breast cancer following breast-conserving surgery, PBI demonstrated no difference in IBTR as compared to WBI while IORT was inferior to WBI with respect to IBTR.

Radiation therapy options in kidney cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In this review, the authors discuss the use of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for the treatment of primary and metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC).

RECENT FINDINGS

For primary RCC treated with SBRT, local control is estimated at >95%, and grade 3-4 toxicity is limited at ≤5%. The difference in glomerular filtration rate pretreatment versus posttreatment was about 7.7 ml/min. For metastatic RCC treated with SBRT, the 1-year local control is ~90%. The incidence of any grade 3-4 toxicity is ~1%. Several ongoing trials are evaluating SBRT in combination or in lieu of systemic therapy. There are many unknowns remaining in the treatment of RCC, including tumor prognostication, treatment selection, and treatment delivery.

SUMMARY

Stereotactic body radiation therapy is a safe and effective treatment option for patients with primary and metastatic RCC.

Increasing Use of Shorter-Course Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer

Importance

Randomized clinical trials have demonstrated the noninferiority of shorter radiotherapy (RT) courses (termed hypofractionation) compared with longer RT courses in patients with localized prostate cancer. Although shorter courses are associated with cost-effectiveness, convenience, and expanded RT access, their adoption remains variable.

Objective

To identify the current practice patterns of external beam RT for prostate cancer in the US.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study obtained data from the National Cancer Database, which collects hospital registry data from more than 1500 accredited US facilities on approximately 72% of US patients with cancer. Patients were included in the sample if they had localized prostate adenocarcinoma that was diagnosed between 2004 and 2020 and underwent external beam RT with curative intent. Analyses were conducted between February and March 2023.

Exposures

Radiotherapy schedules, which were categorized as ultrahypofractionation (≤7 fractions), moderate hypofractionation (20-30 fractions), and conventional fractionation (31-50 fractions).

Main Outcomes and Measures

Longitudinal pattern in RT fractionation schedule was the primary outcome. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to evaluate the variables associated with shorter RT courses. Covariables included age, National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk group, rurality, race, facility location, facility type, median income, insurance type or status, and Charlson-Deyo Comorbidity Index.

Results

A total of 313 062 patients with localized prostate cancer (mean [SD] age, 68.8 [7.7] years) were included in the analysis. There was a temporal pattern of decline in the proportion of patients who received conventional fractionation, from 76.0% in 2004 to 36.6% in 2020 (P for trend <.001). From 2004 to 2020, use of moderate hypofractionation increased from 22.0% to 45.0% (P for trend <.001), and use of ultrahypofractionation increased from 2.0% to 18.3% (P for trend <.001). By 2020, the most common RT schedule was ultrahypofractionation for patients in the low-risk group and moderate hypofractionation for patients in the intermediate-risk group. On multivariable analysis, treatment at a community cancer program (compared with academic or research program; odds ratio [OR], 0.54 [95% CI, 0.52-0.56]; P < .001), Medicaid insurance (compared with Medicare; OR, 1.49 [95% CI, 1.41-1.57]; P < .001), Black race (compared with White race; OR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.87-0.92]; P < .001), and higher median income (compared with lower median income; OR, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.25-1.31]; P < .001) were associated with receipt of shorter courses of RT.

Conclusions and Relevance

Results of this cohort study showed an increase in the use of shorter courses of RT for prostate cancer from 2004 to 2020; a number of social determinants of health appeared to be associated with reduced adoption of shorter treatment courses. Realignment of reimbursement models may be necessary to enable broader adoption of ultrahypofractionation to support technology acquisition costs.

Biochemical Recurrence Surrogacy for Clinical Outcomes After Radiotherapy for Adenocarcinoma of the Prostate

PURPOSE

The surrogacy of biochemical recurrence (BCR) for overall survival (OS) in localized prostate cancer remains controversial. Herein, we evaluate the surrogacy of BCR using different surrogacy analytic methods.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Individual patient data from 11 trials evaluating radiotherapy dose escalation, androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) use, and ADT prolongation were obtained. Surrogate candidacy was assessed using the Prentice criteria (including landmark analyses) and the two-stage meta-analytic approach (estimating Kendall's tau and the R2). Biochemical recurrence-free survival (BCRFS, time from random assignment to BCR or any death) and time to BCR (TTBCR, time from random assignment to BCR or cancer-specific deaths censoring for noncancer-related deaths) were assessed.

RESULTS

Overall, 10,741 patients were included. Dose escalation, addition of short-term ADT, and prolongation of ADT duration significantly improved BCR (hazard ratio [HR], 0.71 [95% CI, 0.63 to 0.79]; HR, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.48 to 0.59]; and HR, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.48 to 0.61], respectively). Adding short-term ADT (HR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.84 to 0.99]) and prolonging ADT (HR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.78 to 0.94]) significantly improved OS, whereas dose escalation did not (HR, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.87 to 1.11]). BCR at 48 months was associated with inferior OS in all three groups (HR, 2.46 [95% CI, 2.08 to 2.92]; HR, 1.51 [95% CI, 1.35 to 1.70]; and HR, 2.31 [95% CI, 2.04 to 2.61], respectively). However, after adjusting for BCR at 48 months, there was no significant treatment effect on OS (HR, 1.10 [95% CI, 0.96 to 1.27]; HR, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.87 to 1.06] and 1.00 [95% CI, 0.90 to 1.12], respectively). The patient-level correlation (Kendall's tau) for BCRFS and OS ranged between 0.59 and 0.69, and that for TTBCR and OS ranged between 0.23 and 0.41. The R2 values for trial-level correlation of the treatment effect on BCRFS and TTBCR with that on OS were 0.563 and 0.160, respectively.

CONCLUSION

BCRFS and TTBCR are prognostic but failed to satisfy all surrogacy criteria. Strength of correlation was greater when noncancer-related deaths were considered events.

Long-Term Quality-of-Life Outcomes After Prostate Radiation Therapy With or Without High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy Boost: Post Hoc Analysis of TROG 03.04 RADAR

PURPOSE

Adding high-dose-rate brachytherapy (BT) boost to external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) improves biochemical control but may affect patient-reported quality of life (QOL). We sought to determine long-term QOL outcomes for EBRT+BT versus EBRT alone.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

This was a post hoc analysis of the Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group 03.04 Randomized Androgen Deprivation and Radiotherapy (TROG 03.04 RADAR) trial. Only patients who received 74 Gy conventionally fractionated EBRT (n = 260) or 46 Gy conventionally fractionated EBRT plus 19.5 Gy in 3 fractions high-dose-rate BT boost (n = 237) were included in this analysis. The primary endpoint was patient-reported QOL measured using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QOL (EORTC QLQ-C30) and prostate-specific QOL module (EORTC QLQ-PR25) questionnaires. We evaluated temporal changes in QOL scores, rates of symptom resolution, and the proportion of men who had decrements from baseline of >2 × the threshold for minimal clinically important change (2 × MCIC) for each domain.

RESULTS

At 5, 17, and 29 months after radiation therapy, the EBRT+BT group had 2.5 times (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4-4.2; P < .001), 2.9 times (95% CI, 1.7-4.9; P < .001), and 2.6 times (95% CI, 1.4-4.6; P = .002) greater odds of reporting 2 × MCIC in urinary QOL score compared with EBRT. There were no differences beyond 29 months. EBRT+BT led to a slower rate of urinary QOL symptom score resolution up to 17 months after radiation therapy compared with EBRT (P < .001) but not at later intervals. In contrast, at the end of the radiation therapy period and at 53 months after radiation therapy, the EBRT+BT group had 0.65 times (95% CI, 0.44-0.96; P = .03) and 0.51 times (95% CI, 0.32-0.79; P = .003) the odds of reporting 2 × MCIC in bowel QOL symptom scores compared with EBRT. There were no significant differences in the rate of bowel QOL score resolution. There were no significant differences in global health status or sexual activity scores between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no persistent differences in patient-reported QOL measures between EBRT alone and EBRT+BT. BT boost does not appear to negatively affect long-term, patient-reported QOL.

Post-Prostatectomy Risk Stratification of Biochemical Recurrence Using Transfer Learning-Based Multi-Modal Artificial Intelligence

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S)

For patients undergoing radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer (PCa), accurate risk stratification is essential to guide post-prostatectomy therapeutic decision making. Recently, there has been success in the use of multi-modal artificial intelligence models for men after prostate biopsy to aid in risk stratification. Herein, we trained and tested a TRansfer learning-based multi-modal Artificial InteLligence model (TRAIL) for biochemical recurrence (BCR) risk stratification following radical prostatectomy.

MATERIALS/METHODS

Patients contained within a prospective PCa registry at a single institution were utilized. Digital pathology slides from the diagnostic biopsies prior to radical prostatectomy for patients with clinically localized PCa were scanned at 20x resolution. Features were extracted for the TRAIL model from pathology slides via two transfer learning steps: (1) InceptionResNetv2 that first determines a heatmap of tumor areas, and (2) A ResNet18 that extracts representative features from the high tumor probability areas. Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) was used for feature selection from the pathology-extracted features. Finally, TRAIL combines the clinical and pathology-extracted features via a classification ensemble model based on weak tree learners to predict 2- and 5-year BCR defined as two consecutive serum PSA levels ≥0.2 ng/mL. TRAIL training was performed on 250 patients and was then locked and applied to the test set of 125 patients. Accuracy and the area under the curve (AUC) were calculated. Comparison to CAPRA-S and to clinical-only features were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 818 digital whole pathology biopsy slides from 375 patients treated with subsequent radical prostatectomy were included. Surgical margins were positive in 29% of the patients, and 41% had extra-prostatic extension. The median follow-up was 48 months (Range: 1-132 months). The rates of 2-and 5-year BCR were 11% and 18% respectively. A total of 19 digital pathology-driven features were included in TRAIL. Clinical factors included age, ISUPG, Gleason score, PSA, pathological T and N stages, surgical margin involvement, and the presence of extra-prostatic extension. On the testing set, TRAIL achieved a 2-year BCR AUC of 0.76 and accuracy of 0.87, and was superior to CAPRA-S (AUC = 0.57) and clinical-only features (AUC 0.50, accuracy 0.14). For 5-year BCR, TRAIL achieved an AUC of 0.69 and accuracy of 0.78, and performed better than CAPRA-S (AUC = 0.58), and clinical only features (AUC = 0.50, accuracy = 0.23).

CONCLUSION

Through a combination of deep and ensemble learning, TRAIL incorporates clinical and histopathology features, enabling an improved BCR risk stratification post-prostatectomy when compared to the currently used clinicopathologic models. Future work with larger datasets with metastatic events is warranted to further optimize the model for clinical use.

Cross-Comparison Individual Patient Level Analysis of Three Gene Expression Signatures in Localized Prostate in over 50,000 Men

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S)

Risk stratification guides the management of localized prostate cancer. Multiple commercial gene expression biomarkers have been developed to improve estimates of prognosis, however the 22-gene Decipher genomic classifier (22-GC) is the only test with level 1 evidence supporting its use per NCCN guidelines. It is unknown whether other commercial signatures, Oncotype (GPS) or Prolaris (CCP), are sufficiently correlated to negate the differences in evidence supporting these commercial tests. Herein, we aim to perform a cross-comparison of these signatures in a large cohort of patients diagnosed with localized prostate cancer.

MATERIALS/METHODS

Patients diagnosed with localized prostate cancer who underwent whole transcriptome gene expression microarray analysis on their primary tumor biopsy specimen were included. The 22-GC score was calculated by Veracyte using a commercially locked model. Individual genes in each of the GPS and CCP gene signatures were identified, and the gene weights in each signature were retrained for prediction of metastasis in a multi-institutional cohort of 1,574 men with long-term outcome data. This was performed to improve correlation performance of GPS and CCP given only the 22-GC was trained for prediction of metastasis. For each of the three signatures, both continuous and categorical scores were calculated. Linear regression and spearman correlations were calculated both on univariable and multivariable analyses adjusting for age, grade group, PSA, and T-stage.

RESULTS

A total of 50,881 patients were included (15,379 (30.2%) NCCN low-risk, 14,773 (29.0%) favorable intermediate-risk, 15,544 (30.5%) unfavorable intermediate-risk, and 5,185 (10.2%) high/very high-risk) with a median age of 68 years, and a median PSA of 6.2 ng/mL. On linear regression, the GPS model had poor goodness-of-fit to the 22-GC with an R2 of 0.36, as did the CCP model to the 22-GC with an R2 of 0.32. For CCP, the linear sum of the 31-genes was also tested but had inferior performance (R2 0.28) compared to the reoptimized CCP model. Results were similar on multivariable analysis adjusting for age, PSA, clinical stage and grade group. Spearman correlation between the continuous GPS model scores and the 22-GC was moderate at 0.59, as was the correlation between CCP model and the 22-GC of 0.54. CCP is a measure of proliferation, but in 22-GC high-risk patients, the majority (64.1%) of patients had low-average proliferation and only 35.9% had high proliferation, potentially explaining the lack of strong correlation.

CONCLUSION

There is minimal to moderate correlation between the 22-GC and GPS or CCP gene expression signatures tested. Therefore, these tests should not be viewed as interchangeable, and utilization should be based on the level of evidence supporting each gene expression biomarker.

Projected Lifetime Earnings of a Radiation Oncologist

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S)

The estimated lifetime earnings of a radiation oncologist depend on many choices and have not been calculated. The objective of this work is to project the year-by-year and cumulative lifetime earnings of a US-based radiation oncologist based on various career pathways.

MATERIALS/METHODS

We modeled lifetime earnings based on undergraduate training (reference: assumes starting at age 18, tuition/loans of $40,000 x 4 years), MD/DO (reference: assumes tuition/loans of $55,000 x 4 years, 8% interest) vs MD/PhD program (assumes no tuition, $30,000 yearly stipend x 8 years), gap year(s), fellowship, employment paths (academic, private practice, hospital employed, physician scientist with NIH salary cap), adjustable salary during employment (based on 2016-2018 AAMC and MGMA; e.g., promotion for academic track, partnership for private practice), adjustable state and federal income taxes, loan repayment options (e.g., out of pocket, NIH loan repayment program [LRP], public service loan forgiveness [PSLF]). The primary outcome was cumulative lifetime earnings, and additional analyses were conducted based on changes in career paths. We created a web-based application to simulate the various choices using R Shiny: https://physician-earnings.shinyapps.io/rshiny/.

RESULTS

For an academic radiation oncologist, assuming MD/DO degree, national average of $220,000 in loans at medical school graduation, 5% state income tax, no gap years, pursuing PSLF, starting as assistant professor, 7 year promotion until associate professor, and 7 subsequent year promotion to full professor, and retirement age of 65, the post-tax median lifetime earnings are $9,610,675 (IQR $8,097,433 - $10,885,824), with $5,242,653 federal + state taxes. With the private practice setting, the median lifetime earnings are $11,383,781 (IQR $9,875,040 - $13,325,316). As a hospital employee, the median lifetime earnings are $8,834,886 (IQR $8,127,132 - $10,166,145). As an NIH-salary capped physician scientist, the median lifetime earnings are $4,678,668 (IQR not provided, given one set cap). Using the academic track as the reference group, the median lifetime earnings would change as follows: $9,333,434 (IQR $7,876,310 - $10,572,388) for those who pursue one paid undergraduate gap year; $9,125,590 (IQR $7,822,115 - $10,274,801) for those who pursue MD/PhD programs; $10,365,300 (IQR $8,725,954 - $11,746,712) for those with 0% state income tax during practice; and $9,565,364 (IQR $7,875,284 - $10,802,830) for those who repay their loans out of pocket at 50% of their attending salary. PSLF and NIH LRP allow one to cross a net worth of $0 by their mid-30s; pursuit of fellowship, starting as an instructor in academics, salary in bottom quartile %, paying loans out of pocket, and gap years all delay this landmark by 1-4 years. NIH-salary capped positions have the largest negative impact on lifetime earnings, by > $5,000,000.

CONCLUSION

We created a model to estimate lifetime earnings of a radiation oncologist in the US.

Quantifying the Impact of Research Productivity on Salary in Academic Radiation Oncology

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S)

Academic physicians typically do not receive a salary based on individual publications; however, publications are necessary for promotion, and the impact of publication productivity among ranks on salary is unknown. The objective of this was to evaluate salary changes associated with publication productivity among academic radiation oncologists.

MATERIALS/METHODS

Radiation oncologist faculty-level academic productivity data were obtained, including the h-index, m-index, number of papers, and number of citations, based on prior work (Holliday et al, 2014). The AAMC and MGMA Provider Compensation Data from 2017 provided percentile-level salaries. The delta in salary was calculated for each delta in rank the publication metrics among ranks. The primary outcome was delta in salary per delta in h-index; additional calculations were performed for delta in m-index and delta in publications.

RESULTS

A total of 986 radiation oncologists were included. For assistant professor, median salary was $367,000, average h-index 6.8, m-index 0.68, 15.7 publications. For associate professor, median salary was $452,000, average h-index 14, m-index 0.87, 41.8 publications. For full professor, median salary was $520,000, average h-index 31.3, m-index 1.33, 118.7 publications. For chair (not mutually exclusive from full professor), median salary was $720,000, average h-index 34.8, m-index 1.36, 146.8 publications. The delta in salary per delta in rank and the associated changes in h-index, m-index, and publications are shown in Table 1. The average change in salary from assistant to associate professor is $11,805.56 / h-index, $447,368.42 / m-index, and $3,256.70 / publication; for associate to full it is $3,930.64 / h-index, $147,826.09 / m-index, and $884.27 / publication; and for full to chair it is $57,142.86 / h-index, and $7,117.44 / publication.

CONCLUSION

This work provides the average change in salary among academic ranks based on changes in research publication productivity. Our present analysis is unable to assess causality of this association, and many unaccounted confounders may affect this relationship. Further work in this area may include evaluation of demographic factors that have demonstrated rank and salary disparities in radiation oncology, such as gender.

Individual Patient Data Analysis of 17 Randomized Trials vs. Real-World Data for Men with Localized Prostate Cancer Receiving Radiotherapy

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S)

Prior work has demonstrated poor correlation between the results of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and real-world evidence (RWD). However, patients enrolled in RCTs are often considered to poorly represent the real-world population. Herein, we utilize multiple large data repositories to determine differences in baseline characteristics and long-term outcomes between patients enrolled in RCTs and RWD that received radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer.

MATERIALS/METHODS

Meta-Analysis of Randomized trials in Cancer of the Prostate (MARCAP) Consortium was leveraged, and 17 phase III randomized trials were included. RWD were accessed through the Staging Collaboration for Cancer of the Prostate (STAR-CAP) cohort, a cohort that is comprised of >60 centers across the United States and Europe. Additionally, RWD was assessed via the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. MARCAP and STAR-CAP both contain outcomes for distant metastasis (DM), metastasis-free survival (MFS), prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM), and overall survival (OS). SEER only contains PCSM and OS. Wilcoxon signed-rank test and chi-square test were used to compare continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis was conducted, balancing for age, PSA, Gleason score, T stage, and treatment year in the three cohorts. Cox and Fine-Gray regression models were used to compare disease outcomes between RCTs vs. RWD.

RESULTS

Data from 10,666 patients from RCTs, 6,530 patients in STAR-CAP, and 117,586 patients in SEER were included. SEER patients were slightly younger (p<0.001, median age 68 (IQR 62-73) than those in RCTs (70, IQR 65-74) and in STAR-CAP (70, IQR 64-74). 10-year OS in RCTs was 65.4%, STAR-CAP 70.2%, SEER 64.1%. OS was superior in STAR-CAP (RCTs as reference; HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.85-0.96, p<0.0001), but there was no significant difference between SEER and RCTs (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.91-1.02, p = 0.22). 10-year PCSM cumulative incidence was 7.4% in RCTs, 8.1% in STAR-CAP, and 11.0% in SEER. There was no significant difference in PCSM between STAR-CAP RWD and RCTs (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.78-1.01, p = 0.08), whereas PCSM was worse in SEER than RCTs (HR 1.37, 95% CI 1.21-1.55, p<0.0001). There was no significant difference in DM between STAR-CAP RWD and RCTs (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.83-1.04, p = 0.2).

CONCLUSION

While baseline differences exist in patients enrolled on localized prostate cancer RCTs and real-world datasets, there were small if any significant relative differences in oncologic outcomes. This provides reassurance that RCT results are generally applicable to patients in routine practice.

Real-World Data: Applications and Relevance to Cancer Clinical Trials

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for comparative-effectiveness research (CER). Since the 1980s, there has been a rise in the creation and utilization of large national cancer databases to provide readily accessible "real-world data" (RWD). This review article discusses the role of RCTs in oncology, and the role of RWD from the national cancer database in CER. RCTs remain the preferred study type for CER because they minimize confounding and bias. RCTs have challenges to conduct, including extensive time and resources, but these factors do not impact the internal validity of the result. Generalizability and external validity are potential limitations of RCTs. RWD is ideal for studying cancer epidemiology, patterns of care, disparities in care delivery, quality-of-care evaluation, and applicability of RCT data in specific populations excluded from RCTs. However, retrospective databases with RWD have limitations in CER due to unmeasured confounders and are often suboptimal in identifying causal treatment effects.

Reirradiation with stereotactic body radiotherapy for primary or secondary lung malignancies: Tumor control probability and safety analyses

BACKGROUND

Reirradiation with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for patients with primary or secondary lung malignancies represents an appealing definitive approach, but its feasibility and safety are not well defined. The purpose of this study was to investigate the tumor control probability (TCP) and toxicity for patients receiving reirradiation with SBRT.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligible patients with recurrence of primary or secondary lung malignancies from our hospital were subjected to reirradiation with SBRT, and PubMed- and Embase-indexed articles were reviewed. The patient characteristics, pertinent SBRT dosimetric details, local tumor control, and toxicities were extracted. The logistic dose-response models were compared for TCP and overall survival (OS) in terms of the physical dose and three-, four-, and five-fraction equivalent doses.

RESULTS

The data of 17 patients from our hospital and 195 patients extracted from 12 articles were summarized. Reirradiation with SBRT yielded 2-year estimates of 80% TCP for doses of 50.10 Gy, 55.85 Gy, and 60.54 Gy in three, four, and five fractions, respectively. The estimated TCP with common fractionation schemes were 50%, 60%, and 70% for 42.04 Gy, 47.44 Gy, and 53.32 Gy in five fractions, respectively. Similarly, the 2-year estimated OS was 50%, 60%, and 70% for 41.62 Gy, 46.88 Gy, and 52.55 Gy in five fractions, respectively. Central tumor localization may be associated with severe toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

Reirradiation with SBRT doses of 50-60 Gy in 3-5 fractions is feasible for appropriately selected patients with recurrence of peripheral primary or secondary lung malignancies, but should be carefully considered for centrally-located tumors due to potentially severe toxicity. Further studies are warranted for optimal dose/fractionation schedules and more accurate selection of patients suitable for reirradiation with SBRT.

Patient-Reported Urinary and Bowel Quality of Life Outcomes Following External Beam Radiotherapy with or without High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy Boost: Post-Hoc Analyses of TROG 03.04 (RADAR)

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S)

One of the concerns with combining external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) with a high dose rate brachytherapy boost (HDRBT) for prostate cancer is increased toxicity. We aimed to evaluate long-term urinary and bowel quality of life (QoL) outcomes following EBRT vs EBRT + HDRBT using data from the TROG 03.04 trial.

MATERIALS/METHODS

Men who had dose-escalated EBRT (74 Gy) or EBRT (46 Gy) + HDRBT (19.5 Gy in 3 fractions) were included in this exploratory analysis. QoL outcomes were prospectively collected using the EORTC-QLQ-PR25 at baseline, end of radiotherapy, 12, 18, 24, 36, 60 months, and annually up to 10 years. QoL score was normalized to 0-100 with higher scores representing worse symptom burden. Minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) were defined as differences in the respective QoL scores ≥0.5 standard deviations of the baseline QoL score. Mixed models for repeated measures were used to evaluate longitudinal changes in the QoL score between EBRT and EBRT + HDRBT arms. Logistic regression was used to evaluate differences in proportion of men with 2xMCID between EBRT and EBRT + HDRBT arms at each time point. Age, baseline QoL score, ECOG performance status, and duration of androgen deprivation therapy use (6 vs. 18 months) were adjusted for in all analyses.

RESULTS

Four hundred ninety-seven men were included in this study: 260 (52%) had EBRT and 237 (48%) had EBRT + HDRBT. The median baseline urinary QoL scores were 12.5 (IQR 4.2-19.0) and 8.3 (IQR 4.2-20.8) for men in EBRT and EBRT + HDRBT arms respectively (P = 0.5). Within the first 24 months, men in the EBRT + HDRBT arm had a slower rate of urinary QoL score resolution compared to men in the EBRT arm (P<0.001). At 12, 18, 24, and 36 months, men who had EBRT + HDRBT were 2.4 times (95% CI = 1.4-4.0; P<0.001), 3.1 times (95% CI = 1.8-5.1; P<0.001), 2.8 times (95% CI = 1.7-4.7; P<0.001), and 2.5 times (95% CI = 1.4-4.5; P = 0.002) more likely to have 2xMCID in urinary QoL scores compared to men who had EBRT alone. Beyond 24 months, there were no significant differences in the rate of urinary QoL score resolution between arms, and beyond 36 months there were no significant differences in the proportion with 2xMCID between arms. The median baseline bowel QoL score was 0 in both arms. There were no differences in the rate of bowel QoL score recovery over time between arms. Men who had EBRT + HDRBT were less likely to have 2xMCID in bowel QoL score in the immediate post-radiotherapy period (OR = 0.66; 95% CI = 0.45-0.97; P = 0.03) and at 60 months (OR = 0.51; 95% CI = 0.33-0.80; P = 0.003) compared to men who had EBRT.

CONCLUSION

EBRT + HDRBT is associated with disturbances in urinary QoL that are of greater magnitude compared to EBRT alone within the first 36 months of treatment, but the differences resolved after 36 months. EBRT + HDRBT is associated with less disturbances in bowel QoL immediately after treatment and at 60 months compared to EBRT alone.

Analysis of Racial Disparity among U.S. Patients with Gynecologic Cancers and COVID-19 Infection

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S)

Gynecologic cancer care has been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. We studied the association of racial disparity and COVID infection in the care of patients with gynecologic cancers.

MATERIALS/METHODS

To assess the association of racial disparity and COVID infection in gynecologic cancers the National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried for the year 2020 for patients with histologically confirmed diagnosis of cervical, endometrial and ovarian cancers. Patients were divided into two cohorts based on COVID test result status and subsequently stratified based on race. Race/ethnicity was categorized as 1) non-Hispanic White (NHW), 2) non-Hispanic Black (NHB), and 3) Hispanic. Subjects with missing race/ethnicity information were excluded. Outcome variables were time from diagnosis to initiation of treatment (surgery, radiation therapy versus chemotherapy). Continuous and categorical variables were reported as median [interquartile range] and number [rate] and were compared using Mann-Whitney U test and Chi-Square test, respectively. Statistical software was used and the level of significance was set at 0.05.

RESULTS

A total of 36,863 subjects with newly diagnosed gynecologic cancers in 2020 underwent had available COVID testing information (4,827 with cervical, 23,935 with endometrial, and 8,101 with ovarian cancer). 31,516 (85.5%), 4,735 (12.8%), and 612 (1.7%) of the population were NHW, NHB, and Hispanic, respectively. The overall rate of COVID infection was the highest in NHB (6.9%), followed by Hispanic (5.6%) and NHW (5.4%), p < 0.001. Patients with cervical cancer had the highest rate of COVID infection (7.3%), followed by ovarian (5.6%) and endometrial (5.2%), p < 0.001. Non-Hispanic Black women with cervical cancer had the highest rate of infection (8.6%). Median time from diagnosis to first surgical procedure was highest in COVID positive NHB subjects (52 [IQR 20-91] in NHB, 41 [IQR 12-67] in NHW, and 40 [IQR 9-58] in Hispanics, p = 0.02). Median time from diagnosis to first radiation treatment was also highest in COVID positive NHB subjects (83 [IQR 29-107] in NHB, 52 [IQR 17-67] in NHW, and 39 [IQR 9-51] in Hispanics, p = 0.04). There was not racial or ethnic disparity in time from diagnosis to the first systemic therapy.

CONCLUSION

COVID pandemic has substantially impacted gynecologic cancer care in the United States and exacerbated existing healthcare disparities. Members of African American community with gynecologic cancers have been affected the most compared to other racial groups, both in terms of COVID infection rates and delays in receiving care. Further study is warranted to understand impact on long-term cancer related outcomes.

Risk of stroke-specific mortality after radiotherapy in patients with primary brain tumours

Introduction

Stroke is an established complication in cancer patients, amongst whom brain tumour patients have the highest risk of fatal stroke. Radiotherapy is an important treatment for brain tumours and is associated with increased risk of cerebrovascular disease. However, the impact of brain irradiation on stroke-related deaths in brain tumour patients is unknown, and the timing of any effect uncertain. This study investigates the relationship between radiotherapy and stroke-specific mortality (SSM) in patients with primary brain tumours.

Methods

Patients of any age diagnosed with histologically confirmed primary brain tumours between 1992 and 2015 were abstracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Primary outcome was impact of radiotherapy on 5-year SSM. Cumulative SSM rates under competing risk assumptions were estimated and stratified by intervention type. Time-dependent hazard ratios were estimated to identify when the radiotherapy impact was greatest.

Results

85,284 patients with primary brain tumour diagnoses were analysed. Overall, the 5-year cumulative SSM rate was low (0.6%) with the highest rate (0.76%) in patients receiving no treatment, in whom it mainly occurred < 1 month after diagnosis. SSM rates were lower in patients treated with radiotherapy alone (0.27%) or radiotherapy plus surgery (0.24%); stroke-related deaths also occurred later in these groups. While these patterns were observed in both glioblastoma and non-glioblastoma patients, stroke deaths tended to occur later in non-glioblastoma patients receiving radiotherapy. Relative to the 'no treatment' group, the highest risk of stroke mortality in radiotherapy treated patients occurred 3.5-4 years after diagnosis.

Conclusion

The risk of SSM is low in patients with primary brain tumours and is not increased by radiotherapy. Two different patterns were observed: acute stroke mortality in patients receiving no treatment, and delayed stroke mortality in patients receiving radiotherapy (+/- surgery) with the latter peaking 3.5-4 years after diagnosis.

Use of the Decipher genomic classifier among men with prostate cancer in the United States

BACKGROUND

Management of localized or recurrent prostate cancer since the 1990s has been based on risk stratification using clinicopathological variables, including Gleason score, T stage (based on digital rectal exam), and prostate-specific antigen (PSA). In this study a novel prognostic test, the Decipher Prostate Genomic Classifier (GC), was used to stratify risk of prostate cancer progression in a US national database of men with prostate cancer.

METHODS

Records of prostate cancer cases from participating SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results) program registries, diagnosed during the period from 2010 through 2018, were linked to records of testing with the GC prognostic test. Multivariable analysis was used to quantify the association between GC scores or risk groups and use of definitive local therapy after diagnosis in the GC biopsy-tested cohort and postoperative radiotherapy in the GC-tested cohort as well as adverse pathological findings after prostatectomy.

RESULTS

A total of 572 545 patients were included in the analysis, of whom 8927 patients underwent GC testing. GC biopsy-tested patients were more likely to undergo active active surveillance or watchful waiting than untested patients (odds ratio [OR] =2.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.04 to 2.38, P < .001). The highest use of active surveillance or watchful waiting was for patients with a low-risk GC classification (41%) compared with those with an intermediate- (27%) or high-risk (11%) GC classification (P < .001). Among National Comprehensive Cancer Network patients with low and favorable-intermediate risk, higher GC risk class was associated with greater use of local therapy (OR = 4.79, 95% CI = 3.51 to 6.55, P < .001). Within this subset of patients who were subsequently treated with prostatectomy, high GC risk was associated with harboring adverse pathological findings (OR = 2.94, 95% CI = 1.38 to 6.27, P = .005). Use of radiation after prostatectomy was statistically significantly associated with higher GC risk groups (OR = 2.69, 95% CI = 1.89 to 3.84).

CONCLUSIONS

There is a strong association between use of the biopsy GC test and likelihood of conservative management. Higher genomic classifier scores are associated with higher rates of adverse pathology at time of surgery and greater use of postoperative radiotherapy.In this study the Decipher Prostate Genomic Classifier (GC) was used to analyze a US national database of men with prostate cancer. Use of the GC was associated with conservative management (ie, active surveillance). Among men who had high-risk GC scores and then had surgery, there was a 3-fold higher chance of having worrisome findings in surgical specimens.

Unknown Causes of Death in Cancer Patients

OBJECTIVES

Deaths from an unknown cause are difficult to adjudicate and oncologic studies of comparative effectiveness often demonstrate inconsistencies in incorporating these deaths and competing events (eg, heart disease and stroke) in their analyses. In this study, we identify cancer patients most at risk for death of an unknown cause.

METHODS

This retrospective, population-based study used cancer registry data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (1992-2015). The absolute rate of unknown causes of death (COD) cases stratified by sex, marital status, race, treatment, and cancer site were calculated and a multivariable logistic regression model was applied to obtain adjusted odds ratios with 95% CIs.

RESULTS

Out of 7,154,779 cancer patients across 22 cancer subtypes extracted from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results, 3,448,927 died during follow-up and 276,068 (7.4%) of these deaths were from unknown causes. Patients with an unknown COD had a shorter mean survival time compared with patients with known COD (36.3 vs 65.7 mo, P < 0.001). The contribution of unknown COD to total mortality was highest in patients with more indolent cancers (eg, prostate [12.7%], thyroid [12.3%], breast [10.7%]) and longer follow-up (eg, >5 to 10 y). One, 3, and 5-year cancer-specific survival (CSS) calculations including unknown COD were significantly decreased compared with CSS estimates excluding cancer patients with unknown COD.

CONCLUSION

Of the patients, 7.4% died of unknown causes during follow-up and the proportion of death was higher with longer follow-up and among more indolent cancers. The attribution of high percentages of unknown COD to cancer or non-cancer causes could impact population-based cancer registry studies or clinical trial outcomes with respect to measures involving CSS and mortality.

Future trends in incidence and long-term survival of metastatic cancer in the United States

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have demonstrated epidemiological trends in individual metastatic cancer subtypes; however, research forecasting long-term incidence trends and projected survivorship of metastatic cancers is lacking. We assess the burden of metastatic cancer to 2040 by (1) characterizing past, current, and forecasted incidence trends, and (2) estimating odds of long-term (5-year) survivorship.

METHODS

This retrospective, serial cross-sectional, population-based study used registry data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER 9) database. Average annual percentage change (AAPC) was calculated to describe cancer incidence trends from 1988 to 2018. Autoregressive integrating moving average (ARIMA) models were used to forecast the distribution of primary metastatic cancer and metastatic cancer to specific sites from 2019 to 2040 and JoinPoint models were fitted to estimate mean projected annual percentage change (APC).

RESULTS

The average annual percent change (AAPC) in incidence of metastatic cancer decreased by 0.80 per 100,000 individuals (1988-2018) and we forecast an APC decrease by 0.70 per 100,000 individuals (2018-2040). Analyses predict a decrease in metastases to liver (APC = -3.40, 95% CI [-3.50, -3.30]), lung (APC (2019-2030) = -1.90, 95% CI [-2.90, -1.00]); (2030-2040) = -3.70, 95% CI [-4.60, -2.80]), bone (APC = -4.00, 95% CI [-4.30, -3.70]), and brain (APC = -2.30, 95% CI [-2.60, -2.00]). By 2040, patients with metastatic cancer are predicted to have 46.7% greater odds of long-term survivorship, driven by increasing plurality of patients with more indolent forms of metastatic disease.

CONCLUSIONS

By 2040, the distribution of metastatic cancer patients is predicted to shift in predominance from invariably fatal to indolent cancers subtypes. Continued research on metastatic cancers is important to guide health policy and clinical intervention efforts, and direct allocations of healthcare resources.

Impact of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Targeting on Pathologic Upgrading and Downgrading at Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

CONTEXT

The evidence supporting multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) targeting for biopsy is nearly exclusively based on biopsy pathologic outcomes. This is problematic, as targeting likely allows preferential identification of small high-grade areas of questionable oncologic significance, raising the likelihood of overdiagnosis and overtreatment.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the impact of MRI-targeted, systematic, and combined biopsies on radical prostatectomy (RP) grade group concordance.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

PubMed MEDLINE and Cochrane Library were searched from July 2018 to January 2022. Studies that conducted systematic and MRI-targeted prostate biopsies and compared biopsy results with pathology after RP were included. We performed a meta-analysis to assess whether pathologic upgrading and downgrading were influenced by biopsy type and a net-benefit analysis using pooled risk difference estimates.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Both targeted only and combined biopsies were less likely to result in upgrading (odds ratio [OR] vs systematic of 0.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63-0.77, p < 0.001, and 0.50, 95% CI 0.45-0.55, p < 0.001), respectively). Targeted only and combined biopsies increased the odds of downgrading (1.24 (95% CI 1.05-1.46), p = 0.012, and 1.96 (95% CI 1.68-2.27, p < 0.001) compared with systematic biopsies, respectively. The net benefit of targeted and combined biopsies is 8 and 7 per 100 if harms of up- and downgrading are considered equal, but 7 and -1 per 100 if the harm of downgrading is considered twice that of upgrading.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of MRI-targeting results in lower rates of upgrading as compared to systematic biopsy at RP (27% vs 42%). However, combined MRI-targeted and systematic biopsies are associated with more downgrading at RP (19% v 11% for combined vs systematic). Strong heterogeneity suggests further research into factors that influence the rates of up- and downgrading and that distinguishes clinically relevant from irrelevant grade changes is needed. Until then, the benefits and harms of combined MRI-targeted and systematic biopsies cannot be fully assessed.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We reviewed the ability of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsies to predict cancer grade at prostatectomy. We found that combined MRI-targeted and systematic biopsies result in more cancers being downgraded than systematic biopsies.

Meta-Analysis of Candidate Surrogate End Points in Advanced Prostate Cancer

Meta-Analysis of Surrogate End Points in Prostate CancerGharzai et al. report on the results of a meta-analysis, which concludes that unlike the case in localized prostate cancer, surrogate end points in advanced prostate cancer may not track overall survival.

Development and dissemination of structured hashtags for radiation oncology: Two-Year trends

Purpose

For radiation oncology, social media is a favored communication platform, but it uses non-structured hashtags, which limits communication. In this work, we created a set of structured hashtags with key opinion leaders in radiation oncology, and we report on their use after two years post-deployment.

Materials/Methods

Hashtags were created, voted on, and refined by crowdsourcing 38 international experts, including physicians, physicists, patients, and organizations from North America, Europe, and Australia. The finalized hashtag set was shared with the radiation oncology community in September 2019. The number of tweets for each hashtag was quantified via Symplur through December 2021. For the top five tweeted hashtags, we captured the number of yearly tweets in the pre-deployment and post-deployment periods from 09/01/2019 to 08/31/2021.

Results

The initial 2019 list contained 39 hashtags organized into nine categories. The top five hashtags by total number of tweets were: #Radonc, #PallOnc, #MedPhys, #SurvOnc, and #SuppOnc. Six hashtags had less than 10 total tweets and were eliminated. Post-deployment, there was an increase in the yearly tweets, with the following number of tweets by the second year post-deployment: #RadOnc (98,189 tweets), #MedPhys (15,858 tweets), and #SurvOnc (6,361 tweets). Two popular radiation oncology-related hashtags were added because of increased use: #DEIinRO (1,603 tweets by year 2) and #WomenWhoCurie (7,212 tweets by year 2). Over the two years, hashtags were used mostly by physicians (131,625 tweets, 34.8%).

Conclusion

We created and tracked structured social media hashtags in radiation oncology. These hashtags disseminate information among a diverse oncologic community. To maintain relevance, regular updates are needed.

Exposure to radon and heavy particulate pollution and incidence of brain tumors

BACKGROUND

Global incidence for brain tumors varies substantially without explanation. Studies correlating radon exposure and incidence are inconclusive. Particulate pollution has been linked to increased tumor incidence. Particulates may disrupt the blood-brain barrier allowing intracranial exposure to oncogenic radon. We investigated the relationship between exposure to residential radon, particulate pollution, and brain tumor incidence in the United States (US).

METHODS

County-level median radon testing results and annual air quality index values were obtained and divided into tertiles. Counties without both values were excluded. Four groups of counties were generated: high particulate/high radon (high/high), high/low, low/high, and low/low. Using incidence data from the Central Brain Tumor Registry of the US (provided by CDC's National Program of Cancer Registries and NCI's SEER), annual age-adjusted incidence rates (AAAIRs) by group were generated by behavior. Incidence rate ratios were calculated to examine for significant differences (α = .05). Poisson regression accounting for possible confounders was conducted.

RESULTS

Counties with available data included 83% of the US population. High/high exposure was significantly associated with increased AAAIR of all non-malignant tumors (up to 26% higher, including most meningiomas) even after accounting for potential confounders. An increased AAAIR was noted for all malignant tumors (up to 10% higher), including glioblastoma, but was negated after accounting for demographic/socioeconomic differences.

CONCLUSIONS

We present the first report suggesting increased non-malignant brain tumor incidence in regions with high particulate and radon exposure. These findings provide insight into unexplained variation in tumor incidence. Future studies are needed to validate these findings in other populations.

Sequencing of Androgen-Deprivation Therapy of Short Duration With Radiotherapy for Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer (SANDSTORM): A Pooled Analysis of 12 Randomized Trials

PURPOSE

The sequencing of androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) with radiotherapy (RT) may affect outcomes for prostate cancer in an RT-field size-dependent manner. Herein, we investigate the impact of ADT sequencing for men receiving ADT with prostate-only RT (PORT) or whole-pelvis RT (WPRT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Individual patient data from 12 randomized trials that included patients receiving neoadjuvant/concurrent or concurrent/adjuvant short-term ADT (4-6 months) with RT for localized disease were obtained from the Meta-Analysis of Randomized trials in Cancer of the Prostate consortium. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was performed with propensity scores derived from age, initial prostate-specific antigen, Gleason score, T stage, RT dose, and mid-trial enrollment year. Metastasis-free survival (primary end point) and overall survival (OS) were assessed by IPTW-adjusted Cox regression models, analyzed independently for men receiving PORT versus WPRT. IPTW-adjusted Fine and Gray competing risk models were built to evaluate distant metastasis (DM) and prostate cancer-specific mortality.

RESULTS

Overall, 7,409 patients were included (6,325 neoadjuvant/concurrent and 1,084 concurrent/adjuvant) with a median follow-up of 10.2 years (interquartile range, 7.2-14.9 years). A significant interaction between ADT sequencing and RT field size was observed for all end points (P interaction < .02 for all) except OS. With PORT (n = 4,355), compared with neoadjuvant/concurrent ADT, concurrent/adjuvant ADT was associated with improved metastasis-free survival (10-year benefit 8.0%, hazard ratio [HR], 0.65; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.79; P < .0001), DM (subdistribution HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.82; P = .0046), prostate cancer-specific mortality (subdistribution HR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.54; P < .0001), and OS (HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.83; P = .0001). However, in patients receiving WPRT (n = 3,049), no significant difference in any end point was observed in regard to ADT sequencing except for worse DM (HR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.20 to 2.05; P = .0009) with concurrent/adjuvant ADT.

CONCLUSION

ADT sequencing exhibits a significant impact on clinical outcomes with a significant interaction with field size. Concurrent/adjuvant ADT should be the standard of care where short-term ADT is indicated in combination with PORT.

Evaluation of Social Determinants of Health and Prostate Cancer Outcomes Among Black and White Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

As the field of medicine strives for equity in care, research showing the association of social determinants of health (SDOH) with poorer health care outcomes is needed to better inform quality improvement strategies.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association of SDOH with prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) and overall survival (OS) among Black and White patients with prostate cancer.

DATA SOURCES

A MEDLINE search was performed of prostate cancer comparative effectiveness research from January 1, 1960, to June 5, 2020.

STUDY SELECTION

Two authors independently selected studies conducted among patients within the United States and performed comparative outcome analysis between Black and White patients. Studies were required to report time-to-event outcomes. A total of 251 studies were identified for review.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Three authors independently screened and extracted data. End point meta-analyses were performed using both fixed-effects and random-effects models. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline was followed, and 2 authors independently reviewed all steps. All conflicts were resolved by consensus.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was PCSM, and the secondary outcome was OS. With the US Department of Health and Human Services Healthy People 2030 initiative, an SDOH scoring system was incorporated to evaluate the association of SDOH with the predefined end points. The covariables included in the scoring system were age, comorbidities, insurance status, income status, extent of disease, geography, standardized treatment, and equitable and harmonized insurance benefits. The scoring system was discretized into 3 categories: high (≥10 points), intermediate (5-9 points), and low (<5 points).

RESULTS

The 47 studies identified comprised 1 019 908 patients (176 028 Black men and 843 880 White men; median age, 66.4 years [IQR, 64.8-69.0 years]). The median follow-up was 66.0 months (IQR, 41.5-91.4 months). Pooled estimates found no statistically significant difference in PCSM for Black patients compared with White patients (hazard ratio [HR], 1.08 [95% CI, 0.99-1.19]; P = .08); results were similar for OS (HR, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.95-1.07]; P = .68). There was a significant race-SDOH interaction for both PCSM (regression coefficient, -0.041 [95% CI, -0.059 to 0.023]; P < .001) and OS (meta-regression coefficient, -0.017 [95% CI, -0.033 to -0.002]; P = .03). In studies with minimal accounting for SDOH (<5-point score), Black patients had significantly higher PCSM compared with White patients (HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.17-1.41; P < .001). In studies with greater accounting for SDOH variables (≥10-point score), PCSM was significantly lower among Black patients compared with White patients (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.77-0.96; P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The findings of this meta-analysis suggest that there is a significant interaction between race and SDOH with respect to PCSM and OS among men with prostate cancer. Incorporating SDOH variables into data collection and analyses are vital to developing strategies for achieving equity.

Local Failure Events in Prostate Cancer Treated with Radiotherapy: A Pooled Analysis of 18 Randomized Trials from the Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials in Cancer of the Prostate Consortium (LEVIATHAN)

CONTEXT

The prognostic importance of local failure after definitive radiotherapy (RT) in National Comprehensive Cancer Network intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the prognostic impact of local failure and the kinetics of distant metastasis following RT.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A pooled analysis was performed on individual patient data of 12 533 PCa (6288 high-risk and 6245 intermediate-risk) patients enrolled in 18 randomized trials (conducted between 1985 and 2015) within the Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials in Cancer of the Prostate Consortium. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard (PH) models were developed to evaluate the relationship between overall survival (OS), PCa-specific survival (PCSS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and local failure as a time-dependent covariate. Markov PH models were developed to evaluate the impact of specific transition states.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The median follow-up was 11 yr. There were 795 (13%) local failure events and 1288 (21%) distant metastases for high-risk patients and 449 (7.2%) and 451 (7.2%) for intermediate-risk patients, respectively. For both groups, 81% of distant metastases developed from a clinically relapse-free state (cRF state). Local failure was significantly associated with OS (hazard ratio [HR] 1.17, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06-1.30), PCSS (HR 2.02, 95% CI 1.75-2.33), and DMFS (HR 1.94, 95% CI 1.75-2.15, p < 0.01 for all) in high-risk patients. Local failure was also significantly associated with DMFS (HR 1.57, 95% CI 1.36-1.81) but not with OS in intermediate-risk patients. Patients without local failure had a significantly lower HR of transitioning to a PCa-specific death state than those who had local failure (HR 0.32, 95% CI 0.21-0.50, p < 0.001). At later time points, more distant metastases emerged after a local failure event for both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Local failure is an independent prognosticator of OS, PCSS, and DMFS in high-risk and of DMFS in intermediate-risk PCa. Distant metastasis predominantly developed from the cRF state, underscoring the importance of addressing occult microscopic disease. However a "second wave" of distant metastases occurs subsequent to local failure events, and optimization of local control may reduce the risk of distant metastasis.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Among men receiving definitive radiation therapy for high- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer, about 10% experience local recurrence, and they are at significantly increased risks of further disease progression. About 80% of patients who develop distant metastasis do not have a detectable local recurrence preceding it.

Nonadherence to Multimodality Cancer Treatment Guidelines in the United States

Purpose

Our purpose was to identify patients with cancer who do not receive guideline-concordant multimodality treatment and to identify factors that are associated with nonreceipt of guideline-concordant multimodality treatment.

Methods and Materials

Five cancers for which the multimodal guideline-concordant treatment (with surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy) is clearly defined in national guidelines were selected from the National Cancer Database: (1) nonmetastatic anal cancer, (2) locally advanced cervical cancer, (3) nonmetastatic nasopharynx cancer, (4) locally advanced rectal cancer, and (5) locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine the odds ratios (with 95% confidence intervals) of receiving the guideline-concordant treatment versus not, adjusting for common confounding variables.

Results

178,005 patients with cancer were included: 32,214 anal, 54,485 rectal, 13,179 cervical, 5061 nasopharyngeal, and 73,066 lung. Overall, 162,514 (91%) received guideline-concordant treatment and 15,491 (9%) did not. Twenty-one percent of patients with cervical cancer, 10% of patients with rectal cancer, 7% of patients with lung cancer, 5% of patients with anal cancer, and 3% of patients with nasopharynx cancer did not receive guideline-concordant treatment. In general, patients who were older, with comorbid conditions, and who were evaluated at low-volume facilities (odds ratios > 1 with P < .05) were less likely to receive guideline-concordant treatment.

Conclusions

Nearly 1 in 10 patients in this cohort are not receiving appropriate multimodal cancer therapy. There appear to be significant disparities in receipt of guideline-concordant treatment based on primary tumor site, age, comorbidities, and reporting facility.

Risk of secondary malignant neoplasms in children following proton therapy vs. photon therapy for primary CNS tumors: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Central nervous system tumors are now the most common primary neoplasms seen in children, and radiation therapy is a key component in management. Secondary malignant neoplasms (SMNs) are rare, but dreaded complications. Proton beam therapy (PBT) can potentially minimize the risk of SMNs compared to conventional photon radiation therapy (RT), and multiple recent studies with mature data have reported the risk of SMNs after PBT. We performed this systematic review and meta-analysis to characterize and compare the incidence of SMNs after proton and photon-based radiation for pediatric CNS tumors.

Methods

A systematic search of literature on electronic (PubMed, Cochrane Central, and Embase) databases was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) method. We included studies reporting the incidence and nature of SMNs in pediatric patients with primary CNS tumors. The crude incidence of SMNs and all secondary neoplasms were separately extracted, and the random-effects model was used for pooled analysis and subgroup comparison was performed between studies using photons vs. protons.

Results

Twenty-four studies were included for analysis. A total of 418 SMNs were seen in 38,163 patients. The most common SMN were gliomas (40.6%) followed by meningiomas (38.7%), sarcomas (4.8%), and thyroid cancers (4.2%). The median follow-up was 8.8 years [3.3–23.2].The median latency to SMN for photons and protons were 11.9 years [5-23] and 5.9 years [5-6.7], respectively. The pooled incidence of SMNs was 1.8% (95% CI: 1.1%–2.6%, I² = 94%) with photons and 1.5% (95% CI: 0%–4.5%, I² = 81%) with protons. The pooled incidence of all SNs was not different [photons: 3.6% (95% CI: 2.5%–4.8%, I² = 96%) vs. protons: 1.5% (95% CI: 0–4.5%, I² = 80%); p = 0.21].

Conclusion

We observed similar rates of SMN with PBT at 1.5% compared to 1.8% with photon-based RT for pediatric CNS tumors. We observed a shorter latency to SMN with PBT compared to RT. With increasing use of pencil beam scanning PBT and VMAT, further studies are warranted to evaluate the risk of secondary cancers in patients treated with these newer modalities.

Local Treatment of the Primary Tumor for Patients with Metastatic Cancer (PRIME-TX): A Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Local treatment of the primary tumor for patients with metastases is controversial, and prospective data across many disease sites have conflicting conclusions regarding benefits.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE including randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in the past fifty years. Inclusion criteria were multi-institutional RCTs of patients with metastatic disease receiving systemic therapy randomized to addition of local treatment to the primary tumor. Two primary outcome measures, overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), were quantitatively assessed using random effects and meta-analyses were conducted using the inverse variance method for pooling. Secondary endpoints were qualitatively assessed and included toxicity and patient-reported quality of life. Exploratory analyses were performed by treatment type and volume of disease.

RESULTS

Eleven studies comprising 4,952 patients were included (n=1,558 received radiotherapy, 913 received surgery as primary tumor treatment). OS and PFS were not significantly improved from treatment of the primary (OS: HR 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.80-1.05; PFS: HR 0.88, 95%CI: 0.72-1.07). Assessment of primary local treatment modality demonstrated a significant difference in summary effect size on PFS between trials using surgery (HR 1.15, 95%CI 0.99-1.33) as compared to radiotherapy (HR 0.73, 95%CI 0.56-0.96) as the local treatment modality (p=0.005). In low metastatic burden patients, radiotherapy was associated with significantly improved OS (HR 0.67, 95%CI 0.52-0.85), but surgery was not associated with improved OS compared to no local treatment (HR 1.12, 95%CI 0.94-1.34).

CONCLUSIONS

In RCTs conducted to date enrolling a variety of cancer types with variable metastatic burden, there is no consistent improvement in PFS or OS from the addition of local therapy to the primary tumor in unselected patients with metastatic disease. Carefully selected patients may derive oncologic benefit and should be discussed in tumor boards. Future prospective studies should aim to further optimize patient selection, and the optimal systemic and local therapy treatment types.

Lutetium-177 Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen Therapy: A Practical Review

Prostate-specific membrane antigen is a transmembrane protein found predominately on prostate epithelium and is expressed at high levels in prostate cancer. In this review, we discuss the background, clinical data, patient selection, side effects, and necessary resources to deliver lutetium-177 prostate-specific membrane antigen in the research setting, or as standard of care if approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration. Targeted radionuclide therapeutics require understanding of fundamental principles of radiobiology and physics, and radiation oncologists and medical physicists are well-suited to play an integral role in their delivery and treatment response monitoring as key components of a multidisciplinary care team.

High-dose Radiotherapy or Androgen Deprivation Therapy (HEAT) as Treatment Intensification for Localized Prostate Cancer: An Individual Patient-data Network Meta-analysis from the MARCAP Consortium

BACKGROUND

The relative benefits of radiotherapy (RT) dose escalation and the addition of short-term or long-term androgen deprivation therapy (STADT or LTADT) in the treatment of prostate cancer are unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To perform a network meta-analysis (NMA) of relevant randomized trials to compare the relative benefits of RT dose escalation ± STADT or LTADT.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

An NMA of individual patient data from 13 multicenter randomized trials was carried out for a total of 11862 patients. Patients received one of the six permutations of low-dose RT (64 to <74 Gy) ± STADT or LTADT, high-dose RT (≥74 Gy), or high-dose RT ± STADT or LTADT.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSES

Metastasis-free survival (MFS) was the primary endpoint. Frequentist and Bayesian NMAs were performed to rank the various treatment strategies by MFS and biochemical recurrence-free survival (BCRFS).

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Median follow-up was 8.8 yr (interquartile range 5.7-11.5). The greatest relative improvement in outcomes was seen for addition of LTADT, irrespective of RT dose, followed by addition of STADT, irrespective of RT dose. RT dose escalation did not improve MFS either in the absence of ADT (hazard ratio [HR] 0.97, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.80-1.18) or with STADT (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.8-1.23) or LTADT (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.65-1.37). According to P-score ranking and rankogram analysis, high-dose RT + LTADT was the optimal treatment strategy for both BCRFS and longer-term outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Conventionally escalated RT up to 79.2 Gy, alone or in the presence of ADT, does not improve MFS, while addition of STADT or LTADT to RT alone, regardless of RT dose, consistently improves MFS. RT dose escalation does provide a high probability of improving BCRFS and, provided it can be delivered without compromising quality of life, may represent the optimal treatment strategy when used in conjunction with ADT.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Using a higher radiotherapy dose when treating prostate cancer does not reduce the chance of developing metastases or death, but it does reduce the chance of having a rise in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) signifying recurrence of cancer. Androgen deprivation therapy improves all outcomes. A safe increase in radiotherapy dose in conjunction with androgen deprivation therapy may be the optimal treatment.

Management of Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma: ASCO Guideline

PURPOSE

To provide recommendations for the management of patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC).

METHODS

An Expert Panel conducted a systematic literature review to obtain evidence to guide treatment recommendations.

RESULTS

The panel considered peer-reviewed reports published in English.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The diagnosis of metastatic ccRCC should be made using tissue biopsy of the primary tumor or a metastatic site with the inclusion of markers and/or stains to support the diagnosis. The International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium risk criteria should be used to inform treatment. Cytoreductive nephrectomy may be offered to select patients with kidney-in-place and favorable- or intermediate-risk disease. For those who have already had a nephrectomy, an initial period of active surveillance may be offered if they are asymptomatic with a low burden of disease. Patients with favorable-risk disease who need systemic therapy may be offered an immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) in combination with a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI); patients with intermediate or poor risk should be offered a doublet regimen (no recommendation was provided between ICIs or an ICI in combination with a VEGFR TKI). For select patients, monotherapy with either an ICI or a VEGFR TKI may be offered on the basis of comorbidities. Interleukin-2 remains an option, although selection criteria could not be identified. Recommendations are also provided for second- and subsequent-line therapy as well as the treatment of bone metastases, brain metastases, or the presence of sarcomatoid features. Participation in clinical trials is highly encouraged for patients with metastatic ccRCC.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/genitourinary-cancer-guidelines.

Epidemiology of bone metastases

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated the incidence of de novo bone metastasis across all primary cancer sites and their impact on survival by primary cancer site, age, race, and sex.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

Our objectives were (I) characterize the epidemiology of de novo bone metastasis with respect to patient demographics, (II) characterize the incidence by primary site, age, and sex (2010-2015), and (III) compare survival of de novo metastatic cancer patients with and without bone metastasis.

METHODS

This is a retrospective, population-based study using nationally representative data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program, 2010-2015. Incidence rates by year of diagnosis, annual percentage changes, Kaplan-Meier, univariate and multiple Cox regression models are included in the analysis.

RESULTS

Of patients with cancer in the SEER database, 5.1% were diagnosed with metastasis to bone, equaling ~18.8 per 100,000 bone metastasis diagnoses in the US per year (2010-2015). For adults >25, lung cancer is the most common primary site (2015 rate: 8.7 per 100,000) with de novo bone metastases, then prostate and breast primaries (2015 rates: 3.19 and 2.38 per 100,000, respectively). For patients <20 years old, endocrine cancers and soft tissue sarcomas are the most common primaries. Incidence is increasing for prostate (Annual Percentage Change (APC) = 4.6%, P < 0.001) and stomach (APC = 5.0%, P = 0.001) cancers. The presence of de novo bone metastasis was associated with a limited reduction in overall survival (HR = 1.02, 95%, CI = [1.01-1.03], p < 0.001) when compared to patients with other non-bone metastases.

CONCLUSION

The presence of bone metastasis versus metastasis to other sites has disease site-specific impact on survival. The incidence of de novo bone metastasis varies by age, sex, and primary disease site.

Long-Term Risk of Death From Heart Disease Among Breast Cancer Patients

Background

Most breast cancer patients die of non-cancer causes. The risk of death from heart disease, a leading cause of death, is unknown. The aim of this study is to characterize the long-term risk of fatal heart disease in breast cancer patients.

Methods

This retrospective study used the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Standard mortality ratios (SMR) were calculated for breast cancer patients diagnosed from 1992 to 2014. Patients were stratified by receipt of radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy, disease laterality, and diagnosis era. Hazard ratios (HRs) and odds ratios (ORs) were calculated to compare the risk of death from heart disease among other breast cancer patients.

Results

There were 1,059,048 patients diagnosed with breast cancer from 1992 to 2014, of which 47,872 (4.6%) died from heart disease. The SMR for death from heart disease at 10+ years for patients who received only radiotherapy was 2.92 (95% CI 2.81–3.04, p < 0.001) and in patients who received only chemotherapy was 5.05 (95% CI 4.57–5.55, p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in SMR for death from heart disease for left-sided vs. right-sided disease. At 10+ years, heart disease made up 28% of deaths from non-primary cancer. HRs and ORs showed that the risk of death from heart disease was highest in patients older than 70 years of age and with longer follow-up.

Conclusion

The risk of fatal heart disease was highest in older breast cancer patients with longer follow-up (i.e., >5–10 years) and who received chemotherapy. These patients should be referred to cardio-oncology clinics to mitigate this risk.

Current treatment and future directions in the management of anal cancer

Although rare, the rate of squamous cell carcinoma of the anus (SCCA) is rising globally. Most patients present with nonmetastatic disease and are curable with appropriate treatment, which has evolved significantly over the last several decades. Before the 1970s, SCCA was managed with radical surgery, resulting in a permanent colostomy. Researchers found that preoperative treatment with chemotherapy and concurrent radiation could achieve a pathologic complete response. After this observation, definitive therapy shifted from radical surgery to sphincter-preserving chemoradiation. Investigations into the necessity of chemotherapy and the optimal regimen found that chemotherapy with mitomycin-C and 5-fluorouracil is required for cure. Further studies evaluating the addition of induction or maintenance chemotherapy, monoclonal antibody therapy, or higher radiation doses have demonstrated no significant benefit to disease control. Advanced radiation delivery with intensity-modulated radiotherapy techniques is now considered the standard of care because of its prospectively determined, favorable acute toxicity profile compared with 3-dimensional conformal radiation. It is important to note that chemoradiation treatment response may be slow (up to 26 weeks) and should be assessed through serial clinical examinations. Today, surgical management of SCCA is reserved only for the lowest risk, early stage tumors or for recurrent/persistent disease. Current studies are evaluating radiation dose de-escalation in early stage disease and radiation dose escalation and the addition of immune checkpoint inhibitors in locally advanced cancers. In reviewing how and why modern-day treatment of SCCA was established, the objective of this report is to reenforce adherence to current treatment paradigms to assure the best possible outcomes for patients.

A patient-level data meta-analysis of the abscopal effect

Purpose

Methods and Materials

Results

Conclusions

Retrospective comparative effectiveness research: will changing the analytical methods change the results?

In medicine, retrospective cohort studies are used to compare treatments to one another. We hypothesize that the outcomes of retrospective comparative effectiveness research studies can be heavily influenced by biostatistical analytic choices, thereby leading to inconsistent conclusions. We selected a clinical scenario currently under investigation: survival in metastatic prostate, breast, or lung cancer after systemic vs systemic + definitive local therapy. We ran >300 000 regression models (each representing a publishable study). Each model had various forms of analytic choices (to account for bias): propensity score matching, left truncation adjustment, landmark analysis, and covariate combinations. There were 72 549 lung, 14 904 prostate, and 13 857 breast cancer patients included. In the most basic analysis, which omitted propensity score matching, left truncation adjustment, and landmark analysis, all of the HRs were < 1 (generally, 0.60-0.95, favoring addition of local therapy), with all P-values < 0.001. Left truncation adjustment landmark analysis produced results with non-significant P-values. The combination of propensity score matching, left truncation adjustment, landmark analysis, and covariate combinations generally produced P-values that were > 0.05 and/or HRs that were > 1 (favoring systemic therapy alone). The use of more statistical methods to reduce the selection bias caused reported HR ranges to approach 1.0. By varying analytic choices in comparative effectiveness research, we generated contrary outcomes. Our results suggest that some retrospective observational studies may find a treatment improves outcomes for patients, while another similar study may find it does not, simply based on analytical choices. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.