1
|
Kim IA, Winter KA, Sperduto PW, De Los Santos JF, Peereboom DM, Ogunleye T, Boulter D, Fritz JM, Cho KH, Shin KH, Zoberi I, Choi S, Palmer JD, Liem B, Kim YB, Anderson BM, Thakrar AW, Muanza TM, Kim MM, Choi DH, Mehta MP, White JR. Concurrent Lapatinib With Brain Radiation Therapy in Patients With HER2+ Breast Cancer With Brain Metastases: NRG Oncology-KROG/RTOG 1119 Phase 2 Randomized Trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024; 118:1391-1401. [PMID: 37506981 PMCID: PMC10811275 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.07.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/10/2023] [Revised: 06/03/2023] [Accepted: 07/14/2023] [Indexed: 07/30/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Lapatinib plus whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) or stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) was hypothesized to improve the 12-week intracranial complete response (CR) rate compared with either option of radiation therapy (RT) alone for patients with brain metastases (BM) from human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (HER2+) breast cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS This study included patients with HER2+ breast cancer with ≥1 measurable, unirradiated BM. Patients were randomized to WBRT (37.5 Gy/3 wk)/SRS (size-based dosing) ± concurrent lapatinib (1000 mg daily for 6 weeks). Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), lesion-specific response, central nervous system progression-free survival, and overall survival. RESULTS From July 2012 to September 2019, 143 patients were randomized, with 116 analyzable for the primary endpoint. RT + lapatinib did not improve 12-week CR (0% vs 6% for RT alone, 1-sided P = .97), or ORR at 12 weeks. At 4 weeks, RT + lapatinib showed higher ORR (55% vs 42%). Higher graded prognostic assessment and ≤10 lesions were associated with higher 12-week ORR. Grade 3 and 4 adverse event rates were 8% and 0% for RT and 28% and 6% for RT + lapatinib. CONCLUSIONS The addition of 6 weeks of concomitant lapatinib to WBRT/SRS did not improve the primary endpoint of 12-week CR rate or 12-week ORR. Adding lapatinib to WBRT/SRS showed improvement of 4-week ORR, suggesting a short-term benefit from concomitant therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- In Ah Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University, Seoul, South Korea.
| | - Kathryn A Winter
- NRG Oncology Statistics and Data Management Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Paul W Sperduto
- Radiation Oncologist, Minneapolis Radiation Oncology, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | | | - David M Peereboom
- Brain Tumor & Neuro-Oncology Cleveland Clinic Main Campus, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Tomi Ogunleye
- Medical Physics Department, Northside Hospital Cancer Institute, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Daniel Boulter
- Department of Radiology, Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Joel M Fritz
- Department of Radiology, Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Kwan Ho Cho
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Kyung Hwan Shin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Imran Zoberi
- Department of Radiology Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
| | - Serah Choi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center and Case Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Joshua D Palmer
- Department of Radiology, Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Ben Liem
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, New Mexico Minority Underserved NCORP, Albuquerque, New Mexico
| | - Yong Bae Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei University Health System-Severance Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Bethany M Anderson
- Department of Human Oncology, University of Wisconsin Hospital and Clinics, Madison, Wisconsin
| | - Anupama W Thakrar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stroger Hospital of Cook County Minority Underserved NCORP, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Thierry M Muanza
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Michelle M Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan
| | - Doo Ho Choi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Minesh P Mehta
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Miami, Florida
| | - Julia R White
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Kansas, Kansas City, Kansas
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Kim MM, Mehta MP, Smart DK, Steeg PS, Hong JA, Espey MG, Prasanna PG, Crandon L, Hodgdon C, Kozak N, Armstrong TS, Morikawa A, Willmarth N, Tanner K, Boire A, Gephart MH, Margolin KA, Hattangadi-Gluth J, Tawbi H, Trifiletti DM, Chung C, Basu-Roy U, Burns R, Oliva ICG, Aizer AA, Anders CK, Davis J, Ahluwalia MS, Chiang V, Li J, Kotecha R, Formenti SC, Ellingson BM, Gondi V, Sperduto PW, Barnholtz-Sloan JS, Rodon J, Lee EQ, Khasraw M, Yeboa DN, Brastianos PK, Galanis E, Coleman CN, Ahmed MM. National Cancer Institute Collaborative Workshop on Shaping the Landscape of Brain Metastases Research: challenges and recommended priorities. Lancet Oncol 2023; 24:e344-e354. [PMID: 37541280 PMCID: PMC10681121 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(23)00297-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/10/2023] [Revised: 06/13/2023] [Accepted: 06/21/2023] [Indexed: 08/06/2023]
Abstract
Brain metastases are an increasing global public health concern, even as survival rates improve for patients with metastatic disease. Both metastases and the sequelae of their treatment are key determinants of the inter-related priorities of patient survival, function, and quality of life, mandating a multidimensional approach to clinical care and research. At a virtual National Cancer Institute Workshop in September, 2022, key stakeholders convened to define research priorities to address the crucial areas of unmet need for patients with brain metastases to achieve meaningful advances in patient outcomes. This Policy Review outlines existing knowledge gaps, collaborative opportunities, and specific recommendations regarding consensus priorities and future directions in brain metastases research. Achieving major advances in research will require enhanced coordination between the ongoing efforts of individual organisations and consortia. Importantly, the continual and active engagement of patients and patient advocates will be necessary to ensure that the directionality of all efforts reflects what is most meaningful in the context of patient care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michelle M Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
| | - Minesh P Mehta
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL, USA
| | - DeeDee K Smart
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Patricia S Steeg
- Women's Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Julie A Hong
- Radiation Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, USA
| | - Michael G Espey
- Radiation Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, USA
| | - Pataje G Prasanna
- Radiation Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, USA
| | | | | | | | - Terri S Armstrong
- Neuro-Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Aki Morikawa
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | | | - Kirk Tanner
- National Brain Tumor Society, Newton, MA, USA
| | - Adrienne Boire
- Department of Neurology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | | | | | - Jona Hattangadi-Gluth
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California San Diego Health, La Jolla, CA, USA
| | - Hussein Tawbi
- Department of Melanoma Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Daniel M Trifiletti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Florida, Jacksonville, FL, USA
| | - Caroline Chung
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | | | - Robyn Burns
- Melanoma Research Foundation, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Isabella C Glitza Oliva
- Department of Melanoma Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Ayal A Aizer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Brigham and Women's Hospital/Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Carey K Anders
- Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA
| | | | - Manmeet S Ahluwalia
- Department of Medical Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Veronica Chiang
- Department of Neurosurgery and Department of Therapeutic Radiology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - Jing Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Rupesh Kotecha
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Silvia C Formenti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA
| | - Benjamin M Ellingson
- UCLA Brain Tumor Imaging Laboratory, Department of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Vinai Gondi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Northwestern Medicine Cancer Center Warrenville and Proton Center, Warrenville, IL, USA
| | - Paul W Sperduto
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Jill S Barnholtz-Sloan
- Informatics and Data Science Program, Center for Biomedical Informatics and Information Technology, Trans-Divisional Research Program, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, USA
| | - Jordi Rodon
- Department of Investigational Cancer Therapeutics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Eudocia Q Lee
- Center for Neuro-Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Mustafa Khasraw
- Preston Robert Tisch Brain Tumor Center, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Debra Nana Yeboa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Priscilla K Brastianos
- Division of Hematology/Oncology and Division of Neuro-Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Evanthia Galanis
- Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic Comprehensive Cancer Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - C Norman Coleman
- Radiation Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, USA
| | - Mansoor M Ahmed
- Radiation Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Sperduto PW, Salama AKS, Anders C. Progress for patients with melanoma brain metastases. Neuro Oncol 2023; 25:1321-1322. [PMID: 36883201 PMCID: PMC10326485 DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/noad050] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/17/2023] [Indexed: 03/09/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Paul W Sperduto
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical
Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | - April K S Salama
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Duke University
Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | - Carey Anders
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Duke University
Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Sperduto PW, De B, Li J, Carpenter D, Kirkpatrick J, Milligan M, Shih HA, Kutuk T, Kotecha R, Higaki H, Otsuka M, Aoyama H, Bourgoin M, Roberge D, Dajani S, Sachdev S, Gainey J, Buatti JM, Breen W, Brown PD, Ni L, Braunstein S, Gallitto M, Wang TJC, Shanley R, Lou E, Shiao J, Gaspar LE, Tanabe S, Nakano T, An Y, Chiang V, Zeng L, Soliman H, Elhalawani H, Cagney D, Thomas E, Boggs DH, Ahluwalia MS, Mehta MP. Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA) for Patients With Lung Cancer and Brain Metastases: Initial Report of the Small Cell Lung Cancer GPA and Update of the Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer GPA Including the Effect of Programmed Death Ligand 1 and Other Prognostic Factors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2022; 114:60-74. [PMID: 35331827 PMCID: PMC9378572 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.03.020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/06/2021] [Revised: 03/02/2022] [Accepted: 03/14/2022] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Patients with lung cancer and brain metastases represent a markedly heterogeneous population. Accurate prognosis is essential to optimally individualize care. In prior publications, we described the graded prognostic assessment (GPA), but a GPA for patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC) has never been reported, and in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the effect of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) was unknown. The 3-fold purpose of this work is to provide the initial report of an SCLC GPA, to evaluate the effect of PD-L1 on survival in patients with NSCLC, and to update the Lung GPA accordingly. METHODS AND MATERIALS A multivariable analysis of prognostic factors and treatments associated with survival was performed on 4183 patients with lung cancer (3002 adenocarcinoma, 611 nonadenocarcinoma, 570 SCLC) with newly diagnosed brain metastases between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2020, using a multi-institutional retrospective database. Significant variables were used to update the Lung GPA. RESULTS Overall median survival for lung adenocarcinoma, SCLC, and nonadenocarcinoma was 17, 10, and 8 months, respectively, but varied widely by GPA from 2 to 52 months. In SCLC, the significant prognostic factors were age, performance status, extracranial metastases, and number of brain metastases. In NSCLC, the distribution of molecular markers among patients with lung adenocarcinoma and known primary tumor molecular status revealed alterations/expression in PD-L1 50% to 100%, PD-L1 1% to 49%, epidermal growth factor receptor, and anaplastic lymphoma kinase in 32%, 31%, 30%, and 7%, respectively. Median survival of patients with lung adenocarcinoma and brain metastases with 0, 1% to 49%, and ≥50% PD-L1 expression was 17, 19, and 24 months, respectively (P < .01), confirming PD-L1 is a prognostic factor. Previously identified prognostic factors for NSCLC (epidermal growth factor receptor and anaplastic lymphoma kinase status, performance status, age, number of brain metastases, and extracranial metastases) were reaffirmed. These factors were incorporated into the updated Lung GPA with robust separation between subgroups for all histologies. CONCLUSIONS Survival for patients with lung cancer and brain metastases has improved but varies widely. The initial report of a GPA for SCLC is presented. For patients with NSCLC-adenocarcinoma and brain metastases, PD-L1 is a newly identified significant prognostic factor, and the previously identified factors were reaffirmed. The updated indices establish unique criteria for SCLC, NSCLC-nonadenocarcinoma, and NSCLC-adenocarcinoma (incorporating PD-L1). The updated Lung GPA, available for free at brainmetgpa.com, provides an accurate tool to estimate survival, individualize treatment, and stratify clinical trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Brian De
- MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Jing Li
- MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | | | | | | | - Helen A Shih
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Tugce Kutuk
- Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida
| | - Rupesh Kotecha
- Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida
| | | | | | - Hidefumi Aoyama
- Hokkaido Cancer Center, Hokkaido, Japan; Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Malie Bourgoin
- Centre Hospitalier de l' Université de Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - David Roberge
- Centre Hospitalier de l' Université de Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Lisa Ni
- University of California, San Francisco, California
| | | | | | | | | | - Emil Lou
- University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Jay Shiao
- University of Colorado Denver, Denver, Colorado
| | - Laurie E Gaspar
- University of Colorado Denver, Denver, Colorado; Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Loveland, Colorado
| | | | | | - Yi An
- Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut
| | | | - Liang Zeng
- Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Hany Soliman
- Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | | | | | - Evan Thomas
- University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama
| | | | | | - Minesh P Mehta
- Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Sperduto PW, Lou E. The past, present, and future management of brain metastases in EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer. Neuro Oncol 2021; 23:867-868. [PMID: 33674853 DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/noab054] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
| | - Emil Lou
- Department of Medical Oncology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Sperduto PW, Mesko S, Li J, Cagney D, Aizer A, Lin NU, Nesbit E, Kruser TJ, Chan J, Braunstein S, Lee J, Kirkpatrick JP, Breen W, Brown PD, Shi D, Shih HA, Soliman H, Sahgal A, Shanley R, Sperduto W, Lou E, Everett A, Boggs DH, Masucci L, Roberge D, Remick J, Plichta K, Buatti JM, Jain S, Gaspar LE, Wu CC, Wang TJC, Bryant J, Chuong M, Yu J, Chiang V, Nakano T, Aoyama H, Mehta MP. Estrogen/progesterone receptor and HER2 discordance between primary tumor and brain metastases in breast cancer and its effect on treatment and survival. Neuro Oncol 2021; 22:1359-1367. [PMID: 32034917 PMCID: PMC7523450 DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/noaa025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Breast cancer treatment is based on estrogen receptors (ERs), progesterone receptors (PRs), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). At the time of metastasis, receptor status can be discordant from that at initial diagnosis. The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence of discordance and its effect on survival and subsequent treatment in patients with breast cancer brain metastases (BCBM). METHODS A retrospective database of 316 patients who underwent craniotomy for BCBM between 2006 and 2017 was created. Discordance was considered present if the ER, PR, or HER2 status differed between the primary tumor and the BCBM. RESULTS The overall receptor discordance rate was 132/316 (42%), and the subtype discordance rate was 100/316 (32%). Hormone receptors (HR, either ER or PR) were gained in 40/160 (25%) patients with HR-negative primary tumors. HER2 was gained in 22/173 (13%) patients with HER2-negative primary tumors. Subsequent treatment was not adjusted for most patients who gained receptors-nonetheless, median survival (MS) improved but did not reach statistical significance (HR, 17-28 mo, P = 0.12; HER2, 15-19 mo, P = 0.39). MS for patients who lost receptors was worse (HR, 27-18 mo, P = 0.02; HER2, 30-18 mo, P = 0.08). CONCLUSIONS Receptor discordance between primary tumor and BCBM is common, adversely affects survival if receptors are lost, and represents a missed opportunity for use of effective treatments if receptors are gained. Receptor analysis of BCBM is indicated when clinically appropriate. Treatment should be adjusted accordingly. KEY POINTS 1. Receptor discordance alters subtype in 32% of BCBM patients.2. The frequency of receptor gain for HR and HER2 was 25% and 13%, respectively.3. If receptors are lost, survival suffers. If receptors are gained, consider targeted treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul W Sperduto
- Minneapolis Radiation Oncology and University of Minnesota Gamma Knife Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Shane Mesko
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Jing Li
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Daniel Cagney
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Ayal Aizer
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Nancy U Lin
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Eric Nesbit
- Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | | | - Jason Chan
- University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA
| | - Steve Braunstein
- University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA
| | - Jessica Lee
- Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | | | | | | | - Diana Shi
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Helen A Shih
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Hany Soliman
- Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Arjun Sahgal
- Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Ryan Shanley
- University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | | | - Emil Lou
- University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Ashlyn Everett
- University of Alabama Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, USA
| | | | - Laura Masucci
- Centre Hospitalier de l' Université de Montréal, Montreal, Canada
| | - David Roberge
- Centre Hospitalier de l' Université de Montréal, Montreal, Canada
| | - Jill Remick
- University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | | | | | - Supriya Jain
- University of Colorado Denver, Denver, Colorado, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | - James Yu
- Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, USA
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Sperduto PW, Mesko S, Li J, Cagney D, Aizer A, Lin NU, Nesbit E, Kruser TJ, Chan J, Braunstein S, Lee J, Kirkpatrick JP, Breen W, Brown PD, Shi D, Shih HA, Soliman H, Sahgal A, Shanley R, Sperduto WA, Lou E, Everett A, Boggs DH, Masucci L, Roberge D, Remick J, Plichta K, Buatti JM, Jain S, Gaspar LE, Wu CC, Wang TJ, Bryant J, Chuong M, An Y, Chiang V, Nakano T, Aoyama H, Mehta MP. Survival in Patients With Brain Metastases: Summary Report on the Updated Diagnosis-Specific Graded Prognostic Assessment and Definition of the Eligibility Quotient. J Clin Oncol 2020; 38:3773-3784. [PMID: 32931399 PMCID: PMC7655019 DOI: 10.1200/jco.20.01255] [Citation(s) in RCA: 191] [Impact Index Per Article: 47.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 08/15/2020] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Conventional wisdom has rendered patients with brain metastases ineligible for clinical trials for fear that poor survival could mask the benefit of otherwise promising treatments. Our group previously published the diagnosis-specific Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA). Updates with larger contemporary cohorts using molecular markers and newly identified prognostic factors have been published. The purposes of this work are to present all the updated indices in a single report to guide treatment choice, stratify research, and define an eligibility quotient to expand eligibility. METHODS A multi-institutional database of 6,984 patients with newly diagnosed brain metastases underwent multivariable analyses of prognostic factors and treatments associated with survival for each primary site. Significant factors were used to define the updated GPA. GPAs of 4.0 and 0.0 correlate with the best and worst prognoses, respectively. RESULTS Significant prognostic factors varied by diagnosis and new prognostic factors were identified. Those factors were incorporated into the updated GPA with robust separation (P < .01) between subgroups. Survival has improved, but varies widely by GPA for patients with non-small-cell lung, breast, melanoma, GI, and renal cancer with brain metastases from 7-47 months, 3-36 months, 5-34 months, 3-17 months, and 4-35 months, respectively. CONCLUSION Median survival varies widely and our ability to estimate survival for patients with brain metastases has improved. The updated GPA (available free at brainmetgpa.com) provides an accurate tool with which to estimate survival, individualize treatment, and stratify clinical trials. Instead of excluding patients with brain metastases, enrollment should be encouraged and those trials should be stratified by the GPA to ensure those trials make appropriate comparisons. Furthermore, we recommend the expansion of eligibility to allow for the enrollment of patients with previously treated brain metastases who have a 50% or greater probability of an additional year of survival (eligibility quotient > 0.50).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul W. Sperduto
- Minneapolis Radiation Oncology and University of Minnesota Gamma Knife Center, Minneapolis, MN
| | | | - Jing Li
- MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | | | - Ayal Aizer
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA
| | | | | | | | - Jason Chan
- University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Diana Shi
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | | | - Hany Soliman
- Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Arjun Sahgal
- Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | | | | | - Emil Lou
- University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN
| | | | | | - Laura Masucci
- Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - David Roberge
- Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Yi An
- Yale University, New Haven, CT
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Sperduto PW, Mesko S, Li J, Cagney D, Aizer A, Lin NU, Nesbit E, Kruser TJ, Chan J, Braunstein S, Lee J, Kirkpatrick JP, Breen W, Brown PD, Shi D, Shih HA, Soliman H, Sahgal A, Shanley R, Sperduto W, Lou E, Everett A, Boggs DH, Masucci L, Roberge D, Remick J, Plichta K, Buatti JM, Jain S, Gaspar LE, Wu CC, Wang TJC, Bryant J, Chuong M, Yu J, Chiang V, Nakano T, Aoyama H, Mehta MP. Beyond an Updated Graded Prognostic Assessment (Breast GPA): A Prognostic Index and Trends in Treatment and Survival in Breast Cancer Brain Metastases From 1985 to Today. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2020; 107:334-343. [PMID: 32084525 PMCID: PMC7276246 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.01.051] [Citation(s) in RCA: 73] [Impact Index Per Article: 18.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/25/2019] [Revised: 01/28/2020] [Accepted: 01/31/2020] [Indexed: 02/02/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Brain metastases are a common sequelae of breast cancer. Survival varies widely based on diagnosis-specific prognostic factors (PF). We previously published a prognostic index (Graded Prognostic Assessment [GPA]) for patients with breast cancer with brain metastases (BCBM), based on cohort A (1985-2007, n = 642), then updated it, reporting the effect of tumor subtype in cohort B (1993-2010, n = 400). The purpose of this study is to update the Breast GPA with a larger contemporary cohort (C) and compare treatment and survival across the 3 cohorts. METHODS AND MATERIALS A multi-institutional (19), multinational (3), retrospective database of 2473 patients with breast cancer with newly diagnosed brain metastases (BCBM) diagnosed from January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2017, was created and compared with prior cohorts. Associations of PF and treatment with survival were analyzed. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates were compared with log-rank tests. PF were weighted and the Breast GPA was updated such that a GPA of 0 and 4.0 correlate with the worst and best prognoses, respectively. RESULTS Median survival (MS) for cohorts A, B, and C improved over time (from 11, to 14 to 16 months, respectively; P < .01), despite the subtype distribution becoming less favorable. PF significant for survival were tumor subtype, Karnofsky Performance Status, age, number of BCBMs, and extracranial metastases (all P < .01). MS for GPA 0 to 1.0, 1.5-2.0, 2.5-3.0, and 3.5-4.0 was 6, 13, 24, and 36 months, respectively. Between cohorts B and C, the proportion of human epidermal receptor 2 + subtype decreased from 31% to 18% (P < .01) and MS in this subtype increased from 18 to 25 months (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS MS has improved modestly but varies widely by diagnosis-specific PF. New PF are identified and incorporated into an updated Breast GPA (free online calculator available at brainmetgpa.com). The Breast GPA facilitates clinical decision-making and will be useful for stratification of future clinical trials. Furthermore, these data suggest human epidermal receptor 2-targeted therapies improve clinical outcomes in some patients with BCBM.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul W Sperduto
- Minneapolis Radiation Oncology & University of Minnesota Gamma Knife Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
| | | | - Jing Li
- MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | | | - Ayal Aizer
- Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Nancy U Lin
- Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | | | | | - Jason Chan
- University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California
| | - Steve Braunstein
- University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California
| | | | | | | | | | - Diana Shi
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Massachusetts, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Helen A Shih
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Massachusetts, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Hany Soliman
- Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Arjun Sahgal
- Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | | | | | - Emil Lou
- University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | | | | | - Laura Masucci
- Centre Hospitalier de l' Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - David Roberge
- Centre Hospitalier de l' Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - James Yu
- Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Patrikidou A, Chaigneau L, Isambert N, Kitikidou K, Shanley R, Ray-Coquard I, Valentin T, Malivoir B, Laigre M, Bay JO, Moureau-Zabotto L, Bompas E, Piperno-Neumann S, Penel N, Alcindor T, Guillemet C, Duffaud F, Hügli A, Le Pechoux C, Dhermain F, Blay JY, Sperduto PW, Le Cesne A. Development of a disease-specific graded prognostic assessment index for the management of sarcoma patients with brain metastases (Sarcoma-GPA). BMC Cancer 2020; 20:117. [PMID: 32050939 PMCID: PMC7014599 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-020-6548-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2019] [Accepted: 01/16/2020] [Indexed: 01/13/2023] Open
Abstract
Abstract Background Brain metastases from sarcomatous lesions pose a management challenge owing to their rarity and the histopathological heterogeneity. Prognostic indices such as the Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA) index have been developed for several primary tumour types presenting with brain metastases (e.g. lung, breast, melanoma), tailored to the specifics of different primary histologies and molecular profiles. Thus far, a prognostic index to direct treatment decisions is lacking for adult sarcoma patients with brain metastases. Methods We performed a multicentre analysis of a national group of expert sarcoma tertiary centres (French Sarcoma Group, GSF-GETO) with the participation of one Canadian and one Swiss centre. The study cohort included adult patients with a diagnosis of a bone or soft tissue sarcoma presenting parenchymal or meningeal brain metastases, managed between January 1992 and March 2012. We assessed the validity of the original GPA index in this patient population and developed a disease-specific Sarcoma-GPA index. Results The original GPA index is not prognostic for sarcoma brain metastasis patients. We have developed a dedicated Sarcoma-GPA index that identifies a sub-group of patients with particularly favourable prognosis based on histology, number of brain lesions and performance status. Conclusions The Sarcoma-GPA index provides a novel tool for sarcoma oncologists to guide clinical decision-making and outcomes research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna Patrikidou
- Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus, Villejuif, France. .,Present Address: Sarah Cannon Research Institute and UCL Cancer Institute & University College London Hospitals, 93 Harley Street, London W1G 6AD, UK.
| | | | | | | | - Ryan Shanley
- Gamma Knife Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Paul W Sperduto
- Gamma Knife Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Moravan MJ, Fecci PE, Anders CK, Clarke JM, Salama AKS, Adamson JD, Floyd SR, Torok JA, Salama JK, Sampson JH, Sperduto PW, Kirkpatrick JP. Current multidisciplinary management of brain metastases. Cancer 2020; 126:1390-1406. [PMID: 31971613 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.32714] [Citation(s) in RCA: 56] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/25/2019] [Revised: 12/08/2019] [Accepted: 12/19/2019] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
Brain metastasis (BM), the most common adult brain tumor, develops in 20% to 40% of patients with late-stage cancer and traditionally are associated with a poor prognosis. The management of patients with BM has become increasingly complex because of new and emerging systemic therapies and advancements in radiation oncology and neurosurgery. Current therapies include stereotactic radiosurgery, whole-brain radiation therapy, surgical resection, laser-interstitial thermal therapy, systemic cytotoxic chemotherapy, targeted agents, and immune-checkpoint inhibitors. Determining the optimal treatment for a specific patient has become increasingly individualized, emphasizing the need for multidisciplinary discussions of patients with BM. Recognizing and addressing the sequelae of BMs and their treatment while maintaining quality of life and neurocognition is especially important because survival for patients with BMs has improved. The authors present current and emerging treatment options for patients with BM and suggest approaches for managing sequelae and disease recurrence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael J Moravan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Peter E Fecci
- Department of Neurosurgery, Duke University Hospital, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Carey K Anders
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, Duke University Hospital, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Jeffrey M Clarke
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, Duke University Hospital, Durham, North Carolina
| | - April K S Salama
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, Duke University Hospital, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Justus D Adamson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Scott R Floyd
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Jordan A Torok
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Joseph K Salama
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
| | - John H Sampson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.,Department of Neurosurgery, Duke University Hospital, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Paul W Sperduto
- Minneapolis Radiation Oncology, Minneapolis, Minnesota.,University of Minnesota Gamma Knife Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - John P Kirkpatrick
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.,Department of Neurosurgery, Duke University Hospital, Durham, North Carolina
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Song CW, Terezakis S, Emami B, Griffin RJ, Sperduto PW, Kim MS, Cho LC. Indirect cell death and the LQ model in SBRT and SRS. J Radiosurg SBRT 2020; 7:1-4. [PMID: 32802572 PMCID: PMC7406346] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2020] [Accepted: 03/30/2020] [Indexed: 06/11/2023]
Abstract
High-dose hypofractionated SBRT and SRS indirectly kills substantial fractions of tumor cells via causing vascular damage. The LQ formula may work well for certain clinical cases of SBRT and SRS when the indirect/additional tumor cell death secondary to vascular damage is small. However, when the indirect cell death is extensive, the LQ model will underestimate the clinical outcome of SBRT and SRS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chang W. Song
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - Stephanie Terezakis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - Bahman Emami
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Loyola University Medical Center Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Robert J Griffin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, USA
| | - Paul W Sperduto
- Minneapolis Radiation Oncology and Gamma Knife Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - Mi-Sook Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Korea Institute of Radiological & Medical Sciences, Seoul Korea
| | - L Chinsoo Cho
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Sperduto PW, Deegan BJ, Li J, Jethwa KR, Brown PD, Lockney N, Beal K, Rana NG, Attia A, Tseng CL, Sahgal A, Shanley R, Sperduto WA, Lou E, Zahra A, Buatti JM, Yu JB, Chiang V, Molitoris JK, Masucci L, Roberge D, Shi DD, Shih HA, Olson A, Kirkpatrick JP, Braunstein S, Sneed P, Mehta MP. Estimating survival for renal cell carcinoma patients with brain metastases: an update of the Renal Graded Prognostic Assessment tool. Neuro Oncol 2019; 20:1652-1660. [PMID: 30418657 DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/noy099] [Citation(s) in RCA: 40] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Brain metastases are a common complication of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Our group previously published the Renal Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA) tool. In our prior RCC study (n = 286, 1985-2005), we found marked heterogeneity and variation in outcomes. In our recent update in a larger, more contemporary cohort, we identified additional significant prognostic factors. The purpose of this study is to update the original Renal-GPA based on the newly identified prognostic factors. Methods A multi-institutional retrospective institutional review board-approved database of 711 RCC patients with new brain metastases diagnosed from January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2015 was created. Clinical parameters and treatment were correlated with survival. A revised Renal GPA index was designed by weighting the most significant factors in proportion to their hazard ratios and assigning scores such that the patients with the best and worst prognoses would have a GPA of 4.0 and 0.0, respectively. Results The 4 most significant factors were Karnofsky performance status, number of brain metastases, extracranial metastases, and hemoglobin. The overall median survival was 12 months. Median survival for GPA groups 0-1.0, 1.5-2.0, 2.5-3, and 3.5-4.0 (% n = 25, 27, 30 and 17) was 4, 12, 17, and 35 months, respectively. Conclusion The updated Renal GPA is a user-friendly tool that will help clinicians and patients better understand prognosis, individualize clinical decision making and treatment selection, provide a means to compare retrospective literature, and provide more robust stratification of future clinical trials in this heterogeneous population. To simplify use of this tool in daily practice, a free online application is available at brainmetgpa.com.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul W Sperduto
- Minneapolis Radiation Oncology and University of Minnesota Gamma Knife Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Brian J Deegan
- MD Anderson Cancer Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, Houston, Texas
| | - Jing Li
- MD Anderson Cancer Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, Houston, Texas
| | - Krishan R Jethwa
- Mayo Clinic, Department of Radiation Oncology, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Paul D Brown
- Mayo Clinic, Department of Radiation Oncology, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Natalie Lockney
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, New York, New York
| | - Kathryn Beal
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, New York, New York
| | - Nitesh G Rana
- Vanderbilt University, Department of Radiation Oncology, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Albert Attia
- Vanderbilt University, Department of Radiation Oncology, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Chia-Lin Tseng
- Sunnybrook-University of Toronto, Department of Radiation Oncology, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Arjun Sahgal
- Sunnybrook-University of Toronto, Department of Radiation Oncology, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Ryan Shanley
- University of Minnesota Biostatistics, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - William A Sperduto
- University of Minnesota Cancer Center, Department of Medical Oncology, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Emil Lou
- University of Minnesota Cancer Center, Department of Medical Oncology, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Amir Zahra
- University of Iowa, Department of Radiation Oncology, Iowa City, Iowa
| | - John M Buatti
- University of Iowa, Department of Radiation Oncology, Iowa City, Iowa
| | - James B Yu
- Yale University, Department of Radiation Oncology, New Haven, Connecticut
| | - Veronica Chiang
- Yale University, Department of Neurosurgery, New Haven, Connecticut
| | - Jason K Molitoris
- University of Maryland, Department of Radiation Oncology, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Laura Masucci
- Centre Hospitalier de l' Université de Montreal, Department of Radiation Oncology, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - David Roberge
- Centre Hospitalier de l' Université de Montreal, Department of Radiation Oncology, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Diana D Shi
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Department of Radiation Oncology, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Helen A Shih
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Department of Radiation Oncology, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Adam Olson
- Duke University, Department of Radiation Oncology, Durham, North Carolina
| | - John P Kirkpatrick
- Duke University, Department of Radiation Oncology, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Steve Braunstein
- University of California San Francisco, Department of Radiation Oncology, San Francisco, California
| | - Penny Sneed
- University of California San Francisco, Department of Radiation Oncology, San Francisco, California
| | - Minesh P Mehta
- Miami Cancer Institute, Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami, Florida
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Sperduto PW, Fang P, Li J, Breen W, Brown PD, Cagney D, Aizer A, Yu JB, Chiang V, Jain S, Gaspar LE, Myrehaug S, Sahgal A, Braunstein S, Sneed P, Cameron B, Attia A, Molitoris J, Wu CC, Wang TJC, Lockney NA, Beal K, Parkhurst J, Buatti JM, Shanley R, Lou E, Tandberg DD, Kirkpatrick JP, Shi D, Shih HA, Chuong M, Saito H, Aoyama H, Masucci L, Roberge D, Mehta MP. Estimating survival in patients with gastrointestinal cancers and brain metastases: An update of the graded prognostic assessment for gastrointestinal cancers (GI-GPA). Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2019; 18:39-45. [PMID: 31341974 PMCID: PMC6612649 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2019.06.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/14/2019] [Revised: 06/23/2019] [Accepted: 06/24/2019] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Patients with gastrointestinal cancers and brain metastases (BM) represent a unique and heterogeneous population. Our group previously published the Diagnosis-Specific Graded Prognostic Assessment (DS-GPA) for patients with GI cancers (GI-GPA) (1985-2007, n = 209). The purpose of this study is to update the GI-GPA based on a larger contemporary database. Methods An IRB-approved consortium database analysis was performed using a multi-institutional (18), multi-national (3) cohort of 792 patients with gastrointestinal (GI) cancers, with newly-diagnosed BM diagnosed between 1/1/2006 and 12/31/2017. Survival was measured from date of first treatment for BM. Multiple Cox regression was used to select and weight prognostic factors in proportion to their hazard ratios. These factors were incorporated into the updated GI-GPA. Results Median survival (MS) varied widely by primary site and other prognostic factors. Four significant factors (KPS, age, extracranial metastases and number of BM) were used to formulate the updated GI-GPA. Overall MS for this cohort remains poor; 8 months. MS by GPA was 3, 7, 11 and 17 months for GPA 0-1, 1.5-2, 2.5-3.0 and 3.5-4.0, respectively. >30% present in the worst prognostic group (GI-GPA of ≤1.0). Conclusions Brain metastases are not uncommon in GI cancer patients and MS varies widely among them. This updated GI-GPA index improves our ability to estimate survival for these patients and will be useful for therapy selection, end-of-life decision-making and stratification for future clinical trials. A user-friendly, free, on-line app to calculate the GPA score and estimate survival for an individual patient is available at brainmetgpa.com.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul W Sperduto
- Minneapolis Radiation Oncology and University of Minnesota Gamma Knife Center, USA
| | | | - Jing Li
- MD Anderson Cancer Center, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Laura Masucci
- Centre Hospitalier de l' Université de Montreal, Canada
| | - David Roberge
- Centre Hospitalier de l' Université de Montreal, Canada
| | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
Sperduto PW, Fang P, Li J, Breen W, Brown PD, Cagney D, Aizer A, Yu J, Chiang V, Jain S, Gaspar LE, Myrehaug S, Sahgal A, Braunstein S, Sneed P, Cameron B, Attia A, Molitoris J, Wu CC, Wang TJC, Lockney N, Beal K, Parkhurst J, Buatti JM, Shanley R, Lou E, Tandberg DD, Kirkpatrick JP, Shi D, Shih HA, Chuong M, Saito H, Aoyama H, Masucci L, Roberge D, Mehta MP. Survival and prognostic factors in patients with gastrointestinal cancers and brain metastases: have we made progress? Transl Res 2019; 208:63-72. [PMID: 30885538 PMCID: PMC6527460 DOI: 10.1016/j.trsl.2019.02.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/15/2018] [Revised: 02/17/2019] [Accepted: 02/22/2019] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
The literature describing the prognosis of patients with gastrointestinal (GI) cancers and brain metastases (BM) is sparse. Our group previously published a prognostic index, the Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA) for GI cancer patients with BM, based on 209 patients diagnosed from 1985-2005. The purpose of this analysis is to identify prognostic factors for GI cancer patients with newly diagnosed BM in a larger contemporary cohort. A multi-institutional retrospective IRB-approved database of 792 GI cancer patients with new BM diagnosed from 1/1/2006 to 12/31/2016 was created. Demographic data, clinical parameters, and treatment were correlated with survival and time from primary diagnosis to BM (TPDBM). Kaplan-Meier median survival (MS) estimates were calculated and compared with log-rank tests. The MS from time of first treatment for BM for the prior and current cohorts were 5 and 8 months, respectively (P < 0.001). Eight prognostic factors (age, stage, primary site, resection of primary tumor, Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS), extracranial metastases, number of BM and Hgb were found to be significant for survival, in contrast to only one (KPS) in the prior cohort. In this cohort, the most common primary sites were rectum (24%) and esophagus (23%). Median TPDBM was 22 months. Notably, 37% (267/716) presented with poor prognosis (GPA 0-1.0). Although little improvement in overall survival in this cohort has been achieved in recent decades, survival varies widely and multiple new prognostic factors were identified. Future work will translate these factors into a prognostic index to facilitate clinical decision-making and stratification of future clinical trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul W Sperduto
- Minneapolis Radiation Oncology and University of Minnesota Gamma Knife Center.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Sperduto PW, Mesko S, Cagney D, Nesbit E, Chan J, Lee J, Breen W, Shi D, Soliman H, Shanley R, Everett AS, Masucci L, Remick J, Plichta K, Jain SK, Wu CC, Bryant J, Yu JB, Nakano T, Mehta MP. Tumor subtype and other prognostic factors in breast cancer patients with brain metastases: The updated graded prognostic assessment (Breast-GPA). J Clin Oncol 2019. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2019.37.15_suppl.1079] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
1079 Background: Brain metastases (BM) are a common and fatal complication of breast cancer but survival varies widely based on various prognostic factors (PF). Hence, patient counseling and therapeutic decisions should be individualized. We previously published a prognostic index (Breast GPA) based on cohort A (1985-2007, n = 642), updated it with tumor subtype in cohort B (1993-2010, n = 400) and are now updating it with a larger contemporary cohort (C). Methods: A multi-institutional (19) multi-national (3) retrospective database of 2473 breast cancer patients with BM diagnosed from 1/1/2006-12/31/2017 was created and compared to our prior cohorts. Demographic, clinical, molecular factors, tumor subtype and treatment were correlated with survival. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates were calculated and compared with log-rank tests. Results: The median survival (MS) for cohorts A, B and C improved over time [12, 14 and 16 mo, respectively ( < 0.01)] despite the subtype distribution becoming less favorable: Luminal B (ER/PR/HER2+) decreased from 26% to 21%; HER2 (HER2+/ER/PR-) decreased from 31% to 17%, Luminal A (ER/PR+/HER2-) increased from 20% to 31%; Basal (ER/PR/HER2-) was unchanged at 24%.MS by subtype improved from 21 to 27 mo in Luminal B, 18 to 25 mo in HER2, 10 to 14 mo in Luminal A and 6 to 9 mo in Basal tumors. The number of BM was 1 in 35%, ≤4 in 67% and > 10 in 18%. PF significant for survival were tumor subtype, age, KPS, number of BM and extracranial metastases (ECM) (all < 0.01). Surprisingly, Hispanic women (7%) showed improved survival (p < 0.01). BRCA1 was mutated in 57/533 (11%) and those patients showed a trend (0.16) toward improved survival. Treatment patterns have changed: the use of whole brain radiation therapy decreased from 71% to 67% to 47% in cohorts A, B and C, respectively. Conclusions: Despite the shift to less favorable tumor subtypes, MS has improvedbut varies widely by diagnosis-specific PF. Compared to prior cohorts, number of BM and ECM were identified as new PF. Ethnic, genetic and treatment differences between the eras are apparent. The updated Breast GPA, based on these data, and the correlation between BRCA1 and tumor subtype will be presented.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | - Jason Chan
- University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA
| | | | | | | | - Hany Soliman
- Princess Margaret Hospital, Mississauga, ON, Canada
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Cheng-Chia Wu
- New York-Presbyterian Hospital, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY
| | | | - James B. Yu
- Department of Therapeutic Radiology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
16
|
Song CW, Glatstein E, Marks LB, Emami B, Grimm J, Sperduto PW, Kim MS, Hui S, Dusenbery KE, Cho LC. Biological Principles of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) and Stereotactic Radiation Surgery (SRS): Indirect Cell Death. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2019; 110:21-34. [PMID: 30836165 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2019.02.047] [Citation(s) in RCA: 84] [Impact Index Per Article: 16.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/13/2019] [Revised: 02/13/2019] [Accepted: 02/14/2019] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To review the radiobiological mechanisms of stereotactic body radiation therapy stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and stereotactic radiation surgery (SRS). METHODS AND MATERIALS We reviewed previous reports and recent observations on the effects of high-dose irradiation on tumor cell survival, tumor vasculature, and antitumor immunity. We then assessed the potential implications of these biological changes associated with SBRT and SRS. RESULTS Irradiation with doses higher than approximately 10 Gy/fraction causes significant vascular injury in tumors, leading to secondary tumor cell death. Irradiation of tumors with high doses has also been reported to increase the antitumor immunity, and various approaches are being investigated to further elevate antitumor immunity. The mechanism of normal tissue damage by high-dose irradiation needs to be further investigated. CONCLUSIONS In addition to directly killing tumor cells, high-dose irradiation used in SBRT and SRS induces indirect tumor cell death via vascular damage and antitumor immunity. Further studies are warranted to better understand the biological mechanisms underlying the high efficacy of clinical SBRT and SRS and to further improve the efficacy of SBRT and SRS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chang W Song
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
| | - Eli Glatstein
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Lawrence B Marks
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Bahman Emami
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Loyola University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Jimm Grimm
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Paul W Sperduto
- Minneapolis Radiation Oncology and Gamma Knife Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Mi-Sook Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Korea Institute of Radiological & Medical Sciences, Seoul, Korea
| | - Susanta Hui
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Kathryn E Dusenbery
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - L Chinsoo Cho
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Sperduto PW. In Regard to Churilla et al. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2018; 101:238-239. [PMID: 29619973 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.01.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/02/2018] [Accepted: 01/03/2018] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Paul W Sperduto
- Minneapolis Radiation Oncology, University of Minnesota Gamma Knife Center, Waconia, Minnesota
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Sperduto PW, Deegan BJ, Li J, Jethwa KR, Brown PD, Lockney N, Beal K, Rana NG, Attia A, Tseng CL, Sahgal A, Shanley R, Sperduto WA, Lou E, Zahra A, Buatti JM, Yu JB, Chiang V, Molitoris JK, Masucci L, Roberge D, Shi DD, Shih HA, Olson A, Kirkpatrick JP, Braunstein S, Sneed P, Mehta MP. Effect of Targeted Therapies on Prognostic Factors, Patterns of Care, and Survival in Patients With Renal Cell Carcinoma and Brain Metastases. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2018; 101:845-853. [PMID: 29976497 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.04.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/05/2017] [Revised: 03/06/2018] [Accepted: 04/03/2018] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To identify prognostic factors, define evolving patterns of care, and the effect of targeted therapies in a larger contemporary cohort of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients with new brain metastases (BM). METHODS AND MATERIALS A multi-institutional retrospective institutional review board-approved database of 711 RCC patients with new BM diagnosed from January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2015, was created. Clinical parameters and treatment were correlated with median survival and time from primary diagnosis to BM. Multivariable analyses were performed. RESULTS The median survival for the prior/present cohorts was 9.6/12 months, respectively (P < .01). Four prognostic factors (Karnofsky performance status, extracranial metastases, number of BM, and hemoglobin b) were significant for survival after the diagnosis of BM. Of the 6 drug types studied, only cytokine use after BM was associated with improved survival. The use of whole-brain radiation therapy declined from 50% to 22%, and the use of stereotactic radiosurgery alone increased from 46% to 58%. Nonneurologic causes of death were twice as common as neurologic causes. CONCLUSIONS Additional prognostic factors refine prognostication in this larger contemporary cohort. Patterns of care have changed, and survival of RCC patients with BM has improved over time. The reasons for this improvement in survival remain unknown but may relate to more aggressive use of local brain metastasis therapy and a wider array of systemic treatment options for those patients with progressive extracranial tumor.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul W Sperduto
- Minneapolis Radiation Oncology and University of Minnesota Gamma Knife Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
| | | | - Jing Li
- MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | | | | | | | - Kathryn Beal
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Nitesh G Rana
- Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Albert Attia
- Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | | | - Arjun Sahgal
- Sunnybrook-University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Ryan Shanley
- University of Minnesota Biostatistics, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | | | - Emil Lou
- University of Minnesota Cancer Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Laura Masucci
- Centre Hospitalier de l' Université de Montreal, Montreal, Canada
| | - David Roberge
- Centre Hospitalier de l' Université de Montreal, Montreal, Canada
| | - Diana D Shi
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Helen A Shih
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | | | | | - Steve Braunstein
- University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California
| | - Penny Sneed
- University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California
| | | |
Collapse
|
19
|
Sperduto PW, Mehta MP. Brain Metastases in Lung Cancer With Targetable Mutations—Reply. JAMA Oncol 2018; 4:422-423. [DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2017.3375] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Paul W. Sperduto
- Minneapolis Radiation Oncology and Gamma Knife Center, University of Minnesota, Waconia
| | | |
Collapse
|
20
|
Sperduto W, King DM, Watanabe Y, Lou E, Sperduto PW. Case Report of Extended Survival and Quality of Life in a Melanoma Patient with Multiple Brain Metastases and Review of Literature. Cureus 2017; 9:e1947. [PMID: 29487766 PMCID: PMC5814294 DOI: 10.7759/cureus.1947] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/01/2023] Open
Abstract
Long-term survival for melanoma patients with multiple brain metastases is rare. A review of the literature reveals only three reported melanoma patients with multiple brain metastases who survived more than 10 years. We present a patient who is recurrence-free 11 years after the diagnosis of three brain metastases. Her treatment consisted of cytokine (interferon and interleukin-2) and chemotherapy nine months prior to developing brain and soft tissue metastases, which were treated with stereotactic radiosurgery and stereotactic ablative radiotherapy, respectively, followed by six months of chemotherapy. Notably, she has not received any treatment for over 10 years, never underwent craniotomy or whole brain radiation therapy, currently has a perfect score on the functional assessment of cancer therapy for brain (FACT-Br) quality of life (QoL) scale, and runs marathons. This treatment course is consistent with emerging literature on the abscopal effect (radiation-induced immune response). Clinical trials are needed to better understand and harness the abscopal effect in order to optimally integrate targeted drug and radiation therapies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- William Sperduto
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology, Oncology and Transplantation, University of Minnesota
| | | | | | - Emil Lou
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology, Oncology and Transplantation, University of Minnesota
| | - Paul W Sperduto
- Minneapolis Radiation Oncology & Gamma Knife Center, University of Minnesota
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Nordmann N, Hubbard M, Nordmann T, Sperduto PW, Clark HB, Hunt MA. Effect of Gamma Knife Radiosurgery and Programmed Cell Death 1 Receptor Antagonists on Metastatic Melanoma. Cureus 2017; 9:e1943. [PMID: 29468099 PMCID: PMC5811164 DOI: 10.7759/cureus.1943] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/02/2023] Open
Abstract
Learning objectives To evaluate radiation-induced changes in patients with brain metastasis secondary to malignant melanoma who received treatment with Gamma Knife radiosurgery (GKRS) and programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) receptor antagonists. Introduction Stereotactic radiosurgery and chemotherapeutics are used together for treatment of metastatic melanoma and have been linked to delayed radiation-induced vasculitic leukoencephalopathy (DRIVL). There have been reports of more intense interactions with new immunotherapeutics targeting PD-1 receptors, but their interactions have not been well described and may result in an accelerated response to GKRS. Here we present data on subjects treated with this combination from a single institution. Methods Records from patients who underwent treatment for metastatic melanoma to the brain with GKRS from 2011 to 2016 were reviewed. Demographics, date of brain metastasis diagnosis, cause of death when applicable, immunotherapeutics, and imaging findings were recorded. The timing of radiation therapy and medications were also documented. Results A total of 79 subjects were treated with GKRS, and 66 underwent treatment with both GKRS and immunotherapy. Regarding the 30 patients treated with anti-PD-1 immunotherapy, 21 patients received pembrolizumab, seven patients received nivolumab, and two patients received pembrolizumab and nivolumab. Serial imaging was available for interpretation in 25 patients, with 13 subjects who received GKRS and anti-PD-1 immunotherapy less than six weeks of each other. While four subjects had indeterminate/mixed findings on subsequent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), nine subjects were noted to have progression. Two of these patients showed progression but subsequent imaging revealed a decrease in progression or improvement on MRI to previously targeted lesions by GKRS. None of the 13 subjects had surgery following their combined therapies. Conclusions This data suggests that there is need for further investigation of the role for concurrent treatment with PD-1 inhibitors and GKRS to enhance the treatment of metastatic melanoma. We present data on 13 patients who appear to have some radiologic benefit to this treatment combination, two of whom had radiographic pseudoprogression.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Paul W Sperduto
- Minneapolis Radiation Oncology & Gamma Knife Center, University of Minnesota
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
22
|
Sperduto PW, Jiang W, Brown PD, Braunstein S, Sneed P, Wattson DA, Shih HA, Bangdiwala A, Shanley R, Lockney NA, Beal K, Lou E, Amatruda T, Sperduto WA, Kirkpatrick JP, Yeh N, Gaspar LE, Molitoris JK, Masucci L, Roberge D, Yu J, Chiang V, Mehta M. Estimating Survival in Melanoma Patients With Brain Metastases: An Update of the Graded Prognostic Assessment for Melanoma Using Molecular Markers (Melanoma-molGPA). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2017; 99:812-816. [PMID: 29063850 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.06.2454] [Citation(s) in RCA: 102] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/02/2017] [Revised: 06/12/2017] [Accepted: 06/19/2017] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To update the Diagnosis-Specific Graded Prognostic Assessment (DS-GPA) for a markedly heterogeneous patient population, patients with melanoma and brain metastases, using a larger, more current cohort, including molecular markers. METHODS The original Melanoma-GPA is based on data from 483 patients whose conditions were diagnosed between 1985 and 2005. This is a multi-institutional retrospective database analysis of 823 melanoma patients with newly diagnosed brain metastases from January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2015. Multivariable analyses identified significant prognostic factors, which were weighted and included in the updated index (Melanoma-molGPA). Multiple Cox regression was used to select and weight prognostic factors in proportion to their hazard ratios to design the updated Melanoma-molGPA in which scores of 4.0 and 0.0 are associated with the best and worst prognoses, as with all of the diagnosis-specific GPA indices. Log-rank tests were used to compare adjacent classes. RESULTS There were 5 significant prognostic factors for survival (age, Karnofsky performance status [KPS], extracranial metastases [ECM], number of brain metastases, and BRAF status), whereas only KPS and the number of brain metastases were significant in the original Melanoma-GPA. Median survival improved from 6.7 to 9.8 months between the 2 treatment eras, and the median survival times for patients with Melanoma-molGPA of 0 to 1.0, 1.5 to 2.0, 2.5 to 3.0, and 3.5 to 4.0 were 4.9, 8.3, 15.8, and 34.1 months (P<.0001 between each adjacent group). CONCLUSIONS Survival and our ability to estimate survival in melanoma patients with brain metastases has improved significantly. The updated Melanoma-molGPA, a user-friendly tool to estimate survival, will facilitate clinical decision making regarding whether and which treatment is appropriate and will also be useful for stratification of future clinical trials. To further simplify use, a free online/smart phone app is available at brainmetgpa.com.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Wen Jiang
- MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | | | - Steve Braunstein
- University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California
| | - Penny Sneed
- University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California
| | - Daniel A Wattson
- Minneapolis Radiation Oncology, Minneapolis, Minnesota; Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Helen A Shih
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | | | - Ryan Shanley
- University of Minnesota Biostatistics, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | | | - Kathryn Beal
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Emil Lou
- University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | | | | | | | - Norman Yeh
- University of Colorado Denver, Denver, Colorado
| | | | | | - Laura Masucci
- Centre Hospitalier de l' Universite de Montreal, Montreal, Canada
| | - David Roberge
- Centre Hospitalier de l' Universite de Montreal, Montreal, Canada
| | - James Yu
- Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
23
|
Sperduto PW, Yang TJ, Beal K, Pan H, Brown PD, Bangdiwala A, Shanley R, Yeh N, Gaspar LE, Braunstein S, Sneed P, Boyle J, Kirkpatrick JP, Mak KS, Shih HA, Engelman A, Roberge D, Arvold ND, Alexander B, Awad MM, Contessa J, Chiang V, Hardie J, Ma D, Lou E, Sperduto W, Mehta MP. Estimating Survival in Patients With Lung Cancer and Brain Metastases: An Update of the Graded Prognostic Assessment for Lung Cancer Using Molecular Markers (Lung-molGPA). JAMA Oncol 2017; 3:827-831. [PMID: 27892978 DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.3834] [Citation(s) in RCA: 443] [Impact Index Per Article: 63.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/29/2023]
Abstract
Importance Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality in the United States and worldwide. As systemic therapies improve, patients with lung cancer live longer and thus are at increased risk for brain metastases. Understanding how prognosis varies across this heterogeneous patient population is essential to individualize care and design future clinical trials. Objective To update the current Diagnosis-Specific Graded Prognostic Assessment (DS-GPA) for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and brain metastases. The DS-GPA is based on data from patients diagnosed between 1985 and 2005, and we set out to update it by incorporating more recently reported gene and molecular alteration data for patients with NSCLC and brain metastases. This new index is called the Lung-molGPA. Design, Setting, and Participants This is a multi-institutional retrospective database analysis of 2186 patients diagnosed between 2006 and 2014 with NSCLC and newly diagnosed brain metastases. The multivariable analyses took place between December 2015 and May 2016, and all prognostic factors were weighted for significance by hazard ratios. Significant factors were included in the updated Lung-molGPA prognostic index. Main Outcomes and Measures The main outcome was survival. Multiple Cox regression was used to select and weight prognostic factors in proportion to their hazard ratios. Log rank tests were used to compare adjacent classes and to compare overall survival for adenocarcinoma vs nonadenocarcinoma groups. Results The original DS-GPA was based on 4 factors found in 1833 patients with NSCLC and brain metastases diagnosed between 1985 and 2005: patient age, Karnofsky Performance Status, extracranial metastases, and number of brain metastases. The patients studied for the creation of the DS-GPA had a median survival of 7 months from the time of initial treatment of brain metastases. To design the updated Lung-molGPA, we analyzed data from 2186 patients from 2006 through 2014 with NSCLC and newly diagnosed brain metastases (1521 adenocarcinoma and 665 nonadenocarcinoma). Significant prognostic factors included the original 4 factors used in the DS-GPA index plus 2 new factors: EGFR and ALK alterations in patients with adenocarcinoma (mutation status was not routinely tested for nonadenocarcinoma). The overall median survival for the cohort in the present study was 12 months, and those with NSCLC-adenocarcinoma and Lung-molGPA scores of 3.5 to 4.0 had a median survival of nearly 4 years. Conclusions and Relevance In recent years, patient survival and physicians' ability to predict survival in NSCLC with brain metastases has improved significantly. The updated Lung-molGPA incorporating gene alteration data into the DS-GPA is a user-friendly tool that may facilitate clinical decision making and appropriate stratification of future clinical trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul W Sperduto
- Minneapolis Radiation Oncology, Minneapolis, Minnesota2University of Minnesota Gamma Knife Center, Minneapolis
| | | | - Kathryn Beal
- Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Hubert Pan
- MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | | | - Ananta Bangdiwala
- University of Minnesota, Masonic Cancer Center, Biostatistics, Minneapolis
| | - Ryan Shanley
- University of Minnesota, Masonic Cancer Center, Biostatistics, Minneapolis
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - David Roberge
- University of Montreal Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Emil Lou
- University of Minnesota, Department of Hematology Oncology, Minneapolis
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
24
|
Sperduto PW, Jiang W, Brown PD, Braunstein S, Sneed P, Wattson DA, Shih HA, Bangdiwala A, Shanley R, Lockney NA, Beal K, Lou E, Amatruda T, Sperduto WA, Kirkpatrick JP, Yeh N, Gaspar LE, Molitoris JK, Masucci L, Roberge D, Yu J, Chiang V, Mehta M. The Prognostic Value of BRAF, C-KIT, and NRAS Mutations in Melanoma Patients With Brain Metastases. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2017; 98:1069-1077. [PMID: 28721890 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.03.030] [Citation(s) in RCA: 39] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2017] [Revised: 03/16/2017] [Accepted: 03/20/2017] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Brain metastases are a common problem in patients with melanoma, but little is known about the effect of gene mutations on survival in these patients. METHODS AND MATERIALS We created a retrospective multi-institutional database of 823 patients with melanoma and brain metastases diagnosed between 2006 and 2015. Clinical parameters, gene mutation status (BRAF, C-KIT, NRAS), and treatment were correlated with survival. Treatment patterns and outcomes were compared with a prior era (1985-2005). RESULTS BRAF status was known in 584 of 823 patients (71%). BRAF, NRAS, and C-KIT mutations were present in 51%, 22%, and 11% of tested patients, respectively. The median time from primary diagnosis to brain metastasis was 32 months, and overall median survival (MS) from the time of initial treatment of brain metastases was 10 months. MS for BRAF-positive and BRAF-negative patients was 13 months and 9 months, respectively (P=.02). There was no significant difference in MS in patients with or without NRAS or C-KIT mutations. The time from primary diagnosis to brain metastasis did not vary by mutation and was not associated with survival after the diagnosis of brain metastases. MS for the 1985 to 2005 and 2006 to 2015 cohorts was 6.7 months and 10.0 months, respectively (P<.01). Reflecting treatment-trend changes, use of whole-brain radiation therapy decreased from 48% to 26% during this period. Among BRAF-positive patients, 71% received targeted BRAF and/or MEK inhibitors and 57% received some combination of targeted therapy, chemotherapy, and/or immunotherapy. CONCLUSIONS For melanoma patients with brain metastases, BRAF-positive patients survive longer than BRAF-negative patients and overall survival has improved from 1985-2005 to 2006-2015.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Wen Jiang
- MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | | | - Steve Braunstein
- University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California
| | - Penny Sneed
- University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California
| | - Daniel A Wattson
- Minneapolis Radiation Oncology, Minneapolis, Minnesota; Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Helen A Shih
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Ananta Bangdiwala
- Division of Biostatistics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Ryan Shanley
- Division of Biostatistics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | | | - Kathryn Beal
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Emil Lou
- Department of Medical Oncology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | | | | | | | - Norman Yeh
- University of Colorado Denver, Denver, Colorado
| | | | | | - Laura Masucci
- Centre Hospitalier de l'Universite de Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - David Roberge
- Centre Hospitalier de l'Universite de Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - James Yu
- Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
25
|
Hurwitz MD, Harris J, Sartor O, Xiao Y, Shayegan B, Sperduto PW, Badiozamani KR, Lawton CAF, Horwitz EM, Michalski JM, Roof K, Beyer DC, Zhang Q, Sandler HM. Adjuvant radiation therapy, androgen deprivation, and docetaxel for high-risk prostate cancer postprostatectomy: Results of NRG Oncology/RTOG study 0621. Cancer 2017; 123:2489-2496. [PMID: 28323339 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.30620] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/21/2016] [Revised: 01/12/2017] [Accepted: 01/15/2017] [Indexed: 11/10/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Phase 3 trials have demonstrated a benefit from adjuvant radiation therapy (ART) for men who have adverse factors at radical prostatectomy (RP). However, some patients have a high risk of progression despite ART. The role of systemic therapy with ART in this high-risk group remains to be defined. METHODS Patients who had either a post-RP prostate-specific antigen (PSA) nadir > 0.2 ng/mL and a Gleason score ≥7 or a PSA nadir ≤0.2 ng/mL, a Gleason score ≥8, and a pathologic tumor (pT) classification ≥ pT3 received 6 months of androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) plus radiotherapy and 6 cycles of docetaxel. The primary objective was to assess whether the addition of ADT and docetaxel to ART resulted in a freedom from progression (FFP) rate ≥ 70% compared with an expected rate of 50%. Multivariate logistic and Cox regression analyses were used to model associations between factors and outcomes. RESULTS In total, 74 patients were enrolled. The median follow-up was 4.4 years. The pathologic tumor classification was pT2 in 4% of patients, pT3 in 95%, and pT4 in 1%. The Gleason score was 7 in 18% of patients and ≥8 in 82%. Post-RP PSA levels were ≤0.2 ng/mL in 53% of patients and >0.2 ng/mL in 47%. The 3-year FFP rate was 73% (95% confidence interval, 61%-83%), and the 3-year cumulative incidence of biochemical, distant, and local failure was 26%, 7%, and 0%, respectively. In multivariate models, postprostatectomy PSA nadir was associated with 3-year FFP, Gleason score, and PSA with biochemical failure. Grade 3 and 4 neutropenia was common; however, only 3 episodes of febrile neutropenia occurred. Late toxicities were not impacted by the addition of systemic therapy. CONCLUSIONS Combined ADT, docetaxel, and ART for men with high-risk prostate cancer after prostatectomy exceeded the prespecified study endpoint of 70% 3-year FFP. Phase 3 trials assessing combined local and systemic therapies for these high-risk patients are warranted. Cancer 2017;123:2489-96. © 2017 American Cancer Society.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mark D Hurwitz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Jonathan Harris
- NRG Oncology Statistics and Data Management Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Oliver Sartor
- Tulane University Cancer Center, New Orleans, Louisiana
| | - Ying Xiao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Bobby Shayegan
- Department of Urology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Paul W Sperduto
- Gamma Knife Center, University of Minnesota Medical Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota.,Minneapolis Radiation Oncology, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Kasra R Badiozamani
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, Washington
| | - Colleen A F Lawton
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Radiation Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin
| | - Eric M Horwitz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Jeff M Michalski
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
| | - Kevin Roof
- Southeast Radiation Oncology, Charlotte, North Carolina
| | | | - Qiang Zhang
- NRG Oncology Statistics and Data Management Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Howard M Sandler
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Doll CM, Moughan J, Klimowicz A, Ho CK, Kornaga EN, Lees-Miller SP, Ajani JA, Crane CH, Kachnic LA, Okawara GS, Berk LB, Roof KS, Becker MJ, Grisell DL, Ellis RJ, Sperduto PW, Marsa GW, Guha C, Magliocco AM. Significance of Co-expression of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor and Ki67 on Clinical Outcome in Patients With Anal Cancer Treated With Chemoradiotherapy: An Analysis of NRG Oncology RTOG 9811. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2016; 97:554-562. [PMID: 28126304 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.11.021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/21/2016] [Revised: 10/12/2016] [Accepted: 11/16/2016] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To measure co-expression of EGFR and Ki67 proteins in pretreatment tumor biopsies of anal cancer patients enrolled on NRG Oncology RTOG 9811, a phase III trial comparing 5-fluorouracil/mitomycin-C/radiation therapy (Arm A) versus 5-fluorouracil/cisplatin/radiation therapy (Arm B), and to correlate expression with clinical outcome. METHODS AND MATERIALS EGFR and Ki67 co-expression was measured after constructing a tissue microarray using fluorescence immunohistochemistry and automated quantitative image analysis. The Ki67 score within EGFR high versus low areas (Ki67ratio in EGFRhigh:low) in each tumor core was analyzed at the median, quartiles, and as a continuous variable. Associations between the tumor markers and clinical endpoints (overall and disease-free survival, locoregional and colostomy failure, and distant metastases) were explored. RESULTS A total of 282 pretreatment tumors were analyzed from NRG Oncology RTOG 9811. Of evaluated specimens, 183 (65%, n=89, Arm A; n=94, Arm B) were eligible and analyzable. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics or outcomes between analyzable and unanalyzable patient cases. Median follow-up was 6.0 years. On multivariate analysis, after adjusting for gender, patients with Ki67ratio in EGFRhigh:low ≥median had worse overall survival (hazard ratio 2.41, 95% confidence interval 1.38-4.19, P=.0019). After adjusting for N stage and largest tumor dimension, patients with Ki67ratio in EGFRhigh:low ≥ median had a higher risk of a disease-free failure (hazard ratio 1.85, 95% confidence interval 1.18-2.92, P=.0078). Technical validation with an independent anal cancer patient cohort was performed and shows a very similar biomarker score distribution. CONCLUSIONS High Ki67ratio in EGFRhigh:low is associated with worse clinical outcome in this subset of patients with anal cancer treated with chemoradiation on NRG Oncology RTOG 9811. Evaluation within a clinical trial will be required to determine whether patients with these tumor characteristics may specifically benefit from an EGFR-targeted therapeutic agent.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Jennifer Moughan
- NRG Oncology Statistics and Data Management Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | | | - Clement K Ho
- Tom Baker Cancer Centre, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | | | | | - Jaffer A Ajani
- University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | | | - Lisa A Kachnic
- Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Gordon S Okawara
- McMaster University Juravinski Cancer Center, Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Lawrence B Berk
- Mount Sinai Comprehensive Cancer Center Community Clinical Oncology Program (CCOP), Miami Beach, Florida
| | - Kevin S Roof
- Southeast Cancer Control Consortium, Inc, CCOP, Winston-Salem, North Carolina
| | | | | | | | | | - Gerald W Marsa
- Toledo Community Hospital Oncology Program CCOP, Toledo, Ohio
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
27
|
Peereboom DM, Moughan J, Kim IA, Delossantos JF, Sperduto PW, White JR, Mehta MP. ACTR-38. NRG/RTOG 1119: PHASE II RANDOMIZED STUDY OF WHOLE BRAIN RADIOTHERAPY WITH CONCURRENT LAPATINIB IN PATIENTS WITH BRAIN METASTASIS FROM Her2-POSITIVE BREAST CANCER: A COLLABORATIVE STUDY OF NRG AND KROG (NCT01622868). Neuro Oncol 2016. [DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/now212.036] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
|
28
|
Sperduto PW, Yang TJ, Beal K, Pan H, Brown PD, Bangdiwala A, Shanley R, Yeh N, Gaspar LE, Braunstein S, Sneed P, Boyle J, Kirkpatrick JP, Mak KS, Shih HA, Engelman A, Roberge D, Arvold ND, Alexander B, Awad MM, Contessa J, Chiang V, Hardie J, Ma D, Lou E, Sperduto W, Mehta MP. The Effect of Gene Alterations and Tyrosine Kinase Inhibition on Survival and Cause of Death in Patients With Adenocarcinoma of the Lung and Brain Metastases. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2016; 96:406-413. [PMID: 27598807 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.06.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 64] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/28/2016] [Revised: 05/08/2016] [Accepted: 06/07/2016] [Indexed: 01/28/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Lung cancer remains the most common cause of both cancer mortality and brain metastases (BM). The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of gene alterations and tyrosine kinase inhibition (TKI) on median survival (MS) and cause of death (CoD) in patients with BM from lung adenocarcinoma (L-adeno). METHODS A multi-institutional retrospective database of patients with L-adeno and newly diagnosed BM between 2006 and 2014 was created. Demographics, gene alterations, treatment, MS, and CoD were analyzed. The treatment patterns and outcomes were compared with those in prior trials. RESULTS Of 1521 L-adeno patients, 816 (54%) had known alteration status. The gene alteration rates were 29%, 10%, and 26% for EGFR, ALK, and KRAS, respectively. The time from primary diagnosis to BM for EGFR-/+ was 10/15 months (P=.02) and for ALK-/+ was 10/20 months (P<.01), respectively. The MS for the group overall (n=1521) was 15 months. The MS from first treatment for BM for EGFR and ALK-, EGFR+, ALK+ were 14, 23 (P<.01), and 45 (P<.0001) months, respectively. The MS after BM for EGFR+ patients who did/did not receive TKI before BM was 17/30 months (P<.01), respectively, but the risk of death was not statistically different between TKI-naïve patients who did/did not receive TKI after the diagnosis of BM (EGFR/ALK hazard ratios: 1.06 [P=.84]/1.60 [P=.45], respectively). The CoD was nonneurologic in 82% of patients with known CoD. CONCLUSION EGFR and ALK gene alterations are associated with delayed onset of BM and longer MS relative to patients without these alterations. The CoD was overwhelmingly nonneurologic in patients with known CoD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul W Sperduto
- Minneapolis Radiation Oncology and University of Minnesota Gamma Knife Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
| | | | - Kathryn Beal
- Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Hubert Pan
- MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | | | - Ananta Bangdiwala
- University of Minnesota, Masonic Cancer Center, Biostatistics, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Ryan Shanley
- University of Minnesota, Masonic Cancer Center, Biostatistics, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Norman Yeh
- University of Colorado-Denver, Denver, Colorado
| | | | - Steve Braunstein
- University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, California
| | - Penny Sneed
- University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, California
| | | | | | | | - Helen A Shih
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | | | - David Roberge
- CHUM, University of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Nils D Arvold
- Dana Farber/Brigham and Women's Cancer Center, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Brian Alexander
- Dana Farber/Brigham and Women's Cancer Center, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Mark M Awad
- Dana Farber/Brigham and Women's Cancer Center, Boston, Massachusetts
| | | | | | | | | | - Emil Lou
- University of Minnesota, Department of Hematology Oncology, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
29
|
Lou E, Sperduto PW. Integrating bevacizumab and radiation treatment of brain metastasis: is there sense and sensibility in this approach? Ann Transl Med 2016; 4:36. [PMID: 26889489 DOI: 10.3978/j.issn.2305-5839.2015.12.42] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022]
Abstract
The incidence of brain metastasis has increased over the past decade. Standard treatment options for brain metastases include whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT), stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and surgery for patients with operable lesions and either mass effect or need for histologic confirmation of the diagnosis. Patients are living longer due to improvements in systemic therapeutic approaches, included targeted therapies such as inhibition of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) using the monoclonal antibody bevacizumab (Bev). A recent phase I trial (REBECA) investigated adding Bev to whole-brain radiation for patients with brain metastasis from solid tumors. In this Perspectives article, we discuss the results of the REBECA trial in context of advancements in radiation and medical oncology in the era of targeted therapies, and discuss pertinent questions of interest in this field.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emil Lou
- 1 Division of Hematology, Oncology and Transplantation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA ; 2 Minneapolis Radiation Oncology & University of Minnesota Gamma Knife Center, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA
| | - Paul W Sperduto
- 1 Division of Hematology, Oncology and Transplantation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA ; 2 Minneapolis Radiation Oncology & University of Minnesota Gamma Knife Center, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
White JR, Moughan J, Kim IA, Peereboom DM, De Los Santos JF, Sperduto PW, Mehta MP. Abstract OT3-01-08: NRG oncology/RTOG 1119: Phase II randomized study of whole brain radiotherapy with concurrent lapatinib in patients with brain met from HER2-positive breast cancer — A collaborative study of RTOG and KROG (NCT01622868). Cancer Res 2016. [DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs15-ot3-01-08] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Background: The addition of trastuzumab to cytotoxic chemotherapy has improved outcomes for patients with HER2+ breast cancer. Increased survival coupled with limited blood-brain barrier (BBB) penetration of trastuzumab may contribute to the increased incidence of brain metastases (mets) in these patients. Half of these patients die of intracranial disease progression rather than extracranial systemic disease. Therefore, strategies to improve survival must include increased CNS disease control. Lapatinib crosses the BBB & demonstrates modest activity against intracranial mets. Based upon preclinical data & phase I study results, it's hypothesized that lapatinib plus WBRT can improve the intracranial disease control compared to whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) alone.
Trial design : RTOG 1119 is a randomized phase II trial that will evaluate if there is a sufficient enough signal in improved 12-week complete response (CR) rate following WBRT with the addition of lapatinib versus WBRT alone in patients with brain met from HER2+ breast cancer to warrant a future phase III trial.
Eligibility criteria: Eligibility includes HER2+ breast cancer with at least one measurable, unirradiated parenchymal brain met (≥10 mm if solitary, & > 5 mm if multiple on enhanced MRI). The two populations targeted for accrual include patients with 1) newly diagnosed, multiple brain mets or 2) progressive brain mets after stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) or surgical resection of 1-3 mets. Patients are stratified by breast-specific graded prognostic assessment; use of non-CNS penetrating HER2 targeted therapy; & prior SRS or surgical resection. Non-CNS penetrating HER2 targeted therapy is permitted throughout the study, but patients not on trastuzumab, pertuzumab or any other breast cancer therapy at study entry are not permitted to begin this therapy while on protocol treatment, but may begin it 24 hours after its completion. Prior lapatinib is allowed, last dose > 21 days prior to study entry.
Specific aims: Primary objective is to determine if there is an increase in CR rate in the brain at 12 weeks post WBRT as determined by MRI scan of the brain, with the addition of lapatinib to WBRT compared to WBRT alone. Secondary objectives includes: CR rate at 4 weeks on MRI post WBRT, objective response rate on MRI at 4 & 12 weeks, evaluation of lesion specific MRI response rates; CNS progression-free survival rate, overall survival rate, & adverse event rates.
Statistical methods: The randomization of experimental & control arms is set as 1:1. With 114 eligible subjects there will be 86% power to detect a 15% absolute increase in CR rate at a significance level of 0.10, using a 1-sided Z-test for 2 proportions. Targeted accrual is 143 accounting for up to a 5% ineligibility rate, 15% patients not evaluable for the primary endpoint due to death, patient withdrawal, or other reasons.
Present accrual (6-1-2015): 52. Targeted accrual: 143.
Contact Information:
Protocol: CTSU member web site https://www.ctsu.org. Enrollment: OPEN at https://open.ctsu.org.
Supported by NCI U10 grants CA21661, CA180868, CA180822, CA37422 & UG1CA189867.
Citation Format: White JR, Moughan J, Kim IA, Peereboom DM, De Los Santos JF, Sperduto PW, Mehta MP. NRG oncology/RTOG 1119: Phase II randomized study of whole brain radiotherapy with concurrent lapatinib in patients with brain met from HER2-positive breast cancer — A collaborative study of RTOG and KROG (NCT01622868). [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Eighth Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2015 Dec 8-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(4 Suppl):Abstract nr OT3-01-08.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- JR White
- The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH; NRG Oncology Statistics and Data Managment Center; Seoul National University Bundang Hospital; Cleveland Clinic Foundation; University of Alabama at Birmingham Cancer Center; Metro-Minnesota CCOP; University of Maryland
| | - J Moughan
- The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH; NRG Oncology Statistics and Data Managment Center; Seoul National University Bundang Hospital; Cleveland Clinic Foundation; University of Alabama at Birmingham Cancer Center; Metro-Minnesota CCOP; University of Maryland
| | - IA Kim
- The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH; NRG Oncology Statistics and Data Managment Center; Seoul National University Bundang Hospital; Cleveland Clinic Foundation; University of Alabama at Birmingham Cancer Center; Metro-Minnesota CCOP; University of Maryland
| | - DM Peereboom
- The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH; NRG Oncology Statistics and Data Managment Center; Seoul National University Bundang Hospital; Cleveland Clinic Foundation; University of Alabama at Birmingham Cancer Center; Metro-Minnesota CCOP; University of Maryland
| | - JF De Los Santos
- The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH; NRG Oncology Statistics and Data Managment Center; Seoul National University Bundang Hospital; Cleveland Clinic Foundation; University of Alabama at Birmingham Cancer Center; Metro-Minnesota CCOP; University of Maryland
| | - PW Sperduto
- The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH; NRG Oncology Statistics and Data Managment Center; Seoul National University Bundang Hospital; Cleveland Clinic Foundation; University of Alabama at Birmingham Cancer Center; Metro-Minnesota CCOP; University of Maryland
| | - MP Mehta
- The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH; NRG Oncology Statistics and Data Managment Center; Seoul National University Bundang Hospital; Cleveland Clinic Foundation; University of Alabama at Birmingham Cancer Center; Metro-Minnesota CCOP; University of Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Kim IA, Winter KA, Peereboom DM, Santos JFDL, Sperduto PW, White JR, Mehta MP. BMET-20RTOG1119 PHASE II RANDOMIZED STUDY OF WHOLE BRAIN RADIOTHERAPY WITH CONCURRENT LAPATINIB IN PATIENTS WITH BRAIN METASTASIS FROM Her2-POSITIVE BREAST CANCER: A COLLABORATIVE STUDY OF NRG AND KROG (NCT01622868). Neuro Oncol 2015. [DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/nov208.20] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
|
32
|
Sperduto PW, Song CW, Kirkpatrick JP, Glatstein E. A hypothesis: indirect cell death in the radiosurgery era. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2015; 91:11-3. [PMID: 25835617 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.08.355] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/25/2014] [Revised: 08/29/2014] [Accepted: 08/29/2014] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Paul W Sperduto
- Minneapolis Radiation Oncology and the Gamma Knife Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
| | - Chang W Song
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - John P Kirkpatrick
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Eli Glatstein
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Sperduto PW, Shanley R, Luo X, Andrews D, Werner-Wasik M, Valicenti R, Bahary JP, Souhami L, Won M, Mehta M. Secondary analysis of RTOG 9508, a phase 3 randomized trial of whole-brain radiation therapy versus WBRT plus stereotactic radiosurgery in patients with 1-3 brain metastases; poststratified by the graded prognostic assessment (GPA). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2014; 90:526-31. [PMID: 25304947 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.07.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 113] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/22/2014] [Revised: 06/27/2014] [Accepted: 07/03/2014] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 9508 showed a survival advantage for patients with 1 but not 2 or 3 brain metastasis (BM) treated with whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT) and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) versus WBRT alone. An improved prognostic index, the graded prognostic assessment (GPA) has been developed. Our hypothesis was that if the data from RTOG 9508 were poststratified by the GPA, the conclusions may vary. METHODS AND MATERIALS In this analysis, 252 of the 331 patients were evaluable by GPA. Of those, 211 had lung cancer. Breast cancer patients were excluded because the components of the breast GPA are not in the RTOG database. Multiple Cox regression was used to compare survival between treatment groups, adjusting for GPA. Treatment comparisons within subgroups were performed with the log-rank test. A free online tool (brainmetgpa.com) simplified GPA use. RESULTS The fundamental conclusions of the primary analysis were confirmed in that there was no survival benefit overall for patients with 1 to 3 metastases; however, there was a benefit for the subset of patients with GPA 3.5 to 4.0 (median survival time [MST] for WBRT + SRS vs WBRT alone was 21.0 versus 10.3 months, P=.05) regardless of the number of metastases. Among patients with GPA 3.5 to 4.0 treated with WBRT and SRS, the MST for patients with 1 versus 2 to 3 metastases was 21 and 14.1 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS This secondary analysis of predominantly lung cancer patients, consistent with the original analysis, shows no survival advantage for the group overall when treated with WBRT and SRS; however, in patients with high GPA (3.5-4), there is a survival advantage regardless of whether they have 1, 2, or 3 BM. This benefit did not extend to patients with lower GPA. Prospective validation of this survival benefit for patients with multiple BM and high GPA when treated with WBRT and SRS is warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul W Sperduto
- Metro-Minnesota CCOP and Minneapolis Radiation Oncology, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
| | - Ryan Shanley
- Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Xianghua Luo
- Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota; Division of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - David Andrews
- Thomas Jefferson University, Department of NeuroOncology, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Maria Werner-Wasik
- Thomas Jefferson University, Department of Radiation Oncology, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Richard Valicenti
- UC Davis Medical Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, Sacramento, California
| | | | | | - Minhee Won
- NRG Oncology Statistics and Data Management Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Minesh Mehta
- University of Maryland Medical System, Baltimore, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Hurwitz M, Sartor AO, Zhang Q, Xiao Y, Shayegan B, Sperduto PW, Badiozamani KR, Lawton CA, Horwitz EM, Michalski JM, Roof KS, Beyer D, George A, Sandler HM. Adjuvant radiation, androgen deprivation, and docetaxel for high-risk prostate cancer post-prostatectomy: Results of RTOG 0621. J Clin Oncol 2014. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2014.32.15_suppl.5031] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Mark Hurwitz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Jefferson Medical College of Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA
| | | | - Qiang Zhang
- Statistical Center, Radiation Therapy Oncology Group, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Ying Xiao
- Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Bobby Shayegan
- Division of Urology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Asha George
- Statistical Center, Radiation Therapy Oncology Group, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Howard Mark Sandler
- Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Peereboom DM, Winter KA, Kim IA, De Los Santos JF, Sperduto PW, White JR, Mehta MP. RTOG 1119: Phase II randomized study of whole brain radiotherapy with concurrent lapatinib in patients with brain metastasis from HER2-positive breast cancer—A collaborative study of RTOG and KROG (NCT01622868). J Clin Oncol 2014. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2014.32.15_suppl.tps664] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
| | - Kathryn A. Winter
- Statistical Center, Radiation Therapy Oncology Group, Philadelphia, PA
| | - In Ah Kim
- Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
| | | | | | - Julia R. White
- Ohio State University (OSU) Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | | |
Collapse
|
36
|
Sperduto PW. In reply to Robins et al. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2013; 86:810. [PMID: 23845833 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2013.04.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/26/2013] [Accepted: 04/02/2013] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
|
37
|
Sperduto PW, Wang M, Robins HI, Schell MC, Werner-Wasik M, Komaki R, Souhami L, Buyyounouski MK, Khuntia D, Demas W, Shah SA, Nedzi LA, Perry G, Suh JH, Mehta MP. A phase 3 trial of whole brain radiation therapy and stereotactic radiosurgery alone versus WBRT and SRS with temozolomide or erlotinib for non-small cell lung cancer and 1 to 3 brain metastases: Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0320. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2013; 85:1312-8. [PMID: 23391814 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2012.11.042] [Citation(s) in RCA: 185] [Impact Index Per Article: 16.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/24/2012] [Revised: 10/05/2012] [Accepted: 11/17/2012] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND A phase 3 Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) study subset analysis demonstrated improved overall survival (OS) with the addition of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) to whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with 1 to 3 brain metastases. Because temozolomide (TMZ) and erlotinib (ETN) cross the blood-brain barrier and have documented activity in NSCLC, a phase 3 study was designed to test whether these drugs would improve the OS associated with WBRT + SRS. METHODS AND MATERIALS NSCLC patients with 1 to 3 brain metastases were randomized to receive WBRT (2.5 Gy × 15 to 37.5 Gy) and SRS alone, versus WBRT + SRS + TMZ (75 mg/m(2)/day × 21 days) or ETN (150 mg/day). ETN (150 mg/day) or TMZ (150-200 mg/m(2)/day × 5 days/month) could be continued for as long as 6 months after WBRT + SRS. The primary endpoint was OS. RESULTS After 126 patients were enrolled, the study closed because of accrual limitations. The median survival times (MST) for WBRT + SRS, WBRT + SRS + TMZ, and WBRT + SRS + ETN were qualitatively different (13.4, 6.3, and 6.1 months, respectively), although the differences were not statistically significant. Time to central nervous system progression and performance status at 6 months were better in the WBRT + SRS arm. Grade 3 to 5 toxicity was 11%, 41%, and 49% in arms 1, 2, and 3, respectively (P<.001). CONCLUSION The addition of TMZ or ETN to WBRT + SRS in NSCLC patients with 1 to 3 brain metastases did not improve survival and possibly had a deleterious effect. Because the analysis is underpowered, these data suggest but do not prove that increased toxicity was the cause of inferior survival in the drug arms.
Collapse
|
38
|
Lin HY, Watanabe Y, Cho LC, Yuan J, Hunt MA, Sperduto PW, Abosch A, Watts CR, Lee CK. Gamma knife stereotactic radiosurgery for renal cell carcinoma and melanoma brain metastases-comparison of dose response. J Radiosurg SBRT 2013; 2:193-207. [PMID: 29296362 PMCID: PMC5658811] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/29/2012] [Accepted: 03/12/2013] [Indexed: 06/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Metastatic melanoma appears to have inferior local control (LC) than renal cell carcinoma (RCC) after stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) to the brain. OBJECTIVE To retrospectively examine RCC vs. melanoma LC dose response. METHODS Follow-up data were available for 88 patients (RCC=38; melanoma=50) with 235 tumors (RCC=92; melanoma=143) treated with Gamma Knife SRS between Dec. 2005 to Aug. 2012. LC was compared among RCC vs. melanoma and then at each margin dose (≤18Gy, 20Gy, 22Gy, and 24Gy). Patient survival and toxicity were analyzed. Median follow-up was 9.8 months (RCC) and 5.4 months (melanoma). RESULTS Patient characteristics were similar between RCC vs. melanoma with respect to gender, age, KPS, GPA, lesions per patient, and tumor volume. For all margin doses, LC at 6 months was 98.6% (RCC) vs. 79.2% (melanoma). When broken down by margin dose, at ≤18 Gy (P<0.0001) and 20 Gy (P=0.02), RCC had better LC compared to melanoma. At 22 Gy, LC were similar between the two histologies (P=0.19). At 24 Gy, melanoma had better LC than RCC (P=0.02). Tumor volumes were similar between RCC vs. melanoma at each margin dose (P>0.05). Small melanoma tumors (<4ml) exhibited LC dose dependence. Median survival was 16.1 months (RCC) and 9.6 months (melanoma). Toxicity was not significantly different between the two histologies and margin doses. CONCLUSIONS RCC has significantly better LC than melanoma after SRS. Higher doses could be used for melanoma tumors <4ml to improve melanoma LC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hong-Yiou Lin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Yoichi Watanabe
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - L. Chinsoo Cho
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Jianling Yuan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Matthew A. Hunt
- Department of Neurosurgery, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Paul W. Sperduto
- University of Minnesota Medical Center-Fairview Gamma Knife Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Aviva Abosch
- Department of Neurosurgery, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Charles R. Watts
- Department of Neurosurgery, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Chung K. Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Sperduto PW, Sneed PK, Roberge D, Shanley R, Luo X, Luo X, Weil RJ, Suh J, Bhatt A, Jensen AW, Brown PD, Shih HA, Kirkpatrick J, Gaspar LE, Fiveash JB, Knisely JP, Lin N, Mehta M. In Regard to Yamamoto et al. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2012; 84:875-6; discussion 876-7. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2012.03.050] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/19/2012] [Accepted: 03/22/2012] [Indexed: 10/27/2022]
|
40
|
Sperduto PW, Kased N, Roberge D, Xu Z, Shanley R, Luo X, Sneed PK, Chao ST, Weil RJ, Suh J, Bhatt A, Jensen AW, Brown PD, Shih HA, Kirkpatrick J, Gaspar LE, Fiveash JB, Chiang V, Knisely JP, Sperduto CM, Lin N, Mehta M. Reply to M.C. Chamberlain et al. J Clin Oncol 2012. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2012.43.0256] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Paul W. Sperduto
- University of Minnesota; Minneapolis Radiation Oncology, Minneapolis, MN
| | - Norbert Kased
- University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA
| | - David Roberge
- McGill University Health Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | | | - Ryan Shanley
- University of Minnesota, Masonic Cancer Center, Minneapolis, MN
| | - Xianghua Luo
- University of Minnesota, Masonic Cancer Center; University of Minnesota, School of Public Health, Minneapolis, MN
| | - Penny K. Sneed
- University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Helen A. Shih
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | | | | | - John B. Fiveash
- University of Alabama Medical Center at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL
| | - Veronica Chiang
- Yale University School of Medicine; Yale Cancer Center, New Haven, CT
| | - Jonathan P.S. Knisely
- Hofstra University School of Medicine; North Shore–Long Island Jewish Health System, Manhasset, NY
| | | | - Nancy Lin
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA
| | | |
Collapse
|
41
|
Barnholtz-Sloan JS, Yu C, Sloan AE, Vengoechea J, Wang M, Dignam JJ, Vogelbaum MA, Sperduto PW, Mehta MP, Machtay M, Kattan MW. A nomogram for individualized estimation of survival among patients with brain metastasis. Neuro Oncol 2012; 14:910-8. [PMID: 22544733 DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/nos087] [Citation(s) in RCA: 106] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE An estimated 24%-45% of patients with cancer develop brain metastases. Individualized estimation of survival for patients with brain metastasis could be useful for counseling patients on clinical outcomes and prognosis. METHODS De-identified data for 2367 patients with brain metastasis from 7 Radiation Therapy Oncology Group randomized trials were used to develop and internally validate a prognostic nomogram for estimation of survival among patients with brain metastasis. The prognostic accuracy for survival from 3 statistical approaches (Cox proportional hazards regression, recursive partitioning analysis [RPA], and random survival forests) was calculated using the concordance index. A nomogram for 12-month, 6-month, and median survival was generated using the most parsimonious model. RESULTS The majority of patients had lung cancer, controlled primary disease, no surgery, Karnofsky performance score (KPS) ≥ 70, and multiple brain metastases and were in RPA class II or had a Diagnosis-Specific Graded Prognostic Assessment (DS-GPA) score of 1.25-2.5. The overall median survival was 136 days (95% confidence interval, 126-144 days). We built the nomogram using the model that included primary site and histology, status of primary disease, metastatic spread, age, KPS, and number of brain lesions. The potential use of individualized survival estimation is demonstrated by showing the heterogeneous distribution of the individual 12-month survival in each RPA class or DS-GPA score group. CONCLUSION Our nomogram provides individualized estimates of survival, compared with current RPA and DS-GPA group estimates. This tool could be useful for counseling patients with respect to clinical outcomes and prognosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jill S Barnholtz-Sloan
- Case Comprehensive Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH 44106-5065, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
42
|
Sperduto PW, Wang M, Robins HI, Schell MC, Werner-Wasik M, Komaki RU, Souhami L, Buyyounouski@fccc.edu MK, Khuntia D, Demas WF, Shah SA, Nedzi LA, Perry GA, Suh JH, Mehta MP. Abstract 736: RTOG 0320:A phase III trial comparing whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) alone versus WBRT with temozolomide (TMZ) or erlotinib for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and 1-3 brain metastases. Cancer Res 2012. [DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.am2012-736] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Background: A previous phase III RTOG study subset analysis demonstrated improvement in overall survival (OS) with the addition of SRS to WBRT in NSCLC patients with 1 to 3 brain metastases. As both TMZ and erlotinib are known to cross the blood brain barrier (potentially providing radiosensitization), and have documented activity in NSCLC, a phase III study was designed to test whether either of these drugs would improve outcome of WBRT/SRS. Methods: NSCLC patients (n=126) with 1-3 brain metastases were randomized (10/2005 to 8/2009; study closed prematurely due to slow accrual) to receive WBRT (2.5 Gy x 15 to 37.5Gy) + SRS alone, vs. WBRT/SRS with TMZ (75mg/m2/D x 21) or erlotinib (150mg/D). Erlotinib or TMZ (150-200 mg/m2/D x 5/mo) could be given in the drug arms post-WBRT/SRS at the discretion of the investigator. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Results: Arms were stratified by RTOG recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) class and balanced for prognostic variables including the Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA) score. Neither the addition of erlotinib nor TMZ to WBRT/SRS resulted in an improvement in OS, or time to CNS progression compared to WBRT/SRS alone. Patients in the WBRT/SRS arm had longer MST (Median Survival Time) (13.4 mo, 95% CI = 6.5-20.8 mo.) compared to the WBRT+SRS+ erlotinib (6.1 mo, 95% CI = 3.6-12.1 mo)[Hazard ratio (≥2 / α1) and 95% CI; 1.47 (0.92 to 2.36)], or TMZ (6.3 mo, 95% CI= 3.4-10.1 mo.) [Hazard ratio (β3 / α1) and 95% CI; 1.43 (0.89 to 2.31)]. This surprising result was not related to excess toxicity. In fact, patients experiencing grade 3+ Adverse Events (AE) appear to have longer OS than those patients without grade 3+ AE for both drug arms. The WBRT/SRS arm had significantly less deterioration in performance status at 6 mo. There were no significant differences between arms for steroid dependence at 6 mo, or causes of death. Conclusion: The addition of either TMZ or erlotinib to WBRT/SRS in this unselected population of NSCLC patients with 1-3 brain metastases provided no clinical advantage. Treatment with WBRT/SRS alone appeared to result in superior outcome data (compared to the addition of TMZ or erlotinib) relative to OS in this limited data set. Detailed analysis to date provides no obvious explanation for these unexpected results. Support: RTOG grant U10 CA21661, and CCOP grant U10 CA37422 from the National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Citation Format: {Authors}. {Abstract title} [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 103rd Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2012 Mar 31-Apr 4; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2012;72(8 Suppl):Abstract nr 736. doi:1538-7445.AM2012-736
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - H. Ian Robins
- 3University of Wisconsin Medical School Cancer Center, Madison, WI
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Lucien A. Nedzi
- 12University of Texas Southwestern Medical School, Dallas, TX
| | - G A. Perry
- 13The Ottawa Hospital Cancer Centre, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - John H. Suh
- 14Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH
| | | |
Collapse
|
43
|
Tsao MN, Rades D, Wirth A, Lo SS, Danielson BL, Gaspar LE, Sperduto PW, Vogelbaum MA, Radawski JD, Wang JZ, Gillin MT, Mohideen N, Hahn CA, Chang EL. Radiotherapeutic and surgical management for newly diagnosed brain metastasis(es): An American Society for Radiation Oncology evidence-based guideline. Pract Radiat Oncol 2012; 2:210-225. [PMID: 25925626 PMCID: PMC3808749 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2011.12.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 412] [Impact Index Per Article: 34.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/27/2011] [Revised: 12/09/2011] [Accepted: 12/15/2011] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
Purpose To systematically review the evidence for the radiotherapeutic and surgical management of patients newly diagnosed with intraparenchymal brain metastases. Methods and Materials Key clinical questions to be addressed in this evidence-based Guideline were identified. Fully published randomized controlled trials dealing with the management of newly diagnosed intraparenchymal brain metastases were searched systematically and reviewed. The U.S. Preventative Services Task Force levels of evidence were used to classify various options of management. Results The choice of management in patients with newly diagnosed single or multiple brain metastases depends on estimated prognosis and the aims of treatment (survival, local treated lesion control, distant brain control, neurocognitive preservation). Single brain metastasis and good prognosis (expected survival 3 months or more): For a single brain metastasis larger than 3 to 4 cm and amenable to safe complete resection, whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) and surgery (level 1) should be considered. Another alternative is surgery and radiosurgery/radiation boost to the resection cavity (level 3). For single metastasis less than 3 to 4 cm, radiosurgery alone or WBRT and radiosurgery or WBRT and surgery (all based on level 1 evidence) should be considered. Another alternative is surgery and radiosurgery or radiation boost to the resection cavity (level 3). For single brain metastasis (less than 3 to 4 cm) that is not resectable or incompletely resected, WBRT and radiosurgery, or radiosurgery alone should be considered (level 1). For nonresectable single brain metastasis (larger than 3 to 4 cm), WBRT should be considered (level 3). Multiple brain metastases and good prognosis (expected survival 3 months or more): For selected patients with multiple brain metastases (all less than 3 to 4 cm), radiosurgery alone, WBRT and radiosurgery, or WBRT alone should be considered, based on level 1 evidence. Safe resection of a brain metastasis or metastases causing significant mass effect and postoperative WBRT may also be considered (level 3). Patients with poor prognosis (expected survival less than 3 months): Patients with either single or multiple brain metastases with poor prognosis should be considered for palliative care with or without WBRT (level 3). It should be recognized, however, that there are limitations in the ability of physicians to accurately predict patient survival. Prognostic systems such as recursive partitioning analysis, and diagnosis-specific graded prognostic assessment may be helpful. Conclusions Radiotherapeutic intervention (WBRT or radiosurgery) is associated with improved brain control. In selected patients with single brain metastasis, radiosurgery or surgery has been found to improve survival and locally treated metastasis control (compared with WBRT alone).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- May N Tsao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Odette Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
| | - Dirk Rades
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Luebeck, Germany (ESTRO representative)
| | - Andrew Wirth
- Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Trans Tasman Radiation Oncology Group (TROG), East Melbourne, Australia
| | - Simon S Lo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Case Western Reserve University, University Hospitals Case Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Brita L Danielson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cross Cancer Institute, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada (CARO representative)
| | - Laurie E Gaspar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Colorado, Aurora, Colorado
| | - Paul W Sperduto
- University of Minnesota Gamma Knife Center and Minneapolis Radiation Oncology, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | | | | | - Jian Z Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio (deceased)
| | - Michael T Gillin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Najeeb Mohideen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Northwest Community Hospital, Arlington Heights, Illinois
| | - Carol A Hahn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical School, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Eric L Chang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Sperduto PW, Kased N, Roberge D, Xu Z, Shanley R, Luo X, Sneed PK, Chao ST, Weil RJ, Suh J, Bhatt A, Jensen AW, Brown PD, Shih HA, Kirkpatrick J, Gaspar LE, Fiveash JB, Chiang V, Knisely JPS, Sperduto CM, Lin N, Mehta M. Summary report on the graded prognostic assessment: an accurate and facile diagnosis-specific tool to estimate survival for patients with brain metastases. J Clin Oncol 2011; 30:419-25. [PMID: 22203767 DOI: 10.1200/jco.2011.38.0527] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1005] [Impact Index Per Article: 77.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Our group has previously published the Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA), a prognostic index for patients with brain metastases. Updates have been published with refinements to create diagnosis-specific Graded Prognostic Assessment indices. The purpose of this report is to present the updated diagnosis-specific GPA indices in a single, unified, user-friendly report to allow ease of access and use by treating physicians. METHODS A multi-institutional retrospective (1985 to 2007) database of 3,940 patients with newly diagnosed brain metastases underwent univariate and multivariate analyses of prognostic factors associated with outcomes by primary site and treatment. Significant prognostic factors were used to define the diagnosis-specific GPA prognostic indices. A GPA of 4.0 correlates with the best prognosis, whereas a GPA of 0.0 corresponds with the worst prognosis. RESULTS Significant prognostic factors varied by diagnosis. For lung cancer, prognostic factors were Karnofsky performance score, age, presence of extracranial metastases, and number of brain metastases, confirming the original Lung-GPA. For melanoma and renal cell cancer, prognostic factors were Karnofsky performance score and the number of brain metastases. For breast cancer, prognostic factors were tumor subtype, Karnofsky performance score, and age. For GI cancer, the only prognostic factor was the Karnofsky performance score. The median survival times by GPA score and diagnosis were determined. CONCLUSION Prognostic factors for patients with brain metastases vary by diagnosis, and for each diagnosis, a robust separation into different GPA scores was discerned, implying considerable heterogeneity in outcome, even within a single tumor type. In summary, these indices and related worksheet provide an accurate and facile diagnosis-specific tool to estimate survival, potentially select appropriate treatment, and stratify clinical trials for patients with brain metastases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul W Sperduto
- University of Minnesota Gamma Knife, Minneapolis Radiation Oncology, MN, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
45
|
Sperduto PW, Chao ST, Suh J, Sneed PK, Luo X, Roberge D, Bhatt A, Mehta MP, Jensen AW, Brown PD, Shih H, Kirkpatrick J, Gaspar LE, Fiveash JB, Chiang V, Knisely J, Sperduto CM. Reply to Drs. Mulvenna and Holt. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.09.047] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
|
46
|
Sperduto PW. What Is Your Patient's GPA and Why Does It Matter? Managing Brain Metastases and the Cost of Hope. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2010; 77:643-4. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.02.038] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/22/2009] [Revised: 02/11/2010] [Accepted: 02/12/2010] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
|
47
|
Bernad DM, Sperduto PW, Souhami L, Jensen AW, Roberge D. Stereotactic radiosurgery in the management of brain metastases from primary thyroid cancers. J Neurooncol 2010; 98:249-52. [PMID: 20376550 DOI: 10.1007/s11060-010-0175-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/01/2009] [Accepted: 03/31/2010] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
Patients with metastatic well-differentiated thyroid cancer have a generally favorable long-term outcome although multi-organ involvement is a known marker of poor prognosis. Brain metastases are rare, occurring in less than 1% of patients with thyroid cancer. Few patients have been managed with stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). A retrospective database of 5,067 patients treated for brain metastases between 1985 and 2007 was generated from 11 institutions. Thyroid cancer patients were identified in this database and, when possible, additional information was obtained from further chart review. Patients were excluded if they had incomplete treatment or follow-up information. Two validated prognostic indices, Graded prognostic Assessment (GPA) and Recursive Partitioning Analysis (RPA), were calculated for each patient. The overall survival times were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Twenty-three thyroid cancer patients were identified (51% male, 48% female). Median age was 63 years (range 20-81). Pathology of the primary thyroid disease was available for twelve patients; the majority were diagnosed with differentiated thyroid cancer (n = 9 papillary, n = 2 Hürthle cell; 92%) and one had medullary subtype (8%). Median time from diagnosis of primary disease to brain metastasis was 41.8 months (range 0-516). Fifteen (65%) patients underwent SRS as part of their initial treatment with a median number of lesions treated of 1.5 (range 1-9). The median follow-up time for living patients was 35.2 months. Overall median survival time was 20.8 months (40% alive at last follow-up) and 37.4 months for SRS-treated patients (P = NS). A poor Karnofsky performance status was predictive of worse outcome (P = 0.001). GPA and RPA did not provide additional prognostic information. In conclusion, patients treated with SRS for brain metastases from primary thyroid cancer have a favorable prognosis with an expected median survival greater than 3 years. It is unclear as to whether current prognostic indices are relevant to this patient population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel M Bernad
- Department of Radiation Oncology, McGill University Health Centre/Montreal General Hospital, 1650 Cedar Avenue, Montreal, QC, H3G 1A4, Canada.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
48
|
Sperduto PW, Chao ST, Sneed PK, Luo X, Suh J, Roberge D, Bhatt A, Jensen AW, Brown PD, Shih H, Kirkpatrick J, Schwer A, Gaspar LE, Fiveash JB, Chiang V, Knisely J, Sperduto CM, Mehta M. Diagnosis-specific prognostic factors, indexes, and treatment outcomes for patients with newly diagnosed brain metastases: a multi-institutional analysis of 4,259 patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009; 77:655-61. [PMID: 19942357 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.08.025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 689] [Impact Index Per Article: 45.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/16/2009] [Revised: 08/07/2009] [Accepted: 08/10/2009] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Controversy endures regarding the optimal treatment of patients with brain metastases (BMs). Debate persists, despite many randomized trials, perhaps because BM patients are a heterogeneous population. The purpose of the present study was to identify significant diagnosis-specific prognostic factors and indexes (Diagnosis-Specific Graded Prognostic Assessment [DS-GPA]). METHODS AND MATERIALS A retrospective database of 5,067 patients treated for BMs between 1985 and 2007 was generated from 11 institutions. After exclusion of the patients with recurrent BMs or incomplete data, 4,259 patients with newly diagnosed BMs remained eligible for analysis. Univariate and multivariate analyses of the prognostic factors and outcomes by primary site and treatment were performed. The significant prognostic factors were determined and used to define the DS-GPA prognostic indexes. The DS-GPA scores were calculated and correlated with the outcomes, stratified by diagnosis and treatment. RESULTS The significant prognostic factors varied by diagnosis. For non-small-cell lung cancer and small-cell lung cancer, the significant prognostic factors were Karnofsky performance status, age, presence of extracranial metastases, and number of BMs, confirming the original GPA for these diagnoses. For melanoma and renal cell cancer, the significant prognostic factors were Karnofsky performance status and the number of BMs. For breast and gastrointestinal cancer, the only significant prognostic factor was the Karnofsky performance status. Two new DS-GPA indexes were thus designed for breast/gastrointestinal cancer and melanoma/renal cell carcinoma. The median survival by GPA score, diagnosis, and treatment were determined. CONCLUSION The prognostic factors for BM patients varied by diagnosis. The original GPA was confirmed for non-small-cell lung cancer and small-cell lung cancer. New DS-GPA indexes were determined for other histologic types and correlated with the outcome, and statistical separation between the groups was confirmed. These data should be considered in the design of future randomized trials and in clinical decision-making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul W Sperduto
- Gamma Knife Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55387, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
49
|
Sperduto PW. Brain Metastasis—A Multidisciplinary Approach. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.07.1711] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
|
50
|
Sperduto PW, Berkey B, Gaspar LE, Mehta M, Curran W. In Reply to Drs. Nieder and Molls. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.06.1915] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
|