A Mechanistic Investigation into Ischemia-Driven Distal Recurrence of Glioblastoma

Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most aggressive primary brain tumor with a short median survival. Tumor recurrence is a clinical expectation of this disease and usually occurs along the resection cavity wall. However, previous clinical observations have suggested that in cases of ischemia following surgery, tumors are more likely to recur distally. Through the use of a previously established mechanistic model of GBM, the Proliferation Invasion Hypoxia Necrosis Angiogenesis (PIHNA) model, we explore the phenotypic drivers of this observed behavior. We have extended the PIHNA model to include a new nutrient-based vascular efficiency term that encodes the ability of local vasculature to provide nutrients to the simulated tumor. The extended model suggests sensitivity to a hypoxic microenvironment and the inherent migration and proliferation rates of the tumor cells are key factors that drive distal recurrence

The State of Neuro-Oncology During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Worldwide Assessment

To assess the impact of the pandemic on the field, we performed an international web-based survey of practitioners, scientists, and trainees from 21 neuro-oncology organizations across 6 continents from April 24 through May 17. Of 582 respondents, 258 (45%) were in the US, and 314 (55%) were international. 80.4% were affiliated with academic institutions. 94% respondents reported changes in clinical practice; 95% reported conversion to telemedicine for at least some appointments. However, almost 10% practitioners felt the need to see patients in person specifically because of billing concerns and perceived institutional pressure. Over 50% believed neuro-oncology patients were at increased risk of contracting COVID-19. 67% practitioners suspended enrollment for at least one clinical trial: 53% suspended phase II and 62% suspended phase III trial enrollment. 71% clinicians feared for their or their families’ safety, specifically because of their clinical duties. 20% percent said they did not have enough PPE to work safely; about the same percentage were unhappy with their institutions’ response to the pandemic. 43% believed the pandemic would negatively affect their academic career, and 52% fellowship program directors were worried about losing funding for their training programs. While 69% respondents reported increased stress, 44% were offered no psychosocial support. 37% had their salary reduced. 36% researchers had to temporarily close their laboratories. In contrast, the pandemic created positive changes in perceived patient and family satisfaction, quality of communication, and use of technology to deliver care and interactions with other practitioners. CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic has altered standard treatment schedules and limited investigational treatment options for patients. In some cases, clinicians felt institutional pressure to continue conducting billable in-person visits when telemedicine visits would have sufficed. A lack of institutional support created anxiety among clinicians and researchers. We make specific recommendations to guide clinical and scientific infrastructure moving forward

The impact of mentoring on early career faculty: Assessment of a virtual mentoring program.

Background: Participation in mentorship programs for early career physicians may be crucial to developing key skills and professional networks to navigate racial, ethnic and gender leadership disparities in medicine. A 6-month virtual facilitated peer mentorship program was developed and piloted through the Society for Neuro-Oncology (SNO) Women & Diversity Committee. The evaluation of the program’s feasibility to positively impact early career physicians, investigators and trainees is presented here. Methods: We designed and conducted a virtual mentoring program pilot open to SNO’s multidisciplinary members in residency, fellowship, or early career phase, leveraging peer-mentoring sessions with mid-to late-career physician mentors. A curriculum with online resources was provided recommending groups meet for 6 sessions: 3 involving the mentor and 3 dedicated to peer-mentoring. Group assignments were based on time-zones and interests. Pre- and post-participation surveys assessed mentee experience. Descriptive statistics were used to assess participant demographics and survey results. Results: Our call for participation was broad; all 20 mentee applicants participated in 5 groups. Mentees were 90% women and 60% were from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds. Most were aged 31-40 (75%) and junior faculty (50%) in neuro-oncology (65%). The 5 senior mentors (3 men and 3 of diverse race and ethnic backgrounds) practiced either neuro-oncology (3), neurosurgery (1) or radiation oncology (1). The proportion who reporting having a signature lecture increased from 15% to 62% during the pilot. A large majority reported their participation was worthwhile (85%), that they would participate again (92%) and would recommend it to others (92%). Feedback themes included positive personal growth, peer support, networking and job opportunities, access to CV reviews, lack of and desire for late career female mentors, and virtual scheduling constraints. While the pilot was limited by several variables, it was timely to connect participants in Q3 of 2020 early in the COVID-19 global pandemic. The virtual meeting environment created a venue to share and discuss topics such as work-life balance, burnout, leading through change and social connection. Despite not achieving 100% professional concordance, participants found the experience worthwhile. The tools and curriculum of topics provided was implemented differently across groups, leading to varied experiences. Finally, we did not have 100% post pilot follow up despite multiple attempts limiting our complete understanding of the pilot. Conclusions: This virtual mentorship pilot program proved feasible and of value in development of early career women and diverse individuals. A resource toolkit has been designed to scale and diffuse

How much time do we have? Longitudinal perception of prognosis in newly-diagnosed high grade glioma patients and caregivers compared to clinicians.

PURPOSE: Discordant prognostic awareness (PA) can cause distress, impact goals of care and future planning, especially in patients with high grade glioma (pwHGG) who have limited survival. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility of assessing PA of pwHGG, caregivers and clinicians using a single question and to evaluate these responses for discord, alignment and fluctuation over time. METHODS: This is a sub-study of an IRB-approved pilot study evaluating early palliative care and longitudinal symptom monitoring via a smart-device tool in 16 pwHGG and their caregivers receiving treatment at the Mayo Clinic Arizona (United States). Eligible patients were ≥ 18 years, English-speaking, newly-diagnosed, and had a willing caregiver. Participants answered a multiple-choice question asking for an estimate of their own or their loved one\u27s survival on a monthly basis. RESULTS: All except one patient/caregiver dyad answered the question each time it was asked. The question did not appear to cause discomfort or increase conversations with clinicians around prognosis. PA of patients and caregivers fluctuated monthly, ranging from dismal to overtly optimistic, with a discordance frequency of 68%. Patients tended to be more optimistic than caregivers, and a higher QOL correlated to a more optimistic response. Clinicians\u27 were more hopeful; their prediction tended to fluctuate less than those of patients and caregivers. CONCLUSIONS: PA may be assessed in pwHGG and caregivers with a single, frank question. There is clear discordance between PA of patients, their caregivers and clinicians. Understanding fluctuates longitudinally through disease and treatment course. Additional studies on timing and ways of discussing prognosis in this population are needed. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04630379

A population study of clinical trial accrual for women and minorities in neuro-oncology following the NIH Revitalization Act.

BackgroundThe NIH Revitalization Act, implemented 29 years ago, set to improve the representation of women and minorities in clinical trials. In this study, we investigate progress made in all phase therapeutic clinical trials for neuroepithelial CNS tumors stratified by demographic-specific age-adjusted disease incidence and mortality. Additionally, we identify workforce characteristics associated with clinical trials meeting established accrual benchmarks.MethodsRegistry study of published clinical trials for World Health Organization defined neuroepithelial CNS tumors between January 2000 and December 2019. Study participants were obtained from PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov. Population-based data originated from the CBTRUS for incidence analyses. SEER-18 Incidence-Based Mortality data was used for mortality analysis. Descriptive statistics, Fisher exact, and χ 2 tests were used for data analysis.ResultsAmong 662 published clinical trials representing 49 907 participants, 62.5% of participants were men and 37.5% women (P < .0001) representing a mortality specific over-accrual for men (P = .001). Whites, Asians, Blacks, and Hispanics represented 91.7%, 1.5%, 2.6%, and 1.7% of trial participants. Compared with mortality, Blacks (47% of expected mortality, P = .008), Hispanics (17% of expected mortality, P < .001) and Asians (33% of expected mortality, P < .001) were underrepresented compared with Whites (114% of expected mortality, P < .001). Clinical trials meeting accrual benchmarks for race included minority authorship.ConclusionsFollowing the Revitalization Act, minorities and women remain underrepresented in therapeutic clinical trials for neuroepithelial tumors, relative to disease incidence and mortality. Study accrual has improved with time. This study provides a framework for clinical trial accrual efforts and offers guidance regarding workforce considerations associated with enrollment of underserved patients

Clinical Outcomes of Stereotactic Radiosurgery-Related Radiation Necrosis in Patients with Intracranial Metastasis from Melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Radiation necrosis (RN) is a clinically relevant complication of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for intracranial metastasis (ICM) treatments. Radiation necrosis development is variable following SRS. It remains unclear if risk factors for and clinical outcomes following RN may be different for melanoma patients. We reviewed patients with ICM from metastatic melanoma to understand the potential impact of RN in this patient population. METHODS: Patients who received SRS for ICM from melanoma at Mayo Clinic Arizona between 2013 and 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Data collected included demographics, tumor characteristics, radiation parameters, prior surgical and systemic treatments, and patient outcomes. Radiation necrosis was diagnosed by clinical evaluation including brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and, in some cases, tissue evaluation. RESULTS: Radiation necrosis was diagnosed in 7 (27%) of 26 patients at 1.6 to 38 months following initial SRS. Almost 92% of all patients received systemic therapy and 35% had surgical resection prior to SRS. Patients with RN trended toward having larger ICM and a prior history of surgical resection, although statistical significance was not reached. Among patients with resection, those who developed RN had a longer period between surgery and SRS start (mean 44 vs 33 days). Clinical improvement following treatment for RN was noted in 2 (29%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: Radiation necrosis is relatively common following SRS for treatment of ICM from metastatic melanoma and clinical outcomes are poor. Further studies aimed at mitigating RN development and identifying novel approaches for treatment are warranted

Image-based metric of invasiveness predicts response to adjuvant temozolomide for primary glioblastoma.

BackgroundTemozolomide (TMZ) has been the standard-of-care chemotherapy for glioblastoma (GBM) patients for more than a decade. Despite this long time in use, significant questions remain regarding how best to optimize TMZ therapy for individual patients. Understanding the relationship between TMZ response and factors such as number of adjuvant TMZ cycles, patient age, patient sex, and image-based tumor features, might help predict which GBM patients would benefit most from TMZ, particularly for those whose tumors lack O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation.Methods and findingsUsing a cohort of 90 newly-diagnosed GBM patients treated according to the standard of care, we examined the relationships between several patient and tumor characteristics and volumetric and survival outcomes during adjuvant chemotherapy. Volumetric changes in MR imaging abnormalities during adjuvant therapy were used to assess TMZ response. T1Gd volumetric response is associated with younger patient age, increased number of TMZ cycles, longer time to nadir volume, and decreased tumor invasiveness. Moreover, increased adjuvant TMZ cycles corresponded with improved volumetric response only among more nodular tumors, and this volumetric response was associated with improved survival outcomes. Finally, in a subcohort of patients with known MGMT methylation status, methylated tumors were more diffusely invasive than unmethylated tumors, suggesting the improved response in nodular tumors is not driven by a preponderance of MGMT methylated tumors.ConclusionsOur finding that less diffusely invasive tumors are associated with greater volumetric response to TMZ suggests patients with these tumors may benefit from additional adjuvant TMZ cycles, even for those without MGMT methylation

SNO 2020 diversity survey: defining demographics, racial biases, career success metrics and a path forward for the field of neuro-oncology

Abstract Background Neuro-oncology has grown tremendously since 2010, marked by increasing society membership, specialized clinical expertise, and new journals. Yet, modest improvement in racial/ethnic diversity amongst clinical trial participants, researchers, and clinicians led us to conduct a survey to identify opportunities to enhance diversity and inclusiveness amongst neuro-oncology professionals. Methods In summer 2020, the Women and Diversity Committee of the Society for Neuro-Oncology (SNO) distributed an anonymous online survey to members and affiliates including the European Association of Neuro-Oncology (EANO), Asian Society for Neuro-Oncology (ASNO), Society for Neuro-Oncology Latin America (SNOLA) and Society for Neuro-Oncology Sub-Saharan Africa (SNOSSA). The survey captured personal and professional characteristics, biases, effective mentorship qualities, career service metrics, and suggested field/society changes. Results were analyzed by geography, profession, age, racial/ethnic, and sexual identity. Standard descriptive statistics characterized the study population. Results The 386 respondents were predominantly female (58%) with a median age range of 40–49 years (31%), White (65%), and SNO members (97%). Most worked in North America (77%) in a research profession (67%). A majority of White respondents reported never experiencing biases (64%), while the majority of non-White respondents reported unconscious biases/microaggressions, followed by a lack of/limited mentorship. Qualitative assessments showcased that personal/professional success metrics were linked to needed improvements in diversity and inclusion efforts within the neuro-oncology field. Conclusions The prevalence of racial/ethnic biases and poor mentorship rates amongst underrepresented groups in neuro-oncology is high and potentially linked to the limited diverse representation amongst members and affiliates. These findings warrant a swift implementation of equity and inclusion practices within the neuro-oncology field