A randomized phase III trial of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for patients with up to 10 oligometastases and a synchronous primary tumor (SABR-SYNC): study protocol

BACKGROUND Emerging randomized data, mostly from phase II trials, have suggested that patients with oligometastatic cancers may benefit from ablative treatments such as stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR). However, phase III data testing this paradigm are lacking, and many studies have examined SABR in the setting of metachronous oligometastatic disease. The goal of the SABR-SYNC trial is to assess the effect of SABR in patients with oligometastatic cancers and a synchronous primary tumor. METHODS One hundred and eighty patients will be randomized in a 1:2 ratio between standard of care (SOC) palliative-intent treatments vs. SOC + ablative therapy (SABR preferred) to all sites of known disease. Randomization will be stratified based on histology and number of metastases at enrollment. SABR may be delivered in 1-, 3- and 5-fraction regimens, with recommended doses of 20 Gy, 30 Gy, and 35 Gy, respectively. Non-SABR local modalities (e.g. surgery, thermal ablation, conventional radiation) may be used for treatment of the primary or metastases at the discretion of the treating physicians, if those modalities are clinically preferred. The primary endpoint is overall survival, and secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, time to development of new metastatic lesions, time to initiation of next systemic therapy, quality of life, and toxicity. Translational endpoints include assessment of circulating tumor DNA and immunological predictors of outcomes. DISCUSSION SABR-SYNC will provide phase III data to assess the impact of SABR on overall survival in a population of patients with synchronous oligometastases. The translational component will attempt to identify novel prognostic and predictive biomarkers to aid in clinical decision making. TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinicaltrials.gov NCT05717166 (registration date: Feb. 8, 2023)

Oligometastasis in Prostate Cancer: Can We Learn from Those “Excluded” from a Phase 2 Trial?

We conducted and previously published a phase 2 trial of metastasis-directed therapy (MDT) in men with recurrence of prostate cancer at a low prostate-specific antigen level following radical prostatectomy and postoperative radiotherapy. All patients had negative conventional imaging and underwent prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET). Patients without visible disease (n = 16) or with metastatic disease not amenable to MDT (n = 19) were excluded from the interventional study. The remaining patients with disease visible on PSMA-PET received MDT (n = 37). We analyzed all three groups to identify distinct phenotypes in the era of molecular imaging–based characterization of recurrent disease. Median follow up was 37 mo (interquartile range 27.5–43.0). There was no significant difference in time to the development of metastasis on conventional imaging among the groups; however, castrate-resistant prostate cancer-free survival was significantly shorter for patients with PSMA-avid disease not amenable to MDT (p = 0.047). Our findings suggest that PSMA-PET findings can help in discriminating diverging clinical phenotypes among men with disease recurrence and negative conventional imaging after local therapies with curative intent. There is a pressing need for better characterization of this rapidly growing population of patients with recurrent disease defined by PSMA-PET to derive robust selection criteria and outcome definitions for ongoing and future studies. Patient summary: In men with prostate cancer with rising PSA levels following surgery and radiation, a newer type of scan called PSMA-PET (prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography) can be used to characterize and differentiate the patterns of recurrence, and inform future cancer outcomes

Prognostic Factor Risk Groups for Clinical Stage I Seminoma:An Individual Patient Data Analysis by the European Association of Urology Testicular Cancer Guidelines Panel and Guidelines Office

BACKGROUND: The relapse rate in patients with clinical stage I (CSI) seminomatous germ cell tumor of the testis (SGCTT) who were undergoing surveillance after radical orchidectomy is 4-30%, depending on tumor size and rete testis invasion (RTI). However, the level of evidence supporting the use of both risk factors in clinical decision-making is low. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify the most important prognostic factors for relapse in CSI SGCTT patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Individual patient data for 1016 CSI SGCTT patients diagnosed between 1994 and 2019 with normal postorchidectomy serum tumor marker levels and undergoing surveillance were collected from nine institutions. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression models were fit to identify the most important prognostic factors. The primary endpoint was the time to first relapse by imaging and/or markers. Relapse probabilities were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: After a median follow-up of 7.7 yr, 149 (14.7%) patients had relapsed. Categorical tumor size (≤2, &gt;2-5, and &gt;5 cm), presence of RTI, and lymphovascular invasion were used to form three risk groups: low (56.4%), intermediate (41.3%), and high (2.3%) risks with 5-yr cumulative relapse probabilities of 8%, 20%, and 44%, respectively. The model outperformed the currently used model with tumor size ≤4 versus &gt;4 cm and presence of RTI (Harrell's C index 0.65 vs 0.61). The low- and intermediate-risk groups were validated successfully in an independent cohort of 285 patients. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of relapse after radical orchidectomy in CSI SGCTT patients under surveillance is low. We propose a new risk stratification model that outperformed the current model and identified a small subgroup with a high risk of relapse. PATIENT SUMMARY: The risk of relapse after radical orchidectomy in patients with clinical stage I seminomatous germ cell tumor of the testis is low. We propose a new risk stratification model that outperformed the current model and identified a small subgroup with a high risk of relapse.</p

Prognostic Factor Risk Groups for Clinical Stage I Seminoma:An Individual Patient Data Analysis by the European Association of Urology Testicular Cancer Guidelines Panel and Guidelines Office

BACKGROUND: The relapse rate in patients with clinical stage I (CSI) seminomatous germ cell tumor of the testis (SGCTT) who were undergoing surveillance after radical orchidectomy is 4-30%, depending on tumor size and rete testis invasion (RTI). However, the level of evidence supporting the use of both risk factors in clinical decision-making is low. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify the most important prognostic factors for relapse in CSI SGCTT patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Individual patient data for 1016 CSI SGCTT patients diagnosed between 1994 and 2019 with normal postorchidectomy serum tumor marker levels and undergoing surveillance were collected from nine institutions. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression models were fit to identify the most important prognostic factors. The primary endpoint was the time to first relapse by imaging and/or markers. Relapse probabilities were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: After a median follow-up of 7.7 yr, 149 (14.7%) patients had relapsed. Categorical tumor size (≤2, &gt;2-5, and &gt;5 cm), presence of RTI, and lymphovascular invasion were used to form three risk groups: low (56.4%), intermediate (41.3%), and high (2.3%) risks with 5-yr cumulative relapse probabilities of 8%, 20%, and 44%, respectively. The model outperformed the currently used model with tumor size ≤4 versus &gt;4 cm and presence of RTI (Harrell's C index 0.65 vs 0.61). The low- and intermediate-risk groups were validated successfully in an independent cohort of 285 patients. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of relapse after radical orchidectomy in CSI SGCTT patients under surveillance is low. We propose a new risk stratification model that outperformed the current model and identified a small subgroup with a high risk of relapse. PATIENT SUMMARY: The risk of relapse after radical orchidectomy in patients with clinical stage I seminomatous germ cell tumor of the testis is low. We propose a new risk stratification model that outperformed the current model and identified a small subgroup with a high risk of relapse.</p

Prognostic Factor Risk Groups for Clinical Stage I Seminoma: An Individual Patient Data Analysis by the European Association of Urology Testicular Cancer Guidelines Panel and Guidelines Office.

BACKGROUND The relapse rate in patients with clinical stage I (CSI) seminomatous germ cell tumor of the testis (SGCTT) who were undergoing surveillance after radical orchidectomy is 4-30%, depending on tumor size and rete testis invasion (RTI). However, the level of evidence supporting the use of both risk factors in clinical decision-making is low. OBJECTIVE We aimed to identify the most important prognostic factors for relapse in CSI SGCTT patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Individual patient data for 1016 CSI SGCTT patients diagnosed between 1994 and 2019 with normal postorchidectomy serum tumor marker levels and undergoing surveillance were collected from nine institutions. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression models were fit to identify the most important prognostic factors. The primary endpoint was the time to first relapse by imaging and/or markers. Relapse probabilities were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS After a median follow-up of 7.7 yr, 149 (14.7%) patients had relapsed. Categorical tumor size (≤2, >2-5, and >5 cm), presence of RTI, and lymphovascular invasion were used to form three risk groups: low (56.4%), intermediate (41.3%), and high (2.3%) risks with 5-yr cumulative relapse probabilities of 8%, 20%, and 44%, respectively. The model outperformed the currently used model with tumor size ≤4 versus >4 cm and presence of RTI (Harrell's C index 0.65 vs 0.61). The low- and intermediate-risk groups were validated successfully in an independent cohort of 285 patients. CONCLUSIONS The risk of relapse after radical orchidectomy in CSI SGCTT patients under surveillance is low. We propose a new risk stratification model that outperformed the current model and identified a small subgroup with a high risk of relapse. PATIENT SUMMARY The risk of relapse after radical orchidectomy in patients with clinical stage I seminomatous germ cell tumor of the testis is low. We propose a new risk stratification model that outperformed the current model and identified a small subgroup with a high risk of relapse

Prospective evaluation of patient-reported anxiety and experiences with adaptive radiation therapy on an MR-linac

Purpose: An integrated magnetic resonance scanner and linear accelerator (MR-linac) was implemented with daily online adaptive radiation therapy (ART). This study evaluated patient-reported experiences with their overall hospital care as well as treatment in the MR-linac environment. Methods: Patients pre-screened for MR eligibility and claustrophobia were referred to simulation on a 1.5 T MR-linac. Patient-reported experience measures were captured using two validated surveys. The 15-item MR-anxiety questionnaire (MR-AQ) was administered immediately after the first treatment to rate MR-related anxiety and relaxation. The 40-item satisfaction with cancer care questionnaire rating doctors, radiation therapists, the services and care organization and their outpatient experience was administered immediately after the last treatment using five-point Likert responses. Results were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results: 205 patients were included in this analysis. Multiple sites were treated across the pelvis and abdomen with a median treatment time per fraction of 46 and 66 min respectively. Patients rated MR-related anxiety as “not at all” (87%), “somewhat” (11%), “moderately” (1%) and “very much so” (1%). Positive satisfaction responses ranged from 78 to 100% (median 93%) across all items. All radiation therapist-specific items were rated positively as 96–100%. The five lowest rated items (range 78–85%) were related to general provision of information, coordination, and communication. Overall hospital care was rated positively at 99%. Conclusion: In this large, single-institution prospective cohort, all patients had low MR-related anxiety and completed treatment as planned despite lengthy ART treatments with the MR-linac. Patients overall were highly satisfied with their cancer care involving ART using an MR-linac

Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy for the Management of Spinal Metastases: A Review

Importance: Rising cancer incidence combined with improvements in systemic and local therapies extending life expectancy are translating into more patients with spinal metastases. This makes the multidisciplinary management of spinal metastases and development of new therapies increasingly important. Spinal metastases may cause significant pain and reduced quality of life and lead to permanent neurological disability if compression of the spinal cord and/or nerve root occurs. Until recently, treatments for spinal metastases were not optimal and provided temporary local control and pain relief. Spinal stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) is an effective approach associated with an improved therapeutic ratio, with evolving clinical application. Objective: To review the literature of spinal SABR for spinal metastases, discuss a multidisciplinary approach to appropriate patient selection and technical considerations, and summarize current efforts to combine spinal SABR with systemic therapies. Evidence Review: The MEDLINE database was searched to identify articles reporting on spinal SABR to September 30, 2018. Articles including clinical trials, prospective and retrospective studies, systematic reviews, and consensus recommendations were selected for relevance to multidisciplinary management of spinal metastases. Results: Fifty-nine unique publications with 5655 patients who underwent SABR for spinal metastases were included. Four comprehensive frameworks for patient selection were discussed. Spinal SABR was associated with 1-year local control rates of approximately 80% to 90% in the de novo setting, greater than 80% in the postoperative setting, and greater than 65% in the reirradiation setting. The most commonly discussed adverse effect was development of a vertebral compression fracture with variable rates, most commonly reported as approximately 10% to 15%. High-level data on the combination of SABR with modern therapies are still lacking. At present, 19 clinical trials are ongoing, mainly focusing on combined modality therapies, radiotherapy prescription dose, and oligometastic disease. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that spinal SABR may be an effective treatment option for well-selected patients with spinal metastases, achieving high rates of local tumor control with moderate rates of adverse effects. Optimal management should include review by a multidisciplinary care team