Prospective randomized clinical studies involving reirradiation: update of a systematic review

BACKGROUND Reirradiation is a potentially useful option for many patients with recurrent cancer, aiming at cure or symptom palliation, depending on disease/recurrence type and stage. The purpose of this follow-up study to a previous review from 2016 was to summarize all recently published randomized trials. Points of interest again included identifcation of methodological strengths and weaknesses, practice-changing results, and open questions. MATERIAL AND METHODS Systematic review of trials published between 2015 and February 2023. RESULTS We reviewed 7 additional trials, most of which addressed reirradiation of head and neck or brain tumours. The median number of patients was 60. Mirroring the previous review, trial design, primary endpoints and statistical hypotheses varied widely. The updated results only impact on decision making for reirradiation of nasopharynx cancer and glioma. Patients with one of these diseases, as well as other head and neck cancers, may benefit from reirradiation-induced local control, e.g. in terms of progression-free survival. For the first time, hyperfractionated radiotherapy emerged as preferred option for recurrent, inoperable nasopharynx cancer. Despite better therapeutic ratio with hyperfractionation, serious toxicity remains a concern after high cumulative total doses. Randomized trials are still lacking for prostate cancer and other sites. CONCLUSION Multicentric randomized trials on reirradiation are feasible and continue to refine the current standard of care for recurrent disease after previous radiotherapy. Ongoing prospective studies such as the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (ESTRO-EORTC) observational cohort ReCare (NCT: NCT03818503) will further shape the clinical practice of reirradiation

Prospective randomized clinical studies involving reirradiation: update of a systematic review

Background Reirradiation is a potentially useful option for many patients with recurrent cancer, aiming at cure or symptom palliation, depending on disease/recurrence type and stage. The purpose of this follow-up study to a previous review from 2016 was to summarize all recently published randomized trials. Points of interest again included identifcation of methodological strengths and weaknesses, practice-changing results, and open questions. Material and methods Systematic review of trials published between 2015 and February 2023. Results We reviewed 7 additional trials, most of which addressed reirradiation of head and neck or brain tumours. The median number of patients was 60. Mirroring the previous review, trial design, primary endpoints and statistical hypotheses varied widely. The updated results only impact on decision making for reirradiation of nasopharynx cancer and glioma. Patients with one of these diseases, as well as other head and neck cancers, may benefit from reirradiation-induced local control, e.g. in terms of progression-free survival. For the first time, hyperfractionated radiotherapy emerged as preferred option for recurrent, inoperable nasopharynx cancer. Despite better therapeutic ratio with hyperfractionation, serious toxicity remains a concern after high cumulative total doses. Randomized trials are still lacking for prostate cancer and other sites. Conclusion Multicentric randomized trials on reirradiation are feasible and continue to refine the current standard of care for recurrent disease after previous radiotherapy. Ongoing prospective studies such as the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (ESTRO-EORTC) observational cohort ReCare (NCT: NCT03818503) will further shape the clinical practice of reirradiation

How we treat octogenarians with brain metastases

Biologically younger, fully independent octogenarians are able to tolerate most oncological treatments. Increasing frailty results in decreasing eligibility for certain treatments, e.g., chemotherapy and surgery. Most brain metastases are not an isolated problem, but part of widespread cancer dissemination, often in combination with compromised performance status. Multidisciplinary assessment is key in this vulnerable patient population where age, frailty, comorbidity and even moderate additional deficits from brain metastases or their treatment may result in immobilization, hospitalization, need for nursing home care, termination of systemic anticancer treatment etc. Here, we provide examples of successful treatment (surgery, radiosurgery, systemic therapy) and best supportive care, and comment on the limitations of prognostic scores, which often were developed in all-comers rather than octogenarians. Despite selection bias in retrospective studies, survival after radiosurgery was more encouraging than after whole-brain radiotherapy. Prospective research with focus on octogenarians is warranted to optimize outcomes

Personalized treatment of brain metastases: Evolving survival prediction models may benefit from evaluation of serum tumor markers (narrative review)

Treatment of a limited number of brain metastases (oligometastases) might include complex and sometimes invasive approaches, e.g. neurosurgical resection followed by post-operative stereotactic radiotherapy, and thus, correct identification of patients who are appropriate candidates is crucial. Both, staging procedures that visualize the true number of metastastic lesions and prognostic assessments that identify patients with limited survival, who should be managed with less complex, palliative approaches, are necessary before proceeding with local treatment that aims at eradication of all oligometastases. Some of the prognostic models, e.g. the LabBM score (laboratory parameters in patients with brain metastases), include blood biomarkers believed to represent surrogate markers of disease extent. In a recent study, patients with oligometastases and a LabBM score of 0 (no abnormal biomarkers) had an actuarial 5-year survival rate of 27% after neurosurgical resection and 39% after stereotactic radiotherapy. Other studies have tied serum tumor markers such as carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) to survival outcomes. Even if head-to-head comparisons and large-scale definitive analyses are lacking, the available data suggest that attempts to integrate tumor marker levels in blood biomarker-based survival prediction models are warranted

Personalized radiotherapy of brain metastases: survival prediction by means of dichotomized or differentiated blood test results?

Background and objectives: The validated LabBM score (laboratory parameters in patients with brain metastases) represents a widely applicable survival prediction model, which incorporates 5 blood test results (serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), C-reactive protein (CRP), albumin, platelets and hemoglobin). All tests are classified as normal or abnormal, without accounting for the wide range of abnormality observed in practice. We tested the hypothesis that improved stratification might be possible, if more granular test results are employed. Methods: Retrospective analysis of 198 patients managed with primary whole-brain radiotherapy in one of the institutions who validated the original LabBM score. Results: For two blood tests (albumin, CRP), discrimination was best for the original dichotomized version (normal/abnormal). For two others (LDH, hemoglobin), a three-tiered classification was best. The number of patients with low platelet count was not large enough for detailed analyses. A modified LabBM score was developed, which separates the intermediate of originally 3 prognostic groups into 2 statistically significantly different strata, resulting in a 4-tiered score. Conclusion: This initial proof-of-principle study suggests that granular blood test results might contribute to further improvement of the score, or alternatively development of a nomogram, if additional large-scale studies confirm the encouraging results of the present analysis

Personalized treatment of brain metastases: Evolving survival prediction models may benefit from evaluation of serum tumor markers (narrative review)

Treatment of a limited number of brain metastases (oligometastases) might include complex and sometimes invasive approaches, e.g. neurosurgical resection followed by post-operative stereotactic radiotherapy, and thus, correct identification of patients who are appropriate candidates is crucial. Both, staging procedures that visualize the true number of metastastic lesions and prognostic assessments that identify patients with limited survival, who should be managed with less complex, palliative approaches, are necessary before proceeding with local treatment that aims at eradication of all oligometastases. Some of the prognostic models, e.g. the LabBM score (laboratory parameters in patients with brain metastases), include blood biomarkers believed to represent surrogate markers of disease extent. In a recent study, patients with oligometastases and a LabBM score of 0 (no abnormal biomarkers) had an actuarial 5-year survival rate of 27% after neurosurgical resection and 39% after stereotactic radiotherapy. Other studies have tied serum tumor markers such as carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) to survival outcomes. Even if head-to-head comparisons and large-scale definitive analyses are lacking, the available data suggest that attempts to integrate tumor marker levels in blood biomarker-based survival prediction models are warranted. Keywords: biomarkers; brain metastases; prognostic model; score; tumor marker

Stereotactic arrhythmia radioablation: competitor or adjunct to catheter ablation?

Cardiology and Radiation Oncology working together—a new ‘STAR’ on the horizon? Until recently, most cardiologists associated radiation exposure to the heart with potential adverse effects, such as pericarditis, late coronary artery disease or potential damage to cardiac implantable devices. The landmark publication of 2017 reporting a case series of just five patients with recurrent ventricular tachycardia (VT) treated with stereotactic arrhythmia radioablation (STAR) changed this perception and introduced a new area for both cardiac electrophysiology and radiation oncology

Clinical adoption patterns of 0.35 Tesla MR-guided radiation therapy in Europe and Asia

BACKGROUND Magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) utilization is rapidly expanding, driven by advanced capabilities including better soft tissue imaging, continuous intrafraction target visualization, automatic triggered beam delivery, and the availability of on-table adaptive replanning. Our objective was to describe patterns of 0.35 Tesla (T)-MRgRT utilization in Europe and Asia among early adopters of this novel technology. METHODS Anonymized administrative data from all 0.35T-MRgRT treatment systems in Europe and Asia were extracted for patients who completed treatment from 2015 to 2020. Detailed treatment information was analyzed for all MR-linear accelerators (linac) and -cobalt systems. RESULTS From 2015 through the end of 2020, there were 5796 completed treatment courses delivered in 46,389 individual fractions. 23.5% of fractions were adapted. Ultra-hypofractionated (UHfx) dose schedules (1-5 fractions) were delivered for 63.5% of courses, with 57.8% of UHfx fractions adapted on-table. The most commonly treated tumor types were prostate (23.5%), liver (14.5%), lung (12.3%), pancreas (11.2%), and breast (8.0%), with increasing compound annual growth rates (CAGRs) in numbers of courses from 2015 through 2020 (pancreas: 157.1%; prostate: 120.9%; lung: 136.0%; liver: 134.2%). CONCLUSIONS This is the first comprehensive study reporting patterns of utilization among early adopters of a 0.35T-MRgRT system in Europe and Asia. Intrafraction MR image-guidance, advanced motion management, and increasing adoption of on-table adaptive RT have accelerated a transition to UHfx regimens. MRgRT has been predominantly used to treat tumors in the upper abdomen, pelvis and lungs, and increasingly with adaptive replanning, which is a radical departure from legacy radiotherapy practices

Diagnosis and Treatment of Peripheral and Cranial Nerve Tumors with Expert Recommendations: An EUropean Network for RAre CANcers (EURACAN) Initiative

The 2021 WHO classification of the CNS Tumors identifies as "Peripheral nerve sheath tumors" (PNST) some entities with specific clinical and anatomical characteristics, histological and molecular markers, imaging findings, and aggressiveness. The Task Force has reviewed the evidence of diagnostic and therapeutic interventions, which is particularly low due to the rarity, and drawn recommendations accordingly. Tumor diagnosis is primarily based on hematoxylin and eosin-stained sections and immunohistochemistry. Molecular analysis is not essential to establish the histological nature of these tumors, although genetic analyses on DNA extracted from PNST (neurofibromas/schwannomas) is required to diagnose mosaic forms of NF1 and SPS. MRI is the gold-standard to delineate the extension with respect to adjacent structures. Gross-total resection is the first choice, and can be curative in benign lesions; however, the extent of resection must be balanced with preservation of nerve functioning. Radiotherapy can be omitted in benign tumors after complete resection and in NF-related tumors, due to the theoretic risk of secondary malignancies in a tumor-suppressor syndrome. Systemic therapy should be considered in incomplete resected plexiform neurofibromas/MPNSTs. MEK inhibitor selumetinib can be used in NF1 children ≥2 years with inoperable/symptomatic plexiform neurofibromas, while anthracycline-based treatment is the first choice for unresectable/locally advanced/metastatic MPNST. Clinical trials on other MEK1-2 inhibitors alone or in combination with mTOR inhibitors are under investigation in plexiform neurofibromas and MPNST, respectively

Correspondence on rajyaguru et al

N/