Search

Purpose: Although level 1 evidence supports 45-Gy twice-daily radiotherapy as standard for limited-stage small-cell lung cancer, most patients receive higher-dose once-daily regimens in clinical practice. Whether increasing radiotherapy dose improves outcomes remains to be prospectively demonstrated., Methods: This phase III trial, CALGB 30610/RTOG 0538 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00632853), was conducted in two stages. In the first stage, patients with limited-stage disease were randomly assigned to receive 45-Gy twice-daily, 70-Gy once-daily, or 61.2-Gy concomitant-boost radiotherapy, starting with either the first or second (of four total) chemotherapy cycles. In the second stage, allocation to the 61.2-Gy arm was discontinued following planned interim toxicity analysis, and the study continued with two remaining arms. The primary end point was overall survival (OS) in the intention-to-treat population., Results: Trial accrual opened on March 15, 2008, and closed on December 1, 2019. All patients randomly assigned to 45-Gy twice-daily (n = 313) or 70-Gy once-daily radiotherapy (n = 325) are included in this analysis. After a median follow-up of 4.7 years, OS was not improved on the once-daily arm (hazard ratio for death, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.17; P = .594). Median survival is 28.5 months for twice-daily treatment, and 30.1 months for once-daily treatment, with 5-year OS of 29% and 32%, respectively. Treatment was tolerable, and the frequency of severe adverse events, including esophageal and pulmonary toxicity, was similar on both arms., Conclusion: Although 45-Gy twice-daily radiotherapy remains the standard of care, this study provides the most robust information available to help guide the choice of thoracic radiotherapy regimen for patients with limited-stage small-cell lung cancer.

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., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: American Society of Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) has developed a guideline on appropriate radiation therapy for brain metastases. ASCO has a policy and set of procedures for endorsing clinical practice guidelines that have been developed by other professional organizations., Methods: "Radiation Therapy for Brain Metastases: An ASTRO Clinical Practice Guideline" 2 was reviewed for developmental rigor by methodologists. An ASCO Endorsement Panel subsequently reviewed the content and the recommendations., Results: The ASCO Endorsement Panel determined that the recommendations from the ASTRO guideline, published May 6, 2022, are clear, thorough, and based upon the most relevant scientific evidence. ASCO endorses "Radiation Therapy for Brain Metastases: An ASTRO Clinical Practice Guideline." 2 ., Recommendations: Within the guideline, stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is recommended for patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 and up to four intact brain metastases, and conditionally recommended for patients with up to 10 intact brain metastases. The guideline provides detailed dosing and fractionation recommendations on the basis of the size of the metastases. For patients with resected brain metastases, radiation therapy (SRS or whole-brain radiation therapy [WBRT]) is recommended to improve intracranial disease control; if there are limited additional brain metastases, SRS is recommended over WBRT. For patients with favorable prognosis and brain metastases ineligible for surgery and/or SRS, WBRT is recommended with hippocampal avoidance where possible and the addition of memantine is recommended. For patients with brain metastases, limiting the single-fraction V 12Gy to brain tissue to ≤ 10 cm 3 is conditionally recommended.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/neurooncology-guidelines.

ASCO Rapid Recommendations Updates highlight revisions to select ASCO guideline recommendations as a response to the emergence of new and practice-changing data. The rapid updates are supported by an evidence review and follow the guideline development processes outlined in the ASCO Guideline Methodology Manual. The goal of these articles is to disseminate updated recommendations, in a timely manner, to better inform health practitioners and the public on the best available cancer care options., Competing Interests: Mark G. KrisConsulting or Advisory Role: AstraZeneca, Pfizer, JanssenTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: GenentechOpen Payments Link: https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/physician/markgkris/summary Laurie E. GasparEmployment: Banner MD Anderson ColoradoSpeakers' Bureau: Cancer Experts NowOther Relationship: NCIOpen Payments Link: https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/physician/275039/summary Nofisat IsmailaEmployment: GlaxoSmithKline (I)Stock and Other Ownership Interests: GlaxoSmithKline (I)No other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Purpose: Radiation pneumonitis remains a major limitation in the radiation therapy treatment of patients with lung cancer. Functional avoidance radiation therapy uses functional imaging to reduce pulmonary toxic effects by designing radiation therapy plans that reduce doses to functional regions of the lung. Lung functional imaging has been developed that uses 4-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) imaging to calculate 4DCT-based lung ventilation (4DCT-ventilation). A phase 2 multicenter study was initiated to evaluate 4DCT-ventilation functional avoidance radiation therapy. The study hypothesis was that functional avoidance radiation therapy could reduce the rate of grade ≥2 radiation pneumonitis to 12% compared with a 25% historical rate, with the trial being positive if ≤16.4% of patients experienced grade ≥2 pneumonitis., Methods and Materials: Lung cancer patients receiving curative-intent radiation therapy (prescription doses of 45-75 Gy) and chemotherapy were accrued. Patient 4DCT scans were used to generate 4DCT-ventilation images. The 4DCT-ventilation images were used to generate functional avoidance plans that reduced doses to functional portions of the lung while delivering the prescribed tumor dose. Pneumonitis was evaluated by a clinician at 3, 6, and 12 months after radiation therapy., Results: Sixty-seven evaluable patients were accrued between April 2015 and December 2019. The median prescription dose was 60 Gy (range, 45-66 Gy) delivered in 30 fractions (range, 15-33 fractions). The average reduction in the functional volume of lung receiving ≥20 Gy with functional avoidance was 3.5% (range, 0%-12.8%). The median follow-up was 312 days. The rate of grade ≥2 radiation pneumonitis was 10 of 67 patients (14.9%; 95% upper CI, 24.0%), meeting the phase 2 criteria., Conclusions: 4DCT-ventilation offers an imaging modality that is convenient and provides functional imaging without an extra procedure necessary. This first report of a multicenter study of 4DCT-ventilation functional avoidance radiation therapy provided data showing that the trial met phase 2 criteria and that evaluation in a phase 3 study is warranted., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To provide guidance to clinicians regarding therapy for patients with brain metastases from solid tumors., Methods: ASCO convened an Expert Panel and conducted a systematic review of the literature., Results: Thirty-two randomized trials published in 2008 or later met eligibility criteria and form the primary evidentiary base., Recommendations: Surgery is a reasonable option for patients with brain metastases. Patients with large tumors with mass effect are more likely to benefit than those with multiple brain metastases and/or uncontrolled systemic disease. Patients with symptomatic brain metastases should receive local therapy regardless of the systemic therapy used. For patients with asymptomatic brain metastases, local therapy should not be deferred unless deferral is specifically recommended in this guideline. The decision to defer local therapy should be based on a multidisciplinary discussion of the potential benefits and harms that the patient may experience. Several regimens were recommended for non-small-cell lung cancer, breast cancer, and melanoma. For patients with asymptomatic brain metastases and no systemic therapy options, stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) alone should be offered to patients with one to four unresected brain metastases, excluding small-cell lung carcinoma. SRS alone to the surgical cavity should be offered to patients with one to two resected brain metastases. SRS, whole brain radiation therapy, or their combination are reasonable options for other patients. Memantine and hippocampal avoidance should be offered to patients who receive whole brain radiation therapy and have no hippocampal lesions and 4 months or more expected survival. Patients with asymptomatic brain metastases with either Karnofsky Performance Status ≤ 50 or Karnofsky Performance Status < 70 with no systemic therapy options do not derive benefit from radiation therapy.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/neurooncology-guidelines., Competing Interests: Michael A. VogelbaumStock and Other Ownership Interests: Infusion TherapeuticsHonoraria: Tocagen, Celgene, Cellinta, Plus TherapeuticsResearch Funding: Celgene (Inst), OncoSynergy (Inst), Denovo Biopharma (Inst)¸ Olympus (Inst)Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Patents for drug delivery devices for the brain Paul D. BrownHonoraria: UpToDate Priscilla K. BrastianosHonoraria: PfizerConsulting or Advisory Role: ElevateBio, Dantari Pharmaceuticals, SK Life Sciences, Pfizer, Voyager Therapeutics, SinteticaResearch Funding: Merck (Inst), Bristol Myers Squibb (Inst), Lilly (Inst), Mirati Therapeutics (Inst) Stuart BurriEmployment: Southeast Radiation Oncology GroupStock and Other Ownership Interests: Southeast Radiation Oncology Group, Radiation Oncology Centers of the CarolinasTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: NovocureOther Relationship: Novocure Dan CahillStock and Other Ownership Interests: Pyramid BiosciencesConsulting or Advisory Role: Lilly, Boston Pharmaceuticals, GlaxoSmithKline Laurie E. GasparEmployment: Banner MD Anderson ColoradoSpeakers' Bureau: Cancer Experts NowOther Relationship: NCIOpen Payments Link: https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/physician/275039/summary Na Tosha N. GatsonHonoraria: NovocureConsulting or Advisory Role: NovocureTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Novocure Vinai GondiHonoraria: UpToDate Justin T. JordanStock and Other Ownership Interests: Navio TheragnosticsConsulting or Advisory Role: Guidepoint Global, ClearView Healthcare Partners, Recursion Pharmaceuticals, GLG, CereXis, Navio Theragnostics, Health2047, EMP Advisory,Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Textbook royaltiesExpert Testimony: Medical Mutual Insurance of MaineOther Relationship: Shepherd Therapeutics, Shepherd Foundation, Neurofibromatosis Network, American Academy of Neurology (AAN) Andrew B. LassmanHonoraria: Abbott MolecularConsulting or Advisory Role: Karyopharm Therapeutics, Sapience Therapeutics, QED Therapeutics, FORMA Therapeutics, Bayer, Orbus Therapeutics, BioClinica, Novocure, Elsevier, Vivacitas OncologyResearch Funding: AbbVie (Inst), Novartis (Inst), Genentech/Roche (Inst), Aeterna Zentaris (Inst), Celldex (Inst), Kadmon (Inst), BeiGene (Inst), VBI Vaccines (Inst), Pfizer (Inst), Millennium (Inst), Oncoceutics (Inst), Karyopharm Therapeutics (Inst), Bayer (Inst), QED Therapeutics (Inst), Agios (Inst), Orbus Therapeutics (Inst), BMS (Inst), RTOG Foundation (Inst)Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: ElsevierTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: AbbVie, BioClinica, Abbott Molecular, FORMA Therapeutics, Karyopharm Therapeutics, QED Therapeutics, Bayer, Novartis, Pfizer, VBI Vaccines Julia MauesHonoraria: Pfizer, AstraZenecaConsulting or Advisory Role: AstraZeneca Nimish MohileConsulting or Advisory Role: Sapience TherapeuticsResearch Funding: Vascular Biogenics, Boston Biomedical, Quell, Tocagen Erik SulmanHonoraria: Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novocure, Zai LabConsulting or Advisory Role: Merck Sharp & Dohme, NovocureResearch Funding: Novocure (Inst)Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novocure, Brainlab, PER, Zai Lab Martin van den BentThis author is a member of the Journal of Clinical Oncology Editorial Board. Journal policy recused the author from having any role in the peer review of this manuscript.Employment: AstraZeneca (I)Consulting or Advisory Role: AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Agios, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer, Carthera, Genenta Science, Nerviano Medical Sciences, Boston PharmaceuticalsResearch Funding: AbbVie (Inst) Jeffrey S. WeinbergConsulting or Advisory Role: OsteoMed David SchiffConsulting or Advisory Role: Orbus Therapeutics, GlaxoSmithKline, PRA, AstraZenecaResearch Funding: Bayer (Inst)No other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Introduction: The CALGB 30610/RTOG 0538 randomized trial was designed to test whether high-dose thoracic radiotherapy (TRT) would improve survival compared with 45 Gy twice-daily (BID) TRT in limited stage small cell lung cancer (LSCLC). Two piloted experimental TRT regimens were of interest to study, 70 Gy daily (QD) and 61.2 Gy concomitant boost (CB). Driven by concerns about adequate patient accrual, a study design was employed that eliminated one experimental TRT arm based on early interim toxicity and tolerability, with the study then continuing as a traditional 2-arm phase III study., Methods: Patients with LSCLC were assigned to receive four cycles of cisplatin and etoposide chemotherapy with one of 3 TRT regimens starting with either the first or second cycle of chemotherapy. The interim endpoint was the cumulative highest toxicity calculated from a scoring system based on treatment-related grade 3 and higher toxicity and the ability to complete therapy in the experimental arms., Results: The final interim analysis was performed after 70 patients accrued to each experimental cohort, and a difference in treatment related toxicity scoring was not found (p = 0.739). Severe esophageal toxicity was comparable in both cohorts. Pulmonary toxicity was low overall, though 4 patients (5.7 %) on the 61.2 Gy arm developed grade 4 dyspnea, which was not observed in the 70 Gy arm. A protocol mandated decision was made to discontinue the 61.2 Gy arm following review of toxicity with the Data and Safety Monitoring Board., Conclusion: A randomized trial design using a planned early interim toxicity analysis to discriminate between experimental treatment arms is feasible in a phase III setting. Refinement of the design could increase the likelihood of detecting clinically meaningful differences in toxicity in future studies., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Survival prediction models may serve as decision-support tools for clinicians who have to assign the right treatment to each patient, in a manner whereby harmful over- or undertreatment is avoided as much as possible. Current models differ regarding their components, the overall number of components and the weighting of individual components. Some of the components are easy to assess, such as age or primary tumor type. Others carry the risk of inter-assessor inconsistency and time-dependent variation. The present publication focuses on issues related to assessment of extracranial metastases and potential surrogates, e.g. blood biomarkers. It identifies areas of controversy and provides recommendations for future research projects, which may contribute to prognostic models with improved accuracy., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To provide evidence-based recommendations updating the 2017 ASCO guideline on systemic therapy for patients with stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with driver alterations. A guideline update for systemic therapy for patients with stage IV NSCLC without driver alterations was published separately., Methods: The American Society of Clinical Oncology and Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario) NSCLC Expert Panel updated recommendations based on a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from December 2015 to January 2020 and meeting abstracts from ASCO 2020., Results: This guideline update reflects changes in evidence since the previous update. Twenty-seven RCTs, 26 observational studies, and one meta-analysis provide the evidence base (total 54). Outcomes of interest included efficacy and safety. Additional literature suggested by the Expert Panel is discussed., Recommendations: All patients with nonsquamous NSCLC should have the results of testing for potentially targetable mutations (alterations) before implementing therapy for advanced lung cancer, regardless of smoking status recommendations, when possible, following other existing high-quality testing guidelines. Most patients should receive targeted therapy for these alterations: Targeted therapies against ROS -1 fusions, BRAF V600e mutations, RET fusions, MET exon 14 skipping mutations, and NTRK fusions should be offered to patients, either as initial or second-line therapy when not given in the first-line setting. New or revised recommendations include the following: Osimertinib is the optimal first-line treatment for patients with activating epidermal growth factor receptor mutations (exon 19 deletion, exon 21 L858R, and exon 20 T790M); alectinib or brigatinib is the optimal first-line treatment for patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase fusions. For the first time, to our knowledge, the guideline includes recommendations regarding RET, MET, and NTRK alterations. Chemotherapy is still an option at most stages.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/thoracic-cancer-guidelines., Competing Interests: Reprint Requests: 2318 Mill Road, Suite 800, Alexandria, VA 22314; guidelines@asco.org

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).

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., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

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., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The aim of this work is to provide evidence-based recommendations updating the 2017 ASCO guideline on systemic therapy for patients with stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without driver alterations. A guideline update for patients with stage IV NSCLC with driver alterations will be published separately., Methods: The American Society of Clinical Oncology and Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario) NSCLC Expert Panel made updated recommendations based on a systematic review of randomized controlled trials from December 2015 to 2019., Results: This guideline update reflects changes in evidence since the previous guideline update. Five randomized controlled trials provide the evidence base. Additional literature suggested by the Expert Panel is discussed., Recommendations: Recommendations apply to patients without driver alterations in epidermal growth factor receptor or ALK. For patients with high programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression (tumor proportion score [TPS] ≥ 50%) and non-squamous cell carcinoma (non-SCC), the Expert Panel recommends single-agent pembrolizumab. Additional treatment options include pembrolizumab/carboplatin/pemetrexed, atezolizumab/carboplatin/paclitaxel/bevacizumab, or atezolizumab/carboplatin/nab-paclitaxel. For most patients with non-SCC and either negative (0%) or low positive (1% to 49%) PD-L1, the Expert Panel recommends pembrolizumab/carboplatin/pemetrexed. Additional options are atezolizumab/carboplatin/nab-paclitaxel, atezolizumab/carboplatin/paclitaxel/bevacizumab, platinum-based two-drug combination chemotherapy, or non-platinum-based two-drug therapy. Single-agent pembrolizumab is an option for low positive PD-L1. For patients with high PD-L1 expression (TPS ≥ 50%) and SCC, the Expert Panel recommends single-agent pembrolizumab. An additional treatment option is pembrolizumab/carboplatin/(paclitaxel or nab-paclitaxel). For most patients with SCC and either negative (0%) or low positive PD-L1 (TPS 1% to 49%), the Expert Panel recommends pembrolizumab/carboplatin/(paclitaxel or nab-paclitaxel) or chemotherapy. Single-agent pembrolizumab is an option in select cases of low positive PD-L1. Recommendations are conditional on the basis of histology, PD-L1 status, and/or the presence or absence of contraindications. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/lung-cancer-guidelines.

Purpose: Studies have noted a link between radiation dose to the heart and overall survival (OS) for patients with lung cancer treated with chemoradiation. The purpose of this study was to characterize pre- to posttreatment cardiac metabolic changes using fluorodeoxyglucose/positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) images and to evaluate whether changes in cardiac metabolism predict for OS., Methods and Materials: Thirty-nine patients enrolled in a functional avoidance prospective study who had undergone pre- and postchemoradiation FDG-PET imaging were evaluated. For each patient, the pretreatment and posttreatment PET/CTs were rigidly registered to the planning CT, dose, and structure set. PET-based metabolic dose-response was assessed by comparing pretreatment to posttreatment mean standardized uptake values (SUVmean) in the heart as a function of dose-bin. OS analysis was performed by comparing SUVmean changes for patients who were alive or had died at last follow-up and by using a multivariate model to assess whether pre- to posttreatment SUVmean changes were a predictor of OS., Results: The dose-response curve revealed increasing changes in SUV as a function of cardiac dose with an average SUVmean increase of 1.7% per 10 Gy. Patients were followed for a median of 437 days (range, 201-1131 days). SUVmean change was significantly predictive of OS on multivariate analysis with a hazard ratio of 0.541 (95% confidence intervals, 0.312-0.937). Patients alive at follow-up had an average increase of 17.2% in cardiac SUVmean while patients that died had an average decrease in SUVmean decrease of 13.5% (P = .048)., Conclusions: Our data demonstrated that posttreatment SUV changes in the heart were significant indicators of dose-response and predictors of OS. The present work is hypothesis generating and must be validated in an independent cohort. If validated, our data show the potential for cardiac metabolic changes to be an early predictor for clinical outcomes., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background : Early mortality is a major deterrent to oncologic management, often preventing delivery of therapy or leading to administration of treatment that offers limited benefit from aggressive interventions. Due to more recent progress in therapeutic options for stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, identifying those at high risk of early mortality (within 30 days) could have implications for treatment selection. Because early mortality following diagnosis of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is not well-characterized, this investigation evaluated national trends and predictors thereof. Material and methods: The National Cancer Database was queried for cases of pathologically confirmed metastatic NSCLC with complete vital status and clinical information, diagnosed between 2006 and 2014. Multivariable logistic regression ascertained factors associated with 30-day mortality. Results: Of 346,681 patients, 45,861 (13%) experienced early mortality over the past decade, which remained relatively constant over time. Predictors of early mortality included advancing age (>65 years), male gender, Caucasian race, non-private insurance, lower income, greater comorbidities, residence in metropolitan and/or lesser-educated areas, treatment at community centers, patients with no prior history of cancer and regional differences ( p  < .01 for all). Early mortality was highest in patients older than 80 years with multiple comorbidities (29%). The majority of patients (71%) who died within 30 days did not receive any therapy. Conclusions: A fair proportion of NSCLC patients experience early mortality, which has not decreased over time. The majority of patients with early mortality do not receive treatment. Prognostic factors for early mortality should be considered during initial evaluation and subsequent follow-up of these patients. Doing so may impact systemic treatment selection by medical oncologists, management of (oligo)metastatic disease by radiation and surgical oncologists and cost-effective administration of these therapies in the stage IV NSCLC population.

Purpose: Patients with human EGFR2-positive (HER2 + ) breast cancer have a high incidence of brain metastases, and trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) is often employed. Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is frequently utilized, and case series report increased toxicity with combination SRS and T-DM1. We provide an update of our experience of T-DM1 and SRS evaluating risk of clinically significant radionecrosis (CSRN) and propose a mechanism for this toxicity., Experimental Design: Patients with breast cancer who were ≤45 years regardless of HER2 status or had HER2 + disease regardless of age and underwent SRS for brain metastases were included. Rates of CSRN, SRS data, and details of T-DM1 administration were recorded. Proliferation and astrocytic swelling studies were performed to elucidate mechanisms of toxicity., Results: A total of 45 patients were identified; 66.7% were HER2 + , and 60.0% were ≤ 45 years old. Of the entire cohort, 10 patients (22.2%) developed CSRN, 9 of whom received T-DM1. CSRN was observed in 39.1% of patients who received T-DM1 versus 4.5% of patients who did not. Receipt of T-DM1 was associated with a 13.5-fold ( P = 0.02) increase in CSRN. Mechanistically, T-DM1 targeted reactive astrocytes and increased radiation-induced cytotoxicity and astrocytic swelling via upregulation of Aquaporin-4 (Aqp4)., Conclusions: The strong correlation between development of CSRN after SRS and T-DM1 warrants prospective studies controlling for variations in timing of T-DM1 and radiation dosing to further stratify risk of CSRN and mitigate toxicity. Until such studies are completed, we advise caution in the combination of SRS and T-DM1., (©2019 American Association for Cancer Research.)

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., Competing Interests: None of the authors have a conflict of interest related to this work. The following authors have no relationships to report: PWS, PF, JL, WB, PDB, DC, JBY, VC, SJ, LEG, SM, SB, PS, BC, A Attia, JKM, CCW, JP, JMB, RS, DDT, DS, MC, HS, HA, LM. The following authors have relationships to report, but again none are related to this work: A Aizer (Astra Zeneca), AS (Elekta, Varian, Accuray), TJCW (Merck, Astra-Zeneca, Doximity, Novocure, Elekta, Wolters Kluwer), EL (Novocure, Nomocan Pharmaceuticals), JPK (Varian), HAS (Genentech), DR (Varian, Siemens, Accuray, BrainLab, Elekta, Pfizer, EMD Serono), MPM (Agenus, Insys, Remedy, IBA, Varian, Oncoceutics, Astra-Zeneca, Monteris.

Purpose: Our previously published findings reported that local consolidative therapy (LCT) with radiotherapy or surgery improved progression-free survival (PFS) and delayed new disease in patients with oligometastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that did not progress after front-line systemic therapy. Herein, we present the longer-term overall survival (OS) results accompanied by additional secondary end points., Patients and Methods: This multicenter, randomized, phase II trial enrolled patients with stage IV NSCLC, three or fewer metastases, and no progression at 3 or more months after front-line systemic therapy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to maintenance therapy or observation (MT/O) or to LCT to all active disease sites. The primary end point was PFS; secondary end points were OS, toxicity, and the appearance of new lesions. All analyses were two sided, and P values less than .10 were deemed significant., Results: The Data Safety and Monitoring Board recommended early trial closure after 49 patients were randomly assigned because of a significant PFS benefit in the LCT arm. With an updated median follow-up time of 38.8 months (range, 28.3 to 61.4 months), the PFS benefit was durable (median, 14.2 months [95% CI, 7.4 to 23.1 months] with LCT v 4.4 months [95% CI, 2.2 to 8.3 months] with MT/O; P = .022). We also found an OS benefit in the LCT arm (median, 41.2 months [95% CI, 18.9 months to not reached] with LCT v 17.0 months [95% CI, 10.1 to 39.8 months] with MT/O; P = .017). No additional grade 3 or greater toxicities were observed. Survival after progression was longer in the LCT group (37.6 months with LCT v 9.4 months with MT/O; P = .034). Of the 20 patients who experienced progression in the MT/O arm, nine received LCT to all lesions after progression, and the median OS was 17 months (95% CI, 7.8 months to not reached)., Conclusion: In patients with oligometastatic NSCLC that did not progress after front-line systemic therapy, LCT prolonged PFS and OS relative to MT/O.

Importance: Brain metastasis (BM) rates are high in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC), approaching rates seen in small cell lung cancer, where prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) is standard of care. Although PCI decreases the incidence of BM in LA-NSCLC, a survival advantage has not yet been shown., Objective: To determine if PCI improves survival in LA-NSCLC., Design, Setting, and Participants: Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0214 was a randomized phase 3 clinical trial in stage III NSCLC stratified by stage (IIIA vs IIIB), histologic characteristics (nonsquamous vs squamous) and therapy (no surgery vs surgery). The study took place at 291 institutions in the United States, Canada, and internationally. Of 356 patients with stage III NSCLC entered onto this study, 16 were ineligible; therefore, 340 patients were randomized., Intervention for Clinical Trials: Observation vs PCI., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). The secondary end points were disease-free survival (DFS) and incidence of BM., Results: Of the 340 total participants, mean (SD) age was 61 years; 213 of the participants were men and 127 were women. The median follow-up time was 2.1 years for all patients, and 9.2 years for living patients. The OS for PCI was not significantly better than observation (hazard ratio [HR], 0.82; 95% CI, 0.63-1.06; P = .12; 5- and 10-year rates, 24.7% and 17.6% vs 26.0% and 13.3%, respectively), while the DFS (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.59-0.97; P = .03; 5- and 10-year rates, 19.0% and 12.6% vs 16.1% and 7.5% for PCI vs observation) and BM (HR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.24-0.77; P = .003; 5- and 10-year rates, 16.7% vs 28.3% for PCI vs observation) were significantly different. Patients in the PCI arm were 57% less likely to develop BM than those in the observation arm. Younger patients (<60 years) and patients with nonsquamous disease developed more BM. On multivariable analysis, PCI was associated with decreased BM and improved DFS, but not improved OS. Multivariable analysis within the nonsurgical arm suggests that PCI effectively prolongs OS, DFS, and BM., Conclusions and Relevance: In patients with stage III LA-NSCLC without progression of disease after therapy, PCI decreased the 5- and 10-year rate of BM and improved 5- and 10-year DFS, but did not improve OS. Although this study did not meet its primary end point, the long-term results reveal many important findings that will benefit future trials. Identifying the appropriate patient population and a safe intervention is critical., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00048997.

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., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Patients with centrally located early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are at a higher risk of toxicity from high-dose ablative radiotherapy. NRG Oncology/RTOG 0813 was a phase I/II study designed to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), efficacy, and toxicity of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for centrally located NSCLC., Materials and Methods: Medically inoperable patients with biopsy-proven, positron emission tomography-staged T1 to 2 (≤ 5 cm) N0M0 centrally located NSCLC were accrued into a dose-escalating, five-fraction SBRT schedule that ranged from 10 to 12 Gy/fraction (fx) delivered over 1.5 to 2 weeks. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined as any treatment-related grade 3 or worse predefined toxicity that occurred within the first year. MTD was defined as the SBRT dose at which the probability of DLT was closest to 20% without exceeding it., Results: One hundred twenty patients were accrued between February 2009 and September 2013. Patients were elderly, there were slightly more females, and the majority had a performance status of 0 to 1. Most cancers were T1 (65%) and squamous cell (45%). Organs closest to planning target volume/most at risk were the main bronchus and large vessels. Median follow-up was 37.9 months. Five patients experienced DLTs; MTD was 12.0 Gy/fx, which had a probability of a DLT of 7.2% (95% CI, 2.8% to 14.5%). Two-year rates for the 71 evaluable patients in the 11.5 and 12.0 Gy/fx cohorts were local control, 89.4% (90% CI, 81.6% to 97.4%) and 87.9% (90% CI, 78.8% to 97.0%); overall survival, 67.9% (95% CI, 50.4% to 80.3%) and 72.7% (95% CI, 54.1% to 84.8%); and progression-free survival, 52.2% (95% CI, 35.3% to 66.6%) and 54.5% (95% CI, 36.3% to 69.6%), respectively., Conclusion: The MTD for this study was 12.0 Gy/fx; it was associated with 7.2% DLTs and high rates of tumor control. Outcomes in this medically inoperable group of mostly elderly patients with comorbidities were comparable with that of patients with peripheral early-stage tumors.

Purpose: The Congress of Neurological Surgeons (CNS) has developed a series of guidelines for the treatment of adults with metastatic brain tumors, including systemic therapy and supportive care topics. ASCO has a policy and set of procedures for endorsing clinical practice guidelines that have been developed by other professional organizations., Methods: Two CNS guidelines were reviewed for developmental rigor by methodologists, and an independent multidisciplinary Expert Panel was formed to review the content and assess agreement with the recommendations. The Expert Panel voted to endorse the two guidelines, and ASCO and Society for Neuro-Oncology (SNO) independently reviewed and approved the ASCO/SNO guideline endorsement., Results: The ASCO/SNO Expert Panel determined that the recommendations from the CNS anticonvulsants and steroids guidelines, published January 9, 2019, are clear, thorough, and based on the most relevant scientific evidence. ASCO/SNO endorsed these two CNS guidelines with minor alterations., Recommendations: Key recommendations include the following: prophylactic antiepileptic drugs were not recommended for routine use; and corticosteroids, specifically dexamethasone, were recommended for temporary symptomatic relief in patients with neurologic symptoms and signs related to mass effect from brain metastases. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/neurooncology-guidelines .

Background: The Congress of Neurological Surgeons (CNS) has developed a series of guidelines on the treatment of adults with metastatic brain tumors, including systemic therapy and supportive care topics. ASCO has a policy and set of procedures for endorsing clinical practice guidelines that have been developed by other professional organizations., Methods: Two CNS Guidelines were reviewed for developmental rigor by methodologists and an independent multi-disciplinary Expert Panel was formed to review the content and assess agreement with the recommendations. The expert panel voted to endorse the two guidelines and ASCO and SNO independently reviewed and approved the ASCO/SNO guideline endorsement., Results: The ASCO/SNO Expert Panel determined that the recommendations from the CNS anticonvulsants and steroids guidelines, published January 9, 2019, are clear, thorough, and based upon the most relevant scientific evidence. ASCO/SNO endorsed these two CNS guidelines, with minor alterations., Conclusions: Key recommendations include: prophylactic anti-epileptic drugs were not recommended for routine use; corticosteroids (specifically dexamethasone) were recommended for temporary symptomatic relief in patients with neurologic symptoms and signs related to mass effect from brain metastases., (© 2019. Society for Neuro-Oncology and the American Society of Clinical Oncology. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology. This summary guideline endorsement was developed jointly by the Society for Neuro-Oncology & the American Society of Clinical Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Target Population: Adult patients (older than 18 yr of age) with newly diagnosed brain metastases., Question: If whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) is used, is there an optimal dose/fractionation schedule?, Recommendations: Level 1:  A standard WBRT dose/fractionation schedule (ie, 30 Gy in 10 fractions or a biological equivalent dose [BED] of 39 Gy10) is recommended as altered dose/fractionation schedules do not result in significant differences in median survival or local control. Level 3: Due to concerns regarding neurocognitive effects, higher dose per fraction schedules (such as 20 Gy in 5 fractions) are recommended only for patients with poor performance status or short predicted survival. Level 3: WBRT can be recommended to improve progression-free survival for patients with more than 4 brain metastases., Question: What impact does tumor histopathology or molecular status have on the decision to use WBRT, the dose fractionation scheme to be utilized, and its outcomes?, Recommendations: There is insufficient evidence to support the choice of any particular dose/fractionation regimen based on histopathology. Molecular status may have an impact on the decision to delay WBRT in subgroups of patients, but there is not sufficient data to make a more definitive recommendation., Question: Separate from survival outcomes, what are the neurocognitive consequences of WBRT, and what steps can be taken to minimize them?, Recommendations: Level 2: Due to neurocognitive toxicity, local therapy (surgery or SRS) without WBRT is recommended for patients with ≤4 brain metastases amenable to local therapy in terms of size and location. Level 2:  Given the association of neurocognitive toxicity with increasing total dose and dose per fraction of WBRT, WBRT doses exceeding 30 Gy given in 10 fractions, or similar biologically equivalent doses, are not recommended, except in patients with poor performance status or short predicted survival. Level 2: If prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) is given to prevent brain metastases for small cell lung cancer, the recommended WBRT dose/fractionation regimen is 25 Gy in 10 fractions, and because this can be associated with neurocognitive decline, patients should be told of this risk at the same time they are counseled about the possible survival benefits. Level 3: Patients having WBRT (given for either existing brain metastases or as PCI) should be offered 6 mo of memantine to potentially delay, lessen, or prevent the associated neurocognitive toxicity., Question: Does the addition of WBRT after surgical resection or radiosurgery improve progression-free or overall survival outcomes when compared to surgical resection or radiosurgery alone?, Recommendations: Level 2: WBRT is not recommended in WHO performance status 0 to 2 patients with up to 4 brain metastases because, compared to surgical resection or radiosurgery alone, the addition of WBRT improves intracranial progression-free survival but not overall survival. Level 2: In WHO performance status 0 to 2 patients with up to 4 brain metastases where the goal is minimizing neurocognitive toxicity, as opposed to maximizing progression-free survival and overall survival, local therapy (surgery or radiosurgery) without WBRT is recommended. Level 3: Compared to surgical resection or radiosurgery alone, the addition of WBRT is not recommended for patients with more than 4 brain metastases unless the metastases' volume exceeds 7 cc, or there are more than 15 metastases, or the size or location of the metastases are not amenable to surgical resection or radiosurgery.The full guideline can be found at: https://www.cns.org/guidelines/guidelines-treatment-adults-metastatic-brain-tumors/chapter&#95;3., (Copyright © 2019 by the Congress of Neurological Surgeons.)

Background: Different management options exist for patients with brain metastases from non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), patients whose treatment with whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) has become more controversial over the last decade. It is not trivial to find the optimal balance of over- versus undertreatment in these patients. Several recent trials, including the randomized QUARTZ trial now influence the decision to recommend or withhold WBRT for patients with unfavorable prognosis, and similarly, for favorable prognosis patients, the balance between radiosurgery alone or WBRT has become a nuanced decision. Additionally, the availability of intracranially active targeted agent for some subsets of these patients has added another layer of complexity to the decision-making., Methods: A multinational consortium of expert radiation oncologists was established with the aim of compiling treatment recommendations for challenging scenarios, in this case the choice between optimal supportive care (SC), WBRT and other types of radiation therapy (RT). We distributed 17 cases to 7 radiation oncologists who were allowed to involve coworkers to provide their treatment recommendations. The cases differed in extra- and intracranial disease extent, histology, age and other prognostic factors. Expert recommendations were tabulated with the aim of providing guidance., Results: Regarding willingness to include the 17 patients in the QUARTZ trial, the rates of trial inclusion were low (range 0/7 to 3/7). Experts not recommending trial inclusion provided their treatment recommendations. These suggestions differed widely for most of the patients. It was not uncommon to see 3 or 4 different recommendations. In general, few (0-2) recommended SC. Some kind of local treatment was suggested by the majority of experts for all 17 patients. Commonly, stereotactic single-fraction radiosurgery (SRS) or stereotactic fractionated radiotherapy (SFRT) were recommended by many experts, also for patients with 5-7 lesions. The highest proportion of recommendations towards WBRT in any patient was 3/7. It was also quite common for patients with multiple metastases of varying size that experts suggested combinations of resection, post-operative SRS/SFRT and SRS/SFRT to intact lesions. Despite recommending active treatment, experts were often willing to include the patients in a hypothetical protocol investigating radiotherapy utilization in the last 30 days of life (assessment of factors predicting early death)., Conclusions: WBRT was infrequently recommended. Even in patients with adverse prognostic features that raised the experts' awareness of an increased risk for futile treatment near the end of life, SRS/SFRT were more often recommended than optimal supportive care, unless a patient decided to forego active treatment.

Introduction: Target delineation variability is a significant technical impediment in multi-institutional trials which employ intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), as there is a real potential for clinically meaningful variances that can impact the outcomes in clinical trials. The goal of this study is to determine the variability of target delineation among participants from different institutions as part of Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) Radiotherapy Committee's multi-institutional in-silico quality assurance study in patients with Pancoast tumors as a "dry run" for trial implementation., Methods: CT simulation scans were acquired from four patients with Pancoast tumor. Two patients had simulation 4D-CT and FDG-FDG PET-CT while two patients had 3D-CT and FDG-FDG PET-CT. Seventeen SWOG-affiliated physicians independently delineated target volumes defined as gross primary and nodal tumor volumes (GTV&#95;P & GTV&#95;N), clinical target volume (CTV), and planning target volume (PTV).Six board-certified thoracic radiation oncologists were designated as the 'Experts' for this study. Their delineations were used to create a simultaneous truth and performance level estimation (STAPLE) contours using ADMIRE software (Elekta AB, Sweden 2017). Individual participants' contours were then compared with Experts' STAPLE contours., Results: When compared to the Experts' STAPLE, GTV&#95;P had the best agreement among all participants, while GTV&#95;N showed the lowest agreement among all participants. There were no statistically significant differences in all studied parameters for all TVs for cases with 4D-CT versus cases with 3D-CT simulation scans., Conclusions: High degree of inter-observer variation was noted for all target volume except for GTV&#95;P, unveiling potentials for protocol modification for subsequent clinically meaningful improvement in target definition. Various similarity indices exist that can be used to guide multi-institutional radiotherapy delineation QA credentialing.

Purpose: Functional imaging has been proposed that uses 4DCT images to calculate 4DCT-based lung ventilation (4DCT-ventilation). We have started a 2-institution, phase 2 prospective trial evaluating the feasibility, safety, and preliminary efficacy of 4DCT-ventilation functional avoidance. The trial hypothesis is that the rate of grade ≥2 radiation pneumonitis could be reduced to 12% with functional avoidance, compared with a 25% rate of pneumonitis with a historical control. The trial employed a Simon 2-stage design with a planned futility analysis after 17 evaluable patients. The purpose of this work is to present the trial design and implementation, dosimetric data, and clinical results for the planned futility analysis., Methods and Materials: Eligible patients were patients with lung cancer who were prescribed doses of 45 to 75 Gy. For each patient, the 4DCT data were used to generate a 4DCT-ventilation image using the Hounsfield unit technique along with a compressible flow-based image registration algorithm. Two intensity modulated radiation therapy treatment plans were generated: (1) a standard lung plan and (2) a functional avoidance treatment plan that aimed to reduce dose to functional lung while meeting target and normal tissue constraints. Patients were treated with the functional avoidance plan and evaluated for thoracic toxicity (presented as rate and 95% confidence intervals [CI]) with a 1-year follow-up., Results: The V20 to functional lung was 21.6% ± 9.5% (mean ± standard deviation) with functional avoidance, representing a decrease of 3.2% (P < .01) relative to standard, nonfunctional treatment plans. The rates of grade ≥2 and grade ≥3 radiation pneumonitis were 17.6% (95% CI, 3.8%-43.4%) and 5.9% (95% CI, 0.1%-28.7%), respectively., Conclusions: Dosimetrically, functional avoidance achieved reduction in doses to functional lung while meeting target and organ at risk constraints. On the basis of Simon's 2-stage design and the 17.6% grade ≥2 pneumonitis rate, the trial met its futility criteria and has continued accrual., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Guidelines have recommended prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) for patients with limited-stage small-cell lung cancer with at least a partial response after thoracic chemoradiation. However, the survival advantage has been small and was observed in an era before magnetic resonance imaging and surveillance. Neurotoxicity also remains a concern, especially in older adults. Thus, patients have a complex value-laden decision to make. We sought to better understand the role physicians play in patient decision making and introduce a patient decision aid (PDA) to potentially facilitate these discussions., Materials and Methods: An e-mail survey was sent to International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer members querying their personal perspectives and professional recommendations regarding PCI for limited-stage small-cell lung cancer., Results: We received 295 responses. Most were from the United States (35%) and Europe (35%) and were radiation (45%) or medical (43%) oncologists. Of those responding, 88% and 50% reported they would recommend PCI to a 50- and 70-year-old patient, respectively. Also, 79% reported that they would wish to receive PCI if faced with this decision. The physicians who would have chosen PCI if faced with the decision were 27.6 and 12.9 times more likely to recommend PCI to a 50- and 70-year-old patient, respectively, than were physicians who would not undergo PCI themselves. Most of the respondents had positive responses to the proposed PDA., Conclusion: Physician bias appears to play a role in PCI counseling, and most physicians reported that the provided PDA was better than their present method for discussing PCI and would help patients make such value-laden choices., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Brain metastases are common in metastatic melanoma and radiosurgery is often utilized for local control. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) play a central role in contemporary melanoma management; however, there is limited data exploring outcomes and potential toxicities for patients treated with CPIs and radiosurgery., Methods: We retrospectively identified all consecutive cases of newly diagnosed melanoma brain metastases (MBM) treated with Gamma Knife radiosurgery at a single institution between 2012 and 2017, and included only patients that initiated CPIs within 8 weeks before or after radiosurgery., Results: Thirty-eight patients were included with a median follow-up of 31.6 months. Two-year local control was 92%. Median time to out-of-field CNS and extra-CNS progression were 8.4 and 7.9 months, respectively. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.4 months and median overall survival (OS) was not reached (NR). Twenty-five patients (66%) received anti-CTLA4 and 13 patients (34%) received anti-PD-1+/-anti-CTLA4. Compared with anti-CTLA4, patients that received anti-PD-1+/-anti-CTLA4 had significant improvements in time to out-of-field CNS progression (p = 0.049), extra-CNS progression (p = 0.015), and PFS (p = 0.043), with median time to out-of-field CNS progression of NR vs. 3.1 months, median time to extra-CNS progression of NR vs. 4.4 months, and median PFS of 20.3 vs. 2.4 months. Six patients (16%) developed grade ≥ 2 CNS toxicities (grade 2: 3, grade 3: 3, grade 4/5: 0)., Conclusions: Excellent outcomes were observed in patients that initiated CPIs within 8 weeks of undergoing radiosurgery for newly diagnosed MBM. There appears to be an advantage to anti-PD-1 or combination therapy compared to anti-CTLA4.

Introduction: Whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT) is the standard approach for brain metastases (BM) arising in patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC), but the neurocognitive toxicities of WBRT are well documented. For this reason, stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) alone is the preferred modality for limited BM in most histologies, but in SCLC there are few data exploring this approach., Methods: We queried the National Cancer Database (NCDB) for patients with SCLC with BM at diagnosis and stratified by upfront SRS compared with upfront WBRT ± SRS. We utilized multivariate Cox regression and propensity score matching (PSM) to determine the impact on overall survival (OS) of each approach., Results: 5952 eligible patients (WBRT: 5752; SRS: 200) were identified from 2010 to 2014 with a median follow-up of 40.0 months. Upfront SRS was associated with superior OS (median 10.8 vs 7.1 months, HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.55-0.75, p < 0.001), which persisted on multivariate analysis controlling for comorbidities, extracranial metastases, age, race/ethnicity, and gender (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.60-0.81, p < 0.001). These results were confirmed in PSM analysis. A subset analysis comparing outcomes after SRS vs SRS + WBRT showed no differences in OS (p = .601)., Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the largest dataset of patients treated with SRS alone for SCLC. The observation of favorable OS with SRS alone in this contemporary dataset suggests that SRS alone may be appropriate for some patients with SCLC. Prospective investigations of SRS in SCLC are warranted., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Patients with brain metastases (BMs) arising from EGFR-mutated and anaplastic lymphoma kinase gene (ALK)-rearranged NSCLC have a favorable prognosis compared with patients with non-oncogene-addicted NSCLC, emphasizing the importance of minimizing toxicities such as the cognitive sequelae of whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT). Although radiosurgery without WBRT is the preferred strategy for one to three BMs, this paradigm remains controversial for patients with multiple BMs., Methods: We reviewed the cases of patients with EGFR-mutated and ALK-rearranged NSCLC presenting to our cancer center between 2008 and 2017 and included only patients receiving treatment to four or more BMs in a single radiosurgery session., Results: We identified 35 patients with a median follow-up of 4.1 years. The maximum number of BMs treated in a single radiosurgery session ranged from four to 26 (median number of BM treated per radiosurgery course: 6), and in total over all courses the number ranged from four to 47 (median: 10). The median survival was 3.0 years (4.2 for ALK-rearranged NSCLC; 2.4 for EGFR-mutated NSCLC) from the diagnosis of BM, and survival was comparable regardless of number of radiosurgery courses, number of BMs treated in total, or number of BMs treated in a single radiosurgery session. The mean hippocampal and whole-brain doses were exceedingly low even for patients receiving treatment to more than 10 BMs (1.2 and 0.8 Gy, respectively). Radiosurgery was well tolerated overall and the 5-year rate of freedom from neurologic death was 84%. The 5-year rate of freedom from WBRT was 97%., Conclusions: Radiosurgery for multiple BMs is controversial, yet patients with EGFR-mutated and ALK-rearranged NSCLC may be uniquely suited to benefit from this approach. These results support single and multiple courses of radiosurgery without WBRT for patients with oncogene-addicted NSCLC with four or more BMs., (Copyright © 2017 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Improved survival of patients with spinal bone metastases has resulted in an increased number of referrals for retreatment and repeat reirradiation., Methods: A consortium of expert radiation oncologists (RO) has been established with the aim of providing treatment recommendations for challenging clinical scenarios for which there are no established guidelines. In this case, a patient developed local progression of a T5 vertebral lesion after two prior courses of palliative radiotherapy (time interval >12 months, assumed cumulative biologically equivalent dose in 2‑Gy fractions [EQD2] for spinal cord [alpha/beta 2 Gy] 75 Gy). Expert recommendations were tabulated with the aim of providing guidance., Results: Five of seven RO would offer a third course of radiotherapy, preferably with advanced techniques such as stereotactic radiotherapy. However, the dose-fractionation concepts were heterogeneous (3-20 fractions) and sometimes adjusted to different options for systemic treatment. All five RO would compromise target volume coverage to reduce the dose to the spinal cord. Definition of the spinal cord planning-organ-at-risk volume was heterogeneous. All five RO limited the EQD2 for spinal cord. Two were willing to accept more than 12.5 Gy and the highest EQD2 was 19 Gy., Conclusions: The increasing body of literature about bone metastases and spinal cord reirradiation has encouraged some expert RO to offer palliative reirradiation with cumulative cord doses above 75 Gy EQD2; however, no consensus was achieved. Strategies for harmonization of clinical practice and development of evidence-based dose constraints are discussed.

Purpose In early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), post-treatment mortality may influence the comparative effectiveness of surgery and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), with implications for shared decision making among high-risk surgical candidates. We analyzed early mortality after these interventions using the National Cancer Database. Patients and Methods We abstracted patients with cT1-T2a, N0, M0 NSCLC diagnosed between 2004 and 2013 undergoing either surgery or SBRT. Thirty-day and 90-day post-treatment mortality rates were calculated and compared using Cox regression and propensity score-matched analyses. Results We identified 76,623 patients who underwent surgery (78% lobectomy, 20% sublobar resection, 2% pneumonectomy) and 8,216 patients who received SBRT. In the unmatched cohort, mortality rates were moderately increased with surgery versus SBRT (30 days, 2.07% v 0.73% [absolute difference (Δ), 1.34%]; P < .001; 90 days, 3.59% v 2.93% [Δ, 0.66%]; P < .001). Among the 27,200 propensity score-matched patients, these differences increased (30 days, 2.41% v 0.79% [Δ, 1.62%]; P < .001; 90 days, 4.23% v 2.82% [Δ, 1.41%]; P < .001). Differences in mortality between surgery and SBRT increased with age, with interaction P < .001 at both 30 days and 90 days (71 to 75 years old: 30-day Δ, 1.87%; 90-day Δ, 2.02%; 76 to 80 years old: 30-day Δ, 2.80%; 90-day Δ, 2.59%; > 80 years old: 30-day Δ, 3.03%; 90-day Δ, 3.67%; all P ≤ .001). Compared with SBRT, surgical mortality rates were higher with increased extent of resection (30-day and 90-day multivariate hazard ratio for mortality: sublobar resection, 2.85 and 1.37; lobectomy, 3.65 and 1.60; pneumonectomy, 14.5 and 5.66; all P < 0.001). Conclusion Differences in 30- and 90-day post-treatment mortality between surgery and SBRT increased as a function of age, with the largest differences in favor of SBRT observed among patients older than 70 years. These representative mortality data may inform shared decision making among patients with early-stage NSCLC who are eligible for both interventions.

The goals of therapeutic and biomarker development form the foundation of clinical trial design, and change considerably from early-phase to late-phase trials. From these goals, decisions on specific clinical trial design elements, such as endpoint selection and statistical approaches, are formed. Whereas early-phase trials might focus on finding a therapeutic signal to make decisions on further development, late-phase trials focus on the confirmation of therapeutic impact by considering clinically meaningful endpoints. In this guideline from the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Brain Metastases (RANO-BM) working group, we highlight issues related to, and provide recommendations for, the design of clinical trials on local therapies for CNS metastases from solid tumours. We discuss endpoint selection criteria, the analysis appropriate for early-phase and late-phase trials, the association between tumour-specific and clinically meaningful endpoints, and possible issues related to the estimation of local control in the context of competing risks. In light of these discussions, we make specific recommendations on the clinical trial design of local therapies for brain metastases., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

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., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aim/background: Papillary meningioma represents a rare subset of World Health Organization (WHO) Grade III meningioma that portends an overall poor prognosis. There is relatively limited data regarding the benefit of postoperative radiation therapy (PORT). We used the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) to compare overall survival (OS) outcomes of surgically resected papillary meningioma cases undergoing PORT compared to post-operative observation., Materials and Methods: The NCDB was queried for patients with papillary meningioma, diagnosed between 2004 and 2013, who underwent upfront surgery with or without PORT. Overall survival (OS) was determined using the Kaplan-Meier method. Univariate (UVA) and multivariate (MVA) analyses were performed., Results: In total, 190 patients were identified; 89 patients underwent PORT, 101 patients were observed. Eleven patients received chemotherapy (6 with PORT, 5 without). 2-Year OS was significantly improved with PORT vs. no PORT (93.0% vs. 74.4%), as was 5-year OS (78.5% vs. 62.5%) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27-0.85; p  = 0.01). On MVA, patients receiving PORT had improved OS compared to observation (HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.22-0.76; p  = 0.005). On subset analysis by age group, the benefit of PORT vs. no PORT was significant in patients ≤18 years ( n  = 13), with 2-year OS of 85.7% vs. 50.0% (HR, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.01-0.80; p  = 0.032) and for patients >18 years ( n  = 184), with 2-year OS of 94.7% vs. 76.1% (HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.31-1.00; p  = 0.049), respectively., Conclusions: In this large contemporary analysis, PORT was associated with improved survival for both adult and pediatric patients with papillary meningioma. PORT should be considered in those who present with this rare, aggressive tumor.

Background: This collaborative practice parameter technical standard has been created between the American College of Radiology and American Brachytherapy Society to guide the usage of electronically generated low energy radiation sources (ELSs). It refers to the use of electronic X-ray sources with peak voltages up to 120 kVp to deliver therapeutic radiation therapy., Main Findings: The parameter provides a guideline for utilizing ELS, including patient selection and consent, treatment planning, and delivery processes. The parameter reviews the published clinical data with regard to ELS results in skin, breast, and other cancers., Conclusions: This technical standard recommends appropriate qualifications of the involved personnel. The parameter reviews the technical issues relating to equipment specifications as well as patient and personnel safety. Regarding suggestions for educational programs with regard to this parameter,it is suggested that the training level for clinicians be equivalent to that for other radiation therapies. It also suggests that ELS must be done using the same standards of quality and safety as those in place for other forms of radiation therapy., (Copyright © 2017 American Brachytherapy Society and American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose The panel updated the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) adjuvant therapy guideline for resected non-small-cell lung cancers. Methods ASCO convened an update panel and conducted a systematic review of the literature, investigating adjuvant therapy in resected non-small-cell lung cancers. Results The updated evidence base covered questions related to adjuvant systemic therapy and included a systematic review conducted by Cancer Care Ontario current to January 2016. A recent American Society for Radiation Oncology guideline and systematic review, previously endorsed by ASCO, was used as the basis for recommendations for adjuvant radiation therapy. An update of these systematic reviews and a search for studies related to radiation therapy found no additional randomized controlled trials. Recommendations Adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy is recommended for routine use in patients with stage IIA, IIB, or IIIA disease who have undergone complete surgical resections. For individuals with stage IB, adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy is not recommended for routine use. However, a postoperative multimodality evaluation, including a consultation with a medical oncologist, is recommended to assess benefits and risks of adjuvant chemotherapy for each patient. The guideline provides information on factors other than stage to consider when making a recommendation for adjuvant chemotherapy, including tumor size, histopathologic features, and genetic alterations. Adjuvant chemotherapy is not recommended for patients with stage IA disease. Adjuvant radiation therapy is not recommended for patients with resected stage I or II disease. In patients with stage IIIA N2 disease, adjuvant radiation therapy is not recommended for routine use. However, a postoperative multimodality evaluation, including a consultation with a radiation oncologist, is recommended to assess benefits and risks of adjuvant radiation therapy for each patient with N2 disease. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/lung-cancer-guidelines and www.asco.org/guidelineswiki .

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., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Practice guidelines have been developed for early-stage and locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, many common clinical scenarios still require individualized decision making. This is true for locoregional relapse after initial stereotactic radiotherapy (stereotactic body radiation therapy or stereotactic ablative radiotherapy; SBRT or SABR), an increasingly utilized curative treatment option for stage I NSCLC., Methods: A consortium of expert radiation oncologists was established with the aim of providing treatment recommendations. In this scenario, a case was distributed to six radiation oncologists who provided their institutions' treatment recommendations. In this case, a patient developed local and mediastinal relapse after SABR (45 Gy, 3 fractions), comparable to the tumor burden in de novo stage IIIA NSCLC. Treatment recommendations were tabulated and a consensus conclusion was developed., Results: Three institutions recommended evaluation for surgery. If the patient was not a surgical candidate, and/or refused surgery, definitive chemoradiation was recommended, including retreating the primary to full dose. European participants were more in favor of a non-surgical approach. None of the participants were reluctant to prescribe reirradiation, but two institutions prescribed doses lower than 60 Gy. Platinum-based doublets together with intensity-modulated radiotherapy were preferred., Conclusion: The institutional recommendations reflect the questions and uncertainties discussed in current stage III guidelines. All institutions agreed that previous SABR is not a contraindication for salvage chemoradiation. In the absence of high-quality prospective trials for recurrent NSCLC, all treatment options recommended in current guidelines for stage III disease can be considered in clinical scenarios such as this.

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.

Introduction: The optimal role for postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) for thymoma and thymic carcinoma remains controversial. We used the National Cancer Data Base to investigate the impact of PORT on overall survival (OS)., Methods: Patients who underwent an operation for thymoma or thymic carcinoma were categorized into Masaoka-Koga stage groups I to IIA, IIB, III, and IV. Patients who did not undergo an operation or those who received preoperative radiation were excluded. Kaplan-Meier estimates of OS and univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were performed. Propensity score-matched analyses were performed to further control for baseline confounders., Results: From 2004 to 2012, 4056 patients were eligible for inclusion, 2001 of whom (49%) received PORT. On multivariate analysis of OS in the thymoma cohort adjusted for age, WHO histologic subtype, Masaoka-Koga stage group, surgical margins, and chemotherapy administration, PORT was associated with superior OS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.72, p = 0.001). Propensity score-matched analyses confirmed the survival advantage associated with PORT. Subset analysis indicated longer OS in association with PORT for patients with stage IIB thymoma (HR = 0.61, p = 0.035), stage III (HR = 0.69, p = 0.020), and positive margins (HR = 0.53, p < 0.001). The impact of PORT for stage I to IIA disease did not reach significance (HR = 0.76, p = 0.156)., Conclusions: In this large database analysis of PORT for thymic tumors, PORT was associated with longer OS, with the greatest relative benefits observed for stage IIB to III disease and positive margins. In the absence of randomized studies assessing the value of PORT, these data may inform clinical practice., (Copyright © 2017 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Breast cancer is the second most common primary tumor associated with central nervous system (CNS) metastases. Patients with metastatic HER2-positive or triple-negative (estrogen receptor (ER)-negative, progesterone receptor (PR)-negative, HER2-negative) breast cancer are at the highest risk of developing parenchymal brain metastases. Leptomeningeal disease is less frequent but is distributed across breast cancer subtypes, including lobular breast cancer. Initial treatment strategies can include surgery, radiation, intravenous or intrathecal chemotherapy, and/or targeted approaches. In this article, we review the epidemiology of breast cancer brain metastases, differences in clinical behavior and natural history by tumor subtype, and important considerations in the multidisciplinary treatment of these patients. We will highlight new findings that impact current standards of care, clinical controversies, and notable investigational approaches in clinical testing.

Background: Evidence from retrospective studies suggests that disease progression after first-line chemotherapy for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) occurs most often at sites of disease known to exist at baseline. However, the potential effect of aggressive local consolidative therapy for patients with oligometastatic NSCLC is unknown. We aimed to assess the effect of local consolidative therapy on progression-free survival., Methods: In this multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 2 study, eligible patients from three hospitals had histological confirmation of stage IV NSCLC, three or fewer metastatic disease lesions after first-line systemic therapy, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 2 or less, had received standard first-line systemic therapy, and had no disease progression before randomisation. First-line therapy was four or more cycles of platinum doublet therapy or 3 or more months of EGFR or ALK inhibitors for patients with EGFR mutations or ALK rearrangements, respectively. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either local consolidative therapy ([chemo]radiotherapy or resection of all lesions) with or without subsequent maintenance treatment or to maintenance treatment alone, which could be observation only. Maintenance treatment was recommended based on a list of approved regimens, and observation was defined as close surveillance without cytotoxic treatment. Randomisation was not masked and was balanced dynamically on five factors: number of metastases, response to initial therapy, CNS metastases, intrathoracic nodal status, and EGFR and ALK status. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival analysed in all patients who were treated and had at least one post-baseline imaging assessment. The study is ongoing but not recruiting participants. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01725165., Findings: Between Nov 28, 2012, and Jan 19, 2016, 74 patients were enrolled either during or at the completion of first-line systemic therapy. The study was terminated early after randomisation of 49 patients (25 in the local consolidative therapy group and 24 in the maintenance treatment group) as part of the annual analyses done by the Data Safety Monitoring Committee of all randomised trials at MD Anderson Cancer Center, and before a planned interim analysis of 44 events. At a median follow-up time for all randomised patients of 12·39 months (IQR 5·52-20·30), the median progression-free survival in the local consolidative therapy group was 11·9 months (90% CI 5·7-20·9) versus 3·9 months (2·3-6·6) in the maintenance treatment group (hazard ratio 0·35 [90% CI 0·18-0·66], log-rank p=0·0054). Adverse events were similar between groups, with no grade 4 adverse events or deaths due to treatment. Grade 3 adverse events in the maintenance therapy group were fatigue (n=1) and anaemia (n=1) and in the local consolidative therapy group were oesophagitis (n=2), anaemia (n=1), pneumothorax (n=1), and abdominal pain (n=1, unlikely related)., Interpretation: Local consolidative therapy with or without maintenance therapy for patients with three or fewer metastases from NSCLC that did not progress after initial systemic therapy improved progression-free survival compared with maintenance therapy alone. These findings suggest that aggressive local therapy should be further explored in phase 3 trials as a standard treatment option in this clinical scenario., Funding: MD Anderson Lung Cancer Priority Fund, MD Anderson Cancer Center Moon Shot Initiative, and Cancer Center Support (Core), National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health., Competing Interests: Declaration of Interest: The other authors declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

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., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Brain metastases (BMs) will develop in a large proportion of patients with NSCLC throughout the course of their disease. Among patients with NSCLC with oncogenic drivers, mainly EGFR activating mutations and anaplastic lymphoma receptor tyrosine kinase gene (ALK) rearrangements, the presence of BM is a common secondary localization of disease both at the time of diagnosis and at relapse. Because of the limited penetration of a wide range of drugs across the blood-brain barrier, radiotherapy is considered the cornerstone of treatment of BMs. However, evidence of dramatic intracranial response rates has been reported in recent years with targeted therapies such as tyrosine kinase inhibitors and has been supported by new insights into pharmacokinetics to increase rates of tyrosine kinase inhibitors' penetration of the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). In this context, the combination of brain radiotherapy and targeted therapies seems relevant, and there is a strong radiobiological rationale to harness the radiosentizing effect of the drugs. Nevertheless, to date, there is a paucity of high-level clinical evidence supporting the combination of brain radiotherapy and targeted therapies in patients with NSCLC and BMs, and there are often methodological biases in reported studies, such as the lack of stratification by mutation status. Moreover, among asymptomatic patients not suitable for ablative treatment, this strategy is challenged by the promising results associated with the administration of targeted therapies alone. Herein, we review the biological rationale to combine targeted therapies and brain radiotherapy for patients with NSCLC and BMs, report the clinical data available to date, and discuss future directions to improve outcome in this group of patients., (Copyright © 2016 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. All rights reserved.)

Importance: The optimal management for elderly patients with glioblastoma (GBM) is controversial. Following maximal safe resection or biopsy, accepted treatment paradigms for elderly patients with GBM include combined-modality therapy (CMT) with both radiotherapy (RT) and chemotherapy (CT), RT alone, and CT alone., Objective: To evaluate the overall survival (OS) outcomes associated with RT, CT, and CMT for elderly patients with GBM in the modern temozolomide era., Design, Setting, and Participants: In this retrospective cohort study of a prospectively maintained, multi-institutional national cancer registry, the National Cancer Database was queried for elderly patients (≥65 years) with newly diagnosed GBM from January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2011, with complete data sets for RT, CT, tumor resection, Charlson-Deyo comorbidity scores, age, sex, and year of diagnosis. Data analysis was performed from October 2015 through December 2015., Interventions: Combined-modality therapy, RT, CT., Main Outcomes and Measures: Survival by treatment cohort was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and analyzed using the log rank test, univariate and multivariate Cox models, and propensity score-matched analyses., Results: A total of 16 717 patients (median [range] age, 73 [65-≥90 y]; 8870 [53%] male) were identified. The median OS by treatment was 9.0 (95% CI, 8.8-9.3) months with CMT (8435 patients), 4.7 (95% CI, 4.5-5.0) months with RT alone (1693 patients), 4.3 (95% CI, 4.0-4.7) months with CT alone (1018 patients), and 2.8 (95% CI, 2.8-2.9) months with no therapy (5571 patients) (P < .001). On multivariate analysis, CMT was superior to both CT alone (hazard ratio, 1.50 [95% CI, 1.40-1.60]; P < .001) and RT alone (hazard ratio, 1.47 [95% CI, 1.39-1.55]; P < .001), whereas no differences were observed between CT alone vs RT alone (P = .60). Propensity score-matched analyses redemonstrated improved OS with CMT over CT alone (P = .002) and RT alone (P < .001); no differences were observed between CT alone vs RT alone (P = .44). On subgroup analyses, a consistent OS advantage was observed with CMT over both CT alone and RT alone across each age stratification (65-69, 70-74, 75-79, and ≥80 years) and among patients treated with or without tumor resection (all P < .001)., Conclusions and Relevance: In this analysis of multimodality therapy for elderly patients with GBM, OS was superior with CMT compared with CT alone and RT alone. Survival was similar between CT alone and RT alone, and both CT alone and RT alone were superior to no therapy. This analysis supports the use of CMT for suitable elderly candidates.