Search

The treatment for locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer has changed dramatically over the past several years, with consolidative immunotherapy after concurrent chemoradiation becoming the new standard of care. Five-year survival outcomes have substantially improved with this approach. Despite these advances, further improvements are needed as the majority of patients ultimately develop progression of disease. The next-generation immunotherapy trials are currently being conducted that include approaches such as concurrent immunotherapy and addition of other therapeutic agents in the concurrent and consolidative settings. Specific unmet needs continue to exist for patients who develop disease progression after concurrent chemoradiation and immunotherapy, as well as defining the best treatment for patients with driver mutations. Future directions also include refinement of radiation techniques to reduce toxicities as much as possible, as well as the use of circulating tumor DNA in the surveillance setting. The current scientific landscape shows promising approaches that may further improve outcomes for patients with locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer., Competing Interests: Kristin A. HigginsHonoraria: PrecisCAConsulting or Advisory Role: AstraZeneca, Genentech, Varian Medical SystemsResearch Funding: Reflexion MedicalTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: AstraZeneca Sonam PuriConsulting or Advisory Role: AstraZeneca, G1 Therapeutics Jhanelle E. GrayHonoraria: Merck Sharp & Dohme, Axiom Healthcare Strategies, InivataConsulting or Advisory Role: Novartis, AstraZeneca, Blueprint Medicines, Bristol Myers Squibb, EMD Serono, Lilly, Sanofi, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Janssen Scientific AffairsResearch Funding: Array BioPharma, Merck, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Genentech/Roche, G1 Therapeutics, Novartis, Pfizer, Ludwig Institute for Cancer ResearchTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Merck Sharp & Dohme, Inivata, Merck, EMD Serono, NovartisNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Progress in the overall treatment of small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) has moved at a slower pace than non-small-cell lung cancer. In fact, the standard treatment regimen for limited stage SCLC has not appreciably shifted in more than 20 years, consisting of four to six cycles of cisplatin and etoposide chemotherapy concurrent with thoracic radiotherapy (TRT) followed by prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) for responsive disease. Nevertheless, long-term outcomes have improved with median survival approaching 25-30 months, and approximately one third of patients now survive 5 years. This is likely attributable in part to improvements in staging, including use of brain magnetic resonance imaging and fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography imaging, advances in radiation treatment planning, and supportive care. The CONVERT and CALGB 30610 phase III trials failed to demonstrate a survival advantage for high-dose, once-daily TRT compared with standard 45 Gy twice-daily TRT, although high-dose, once-daily TRT remains common in practice. A phase III comparison of high-dose 60 Gy twice-daily TRT versus 45 Gy twice-daily TRT aims to confirm the provocative outcomes reported with 60 Gy twice daily in the phase II setting. Efforts over time have shifted from intensifying PCI, to attempting to reduce treatment-related neurotoxicity, to more recently questioning whether careful magnetic resonance imaging surveillance may obviate the routine need for PCI. The addition of immunotherapy has resulted in mixed success in extensive-stage SCLC with modest benefit observed with programmed death-ligand 1 inhibitors, and several ongoing trials assess programmed death-ligand 1 inhibition concurrent or adjuvant to chemoradiotherapy in limited-stage SCLC. Major advances in future treatment will likely depend on a better understanding and exploiting of molecular characteristics of SCLC with increasing personalization of therapy., Competing Interests: Jeffrey A. BogartStock and Other Ownership Interests: Cardan Robotics, Verve Medical Saiama N. WaqarResearch Funding: Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, Lilly, Pfizer, Genentech/Roche, Daiichi Sankyo, Newlink Genetics, EMD Serono, Puma Biotechnology, Novartis, Xcovery, Synermore biologics, Celgene, Vertex, Bristol Myers Squibb, Stem CentrRx, Hengrui Therapeutics, Checkpoint Therapeutics, Ignyta, AstraZeneca, ARIAD, Roche, MerckNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Purpose: To study the impact of transarterial Yttrium-90 radioembolization (TARE) in combination with second-line systemic chemotherapy for colorectal liver metastases (CLM)., Methods: In this international, multicenter, open-label phase III trial, patients with CLM who progressed on oxaliplatin- or irinotecan-based first-line therapy were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive second-line chemotherapy with or without TARE. The two primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) and hepatic PFS (hPFS), assessed by blinded independent central review. Random assignment was performed using a web- or voice-based system stratified by unilobar or bilobar disease, oxaliplatin- or irinotecan-based first-line chemotherapy, and KRAS mutation status., Results: Four hundred twenty-eight patients from 95 centers in North America, Europe, and Asia were randomly assigned to chemotherapy with or without TARE; this represents the intention-to-treat population and included 215 patients in the TARE plus chemotherapy group and 213 patients in the chemotherapy alone group. The hazard ratio (HR) for PFS was 0.69 (95% CI, 0.54 to 0.88; 1-sided P = .0013), with a median PFS of 8.0 (95% CI, 7.2 to 9.2) and 7.2 (95% CI, 5.7 to 7.6) months, respectively. The HR for hPFS was 0.59 (95% CI, 0.46 to 0.77; 1-sided P < .0001), with a median hPFS of 9.1 (95% CI, 7.8 to 9.7) and 7.2 (95% CI, 5.7 to 7.6) months, respectively. Objective response rates were 34.0% (95% CI, 28.0 to 40.5) and 21.1% (95% CI, 16.2 to 27.1; 1-sided P = .0019) for the TARE and chemotherapy groups, respectively. Median overall survival was 14.0 (95% CI, 11.8 to 15.5) and 14.4 months (95% CI, 12.8 to 16.4; 1-sided P = .7229) with a HR of 1.07 (95% CI, 0.86 to 1.32) for TARE and chemotherapy groups, respectively. Grade 3 adverse events were reported more frequently with TARE (68.4% v 49.3%). Both groups received full chemotherapy dose intensity., Conclusion: The addition of TARE to systemic therapy for second-line CLM led to longer PFS and hPFS. Further subset analyses are needed to better define the ideal patient population that would benefit from TARE., Competing Interests: Mary F. MulcahyResearch Funding: BTG Armeen MahvashHonoraria: Sirtex MedicalConsulting or Advisory Role: Sirtex Medical, Boston Scientific, AbbiskoSpeakers' Bureau: SIR-TexResearch Funding: BTG, Sirtex MedicalTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: BTG, SIR-TexOpen Payments Link: https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/physician/1192235 Marc PrachtTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: MSD Steve BandulaHonoraria: Varian Medical Systems Robert C. G. MartinConsulting or Advisory Role: Angiodynamics Ken HerrmannLeadership: Sofibio, Theragnostics, Pharma15Stock and Other Ownership Interests: Sofibio, Theragnostics, Pharma15, Aktis OncologyConsulting or Advisory Role: Novartis, Bain Capital, Bayer, Advanced Accelerator Applications, Amgen, BTG, Ipsen, ITG, ROTOP Pharmaka, Siemens Healthineers, GE Healthcare Ewan BrownResearch Funding: MSD Oncology Gregory WilsonStock and Other Ownership Interests: Tandem Diabetes Care, Regeneron, Novacyt, Spire Hospital GroupConsulting or Advisory Role: Delcath Systems Paul RossStock and Other Ownership Interests: Perci Health LtdHonoraria: Sirtex Medical, Eisai, Servier, Pierre Fabre, Shire, Roche, AstraZeneca, MerckConsulting or Advisory Role: Sirtex Medical, Eisai, Servier, Roche, AstraZeneca, AmgenSpeakers' Bureau: Amgen, Merck, Servier, Boston ScientificResearch Funding: Sanofi, BayerTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Roche, Ipsen William P. HarrisConsulting or Advisory Role: Neo Therma, Eisai, Exelixis, Bristol Myers Squibb, QED Therapeutics, Zymeworks, BD Medical, MerckResearch Funding: ArQule, Exelixis, Halozyme, Bristol Myers Squibb, MedImmune, Agios, Bayer, Merck, BTG, Boston Scientific, Koo Foundation, ZymeworksTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Eisai Janet GrahamHonoraria: Merck Serono, Bristol Myers Squibb, Nucana, BayerConsulting or Advisory Role: Merck KGaATravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Nucana Jamie MillsTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: GenesisCare UK Matthew S. JohnsonStock and Other Ownership Interests: Endoshape, FluidXConsulting or Advisory Role: Argon Medical Devices, Boston Scientific, Cook MedicalResearch Funding: Argon Medical Devices, Boston Scientific, Black SwanExpert Testimony: Argon Medical Devices Constantinos T. SofocleousHonoraria: Ethicon/Johnson & JohnsonConsulting or Advisory Role: Varian Medical Systems, BTG, Sirtex Medical, TerumoSpeakers' Bureau: Ethicon/Johnson & JohnsonResearch Funding: BTG, Ethicon, Sirtex MedicalTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Ethicon/Johnson & Johnson, Terumo Siddharth A. PadiaConsulting or Advisory Role: Boston Scientific, Bristol Meyer Squibb, Johnson & Johnson, Teleflex Medical, Varian Medical SystemsResearch Funding: Varian Medical Systems Robert J. LewandowskiConsulting or Advisory Role: Boston Scientific, BD Bard, Varian Medical Systems, ABKSpeakers' Bureau: Boston Scientific Etienne GarinHonoraria: BTG/Boston ScientificConsulting or Advisory Role: BTG/Boston ScientificTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: BTG/Boston Scientific Philip SinclairEmployment: Boston ScientificStock and Other Ownership Interests: Boston Scientific Riad SalemConsulting or Advisory Role: Eisai, Bard Medical, Cook Medical, Boston Scientific, Sirtex Medical, AstraZeneca, QED Therapeutics, Genentech/Roche, SiemensResearch Funding: Boston ScientificNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Purpose: The contemporary management of early-stage Hodgkin lymphoma (ES-HL) involves balancing the risk of late adverse effects of radiotherapy against the increased risk of relapse if radiotherapy is omitted. This study provides information on the risk of radiation-related cardiovascular disease to help personalize the delivery of radiotherapy in ES-HL., Methods: We predicted 30-year absolute cardiovascular risk from chemotherapy and involved field radiotherapy in patients who were positron emission tomography (PET)-negative following three cycles of doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine chemotherapy within a UK randomized trial of PET-directed therapy for ES-HL. Cardiac and carotid radiation doses and chemotherapy exposure were combined with established dose-response relationships and population-based mortality and incidence rates., Results: Average mean heart dose was 4.0 Gy (range 0.1-24.0 Gy) and average bilateral common carotid artery dose was 21.5 Gy (range 0.6-38.1 Gy), based on individualized cardiovascular dosimetry for 144 PET-negative patients receiving involved field radiotherapy. The average predicted 30-year radiation-related absolute excess overall cardiovascular mortality was 0.56% (range 0.01%-6.79%; < 0.5% in 67% of patients and > 1% in 15%), whereas average predicted 30-year excess incidence was 6.24% (range 0.31%-31.09%; < 5% in 58% of patients and > 10% in 24%). For cardiac disease, the average predicted 30-year radiation-related absolute excess mortality was 0.42% (0.79% with mediastinal involvement and 0.05% without) and for stroke, it was 0.14%., Conclusion: Predicted excess cardiovascular risk is small for most patients, so radiotherapy may provide net benefit. However, for a minority of patients receiving high doses of radiation to cardiovascular structures, it may be preferable to consider advanced radiotherapy techniques to reduce doses or to omit radiotherapy and accept the increased relapse risk. Individual assessment of cardiovascular and other risks before treatment would allow personalized decision making about radiotherapy in ES-HL., Competing Interests: Johanna RamrothEmployment: Gilead Sciences (I)Stock and Other Ownership Interests: Gilead Sciences Laura Clifton-HadleyResearch Funding: Various pharmaceutical companies Peter J. HoskinResearch Funding: Varian Medical Systems, Astellas Pharma, Bayer, Roche, Pfizer, Elekta John RadfordStock and Other Ownership Interests: AstraZeneca, ADC TherapeuticsHonoraria: Takeda, ADC TherapeuticsConsulting or Advisory Role: Takeda, Seattle Genetics, NovartisSpeakers' Bureau: Takeda, Seattle Genetics, NovartisResearch Funding: TakedaTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Takeda, ADC Therapeutics Tim IllidgeConsulting or Advisory Role: Takeda, Nordic NanovectorSpeakers' Bureau: Takeda, Bristol Myers Squibb, RocheResearch Funding: AstraZeneca/MedImmune, MSD OncologyTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: RocheNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Purpose: Although docetaxel is not recommended when managing men with unfavorable-risk prostate cancer (PC) given negative or inconclusive results from previous randomized trials, unstudied benefits may exist., Methods: Between September 21, 2005, and January 13, 2015, we randomly assigned 350 men 1:1 with T1c-4N0M0 unfavorable-risk PC to receive radiation therapy (RT) and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) plus docetaxel (60 mg/m 2 once every 3 weeks for three cycles before RT and 20 mg/m 2 once weekly during RT) versus ADT + RT. We evaluated the treatment effect of adding docetaxel to ADT + RT on the primary end point of overall survival (OS) and the incidence of RT-induced cancers and explored whether the impact of the treatment effect on OS differed within prostate-specific antigen (PSA) subgroups (< 4, > 20 v 4-20 ng/mL) using the interaction test for heterogeneity adjusted for age and PC prognostic factors., Results: After a median follow-up of 10.2 years, 89 men died (25.43%); of these, 42 from PC (47.19%). Although OS was not significantly increased in the docetaxel arm (the restricted mean survival time over 10 years was 9.11 v 8.82 years; P = .22), significantly fewer RT-induced cancers were observed (10-year estimates: 0.61% v 4.90%; age-adjusted hazard ratio of 0.13; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.97; P = .046). The treatment effect of adding docetaxel to ADT + RT on OS significantly differed in men with a PSA < 4 ng/mL versus 4-20 ng/mL (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.27 and 1.51, respectively) because of less PC-specific mortality on the docetaxel arm (0.00% v 28.57%) among men with PSA < 4 ng/mL., Conclusion: Adding docetaxel to ADT + RT did not prolong OS in men with unfavorable-risk PC, but decreased RT-induced cancer incidence, and may prolong OS in the subgroup of men with a PSA < 4 ng/mL by reducing PC-specific mortality., Competing Interests: Molly SullivanEmployment: Moderna Therapeutics, Elektrofi Jeffrey Y. WongResearch Funding: Accuray, Varian Medical Systems Philip W. KantoffLeadership: Context Therapeutics, XLinkStock and Other Ownership Interests: Placon, Druggablity Technologies, Context Therapeutics, Seer, Cogent Biosciences, Mirati Therapeutics, PrognomIQ, SynDevRx, XLinkConsulting or Advisory Role: Janssen, Merck, OncoCellMDX, Genentech/Roche, Tarveda Therapeutics, Druggablity Technologies, Progenity, Seer, Anji, Candel Therapeutics, Context Therapeutics, PrognomIQ, SynDevRx, Veru, XLinkPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Method for Predicting the Risk of Prostate Cancer Morbidity and Mortality, Predicting and Treating Prostate Cancer, Methods for Predicting Likelihood of Responding to Treatment, Chromosome Copy Number Gain as a Biomarker of Urothelial Carcinoma Lethality, Drug Combinations to Treat Cancer, Somatic ERCC2 Mutations Correlate With Cisplatin Sensitivity in Muscle-Invasive Urothelial Carcinoma (Patent), UpToDate Royalties, Wolters Kluwer Royalties, Methods and Kits for Determining Sensitivity to Cancer Treatment, Composition and Methods for Screening and Diagnosis of Prostate CancerOther Relationship: BayerOpen Payments Link: https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/physician/55315/summaryNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Purpose: To analyze the effect of radiation dose escalation to the primary tumor on local tumor control in definitive chemoradiation (dCRT) for patients with esophageal cancer., Patients and Methods: Patients with medically inoperable and/or irresectable esophageal carcinoma, referred for dCRT, were randomly assigned between a standard dose (SD) of 50.4 Gy/1.8 Gy for 5.5 weeks to the tumor and regional lymph nodes and a high dose (HD) up to a total dose of 61.6 Gy to the primary tumor. Chemotherapy consisted of courses of concurrent carboplatin (area under the curve 2) and paclitaxel (50 mg/m 2 ) in both arms once a week for 6 weeks. The primary end point was local progression-free survival., Results: Between September 2012 and June 2018, 260 patients were included. Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) was present in 61% of patients, and 39% had adenocarcinoma (AC). Radiation treatment was completed by 94%, and 85% had at least five courses of chemotherapy. The median follow-up time for all patients was 50 months. The 3-year local progression-free survival (LPFS) was 70% in the SD arm versus 73% in the HD arm (not significant). The LPFS for SCC and AC was 75% versus 79% and 61% versus 61% for SD and HD, respectively (not significant). The 3-year locoregional progression-free survival was 52% and 59% for the SD and HD arms, respectively ( P = .08). Overall, grade 4 and 5 common toxicity criteria were 12% and 5% in the SD arm versus 14% and 10% in the HD arm, respectively ( P = .15)., Conclusion: In dCRT for esophageal cancer, radiation dose escalation up to 61.6 Gy to the primary tumor did not result in a significant increase in local control over 50.4 Gy. The absence of a dose effect was observed in both AC and SCC., Competing Interests: Mark I. van Berge HenegouwenConsulting or Advisory Role: Medtronic, Johnson & Johnson, Mylan, Alesi SurgicalResearch Funding: Olympus, StrykerTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Johnson & Johnson Jeanin E. van HooftConsulting or Advisory Role: Boston Scientific, Cook Medical, Medtronic, Olympus Medical Systems Hanneke W. M. van LaarhovenConsulting or Advisory Role: Lilly/ImClone, Nordic Group, Bristol Myers Squibb, ServierResearch Funding: Bristol Myers Squibb, Bayer Schering Pharma, Celgene, Janssen-Cilag, Lilly, Nordic Group, Philips Healthcare, Roche, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Servier, Merck KGaATravel, Accommodations, Expenses: AstraZenecaNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Purpose: To evaluate the use of early assessment of chemotherapy responsiveness by positron emission tomography (PET) imaging to tailor therapy in patients with esophageal and esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma., Methods: After baseline PET, patients were randomly assigned to an induction chemotherapy regimen: modified oxaliplatin, leucovorin, and fluorouracil (FOLFOX) or carboplatin-paclitaxel (CP). Repeat PET was performed after induction; change in maximum standardized uptake value (SUV) from baseline was assessed. PET nonresponders (< 35% decrease in SUV) crossed over to the alternative chemotherapy during chemoradiation (50.4 Gy/28 fractions). PET responders (≥ 35% decrease in SUV) continued on the same chemotherapy during chemoradiation. Patients underwent surgery at 6 weeks postchemoradiation. Primary end point was pathologic complete response (pCR) rate in nonresponders after switching chemotherapy., Results: Two hundred forty-one eligible patients received Protocol treatment, of whom 225 had an evaluable repeat PET. The pCR rates for PET nonresponders after induction FOLFOX who crossed over to CP (n = 39) or after induction CP who changed to FOLFOX (n = 50) was 18.0% (95% CI, 7.5 to 33.5) and 20% (95% CI, 10 to 33.7), respectively. The pCR rate in responders who received induction FOLFOX was 40.3% (95% CI, 28.9 to 52.5) and 14.1% (95% CI, 6.6 to 25.0) in responders to CP. With a median follow-up of 5.2 years, median overall survival was 48.8 months (95% CI, 33.2 months to not estimable) for PET responders and 27.4 months (95% CI, 19.4 months to not estimable) for nonresponders. For induction FOLFOX patients who were PET responders, median survival was not reached., Conclusion: Early response assessment using PET imaging as a biomarker to individualize therapy for patients with esophageal and esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma was effective, improving pCR rates in PET nonresponders. PET responders to induction FOLFOX who continued on FOLFOX during chemoradiation achieved a promising 5-year overall survival of 53%., Competing Interests: Karyn A. GoodmanConsulting or Advisory Role: RenovoRx Tanios Bekaii-SaabConsulting or Advisory Role: Amgen, Ipsen, Lilly, Bayer, Roche/Genentech, AbbVie, Incyte, Immuneering, Seattle Genetics, Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Eisai, Daiichi Sankyo/UCB Japan, AstraZeneca, Exact Sciences, Natera, Treos Bio, Celularity, SOBI, BeiGene, Foundation MedicinePatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Patent WO/2018/183488 and Patent WO/2019/055687Other Relationship: Exelixis, Merck, AstraZeneca, Lilly, Pancreatic Cancer Action Network Daniel J. BoffaResearch Funding: Epic Sciences Wendy L. FrankelPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Patent title: Automated Identification of Tumor Buds. Application No.: 16/230,118. Filing date: December 21, 2018. Publication date: July 4, 2019. Applicant(s): Ohio State Innovation Foundation, Columbus, OH. Inventor(s): Metin Gurcan, Winston-Salem, NC; Wendy Frankel, Columbus, OH; Wei Chen, Columbus, OH; Ahmad Fauzi and Mohammad Faizal, Selangor, MY Anne NoonanConsulting or Advisory Role: Helsinn Healthcare, QED Therapeutics, Exelixis, Eisai Yelena Y. JanjigianStock and Other Ownership Interests: RgenixConsulting or Advisory Role: Pfizer, Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck Serono, Daiichi Sankyo, Rgenix, Bayer, Imugene, AstraZeneca, Lilly, Zymeworks, Seattle Genetics, Merck Sharpe and Dohme Corp, Michael J. Hennessy Associates, Jounce Therapeutics, Ono PharmaceuticalResearch Funding: Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer, Roche, Genentech, Rgenix, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, LillyOther Relationship: Paradigm, Clinical Care Options, Axis Medical Education, Research to Practice Paul J. ThurmesConsulting or Advisory Role: US OncologyTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: US Oncology Alan P. VenookConsulting or Advisory Role: Merck Sharp & Dohme, Array BioPharmaResearch Funding: Genentech/Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, AmgenPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Royalties from Now-UptoDate for authoring and maintaining two chaptersTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Genentech, Roche Jeffrey A. MeyerhardtHonoraria: Cota Healthcare, Taiho PharmaceuticalResearch Funding: Boston Biomedical Eileen M. O'ReillyConsulting or Advisory Role: Merck, Agios, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BeiGene, Berry Genomics, Celgene, CytomX Therapeutics, Debiopharm Group, Eisai, Exelixis/Ipsen, Flatiron Health, Incyte, Janssen, LAM Therapeutics, Lilly, Loxo, Genentech/Roche, Minapharma, QED Therapeutics, RedHill Biopharma, Sillajen, SOBI, Yiviva, Autem Medical, Gilead Sciences, Ipsen, Silenseed, TheraBionic, twoXAR, Vector HealthResearch Funding: AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Acta Biologica, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Genentech, Halozyme, MabVax, Roche, Silenseed David H. IlsonConsulting or Advisory Role: Lilly/ImClone, Roche/Genentech, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pieris Pharmaceuticals, Merck, Bayer, AstraZeneca, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Astellas Pharma, IQvia, MacrogenicsNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Purpose: To improve curability and limit long-term adverse effects for newly diagnosed early-stage (ES), unfavorable-risk Hodgkin lymphoma., Methods: In this multicenter study with four sequential cohorts, patients received four cycles of brentuximab vedotin (BV) and doxorubicin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (AVD). If positron emission tomography (PET)-4-negative, patients received 30-Gy involved-site radiotherapy in cohort 1, 20-Gy involved-site radiotherapy in cohort 2, 30-Gy consolidation-volume radiotherapy in cohort 3, and no radiotherapy in cohort 4. Eligible patients had ES, unfavorable-risk disease. Bulk disease defined by Memorial Sloan Kettering criteria (> 7 cm in maximal transverse or coronal diameter on computed tomography) was not required for cohorts 1 and 2 but was for cohorts 3 and 4. The primary end point was to evaluate safety for cohort 1 and to evaluate complete response rate by PET for cohorts 2-4., Results: Of the 117 patients enrolled, 116 completed chemotherapy, with the median age of 32 years: 50% men, 98% stage II, 86% Memorial Sloan Kettering-defined disease bulk, 27% traditional bulk (> 10 cm), 52% elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate, 21% extranodal involvement, and 56% > 2 involved lymph node sites. The complete response rate in cohorts 1-4 was 93%, 100%, 93%, and 97%, respectively. With median follow-up of 3.8 years (5.9, 4.5, 2.5, and 2.2 years for cohorts 1-4), the overall 2-year progression-free and overall survival were 94% and 99%, respectively. In cohorts 1-4, the 2-year progression-free survival was 93%, 97%, 90%, and 97%, respectively. Adverse events included neutropenia (44%), febrile neutropenia (8%), and peripheral neuropathy (54%), which was largely reversible., Conclusion: BV + AVD × four cycles is a highly active and well-tolerated treatment program for ES, unfavorable-risk Hodgkin lymphoma, including bulky disease. The efficacy of BV + AVD supports the safe reduction or elimination of consolidative radiation among PET-4-negative patients., Competing Interests: Anita KumarStock and Other Ownership Interests: BridgebioConsulting or Advisory Role: Celgene, Kite, a Gilead company, AstraZenecaResearch Funding: AbbVie/Genentech, Adaptive Biotechnologies, Celgene, Seattle Genetics, AstraZeneca, Pharmacyclics Carla CasuloHonoraria: Gilead SciencesResearch Funding: Celgene, Verastem, Gilead SciencesTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Gilead Sciences, Roche Ranjana H. AdvaniConsulting or Advisory Role: Genentech/Roche, Seattle Genetics, Takeda, Portola Pharmaceuticals, Celgene, Sanofi, Kura Oncology, Merck, Karyopharm Therapeutics, ADC Therapeutics, Daiichi Sankyo, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Epizyme, IncyteResearch Funding: Millennium, Seattle Genetics, Genentech/Roche, Pharmacyclics, Janssen, Merck, Kura Oncology, Regeneron, Forty Seven, Cyteir Elizabeth BuddeHonoraria: AstraZenecaConsulting or Advisory Role: Roche/Genentech, Kite/Gilead, NovartisSpeakers' Bureau: Kite, a Gilead company, AstraZenecaResearch Funding: Merck, Amgen, MustangBio, AstraZenecaPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: CCR4 CAR T cells for treatment of patients with CCR4 positive cancer, CD33CAR for treatment of patients with CD33+ acute myeloid leukemiaTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Roche/Genentech, Kite/Gilead, AstraZeneca Paul M. BarrConsulting or Advisory Role: Pharmacyclics, AbbVie, Seattle Genetics, Genentech, Novartis, Infinity Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, Merck, TG Therapeutics, MorphoSys, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, MEI Pharma, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, BayerResearch Funding: Pharmacyclics, AstraZeneca Connie L. BatleviStock and Other Ownership Interests: Moderna Therapeutics, Novavax, Pfizer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Regeneron, ViatrisHonoraria: DAVAOncologyConsulting or Advisory Role: Lifesci Capital, GLG, Juno Therapeutics, Celgene, Seattle Genetics, Kite, a Gilead company, TG Therapeutics, Karyopharm TherapeuticsResearch Funding: Janssen Biotech, Novartis, Epizyme, Xynomic Pharma, Bayer, Roche, AutolusOpen Payments Link: https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/physician/2778694 Philip CaronStock and Other Ownership Interests: AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson/Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Teva Louis S. ConstineHonoraria: UpToDate, Springer, Lippincott Savita V. DandapaniResearch Funding: Bayer Pamela DrullinskyResearch Funding: Novartis Jonathan W. FriedbergConsulting or Advisory Role: Astellas Pharma, NovartisResearch Funding: Seattle GeneticsPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Patent on bone marrow microenvironment signals Paul A. HamlinConsulting or Advisory Role: Juno Therapeutics, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Celgene, Sandoz, AstraZeneca/MerckResearch Funding: Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, Seattle Genetics, Janssen, Portola Pharmaceuticals, GlaxoSmithKline, Molecular Templates, Incyte Richard T. HoppeStock and Other Ownership Interests: Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer Steven M. HorwitzConsulting or Advisory Role: Celgene, Millennium, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, Seattle Genetics, ADC Therapeutics, Portola Pharmaceuticals, Verastem, Takeda, Astex Pharmaceuticals, Kura Oncology, Acrotech Biopharma, C4 Therapeutics, Janssen Oncology, Trillium Therapeutics, Vividion Therapeutics, Myeloid Therapeutics, Ono PharmaceuticalResearch Funding: Celgene, Seattle Genetics, Takeda, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, Aileron Therapeutics, ADC Therapeutics, Verastem, Forty Seven, Trillium Therapeutics, Daiichi Sankyo, Affimed Therapeutics, Corvus Pharmaceuticals Niloufer KhanResearch Funding: Seattle Genetics Matthew J. MatasarStock and Other Ownership Interests: MerckHonoraria: Genentech, Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Bayer, Pharmacyclics, Janssen, Seattle Genetics, Takeda, IGM Biosciences, ImmunovaccineConsulting or Advisory Role: Genentech, Bayer, Merck, Juno Therapeutics, Roche, Teva, Rocket Medical, Seattle Genetics, Daiichi Sankyo, TakedaResearch Funding: Genentech, Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Bayer, Pharmacyclics, Janssen, Rocket Medical, Seattle Genetics, Immunovaccine, IGM BiosciencesTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Genentech, Roche, Seattle Genetics, Bayer Alison J. MoskowitzHonoraria: Seattle GeneticsConsulting or Advisory Role: Seattle Genetics, Takeda, Imbrium Therapeutics, Merck, Janpix, Kyowa Kirin International, miRagen, ADC Therapeutics, Bristol Myers SquibbResearch Funding: Incyte, Seattle Genetics, Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, miRagen, ADC Therapeutics Ariela NoyConsulting or Advisory Role: MorphoSys, Janssen Biotech, Prime OncologyResearch Funding: Pharmacyclics, Rafael PharmaceuticalsTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Pharmacyclics, Janssen Oncology Maria Lia PalombaStock and Other Ownership Interests: Seres TherapeuticsHonoraria: Merck, Celgene, Pharmacyclics, Flagship Biosciences, Novartis, Evelo Therapeutics, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Therakos, Amgen, Seres TherapeuticsConsulting or Advisory Role: Merck, Celgene, Flagship Biosciences, Novartis, Evelo Therapeutics, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Therakos, Amgen, Seres Therapeutics, Kite, Gilead Company, NovartisResearch Funding: Seres TherapeuticsPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Intellectual Property Rights, Juno intellectual property rights David J. StrausConsulting or Advisory Role: Takeda, Seattle Genetics Anas YounesEmployment: AstraZenecaStock and Other Ownership Interests: AstraZenecaHonoraria: Merck, Roche, Takeda, Janssen, AbbVie, Curis, EpizymeConsulting or Advisory Role: Bio-Path Holdings Inc, Xynomic Pharma, Epizyme, Roche, Celgene, HCMResearch Funding: Janssen, Curis, Roche, Genentech, Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, SyndaxOther Relationship: AstraZeneca Andrew D. ZelenetzHonoraria: NCCN, Clinical Care Options, Oncology Information Group, PER, PlexusConsulting or Advisory Role: Gilead Sciences, Amgen, Genentech/Roche, Celgene, AstraZeneca, DAVAOncology, MorphoSys, BeiGene, MEI Pharma, Vaniam Group, Verastem, Pharmacyclics, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Debiopharm Group, Seattle Genetics, Quant Health Ltd, Kite, Gilead Company, Curis, Coherus Biosciences, Juno/Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb, Curio ScienceResearch Funding: Genentech/Roche, Gilead Sciences, MEI Pharma, BeiGene Craig H. MoskowitzConsulting or Advisory Role: Merck Sharp & Dohme, Molecular Templates, Takeda, AstraZeneca, IncyteResearch Funding: AstraZeneca, Merck Sharp & DohmeNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Purpose: Brentuximab vedotin, an effective anti-CD30 antibody-drug conjugate approved for use in adults with classical Hodgkin lymphoma (HL), was introduced in this frontline trial to reduce prescribed radiation in children and adolescents with classical HL., Methods: Open-label, single-arm, multicenter trial for patients (age ≤ 18 years) with stage IIB, IIIB, or IV classical HL was conducted. Brentuximab vedotin replaced each vincristine in the OEPA/COPDac (vincristine, etoposide, prednisone, and doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide, vincristine, prednisone, and dacarbazine) regimen according to GPOH-HD2002 treatment group 3 (TG3); two cycles of AEPA and four cycles of CAPDac. Residual node radiotherapy (25.5 Gy) was given at the end of all chemotherapy only to nodal sites that did not achieve a complete response (CR) at the early response assessment (ERA) after two cycles of therapy. Primary objectives were to evaluate the safety and efficacy (complete remission at ERA) of this combination and the 3-year event-free (EFS) and overall survival (OS). The trials are registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT01920932)., Results: Of the 77 patients enrolled in the study, 27 (35%) achieved complete remission at ERA and were spared radiation. Patients who were irradiated received radiation to individual residual nodal tissue. At a median follow-up of 3.4 years, the 3-year EFS was 97.4% (SE 2.3%) and the OS was 98.7% (SE 1.6%). One irradiated patient experienced disease progression at the end of therapy and now remains disease free more than 6 years following salvage therapy, and one unexpected death occurred. Only 4% of patients experienced grade 3 neuropathy., Conclusion: The integration of brentuximab vedotin in the frontline treatment of pediatric high-risk HL is highly tolerable, facilitated significant reduction in radiation exposure, and yielded excellent outcomes., Competing Interests: Monika L. MetzgerResearch Funding: Seattle Genetics Michael P. LinkConsulting or Advisory Role: Incyte, ADC Therapeutics, Lilly, Steba Biotech, Mesoblast, GlaxoSmithKline, SyndaxResearch Funding: Seattle Genetics, Janssen Oncology Jamie FlerlageResearch Funding: Seattle Genetics Matthew J. EhrhardtHonoraria: Optum Torunn I. YockConsulting or Advisory Role: Huron Consulting Services, LLCResearch Funding: MIM Software Sue C. KasteStock and Other Ownership Interests: GE Healthcare Barry ShulkinConsulting or Advisory Role: Navidea Melissa M. HudsonConsulting or Advisory Role: Oncology Research Information Exchange Network, Princess Máxima Center Matthew J. KrasinConsulting or Advisory Role: Debiopharm GroupNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Purpose: Reducing radiation treatment dose could improve the quality of life (QOL) of patients with good-risk human papillomavirus-associated oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC). Whether reduced-dose radiation produces disease control and QOL equivalent to standard chemoradiation is not proven., Patients and Methods: In this randomized, phase II trial, patients with p16-positive, T1-T2 N1-N2b M0, or T3 N0-N2b M0 OPSCC (7th edition staging) with ≤ 10 pack-years of smoking received 60 Gy of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) over 6 weeks with concurrent weekly cisplatin (C) or 60 Gy IMRT over 5 weeks. To be considered for a phase III study, an arm had to achieve a 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate superior to a historical control rate of 85% and a 1-year mean composite score ≥ 60 on the MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI)., Results: Three hundred six patients were randomly assigned and eligible. Two-year PFS for IMRT + C was 90.5% rejecting the null hypothesis of 2-year PFS ≤ 85% ( P = .04). For IMRT, 2-year PFS was 87.6% ( P = .23). One-year MDADI mean scores were 85.30 and 81.76 for IMRT + C and IMRT, respectively. Two-year overall survival rates were 96.7% for IMRT + C and 97.3% for IMRT. Acute adverse events (AEs) were defined as those occurring within 180 days from the end of treatment. There were more grade 3-4 acute AEs for IMRT + C (79.6% v 52.4%; P < .001). Rates of grade 3-4 late AEs were 21.3% and 18.1% ( P = .56)., Conclusion: The IMRT + C arm met both prespecified end points justifying advancement to a phase III study. Higher rates of grade ≥ 3 acute AEs were reported in the IMRT + C arm.

Purpose: The aim of this joint guideline is to provide evidence-based recommendations to practicing physicians and other healthcare providers on definitive-intent chemoradiotherapy for patients with stage II-IVA nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC)., Methods: The Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO) and ASCO convened an expert panel of radiation oncology, medical oncology, surgery, and advocacy representatives. The literature search included systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials published from 1990 through 2020. Outcomes of interest included survival, distant and locoregional disease control, and quality of life. Expert panel members used this evidence and informal consensus to develop evidence-based guideline recommendations., Results: The literature search identified 108 relevant studies to inform the evidence base for this guideline. Five overarching clinical questions were addressed, which included subquestions on radiotherapy (RT), chemotherapy sequence, and concurrent, induction, and adjuvant chemotherapy options., Recommendations: Evidence-based recommendations were developed to address aspects of care related to chemotherapy in combination with RT for the definitive-intent treatment of stage II to IVA NPC.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/head-neck-cancer-guidelines.

Purpose: Total body irradiation (TBI) before allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) in pediatric patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) is efficacious, but long-term side effects are concerning. We investigated whether preparative combination chemotherapy could replace TBI in such patients., Patients and Methods: FORUM is a randomized, controlled, open-label, international, multicenter, phase III, noninferiority study. Patients ≤ 18 years at diagnosis, 4-21 years at HSCT, in complete remission pre-HSCT, and with an HLA-compatible related or unrelated donor were randomly assigned to myeloablative conditioning with fractionated 12 Gy TBI and etoposide versus fludarabine, thiotepa, and either busulfan or treosulfan. The noninferiority margin was 8%. With 1,000 patients randomly assigned in 5 years, 2-year minimum follow-up, and one-sided alpha of 5%, 80% power was calculated. A futility stopping rule would halt random assignment if chemoconditioning was significantly inferior to TBI (EudraCT: 2012-003032-22; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01949129)., Results: Between April 2013 and December 2018, 543 patients were screened, 417 were randomly assigned, 212 received TBI, and 201 received chemoconditioning. The stopping rule was applied on March 31, 2019. The median follow-up was 2.1 years. In the intention-to-treat population, 2-year overall survival (OS) was significantly higher following TBI (0.91; 95% CI, 0.86 to 0.95; P < .0001) versus chemoconditioning (0.75; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.81). Two-year cumulative incidence of relapse and treatment-related mortality were 0.12 (95% CI, 0.08 to 0.17; P < .0001) and 0.02 (95% CI, < 0.01 to 0.05; P = .0269) following TBI and 0.33 (95% CI, 0.25 to 0.40) and 0.09 (95% CI, 0.05 to 0.14) following chemoconditioning, respectively., Conclusion: Improved OS and lower relapse risk were observed following TBI plus etoposide compared with chemoconditioning. We therefore recommend TBI plus etoposide for patients > 4 years old with high-risk ALL undergoing allogeneic HSCT.

Purpose: In men with localized prostate cancer, the addition of androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) or a brachytherapy boost (BT) to external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) have been shown to improve various oncologic end points. Practice patterns indicate that those who receive BT are significantly less likely to receive ADT, and thus we sought to perform a network meta-analysis to compare the predicted outcomes of a randomized trial of EBRT plus ADT versus EBRT plus BT., Materials and Methods: A systematic review identified published randomized trials comparing EBRT with or without ADT, or EBRT (with or without ADT) with or without BT, that reported on overall survival (OS). Standard fixed-effects meta-analyses were performed for each comparison, and a meta-regression was conducted to adjust for use and duration of ADT. Network meta-analyses were performed to compare EBRT plus ADT versus EBRT plus BT. Bayesian analyses were also performed, and a rank was assigned to each treatment after Markov Chain Monte Carlo analyses to create a surface under the cumulative ranking curve., Results: Six trials compared EBRT with or without ADT (n = 4,663), and 3 compared EBRT with or without BT (n = 718). The addition of ADT to EBRT improved OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.71 [95% CI, 0.62 to 0.81]), whereas the addition of BT did not significantly improve OS (HR, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.78 to 1.36]). In a network meta-analysis, EBRT plus ADT had improved OS compared with EBRT plus BT (HR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.52 to 0.89]). Bayesian modeling demonstrated an 88% probability that EBRT plus ADT resulted in superior OS compared with EBRT plus BT., Conclusion: Our findings suggest that current practice patterns of omitting ADT with EBRT plus BT may result in inferior OS compared with EBRT plus ADT in men with intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer. ADT for these men should remain a critical component of treatment regardless of radiotherapy delivery method until randomized evidence demonstrates otherwise.

Purpose: Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) presents as a limited-stage disease in 25% to 30% of patients, with better overall survival (OS) than that for advanced-stage disease but with continuous relapse regardless of treatment approach. The preferred treatment is abbreviated rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) and radiation therapy. On the basis of promising results of positron emission tomography (PET)-directed treatment approaches, we designed a National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN) study to improve outcomes and decrease toxicity., Methods: Patients with nonbulky (< 10 cm) stage I/II untreated DLBCL received 3 cycles of standard R-CHOP therapy and underwent a centrally reviewed interim PET/computed tomography scan (iPET). Those with a negative iPET proceeded with 1 additional cycle of R-CHOP, whereas those with a positive iPET received involved field radiation therapy followed by ibritumomab tiuxetan radioimmunotherapy., Results: Of 158 patients enrolled, 132 were eligible and 128 underwent iPET, which was positive in 14 (11%) of the patients. With a median follow-up of 4.92 years (range, 1.1-7.7 years), only 6 patients progressed and 3 died as a result of lymphoma. Eleven patients died as a result of nonlymphoma causes at a median age of 80 years. The 5-year progression-free survival estimate was 87% (95% CI, 79% to 92%) and the OS estimate was 89% (95% CI, 82% to 94%), with iPET-positive and iPET-negative patients having similar outcomes., Conclusion: To our knowledge, S1001 is the largest prospective study in the United States of limited-stage DLBCL in the rituximab era, with the best NCTN results in this disease subset. With PET-directed therapy, 89% of the patients with a negative iPET received R-CHOP × 4, and only 11% had a positive iPET and required radiation, with both groups having excellent outcomes. The trial establishes R-CHOP × 4 alone as the new standard approach to limited-stage disease for the absolute majority of patients.

Purpose: The treatment of childhood nasopharyngeal carcinoma has been adapted from adult regimens; pediatric-specific studies are limited. The ARAR0331 study sought to evaluate the impact of induction chemotherapy (IC) and concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCR)., Patients and Methods: Patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer stages IIb to IV were scheduled to receive three cycles of IC with cisplatin and fluorouracil, followed by CCR with three cycles of cisplatin. Patients with complete or partial response to IC received 61.2 Gy to the nasopharynx and neck, and patients with stable disease received 71.2 Gy., Results: Between February 2006 and January 2012, 111 patients (75 male) were enrolled. Median age was 15 years, and 46.8% of the patients were African American. After a feasibility analysis, the study was amended to reduce cisplatin to two cycles during CCR. The 5-year event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival estimates were 84.3% and 89.2%, respectively. The 5-year EFS for stages IIb, III, and IV were 100%, 82.8%, and 82.7%, respectively. The 5-year cumulative incidence estimates of local, distant, and combined relapse were 3.7%, 8.7%, and 1.8%, respectively. Patients treated with three versus two CCR cycles of cisplatin had improved 5-year postinduction EFS (90.7% v 81.2%, P = .14)., Conclusion: Patients in ARAR0331 were characterized by advanced disease and by a high proportion of black children and adolescents. Treatment with IC and CRT resulted in excellent outcomes. A radiation dose reduction is possible for patients responding to IC. Although the outcomes are comparable, we observed a trend toward decreased EFS for patients assigned to receive fewer doses of cisplatin during CCR.

Purpose: Stratum 1 of ACNS1123 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01602666), a Children's Oncology Group phase II trial, evaluated efficacy of reduced-dose and volume of radiotherapy (RT) in children and adolescents with localized nongerminomatous germ cell tumors (NGGCTs). The primary objective was to evaluate the impact of reduced RT on progression-free survival (PFS) with a goal of preserving neurocognitive function., Patients and Methods: Patients received six cycles of chemotherapy with carboplatin and etoposide alternating with ifosfamide and etoposide, as used in the Children's Oncology Group predecessor study (ACNS0122; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00047320). Patients who achieved a complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) with or without second-look surgery were eligible for reduced RT, defined as 30.6 Gy whole ventricular field and 54 Gy tumor-bed boost, compared with 36 Gy craniospinal irradiation plus 54 Gy tumor-bed boost used in ACNS0122., Results: A total of 107 eligible patients were enrolled. Median age was 10.98 years (range, 3.68 to 21.63) and 75% were male. Sixty-six of 107 (61.7%) achieved a CR or PR and proceeded to reduced RT. The 3-year PFS and overall survival and standard error values were 87.8% ± 4.04% and 92.4% ± 3.3% compared with 92% and 94.1%, respectively, in ACNS0122. There were 10 recurrences, prompting early study closure; however, after a retrospective central review, only disease in eight of 66 (12.1%) patients eligible for reduced RT subsequently progressed; six patients had distant spinal relapse alone and two had disease with combined local plus distant relapse. Serum and CSF α-fetoprotein and β-human chorionic gonadotropin levels were not associated with PFS., Conclusion: Patients with localized NGGCT who achieved a CR or PR to chemotherapy and received reduced RT had encouraging PFS similar to patients in ACNS0122 who received full-dose craniospinal irradiation. However, the patterns of failure were distinct, with all patients having treatment failure in the spine.

Purpose: Multimodal therapy is a well-established approach for the treatment of sinonasal undifferentiated carcinoma (SNUC); however, the optimal sequence of the various treatments modalities is yet to be determined. This study aimed to assess the role of induction chemotherapy (IC) in guiding definitive therapy in patients with SNUC., Methods: Ninety-five previously untreated patients diagnosed with SNUC and treated between 2001 and 2018 at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center were included in the analysis. Patients were treated with curative intent and received IC before definitive locoregional therapy. The primary end point was disease-specific survival (DSS). Secondary end points included overall and disease-free survival, disease recurrence, and organ preservation., Results: A total of 95 treatment-naïve patients were included in the analysis. For the entire cohort, the 5-years DSS probability was 59% (95% CI, 53% to 66%). In patients who had partial or complete response to IC, the 5-year DSS probabilities were 81% (95% CI, 69% to 88%) after treatment with definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) after IC and 54% (95% CI, 44% to 61%) after definitive surgery and postoperative radiotherapy or CRT after IC (log-rank P = .001). In patients who did not experience at least a partial response to IC, the 5-year DSS probabilities were 0% (95% CI, 0% to 4%) in patients who were treated with concurrent CRT after IC and 39% (95% CI, 30% to 46%) in patients who were treated with surgery plus radiotherapy or CRT (adjusted hazard ratio of 5.68 [95% CI, 2.89 to 9.36])., Conclusion: In patients who achieve a favorable response to IC, definitive CRT results in improved survival compared with those who undergo definitive surgery. In patients who do not achieve a favorable response to IC, surgery when feasible seems to provide a better chance of disease control and improved survival.

Purpose: Intraocular retinoblastoma is curable, but survivors with a heritable predisposition are at high risk for second malignancies. Because second malignancies are associated with high mortality, prognostic factors for second malignancy influence long-term overall survival. This study investigates the impact of all types of eye-preserving therapies on long-term survival in the complete German cohort of patients with heritable retinoblastoma., Patients and Methods: Overall survival, disease staging using international scales, time period of diagnosis, and treatment type were analyzed in the 633 German children treated at the national reference center for heritable retinoblastoma., Results: The 5-year overall survival of children diagnosed in Germany with heritable retinoblastoma between 1940 and 2008 was 93.2% (95% CI, 91.2% to 95.1%), but long-term mortality was increased compared with patients with nonheritable disease. Overall survival correlated with tumor staging, and 92% of patients were diagnosed with a favorable tumor stage (International Retinoblastoma Staging System stage 0 or I). Despite a 5-year overall survival of 97.4% (95% CI, 96.0% to 98.8%) in patients with stage 0 or I, only 79.5% (95% CI, 74.2% to 84.8%) of these patients survived 40 years after diagnosis. Long-term overall survival was reduced in children treated with eye-preserving radiotherapy compared with enucleation alone, and adding chemotherapy aggravated this effect., Conclusion: The benefits of preserving vision must be balanced with the impact of eye-preserving treatments on long-term survival in heritable retinoblastoma, and the genetic background of the patient influences choice of eye-preserving treatment. Germline RB1 genetic analysis is important to identify heritable retinoblastoma among unilateral retinoblastoma cases. Eye-preserving radiotherapy should be carefully considered in patients with germline RB1 mutations. Life-long oncologic follow-up is crucial for all retinoblastoma survivors, and less detrimental eye-preserving therapies must be developed., (© 2016 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Purpose: The aim of this large multicenter study was to assess the impact of salvage esophagectomy after definitive chemoradiotherapy (SALV) on clinical outcome., Patients and Methods: Data from consecutive adult patients undergoing resection for esophageal cancer in 30 European centers from 2000 to 2010 were collected. First, groups undergoing SALV (n = 308) and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by planned esophagectomy (NCRS; n = 540) were compared. Second, patients who benefited from SALV for persistent (n = 234) versus recurrent disease (n = 74) were compared. Propensity score matching and multivariable analyses were used to compensate for differences in some baseline characteristics., Results: SALV versus NCRS groups: In-hospital mortality was similar in both groups (8.4% v 9.3%). The only significant differences in complications were seen for anastomotic leak (17.2% v 10.7%; P = .007) and surgical site infection, which were both more frequent in the SALV group. At 3 years, groups had similar overall (43.3% v 40.1%; P = .542) and disease-free survival (39.2% v 32.8%; P = .232) after matching, along with a similar recurrence pattern. Persistent versus recurrent disease groups: There were no significant differences between groups in incidence of in-hospital mortality or major complications. At 3 years, overall (40.9% v 56.2%; P = .046) and disease-free survival (36.6% v 51.6%; P = .095) were lower in the persistent disease group., Conclusion: The results of this large multicenter study from the modern era suggest that SALV can offer acceptable short- and long-term outcomes in selected patients at experienced centers. Persistent cancer after definitive chemoradiotherapy seems to be more biologically aggressive, with poorer survival compared with recurrent cancer., (© 2015 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Purpose: We tested the efficacy and toxicity of cisplatin plus accelerated fractionation with a concomitant boost (AFX-C) versus standard fractionation (SFX) in locally advanced head and neck carcinoma (LA-HNC)., Patients and Methods: Patients had stage III to IV carcinoma of the oral cavity, oropharynx, hypopharynx, or larynx. Radiation therapy schedules were 70 Gy in 35 fractions over 7 weeks (SFX) or 72 Gy in 42 fractions over 6 weeks (AFX-C). Cisplatin doses were 100 mg/m(2) once every 3 weeks for two (AFX-C) or three (SFX) cycles. Toxicities were scored by using National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria 2.0 and the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group/European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer criteria. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) rates were estimated by using the Kaplan-Meier method and were compared by using the one-sided log-rank test. Locoregional failure (LRF) and distant metastasis (DM) rates were estimated by using the cumulative incidence method and Gray's test., Results: In all, 721 of 743 patients were analyzable (361, SFX; 360, AFX-C). At a median follow-up of 7.9 years (range, 0.3 to 10.1 years) for 355 surviving patients, no differences were observed in OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.96; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.18; P = .37; 8-year survival, 48% v 48%), PFS (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.84 to 1.24; P = .52; 8-year estimate, 42% v 41%), LRF (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.84 to 1.38; P = .78; 8-year estimate, 37% v 39%), or DM (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.56 to 1.24; P = .16; 8-year estimate, 15% v 13%). For oropharyngeal cancer, p16-positive patients had better OS than p16-negative patients (HR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.42; P < .001; 8-year survival, 70.9% v 30.2%). There were no statistically significant differences in the grade 3 to 5 acute or late toxicities between the two arms and p-16 status., Conclusion: When combined with cisplatin, AFX-C neither improved outcome nor increased late toxicity in patients with LA-HNC. Long-term high survival rates in p16-positive patients with oropharyngeal cancer support the ongoing efforts to explore deintensification., (© 2014 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Purpose: This prospective, randomized phase III intergroup trial of the Gynecologic Oncology Group and National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group was designed to test the effectiveness and safety of adding the hypoxic cell sensitizer tirapazamine (TPZ) to standard cisplatin (CIS) chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced cervix cancer., Patients and Methods: Patients with locally advanced cervix cancer were randomly assigned to CIS chemoradiotherapy versus CIS/TPZ chemoradiotherapy. Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included overall survival (OS) and tolerability., Results: PFS was evaluable in 387 of 402 patients randomly assigned over 36 months, with enrollment ending in September 2009. Because of the lack of TPZ supply, the study did not reach its original target accrual goal. At median follow-up of 28.3 months, PFS and OS were similar in both arms. Three-year PFS for the TPZ/CIS/RT and CIS/RT arms were 63.0% and 64.4%, respectively (log-rank P = .7869). Three-year OS for the TPZ/CIS/RT and CIS/RT arms were 70.5% and 70.6%, respectively (log-rank P = .8333). A scheduled interim safety analysis led to a reduction in the starting dose for the TPZ/CIS arm, with resulting tolerance in both treatment arms., Conclusion: TPZ/CIS chemoradiotherapy was not superior to CIS chemoradiotherapy in either PFS or OS, although definitive commentary was limited by an inadequate number of events (progression or death). TPZ/CIS chemoradiotherapy was tolerable at a modified starting dose.