Search

Brain metastases are an increasing global public health concern, even as survival rates improve for patients with metastatic disease. Both metastases and the sequelae of their treatment are key determinants of the inter-related priorities of patient survival, function, and quality of life, mandating a multidimensional approach to clinical care and research. At a virtual National Cancer Institute Workshop in September, 2022, key stakeholders convened to define research priorities to address the crucial areas of unmet need for patients with brain metastases to achieve meaningful advances in patient outcomes. This Policy Review outlines existing knowledge gaps, collaborative opportunities, and specific recommendations regarding consensus priorities and future directions in brain metastases research. Achieving major advances in research will require enhanced coordination between the ongoing efforts of individual organisations and consortia. Importantly, the continual and active engagement of patients and patient advocates will be necessary to ensure that the directionality of all efforts reflects what is most meaningful in the context of patient care.

BackgroundMeningiomas are the most common primary intracranial tumor in adults. Clinical care is currently guided by the World Health Organization (WHO) grade assigned to meningiomas, a 3-tiered grading system based on histopathology features, as well as extent of surgical resection. Clinical behavior, however, often fails to conform to the WHO grade. Additional prognostic information is needed to optimize patient management.MethodsWe evaluated whether chromosomal copy-number data improved prediction of time-to-recurrence for patients with meningioma who were treated with surgery, relative to the WHO schema. The models were developed using Cox proportional hazards, random survival forest, and gradient boosting in a discovery cohort of 527 meningioma patients and validated in 2 independent cohorts of 172 meningioma patients characterized by orthogonal genomic platforms.ResultsWe developed a 3-tiered grading scheme (Integrated Grades 1-3), which incorporated mitotic count and loss of chromosome 1p, 3p, 4, 6, 10, 14q, 18, 19, or CDKN2A. 32% of meningiomas reclassified to either a lower-risk or higher-risk Integrated Grade compared to their assigned WHO grade. The Integrated Grade more accurately identified meningioma patients at risk for recurrence, relative to the WHO grade, as determined by time-dependent area under the curve, average precision, and the Brier score.ConclusionWe propose a molecularly integrated grading scheme for meningiomas that significantly improves upon the current WHO grading system in prediction of progression-free survival. This framework can be broadly adopted by clinicians with relative ease using widely available genomic technologies and presents an advance in the care of meningioma patients.

PurposeConventional 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.MethodsA 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.ResultsSignificant 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.ConclusionMedian 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).

BackgroundBreast 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).MethodsA 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.ResultsThe 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).ConclusionsReceptor 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 points1. 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.

PurposeBrain 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 materialsA 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.ResultsMedian 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).ConclusionsMS 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.

BackgroundPatients 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.MethodsAn 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.ResultsMedian 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).ConclusionsBrain 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.

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.

PurposeThe integrated histopathologic and molecular diagnoses of the 2016 WHO classification of central nervous system tumors have revolutionized patient care by improving diagnostic accuracy and reproducibility; however, the frequency and consequences of misclassification of histologically diagnosed diffuse gliomas are unknown.Experimental designPatients with newly diagnosed ICD-O-3 (International Classification of Diseases) histologically encoded diffuse gliomas from 2010-2015 were identified from the National Cancer Database, the misclassification rates and overall survival (OS) of which were assessed by WHO grade and 1p/19q status. In addition, misclassification rates by isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH), ATRX, and p53 statuses were examined in an analogous multi-institutional cohort of registry-encoded diffuse gliomas.ResultsOf 74,718 patients with diffuse glioma, only 74.4% and 78.8% of molecularly characterized WHO grade II and III oligodendrogliomas were in fact 1p/19q-codeleted. In addition, 28.9% and 36.8% of histologically encoded grade II and III "oligoastrocytomas", and 6.3% and 8.8% of grade II and III astrocytomas had 1p/19q-codeletion, thus molecularly representing oligodendrogliomas if also IDH mutant. OS significantly depended on accurate WHO grading and 1p/19q status.ConclusionsOn the basis of 1p/19q, IDH, ATRX, and p53, the misclassification rates of histologically encoded oligodendrogliomas, astrocytomas, and glioblastomas are approximately 21%-35%, 6%-9%, and 9%, respectively; with significant clinical implications. Our findings suggest that when compared with historical histology-only classified data, in national registry, as well as, institutional databases, there is the potential for false-positive results in contemporary trials of molecularly classified diffuse gliomas, which could contribute to a seemingly positive phase II trial (based on historical comparison) failing at the phase III stage. Critically, findings from diffuse glioma clinical trials and historical cohorts using prior histology-only WHO schemes must be cautiously reinterpreted.

PurposeThe long-term prostate cancer-specific survival for patients initially managed with active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer ranges from 97% to 100%. We characterized factors that are associated with aggressive treatment with radical prostatectomy or radiation for indolent prostate cancer (defined as screening-detected, low-risk disease).MethodsThe Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program was used to extract a cohort of 39,803 men diagnosed with prostate-specific antigen-detected, low-risk prostate cancer (clinical category T1c, Gleason score ≤6, and prostate-specific antigen

PURPOSE: RET rearrangements and RET activating point mutations represent targetable genomic alterations in advanced solid tumors. However, the frequency and clinicopathologic characteristics of wild-type RET amplification in cancer and its potential role as a targetable oncogenic driver are not well-characterized. METHODS: In two institutional cohorts of patients with solid cancers from the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (DFCI) and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) whose tumors underwent next-generation sequencing (NGS), the frequency and clinicopathologic features of wild-type RET amplification in the absence of RET rearrangements or activating mutations was assessed. The findings were validated using merged data from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), Genomics Evidence Neoplasia Information Exchange (GENIE), and China Pan-Cancer data sets. RESULTS: The frequency of wild-type RET amplification across all solid cancers was 0.08% (26 of 32,505) in the DFCI cohort, 0.05% (26 of 53,152) in the MSKCC cohort, and 0.25% (71 of 28,623) in the cohort from TCGA, GENIE, and China Pan-Cancer. Cancer types with RET amplification included non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), hepatobiliary cancer, prostate cancer, breast cancer, and others. The median RET copy number in RET -amplified cases was 7.5 (range, 6-36) in the DFCI cohort and 5.7 (range, 4-27.7) in the MSKCC cohort. Among 11 RET -amplified NSCLCs, eight had no other concurrent driver mutations. Finally, we report on a 69-year-old man with recurrent NSCLC harboring high-level wild-type RET amplification (22-28 copies) as the only identified putative genomic driver who experienced both a systemic and intracranial confirmed response to the RET inhibitor selpercatinib. CONCLUSION: Amplification of wild-type RET represents a novel, targetable molecular subset of cancer. This study establishes wild-type RET amplification as a novel, actionable genomic subset of cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]