Search

Purpose The accuracy of target delineation for node-positive thoracic tumors is dependent on both four-dimensional computed tomography (4D-CT) and contrast-enhanced three-dimensional (3D)-CT images; these scans enable the motion visualization of tumors and delineate the nodal areas. Combining the two techniques would be more effective; however, currently, there is no standard protocol for the contrast media injection parameters for contrast-enhanced 4D-CT (CE-4D-CT) scans because of its long scan durations and complexity. Thus, we aimed to perform quantitative and qualitative assessments of the image quality of single contrast-enhanced 4D-CT scans to simplify this process and improve the accuracy of target delineation in order to replace the standard clinical modality involved in administering radiotherapy for thoracic tumors. Methods Ninety consecutive patients with thoracic tumors were randomly and parallelly assigned to one of nine subgroups subjected to CE-4D-CT scans with the administration of contrast agent volume equal to the patient’s weight but different flow rate and scan delay time (protocol A1: flow rate of 2.0 ml/s, delay time of 15 s; A2: 2.0 ml/s, 20 s; A3: 2.0 ml/s, 25 s; B1: 2.5 ml/s, 15 s; B2: 2.5 ml/s, 20 s; B3: 2.5 ml/s, 25 s; C1: 3.0 ml/s, 15 s; C2: 3.0 ml/s, 20 s; C3: 3.0 ml/s, 25 s). The Hounsfield unit (HU) values of the thoracic aorta, pulmonary artery stem, pulmonary veins, carotid artery, and jugular vein were acquired for each protocol. Both quantitative and qualitative image analysis and delineation acceptability were assessed. Results The results revealed significant differences among the nine protocols. Enhancement of the vascular structures in mediastinal and perihilar regions was more effective with protocol A1 or A2; however, when interested in the region of superior mediastinum and supraclavicular fossa, protocol C2 or C3 is recommended. Conclusion Qualitatively acceptable enhancement on contrast-enhanced 4D-CT images of thoracic tumors can be obtained by varying the flow rate and delay time when minimal contrast agent is used.

Background Although EGFR mutant tumors exhibit low response rates to immune checkpoint blockade overall, some EGFR mutant tumors do respond to these therapies; however, there is a lack of understanding of the characteristics of EGFR mutant lung tumors responsive to immune checkpoint blockade. Patients and methods We retrospectively analyzed de-identified clinical and molecular data on 171 cases of EGFR mutant lung tumors treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors from the Yale Cancer Center, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, University of California Los Angeles, and Dana Farber Cancer Institute. A separate cohort of 383 EGFR mutant lung cancer cases with sequencing data available from the Yale Cancer Center, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, and The Cancer Genome Atlas was compiled to assess the relationship between tumor mutation burden and specific EGFR alterations. Results Compared with 212 EGFR wild-type lung cancers, outcomes with programmed cell death 1 or programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-(L)1) blockade were worse in patients with lung tumors harboring alterations in exon 19 of EGFR (EGFRΔ19) but similar for EGFRL858R lung tumors. EGFRT790M status and PD-L1 expression did not impact response or survival outcomes to immune checkpoint blockade. PD-L1 expression was similar across EGFR alleles. Lung tumors with EGFRΔ19 alterations harbored a lower tumor mutation burden compared with EGFRL858R lung tumors despite similar smoking history. Conclusions EGFR mutant tumors have generally low response to immune checkpoint inhibitors, but outcomes vary by allele. Understanding the heterogeneity of EGFR mutant tumors may be informative for establishing the benefits and uses of PD-(L)1 therapies for patients with this disease.

Background In the ongoing phase I PROFILE 1001 study, crizotinib showed antitumor activity in patients with ROS1-rearranged advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Here, we present updated antitumor activity, overall survival (OS) and safety data (additional 46.2months follow-up) for patients with ROS1-rearranged advanced NSCLC from PROFILE 1001. Patients and methods ROS1 status was determined by FISH or reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction. All patients received crizotinib at a starting dose of 250mg twice daily. Results Fifty-three patients received crizotinib, with a median duration of treatment of 22.4months. At data cut-off, treatment was ongoing in 12 patients (23%). The objective response rate (ORR) was 72% [95% confidence interval (CI), 58% to 83%], including six confirmed complete responses and 32 confirmed partial responses; 10 patients had stable disease. Responses were durable (median duration of response 24.7months; 95% CI, 15.2–45.3). ORRs were consistent across different patient subgroups. Median progression-free survival was 19.3months (95% CI, 15.2–39.1). A total of 26 deaths (49%) occurred (median follow-up period of 62.6months), and of the remaining 27 patients (51%), 14 (26%) were in follow-up at data cut-off. Median OS was 51.4months (95% CI, 29.3 to not reached) and survival probabilities at 12, 24, 36, and 48months were 79%, 67%, 53%, and 51%, respectively. No correlation was observed between OS and specific ROS1 fusion partner. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were mainly grade 1 or 2, per CTCAE v3.0. There were no grade ≥4 TRAEs and no TRAEs associated with permanent discontinuation. No new safety signals were reported with long-term crizotinib treatment. Conclusions These findings serve as a new benchmark for OS in ROS1-rearranged advanced NSCLC, and continue to show the clinically meaningful benefit and safety of crizotinib in this molecular subgroup. Trial Registration Number ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00585195

Background ASP8273, a novel, small molecule, irreversible tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) specifically inhibits the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) in patients with activating mutations or EGFR T790M resistance mutations. The current study examines the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of ASP8273 versus erlotinib or gefitinib in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with activating EGFR mutations not previously treated with an EGFR inhibitor. Patients and methods This global, phase III, open-label, randomized study evaluated ASP8273 versus erlotinib/gefitinib in patients with locally advanced, metastatic, or unresectable stage IIIB/IV NSCLC with activating EGFR mutations. They were ineligible if they received prior chemotherapy for metastatic disease. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS), and secondary end points included overall survival, investigator-assessed PFS, best overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate, duration of response (DoR), and the safety/tolerability profile. Results Patients (n = 530) were randomized 1 : 1 to receive ASP8273 (n = 267) or erlotinib/gefitinib (n = 263). Patient demographics between both treatment groups were generally balanced. Median PFS was 9.3 months (95% CI 5.6–11.1 months) for patients receiving ASP8273 and 9.6 months (95% CI 8.8–NE) for the erlotinib/gefitinib group, with a hazard ratio of 1.611 (P = 0.992). The ORR in the ASP8273 group was 33% (95% CI 27.4–39.0) versus 47.9% (95% CI 41.7–54.1) in the erlotinib/gefitinib group. Median DoR was similar for both groups (9.2 months for ASP8273 versus 9.0 months for erlotinib/gefitinib). More grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in patients receiving ASP8273 than in those receiving erlotinib/gefitinib (54.7% versus 43.5%). An independent data monitoring committee carried out an interim safety analysis and recommended discontinuing the study due to toxicity and limited predicted efficacy of ASP8273 relative to erlotinib/gefitinib. Conclusions First-line ASP8273 did not show improved PFS or equivalent toxicities versus erlotinib/gefitinib. ClinicalTrial.gov number NCT02588261.

Objective: In this review, we evaluate the role of liquid biopsy in managing lung cancer patients during the still ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) healthcare emergency. Background: The novel influenza coronavirus (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus or SARSCoV-2) has upended several aspects of our lives, including medical activities. In this setting, many routine cancer diagnostic and therapeutic procedures have been suspended, leading to delays in diagnosis, treatments, and, ultimately, increases in cancer mortality rates. Equally drastic has been the impact of COVID-19 on clinical trials, many of which have been stalled or have never begun. This has left many patients who were hoping to receive innovative treatments in a limbo. Although, as of today, the introduction of drastic security measures has been crucially important to contain the pandemic, one cannot ignore the need to continue providing chronically ill patients all the health care they need, in terms of detection, prevention, and treatment. In these unprecedented times, liquid biopsy, more than ever before, may play a relevant role in the adequate management of these frail patients. Methods: we performed a deep analysis of the recent international literature published in English on PUBMED in the last six months focused on the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on the management of lung cancer patients, focusing the attention on the role of liquid biopsy. Conclusions: COVID-19 pandemic has significantly modified our lives and overall medical practice. In these unprecedented times, liquid biopsy may represent a valid and less time-consuming diagnostic approach than conventional tissue and cytological specimens. © Mediastinum. All rights reserved.

Background A major limitation of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) for somatic mutation detection has been the low level of ctDNA found in a subset of cancer patients. We investigated whether using a combined isolation of exosomal RNA (exoRNA) and cell-free DNA (cfDNA) could improve blood-based liquid biopsy for EGFR mutation detection in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Patients and methods Matched pretreatment tumor and plasma were collected from 84 patients enrolled in TIGER-X (NCT01526928), a phase 1/2 study of rociletinib in mutant EGFR NSCLC patients. The combined isolated exoRNA and cfDNA (exoNA) was analyzed blinded for mutations using a targeted next-generation sequencing panel (EXO1000) and compared with existing data from the same samples using analysis of ctDNA by BEAMing. Results For exoNA, the sensitivity was 98% for detection of activating EGFR mutations and 90% for EGFR T790M. The corresponding sensitivities for ctDNA by BEAMing were 82% for activating mutations and 84% for T790M. In a subgroup of patients with intrathoracic metastatic disease (M0/M1a; n = 21), the sensitivity increased from 26% to 74% for activating mutations (P = 0.003) and from 19% to 31% for T790M (P = 0.5) when using exoNA for detection. Conclusions Combining exoRNA and ctDNA increased the sensitivity for EGFR mutation detection in plasma, with the largest improvement seen in the subgroup of M0/M1a disease patients known to have low levels of ctDNA and poses challenges for mutation detection on ctDNA alone. Clinical Trials NCT01526928

Background The clinical significance of circulating tumour cells (CTCs) in limited-stage small-cell lung cancer (LS-SCLC) is not well defined. We report a planned exploratory analysis of the prevalence and prognostic value of CTCs in LS-SCLC patients enrolled within the phase III randomised CONVERT (concurrent once-daily versus twice-daily chemoradiotherapy) trial. Patients and methods Baseline blood samples were enumerated for CTCs using CellSearch in 75 patients with LS-SCLC who were enrolled in the CONVERT trial and randomised between twice- and once-daily concurrent chemoradiation. Standard statistical methods were used for correlations of CTCs with clinical factors. Log-rank test and Cox regression analyses were applied to establish the associations of 2, 15 and 50 CTC thresholds with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). An optimal CTC count threshold for LS-SCLC was established. Results CTCs were detected in 60% (45/75) of patients (range 0–3750). CTC count thresholds of 2, 15 and 50 CTCs all significantly correlate with PFS and OS. An optimal CTC count threshold in LS-SCLC was established at 15 CTCs, defining ‘favourable’ and ‘unfavourable’ prognostic risk groups. The median OS in

Background Combination of selumetinib plus docetaxel provided clinical benefit in a previous phase II trial for patients with KRAS-mutant advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The phase II SELECT-2 trial investigated safety and efficacy of selumetinib plus docetaxel for patients with advanced or metastatic NSCLC. Patients and methods Patients who had disease progression after first-line anti-cancer therapy were randomized (2 : 2 : 1) to selumetinib 75 mg b.i.d. plus docetaxel 60 or 75 mg/m2 (SEL + DOC 60; SEL + DOC 75), or placebo plus docetaxel 75 mg/m2 (PBO + DOC 75). Patients were initially enrolled independently of KRAS mutation status, but the protocol was amended to include only patients with centrally confirmed KRAS wild-type NSCLC. Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS; RECIST 1.1); statistical analyses compared each selumetinib group with PBO + DOC 75 for KRAS wild-type and overall (KRAS mutant or wild-type) populations. Results A total of 212 patients were randomized; 69% were KRAS wild-type. There were no statistically significant improvements in PFS or overall survival for overall or KRAS wild-type populations in either selumetinib group compared with PBO + DOC 75. Overall population median PFS for SEL + DOC 60, SEL + DOC 75 compared with PBO + DOC 75 was 3.0, 4.2, and 4.3 months, HRs: 1.12 (90% CI: 0.8, 1.61) and 0.92 (90% CI: 0.65, 1.31), respectively. In the overall population, a higher objective response rate (ORR; investigator assessed) was observed for SEL + DOC 75 (33%) compared with PBO + DOC 75 (14%); odds ratio: 3.26 (90% CI: 1.47, 7.95). Overall the tolerability profile of SEL + DOC was consistent with historical data, without new or unexpected safety concerns identified. Conclusion The primary end point (PFS) was not met. The higher ORR with SEL + DOC 75 did not translate into prolonged PFS for the overall or KRAS wild-type patient populations. No clinical benefit was observed with SEL + DOC in KRAS wild-type patients compared with docetaxel alone. No unexpected safety concerns were reported. Trial identifier Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01750281.

Background: Coagulation activation and venous thromboembolism (VTE) are hallmarks of malignant disease and represent a major cause of morbidity and mortality in cancer. Coagulation inhibition with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) may improve survival specifically in small cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients by preventing VTE and tumor progression; however, randomized trials with well-defined patient populations are needed to obtain conclusive data. The aim of RASTEN was to investigate the survival effect of LMWH enoxaparin in a homogenous population of SCLC patients.Patients and Methods: We performed a randomized, multicenter, open-label trial to investigate the addition of enoxaparin at a supraprophylactic dose (1 mg/kg) to standard treatment in patients with newly diagnosed SCLC. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), and secondary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS), incidence of VTE and hemorrhagic events.Results: In RASTEN, 390 patients were randomized over an 8-year period (2008-2016), of which 186 and 191 were included in the final analysis in the LMWH and control arm, respectively. We found no evidence of a difference in OS or PFS by the addition of enoxaparin (HR 1.11; 95% CI: 0.89-1.38, P=0.36 and HR 1.18; 95% CI: 0.95-1.46, P=0.14, respectively). Subgroup analysis of patients with limited and extensive disease did not show reduced mortality by enoxaparin. The incidence of VTE was significantly reduced in the LMWH arm (HR 0.31; 95% CI: 0.11-0.84, P=0.02). Hemorrhagic events were more frequent in the LMWH-treated group but fatal bleedings occurred in both arms.Conclusion: LMWH enoxaparin in addition to standard therapy did not improve OS in SCLC patients, despite being administered at a supraprophylactic dose and despite resulting in a significant reduction in VTE incidence. Addition of LMWH cannot be generally recommended in the management of SCLC patients, and predictive biomarkers of VTE and LMWH-associated bleeding in cancer patients are warranted. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00717938.

Background Eribulin is a microtubule dynamics inhibitor with a novel mechanism of action. This phase 3 study aimed to compare overall survival (OS) in patients with heavily pretreated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receiving eribulin to treatment of physician’s choice (TPC). Patients and methods Patients with advanced NSCLC who had received ≥2 prior therapies, including platinum-based doublet and epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, were randomly assigned to receive eribulin or TPC (gemcitabine, pemetrexed, vinorelbine, docetaxel). The primary endpoint was OS. Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival and objective response rate. Results Five hundred and forty patients were randomized to either eribulin (n = 270) or TPC (n = 270). Median OS for eribulin and TPC was the same: 9.5 months [hazard ratio (HR): 1.16; 95% confidence interval: 0.95–1.41; P = 0.13]. Progression-free survival for eribulin and TPC was 3.0 and 2.8 months, respectively (HR: 1.09; 95% confidence interval: 0.90–1.32; P = 0.39). The objective response rate was 12% for eribulin and 15% for TPC. Clinical benefit rate (eribulin, 57%; TPC, 55%) and disease control rate (eribulin, 63%; TPC, 58%) were similar between treatment arms. The most common adverse event was neutropenia, which occurred in 57% of eribulin patients and 49% of TPC patients at all grades. Other non-hematologic side-effects were manageable and similar in both groups except for peripheral sensory neuropathy (all grades; eribulin, 16%; TPC, 9%). Conclusion This phase 3 study did not demonstrate superiority of eribulin over TPC with regard to overall survival. However, eribulin does show activity in the third-line setting for NSCLC. Trial registration ID www.ClinicalTrials.gov ; NCT01454934.

In this phase Ib study, four combination therapies of nivolumab 10 mg/kg and standard chemotherapy (cisplatin/gemcitabine, cisplatin/pemetrexed, carboplatin/paclitaxel/bevacizumab, or docetaxel) showed acceptable toxicity profiles in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Furthermore, these combination therapies presented encouraging antitumor activities., Background The human IgG4 monoclonal antibody nivolumab targets programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) and promotes antitumor response by blocking the interaction of PD-1 with its ligands. This single-center phase Ib study investigated the tolerability, safety, and pharmacokinetics of nivolumab combined with standard chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and methods Patients who had stage IIIB without indication for definitive radiotherapy, stage IV, or recurrent NSCLC were eligible. Regimens were nivolumab 10 mg/kg + gemcitabine/cisplatin (arm A), pemetrexed/cisplatin (arm B), paclitaxel/carboplatin/bevacizumab (arm C), or docetaxel (arm D). Regimens A, B, and D were repeated every 3 weeks for up to four cycles and regimen C was repeated for up to six cycles; nivolumab alone (arm A), with pemetrexed (arm B), bevacizumab (arm C), or docetaxel (arm D) was continued every 3 weeks as maintenance therapy until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was evaluated during the first treatment cycle. Results As of March 2014, six patients were enrolled in each arm. The combination of nivolumab 10 mg/kg and chemotherapy was well tolerated. DLT was observed in only one patient in arm A (alanine aminotransferase increased). Select adverse events (those with a potential immunologic cause) of any grade were observed in six, four, six, and five patients in arms A, B, C, and D, respectively. Three, three, six, and one patient achieved partial response while median progression-free survival was 6.28, 9.63 months, not reached, and 3.15 months in arms A, B, C, and D, respectively. Conclusions Combination of nivolumab 10 mg/kg and chemotherapy showed an acceptable toxicity profile and encouraging antitumor activity in patients with advanced NSCLC. Clinical trials number Japanese Pharmaceutical Information Center Clinical Trials Information (JapicCTI)-132071.

Background We analyzed whether co-occurring mutations influence the outcome of systemic therapy in ALK-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and methods ALK-rearranged stage IIIB/IV NSCLC patients were analyzed with next-generation sequencing and fluorescence in situ hybridization analyses on a centralized diagnostic platform. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were determined in the total cohort and in treatment-related sub-cohorts. Cox regression analyses were carried out to exclude confounders. Results Among 216 patients with ALK-rearranged NSCLC, the frequency of pathogenic TP53 mutations was 23.8%, while other co-occurring mutations were rare events. In ALK/TP53 co-mutated patients, median PFS and OS were significantly lower compared with TP53 wildtype patients [PFS 3.9 months (95% CI: 2.4–5.6) versus 10.3 months (95% CI: 8.6–12.0), P

Background Chemotherapy-induced damage of hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPC) causes multi-lineage myelosuppression. Trilaciclib is an intravenous CDK4/6 inhibitor in development to proactively preserve HSPC and immune system function during chemotherapy (myelopreservation). Preclinically, trilaciclib transiently maintains HSPC in G1 arrest and protects them from chemotherapy damage, leading to faster hematopoietic recovery and enhanced antitumor immunity. Patients and methods This was a phase Ib (open-label, dose-finding) and phase II (randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled) study of the safety, efficacy and PK of trilaciclib in combination with etoposide/carboplatin (E/P) therapy for treatment-naive extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer patients. Patients received trilaciclib or placebo before E/P on days 1–3 of each cycle. Select end points were prespecified to assess the effect of trilaciclib on myelosuppression and antitumor efficacy. Results A total of 122 patients were enrolled, with 19 patients in part 1 and 75 patients in part 2 receiving study drug. Improvements were seen with trilaciclib in neutrophil, RBC (red blood cell) and lymphocyte measures. Safety on trilaciclib+E/P was improved with fewer ≥G3 adverse events (AEs) in trilaciclib (50%) versus placebo (83.8%), primarily due to less hematological toxicity. No trilaciclib-related ≥G3 AEs occurred. Antitumor efficacy assessment for trilaciclib versus placebo, respectively, showed: ORR (66.7% versus 56.8%, P = 0.3831); median PFS [6.2 versus 5.0 m; hazard ratio (HR) 0.71; P = 0.1695]; and OS (10.9 versus 10.6 m; HR 0.87; P = 0.6107). Conclusion Trilaciclib demonstrated an improvement in the patient's tolerability of chemotherapy as shown by myelopreservation across multiple hematopoietic lineages resulting in fewer supportive care interventions and dose reductions, improved safety profile, and no detriment to antitumor efficacy. These data demonstrate strong proof-of-concept for trilaciclib's myelopreservation benefits. Clinical Trail number NCT02499770.

Background The immune surveillance reactivator lefitolimod (MGN1703), a DNA-based TLR9 agonist, might foster innate and adaptive immune response and thus improve immune-mediated control of residual cancer disease. The IMPULSE phase II study evaluated the efficacy and safety of lefitolimod as maintenance treatment in extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) after objective response to first-line chemotherapy, an indication with a high unmet medical need and stagnant treatment improvement in the last decades. Patients and methods 103 patients with ES-SCLC and objective tumor response (as per RECIST 1.1) following four cycles of platinum-based first-line induction therapy were randomized to receive either lefitolimod maintenance therapy or local standard of care at a ratio of 3 : 2 until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Results From 103 patients enrolled, 62 were randomized to lefitolimod, 41 to the control arm. Patient demographics and response patterns to first-line therapy were balanced. Lefitolimod exhibited a favorable safety profile and pharmacodynamic assessment confirmed the mode-of-action showing a clear activation of monocytes and production of interferon-gamma-induced protein 10 (IP-10). While in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population no relevant effect of lefitolimod on progression-free and overall survival (OS) could be observed, two predefined patient subgroups indicated promising results, favoring lefitolimod with respect to OS: in patients with a low frequency of activated CD86+ B cells (hazard ratio, HR 0.53, 95% CI: 0.26–1.08; n = 38 of 88 analyzed) and in patients with reported chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (HR 0.48, 95% CI: 0.20–1.17, n = 25 of 103). Conclusions The IMPULSE study showed no relevant effect of lefitolimod on the main efficacy end point OS in the ITT, but (1) the expected pharmacodynamic response to lefitolimod, (2) positive OS efficacy signals in two predefined subgroups and (3) a favorable safety profile. These data support further exploration of lefitolimod in SCLC.

Purpose/Objective For pencil beam scanning proton therapy (PBS-PT), moving targets remain challenging due to the interplay effect. Even when using motion mitigation strategies, one needs to be aware of motion variations. We investigated weekly and daily motion variations to define the most optimal motion monitoring protocol for PBS-PT treatments of lung cancer patients. Material/Methods For 20 stage II-IV (N)SCLC patients 4DCT imaging was performed during treatment simulation (week 0) and weekly during the treatment course. GTVs were delineated on the maximum inspiration and expiration 4DCT phases and the centroid 3D-vector translations were evaluated. For one patient, daily 3D-vector centroid 4DCBCT motion was evaluated additionally. Results A median initial tumor motion (Figure 1) of 1.3 mm (range: 0.0 – 7.4 mm) was observed. GTV motions varied each week; 7 out of 20 patients showed motion variation >3 mm compared to the motion measured in week 0. Figure 2 shows that motion amplitudes extracted from weekly 4DCTs were not predictive for motion amplitudes extracted from daily 4DCBCTs. Conclusion For a considerable part of the patients, the motion measured in week 0 based on weekly repeat 4DCT imaging was not predictive for motion in the following weeks. Daily motion measured by 4DCBCT imaging for one patient suggests that weekly measured 4DCT motion is not predictive for the daily motion in between the weekly 4DCTs. This indicates that breathing motion differs from day to day and daily 4D-imaging is therefore needed to assure safe PBS-PT treatments for lung cancer patients.

Purpose/ObjectiveFor pencil beam scanning proton therapy (PBS-PT), moving targets remain challenging due to the interplay effect. Even when using motion mitigation strategies, one needs to be aware of motion variations. We investigated weekly and daily motion variations to define the most optimal motion monitoring protocol for PBS-PT treatments of lung cancer patients.Material/MethodsFor 20 stage II-IV (N)SCLC patients 4DCT imaging was performed during treatment simulation (week 0) and weekly during the treatment course. GTVs were delineated on the maximum inspiration and expiration 4DCT phases and the centroid 3D-vector translations were evaluated. For one patient, daily 3D-vector centroid 4DCBCT motion was evaluated additionally. ResultsA median initial tumor motion (Figure 1) of 1.3 mm (range: 0.0 – 7.4 mm) was observed. GTV motions varied each week; 7 out of 20 patients showed motion variation >3 mm compared to the motion measured in week 0. Figure 2 shows that motion amplitudes extracted from weekly 4DCTs were not predictive for motion amplitudes extracted from daily 4DCBCTs.ConclusionFor a considerable part of the patients, the motion measured in week 0 based on weekly repeat 4DCT imaging was not predictive for motion in the following weeks. Daily motion measured by 4DCBCT imaging for one patient suggests that weekly measured 4DCT motion is not predictive for the daily motion in between the weekly 4DCTs. This indicates that breathing motion differs from day to day and daily 4D-imaging is therefore needed to assure safe PBS-PT treatments for lung cancer patients.

Oral S-1 plus cisplatin is noninferior to docetaxel plus cisplatin in terms of overall survival with favorable QoL data. S-1 plus cisplatin is an option for the first-line treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC., Background Platinum-based two-drug combination chemotherapy has been standard of care for patients with advanced nonsmall-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The primary aim was to compare overall survival (OS) of patients with advanced NSCLC between the two chemotherapy regimens. Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), response, safety, and quality of life (QoL). Patients and methods Patients with previously untreated stage IIIB or IV NSCLC, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–1 and adequate organ function were randomized to receive either oral S-1 80 mg/m2/day on days 1–21 plus cisplatin 60 mg/m2 on day 8 every 4–5 weeks, or docetaxel 60 mg/m2 on day 1 plus cisplatin 80 mg/m2 on day 1 every 3–4 weeks, both up to six cycles. Results A total of 608 patients from 66 sites in Japan were randomized to S-1 plus cisplatin (n = 303) or docetaxel plus cisplatin (n = 305). OS for oral S-1 plus cisplatin was noninferior to docetaxel plus cisplatin [median survival, 16.1 versus 17.1 months, respectively; hazard ratio = 1.013; 96.4% confidence interval (CI) 0.837–1.227]. Significantly higher febrile neutropenia (7.4% versus 1.0%), grade 3/4 neutropenia (73.4% versus 22.9%), grade 3/4 infection (14.5% versus 5.3%), and grade 1/2 alopecia (59.3% versus 12.3%) were observed in the docetaxel plus cisplatin than in the S-1 plus cisplatin. There were no differences found in PFS or response between the two arms. QoL data investigated by EORTC QLQ-C30 and LC-13 favored the S-1 plus cisplatin. Conclusion Oral S-1 plus cisplatin is not inferior to docetaxel plus cisplatin and is better tolerated in Japanese patients with advanced NSCLC. Clinical trial number UMIN000000608.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: In thoracic irradiation, the maximum radiation dose is restricted by the risk of radiation-induced cardiopulmonary damage and dysfunction limiting tumor control. We showed that radiation-induced sub-clinical cardiac damage and lung damage in rats mutually interact and that combined irradiation intensifies cardiopulmonary toxicity. Unfortunately, current clinical practice does not include preventative measures to attenuate radiation-induced lung or cardiac toxicity. Here, we investigate the effects of the ACE inhibitor captopril on radiation-induced cardiopulmonary damage.MATERIAL AND METHODS: After local irradiation of rat heart and/or lungs captopril was administered orally. Cardiopulmonary performance was assessed using biweekly breathing rate measurements. At 8weeks post-irradiation, cardiac hemodynamics were measured, CT scans and histopathology were analyzed.RESULTS: Captopril significantly improved breathing rate and cardiopulmonary density/structure, but only when the heart was included in the radiation field. Consistently, captopril reduced radiation-induced pleural and pericardial effusion and cardiac fibrosis, resulting in an improved left ventricular end-diastolic pressure only in the heart-irradiated groups.CONCLUSION: Captopril improves cardiopulmonary morphology and function by reducing acute cardiac damage, a risk factor in the development of radiation-induced cardiopulmonary toxicity. ACE inhibition should be evaluated as a strategy to reduce cardiopulmonary complications induced by radiotherapy to the thoracic area.