Frank, Steven J.

6006 Background: IMPT has unique biologic and physical properties compared with IMRT, limits radiation dose beyond the targeted tumor volumes, and is a novel de-intensification strategy for the management of head and neck tumors. This study was designed to compare the outcomes for patients with OPC after chemoradiation therapy (CRT) with IMRT vs IMPT. Methods: This is a multi-center, randomized, phase III non-inferiority OPC trial Stage III/IV (AJCC 7th) squamous cell carcinoma stratified patients by human papillomavirus status, smoking status, and receipt of induction chemotherapy (IC). The primary endpoint was the rate of progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 3 years, where progression was defined as disease recurrence or death. Under the null hypothesis, H0: r ≥ 1.535 established the margin for non-inferiority of IMPT. Secondary endpoints include overall survival (OS), treatment-related malnutrition, and gastrostomy-tube dependence. Analyses were conducted on intent-to-treat (ITT; n=440), per-protocol (PP; n=296), and as-treated (AT; n=397) populations. Results: Patients (n=440) were randomized to undergo IMRT(n=219) or IMPT (n=221) at 21 institutions. The median age was 61 years and HPV/p16 was positive in 95%. IC was the initial treatment in 13% of patients. All patients were treated with CRT to 70 Gy in 33 fx with bilateral neck treatment, and post-CRT surgical lymph node dissection occurred in 8%. The median follow-up was 3.14 years. In the ITT analysis, the hazard ratio (HR) for disease progression or death at 3 y was 0.87 (95%CI 0.56,1.35); p=0.006 and the corresponding HR for death (OS) was 0.63 (95%CI 0.36-1.10) suggesting a protective affect with IMPT. In PP analysis, the PFS HR was 0.85 (95%CI 0.52,1.38); p=0.009 and HR for death (OS) was 0.60 (95%CI 0.32-1.12). In the AT analysis, PFS HR was 0.88 (95%CI 0.56,1.37); p=0.007 and the corresponding HR for death (OS) was 0.70 (95%CI 0.40-1.22). For each analysis above, the null hypothesis was rejected and IMPT was non-inferior to IMRT. PP gastrostomy-tube dependence decreased with IMPT vs. IMRT from 42% to 28% (p=0.019), and more IMPT patients sustained their nutrition with end of treatment weight loss < 5% from baseline: 24% vs 14% (p=0.037). Conclusions: IMPT is non-inferior to IMRT and has emerged as a standard of care CRT approach for OPC that reduces malnutrition and gastrostomy-tube dependence. Clinical trial information: NCT01893307 .

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can facilitate accurate organ delineation and optimal dose distributions in high-dose-rate (HDR) MRI-Assisted Radiosurgery (MARS). Its use for this purpose has been limited by the lack of positive-contrast MRI markers that can clearly delineate the lumen of the HDR applicator and precisely show the path of the HDR source on T1- and T2-weighted MRI sequences. We investigated a novel MRI positive-contrast HDR brachytherapy or interventional radiotherapy line marker, C4:S, consisting of C4 (visible on T1-weighted images) complexed with saline. Longitudinal relaxation time (T1) and transverse relaxation time (T2) for C4:S were measured on a 1.5 T MRI scanner. High-density polyethylene (HDPE) tubing filled with C4:S as an HDR brachytherapy line marker was tested for visibility on T1- and T2-weighted MRI sequences in a tissue-equivalent female ultrasound training pelvis phantom. Relaxivity measurements indicated that C4:S solution had good T1-weighted contrast (relative to oil [fat] signal intensity) and good T2-weighted contrast (relative to water signal intensity) at both room temperature (relaxivity ratio > 1; r2/r1 = 1.43) and body temperature (relaxivity ratio > 1; r2/r1 = 1.38). These measurements were verified by the positive visualization of the C4:S (C4/saline 50:50) HDPE tube HDR brachytherapy line marker on both T1- and T2-weighted MRI sequences. Orientation did not affect the relaxivity of the C4:S contrast solution. C4:S encapsulated in HDPE tubing can be visualized as a positive line marker on both T1- and T2-weighted MRI sequences. MRI-guided HDR planning may be possible with these novel line markers for HDR MARS for several types of cancer.

OBJECTIVEThe objective of this study was to assess outcomes after Gamma Knife radiosurgery (GKRS) re-irradiation for palliation of patients with trigeminal pain secondary to recurrent malignant skull base tumors.METHODSFrom 2009 to 2016, 26 patients who had previously undergone radiation treatment to the head and neck received GKRS for palliation of trigeminal neuropathic pain secondary to recurrence of malignant skull base tumors. Twenty-two patients received single-fraction GKRS to a median dose of 17 Gy (range 15–20 Gy) prescribed to the 50% isodose line (range 43%–55%). Four patients received fractionated Gamma Knife Extend therapy to a median dose of 24 Gy in 3 fractions (range 21–27 Gy) prescribed to the 50% isodose line (range 45%–50%). Those with at least a 3-month follow-up were assessed for symptom palliation. Self-reported pain was evaluated by the numeric rating scale (NRS) and MD Anderson Symptom Inventory–Head and Neck (MDASI-HN) pain score. Frequency of as-needed (PRN) analgesic use and opioid requirement were also assessed. Baseline opioid dose was reported as a fentanyl-equivalent dose (FED) and PRN for breakthrough pain use as oral morphine-equivalent dose (OMED). The chi-square and Student t-tests were used to determine differences before and after GKRS.RESULTSSeven patients (29%) were excluded due to local disease progression. Two experienced progression at the first follow-up, and 5 had local recurrence from disease outside the GKRS volume. Nineteen patients were assessed for symptom palliation with a median follow-up duration of 10.4 months (range 3.0–34.4 months). At 3 months after GKRS, the NRS scores (n = 19) decreased from 4.65 ± 3.45 to 1.47 ± 2.11 (p < 0.001); MDASI-HN pain scores (n = 13) decreased from 5.02 ± 1.68 to 2.02 ± 1.54 (p < 0.01); scheduled FED (n = 19) decreased from 62.4 ± 102.1 to 27.9 ± 45.5 mcg/hr (p < 0.01); PRN OMED (n = 19) decreased from 43.9 ± 77.5 to 10.9 ± 20.8 mg/day (p = 0.02); and frequency of any PRN analgesic use (n = 19) decreased from 0.49 ± 0.55 to 1.33 ± 0.90 per day (p = 0.08). At 6 months after GKRS, 9 (56%) of 16 patients reported being pain free (NRS score 0), with 6 (67%) of the 9 being both pain free and not requiring analgesic medications. One patient treated early in our experience developed a temporary increase in trigeminal pain 3–4 days after GKRS requiring hospitalization. All subsequently treated patients were given a single dose of intravenous steroids immediately after GKRS followed by a 2–3-week oral steroid taper. No further cases of increased or new pain after treatment were observed after this intervention.CONCLUSIONSGKRS for palliation of trigeminal pain secondary to recurrent malignant skull base tumors demonstrated a significant decrease in patient-reported pain and opioid requirement. Additional patients and a longer follow-up duration are needed to assess durability of symptom relief and local control.

AbstractBackgroundOverexpression of p16 is associated with improved outcomes among patients with oropharyngeal carcinoma. However, its role in the outcomes of patients with nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) remains unclear.MethodsEighty‐six patients with NPC treated at MD Anderson Cancer Center from 2000 to 2014 were identified. Epstein‐Barr virus (EBV) and human papillomavirus (HPV) status were determined by in situ hybridization (ISH) and p16 by immunohistochemical staining.ResultsEBV positivity was associated with extended overall survival (OS; median, 95.0 vs 44.9 months; p < .004), progression‐free survival (PFS; median, 80.4 vs 28.1 months; p < .013), and locoregional control (median, 104.4 vs 65.5 months; p < .043). In patients with EBV‐positive tumors, p16 overexpression correlated with improved PFS (median, 106.3 vs 27.1 months; p < .02) and locoregional control (median, 93.6 vs 64.5 months; p < .02).ConclusionP16 overexpression is associated with improved PFS and locoregional control in patients with EBV‐positive NPC. P16 expression may complement EBV status in predicting treatment outcomes for patients with NPC. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck 38: E1459–E1466, 2016