Sperduto, William

Background/Objectives: Hypofractionated ablative radiation is an increasingly popular option for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, concern remains about the risk for radiation-induced liver toxicity in patients with decompensated liver function. Methods: We retrospectively identified patients with underlying Child-Pugh (CP) B or C liver function treated at our University and Veterans Affairs (VA) departments from 2014 to 2019. Primary endpoints included treatment-related toxicity and dosimetric parameters. Results: 38 patients were included in the analysis. Most patients (98%) had CP B or Albumin-Bilirubin (ALBI) grade 2–3 (100%) liver disease. The median dose was 50 Gy (range 30–50) delivered in 5 or 10 fractions. Most patients had a single tumor treated (66%) with a median size of 3.1 cm (Interquartile Range (IQR) 2.3–4.1). The mean liver dose was 9.28 Gy (IQR 6.76–13.64) with a liver D800cc of 3.99 Gy (IQR 1.41–8.02). All patients completed their intended course with a median follow-up of 43 months. Four patients (10.3%) developed non-classical radiation-induced liver disease (RILD), comparable to the rate for patients with CP A function treated contemporaneously (8.3%). Otherwise, one patient (2.6%) experienced acute grade 3+ (non-RILD) hepatobiliary toxicity, while one patient (2.6%) experienced late grade 3+ hepatobiliary toxicity. Local control was promising with 2-year freedom from progression in the treated lesion of 73% (95% CI 38–91%). Median overall survival was 12 months (95% CI 5–25 months). Conclusions: Ablative radiation for patients with decompensated liver function and HCC appears well tolerated with low rates of RILD and encouraging local control. With careful selection, these patients should be considered for inclusion in future randomized trials.

PURPOSE Conventional wisdom has rendered patients with brain metastases ineligible for clinical trials for fear that poor survival could mask the benefit of otherwise promising treatments. Our group previously published the diagnosis-specific Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA). Updates with larger contemporary cohorts using molecular markers and newly identified prognostic factors have been published. The purposes of this work are to present all the updated indices in a single report to guide treatment choice, stratify research, and define an eligibility quotient to expand eligibility. METHODS A multi-institutional database of 6,984 patients with newly diagnosed brain metastases underwent multivariable analyses of prognostic factors and treatments associated with survival for each primary site. Significant factors were used to define the updated GPA. GPAs of 4.0 and 0.0 correlate with the best and worst prognoses, respectively. RESULTS Significant prognostic factors varied by diagnosis and new prognostic factors were identified. Those factors were incorporated into the updated GPA with robust separation ( P < .01) between subgroups. Survival has improved, but varies widely by GPA for patients with non–small-cell lung, breast, melanoma, GI, and renal cancer with brain metastases from 7-47 months, 3-36 months, 5-34 months, 3-17 months, and 4-35 months, respectively. CONCLUSION Median survival varies widely and our ability to estimate survival for patients with brain metastases has improved. The updated GPA (available free at brainmetgpa.com) provides an accurate tool with which to estimate survival, individualize treatment, and stratify clinical trials. Instead of excluding patients with brain metastases, enrollment should be encouraged and those trials should be stratified by the GPA to ensure those trials make appropriate comparisons. Furthermore, we recommend the expansion of eligibility to allow for the enrollment of patients with previously treated brain metastases who have a 50% or greater probability of an additional year of survival (eligibility quotient > 0.50).

Abstract Background Breast cancer treatment is based on estrogen receptors (ERs), progesterone receptors (PRs), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). At the time of metastasis, receptor status can be discordant from that at initial diagnosis. The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence of discordance and its effect on survival and subsequent treatment in patients with breast cancer brain metastases (BCBM). Methods A retrospective database of 316 patients who underwent craniotomy for BCBM between 2006 and 2017 was created. Discordance was considered present if the ER, PR, or HER2 status differed between the primary tumor and the BCBM. Results The overall receptor discordance rate was 132/316 (42%), and the subtype discordance rate was 100/316 (32%). Hormone receptors (HR, either ER or PR) were gained in 40/160 (25%) patients with HR-negative primary tumors. HER2 was gained in 22/173 (13%) patients with HER2-negative primary tumors. Subsequent treatment was not adjusted for most patients who gained receptors—nonetheless, median survival (MS) improved but did not reach statistical significance (HR, 17–28 mo, P = 0.12; HER2, 15–19 mo, P = 0.39). MS for patients who lost receptors was worse (HR, 27–18 mo, P = 0.02; HER2, 30–18 mo, P = 0.08). Conclusions Receptor discordance between primary tumor and BCBM is common, adversely affects survival if receptors are lost, and represents a missed opportunity for use of effective treatments if receptors are gained. Receptor analysis of BCBM is indicated when clinically appropriate. Treatment should be adjusted accordingly. Key Points 1. Receptor discordance alters subtype in 32% of BCBM patients. 2. The frequency of receptor gain for HR and HER2 was 25% and 13%, respectively. 3. If receptors are lost, survival suffers. If receptors are gained, consider targeted treatment.