Hartford, Alan C.

Abstract RTOG 9402 demonstrated procarbazine (P), lomustine (CCNU/C), and vincristine (V), collectively PCV, added to radiation therapy significantly improved survival for patients with newly diagnosed anaplastic oligodendroglial tumors. The improvement was most pronounced in 1p19q codeleted cases, and to a lesser extent, IDH-mutant cases, with no survival benefit in cases with neither biomarker. Analogous results were observed in other phase III trials. However, vincristine (V) can cause substantial toxicity and requires intravenous administration, both negatively affecting quality of life, with debatable contribution to PCV efficacy. As a randomized trial comparing PCV to PC is unlikely to be conducted, we explored correlations between survival and V-dosing in patients randomized to PCV in RTOG 9402. We performed post-hoc analyses of all evaluable participants (n = 143) randomized to PCV on RTOG 9402, supplemented by restricting the analyses to the chemosensitive molecular subsets (IDH-mutant and/or 1p/19q codeleted, n = 118). Total V dose by quartile (Q) was calculated. Survival from six months post-randomization was compared among V dose groups, adjusting for age, extent of resection (EOR), and Karnofsky Performances Status (KPS) in a Cox proportional hazards model. Higher V dose received correlated with longer survival in multivariate analyses (n = 134, median-Q3 vs. < Q1, HR 0.40 (0.22, 0.73), p = 0.003; ≥Q3 vs. < Q1, HR 0.39 (0.22, 0.72), p = 0.002). Excluding chemoresistant cases (IDH wild-type/not codeleted), survival was also significantly longer in evaluable participants receiving the highest doses of vincristine (≥Q3 vs. < Q1 HR 0.42 (0.21,0.81), p = 0.01). In this post-hoc analysis, higher overall V-dose received correlated with longer survival in evaluable patients with anaplastic oligodendroglial tumors receiving PCV chemotherapy in RTOG 9402. Of note, as vincristine dosing was not assigned by randomization, confounding due to differences in patient characteristics among V dose groups cannot be ruled out. Caution should be exercised when considering discarding V from the PCV regimen.

Abstract BACKGROUND PCV+RT substantially prolongs survival in AO patients, but long-term CF and QOL implications are unclear. We compared CF and QOL by treatment arm in RTOG 9402 participants and evaluated the impact that baseline characteristics had on CF, QOL, and survival. METHODS CF and QOL were evaluated using the Mini Mental State Exam (MMSE) and Brain-Quality of Life (B-QOL) scale at baseline and annually. Scores were analyzed between treatment arms at each time point for patients with ≥ 10 years of follow-up data. Shared parameter models evaluated MMSE and B-QOL scores and survival for all patients. RESULTS 42/148 (28.4%) participants in PCV+RT and 20/143 (14%) in RT alone arms survived ≥ 10 years. 35/42 and 39/42 (PCV+RT) and 18/20 and 17/20 (RT) participants completed baseline B-QOL and MMSE assessments, respectively. B-QOL scores did not differ between treatment groups at any time-point. Among 16 patients (10 PCV+RT, 6 RT) who completed year 10 MMSE evaluations, mean MMSE score at 10 years was higher in the RT arm (29.83 [95% CI 22.1, 30.0] vs. 26.50 [95% CI 29.4, 30.0], P= 0.04). Change in MMSE and B-QOL scores from baseline did not differ significantly between treatment groups at any time. In shared parameter models including all patients with baseline assessments, MMSE and B-QOL scores decreased over time (MMSE P= 0.0189, B-QOL P= 0.0005), but this did not differ by treatment group (MMSE P= 0.5727, B-QOL P= 0.3592). Younger age and higher KPS predicted better scores (MMSE P < 0.0001, P = 0.0002; B-QOL P = 0.0043, P = 0.0007). PCV+RT predicted better survival in both models. CONCLUSIONS PCV+RT improves survival in AO. Shared parameter models show decrease in MMSE and B-QOL over time. However, relative to RT alone, the addition of PCV did not impact change in CF and QOL over time.

Aim/Objectives/Background: The American College of Radiology (ACR) and the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) have jointly developed the following practice parameter for proton beam radiation therapy. Proton radiotherapy is the application of a high-energy proton beam to a patient in a clinical setting with therapeutic intent. Proton radiotherapy may permit improved therapeutic ratios with lower doses to sensitive normal structures and greater dose to target tumor tissues. Methods: A literature search was performed to identify published articles regarding clinical outcomes, reviews, quality assurance methodologies, and guidelines and standards for proton radiation therapy. Selected articles are referenced in the text. The following recommendations are based on firsthand experiences of multiple clinical authorities who employ proton therapy and have been peer reviewed by experts at different practicing institutions. Results: This practice parameter is developed to serve as a tool in the appropriate application of this evolving technology in the care of cancer patients or other patients with conditions where radiation therapy is indicated. It addresses clinical implementation of proton radiation therapy, including personnel qualifications, quality assurance standards, indications, and suggested documentation. Conclusions: This practice parameter is a tool to guide technical use of proton therapy and does not assess the relative clinical indication of proton radiotherapy when compared with other forms of radiotherapy, but to focus on the best practices required to deliver proton therapy safely and effectively, when clinically indicated. Costs of proton treatments are high, and the economic costs of proton radiotherapy may also need to be considered.

Abstract BACKGROUND Adding intensive-procarbazine, lomustine, and vincristine (iPCV) to radiotherapy (RT) prolonged progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for patients with 1p19q codeleted anaplastic oligodendroglial tumors (AOTs); some benefit was also observed for IDH-mutant non-codeleted cases (Cairncross et al 2013, 2014, 2016). Now, 25 years after study activation, we updated survival, further assessed IDH as a predictive biomarker, and are exploring the benefit from vincristine. METHODS Eligible adults (KPS ≥ 60, adequate end-organ function) were randomized to pre-RT iPCV (4 cycles x 6 weeks each) vs. RT alone, stratified by age (< or ≥ 50), KPS (60–70 or ≥ 80), and level of anaplasia. Histology (anaplastic oligodendroglioma/oligo-astrocytoma required) and biomarkers (IDH and 1p19q, post-hoc) were determined centrally. Survival was estimated by Kaplan-Meier and Hazard Ratios (HRs) by Cox-regression. RESULTS Overall (n=289), median follow-up was 16.4 years vs. 11.3 years at last report. In codeleted cases, 40% randomized to iPCV remained alive vs. 53% at last report; 5, 10, and 14 year-PFS and -OS rates were 62%, 50%, 41% and 70%, 57%, 46%, respectively; and iPCV unequivocally prolonged PFS (median 9.8 vs. 2.9 years, HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.3–0.7, p< 0.001) and OS (median 13.2 vs. 7.3 years, HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.40–0.94; p=0.02). With IDH mutation but without codeletion (n=66), iPCV prolonged PFS (median 2.8 vs. 1.9 years, HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.34–0.99, p=0.046); OS was longer with a trend for significance (median 5.5 vs. 3.3 years, HR 0.6, 95% CI 0.34–1.03, p=0.06) on this underpowered exploratory post-hoc analysis. CONCLUSION For codeleted AOTs, long-term analyses confirmed that pre-RT iPCV produced meaningful and significant prolongations of PFS and OS. With IDH mutation but without codeletion, iPCV significantly prolonged PFS and showed a trend for prolonged OS. The value of vincristine is being assessed. Supported by NCI grants U10CA180868, U10CA180822, U24CA196067, and UG1CA189867.