Michalski, Jeff M.

PURPOSEThere remains a lack of clarity regarding the influence of sequencing of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and radiotherapy (RT) on outcomes in prostate cancer (PCa). Herein, we evaluate the optimal sequencing of ADT with prostate-directed RT in localized PCa.METHODSMEDLINE (1966-2018), Embase (1982-2018), ClinicalTrials.gov, and conference proceedings (1990-2018) were searched to identify randomized trials evaluating the sequencing, but not duration, of ADT with RT. Two randomized phase III trials were identified, and individual patient data were obtained: Ottawa 0101 and NRG Oncology's Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9413. Ottawa 0101 randomly assigned patients to neoadjuvant or concurrent versus concurrent or adjuvant short-term ADT. Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9413, a 2 × 2 factorial trial, included a random assignment of neoadjuvant or concurrent versus adjuvant short-term ADT. The neoadjuvant or concurrent ADT arms of both trials were combined into the neoadjuvant group, and the arms receiving adjuvant ADT were combined into the adjuvant group. The primary end point of this meta-analysis was progression-free survival (PFS).RESULTSThe median follow-up was 14.9 years. Overall, 1,065 patients were included (531 neoadjuvant and 534 adjuvant). PFS was significantly improved in the adjuvant group (15-year PFS, 29% v 36%, hazard ratio [HR], 1.25 [95% CI, 1.07 to 1.47], P = .01). Biochemical failure (subdistribution HR [sHR], 1.37 [95% CI, 1.12 to 1.68], P = .002), distant metastasis (sHR, 1.40 [95% CI, 1.00 to 1.95], P = .04), and metastasis-free survival (HR, 1.17 [95% CI, 1.00 to 1.37], P = .050) were all significantly improved in the adjuvant group. There were no differences in late grade ≥ 3 gastrointestinal (2% v 3%, P = .33) or genitourinary toxicity (5% v 5%, P = .76) between groups.CONCLUSIONThe sequencing of ADT with prostate-directed RT has significant association with long-term PFS and MFS in localized PCa. Our findings favor use of an adjuvant over a neoadjuvant approach, without any increase in long-term toxicity.

During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic, providers and patients must engage in shared decision making regarding the pros and cons of early versus delayed interventions for localized skin cancer. Patients at highest risk of COVID‐19 complications are older; are immunosuppressed; and have diabetes, cancer, or cardiopulmonary disease, with multiple comorbidities associated with worse outcomes. Physicians must weigh the patient's risk of COVID‐19 complications in the event of exposure against the risk of worse oncologic outcomes from delaying cancer therapy. Herein, the authors have summarized current data regarding the risk of COVID‐19 complications and mortality based on age and comorbidities and have reviewed the literature assessing how treatment delays affect oncologic outcomes. They also have provided multidisciplinary recommendations regarding the timing of local therapy for early‐stage skin cancers during this pandemic with input from experts at 11 different institutions. For patients with Merkel cell carcinoma, the authors recommend prioritizing treatment, but a short delay can be considered for patients with favorable T1 disease who are at higher risk of COVID‐19 complications. For patients with melanoma, the authors recommend delaying the treatment of patients with T0 to T1 disease for 3 months if there is no macroscopic residual disease at the time of biopsy. Treatment of tumors ≥T2 can be delayed for 3 months if the biopsy margins are negative. For patients with cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma, those with Brigham and Women's Hospital T1 to T2a disease can have their treatment delayed for 2 to 3 months unless there is rapid growth, symptomatic lesions, or the patient is immunocompromised. The treatment of tumors ≥T2b should be prioritized, but a 1‐month to 2‐month delay is unlikely to worsen disease‐specific mortality. For patients with squamous cell carcinoma in situ and basal cell carcinoma, treatment can be deferred for 3 months unless the individual is highly symptomatic.

5584 Background: The timing of systemic therapy in relation to radiotherapy (RT) is important in most malignancies. In contrast, androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has largely been investigated in relation to its duration rather than its sequencing with RT. Herein, we conduct the first combined individual patient analysis of two phase III randomized trials to determine the optimal timing of ADT with RT in localized prostate cancer (PCa). Methods: Individual patient data was obtained from the Malone et al trial (JCO 2019), which randomized patients to receive neoadjuvant/concurrent or concurrent/adjuvant ADT for 6 months with prostate only RT. This was combined with the prostate only RT arms of RTOG 9413 that randomized patients to 4 months of neoadjuvant/concurrent or adjuvant ADT. The neoadjuvant/concurrent arms of both trials were combined into the “neoadjuvant” group, and the concurrent/adjuvant (Malone) and adjuvant arm (RTOG 9413) were combined in the “adjuvant” group. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Cumulative incidence of distant metastasis (DM), PCa-specific mortality (PCSM) and biochemical failure (BF) were calculated using the Fine-Gray method with non-PCa deaths as competing events. Late genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity are also reported. Results: The median follow-up was 14.9 years (yrs) and 1065 patients were included (n=531 neoadjuvant, 534 adjuvant). Groups were well balanced for all baseline characteristics. Adjuvant ADT was superior to neoadjuvant ADT in terms of BF (15yr: 33% vs 43%, HR: 1.37 (95%CI: 1.12-1.68), p=0.002), DM (15yr: 12% vs 18%, HR: 1.40 (95%CI: 1.00-1.95), p=0.04), and PFS (15yr: 36% vs 29%, HR: 1.25 (95%CI: 1.07-1.47), p=0.01). Adjuvant ADT yielded lower PCSM (15yr: 15% vs 20%, HR: 1.29 (95%CI: 0.95-1.75), p=0.10), but did not reach statistical significance. This approached statistical significance in high risk PCa (HR 1.39 (95%CI 1.00-1.93), p=0.053). OS was not significantly different between arms (15yr: 39% vs 34%, HR: 1.11 (95%CI: 0.95-1.30), p=0.20). There was no significant difference in either late grade ≥3 GI (p=0.21) or GU (p=0.98) toxicity. Conclusions: We demonstrate for the first time that sequencing of ADT with RT significantly impacts long-term oncologic outcomes in localized PCa, favoring an adjuvant rather than neoadjuvant approach, without increasing late toxicity. This data has important implications to ongoing and future clinical trial design. Clinical trial information: NCT00769548 .

7501 Background: The first objective of RTOG 0617 was to compare the overall survival(OS) of patients(pts) treated with standard-dose(SD)(60Gy) versus high-dose(HD)(74Gy) radiotherapy with concurrent chemotherapy(CT). Methods: This Phase III Intergroup trial randomized 464 pts with Stage III NSCLC to the SD(60Gy) vs. HD(74Gy) arms prior to closure of the HD arm. Concurrent CT included weekly paclitaxel(45 mg/m2) and carboplatin(AUC=2). Pts randomized to cetuximab received a 400 mg/m2 loading dose on Day 1 followed by weekly doses of 250 mg/m2. All pts were to receive consolidation CT. We are reporting the final results on radiation dose. Results: 464 pts were accrued prior to closure of the HD arm in 6/11, of which 419 were eligible for analysis. Median follow up was 17.2 months. There were 2 and 10 grade 5 treatment-related adverse events(AEs) on the SD and HD arms, respectively. Grade 3+AEs were 74.2% and 78.2% on SD and HD arms, respectively (p=0.34). The median survival times and 18-month OS rates for the SD and HD arms were 28.7 vs 19.5 months, and 66.9% vs 53.9% respectively (p=0.0007). The primary cause of death was lung cancer (72.2% vs 73.5%)(p=0.84). Local failure rates at 18 months were 25.1% vs 34.3% for SD and HD patients, respectively(p=0.03). Local-regional and distant failures at 18 months were 35.3% vs 44%(p=0.04) and 42.4% vs 47.8%(p=0.16) for SD and HD arms, respectively. Factors predictive of less favorable OS on multivariate analysis were higher radiation dose, higher esophagitis/dysphagia grade, greater gross tumor volume, and heart volume >5 Gy. Conclusions: In this setting of chemoradiation for locally-advanced Stage III NSCLC, 60 Gy is superior to 74 Gy in terms of OS and local-regional control. The effect of the anti-EGFR antibody (cetuximab) awaits further follow up. This project was supported by RTOG grant U10 CA21661, CCOP grant U10 CA37422, and ATC U24 CA 81647 from the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and Eli Lilly and Company. Clinical trial information: NCT00533949.

10554 Background: Age at diagnosis is a prognostic factor in patients with RMS. We sought to determine whether AYA with metastatic alveolar (ARMS) or embryonal (ERMS) RMS had a different failure-free survival (FFS) compared to younger patients, and to identify treatment related factors that may be associated with outcome. Methods: COG ARST0431 patients were reviewed. The incidence of toxicities (AE, grade3/4 using CTCAEv3) by age was determined in 4 reporting periods (RP: wks 1-6; RP2:7-19; RP3: 20-34; RP4: 35-54). The AEs in younger patients (<=13 years) were compared with those in AYA. Fisher’s exact test was used to compare differences between the groups. Results: Of 109 patients, 60 (55%) were AYA. In RP1, they were more likely to have nausea/vomiting (4.1 vs. 16.9%, p=0.06), pain (6.1 vs. 20.3%, p=0.05), and metabolic disturbances (4.1 vs. 20.3%, p=0.02) compared to younger patients. In RP4, older patients trended to have less infection (15.8 vs. 30.1, p=0.07). All other toxicities were similar between the two age cohorts in the other RPs. AYA were less likely to complete therapy (52 vs. 73%, p=0.03) and more likely (in RP 4) to have unplanned dose modifications (outside of protocol guidelines) (23 vs. 2.7%). Of patients that completed therapy, there was no age-related difference in the time to completion. As shown in the table, younger patients had better 3-yr FFS, driven by a lower FFS for AYA with ARMS. Conclusions: This evaluation suggests that AYA with RMS were less likely to complete therapy and experienced a higher prevalence of pain and nausea compared to younger patients; the role of reporting bias and reasons for treatment discontinuation need further study. Children were more likely than AYA to have infection. Inferior FFS was only seen in AYA with ARMS suggesting a clear need for novel therapies for these patients. This study may be underpowered to demonstrate significant differences in other toxicities or in FFS among ERMS patients. [Table: see text]

55 Background: To compare the predictive ability of health utility mapping algorithms derived using cross-sectional and longitudinal data specific to the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC). Methods: This mapping study utilized data from an international, multicenter, randomized controlled trial of patients with low-risk prostate cancer conducted by NRG Oncology (NCT00331773). Health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) data were collected using EPIC, and health utilities were obtained using EuroQOL-5D (EQ5D) at baseline and 6, 12 and 24 months post-intervention. Data were split into an estimation sample (70%) and a validation sample (30%). Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regression models were estimated using baseline cross-sectional data as well as pooled data from all assessment periods. Random effects (RE) specifications that explicitly model the longitudinal nature of the data were also estimated. Candidate models were selected based on root mean square error (RMSE). Results: A total of 196 (147) patients in the estimation sample had complete EQ5D and EPIC domain (subdomain) data at all time points. OLS models using combined data outperformed the counter-part RE models as well as OLS models using baseline data in the five-fold cross-validation. Addition of covariates to the models resulted in improved predictive ability. In the external validation, when only EPIC domain/ subdomain data are available, the OLS model using combined data predicted EQ5D utilities better than the counterpart RE model and OLS model using baseline data (RMSE=0.121108 & 0.111345). OLS model using baseline data outperformed other model types for algorithms with EPIC domains and demographics (RMSE=0.121757), while RE models outperformed the other two model types for algorithms with EPIC subdomains and demographic data, (0.112782) and for algorithms with EPIC domains/ subdomains, demographics, and clinical covariates (RMSE=0.123589 & 0.163093). Conclusions: While algorithms using pooled data outperformed other model types in internal validation, RE models showed better predictive ability in external validation for algorithms with covariates. Clinical trial information: NCT00331773.

327 Background: Though Black men with prostate cancer are more likely to have aggressive disease features than White men, race-specific differences in initial treatment responses in localized disease remains unknown. Methods: Individual patient data were obtained for 9259 patients (including 1674 [18.1%] Black men and 7585 [81.9%] White men) enrolled on eight randomized controlled trials evaluating definitive radiotherapy (RT) ± short-term or long-term androgen deprivation therapy (STADT and LTADT). The primary endpoints were biochemical recurrence (BCR), distant metastasis (DM), and prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM). Fine-Gray subdistribution HR (sHR) models were developed to evaluate the cumulative incidences of all endpoints after stratification by National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk grouping. A meta-analysis was done to estimate pair-wise comparisons of treatments within and between Black and White men, after adjusting for age, Gleason score, clinical T stage, and initial PSA. Results: Black men were more likely to have NCCN high-risk disease at enrollment (656/1674 [39.2%] vs 2506/7585 [33%], p<0.001). However, within the high-risk stratum Black men had lower 10-year rates of BCR (46.1% vs. 50.4%, p=0.02), DM (14% vs. 21.6%, p<0.001), and PCSM (4.9% vs. 9.8%, p<0.001). After adjusting for age and disease characteristics, Black men with high-risk prostate receiving RT+STADT had lower rates of BCR (sHR 0.73, 95% CI 0.62-0.86, p<0.001), DM (sHR 0.64, 95% CI 0.49-0.84, p=0.001) and PCSM (sHR 0.49, 95% CI 0.25-0.95, p=0.04). There were no differences in BCR, DM, or PCSM among men receiving RT+LTADT. The interaction between race and the impact of adding STADT to RT alone on BCR was statistically significant (p=0.003). Conclusions: Black men enrolled on randomized trials with long-term follow-up have higher risk disease at enrollment, but have better BCR, DM, and PCSM outcomes with RT-based therapy compared with White men, particularly with the addition of STADT.

AbstractBackgroundLocal‐regional failure (LF) for locally advanced bladder cancer (LABC) after radical cystectomy (RC) is common even with chemotherapy and is associated with high morbidity/mortality. Postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) can reduce LF and may enhance overall survival (OS) but has no defined role. We hypothesized that the addition of PORT would improve OS in LABC in a large nationwide oncology database.MethodsWe identified ≥ pT3pN0‐3M0 LABC patients in the National Cancer Database diagnosed 2004‐2014 who underwent RC ± PORT. OS was calculated using Kaplan‐Meier and Cox proportional hazards regression modeling was used to identify predictors of OS. Propensity matching was performed to match RC patients who received PORT vs those who did not.Results15,124 RC patients were identified with 512 (3.3%) receiving PORT. Median OS was 20.0 months (95% CI, 18.2‐21.8) for PORT vs 20.8 months (95% CI, 20.3‐21.3) for no PORT (P = 0.178). In multivariable analysis, PORT was independently associated with improved OS: hazard ratio 0.87 (95% CI, 0.78‐0.97); P = 0.008. A one‐to‐three propensity match yielded 1,858 patients (24.9% receiving PORT and 75.1% without). In the propensity‐matched cohort, median OS was 19.8 months (95% CI, 18.0‐21.6) for PORT vs 16.9 months (95% CI, 15.6‐18.1) for no PORT (P = 0.030). In the propensity‐matched cohort of urothelial carcinoma patients (N = 1,460), PORT was associated with improved OS for pT4, pN+, and positive margins (P < 0.01 all).ConclusionIn this observational cohort, PORT was associated with improved OS in LABC. While the data should be interpreted cautiously, these results lend support to the use of PORT in selected patients with LABC, regardless of histology. Prospective trials of PORT are warranted.