Breen, William G.

Abstract BACKGROUND Cognitive symptoms are common among cancer patients treated with intracranial radiation but inadequately assessed and suboptimally treated, owing in part to the time-consuming and resource-intensive nature of formal neuropsychological testing. Through remote administration of brief cognitive assessments and symptom-directed interventions, decentralization uniquely addresses this problem. METHODS In this single-site phase 2 fully decentralized clinical trial (NCT06377696), patients treated with radiation therapy (RT) for primary or metastatic brain tumors undergo cognitive evaluations with the application, Mayo Test Drive, and the Short Test of Mental Status (STMS; via telehealth or in person), at baseline and every three months for one year. Participants are provided wearable devices for health promotion. Half the participants are randomized to metformin to evaluate this agent’s efficacy in treating RT-related cognitive symptoms. Target enrollment is 100 participants. RESULTS Seventy-three patients (median age 45.5, 46% female) with brain tumors who received RT were enrolled May 2024 to May 2025. In this unplanned interim analysis, we evaluated the impact of decentralization on study participation. Thirty-six participants (49%) reported a primary residence greater than 150 miles from our institution. Seven patients were consented remotely, the remainder in person. Of 380 study-related visits (201 STMS, 179 treatment toxicity checks) 216 (57%) were completed by telehealth. Thirty-two of 336 (9.5%) study-related lab draws were completed at locations outside our institution. Wearable device data was continuously collected, with median 3022 steps tracked per patient per day on study. 190/250 (76%) quality-of-life surveys sent digitally were completed to date. CONCLUSION Decentralization implemented as part of this clinical trial enabled participation despite significant distance from our institution and facilitated study-related assessments through digital solutions, eliminating the need for travel. Our findings demonstrate the feasibility of conducting a fully decentralized supportive care trial in neuro-oncology, which can increase participation and accelerate evaluation of novel therapeutics.

Abstract BACKGROUND Access to in-person evaluations is challenging for patients with glioma due to disease-related disability and distance from specialized neuro-oncology centers. Telehealth is an alternative to in-person evaluations, but acceptability of and therapy compliance with this model has not been prospectively evaluated. METHODS In this single-arm non-randomized pragmatic clinical trial, we compared patient satisfaction with telehealth and in-person assessments among patients with glioma undergoing chemotherapy with temozolomide. Participants acted as their own controls, alternating between telehealth and in-person visits. Patient satisfaction with care delivered was evaluated by Press-Ganey surveys with Likert response scales (1-5, 1=very poor, 5=very good). A digital pill diary (DPD) was implemented to track chemotherapy compliance. RESULTS We accrued 30 patients (median age 59, 38% female) between October 2024 and May 2025. Half of the patients (n=15) reported a primary residence greater than 150 miles from our institution. Surveys from 25 participants were reviewed, with 17/25 completing one or more surveys following an in-person visit, and 21/25 completing one or more surveys following a telehealth visit. Overall average Press-Ganey scores were similar between the two visit modalities with high scores (telehealth=4.8; in-person=4.7). Median scores for specific modalities were similarly highly rated: likelihood of recommending practice to others (telehealth=5.0; in-person=5.0), concern the care provider showed (telehealth=5.0, in-person=4.7), provider’s discussion of treatment options (telehealth=5.0, in-person=5.0), provider effort to include patients in decision-making (telehealth=5.0, in-person=5.0). DPDs used to monitor treatment compliance indicated adherence to all prescribed doses of temozolomide in 75/79 cycles; the other 4 (of 79) treatment cycles were halted per provider instructions. CONCLUSION This interim assessment demonstrates feasibility of treating patients with similar patient satisfaction of care delivered between telehealth and in-person visits. The DPD was effective in tracking chemotherapy administration. Additional results including visit type preference and acute care utilization data are maturing.

Background: Post-treatment prognosis and monitoring are critical for determining the timing of salvage treatment in glioblastoma patients but has been challenging due to difficulties differentiating progression from treatment effects in conventional images. This exploratory study aimed to establish the correlation of radiomics image features from time series of amino acid tracer 18F-DOPA PET images, with outcomes, using machine learning and dimension reduction analysis. Methods: 18F-DOPA PET images were collected for a patient cohort with wild-type IDH and unmethylated MGMT who underwent dose-escalated radiation therapy. Quantitative features were derived from the high uptake region (T/N > 2.0) in pre- and post-radiation therapy follow-up 18F-DOPA PET images. A customized workflow was utilized for pre-selecting predictive features, followed by manifold learning. Machine learning algorithms were employed to establish associations between imaging features and remaining survival (RS), defined as the time between a follow-up scan and date of death. Results: The ML models exhibited 81–83% ROC_AUC in predicting RS evaluated on an independent test dataset. A RS map is proposed for monitoring tumor alterations through serial 18F-DOPA PET scans, demonstrating superior sensitivity and better correlation with survival compared to the RANO criteria. Conclusions: Our study demonstrates that ML models utilizing FU 18F-DOPA PET images have the potential to effectively predict future survival outcomes in patients with glioblastoma treated with dose-escalated radiation therapy. The capability to assess changes in tumor over time through imaging can potentially assist in patient stratification and the selection of salvage treatments, while also aiding in distinguishing treatment effects from genuine tumor progression.

Abstract Background Spatially fractionated radiation therapy (SFRT) is a technique that delivers heterogenous dose distributions consisting of alternating regions of high dose “peaks” and low dose “valleys”. Current delivery methods for SFRT using megavoltage x‐rays usually treat large and bulky tumors with brass grid or volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) lattice techniques. The size and spacing of high dose regions in these approaches are typically on the order of centimeters. However, multiple studies have suggested that decreasing these dimensions may improve the therapeutic ratio. Furthermore, a more compact approach to SFRT would allow for a greater number of high dose regions within the tumor, as well as application to smaller and more irregularly shaped targets thereby increasing the number of patients that could benefit from SFRT. Purpose This study describes the commissioning and first patient treatment using mini‐lattice radiation therapy (MLRT). MLRT uses a clinical linear accelerator and decreases the size and spacing of standard lattice SFRT by using individual multileaf collimator (MLC) leaves to deliver 5 mm wide high dose regions. Methods MLRT plans were created in the Varian Eclipse treatment planning system for a Varian Truebeam equipped with Millennium 120 MLCs. MLRT uses 6 MV Flattening Filter Free high dose rate and the width of individual MLCs to define 5 mm by 5 mm openings separated by closed MLCs to deliver alternating opened and blocked regions. Dynamic conformal arcs were used to conform MLCs to 4 mm spherical mini‐lattice structures in the gross tumor volume (GTV). A MLRT‐specific beam model was commissioned to accurately model the small MLRT fields. Film measurements were performed to assess the accuracy of MLRT plans calculations. Plans for seven treatment sites in different parts of the body for retrospective patient candidates were created with varying numbers of mini‐lattices and separation distances to assess the impact of varying these parameters on treatment dose metrics. MLRT was used for the first time to treat a patient with two fractions of MLRT. Results The AcurosXB calculation algorithm with modified x and y spot sizes, dosimetric leaf gap, transmission factor, and output factor table was used to generate a beam model for accurate MLRT calculations. The MLRT‐specific beam model resulted in gamma passing rates (1%/0.5 mm criteria) of 90%–99% for retrospective patient MLRT film measurements. Dose volume histogram statistics, equivalent uniform dose, and mean dose showed a higher number of mini‐lattices with smaller separation increased the dose to the GTV and surrounding tissue. Separation distances between mini‐lattices did not impact plan heterogeneity as measured by D10%/D90%. The first patient treated with the MLRT technique reported pain relief, had stable disease, and no acute toxicities following both fractions. Conclusions MLRT is feasible using clinical linear accelerators and existing radiation oncology infrastructure. It enables targeting smaller tumors with SFRT, allows for a greater number of high dose regions within the target compared to standard VMAT lattice techniques, and may be a useful technique for challenging treatment scenarios.

Abstract Background Dasatinib is an oral inhibitor of the Src kinase family, with preclinical data indicating impact on gliomagenesis, tumor invasion, and radiosensitivity. Methods North Central Cancer Treatment Group N0877 is a phase 1 dose escalation and phase II randomized study evaluating the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, and efficacy of dasatinib with radiation and temozolomide (TMZ) for glioblastoma. Following identification of the MTD, adult patients with a histologic diagnosis of glioblastoma were randomized 2:1 between dasatinib given with standard concurrent and adjuvant TMZ, versus placebo with standard concurrent and adjuvant TMZ. Radiation dose was 60 Gy in 30 fractions. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), toxicity, and quality of life. Results Thirteen patients were enrolled in the phase I component and established the MTD and phase II dose of 150 mg given daily. A total of 204 patients were enrolled in the phase II component. OS was not different between arms (median OS 15.6 months for dasatinib compared to 19.3 months for placebo, hazard ratio:1.21 favoring placebo, 95% CI: 0.88–1.65, log-rank P-value: .238). Similarly, PFS was not significantly different between the dasatinib and placebo arms. There was a significant increase in anemia, nausea, and creatinine elevation with dasatinib, but significantly more grade 3 lymphopenia with placebo. Conclusions The addition of dasatinib to standard chemoradiation did not improve outcomes for patients with glioblastoma. Clinical Trial Identifier NCT00869401.

Background: High-grade gliomas (HGGs), particularly glioblastoma (GBM), are associated with exceptionally high mortality and inevitable recurrence. In considering novel treatment options for these devastating diseases, immunotherapies represent promising candidates. Immunotherapies have demonstrated efficacy for several advanced tumors outside the central nervous system, highlighting a potential role for these agents in treating HGGs. However, multiple challenges to immunotherapy efficacy have tempered therapeutic benefit in practice, including local and systemic immunosuppression, intratumoral heterogeneity, and various mechanisms of intrinsic and acquired resistance. In the past 30 years, diverse immunotherapeutic subclasses have been assessed for benefit against HGGs. Methods: We performed a PubMed search for randomized clinical trials performed within the last 30 years evaluating the following immunotherapy agents for high-grade gliomas: immune checkpoint inhibitors, vaccines, oncologic viruses, cytokines, and CAR T-cells. The present review offers a critical analysis of key pre-clinical and clinical trials that have shaped the immunotherapy landscape for high-grade gliomas over the past two decades. Results/Conclusions: Across the different immunotherapeutic methods and modalities explored thus far, a recurring theme emerges: while therapeutic strategies with a compelling conceptual basis are continually under development and even demonstrate a benefit in preclinical and early-phase trials, larger and later-phase trials consistently fail to produce concordantly significant outcomes. To date, no large-scale clinical trial has demonstrated a benefit of sufficient consequence to change practice. Continued critical appraisal of the strengths and pitfalls of prior investigative work, optimization of treatment development and delivery, and innovative approaches to combination therapy design will collectively be integral to future therapeutic advancement.

e13891 Background: Most patients with central nervous system (CNS) malignancy develop cognitive impairment, fatigue, and mood-related symptoms that are impacted by cancer and treatment, including radiation therapy. We currently have limited therapies to mitigate neurocognitive toxicity. It is important to accurately assess neurocognitive function and symptom burden when working to establish therapeutics. The objective of this trial is to assess the effectiveness of therapies aimed at improving neurocognitive function and quality of life by leveraging a decentralized approach incorporating an established digital neurocognitive assessment tool and development of a remote symptom collection/medication log to improve capture of longitudinal neurocognitive data. Methods: This is an open-label decentralized clinical trial (NCT06377696) that randomizes patients who have received intracranial radiation for primary and secondary brain tumors in a 1:1 allocation to health promotion with a wearable device +/- metformin (targeting radiation-related toxicity). Remote symptom collection is reported through digital patient surveys. Medication adherence is being monitored through a digital medication log developed for the study. Remote neurologic examination is performed by clinical neuro-oncologists at telehealth visits. Participants perform serial remote cognitive assessments with an established digital neurocognitive testing platform – Mayo Test Drive (MTD). Cognitive assessments and symptom surveys were designed to be completed on a smartphone, tablet, or computer device. Results: The study started enrollment on May 31, 2024. As of January 27, 2025, 54 of 100 planned participants have enrolled (27 on each arm). 51 participants remain active on trial; 3 withdrew from trial participation (2 prior to treatment, 1 after treatment). The overall completion rate for a quality-of-life questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is 85.0%, and each dose of metformin logged is 78.5%. The overall completion rate for virtual neurologic examination and short test of mental status is 94.7%. For MTD, the overall completion rate is 97.9%. The average MTD session duration was 16 minutes. Most participants completed MTD testing using a smartphone (90.5%) at home (89.1%). Conclusions: These results provide preliminary support that a decentralized trial assessing neurocognitive outcomes is feasible in patients with CNS malignancy. The completion rates of questionnaires and objective cognitive evaluation are comparable or higher than expected with historic norms. Final study results will provide real-world cognitive and quality-of-life data for patients with CNS tumors while providing preliminary data on the effectiveness of device-based health promotion +/- metformin for treatment related cognitive decline. Clinical trial information: NCT06377696 .

TPS2099 Background: Gliomas are the most common primary central nervous system (CNS) malignancy in adults, accounting for 26.3% of all brain tumors. Care at high volume centers is associated with an overall survival benefit, but access to in-person evaluations can be challenging due to disease-related neurological disability and loss of income. Telehealth represents a convenient and efficient alternative to in-person evaluations, but acceptability and comparative safety of this care delivery modality has not been prospectively evaluated among glioma patients undergoing chemotherapy. Methods: This single-arm non-randomized pragmatic clinical trial evaluates patient satisfaction with, and safety of video-enabled telehealth assessments compared to in-person evaluations for patients with glioma undergoing temozolomide chemotherapy. The study includes adult patients with a diagnosis of glioma requiring adjuvant temozolomide chemotherapy. Participants act as their own controls, alternating between in-person and telehealth assessments while undergoing chemotherapy dosed per standard of care. Monitoring labs are completed locally and transmitted electronically. For participants without access to Wi-Fi or a device (e.g. mobile phone or computer), cellular-enabled tablet devices are provided to facilitate appointments and completion of electronic study components. All participants who travel to in-person appointments are reimbursed for travel expenses. The primary outcome measure is patient satisfaction with care delivered, as measured by institutional Press-Ganey survey scores obtained following telehealth and in-person assessments. A key secondary outcome measure is completion rate of planned oral chemotherapy, tracked using a digital pill diary incorporated into our institutional electronic health record. The digital diary allows real-time tracking of chemotherapy adherence and adverse events experienced by participants. Other secondary outcomes include acute care utilization days following telehealth and in-person visits (defined as emergency department evaluations and days of inpatient stay), neurologic disability as measured by the Neurologic Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (NANO) scale, and disease related quality of life measured by the EORTC QLQ-C30. All participant surveys are self-reported and completed electronically. This decentralized pragmatic clinical trial provides unprecedented, prospective real-world data on utilization of telehealth services compared to in-person visits for patients undergoing chemotherapy for glioma. We expect the data generated to inform the design and conduct of future decentralized interventional neuro-oncology trials. NCT06625047 opened for enrollment in October 2024, 16 of 30 intended participants were accrued as of January 2025. Clinical trial information: NCT06625047 .

TPS2092 Background: Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common primary brain malignancy in adults. GBM is universally recurrent and associated with dismal outcomes. Re-irradiation (reRT) is ideal for evaluating combination therapy for recurrent GBM (rGBM) due to its multifactorial mechanism of action, including downstream immunomodulatory activity. RT (especially multi-fraction) increases immunogenicity in preclinical models by promoting immune activation, immune migration, and antigen uptake. Additionally, a recent study demonstrated enhanced PD-L1 expression in the glioma tumor microenvironment (TME) following RT, and combining stereotactic RT with a PD-1 inhibitor improved survival in murine models. Retifanlimab is a humanized monoclonal anti-PD1 IgG4 antibody that received FDA approval for adults with metastatic or recurrent locally advanced Merkel cell carcinoma. Bevacizumab, an anti-VEGF antibody, is a treatment for radiation necrosis/cerebral edema with less immune suppression than corticosteroids. In a previous Phase 2 study, hypofractionated RT (HFRT), retifanlimab, and bevacizumab was associated with a 9-month overall survival (OS) rate of 71.4%. To demonstrate the efficacy of this regimen compared to HFRT and bevacizumab, we have designed a new randomized controlled Phase 2 trial. We hypothesize that combination reRT with retifanlimab will produce a more robust anti-tumor immune response and improve OS compared to reRT without retifanlimab. Methods: This is a multicenter, open-label, randomized, controlled Phase 2 study of retifanlimab, bevacizumab, and HFRT for adult patients with rGBM. Patients are randomized 1:1 to the experimental (bevacizumab + retifanlimab + HFRT) or control cohort (bevacizumab + HFRT). Key eligibility criteria include age ≥ 18 years, Karnofsky performance status ≥ 60, ≥ 4 months since administration of any prior bevacizumab, and dexamethasone dose ≤ 4 mg at the time of randomization. The primary endpoint is 9-month OS. Secondary endpoints include OS, progression-free survival, objective response rate, neurologic assessment by NANO criteria, and adverse events profile. Protocol treatment will continue up to two years, or until progression or intolerable toxicity. Survival follow up will continue every two months, up to four years. Seven of the planned 94 patients have been enrolled as of submission on 1/28/25. Clinical trial #: NCT06160206. Funding provided by Incyte. Clinical trial information: NCT06160206 .

PURPOSE Survival for patients with melanoma has recently improved. The propensity of melanoma to metastasize to the brain remains a common and serious feature of this disease. The purposes of this study were to evaluate prognostic factors for patients with newly diagnosed melanoma brain metastases (MBMs) in a large cohort treated with modern multimodal therapies, compare those results with those in prior eras, and update the Melanoma Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA). METHODS Univariable and multivariable (MVA) analyses of prognostic factors and treatments associated with survival were performed on 1,796 patients with newly diagnosed MBM treated between January 01, 2015, and December 31, 2021, using a multi-institutional retrospective database. Multiple imputation was used to address missingness of potential predictors. Significant variables in combined MVA were used to update the Melanoma GPA. Comparisons were made with legacy cohorts. RESULTS Median survivals for cohorts A (1985-2007, n = 481), B (2006-2015, n = 823), and C (2015-2021, n = 1,796) were 6.7, 9.8, and 16.6 months and median follow-up times were 40.1, 43.6, and 48.8 months, respectively. In combined MVA, significant prognostic factors for survival were higher Karnofsky Performance Status, fewer MBMs, absence of extracranial metastases, lower serum lactate dehydrogenase, and no immunotherapy before MBM. These factors were incorporated into the updated Melanoma GPA. The combined median and 3-year survivals for patients with GPA 0-1, 1.5-2, and 2.5-4.0 were 5.4, 13.2, and 43.2 months and 12.4%, 28.8%, and 51.6%, respectively. CONCLUSION Prognostic factors have changed and survival has improved for patients with MBM but varies widely by GPA. The updated Melanoma GPA calculator (BrainMetGPA), available free online, can be used to estimate survival, individualize treatment, stratify clinical trials, guide surveillance, and augment clinical trial eligibility. Multidisciplinary treatment is essential. Trials are needed to elucidate the optimal sequencing of various therapeutic modalities.