Grosshans, David R.

Abstract Background Craniopharyngioma is a histologically benign tumor of the suprasellar region for which survival is excellent but quality of life is often poor secondary to functional deficits from tumor and treatment. Standard therapy consists of maximal safe resection with or without radiation therapy. Few prospective trials have been performed, and response assessment has not been standardized. Methods The Response Assessment in Pediatric Neuro-Oncology (RAPNO) committee devised consensus guidelines to assess craniopharyngioma response prospectively. Results Magnetic resonance imaging is the recommended radiologic modality for baseline and follow-up assessments. Radiologic response is defined by 2-dimensional measurements of both solid and cystic tumor components. In certain clinical contexts, response to solid and cystic disease may be differentially considered based on their unique natural histories and responses to treatment. Importantly, the committee incorporated functional endpoints related to neuro-endocrine and visual assessments into craniopharyngioma response definitions. In most circumstances, the cystic disease should be considered progressive only if growth is associated with acute, new-onset or progressive functional impairment. Conclusions Craniopharyngioma is a common pediatric central nervous system tumor for which standardized response parameters have not been defined. A RAPNO committee devised guidelines for craniopharyngioma assessment to uniformly define response in future prospective trials.

Abstract INTRODUCTION: Craniopharyngioma (CP) is a histologically benign tumor of the pituitary stalk that accounts for 4% of pediatric central nervous system (CNS) tumors. Given its location, CP often causes neuro-endocrine, hypothalamic, and vision dysfunction. Standard therapy consists of maximally safe resection +/- radiation therapy (RT). Medical management, including intra-cystic therapy, may have utility in certain contexts. Survival after CP is excellent, but quality of life is often poor secondary to functional deficits from the tumor and/or treatment. Few prospective CP trials have been performed, and response assessment has not been standardized. METHODS: The Response Assessment in Pediatric Neuro-Oncology (RAPNO) committee, formed of international experts in relevant subspecialties, devised consensus guidelines from published literature and/or expert opinion to assess CP response in prospective clinical trials. RESULTS: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the recommended radiological modality for baseline and follow-up CP assessment. Computed tomography can be useful for identification of calcification in the initial diagnostic work-up. The committee defined specific standard MRI-based sequences focused on comprehensive evaluation of the suprasellar space. Radiologic CP response is defined by two-dimensional measurements of both solid and cystic tumor components. Three-dimensional measurements are also encouraged in prospective trials. In certain clinical contexts, response of solid and cystic disease may be differentially considered based on their unique natural histories and responses to treatment (including transient cyst growth during or after RT). Importantly, the committee incorporated functional endpoints related to neuro-endocrine and visual assessments into CP response definitions. In most circumstances, cystic disease should be considered progressive only if growth is associated with acute, new-onset or progressive functional impairment. CONCLUSION: CP is a common pediatric CNS tumor for which standardized response parameters have not been defined. A RAPNO committee devised guidelines for baseline and longitudinal assessments of CP to uniformly define response in future prospective trials.

AbstractBackgroundPediatric brain tumor survivors are at risk for poor social outcomes. It remains unknown whether cognitive sparing with proton radiotherapy (PRT) supports better social outcomes relative to photon radiotherapy (XRT). We hypothesized that survivors treated with PRT would outperform those treated with XRT on measures of cognitive and social outcomes. Further, we hypothesized that cognitive performance would predict survivor social outcomes.ProcedureSurvivors who underwent PRT (n = 38) or XRT (n = 20) participated in a neurocognitive evaluation >1 year post radiotherapy. Group differences in cognitive and social functioning were assessed using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). Regression analyses examined predictors of peer relations and social skills.ResultsAge at evaluation, radiation dose, tumor diameter, and sex did not differ between groups (all p > .05). XRT participants were younger at diagnosis (XRT M = 5.0 years, PRT M = 7.6 years) and further out from radiotherapy (XRT M = 8.7 years, PRT M = 4.6 years). The XRT group performed worse than the PRT group on measures of processing speed (p = .01) and verbal memory (p < .01); however, social outcomes did not differ by radiation type. The proportion of survivors with impairment in peer relations and social skills exceeded expectation; χ2(1) = 38.67, p < .001; χ2(1) = 5.63, p < .05. Household poverty predicted peer relation difficulties (t = 2.18, p < .05), and verbal memory approached significance (t = −1.99, p = .05). Tumor diameter predicted social skills (t = −2.07, p < .05).ConclusionsRegardless of radiation modality, survivors are at risk for social challenges. Deficits in verbal memory may place survivors at particular risk. Results support monitoring of cognitive and social functioning throughout survivorship, as well as consideration of sociodemographic risk factors.

Abstract Background Brainstem toxicity after radiation therapy (RT) is a devastating complication and a particular concern with proton radiation (PBT). We investigated the incidence and clinical correlates of brainstem injury in pediatric brain tumors treated with PBT. Methods All patients &lt;21 years with brain tumors treated with PBT at our institution from 2007–2019, with a brainstem Dmean &gt;30 Gy and/or Dmax &gt;50.4 Gy were included. Symptomatic brainstem injury (SBI) was defined as any new or progressive cranial neuropathy, ataxia, and/or motor weakness with corresponding radiographic abnormality within brainstem. Results A total of 595 patients were reviewed and 468 (medulloblastoma = 200, gliomas = 114, ependymoma = 87, ATRT = 43) met our inclusion criteria. Median age at RT was 6.3 years and median prescribed RT dose was 54Gy [RBE]. Fifteen patients (3.2%) developed SBI, at a median of 4 months after RT. Grades 2, 3, 4, and 5 brainstem injuries were seen in 7, 5, 1, and 2 patients respectively. Asymptomatic radiographic changes were seen in 51 patients (10.9%). SBI was significantly higher in patients with age ≤3 years, female gender, ATRT histology, patients receiving high-dose chemotherapy with stem cell rescue, and those not receiving craniospinal irradiation. Patients with SBI had a significantly higher V50–52. In 2014, our institution started using strict brainstem dose constraints (Dmax ≤57 Gy, Dmean ≤52.4 Gy, and V54≤10%). There was a trend towards decrease in SBI from 4.4% (2007-2013) to 1.5% (2014–2019) (P = .089) without affecting survival. Conclusion Our results suggest a low risk of SBI after PBT for pediatric brain tumors, comparable to photon therapy. A lower risk was seen after adopting strict brainstem dose constraints.

Background: Pediatric brain tumor survivors are at risk for poor social outcomes. It remains unknown whether cognitive sparing with proton radiotherapy (PRT) supports better social outcomes relative to photon radiotherapy (XRT). We hypothesized that survivors treated with PRT would outperform those treated with XRT on measures of cognitive and social outcomes. Further, we hypothesized that cognitive performance would predict survivor social outcomes. Procedure: Survivors who underwent PRT (n=38) or XRT (n=20) participated in a neurocognitive evaluation >1 year post-radiotherapy. Group differences in cognitive and social functioning were assessed using ANCOVA. Regression analyses examined predictors of peer relations and social skills. Results: Age at evaluation, radiation dose, tumor diameter, and sex did not differ between groups (all p>0.05). However, XRT participants were younger at diagnosis (XRT M=5.0 years, PRT M=7.6 years) and further out from radiotherapy (XRT M=8.7 years, PRT M=4.6 years). The XRT group performed worse than the PRT group on measures of processing speed (p=0.01) and verbal memory (p<0.01); however, social outcomes did not differ by radiation type. The proportion of survivors with impairment in peer relations and social skills exceeded expectation (2(1)=38.67, p<0.001; 2(1)=5.63, p<0.05), and verbal memory approached significance as a unique predictor of peer relations (t=-2.01, p=0.05). Total tumor RT dose significantly predicted social skills (t=-2.23, p<0.05). Conclusions: Regardless of radiation modality, survivors are at risk for social challenges, with one-quarter being socially excluded or undervalued. Deficits in verbal memory may place survivors at particular risk. Results support monitoring of cognitive and social functioning throughout survivorship.

BACKGROUNDBoth intensity‐modulated radiotherapy (RT) and passively scattered proton therapy have a risk of secondary malignant neoplasm (SMN) in children. To determine the influence of RT modality on the incidence of SMN after craniospinal irradiation (CSI), the authors compared the incidence of SMN in children who had medulloblastoma treated with either photon CSI plus an intensity‐modulated RT boost (group I) or passively scattered proton CSI plus a boost (group II).METHODSFrom 1996 to 2014, 115 children with medulloblastoma (group I, n = 63; group II, n = 52) received CSI followed by a boost to the tumor bed. Most patients had standard‐risk disease (63.5%). The median follow‐up was 12.8 years for group I and 8.7 years for group II.RESULTSThe 5‐year and 10‐year overall survival (OS) rates were 88.8% and 85.1%, respectively, for standard‐risk patients and 63.1% and 57.3%, respectively, for high‐risk patients, with no OS difference by RT modality (P = .81). Six SMNs were identified (4 in group I, 2 in group II). The 5‐year and 10‐year SMN incidence rates were 1.0% and 6.9%, respectively (0.0% and 8.0%, respectively, in group I; 2.2% and 4.9%, respectively, in group II; P = .74). Two SMNs occurred in the clinical target volume in the brain, 2 occurred in the exit dose region from the photon spinal field, 1 occurred in the entrance path of a proton beam, and 1 occurred outside the radiation field. There were no reported cases of secondary leukemia.CONCLUSIONSThis analysis demonstrates no difference in OS or SMN incidence between patients in groups I and II 10 years after RT.LAY SUMMARY One hundred fifteen children with medulloblastoma received radiotherapy (RT) with either photon craniospinal irradiation (CSI) and an intensity‐modulated RT boost (group I; n = 63) or passively scattered proton CSI and a boost (group II;, n = 52). The majority of children had standard‐risk disease (63.5%). The 5‐year and 10‐year overall survival rates were 88.8% and 85.1% for standard‐risk patients, respectively, and 63.1% and 57.3% for high‐risk patients, respectively, with no difference in overall survival by RT group (P = .81). The 5‐year and 10‐year second malignant neoplasm incidence rates were 1.0% and 6.9%, respectively, with no difference in second malignant neoplasm incidence according to RT group (P = .74).

Abstract Background Proton radiotherapy (PRT) may be associated with less neurocognitive risk than photon RT (XRT) for pediatric brain tumor survivors. We compared neurocognitive and academic outcomes in long‐term survivors treated with XRT versus PRT. Methods Survivors underwent neurocognitive evaluation >1 year after craniospinal (CSI) or focal PRT or XRT. Groups were compared using separate one‐way analyses of covariance for the CSI and focal groups. Results PRT ( n = 58) and XRT ( n = 30) subgroups were similar on gender (66% male), age at RT (median = 6.5 years), age at follow‐up (median = 14.6 years), and government assistance status (32%). PRT and XRT focal groups differed on follow‐up interval, shunt history, and total RT dose (all p < .05), whereas PRT and XRT CSI groups differed on follow‐up interval, baseline neurocognitive performance score, boost volume, and CSI dose (all p < .05). The PRT focal group outperformed the XRT focal group on inhibition/switching ( p = .04). The PRT CSI group outperformed the XRT CSI group on inattention/impulsivity (both p < .05). Several clinical variables (i.e., RT dose, boost field, baseline performance) predicted neurocognitive outcomes (all p < .05). The PRT focal group performed comparably to population means on most neurocognitive measures, while both CSI groups performed below expectation on multiple measures. The XRT CSI group was most impaired. All groups fell below expectation on processing speed, fine motor, and academic fluency (most p < .01). Conclusions Findings suggest generally favorable neurocognitive and academic long‐term outcomes following focal PRT. Impairment was greatest following CSI regardless of modality. Dosimetry and baseline characteristics are important determinants of outcome alone or in combination with modality.

Abstract Background This secondary image analysis of a randomized trial of proton radiotherapy (PT) versus photon intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) compares tumor progression based on clinical radiological assessment versus Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO). Methods Eligible patients were enrolled in the randomized trial and had MR imaging at baseline and follow-up beyond 12 weeks from completion of radiotherapy. “Clinical progression” was based on a clinical radiology report of progression and/or change in treatment for progression. Results Of 90 enrolled patients, 66 were evaluable. Median clinical progression-free survival (PFS) was 10.8 (range: 9.4–14.7) months; 10.8 months IMRT versus 11.2 months PT (P = .14). Median RANO-PFS was 8.2 (range: 6.9, 12): 8.9 months IMRT versus 6.6 months PT (P = .24). RANO-PFS was significantly shorter than clinical PFS overall (P = .001) and for both the IMRT (P = .01) and PT (P = .04) groups. There were 31 (46.3%) discrepant cases of which 17 had RANO progression more than a month prior to clinical progression, and 14 had progression by RANO but not clinical criteria. Conclusions Based on this secondary analysis of a trial of PT versus IMRT for glioblastoma, while no difference in PFS was noted relative to treatment technique, RANO criteria identified progression more often and earlier than clinical assessment. This highlights the disconnect between measures of tumor response in clinical trials versus clinical practice. With growing efforts to utilize real-world data and personalized treatment with timely adaptation, there is a growing need to improve the consistency of determining tumor progression within clinical trials and clinical practice.

Abstract Background To determine if proton radiotherapy (PT), compared to intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), delayed time to cognitive failure in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM). Methods Eligible patients were randomized unblinded to PT vs IMRT. The primary endpoint was time to cognitive failure. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), intracranial progression-free survival (PFS), toxicity, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Results A total of 90 patients were enrolled and 67 were evaluable with median follow-up of 48.7 months (range 7.1-66.7). There was no significant difference in time to cognitive failure between treatment arms (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.45-1.75; P = .74). PT was associated with a lower rate of fatigue (24% vs 58%, P = .05), but otherwise, there were no significant differences in PROs at 6 months. There was no difference in PFS (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.44-1.23; P = .24) or OS (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.49-1.50; P = .60). However, PT significantly reduced the radiation dose for nearly all structures analyzed. The average number of grade 2 or higher toxicities was significantly higher in patients who received IMRT (mean 1.15, range 0-6) compared to PT (mean 0.35, range 0-3; P = .02). Conclusions In this signal-seeking phase II trial, PT was not associated with a delay in time to cognitive failure but did reduce toxicity and patient-reported fatigue. Larger randomized trials are needed to determine the potential of PT such as dose escalation for GBM and cognitive preservation in patients with lower-grade gliomas with a longer survival time.