Guha‐Thakurta, Nandita

Abstract PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE We seek to establish the feasibility of using spine stereotactic radiosurgery (SSRS) allowing for spinal cord dose constraint relaxation as the primary management of metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC) in inoperable patients monitoring for radiation myelopathy (RM) and radiographic local control (LC). MATERIAL/METHODS Patients with radiation naïve MESCC were enrolled on this prospective Phase 1 trial. Single fraction SSRS was delivered to a dose of 18 or 24 Gy. Spinal cord constraint relaxation was performed in sequential cohorts from an initial allowable Dmax cohort of 10 Gy up to 16 Gy only if tumor progression occurred without RM. RESULTS Thirty two patients enrolled on the trial of which 4, 12, 8 and 8 were in the 10 Gy, 12 Gy, 14 Gy and 16 Gy cord Dmax cohorts, respectively. At baseline, there were 10 sites with MESCC Grade 1B, 10 sites with Grade 1C, 9 sites with Grade 2, 2 sites with Grade 1A, and 1 site with Grade 3 disease. Of the 28 evaluable patients, the median overall survival was 32.3 months (range 5.8-122.6 mo). The 1-year and 5-year LC was 84.5% and 79.5%. The 2-year LC did not statistically differ between the 14-16 Gy cord Dmax combined cohorts and the 10-12 Gy cord Dmax combined cohorts (92.9% vs. 62.9%, p = 0.15). With a median clinical follow-up of 22.7 months (range 3-122.3 mo), there were no cases of RM including in the 13 patients who survived at least 3 years. In the cohort receiving a cord Dmax of 16 Gy, there were no cases of RM with a median follow-up of 18.6 mo (range 9.0-97.1 mo). CONCLUSION With long-term follow-up, these data demonstrate that SSRS is a safe and effective tool in patients with MESCC. Cord constraint relaxation may be considered in inoperable patients with MESCC.

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.

Abstract PURPOSE To compare tumor progression based on clinical radiological assessment and on Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria between GBM patients treated with proton radiotherapy (PT) vs. photon intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). METHODS Eligible patients were enrolled on the described prospective phase II trial and had MR imaging at baseline and follow-up beyond 12 weeks from treatment completion. ‘Clinical’ progression was based on a radiology report of progression in combination with changes in treatment due to suspected disease progression. A single blinded observer applied RANO criteria to determine the RANO-based tumor progression. RESULTS Of 90 enrolled patients, 66 were evaluable, with median follow-up of 19.8 (Range: 3.2–65.1) months; median of 22.6 months for PT (n=25) vs. 18.9 months for IMRT (n=41). Median time to progression (TTP) was 7.9 months based on clinical progression criteria (8.1 months IMRT, 6.3 months PT) and 7.2 months (7.3 months IMRT, 5.7 months PT) by RANO criteria (p=ns for all). Median ‘clinical’ progression-free survival (PFS) was 8.7 (Range: 6.4–11.1) months; 8.9 months IMRT vs. 8.7 months PT (p=0.065). Median RANO PFS was 8.3 (range, 5.8–11.6) months: 8.3 months IMRT vs. 6.9 months PT (p=0.226). There were 14 discrepant cases: 3 had progression based on ‘clinical’ but not RANO criteria, and 11 had progression based on RANO but not ‘clinical’ criteria. CONCLUSION Based on this secondary analysis of a randomized trial of PT vs. IMRT for GBM, there was no difference in tumor progression relative to treatment technique used. There was no statistical difference in PFS noted between clinical and RANO-based assessments, but RANO criteria identified progression more often than clinical assessment, and TTP was shortened with the use of RANO criteria alone. Further development of tumor assessment tools that improve consistency and accuracy of determining tumor progression are needed to guide therapeutic trials in GBM.

OBJECTIVEThe objective of this study was to assess outcomes after Gamma Knife radiosurgery (GKRS) re-irradiation for palliation of patients with trigeminal pain secondary to recurrent malignant skull base tumors.METHODSFrom 2009 to 2016, 26 patients who had previously undergone radiation treatment to the head and neck received GKRS for palliation of trigeminal neuropathic pain secondary to recurrence of malignant skull base tumors. Twenty-two patients received single-fraction GKRS to a median dose of 17 Gy (range 15–20 Gy) prescribed to the 50% isodose line (range 43%–55%). Four patients received fractionated Gamma Knife Extend therapy to a median dose of 24 Gy in 3 fractions (range 21–27 Gy) prescribed to the 50% isodose line (range 45%–50%). Those with at least a 3-month follow-up were assessed for symptom palliation. Self-reported pain was evaluated by the numeric rating scale (NRS) and MD Anderson Symptom Inventory–Head and Neck (MDASI-HN) pain score. Frequency of as-needed (PRN) analgesic use and opioid requirement were also assessed. Baseline opioid dose was reported as a fentanyl-equivalent dose (FED) and PRN for breakthrough pain use as oral morphine-equivalent dose (OMED). The chi-square and Student t-tests were used to determine differences before and after GKRS.RESULTSSeven patients (29%) were excluded due to local disease progression. Two experienced progression at the first follow-up, and 5 had local recurrence from disease outside the GKRS volume. Nineteen patients were assessed for symptom palliation with a median follow-up duration of 10.4 months (range 3.0–34.4 months). At 3 months after GKRS, the NRS scores (n = 19) decreased from 4.65 ± 3.45 to 1.47 ± 2.11 (p < 0.001); MDASI-HN pain scores (n = 13) decreased from 5.02 ± 1.68 to 2.02 ± 1.54 (p < 0.01); scheduled FED (n = 19) decreased from 62.4 ± 102.1 to 27.9 ± 45.5 mcg/hr (p < 0.01); PRN OMED (n = 19) decreased from 43.9 ± 77.5 to 10.9 ± 20.8 mg/day (p = 0.02); and frequency of any PRN analgesic use (n = 19) decreased from 0.49 ± 0.55 to 1.33 ± 0.90 per day (p = 0.08). At 6 months after GKRS, 9 (56%) of 16 patients reported being pain free (NRS score 0), with 6 (67%) of the 9 being both pain free and not requiring analgesic medications. One patient treated early in our experience developed a temporary increase in trigeminal pain 3–4 days after GKRS requiring hospitalization. All subsequently treated patients were given a single dose of intravenous steroids immediately after GKRS followed by a 2–3-week oral steroid taper. No further cases of increased or new pain after treatment were observed after this intervention.CONCLUSIONSGKRS for palliation of trigeminal pain secondary to recurrent malignant skull base tumors demonstrated a significant decrease in patient-reported pain and opioid requirement. Additional patients and a longer follow-up duration are needed to assess durability of symptom relief and local control.