Citations

Purpose This study aimed to develop and validate a tool to predict the primary tumor site in patients with metastatic cancer of unknown primary using demographic and clinical variables, including imaging-derived sites of metastasis, without pathology or laboratory data. Methods In this population-based study, data were extracted from the SEER database. Patients diagnosed between 2010 and 2020 with a known primary cancer site, metastatic staging, and metastasis in the bone, liver, brain, and lungs were included. Patients were randomly split into training (70%) and/or testing (30%) sets. A total of 27 primary tumor sites were included. A gradient boosting model was trained to predict the primary tumor site, with random forest and classification tree models evaluated as comparators. Random guess and frequency-weighted guessing models were used for baseline comparison. Results A total of 689,715 patients were included from 9,208,295 queried. The most common primary cancer sites were non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (n = 211,338), intestines (n = 64,187), and pancreas (n = 60,310). The baseline models achieved Top-5 accuracies of 0.179 for a random guess and 0.476 for a frequency-weighted guess. The gradient boosting model achieved Top-1, Top-3, and Top-5 accuracies of 0.40 ± 0.001, 0.680 ± 0.001, and 0.790 ± 0.001, respectively, across 100 Monte-Carlo replicates. Top-5 accuracy was highest for primary NSCLC (0.990 ± 0.001) and intestinal cancer (0.900 ± 0.003). Our model was most influenced by sex (gain = 0.27) and metastasis to bone (gain = 0.20). A web app was constructed: primarycancerpredictor.netlify.app. Conclusion This study developed and evaluated a gradient boosting machine learning model and a user-friendly web tool to aid in the diagnosis of cancer of unknown primary.

Abstract Background: Sexual and gender minority (SGM) representation is growing in the United States. This study estimated the future SGM cancer burden amidst shifting cancer patterns. Methods: Age-specific incidence data for breast, prostate, colorectal, lung, and melanoma were obtained from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program’s 12-registry database. Nordpred age-period-cohort models projected incidence through 2040 to 2044. Rates were applied to US Census population estimates and generation- and sex-specific SGM identification proportions from Gallup’s 2023 to 2024 surveys. Prophet was used for sensitivity analysis. Results: At ages 55 to 59, breast cancer cases among Millennial SGMs were 3,672% higher than among Silent Generation SGMs (34,850 vs. 924 cases), melanoma cases were 1,061% higher (5,526 vs. 476 cases), and colorectal cancer cases were 2,206% higher (23,594 vs. 1,023 cases). Compared with Generation X, Millennial prostate cancer cases were 142% higher (8,100 vs. 3,344 cases), and lung cancer cases were 169% higher (5,451 vs. 2,029 cases). By 2040 to 2044, Millennials were projected to account for 68.4% of breast cancer cases and 59.7% of colorectal cancer cases among SGMs. Conclusions: At ages 55 to 59, the 5-year cancer burden was projected to be 15 times higher among Millennials than Silent Generation SGMs (77,521 vs. 5,134 cases), driven primarily by the larger SGM population in younger generations. Oncology systems will need to prepare for the increase in cancer care demand. Impact: These findings identify a substantial generational shift in the SGM cancer burden and may inform oncology workforce capacity, culturally responsive cancer care, and healthcare system preparation for this growing population.

PURPOSE Although outcomes for nonmetastatic cancers have improved since the 1970s, it remains uncertain whether long-term survival has improved among patients presenting with de novo metastatic disease, defined as cancer presenting with distant metastases at the time of initial diagnosis. This study evaluated changes in 5-year survival among patients with de novo metastatic cancer diagnosed in 1976 versus 2015, with a minimum 5-year follow-up through 1981 and 2020, respectively. METHODS Population-based data were obtained from the SEER database. Patients diagnosed with de novo metastatic cancer in 1976 (n = 11,864) and 2015 (n = 26,324) were included. Five-year overall survival (OS) was compared between cohorts, and multivariable logistic regression identified demographic and clinical factors associated with survival. RESULTS The 5-year OS increased significantly from 10.6% in 1976-1981 to 23.6% in 2015-2020 ( P < .001). Survival gains were largest in breast cancer (12.6%-34.2%; P < .001), ovarian cancer (14.4%-32.5%; P < .001), colorectal cancer (3.7%-15.0%; P < .001), and hematologic malignancies (24.3%-53.9%; P < .001). Minimal improvement occurred in pancreatic cancer (0.25%-1.6%; P = .007) and small cell lung cancer (0.8%-3.1%; P = .008). Multivariable analysis demonstrated that older age, male sex, and Black race were associated with lower odds of 5-year survival (all P < .01) CONCLUSION Over the past four decades, long-term survival among patients with de novo metastatic cancer has more than doubled; however, progress remains uneven across cancer types. Gains appear concentrated in malignancies with substantial therapeutic advances, whereas others show persistently poor outcomes. Continued efforts are needed to address disparities and improve survival in resistant cancer types.

Importance The ideal duration of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for treating localized prostate cancer is unknown due to variable adherence and treatment durations tested in clinical trials. Objective To determine the ideal duration of ADT for patients with prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy. Data Sources This individual patient data meta-analysis of 13 randomized phase 3 clinical trials evaluated the use of radiotherapy alone or with ADT. It included patients with a median follow-up of 11.3 (IQR, 9.5-14.5) years and ADT duration of 0 to 36 months. Most patients (7392 [72%]) included had National Comprehensive Cancer Network high-risk or very high-risk disease. Study Selection For this meta-analysis, a systematic literature search from 1980 to 2020 was performed in trial registries (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov), MEDLINE (1966-2020), Embase (1982-2020), Web of Science, and Scopus to identify trials. Data Extraction and Synthesis Intention-to-treat and as-treated analyses were performed. The number needed to treat to prevent 1 distant metastasis at 10 years was calculated based on prognostic risk group. The analyses were conducted from January 5 to August 15, 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary end point for this study was overall survival, defined as time to death or last follow-up from randomization. Secondary end points included biochemical recurrence, distant metastasis (DM), prostate cancer–specific mortality, and other-cause mortality. Results The median (IQR) age among the 10 266 male patients was 70 (65-74) years. Longer durations of ADT were associated with nonlinear improvement in relative benefits of DM, prostate cancer–specific mortality, and overall survival, with reduced estimated benefits beyond 9 to 12 months of ADT based on the end point. There was a near-linear increase in other-cause mortality associated with long-term ADT use (hazard ratio, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.09-1.50; P = .002 for 28 vs 0 months of ADT). The optimal ADT duration based on 10-year DM was 0, 6, 12 months, and undefined for patients with 1 intermediate-risk factor, 2 or more intermediate-risk factors, and National Comprehensive Cancer Network high-risk and very high-risk disease, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance The results of this meta-analysis suggest that, for men with localized prostate cancer treated with definitive radiotherapy and ADT, there are relative and absolute benefits from increasing durations of ADT that help provide individualized risk estimates.

Objectives: Early identification of patients living with cancer at higher risk of death from an infection is critical in infection mortality prevention. We characterize patients living with cancer at the highest risk of dying from an infection. Methods: 7,529,481 US cancer survivors (1992 to 2015) were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) and 95% CIs were calculated. Fine-gray survival analysis was performed to calculate hazard ratios by adjusting for the effects of competing risks (eg, deaths due to causes other than infection). Results: Among 7,529,481 patients living with cancer (1992 to 2015), 101,167 (1.3%) died of infection. The rate of infection-specific mortality was 27.19/10,000 person-years, with an SMR of 3.29 (95% CI: 3.26-3.32, P <0.001). Patients who were older, male, black, and unmarried were at a greater risk of fatal infection. Overall, the risk of infection-specific mortality for patients living with cancer is greatest 1 year after diagnosis compared with the general population (SMR: 8.68, 95% CI: 8.53-8.84; P< 0.0001), and this risk decreases with follow-up time (SMR at >10 y after diagnosis: 2.93, 95% CI: 2.87-3.00; P< 0.0001). Among patients with Hodgkin Lymphoma, Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma, and Kaposi Sarcoma, 9.2%, 11.5%, and 82.2% of all deaths within the first year after cancer diagnosis occurred due to acute infectious disease. In contrast, for patients with liver cancer, the relative percentage of infection-specific mortality increases with follow-up time from 3.5% at <1 year after cancer diagnosis and 10.4% at 10+ years of follow-up. Conclusion: The results of this study characterize infection mortality in patients living with cancer, which can guide more targeted research and interventions in this population.

309 Background: Standard of care (SOC) treatment options for HR-PCa include RT with long-term androgen deprivation (LT-ADT) or RP with selective use of post-operative RT +/- androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). The optimal treatment approach has been assessed in retrospective population-based and multi-center comparisons, which have yielded mixed results with substantial bias. Therefore, we conducted an emulated randomized comparison of RT vs RP in HR-PCa leveraging patients enrolled in RCTs. Methods: We searched Medline for RCTs in HR-PCa with a SOC arm of an RT- or RP-based regimen. Inclusion required similar experimental treatment and contemporaneous enrollment in the same country to reduce bias. This identified 2 trials, NRG/RTOG 0521 (RT+LT-ADT +/- 6 cycles docetaxel [doce]), and CALGB 90203 (RP +/- neoadjuvant 6 cycles doce and ADT). Due to inherent difference in the biochemical recurrence criteria after RT vs RP, we chose inverse probability of treatment weighted (IPTW) cumulative incidence of distant metastasis (DM) as the primary endpoint, considering deaths as competing events. Death after DM was measured to create a harmonized metric of deaths likely attributed to PCa. To assess potential residual selection bias, death without DM to capture non-cancer associated deaths was analyzed. Results: Overall, 1290 patients (RT n=557, RP n=733) were included, with similar median follow-up of 6.4 years. Prior to IPTW, RP patients were significantly younger with lower baseline PSA compared to RT patients. Adjuvant (18%) and salvage therapy (44%) was used in RP cohort. Cumulative incidence of DM was significantly lower in patients who underwent RT compared to RP (8-year DM: 16% vs 23%; p=0.01; subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR] 0.48 [95%CI 0.34-0.69], p<0.001). 8-year rates of death after DM were 10% vs 8% (p=0.72) in the RP and RT patients, respectively. RT patients had significantly greater risk of death without DM (HR 2.09 [1.01-4.34], p=0.048) with early differences measured. On a cross-arm comparison, 8-year cumulative incidence of DM when comparing SOC RT+LT-ADT group versus the doce+ADT+RP group was 18% vs 21%, respectively (sHR 0.75 [0.45-1.24], p=0.26). Conclusions: HR-PCa patients enrolled on RCTs had significantly lower incidence of DM with an RT-based strategy compared to an RP-based approach. Longer follow-up is needed to assess deaths attributed to PCa. Despite the strengths of the comparison (use of cooperative group RCT data, contemporaneous enrollment in the same country, patients fit enough for chemotherapy, and IPTW adjustments) there appears to be residual unmeasured bias, as expected, based on greater early deaths without DM in the RT arm. Utilization of post-operative radiotherapy and ADT+Doce may mitigate differences between RP and SOC RT+LT-ADT.

387 Background: Level 1 evidence supports treatment of high-risk and node positive PCa using 4-9 weeks of radiotherapy (RT) combined with 18-36 months of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with or without abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AAP). While effective, some cancers recur, and this prolonged treatment is associated with inconvenience and variable morbidity. We aimed to determine whether the biological synergy of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) with a 6-month combination of ADT, AAP, and the PARP inhibitor niraparib, could enable a shorter intensified, yet safe and effective, therapeutic alternative. Methods: ASCLEPIuS (NCT04194554) is a multicenter investigator-initiated phase I/II trial in high-risk or node positive, homologous recombination unselected, PCa. Patients received 6 months of ADT, AAP, niraparib and SBRT to the prostate (37.5-40 Gy) +/- pelvic lymph nodes (25 Gy). Focal prostate/nodal boosting was permitted. The phase I primary endpoint was the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of niraparib using the time-to-event continuous reassessment method (3 dose levels: 100 mg and 200 mg held during SBRT, or 200 mg concurrent with SBRT). Dose limiting toxicities (DLT) were any persistent grade 4+ hematologic toxicity or any grade 3+ rectal/urinary toxicity at least possibly related to treatment as assessed by CTCAE v5.0. Patient reported quality of life (QOL) was assessed with the EPIC-26 short form. Linear mixed models were used to compare scores over time. Results: Accrual began in Nov. 2020 with a transition from phase I to phase II in May 2023 after enrolling 54 men. Median follow-up of the phase I cohort is 12.1 months (IQR 9.4-18.9), 80% (n=43) had Grade Group 4-5, median PSA was 17 ng/mL (range, 1-73), 15% (n=8) had cN+ disease, and 76% (n=41) received nodal RT. There were 0 DLTs to date, no grade 3+ rectal or urinary toxicities, and 5 serious adverse events at least possibly attributable to study treatment (anemia, non-rectal gastrointestinal, syncope, infection, musculoskeletal). The most common grade 3 toxicities were hypertension (n = 11, 21%) and leukopenia (n=6, 11%). Transient dose reductions or holds of AAP or niraparib occurred in 10 and 11 patients, respectively. There were no statistically significant declines in patient reported urinary QOL at 6- or 12-months post-treatment compared to baseline (all p >0.15). A transient decline in bowel QOL at 6-months occurred (p<0.01), which improved by 12-months (p=0.16). Conclusions: Our phase I findings support the short-term safety and tolerability of the combination of SBRT to the prostate and nodes, ADT, AAP, and niraparib at an MTD of 200 mg in men with high-risk or node positive PCa. Our trial completed phase II enrollment in May 2024, and longer-term safety, efficacy, and genomic correlations will be presented in the future. Clinical trial information: NCT04194554 .

Objectives: Deaths from an unknown cause are difficult to adjudicate and oncologic studies of comparative effectiveness often demonstrate inconsistencies in incorporating these deaths and competing events (eg, heart disease and stroke) in their analyses. In this study, we identify cancer patients most at risk for death of an unknown cause. Methods: This retrospective, population-based study used cancer registry data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (1992-2015). The absolute rate of unknown causes of death (COD) cases stratified by sex, marital status, race, treatment, and cancer site were calculated and a multivariable logistic regression model was applied to obtain adjusted odds ratios with 95% CIs. Results: Out of 7,154,779 cancer patients across 22 cancer subtypes extracted from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results, 3,448,927 died during follow-up and 276,068 (7.4%) of these deaths were from unknown causes. Patients with an unknown COD had a shorter mean survival time compared with patients with known COD (36.3 vs 65.7 mo, P < 0.001). The contribution of unknown COD to total mortality was highest in patients with more indolent cancers (eg, prostate [12.7%], thyroid [12.3%], breast [10.7%]) and longer follow-up (eg, >5 to 10 y). One, 3, and 5-year cancer-specific survival (CSS) calculations including unknown COD were significantly decreased compared with CSS estimates excluding cancer patients with unknown COD. Conclusion: Of the patients, 7.4% died of unknown causes during follow-up and the proportion of death was higher with longer follow-up and among more indolent cancers. The attribution of high percentages of unknown COD to cancer or non-cancer causes could impact population-based cancer registry studies or clinical trial outcomes with respect to measures involving CSS and mortality.

PURPOSE The sequencing of androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) with radiotherapy (RT) may affect outcomes for prostate cancer in an RT-field size-dependent manner. Herein, we investigate the impact of ADT sequencing for men receiving ADT with prostate-only RT (PORT) or whole-pelvis RT (WPRT). MATERIALS AND METHODS Individual patient data from 12 randomized trials that included patients receiving neoadjuvant/concurrent or concurrent/adjuvant short-term ADT (4-6 months) with RT for localized disease were obtained from the Meta-Analysis of Randomized trials in Cancer of the Prostate consortium. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was performed with propensity scores derived from age, initial prostate-specific antigen, Gleason score, T stage, RT dose, and mid-trial enrollment year. Metastasis-free survival (primary end point) and overall survival (OS) were assessed by IPTW-adjusted Cox regression models, analyzed independently for men receiving PORT versus WPRT. IPTW-adjusted Fine and Gray competing risk models were built to evaluate distant metastasis (DM) and prostate cancer–specific mortality. RESULTS Overall, 7,409 patients were included (6,325 neoadjuvant/concurrent and 1,084 concurrent/adjuvant) with a median follow-up of 10.2 years (interquartile range, 7.2-14.9 years). A significant interaction between ADT sequencing and RT field size was observed for all end points ( P interaction < .02 for all) except OS. With PORT (n = 4,355), compared with neoadjuvant/concurrent ADT, concurrent/adjuvant ADT was associated with improved metastasis-free survival (10-year benefit 8.0%, hazard ratio [HR], 0.65; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.79; P < .0001), DM (subdistribution HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.82; P = .0046), prostate cancer–specific mortality (subdistribution HR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.54; P < .0001), and OS (HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.83; P = .0001). However, in patients receiving WPRT (n = 3,049), no significant difference in any end point was observed in regard to ADT sequencing except for worse DM (HR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.20 to 2.05; P = .0009) with concurrent/adjuvant ADT. CONCLUSION ADT sequencing exhibits a significant impact on clinical outcomes with a significant interaction with field size. Concurrent/adjuvant ADT should be the standard of care where short-term ADT is indicated in combination with PORT.