Citations

Background/Objectives: Spinal astrocytomas (SA) represent 30–40% of all intramedullary spinal cord tumors (IMSCTs) and present significant clinical challenges due to their aggressive behavior and potential for recurrence. We aimed to pool the evidence on SA and investigate predictors of regrowth or recurrence after surgical resection. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted on peer-reviewed human studies from several databases covering the field of SA. Data were collected including sex, age, tumor location, extent of resection, histopathological diagnosis, and adjuvant therapy to identify predictors of SA recurrence. Recurrence was defined as failure of local tumor control or regrowth after treatment. Results: A total of 53 studies with 1365 patients were included in the meta-analysis. A postoperative deterioration in neurological outcomes, as assessed by the modified McCormick scale, was noted in most of the patients. The overall recurrence rate amounted to 41%. On meta-analysis, high-grade WHO tumors were associated with higher odds of recurrence (OR = 2.65; 95% CI: 1.87, 3.76; p = 0.001). Similarly, GTR was associated with lower odds of recurrence compared to STR (OR = 0.33; 95% CI: 0.18, 0.60; p = 0.0003). Sex (p = 0.5848) and tumor location (p = 0.3693) did not show any significant differences in the odds of recurrence. Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring was described in 8 studies and adjuvant radiotherapy in 41 studies. Conclusions: The results highlight the significant importance of tumor grade and extent of resection in patient prognosis. The role of adjuvant radiotherapy remains unclear, with most studies suggesting no differences in outcomes, with limitations due to potential confounders.

OBJECTIVE Chordomas are rare tumors that originate from undifferentiated remnants of the notochord. Currently, there are no established guidelines regarding the choice of adjuvant radiation modality for patients surgically treated for chordomas. Using a nationwide, multicenter database, the authors aimed to compare long-term survival outcomes associated with the use of proton or photon adjuvant therapy for the management of chordomas of skull base and spine. METHODS The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried for chordoma cases from 2004 to 2017. Patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics were extracted from the database. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were conducted to investigate differences in outcome on propensity score–matched cohorts of patients treated with proton or photon adjuvant radiotherapy. RESULTS Of the 3490 patients available, 424 met the inclusion criteria for this study. In the prematching analysis, patients receiving adjuvant photon therapy were significantly older (median age 57.0 vs 45.0 years, p < 0.001) and were more commonly male (61% vs 43%, p < 0.001) compared with those receiving proton therapy. Races were equally distributed among radiotherapy modalities (p = 0.64). Patients with chordomas of the mobile spine or sacrum were less likely to receive proton compared with photon therapy (37% vs 58%). Patients receiving proton therapy were more often represented among private insurance holders (69% vs 52%, p < 0.001) as well as in the highest income quartile (52% vs 40%, p = 0.008). Patients traveled farther to receive proton, as opposed to photon, therapy (median 59.0 vs 34.9 miles, p < 0.001). On postmatching Kaplan-Meier analysis encompassing all chordoma cases, no difference in OS between photon and proton therapy was revealed (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.39–1.44; p = 0.39). A Kaplan-Meier analysis only including patients with skull base chordomas reached similar results (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.31–2.22; p = 0.71). In patients with spine chordomas, however, a significant difference was found, as proton therapy exhibited a superior OS over photon therapy (HR 0.28, 95% CI 0.09–0.81; p = 0.012). CONCLUSIONS Based on this nationwide analysis, patients with private insurance and higher income were more likely to receive proton adjuvant radiotherapy, while those with spinal or sacral chordomas were less likely to receive this modality. Despite this disparity, an OS benefit was observed in patients with chordomas of the spine and sacrum who received adjuvant proton therapy, in comparison with a matched cohort of patients treated with photon therapy. Conversely, this advantageous outcome was not evident in cases of chordomas located at the skull base.

OBJECTIVE Surgical decompression is often indicated for symptomatic cases of cervical radiculopathy. In the cervical spine, minimally invasive posterior cervical foraminotomy (MIS-PCF) and the anterior transcorporeal approach (ATCA) are modern techniques available to surgeons. This systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis aimed to assess surgical and patient-reported outcomes of MIS-PCF and ATCA for cervical radiculopathy. METHODS A systematic review of the literature was conducted using 1) Ovid; 2) Epub Ahead of Print and In-Process, In-Data-Review & Other Non-Indexed Citations; and 3) Scopus databases, which reported outcomes following cervical decompression using MIS-PCF or the ATCA. Specifically, baseline characteristics, operative outcomes, and changes in visual analog scale (VAS) neck pain score were assessed. The quality of the studies was graded using the modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies. RESULTS Forty studies with 1661 patients were identified. The comparative analysis of both techniques revealed no significant differences in complication (7%, 95% CI 5%–10%, p = 0.75) or reoperation rates (5%, 95% CI 3%–7%, p = 0.41). Additionally, there were no significant differences in estimated blood loss (55.39, 95% CI 44.62–66.16 ml, p = 0.55) or operative time (85.15, 95% CI 65.38–104.92 minutes, p = 0.05). The ATCA showed significantly greater improvement (p < 0.01) in VAS neck pain scores following surgery (ATCA point reduction 6.7, 95% CI 6.0–7.5 points vs MIS-PCF 3.0, 95% CI 1.0–5.0 points). CONCLUSIONS The ATCA and MIS-PCF are effective modern techniques for the surgical treatment of radiculopathy. Both approaches showed comparable postoperative outcomes, including complication and reoperation rates. However, the ATCA was shown to provide significantly greater improvement in VAS neck pain scores.

11079 Background: Phase 3 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) inform the standard of care in cancer treatment yet have a mixed track record of success. In this study, we sought to 1) determine the overall success rate of phase 3 RCTs; 2) assess whether authorship patterns differ between successful (positive) and unsuccessful (negative) trials; and 3) explore if individual authors have distinct track records of success. Methods: The HemOnc knowledgebase (KB) was queried for initial publications of phase 3 RCTs of systemic anticancer therapy; those without primary outcome described were excluded. RCTs were labeled positive if the primary endpoint was met per HemOnc standard criteria (P value ≤ 0.05 or hazard ratio upper bound ≤ 1 for any experimental arm[s]) and negative if they did not meet these criteria or if the experimental arm was statistically inferior. Trial metadata and author information were extracted from the HemOnc KB. Author positive publication rate (PPR) was defined as % of publications reporting a positive result divided by total number of eligible publications. Prolific authors were defined as those with 6+ eligible publications. Author count for manuscripts reporting positive vs negative results was evaluated with the Mann-Whitney U test; other statistics were descriptive. Results: 3328 studies met criteria as of February 5, 2024; these were associated with 3305 initial publications between 1960-2023, involving 25,412 unique authors. 1474 (44.3%) of the studies were positive. Publications reporting positive trial results had, on average, 3 more authors, median (interquartile range) of 18 (12-23) vs 15 (11-20), p<0.0001. The mean (±SD) PPR for n=1967 prolific authors was 47.7% (±22.3%). The PPR was not related to individual author output; mean PPR for non-prolific authors was 48.0% (SD not reported). Differences in PPR were apparent by the disease under study and the years of publication (Table). Among the 46 prolific authors who had a PPR 2+ SD above the mean, 26 (55%) were from China followed by Italy with 3 (6%). Conclusions: Despite known positive publication bias, the success rate of published phase 3 RCTs remains <50%. Publications reporting positive results had significantly more authors; this finding requires further study including adjustment for trial sample size. Significant variation in PPR amongst fields could be due to watershed therapeutic advances, differential selection of primary endpoints, and/or selective reporting of results. Finally, a signal for geographic association of outlier PPRs suggests the need for further investigation. [Table: see text]

11023 Background: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in cancer typically compare experimental to control arm regimens. The choice of an appropriate control (ctrl) arm can have a major impact on the expected success of an RCT. The frequency with which cancer RCTs use control arms based on established dosing and scheduling protocols has not been described. Methods: The HemOnc knowledgebase (KB) was used to identify systemic anti-cancer therapy (SACT) regimen variants, defined as regimens with identical components that differ in dosing, scheduling, and/or route. Non-cancer, nonrandomized, and non-SACT studies were excluded. Study publication year was used to define standard variants as those evaluated in the experimental arm of a positive phase 3 RCT >1 year prior to publication as a control arm, regardless of cancer type or context of treatment. Study-variant dyads were evaluated to determine whether the variant was standard. Success rates of RCTs with standard vs non-standard control arms were evaluated with Fisher’s exact test. Results: 5221 studies were associated with ≥1 named variant in the HemOnc KB, as of 2024-02-06. After exclusions, there were 3511 study-variant dyads (2386 studies; 1714 variants). The 9 most common regimens are shown in the Table. The median (IQR) number of variants per regimen was 2 (1-3); carboplatin & paclitaxel (CP) had the most variants (n=33). Across all control arm study-variant dyads, 2228/3492 (64%) utilized non-standard variants. For example, 60/97 studies (62%) of docetaxel as control used the 75 mg/m2 q3wk variant after it was established in 2000, whereas n=27 others used 19 non-standard variants. Trials that used a standard control arm had a numerically higher success rate, 45% vs 42% (OR 1.10, 95% CI 0.92-1.32). Conclusions: Non-standard regimen variants are frequently used in cancer RCTs. Reasons for this could include toxicity, patient convenience, or emerging data from smaller studies that establish comparable efficacy or improved toxicity to standard variants. However, the a priori efficacy of non-standard control arms is less rigorously established, and trials with standard control arms might be more successful. Future directions include quantifying the granular differences between standard and non-standard variants and investigating whether certain types of non-standard variation (e.g. fewer cycles, lower doses) associate with trial success rates. [Table: see text]

OBJECTIVE Chordomas are rare tumors of the skull base and spine believed to arise from the vestiges of the embryonic notochord. These tumors are locally aggressive and frequently recur following resection and adjuvant radiotherapy. Proton therapy has been introduced as a tissue-sparing option because of the higher level of precision that proton-beam techniques offer compared with traditional photon radiotherapy. This study aimed to compare recurrence in patients with chordomas receiving proton versus photon radiotherapy following resection by applying tree-based machine learning models. METHODS The clinical records of all patients treated with resection followed by adjuvant proton or photon radiotherapy for chordoma at Mayo Clinic were reviewed. Patient demographics, type of surgery and radiotherapy, tumor recurrence, and other variables were extracted. Decision tree classifiers were trained and tested to predict long-term recurrence based on unseen data using an 80/20 split. RESULTS Fifty-three patients with a mean ± SD age of 55.2 ± 13.4 years receiving surgery and adjuvant proton or photon therapy to treat chordoma were identified; most patients were male. Gross-total resection was achieved in 54.7% of cases. Proton therapy was the most common adjuvant radiotherapy (84.9%), followed by conventional or external-beam radiation therapy (9.4%) and stereotactic radiosurgery (5.7%). Patients receiving proton therapy exhibited a 40% likelihood of having recurrence, significantly lower than the 88% likelihood observed in those treated with nonproton therapy. This was confirmed on logistic regression analysis adjusted for extent of tumor resection and tumor location, which revealed that proton adjuvant radiotherapy was associated with a decreased risk of recurrence (OR 0.1, 95% CI 0.01–0.71; p = 0.047) compared with photon therapy. The decision tree algorithm predicted recurrence with an accuracy of 90% (95% CI 55.5%–99.8%), with the lowest risk of recurrence observed in patients receiving gross-total resection with adjuvant proton therapy (23%). CONCLUSIONS Following resection, adjuvant proton therapy was associated with a lower risk of chordoma recurrence compared with photon therapy. The described machine learning models were able to predict tumor progression based on the extent of tumor resection and adjuvant radiotherapy modality used.

Abstract Background Although typically benign, 5% of spinal meningiomas (SMs) present with higher-grade features (World Health Organization grades 2 and 3). High-grade SMs are poorly studied and the role of adjuvant radiotherapy in their management remains controversial. We hence aimed to study the demographic characteristics of this rare tumor and investigate the outcomes associated with the use of surgery with adjuvant therapy in contrast to surgery alone. Methods The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with SMs from 2004 to 2017. Basic statistics were used to identify differences between low- and high-grade tumors in terms of baseline characteristics. Surgery with and without adjuvant radiotherapy were compared after (1:1) propensity-score matching. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis was conducted to study overall survival. All analyses were performed on R. Results A total of 13 184 patients diagnosed with SMs were included, of whom only 5% (n = 669) had high-grade SMs. Patients with high-grade SMs presented at a younger median age (57 years [IQR: 44–68] versus 65 years [54–75]; P &lt; .001) and were more commonly males (33% vs 20%; P &lt; .001). After propensity-score matching, survival analysis revealed similar overall survival outcomes in patients with high-grade SM undergoing both surgery and radiotherapy as compared to those only receiving surgery (P = .19). Conclusions This study reveals major demographic differences between high- and low-grade SMs. There were no benefits associated with the use of adjuvant radiotherapy. However, due to confounding, overall survival outcomes between patients receiving surgery alone and those receiving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy are not causally interpretable.

Background: Limited information is available for patients with breast cancer (BC) and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), especially among underrepresented racial/ethnic populations. Methods: This is a COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry-based retrospective cohort study of females with active or history of BC and laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection diagnosed between March 2020 and June 2021 in the US. Primary outcome was COVID-19 severity measured on a five-level ordinal scale, including none of the following complications, hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, and all-cause mortality. Multivariable ordinal logistic regression model identified characteristics associated with COVID-19 severity. Results: 1383 female patient records with BC and COVID-19 were included in the analysis, the median age was 61 years, and median follow-up was 90 days. Multivariable analysis revealed higher odds of COVID-19 severity for older age (aOR per decade, 1.48 [95% CI, 1.32–1.67]); Black patients (aOR 1.74; 95 CI 1.24–2.45), Asian Americans and Pacific Islander patients (aOR 3.40; 95 CI 1.70–6.79) and Other (aOR 2.97; 95 CI 1.71–5.17) racial/ethnic groups; worse ECOG performance status (ECOG PS ≥2: aOR, 7.78 [95% CI, 4.83–12.5]); pre-existing cardiovascular (aOR, 2.26 [95% CI, 1.63–3.15])/pulmonary comorbidities (aOR, 1.65 [95% CI, 1.20–2.29]); diabetes mellitus (aOR, 2.25 [95% CI, 1.66–3.04]); and active and progressing cancer (aOR, 12.5 [95% CI, 6.89–22.6]). Hispanic ethnicity, timing, and type of anti-cancer therapy modalities were not significantly associated with worse COVID-19 outcomes. The total all-cause mortality and hospitalization rate for the entire cohort was 9% and 37%, respectively however, it varied according to the BC disease status. Conclusions: Using one of the largest registries on cancer and COVID-19, we identified patient and BC-related factors associated with worse COVID-19 outcomes. After adjusting for baseline characteristics, underrepresented racial/ethnic patients experienced worse outcomes compared to non-Hispanic White patients. Funding: This study was partly supported by National Cancer Institute grant number P30 CA068485 to Tianyi Sun, Sanjay Mishra, Benjamin French, Jeremy L Warner; P30-CA046592 to Christopher R Friese; P30 CA023100 for Rana R McKay; P30-CA054174 for Pankil K Shah and Dimpy P Shah; KL2 TR002646 for Pankil Shah and the American Cancer Society and Hope Foundation for Cancer Research (MRSG-16-152-01-CCE) and P30-CA054174 for Dimpy P Shah. REDCap is developed and supported by Vanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational Research grant support (UL1 TR000445 from NCATS/NIH). The funding sources had no role in the writing of the manuscript or the decision to submit it for publication. Clinical trial number: CCC19 registry is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04354701 .