Citations

AbstractPurposeThe Leksell Gamma Knife Icon unit (IU) was introduced recently as an upgrade to the Perfexion unit (PU) at our Gamma Knife practice. In the current study, we sought mainly to characterize dosimetry and targeting accuracy of the IU treatment deliveries using both invasive frame and frameless treatment workflows.MethodsRelative output factors were measured by delivering single‐shot 4, 8 and 16 mm radiation profiles in the manufacturer's acrylonitrile butadiene styrene spherical phantom in coronal and sagittal planes using EBT3 film. Resultant dosimetry was compared with the manufacturer's dose calculation and derived output factors were compared with the manufacturer's published value. Geometric consistency of stereotactic coordinates based on cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT) versus the traditional conventional CT‐based method was characterized using a rigid phantom containing nine fiducial indicators over four separate trials. End‐to‐end (E2E) testing using EBT3 film was designed to evaluate both dosimetric and geometric accuracy for hypothetical framed and frameless workflows.ResultsRelative output factors as measured by the manufacturer were independently confirmed using EBT3 film measurements to within 2%. The mean 3D radial discrepancy in stereotactic space between CBCT and CT‐based definition over the sampled locations in our rigid geometry phantom was demonstrated to be between 0.40 mm and 0.56 mm over the set of trials, larger than prior reported values. E2E performed in 2D demonstrates sub‐mm (and typically < 0.5 mm) accuracy for framed and frameless workflows; geometric accuracy of framed treatments using CBCT‐defined stereotactic coordinates was shown to be slightly improved in comparison with those defined using conventional CT. Furthermore, in phantom, frameless workflows exhibited better accuracy than framed workflows for fractionated treatments, despite large magnitudes of introduced interfraction setup error. Accuracy of dosimetric delivery was confirmed in terms of qualitative comparisons of dose profiles and in terms of 2D gamma pass rates based on 1%/1 mm criteria.ConclusionThe IU was commissioned for clinical use of frameless and framed treatment protocols. The present study outlines an extensive E2E methodology for confirmation of dosimetric and geometric treatment accuracy.

Background To determine whether antibiotic treatment is a risk factor for immune-related adverse events (irAEs) across different patients with cancer receiving anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapies. Methods The retrospective analysis includes clinical information from 767 patients with cancer treated at Hunan Cancer Hospital from 2017 to 2020. The pharmacovigilance data analysis includes individual cases of 38,705 safety reports from the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) from 2014 to 2020, and 25,122 cases of safety reports from the World Health Organization database VigiBase from 2014 to 2019. All cases that received anti-PD-1/PD-L1 treatment were included. Multiomics data from patients across 25 cancer types were download from The Cancer Genome Atlas. Logistic regression and propensity score algorithm was employed to calculate OR of irAEs. Results Retrospective analysis of in-house patients showed that irAE potential risks are higher in all cancer (OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.38 to 3.22, false discovery rate (FDR) adjusted-p=1.93×10−3) and patients with lung cancer (OR 3.16, 95% CI 1.67 to 5.95, FDR adjusted-p=1.93×10−3) when using antibiotics. Potential risk of irAEs in patients with lung cancer with antibiotic treatment is significantly higher in FAERS (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.59; FDR adjusted-p=1.62×10−5) and VigiBase (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.59, FDR adjusted-p=0.05). Mechanistically, decreased microbial diversity caused by antibiotics use may increase the irAE risk through mediating the irAE-related factors. Conclusions Our study is the first to comprehensively demonstrate the associations of irAEs and antibiotic during anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy across a wide spectrum of cancers by analyzing multisource data. Administration of antibiotics should be carefully evaluated in patients with cancer treated by anti-PD-1/PD-L1 to avoid potentially increasing irAE risk.

This Phase Ib study combined programmed death-ligand 1 inhibitor, atezolizumab, with other immunomodulatory agents in locally advanced and metastatic solid tumors. Arms B-D evaluated atezolizumab plus interferon-α, with/without vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor, bevacizumab, in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and other solid tumors. Arm B predominantly recruited patients with previously treated RCC or melanoma to receive atezolizumab plus interferon α-2b. Arm C investigated atezolizumab plus polyethylene glycol (PEG)-interferon α-2a in previously treated RCC. Arm D evaluated atezolizumab plus PEG-interferon α-2a and bevacizumab. Primary objectives were safety and tolerability; secondary objectives included clinical activity. Combination therapy was well tolerated, with safety profiles consistent with known risks of individual agents. The most frequent treatment-related toxicities were fatigue, chills, and pyrexia. The objective response rate (ORR) in arm B was 20.0% overall and 17.8% in patients with previously treated checkpoint inhibitor–naive RCC (n = 45). No responses were reported in arm C. The highest ORR in arm D was 46.7% in patients with treatment-naive RCC (n = 15). Data showed preliminary clinical activity and acceptable tolerability of atezolizumab plus interferon α-2b in patients with previously treated checkpoint inhibitor–naive RCC and of atezolizumab plus PEG-interferon α-2a and bevacizumab in patients with treatment-naive RCC.

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of isolated small bowel Crohn’s disease (CD) can be challenging. Symptoms are non-specific and both imaging and capsule endoscopy (CE) may be misleading as several diseases may mimic CD. Double balloon enteroscopy (DBE) allows a more extensive endoscopic and histologic evaluation of the small bowel. Our aim was to describe the diagnostic utility and impact of DBE on management of patients with known CD and in patients with suspected/rule-out CD. METHODS: Retrospective review of our institution’s DBE database from February 2009 to May 2013. Adult patients referred for DBE for further evaluation of known or suspected CD (due to symptoms, abnormal imaging and/or CE) were included. Patient demographics, clinical characteristics, imaging and CE results, prior DBE, indication for DBE, DBE findings, DBE adverse events, pathology findings, final diagnosis, treatment prior and post DBE and follow-up DBE were abstracted from the electronic medical record. RESULTS: A total of 108 patients were included, 61 (56%) females, mean age 52 years (range 20-83). Indications for DBE included: disease activity assessment/therapeutic in 10 patients with established diagnosis of CD and for diagnostic purposes in 98 patients with suspected CD (31 patients due to abnormal imaging, 29 due to abnormal CE and 26 due to both abnormal imaging and CE). Upper, lower, bidirectional upper and lower, and stomal DBE were performed in 21, 24, 62 and 1 patients, respectively. DBE revealed active disease in 8/10 patients with known CD with one patient undergoing dilation of a stricture. Changes in management were recommended for all patients with active disease – start thiopurine (2), optimize thiopurine dose (1), start biologics (3) change biologics (1), systemic steroids (1) and budesonide (1). The patient who underwent stricture dilation ultimately required surgery. A definitive diagnosis of CD (both endoscopic and histologic) was reached in only 39/98 (40%) patients who were referred for suspected CD. Changes in management were recommended in 32/39 (82%) patients. Interestingly, 24/98 patients had been diagnosed with CD at outside institutions and were recommended to initiate therapy for CD. Of these, CD was confirmed in only 15/24 (63%) patients. Adverse events included perforation in 1 patient (1%) who required surgical management and mouth swelling/abrasion in 3 patients (3%). Follow-up DBE to re-assess disease activity was performed in 10/49 (20%) patients with definitive diagnosis of CD, average time between procedures 4.5 years (range 0.7-11.6). One patient with CD was diagnosed with lymphoma 2.4 years after initial DBE. Changes in management were recommended in 6 patients: de-escalation of therapy (3, two underwent surgery), start thiopurine and/or biologic (2) and switch biologics (1). No complications were seen at follow-up DBE. CONCLUSION: DBE is a useful technique to confirm a diagnosis in patients who have suspected CD and can help establish a diagnosis of several diseases that may mimic CD on CT scan or CE. Additionally, DBE in patients with established diagnosis of small bowel CD is an effective tool to assess disease activity and guide therapy. Serious complications are infrequent.

Abstract Gilteritinib (Gilt), a FLT3 tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), is approved for the treatment of relapsed/refractory (R/R) FLT3-mutated (FLT3 +)acute myeloid leukemia (AML). However, long-term survival is limited by the development of drug resistance mutations in persistent FLT3 + clones. Combination regimens may deepen response and improve outcomes. Venetoclax (Ven), a BCL-2 inhibitor, is approved in combination with hypomethylating agents for newly diagnosed AML not suitable for standard induction therapy. FLT3 + AMLhas been associated with clinical resistance to Ven. Still, FLT3 TKIs + Ven have demonstrated synthetic lethality in preclinical models, prompting this multicenter, open-label, phase 1b trial (NCT03625505) to evaluate Ven + Gilt for R/R AML. Here, we report final response and survival endpoints, and molecular clearance among patients (pts) treated at the recommended phase two dose (RP2D). The study design has been previously described (Daver, et al. ASH 2020, Abstract 333). Pts in the dose expansion cohort received Ven 400 mg + Gilt 120 mg (RP2D) daily in 28-day cycles, following Ven ramp-up. The primary endpoint was mCRc (complete response [CR] + CR with incomplete platelet recovery [CRp] + CR with incomplete blood count recovery [CRi] + morphologic leukemia-free state) to align with the ADMIRAL phase III trial (Perl, et al. NEJM 2019). Baseline co-mutations and serial FLT3 internal tandem duplications (ITD) allelic burden were assessed using the MyAML panel (Invivoscribe, San Diego, CA) and FLT3-ITD MRD assay with sensitivities of 5% and 0.001%, respectively. As of the data cut off of January 31, 2021, 54 pts were treated at the RP2D. Fifty-two pts (as assessed locally) had FLT3 +AML; 41 had FLT3-ITD only, 8 had tyrosine kinase domain only, 3 had both mutations, and 2 were FLT3 wild type (wt). Additional baseline characteristics are in Table 1. Grade 3 or 4 AEs occurred in 51 (94.4%) pts, and 39 (72.2%) pts had serious AEs. Grade 3 or 4 cytopenias occurred in 43 (79.6%) pts. AEs of special interest included tumor lysis syndrome (2 [3.7%]) and QT prolongation (1 [1.9%]). AEs leading to dosing interruptions (Ven, 27 [50%]; Gilt, 26 [48.1%]), reductions (Ven, 3 [5.6%]; Gilt, 4 [7.4%]), and discontinuation (Ven, 7 [13%]; Gilt, 7 [13%]) were reported for both study drugs. There was 1 treatment-emergent death of typhlitis. Among FLT3 + pts with post-baseline assessments (51/52), mCRc was achieved by 38 pts (74.5%; CR/CRp/CRi, 19 [37.3%] pts), with a median follow-up time of 12 mo (range: 0.8 - 20.1). The mCRc in pts with prior TKI (32) or prior Ven (10) use were 78.1% and 60%, respectively. The mOS among all FLT3 +pts was 10 mo (95%CI: 6.6, NE), with a median DoR (mDoR) of 5.4 mo (95% CI: 3.3, 6.6). Pts with FLT3-ITD had a mOS of 10.5 mo (95%CI: 6.8, NE), and a mDoR of 5.6 mo (95% CI: 3.3, 8.3). For the 14 pts who had a transplant, the mOS was not reached (95%CI: 10.0, NE) vs 6.89 mo (95%CI: 3.0, 10.5) for those who did not have a transplant (37). The mOS for pts with prior TKI or Ven was 9.6 (95% CI: 4.3, NE) and 10.5 mo (95% CI: 2.0, NE), respectively, with a mDoR of 9.6 (95% CI: 4.3, NE) and 6.2 mo (95% CI: 2.6, NE), respectively. The 60-day mortality rate was 11.8% (95% CI: 4.4, 23.9). The mCRc for NPM1 + and NPM1wt were 92.3% and 61.1%, respectively. mCRc for DNMT3A + and DMNT3A wt pts were 82.4% and 64.3%, respectively. WT1 + and WT1 wt mCRc were 66.7% and 77.3%, respectively. The mCRc for NPM1 + and DNMT3A + co-mutated pts was 100%. In a post hoc analysis of the 30 analyzable mCRc pts with at least one follow-up MRD assessment, 17 (56.7%) achieved molecular clearance defined as FLT3 allelic burden &lt; 10 -2. The mOS of pts achieving mCRc with FLT3 allelic burden of &lt; 10 -2 vs mCRc with FLT3 allelic burden ≥ 10 -2 (Figure 1) was not reached (95% CI: 9.76, NE) vs 6.83 mo (4.21, NE). Ven + Gilt achieved high mCRc in patients with R/R FLT3 + AML, with or without prior TKI exposure, and an encouraging mOS. FLT3 mutation clearance was seen in a majority of patients and associated with longer OS. Encouraging remission rates were observed across many genotypes and were particularly high among pts with NPM1 + +/- DNMT3A co-mutation. Cytopenias were common but manageable with appropriate Ven or Gilt dosing modifications. Serial NGS molecular data, as well as updated survival data will be presented at the meeting. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Daver: Hanmi: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Trillium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Trovagene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novimmune: Research Funding; FATE Therapeutics: Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sevier: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; ImmunoGen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Other: Data Monitoring Committee member; Dava Oncology (Arog): Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Syndax: Consultancy; Shattuck Labs: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; Kite Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; SOBI: Consultancy; STAR Therapeutics: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Newave: Research Funding. Perl: Actinium: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy, Research Funding; Forma: Consultancy; Syndax: Consultancy; Loxo: Consultancy; Fujifilm: Research Funding; Arog: Research Funding; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onconova: Consultancy; Sumitomo Dainippon: Consultancy. Levis: Amgen, Astellas Pharma, Daiichi-Sankyo, FujiFilm, and Menarini: Honoraria; Astellas and FujiFilm: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria; Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria. Ritchie: Astellas: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Other: travel support, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Jazz: Consultancy, Research Funding; Protaganist: Consultancy, Honoraria; ARIAD Pharmaceuticals: Ended employment in the past 24 months, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding. Litzow: Astellas: Research Funding; Omeros: Other: Advisory Board; Pluristem: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; Jazz: Other: Advisory Board; Biosight: Other: Data monitoring committee. McCloskey: Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Smith: AbbVie: Research Funding; Revolutions Medicine: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; FUJIFILM: Research Funding; Astellas Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria. Schiller: Takeda: Research Funding; Trovagene: Research Funding; Tolero: Research Funding; Ono: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; ASH foundation: Other: Chair-unpaid; Pfizer: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy; Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Ariad: Research Funding; Stemline Therapeutics, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Ono-UK: Consultancy, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Kite/Gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Onconova: Research Funding; Mateon: Research Funding; Sangamo: Research Funding; Samus: Research Funding; Regimmune: Research Funding; PrECOG: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Kaiser Permanente: Consultancy; Cyclacel: Research Funding; MedImmune: Research Funding; Ambit: Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Elevate: Research Funding; Bio: Research Funding; Pharma: Consultancy; Johnson & Johnson: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Biomed Valley Discoveries: Research Funding; Eli Lilly: Research Funding; Sellas: Research Funding; Geron: Research Funding; Genentech-Roche: Research Funding; Gamida Cell Ltd.: Research Funding; FujiFilm: Research Funding; Forma: Research Funding; Delta-Fly: Research Funding; Deciphera: Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Research Funding; Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Celator: Research Funding; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Astellas: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Arog: Research Funding; Actuate: Research Funding; Actinium Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Leukemia & Lymphoma Society: Research Funding; Bluebird Bio: Research Funding; Boehringer-Ingleheim: Research Funding; Cellerant: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Kura Oncology: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Research Funding; National Marrow Donor Program: Research Funding; NIH: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; Pharmamar: Research Funding; UC Davis: Research Funding; UCSD: Research Funding; Evidera: Consultancy; NCI: Consultancy; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Bradley: AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Tiu: Astellas Pharma: Current Employment; Eli Lilly and Company: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Ended employment in the past 24 months. Naqvi: Genentech/Roche: Current Employment, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Dail: Genentech/Roche: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Siddani: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Wang: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Chyla: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Lee: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Altman: Astellas: Consultancy, Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Biosight: Consultancy, Other: Travel fees, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Kura Oncology: Consultancy; Syros: Consultancy; Theradex: Consultancy, Other: Advisory boards; GlycoMimetics: Other: Participation on an advisory board; ALZ Oncology: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Aprea: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding; Fujifilm: Research Funding; Immunogen: Research Funding; Kartos: Research Funding; Kura: Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Venetoclax is a B-cell lymphoma 2 inhibitor approved in combination with azacitidine, or decitabine, or low-dose cytarabine for the treatment of newly-diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in adults who are age 75 years or older, or who have comorbidities that preclude use of intensive induction chemotherapy. Gilteritinib is a kinase inhibitor indicated for the treatment of adult patients who have relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with an FLT3 mutation as detected by an FDA-approved test.

Abstract Intra-tumor genetic heterogeneity is an important cause of treatment failure of GBM. Using MRI and image-localized biopsies, it is possible to train machine learning (ML) models to predict regional genetic status. However, biopsy samples are limited, making it difficult to train a robust ML model. We proposed a data-inclusive model called Weakly Supervised Ordinal Support Vector Machines (WSO-SVM) which leverages the vast amount of MRI data outside the sparsely sampled biopsy regions to augment the biopsy samples to improve ML accuracy. Our study included a unique dataset of 104 image-localized biopsies with spatially matched multiparametric MRI from 30 untreated Glioblastoma (GBM) patients. Each biopsy sample went through genetic sequencing analysis and our study focused on two GBM hallmark genes, EGFR and PDGFRA. For each gene, a biopsy sample was labeled as “altered” if the copy number of this gene was amplified or a mutation was found, and “non-altered” otherwise. From the localized region of six MRI contrasts from T1gd, T2w, diffusion and perfusion imaging, over 300 texture features were extracted. To account for biopsy sample location uncertainty, six neighboring regions of the biopsy sample including four neighbors two pixels away from the biopsy location and two neighbors on adjacent slices were also included in model training. WSO-SVM achieved 0.83 accuracy, 0.77 sensitivity, and 0.86 specificity for classifying EGFR; 0.77 accuracy, 0.74 sensitivity, and 0.79 specificity for classifying PDGFRA, based on 10-fold cross validation. Furthermore, using the trained models, we generated regional EGFR and PDGFRA alteration maps for each patient within the enhancing and non-enhancing tumoral areas. On average we found a greater proportion of enhancing tumor with co-alteration than non-enhancing tumor, while this trend was reversed when considering only one altered gene. The ratio of EGFR vs PDGFRA alterations was higher in non-enhancing tumor than enhancing tumor.

Abstract Medulloblastoma is a posterior fossa tumor rarely diagnosed in adults. Treatment includes craniospinal irradiation (CSI). Proton CSI is increasingly utilized to decrease radiation dose to normal tissues, despite the lack of randomized data demonstrating decreased toxicity compared to photon CSI. This single institution retrospective study of 39 adult medulloblastoma patients includes nineteen patients treated with photon CSI prior to 2015, and twenty treated with proton CSI thereafter. Median age was 28 years (range 18-66). Molecular subtype was most commonly sonic hedgehog (68%). The most common fractionation schedule was 36 Gy CSI in 20 fractions (85% of photon and 58% of proton patients) with a boost to 54-55.8 Gy (92%). Proton CSI delivered significantly lower mean doses to the cochleae (median 32 Gy vs. 44 Gy), lacrimal glands (8 vs. 36 Gy), lens (2 vs. 28 Gy), parotid glands (3 vs. 26 Gy), pharyngeal constrictors (6 vs. 15 Gy), esophagus (2 vs. 29 Gy), heart (0 vs. 14 Gy), lungs (1 vs. 7 Gy), liver (0.1 vs. 7 Gy), and skin (38 vs. 51 Gy) (all p&lt; 0.001). Patients receiving proton CSI had significantly lower rates of acute dysphagia of any grade (5% vs. 35%, p= 0.044) and decreased median weight loss during radiation (+1.0 vs. -2.8 kg, p= 0.011). Acute hospitalization was associated with increased weight loss (p= 0.009). Median follow-up was 2.9 and 12.9 years for proton and photon patients, respectively, limiting late toxicity and outcome comparisons. At last follow-up five photon patients had died (two of progressive disease, three without recurrence ages 41-63) and 21% had experienced major cardiovascular events. At 10 years, 89% were alive and 82% were recurrence free. In conclusion, this study demonstrates dosimetric improvements with proton CSI, potentially leading to decreased acute toxicity including dysphagia and weight loss during treatment.

Abstract While dose escalation of radiotherapy (DERT) has failed to improve overall survival (OS) or progression-free survival (PFS) for glioblastoma in previous studies, a recent phase II clinical trial utilizing 18F-DOPA-PET-directed DERT demonstrated improved PFS in MGMT-unmethylated patients and OS in MGMT-methylated patients compared to historical controls. This planned secondary analysis sought to determine 1) how 18F-DOPA-PET changes RT volumes beyond standard MRI-planning, 2) which patients benefit most and least from this protocol, 3) which are mostly likely to experience clinically significant radionecrosis after DERT, and 4) patterns of failure after DERT. For 69 evaluable patients, median MRI-defined, PET-defined, and combined low-dose gross tumor volumes (GTV51) were 54 cc (range 9-248), 23 cc (0.4-179), and 62 cc (10-260), respectively. Median MRI-defined, PET-defined, and combined high-dose GTVs (GTV76) were 32 cc (range 4-136), 6 cc (0.1-138), and 34 cc (4-162), respectively. 18F-DOPA-PET resulted in a median volumetric expansion of 13% (0-243%) and 5% (0-217%) from MRI-defined low-dose and high-dose GTV’s, respectively. Central failures ( &gt;95% of recurrence tumor volume) occurred within the 76 Gy, 60 Gy, and 51 Gy isodose lines in 32 (46%), 60 (87%), and 64 (93%) patients, respectively. Recursive partitioning analysis stratified patients by OS and PFS. Patients with 18F-DOPA-PET-defined GTV76 &gt; 7.8cc, MRI-defined GTV76 &gt; 42.7cc, and MGMT promotor-unmethylated tumors had the shortest OS, while patients with smaller PET and MRI-defined tumors had the longest OS (median 10.4 vs. 64.6 months, p&lt; 0.001). Similarly, PFS was worst in patients with 18F-DOPA-PET-defined GTV76 &gt; 2.17 cc who had biopsy only (median PFS 3.2 months, p&lt; 0.001). Patients with 18F-DOPA-PET-defined GTV51 &gt; 50 cc had the highest risk of grade 3+ radionecrosis (p&lt; 0.001). In conclusion, larger 18F-DOPA-PET and MRI-defined tumor volumes were associated with worse outcomes, and 18F-DOPA-PET-directed DERT appears to reduce risk of central recurrence in high-dose volumes.

Hypertension is a major cause of cardiovascular disease and deaths worldwide especially in low- and middle-income countries. Despite the availability of safe, well-tolerated, and cost-effective blood pressure (BP)-lowering therapies, <14% of adults with hypertension have BP controlled to a systolic/diastolic BP <140/90 mm Hg. We report new hypertension treatment guidelines, developed in accordance with the World Health Organization Handbook for Guideline Development. Overviews of reviews of the evidence were conducted and summary tables were developed according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations approach. In these guidelines, the World Health Organization provides the most current and relevant evidence-based guidance for the pharmacological treatment of nonpregnant adults with hypertension. The recommendations pertain to adults with an accurate diagnosis of hypertension who have already received lifestyle modification counseling. The guidelines recommend BP threshold to initiate pharmacological therapy, BP treatment targets, intervals for follow-up visits, and best use of health care workers in the management of hypertension. The guidelines provide guidance for choice of monotherapy or dual therapy, treatment with single pill combination medications, and use of treatment algorithms for hypertension management. Strength of the recommendations was guided by the quality of the underlying evidence; the tradeoffs between desirable and undesirable effects; patient’s values, resource considerations and cost-effectiveness; health equity; acceptability, and feasibility consideration of different treatment options. The goal of the guideline is to facilitate standard approaches to pharmacological treatment and management of hypertension which, if widely implemented, will increase the hypertension control rate world-wide.