Citations

Abstract Background Sinonasal neoplasms, whether benign and malignant, pose a significant challenge to clinicians and represent a model area for multidisciplinary collaboration in order to optimize patient care. The International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Sinonasal Tumors (ICSNT) aims to summarize the best available evidence and presents 48 thematic and histopathology‐based topics spanning the field. Methods In accordance with prior International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology documents, ICSNT assigned each topic as an Evidence‐Based Review with Recommendations, Evidence‐Based Review, and Literature Review based on the level of evidence. An international group of multidisciplinary author teams were assembled for the topic reviews using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses format, and completed sections underwent a thorough and iterative consensus‐building process. The final document underwent rigorous synthesis and review prior to publication. Results The ICSNT document consists of four major sections: general principles, benign neoplasms and lesions, malignant neoplasms, and quality of life and surveillance. It covers 48 conceptual and/or histopathology‐based topics relevant to sinonasal neoplasms and masses. Topics with a high level of evidence provided specific recommendations, while other areas summarized the current state of evidence. A final section highlights research opportunities and future directions, contributing to advancing knowledge and community intervention. Conclusion As an embodiment of the multidisciplinary and collaborative model of care in sinonasal neoplasms and masses, ICSNT was designed as a comprehensive, international, and multidisciplinary collaborative endeavor. Its primary objective is to summarize the existing evidence in the field of sinonasal neoplasms and masses.

PURPOSE BMI affects breast cancer risk and prognosis. In contrast to cytotoxic chemotherapy, CDK4/6 inhibitors are given at a fixed dose, irrespective of BMI or weight. This preplanned analysis of the global randomized PALLAS trial investigates the impact of BMI on the side-effect profile, treatment adherence, and efficacy of palbociclib. METHODS Patients were categorized at baseline according to WHO BMI categories. Neutropenia rates were assessed with univariable and multivariable logistic regression. Time to early discontinuation of palbociclib was analyzed with Fine and Gray competing risk models. Unstratified Cox models were used to investigate the association between BMI category and time to invasive disease-free survival (iDFS). 95% CIs were derived. RESULTS Of 5,698 patients included in this analysis, 68 (1.2%) were underweight, 2,082 (36.5%) normal weight, 1,818 (31.9%) overweight, and 1,730 (30.4%) obese at baseline. In the palbociclib arm, higher BMI was associated with a significant decrease in neutropenia (unadjusted odds ratio for 1-unit change, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.91 to 0.94; adjusted for age, race ethnicity, region, chemotherapy use, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group at baseline, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.92 to 0.95). This translated into a significant decrease in treatment discontinuation rate with higher BMI (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] for 10-unit change, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.83). There was no significant improvement in iDFS with the addition of palbociclib to ET in any weight category (normal weight HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.12; overweight HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.49; and obese HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.30) in this analysis early in follow-up (31 months). CONCLUSION This preplanned analysis of the PALLAS trial demonstrates a significant impact of BMI on side effects, dose reductions, early treatment discontinuation, and relative dose intensity. Additional long-term follow-up will further evaluate whether BMI ultimately affects outcome.

2002 Background: Elderly patients with glioblastoma have a poor prognosis with phase III trials reporting median overall survival (OS) and global time to deterioration of 6–9 and 1.2 months respectively. 18F-DOPA (3,4-dihydroxy-6-[18F]-fluoro-L-phenylalanine) positron emission tomography (PET) is sensitive and specific for identifying regions of high density and biologically aggressive glioblastoma. Proton beam therapy (PBT) can spare more healthy tissue that may improve quality of life for this patient population. With improved targeting of disease along with dosimetric advantages of PBT, this phase II trial tested whether hypofractionated PBT can offer both improved survival and quality of life. Methods: Patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma aged ≥65 years without contraindications to 18F-DOPA were eligible. Target volumes were defined by PET (tumor/normal brain SUV ≥2.0) and MRI areas of contrast enhancement including surgical cavity. Patients received dose escalated hypofractionated PBT of 35-40 GyE to PET/MRI over 5-10 treatments with 10 mm margin. Patients received concurrent/adjuvant temozolomide. With an alpha of 0.1, 18 of 39 patients would be required to be alive at 12 months for the study to be considered a success. Kaplan-Meier/Cox regression analysis was performed for progression free survival (PFS) and OS. Toxicities were evaluated with CTCAE v4.0. Patients completed EORTC BN20, QLQ-C30, and MMSE questionnaires. Time to deterioration, defined as a 10-point decrease in the score of the function domain or 10-point increase in score of symptom domain, was evaluated. Results: Between 5/2019-6/2021, 43 patients were enrolled, with 4 patients withdrawing due to progression/insurance denial prior to beginning protocol therapy. The median age was 70.2 yrs. and median follow-up was 12.5 months. MGMT methylation was present in 13 (33%). Tumors were multifocal in 10 (26%) and unifocal in 29 (74%). The primary endpoint was met with median PFS/OS was 6.5/12.9 months for all patients and for MGMT methylated patients 11.9/29.8 months respectively. Grade 3 baseline adjusted treatment related adverse events included 1 (3%) confusion, 2 (5%) fatigue, and 1 (3%) seizure. There were no grade 4/5 events. Multivariate analysis revealed MGMT unmethylated, ECOG 2 and biopsy only patients had worse survival. PET volume was more predictive than MRI volume for OS with PET volume>26 cc having a hazard ratio of 3.7. The median time to global deterioration per QLC-C30 was 6.3 months. Conclusions: This phase II trial incorporating 18F-DOPA PET-guided dose escalated hypofractionated proton beam treatment for elderly patients with glioblastoma met its primary endpoint for improved OS and patient reported quality of life compared to historical controls. Further investigation is warranted. Clinical trial information: NCT03778294 .

Abstract Introduction Historical reservations regarding stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) brain metastases include concerns for short-interval and diffuse central nervous system (CNS) progression, poor prognoses, and increased neurological mortality specific to SCLC histology. We compared SRS outcomes for SCLC and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) where SRS is well established. Methods Multicenter first-line SRS outcomes for SCLC and NSCLC from 2000 to 2022 were retrospectively collected (n = 892 SCLC, n = 4785 NSCLC). Data from the prospective Japanese Leksell Gamma Knife Society (JLGK0901) clinical trial of first-line SRS were analyzed as a comparison cohort (n = 98 SCLC, n = 814 NSCLC). Overall survival (OS) and CNS progression were analyzed using Cox proportional hazard and Fine-Gray models, respectively, with multivariable adjustment for cofactors including age, sex, performance status, year, extracranial disease status, and brain metastasis number and volume. Mutation-stratified analyses were performed in propensity score–matched retrospective cohorts of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) positive NSCLC, mutation-negative NSCLC, and SCLC. Results OS was superior for patients with NSCLC compared to SCLC in the retrospective dataset (median OS = 10.5 vs 8.6 months; P < .001) and in the JLGK0901 dataset. Hazard estimates for first CNS progression favoring NSCLC were similar in both datasets but reached statistical significance in the retrospective dataset only (multivariable hazard ratio = 0.82, 95% confidence interval = 0.73 to 0.92, P = .001). In the propensity score–matched cohorts, there were continued OS advantages for NSCLC patients (median OS = 23.7 [EGFR and ALK positive NSCLC] vs 13.6 [mutation-negative NSCLC] vs 10.4 months [SCLC], pairwise P values < 0.001), but no statistically significant differences in CNS progression were observed in the matched cohorts. Neurological mortality and number of lesions at CNS progression were similar for NSCLC and SCLC patients. Leptomeningeal progression was increased in patients with NSCLC compared to SCLC in the retrospective dataset only (multivariable hazard ratio = 1.61, 95% confidence interval = 1.14 to 2.26, P = .007). Conclusions After SRS, SCLC histology was associated with shorter OS compared to NSCLC. CNS progression occurred earlier in SCLC patients overall but was similar in patients matched on baseline factors. SCLC was not associated with increased neurological mortality, number of lesions at CNS progression, or leptomeningeal progression compared to NSCLC. These findings may better inform clinical expectations and individualized decision making regarding SRS for SCLC patients.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data regarding outcomes for patients with gastrointestinal (GI) primaries and brain metastases treated with stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). OBJECTIVE: To examine clinical outcomes after SRS for patients with brain metastases from GI primaries and evaluate potential prognostic factors. METHODS: The International Radiosurgery Research Foundation centers were queried for patients with brain metastases from GI primaries managed with SRS. Primary outcomes were local control (LC) and overall survival (OS). Kaplan-Meier analysis was used for univariate analysis (UVA) of prognostic factors. Factors significant on UVA were evaluated with a Cox multivariate analysis proportional hazards model. Logistic regressions were used to examine correlations with RN. RESULTS: We identified 263 eligible patients with 543 brain metastases. Common primary sites were rectal (31.2%), colon (31.2%), and esophagus (25.5%) with a median age of 61.6 years (range: 37-91.4 years) and a median Karnofsky performance status (KPS) of 90% (range: 40%-100%). One-year and 2-year LC rates were 83.5% (95% CI: 78.9%-87.1%) and 73.0% (95% CI: 66.4%-78.5%), respectively. On UVA, age >65 years ( P = .001), dose <20 Gy ( P = .006) for single-fraction plans, KPS <90% ( P < .001), and planning target volume ≥2cc ( P = .007) were associated with inferior LC. All factors other than dose were significant on multivariate analysis ( P ≤ .002). One-year and 2-year OS rates were 68.0% (95% CI: 61.5%-73.6%) and 31.2% (95% CI: 24.6%-37.9%), respectively. Age > 65 years ( P = .006), KPS <90% ( P = .005), and extracranial metastases ( P = .05) were associated with inferior OS. CONCLUSION: SRS resulted in comparable LC with common primaries. Age and KPS were associated with both LC and OS with planning target volume and extracranial metastases correlating with LC and OS, respectively. These factors should be considered in GI cancer patient selection for SRS.

PURPOSE This randomized, open-label trial compared the efficacy and safety of adjuvant nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine with those of gemcitabine for resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01964430 ). METHODS We assigned 866 treatment-naive patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma to nab-paclitaxel (125 mg/m 2 ) + gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m 2 ) or gemcitabine alone to one 30-40 infusion on days 1, 8, and 15 of six 28-day cycles. The primary end point was independently assessed disease-free survival (DFS). Additional end points included investigator-assessed DFS, overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS Two hundred eighty-seven of 432 patients and 310 of 434 patients completed nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine and gemcitabine treatment, respectively. At primary data cutoff (December 31, 2018; median follow-up, 38.5 [interquartile range [IQR], 33.8-43 months), the median independently assessed DFS was 19.4 ( nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) versus 18.8 months (gemcitabine; hazard ratio [HR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.729 to 1.063; P = .18). The median investigator-assessed DFS was 16.6 (IQR, 8.4-47.0) and 13.7 (IQR, 8.3-44.1) months, respectively (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.694 to 0.965; P = .02). The median OS (427 events; 68% mature) was 40.5 (IQR, 20.7 to not reached) and 36.2 (IQR, 17.7-53.3) months, respectively (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.680 to 0.996; P = .045). At a 16-month follow-up (cutoff, April 3, 2020; median follow-up, 51.4 months [IQR, 47.0-57.0]), the median OS (511 events; 81% mature) was 41.8 ( nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) versus 37.7 months (gemcitabine; HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.687 to 0.973; P = .0232). At the 5-year follow-up (cutoff, April 9, 2021; median follow-up, 63.2 months [IQR, 60.1-68.7]), the median OS (555 events; 88% mature) was 41.8 versus 37.7 months, respectively (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.678 to 0.947; P = .0091). Eighty-six percent ( nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) and 68% (gemcitabine) of patients experienced grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events. Two patients per study arm died of treatment-emergent adverse events. CONCLUSION The primary end point (independently assessed DFS) was not met despite favorable OS seen with nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine.