Gore, Elizabeth

Abstract Background NRG/RTOG 1010 evaluated trastuzumab added to trimodality therapy for HER2+ localized esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) management. Secondary PRO objectives assessed improvement in the FACT‐Esophageal Cancer Subscale (ECS), version 4, with trastuzumab, and if improved ECS correlated with pathologic complete response (pCR). Methods Patients were randomized to weekly paclitaxel/carboplatin/radiation (chemoradiation, CRT) followed by surgery ± trastuzumab (CRT + Tras). Disease‐free survival (DFS) was the primary end point. The projected PRO sample size of 158 patients, based on an 80% participation rate of the DFS primary endpoint sample size of 197 HER2+ patients, would provide ≥ 89% power to detect ≥25% increase in the proportion of CRT + Tras patients with ECS improvement from baseline to 6–8 weeks post‐CRT; one‐sided α = 0.05, using a χ 2 test. Improvement in ECS and its swallowing index (SI) and eating index (EI) was defined as 5‐, 2‐, and 2‐point increases, respectively, from baseline to 6–8 weeks post‐CRT. Univariate logistic regression was assessed if pCR was associated with improved ECS. Results From 2010 to 2015, 203 HER2+ patients were randomized and 194 were eligible. Of 171 PRO consenting patients, the ECS was completed by 162 (95%) at baseline, 108 (64%) 6–8 weeks, 82 (49%) 1 year, and 55 (33%) at 2 years. The proportion of patients with an improvement in 6–8 weeks ECS was higher on the CRT + Tras arm (46% vs. 38%), although not significantly different ( p = .39). There was no correlation between pCR and ECS scores at 1 year, with 39% and 37% of pCR and non‐pCR patients, respectively, having improved 1‐year ECS scores. Conclusions The addition of trastuzumab to CRT for localized HER2+ EAC did not improve PROs.

Background/objectives: Improvements in esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) treatment have reduced mortality. While chemoradiation before surgery was previously a standard of care, updated guidelines recommend peri-operative chemotherapy without chemoradiation. Continued investigation into optimal non-operative treatment paradigms for patients who defer surgery or are not candidates for surgery and certain chemotherapy regimens is needed. The impact of induction chemotherapy prior to chemoradiation on survival and surgical outcomes remains unclear. This study assessed survival and surgical outcomes in a real-world cohort of EAC patients receiving induction chemotherapy before chemoradiation. Methods: This single-institution, IRB-approved, retrospective cohort study included patients with newly diagnosed stage II-IVb (oligometastatic for IVb) EAC who received definitive chemoradiation (radiation ≥ 40 Gy and two cycles of chemotherapy) +/− esophagectomy from 2007 to 2022. Patients receiving induction chemotherapy were compared to those who did not. Endpoints included survival and surgical outcomes. Results: A total of 141 EAC patients received definitive chemoradiation; 83 received induction chemotherapy before chemoradiation. Patients receiving induction chemotherapy were younger (p < 0.01) with slightly lower performance status (p = 0.27) and presented at a more advanced stage (p < 0.001). Median OS was 3.5 years in the induction chemotherapy group compared to 2.2 years (p = 0.10). There was no difference in pathologic complete response (p = 0.81), esophagectomy frequency (p = 0.87), or surgical downstaging between treatment groups (p = 0.84). Conclusions: In this real-world, single-institutional patient cohort investigating induction chemotherapy prior to chemoradiation in EAC, patients receiving induction chemotherapy did well but did not have a statistically significant improvement in survival outcomes or surgical outcomes. This study showed that significant numbers of real-world patients may not receive esophagectomy. Thus, prospective, randomized clinical trials are warranted to better delineate the efficacy and selection of patients for induction chemotherapy when non-operative approaches are favored.

ABSTRACTBackgroundWe aim to evaluate whether increased lymph node yield at prostatectomy (RP) is associated with improved outcomes in NRG/RTOG 9601, a randomized clinical trial of men who underwent either radiation (RT) alone or RT + bicalutamide for PSA elevation following RP for pT2/T3 prostate cancer.MethodsWe reviewed available pathology reports for patients in NRG/RTOG 9601 to determine the nodal count at RP. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess effect of lymph nodes yield, arm (RT alone or RT + bicalutamide), Gleason score, positive margins, and seminal vesicle invasion on the following endpoints: times to local and distant failure and overall and disease‐specific survival.ResultsOf 760 patients, 552 (73%, 276 in each arm) had complete data available. Median node count in the entire cohort was 6 (range: 0–33, IQR: 3–9). There were no significant differences between arms in terms of patient demographic or clinical characteristics, including total lymph nodes removed in either arm. There was no significant association between total lymph nodes and overall or disease‐specific survival with both arms combined and when adjusting for arm. Notably, interaction analysis revealed that in seminal vesicle invasion, there was a significant association between lymph node yield and OS and DSS (HR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.83–0.99, p = 0.034; HR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.77–0.99, p = 0.029, respectively).ConclusionsAlthough lymph node yield in NRG/RTOG 9601 did not show association with adverse outcomes in the entire cohort or either arm alone, there was significant association between lymph node yield and adverse outcomes when seminal vesicle invasion was present. The therapeutic benefit of extensive lymph node dissection remains uncertain but could be more relevant in higher risk patients.

PURPOSE Long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improves survival in men with high-risk localized prostate cancer (PCa) receiving radiotherapy (RT). Predictive biomarkers are needed to guide ADT duration. METHODS A multimodal artificial intelligence (MMAI)–derived predictive biomarker was trained for long-term (LT) versus short-term (ST) ADT using pretreatment digital prostate biopsy images and clinical data (age, prostate-specific antigen, Gleason, and T stage) from six NRG Oncology phase III randomized radiotherapy trials. The novel MMAI-derived biomarker was developed to predict the differential benefit of LT-ADT on the primary end point, distant metastasis (DM). MMAI predictive utility was validated on a seventh randomized trial, RTOG 9202 (N = 1,192), which randomly assigned men to RT + ST-ADT (4 months) versus RT + LT-ADT (28 months). Fine-Gray and cumulative incidence analyses for DM, and secondarily, death with DM, were performed. Deaths without DM were treated as competing risks. RESULTS In the validation cohort (median follow-up, 17.2 years), LT-ADT significantly improved DM from 26% to 17% (subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR], 0.64 [95% CI, 0.50 to 0.82], P < .001). A significant biomarker-treatment predictive interaction was observed ( P = .04) for DM, whereby MMAI biomarker–positive men (n = 785, 66%) had reduced DM with LT-ADT versus ST-ADT (sHR, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.41 to 0.73], P < .001), whereas no treatment benefit was observed for MMAI biomarker–negative men (n = 407; sHR, 1.06 [95% CI, 0.61 to 1.84], P = .84). The estimated 15-year DM risk difference between RT + LT-ADT and RT + ST-ADT was 14% in MMAI biomarker–positive men and 0% in MMAI biomarker–negative men. The MMAI biomarker was also prognostic for DM, irrespective of treatment (sHR, 2.35 [95% CI, 1.72 to 3.19], P < .001). CONCLUSION To our knowledge, the MMAI model is the first validated predictive biomarker to guide ADT duration with RT in localized/locally advanced PCa. Approximately one third of men with high-risk PCa could safely be spared the additional 24 months of ADT and the associated morbidity.

Abstract Purpose: RTOG 0617 was a phase III randomized trial for patients with unresectable stage IIIA/IIIB non–small cell lung cancer comparing standard-dose (60 Gy) versus high-dose (74 Gy) radiotherapy and chemotherapy, plus or minus cetuximab. Although the study was negative, based on prior evidence that patients with the KRAS-variant, an inherited germline mutation, benefit from cetuximab, we evaluated KRAS-variant patients in RTOG 0617. Experimental Design: From RTOG 0617, 328 of 496 (66%) of patients were included in this analysis. For time-to-event outcomes, stratified log-rank tests and multivariable Cox regression models were used. For binary outcomes, Cochran—Mantel–Haenzel tests and multivariable logistic regression models were used. All statistical tests were two sided, and a P value &lt;0.05 was considered significant. Results: A total of 17.1% (56/328) of patients had the KRAS-variant, and overall survival rates were similar between KRAS-variant and non-variant patients. However, there was a time-dependent effect of cetuximab seen only in KRAS-variant patients—while the hazard of death was higher in cetuximab-treated patients within year 1 [HR = 3.37, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.13–10.10, P = 0.030], death was lower from year 1 to 4 (HR = 0.33, 95% CI: 0.11–0.97, P = 0.043). In contrast, in non-variant patients, the addition of cetuximab significantly increased local failure (HR = 1.59, 95% CI: 1.11–2.28, P = 0.012). Conclusions/Discussion: Although an overall survival advantage was not achieved in KRAS-variant patients, there is potential impact of cetuximab for this genetic subset of patients. In contrast, cetuximab seems to harm non-variant patients. These findings further support the importance of genetic patient selection in trials studying the addition of systemic agents to radiotherapy. Significance: The KRAS-variant is the first functional, inherited miRNA-disrupting variant identified in cancer. Our findings support that cetuximab has a potentially beneficial impact on KRAS-variant patients treated with radiation. The work confirms prior evidence that KRAS-variant patients are a subgroup who are especially sensitive to radiation. These findings further support the potential of this class of variants to enable true treatment personalization, considering the equally important endpoints of response and toxicity.

231 Background: Both peri-operative chemotherapy and neoadjuvant chemoradiation have been shown to improve outcomes in patients (pts) with LA-GEJ CA compared to surgery alone. Rates of post-operative chemotherapy delivery remain suboptimal. Total neo-adjuvant therapy (TNT) in LA-GEJ CA - induction chemotherapy (IC) followed by concurrent chemoradiation (CRT) - may improve systematic delivery of neoadjuvant therapy and result in favorable clinical outcomes. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed medical records of 135 pts with LA-GEJ CA at our institution between 2/2007 and 11/2019; pertinent clinical data were abstracted with Institutional Review Board approval. Patients treated with IC and curative-intent CRT with ≥40 Gy dose of radiation for adenocarcinoma were included in this analysis (N = 59). Doublet or triplet IC regimens utilizing 5-Flurouracil(5-FU), Cisplatin/Oxaliplatin and Docetaxel were commonly administered while combinations of Carboplatin +Paclitaxel or 5-FU + Oxaliplatin were used in CRT. Clinical complete response (CCR) was defined as metabolic imaging and endoscopic biopsies negative for residual malignancy after completion of TNT. Patients were followed from diagnosis to recurrence and overall survival. Survival probabilities were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared between groups using a log-rank test. Results: Out of 59 evaluable pts, 69% were clinical stage T3, 71% were node positive. 37 pts (63%) underwent surgery, R0 resection rate was 89% (33/37), pathologic complete response (pCR) rate was 19% (7/37). Among the pts who did not undergo surgery, 41% (9/22) opted to forego surgery since they attained a CCR. For the entire cohort, median Disease-Free Survival (mDFS), median Overall Survival (mOS), and 3-yr OS were 2.4 yrs, 4.7 yrs, and 67% respectively. Pts who did not undergo surgery had a mDFS, mOS, and 3-yr OS of 1.5 yrs, 4.2 yrs, and 59% respectively. Median DFS, mOS, and 3-yr OS of patients who underwent surgery were 3.5 yrs, 5.8 yrs and 72% respectively. Patients who achieved a CCR and opted to forego surgery (N = 9) had a 3 -yr DFS of 42% vs 83% for pts (N = 7) who demonstrated a pCR after curative intent tri-modality therapy. (P = 0.0099) Interestingly, the same group that achieved CCR and opted out of surgery had 3yr OS of 89% vs 83% of those who demonstrated a pCR (p = 0.0042). Conclusions: TNT for pts with LA-GEJ CA is associated with high rates of R0 resection as well as excellent DFS and OS compared to historical controls, warranting prospective evaluation. The remarkable DFS and OS in patients who opted to forego surgery due to achieving CCR is reflective of the local and systemic control rendered by this approach. Careful characterization and close longitudinal follow-up of patients who achieve CCR may help identify a subgroup of LA-GEJ CA pts who may benefit from surgery sparing approaches.

Abstract Purpose: To quantitatively predict the impact of cardiopulmonary dose on overall survival (OS) after radiotherapy for locally advanced non–small cell lung cancer. Experimental Design: We used the NRG Oncology/RTOG 0617 dataset. The model building procedure was preregistered on a public website. Patients were split between a training and a set-aside validation subset (N = 306/131). The 191 candidate variables covered disease, patient, treatment, and dose-volume characteristics from multiple cardiopulmonary substructures (atria, lung, pericardium, and ventricles), including the minimum dose to the hottest x% volume (Dx%[Gy]), mean dose of the hottest x% (MOHx%[Gy]), and minimum, mean (Mean[Gy]), and maximum dose. The model building was based on Cox regression and given 191 candidate variables; a Bonferroni-corrected P value threshold of 0.0003 was used to identify predictors. To reduce overreliance on the most highly correlated variables, stepwise multivariable analysis (MVA) was repeated on 1000 bootstrapped replicates. Multivariate sets selected in ≥10% of replicates were fit to the training subset and then averaged to generate a final model. In the validation subset, discrimination was assessed using Harrell c-index, and calibration was tested using risk group stratification. Results: Four MVA models were identified on bootstrap. The averaged model included atria D45%[Gy], lung Mean[Gy], pericardium MOH55%[Gy], and ventricles MOH5%[Gy]. This model had excellent performance predicting OS in the validation subset (c = 0.89). Conclusions: The risk of death due to cardiopulmonary irradiation was accurately modeled, as demonstrated by predictions on the validation subset, and provides guidance on the delivery of safe thoracic radiotherapy.

119 Background: Radiotherapy (RT) interruptions have a negative impact on outcomes in many epithelial malignancies treated with definitive RT. The purpose of this study was to analyze the impact of RT duration on outcomes in patients (pts) with esophageal cancer treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy (CRT). Methods: Pts treated with definitive CRT on RTOG trials 8501 and 9405 were included. Separate analyses were performed in pts receiving standard dose (SD-CRT; 50 Gy + 5FU + cisplatin) and high dose (HD-CRT; 64.8 Gy + 5FU + cisplatin) CRT. Local (LF) and regional (RF) failure were estimated by the cumulative incidence method. Disease-free (DFS) and overall (OS) survival were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Univariate (UVA) and multivariate (MVA) Cox proportional hazards models were utilized to examine for correlation between RT duration (< vs. ≥ median) with LF, RF, DFS and OS. Results: In the SD-CRT cohort (n=235), 96 pts (41%) had ≥ 1 RT interruption for a median of 3 (IQR 1-6) days. The median RT duration was 39 (IQR 37-43) days. In UVA and MVA, RT duration was not associated with LF, RF, DFS, or OS. Estimated outcome rates are in the table. In the HD-CRT cohort (n=107), 64 pts (60%) had ≥ 1 RT interruption for a median of 3.5 (IQR 2-7.5) days. The median RT duration was 52 (IQR 50-57) days. In UVA, RT duration ≥ 52 days was associated with a 33% reduction in risk of DFS failure (HR=0.66, 95% CI [0.44-0.98], p=0.039) and a 29% reduction in risk of death (HR=0.71, 95% CI [0.48-1.06], p=0.09). When excluding the 25 pts with RT dose < 64.8 Gy, RT duration was not associated with DFS or OS. Conclusions: In pts with esophageal cancer receiving definitive SD-CRT, an association between RT duration and outcomes was not observed. In pts receiving HD-CRT, longer RT duration was associated with improved DFS, which may have been due to a significant number of deaths at RT dose < 64.8 Gy. Supported by NCI U10 grants CA21661, CA180868, CA180822, CA37422. Clinical trial information: NCT00002631. [Table: see text]

PurposeTo determine whether prolonged androgen suppression (AS) duration before radiotherapy improves survival and disease control in prostate cancer.Patients and MethodsOne thousand five hundred seventy-nine men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer were randomly assigned to 8 weeks of AS followed by radiotherapy with an additional 8 weeks of concurrent AS (16 weeks total) or to 28 weeks of AS followed by radiotherapy with an additional 8 weeks of AS (36 weeks total). The trial sought primarily to detect a 33% reduction in the hazard of prostate cancer death in the 28-week assignment. Time-to-event end points are reported for up to 10 years of follow-up.ResultsThere were no between-group differences in baseline characteristics of 1,489 eligible patients with follow-up. For the 8- and 28-week assignments, 10-year disease-specific survival rates were 95% (95% CI, 93.3% to 97.0%) and 96% (95% CI, 94.6% to 98.0%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.81; P = .45), respectively, and 10-year overall survival rates were 66% (95% CI, 62.0% to 69.9%) and 67% (95% CI, 63.0% to 70.8%; HR, 0.95; P = .62), respectively. For the 8- and 28-week assignments, 10-year cumulative incidences of locoregional progression were 6% (95% CI, 4.3% to 8.0%) and 4% (95% CI, 2.5% to 5.7%; HR, 0.65; P = .07), respectively; 10-year distant metastasis cumulative incidences were 6% (95% CI, 4.0% to 7.7%) and 6% (95% CI, 4.0% to 7.6%; HR, 1.07; P = .80), respectively; and 10-year prostate-specific antigen–based recurrence cumulative incidences were 27% (95% CI, 23.1% to 29.8%) and 27% (95% CI, 23.4% to 30.3%; HR, 0.97; P = .77), respectively.ConclusionExtending AS duration from 8 weeks to 28 weeks before radiotherapy did not improve outcomes. A lower than expected prostate cancer death rate reduced ability to detect a between-group difference in disease-specific survival. The schedule of 8 weeks of AS before radiotherapy plus 8 weeks of AS during radiotherapy remains a standard of care in intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

Abstract Pretreatment evaluation is performed to determine the number, location, and size of the brain metastases and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the recommended imaging technique, particularly in patients being considered for surgery or stereotactic radiosurgery. A contiguous thin-cut volumetric MRI with gadolinium with newer gadolinium-based agents can improve detection of small brain metastases. A systemic workup and medical evaluation are important, given that subsequent treatment for the brain metastases will also depend on the extent of the extracranial disease and on the age and performance status of the patient. Patients with hydrocephalus or impending brain herniation should be started on high doses of corticosteroids and evaluated for possible neurosurgical intervention. Patients with moderate symptoms should receive approximately 4–8 mg/d of dexamethasone in divided doses. The routine use of corticosteroids in patients without neurologic symptoms is not necessary. There is no proven benefit of anticonvulsants in patient without seizures. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 3 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.