Hak Choy

Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Inoperable Early Stage Lung Cancer

CONTEXT Patients with early stage but medically inoperable lung cancer have a poor rate of primary tumor control (30%-40%) and a high rate of mortality (3-year survival, 20%-35%) with current management. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the toxicity and efficacy of stereotactic body radiation therapy in a high-risk population of patients with early stage but medically inoperable lung cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS Phase 2 North American multicenter study of patients aged 18 years or older with biopsy-proven peripheral T1-T2N0M0 non-small cell tumors (measuring <5 cm in diameter) and medical conditions precluding surgical treatment. The prescription dose was 18 Gy per fraction x 3 fractions (54 Gy total) with entire treatment lasting between 1(1/2) and 2 weeks. The study opened May 26, 2004, and closed October 13, 2006; data were analyzed through August 31, 2009. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The primary end point was 2-year actuarial primary tumor control; secondary end points were disease-free survival (ie, primary tumor, involved lobe, regional, and disseminated recurrence), treatment-related toxicity, and overall survival. RESULTS A total of 59 patients accrued, of which 55 were evaluable (44 patients with T1 tumors and 11 patients with T2 tumors) with a median follow-up of 34.4 months (range, 4.8-49.9 months). Only 1 patient had a primary tumor failure; the estimated 3-year primary tumor control rate was 97.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 84.3%-99.7%). Three patients had recurrence within the involved lobe; the 3-year primary tumor and involved lobe (local) control rate was 90.6% (95% CI, 76.0%-96.5%). Two patients experienced regional failure; the local-regional control rate was 87.2% (95% CI, 71.0%-94.7%). Eleven patients experienced disseminated recurrence; the 3-year rate of disseminated failure was 22.1% (95% CI, 12.3%-37.8%). The rates for disease-free survival and overall survival at 3 years were 48.3% (95% CI, 34.4%-60.8%) and 55.8% (95% CI, 41.6%-67.9%), respectively. The median overall survival was 48.1 months (95% CI, 29.6 months to not reached). Protocol-specified treatment-related grade 3 adverse events were reported in 7 patients (12.7%; 95% CI, 9.6%-15.8%); grade 4 adverse events were reported in 2 patients (3.6%; 95% CI, 2.7%-4.5%). No grade 5 adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION Patients with inoperable non-small cell lung cancer who received stereotactic body radiation therapy had a survival rate of 55.8% at 3 years, high rates of local tumor control, and moderate treatment-related morbidity.

Standard-dose versus high-dose conformal radiotherapy with concurrent and consolidation carboplatin plus paclitaxel with or without cetuximab for patients with stage IIIA or IIIB non-small-cell lung cancer (RTOG 0617): a randomised, two-by-two factorial phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND We aimed to compare overall survival after standard-dose versus high-dose conformal radiotherapy with concurrent chemotherapy and the addition of cetuximab to concurrent chemoradiation for patients with inoperable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer. METHODS In this open-label randomised, two-by-two factorial phase 3 study in 185 institutions in the USA and Canada, we enrolled patients (aged ≥ 18 years) with unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer, a Zubrod performance status of 0-1, adequate pulmonary function, and no evidence of supraclavicular or contralateral hilar adenopathy. We randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) patients to receive either 60 Gy (standard dose), 74 Gy (high dose), 60 Gy plus cetuximab, or 74 Gy plus cetuximab. All patients also received concurrent chemotherapy with 45 mg/m(2) paclitaxel and carboplatin once a week (AUC 2); 2 weeks after chemoradiation, two cycles of consolidation chemotherapy separated by 3 weeks were given consisting of paclitaxel (200 mg/m(2)) and carboplatin (AUC 6). Randomisation was done with permuted block randomisation methods, stratified by radiotherapy technique, Zubrod performance status, use of PET during staging, and histology; treatment group assignments were not masked. Radiation dose was prescribed to the planning target volume and was given in 2 Gy daily fractions with either intensity-modulated radiation therapy or three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy. The use of four-dimensional CT and image-guided radiation therapy were encouraged but not necessary. For patients assigned to receive cetuximab, 400 mg/m(2) cetuximab was given on day 1 followed by weekly doses of 250 mg/m(2), and was continued through consolidation therapy. The primary endpoint was overall survival. All analyses were done by modified intention-to-treat. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00533949. FINDINGS Between Nov 27, 2007, and Nov 22, 2011, 166 patients were randomly assigned to receive standard-dose chemoradiotherapy, 121 to high-dose chemoradiotherapy, 147 to standard-dose chemoradiotherapy and cetuximab, and 110 to high-dose chemoradiotherapy and cetuximab. Median follow-up for the radiotherapy comparison was 22.9 months (IQR 27.5-33.3). Median overall survival was 28.7 months (95% CI 24.1-36.9) for patients who received standard-dose radiotherapy and 20.3 months (17.7-25.0) for those who received high-dose radiotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] 1.38, 95% CI 1.09-1.76; p=0.004). Median follow-up for the cetuximab comparison was 21.3 months (IQR 23.5-29.8). Median overall survival in patients who received cetuximab was 25.0 months (95% CI 20.2-30.5) compared with 24.0 months (19.8-28.6) in those who did not (HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.84-1.35; p=0.29). Both the radiation-dose and cetuximab results crossed protocol-specified futility boundaries. We recorded no statistical differences in grade 3 or worse toxic effects between radiotherapy groups. By contrast, the use of cetuximab was associated with a higher rate of grade 3 or worse toxic effects (205 [86%] of 237 vs 160 [70%] of 228 patients; p<0.0001). There were more treatment-related deaths in the high-dose chemoradiotherapy and cetuximab groups (radiotherapy comparison: eight vs three patients; cetuximab comparison: ten vs five patients). There were no differences in severe pulmonary events between treatment groups. Severe oesophagitis was more common in patients who received high-dose chemoradiotherapy than in those who received standard-dose treatment (43 [21%] of 207 patients vs 16 [7%] of 217 patients; p<0.0001). INTERPRETATION 74 Gy radiation given in 2 Gy fractions with concurrent chemotherapy was not better than 60 Gy plus concurrent chemotherapy for patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer, and might be potentially harmful. Addition of cetuximab to concurrent chemoradiation and consolidation treatment provided no benefit in overall survival for these patients. FUNDING National Cancer Institute and Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Combined Chemoradiotherapy Regimens of Paclitaxel and Carboplatin for Locally Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Randomized Phase II Locally Advanced Multi-Modality Protocol

PURPOSE This phase II noncomparative randomized trial was conducted to determine the optimal sequencing and integration of paclitaxel/carboplatin with standard daily thoracic radiation therapy (TRT), in patients with locally advanced unresected stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Survival data were compared with historical standard sequential chemoradiotherapy data from the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with unresected stages IIIA and IIIB NSCLC, with Karnofsky performance status > or = 70% and weight loss < or = 10%, received two cycles of induction paclitaxel (200 mg/m2)/carboplatin (area under the plasma concentration time curve [AUC] = 6) followed by TRT 63.0 Gy (arm 1, sequential) or two cycles of induction paclitaxel (200 mg/m2)/carboplatin (AUC = 6) followed by weekly paclitaxel (45 mg/m2)/carboplatin (AUC = 2) with concurrent TRT 63.0 Gy (arm 2, induction/concurrent), or weekly paclitaxel (45 mg/m2)/carboplatin (AUC = 2)/TRT (63.0 Gy) followed by two cycles of paclitaxel (200 mg/m2)/carboplatin (AUC = 6; arm 3, concurrent/consolidation). RESULTS With a median follow-up time of 39.6 months, median overall survival was 13.0, 12.7, and 16.3 months for arms 1, 2, and 3, respectively. During induction chemotherapy, grade 3/4 granulocytopenia occurred in 32% and 38% of patients on study arms 1 and 2, respectively. The most common locoregional grade 3/4 toxicity during and after TRT was esophagitis, which was more pronounced with the administration of concurrent chemoradiotherapy on study arms 2 and 3 (19% and 28%, respectively). CONCLUSION Concurrent weekly paclitaxel, carboplatin, and TRT followed by consolidation seems to be associated with the best outcome, although this schedule was associated with greater toxicity.

Multiinstitutional phase II trial of paclitaxel, carboplatin, and concurrent radiation therapy for locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE Combined modality therapy for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has produced promising results. A multiinstitutional phase II clinical trial was conducted to evaluate the activity and toxicity of paclitaxel, carboplatin, and concurrent radiation therapy on patients with locally advanced NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS Forty previously untreated patients with inoperable locally advanced NSCLC entered onto a phase II study from March 1995 to December 1996. On an outpatient basis for 7 weeks, patients received paclitaxel 50 mg/m2 weekly over 1 hour; carboplatin at (area under the curve) AUC 2 weekly; and radiation therapy of 66 Gy in 33 fractions. After chemoradiation therapy, patients received an additional two cycles of paclitaxel 200 mg/m2 over 3 hours and carboplatin at AUC 6 every 3 weeks. RESULTS Thirty-nine patients were eligible for the study. The survival rates at 12 months were 56.3%, and at 24 months, 38.3%, with a median overall survival of 20.5 months. The progression-free survival rates at 12 months were 43.6%, and at 24 months, 34.7%, with a median progression-free survival of 9.0 months. Two patients did not receive more than 2 weeks of concurrent chemoradiotherapy and were not assessable for toxicity and response. The overall response rate (partial plus complete response) of 37 assessable patients was 75.7%. The major toxicity was esophagitis. Seventeen patients (46%) developed grade 3 or 4 esophagitis. However, only two patients developed late esophageal toxicity with stricture at 3 and 6 months posttreatment. CONCLUSION Combined modality therapy with paclitaxel, carboplatin, and radiation is a promising treatment for locally advanced NSCLC that has a high response rate and acceptable toxicity and survival rates. A randomized trial will be necessary to fully evaluate the usefulness of these findings.

Phase III Comparison of Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation Versus Observation in Patients With Locally Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Primary Analysis of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Study RTOG 0214

PURPOSE This study was conducted to determine if prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) improves survival in locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with stage III NSCLC without disease progression after treatment with surgery and/or radiation therapy (RT) with or without chemotherapy were eligible. Participants were stratified by stage (IIIA v IIIB), histology (nonsquamous v squamous), and therapy (surgery v none) and were randomly assigned to PCI or observation. PCI was delivered to 30 Gy in 15 fractions. The primary end point of the study was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points were disease-free survival (DFS), neurocognitive function (NCF), and quality of life. Kaplan-Meier and log-rank analyses were used for OS and DFS. The incidence of brain metastasis (BM) was evaluated with the logistic regression model. RESULTS Overall, 356 patients were accrued of the targeted 1,058. The study was closed early because of slow accrual; 340 of the 356 patients were eligible. The 1-year OS (P = .86; 75.6% v 76.9% for PCI v observation) and 1-year DFS (P = .11; 56.4% v 51.2% for PCI v observation) were not significantly different. The hazard ratio for observation versus PCI was 1.03 (95% CI, 0.77 to 1.36). The 1-year rates of BM were significantly different (P = .004; 7.7% v 18.0% for PCI v observation). Patients in the observation arm were 2.52 times more likely to develop BM than those in the PCI arm (unadjusted odds ratio, 2.52; 95% CI, 1.32 to 4.80). CONCLUSION In patients with stage III disease without progression of disease after therapy, PCI decreased the rate of BM but did not improve OS or DFS.

A randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled trial of divalproex sodium prophylaxis in adults with newly diagnosed brain tumors

Background: Seizures occur after the diagnosis of brain tumors in up to 40% of patients. Prophylactic anticonvulsants are widely advocated despite a lack of convincing evidence of their efficacy in preventing first seizures. We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study comparing the incidence of first seizures in divalproex sodium- and placebo-treated patients with newly diagnosed brain tumors. Patients and Methods: Patients who had not previously had a seizure were randomized within 14 days of diagnosis of their brain tumor to receive either divalproex sodium or placebo. All patients had at least one supratentorial brain lesion, a Karnofsky Performance Score (KPS) more than equals 50%, and no previous anticonvulsant use or other brain disease. Compliance and adequacy of dosing were assessed by pill counts and monthly blood levels. Results: Seventy-four of 75 consecutive eligible patients were entered in this study. Median follow-up was 7 months. The drug and placebo groups did not differ significantly in age, sex, KPS, primary tumor type, number or location of brain lesions, frequency of brain surgery, or pretreatment EEG. Thirteen of 37 patients (35%) receiving divalproex sodium and 9 of 37 patients (24%) on placebo had seizures. The odds ratio for a seizure in the divalproex sodium arm relative to the placebo arm was 1.7 (95% CI 0.6 to 4.6; p equals 0.3). The hypothesis that anticonvulsant prophylaxis provides a reduction in the frequency of first seizure as small as 30% was rejected (p equals 0.05). Conclusions: Anticonvulsant prophylaxis with divalproex sodium is not indicated for patients with brain tumors who have not had seizures. NEUROLOGY 1996;46: 985-991.

Current status and future prospects for satraplatin, an oral platinum analogue

Platinum drugs are major chemotherapeutic agents that are used alone or in combination with other systemic agents and/or radiation therapy in the management of many human malignancies. All three platinum drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration, cisplatin, carboplatin, and oxaliplatin, are administrated intravenously. Satraplatin is the first orally administered platinum drug under active clinical investigation. Satraplatin and its major metabolite, JM118, have shown antineoplastic activity in in vitro, in vivo, and in clinical settings. Use of satraplatin as an alternative platinum cytotoxic agent is particularly attractive because of the convenience of administration, milder toxicity profile, lack of cross-resistance with cisplatin, theoretical advantage as a radiosensitizer, and activity in cancers historically nonresponsive to platinum drugs. The most mature clinical data for satraplatin come from the recently completed phase III trial that investigated the efficacy of satraplatin and prednisone on hormone-refractory prostate cancer patients who had failed a course of other chemotherapy agents. Preliminary reports show that the combination is statistically superior to placebo and prednisone in multiple end points, including progression-free survival, prostate-specific antigen response, objective tumor response, pain response, and duration of pain response. The difference in overall survival, however, did not reach statistical significance.

Phase II Study of Cetuximab in Combination With Chemoradiation in Patients With Stage IIIA/B Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: RTOG 0324

PURPOSE Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) commonly expresses the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), which is associated with poor clinical outcome. Cetuximab is a chimerized monoclonal antibody that targets the EGFR and, in preclinical models, it demonstrates radiosensitization properties. We report a phase II trial testing the combination of cetuximab with chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in unresectable stage III NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS Eligibility criteria included unresectable stage III NSCLC, Zubrod performance status ≤ 1, weight loss ≤ 5%, forced expiratory volume in 1 second ≥ 1.2 L, and adequate organ function. Patients received an initial dose of cetuximab (400 mg/m(2)) on day 1 of week 1 and then weekly doses of cetuximab (250 mg/m(2)) until completion of therapy (weeks 2 through 17). During week 2, patients started CRT (63 Gy in 35 fractions) with weekly carboplatin at area under the [concentration-time] curve (AUC) 2 and six doses of paclitaxel at 45 mg/m(2) followed by carboplatin (AUC 6) and two cycles of paclitaxel (200 mg/m(2)) during weeks 12 through 17. Primary end points included safety and compliance of concurrent cetuximab and CRT. RESULTS In all, 93 patients were enrolled and 87 were evaluable. Median follow-up was 21.6 months. Response rate was 62% (n = 54), median survival was 22.7 months, and 24-month overall survival was 49.3%. Adverse events related to treatment included 20% grade 4 hematologic toxicities, 8% grade 3 esophagitis, and 7% grade 3 to 4 pneumonitis. There were five grade 5 events. CONCLUSION The combination of cetuximab with CRT is feasible and shows promising activity. The median and overall survival achieved with this regimen were longer than any previously reported by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group.

CONSIDERATION OF DOSE LIMITS FOR ORGANS AT RISK OF THORACIC RADIOTHERAPY: ATLAS FOR LUNG, PROXIMAL BRONCHIAL TREE, ESOPHAGUS, SPINAL CORD, RIBS, AND BRACHIAL PLEXUS

PURPOSE To review the dose limits and standardize the three-dimenional (3D) radiographic definition for the organs at risk (OARs) for thoracic radiotherapy (RT), including the lung, proximal bronchial tree, esophagus, spinal cord, ribs, and brachial plexus. METHODS AND MATERIALS The present study was performed by representatives from the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group, European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, and Soutwestern Oncology Group lung cancer committees. The dosimetric constraints of major multicenter trials of 3D-conformal RT and stereotactic body RT were reviewed and the challenges of 3D delineation of these OARs described. Using knowledge of the human anatomy and 3D radiographic correlation, draft atlases were generated by a radiation oncologist, medical physicist, dosimetrist, and radiologist from the United States and reviewed by a radiation oncologist and medical physicist from Europe. The atlases were then critically reviewed, discussed, and edited by another 10 radiation oncologists. RESULTS Three-dimensional descriptions of the lung, proximal bronchial tree, esophagus, spinal cord, ribs, and brachial plexus are presented. Two computed tomography atlases were developed: one for the middle and lower thoracic OARs (except for the heart) and one focusing on the brachial plexus for a patient positioned supine with their arms up for thoracic RT. The dosimetric limits of the key OARs are discussed. CONCLUSIONS We believe these atlases will allow us to define OARs with less variation and generate dosimetric data in a more consistent manner. This could help us study the effect of radiation on these OARs and guide high-quality clinical trials and individualized practice in 3D-conformal RT and stereotactic body RT.

Gefitinib Versus Placebo in Completely Resected Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Results of the NCIC CTG BR19 Study

PURPOSE Survival of patients with completely resected non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is unsatisfactory, and in 2002, the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy was not established. This phase III study assessed the impact of postoperative adjuvant gefitinib on overall survival (OS). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with completely resected (stage IB, II, or IIIA) NSCLC stratified by stage, histology, sex, postoperative radiotherapy, and chemotherapy were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive gefitinib 250 mg per day or placebo for 2 years. Study end points were OS, disease-free survival (DFS), and toxicity. RESULTS As a result of early closure, 503 of 1,242 planned patients were randomly assigned (251 to gefitinib and 252 to placebo). Baseline factors were balanced between the arms. With a median of 4.7 years of follow-up (range, 0.1 to 6.3 years), there was no difference in OS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.24; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.64; P = .14) or DFS (HR, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.61; P = .15) between the arms. Exploratory analyses demonstrated no DFS (HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.76; P = .14) or OS benefit (HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.71; P = .18) from gefitinib for 344 patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) wild-type tumors. Similarly, there was no DFS (HR, 1.84; 95% CI, 0.44 to 7.73; P = .395) or OS benefit (HR, 3.16; 95% CI, 0.61 to 16.45; P = .15) from gefitinib for the 15 patients with EGFR mutation-positive tumors. Adverse events were those expected with an EGFR inhibitor. Serious adverse events occurred in ≤ 5% of patients, except infection, fatigue, and pain. One patient in each arm had fatal pneumonitis. CONCLUSION Although the trial closed prematurely and definitive statements regarding the efficacy of adjuvant gefitinib cannot be made, these results indicate that it is unlikely to be of benefit.