Jolie Ringash

Phase I Study of Individualized Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy of Liver Metastases

PURPOSE To report on the outcomes of a phase I study of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for treatment of liver metastases. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with liver metastases that were inoperable or medically unsuitable for resection, and who were not candidates for standard therapies, were eligible for this phase I study of individualized SBRT. Individualized radiation doses were chosen to maintain the same nominal risk of radiation-induced liver disease (RILD) for three estimated risk levels (5%, 10%, and 20%). Additional patients were treated at the maximal study dose (MSD) in an expanded cohort. Median SBRT dose was 41.8 Gy (range, 27.7 to 60 Gy) in six fractions over 2 weeks. RESULTS Sixty-eight patients with inoperable colorectal (n = 40), breast (n = 12), or other (n = 16) liver metastases were treated. Median tumor volume was 75.2 mL (range, 1.19 to 3,090 mL). The highest RILD risk level investigated was safe, with no dose-limiting toxicity. Two grade 3 liver enzyme changes occurred, but no RILD or other grade 3 to 5 liver toxicity was seen, for a low estimated risk of serious liver toxicity (95% CI, 0 to 5.3%). Six (9%) acute grade 3 toxicities (two gastritis, two nausea, lethargy, and thrombocytopenia) and one (1%) grade 4 toxicity (thrombocytopenia) were seen. The 1-year local control rate was 71% (95 CI, 58% to 85%). The median overall survival was 17.6 months (95% CI, 10.4 to 38.1 months). CONCLUSION Individualized six-fraction liver metastases SBRT is safe, with sustained local control observed in the majority of patients.

Deintensification Candidate Subgroups in Human Papillomavirus-Related Oropharyngeal Cancer According to Minimal Risk of Distant Metastasis

PURPOSE To define human papillomavirus (HPV) -positive oropharyngeal cancers (OPC) suitable for treatment deintensification according to low risk of distant metastasis (DM). PATIENTS AND METHODS OPC treated with radiotherapy (RT) or chemoradiotherapy (CRT) from 2001 to 2009 were included. Outcomes were compared for HPV-positive versus HPV-negative patients. Univariate and multivariate analyses identified outcome predictors. Recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) stratified the DM risk. RESULTS HPV status was ascertained in 505 (56%) of 899 consecutive OPCs. Median follow-up was 3.9 years. HPV-positive patients (n = 382), compared with HPV-negative patients (n = 123), had higher local (94% v 80%, respectively, at 3 years; P < .01) and regional control (95% v 82%, respectively; P < .01) but similar distant control (DC; 90% v 86%, respectively; P = .53). Multivariate analysis identified that HPV negativity (hazard ratio [HR], 2.9; 95% CI, 2.0 to 5.0), N2b-N3 (HR, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.8 to 4.9), T4 (HR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.2 to 2.9), and RT alone (HR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.1 to 2.5) predicted a lower recurrence-free survival (RFS; all P < .01). Smoking pack-years > 10 reduced overall survival (HR, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.1 to 2.7; P = .03) but did not impact RFS (HR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.7 to 1.9; P = .65). RPA segregated HPV-positive patients into low (T1-3N0-2c; DC, 93%) and high DM risk (N3 or T4; DC, 76%) groups and HPV-negative patients into different low (T1-2N0-2c; DC, 93%) and high DM risk (T3-4N3; DC, 72%) groups. The DC rates for HPV-positive, low-risk N0-2a or less than 10 pack-year N2b patients were similar for RT alone and CRT, but the rate was lower in the N2c subset managed by RT alone (73% v 92% for CRT; P = .02). CONCLUSION HPV-positive T1-3N0-2c patients have a low DM risk, but N2c patients from this group have a reduced DC when treated with RT alone and seem less suited for deintensification strategies that omit chemotherapy.

Sequential Phase I and II Trials of Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Locally Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma

PURPOSE To describe outcomes of prospective trials of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Two trials of SBRT for patients with active HCC unsuitable for standard locoregional therapies were conducted from 2004 to 2010. All patients had Child-Turcotte-Pugh class A disease, with at least 700 mL of non-HCC liver. The SBRT dose range was 24 to 54 Gy in six fractions. Primary end points were toxicity and local control at 1 year (LC1y), defined as no progressive disease (PD) of irradiated HCC by RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors). RESULTS A total of 102 patients were evaluable (Trial 1, 2004 to 2007: n = 50; Trial 2, 2007 to 2010: n = 52). Underlying liver disease was hepatitis B in 38% of patients, hepatitis C in 38%, alcohol related in 25%, other in 14%, and none in 7%. Fifty-two percent received prior therapies (no prior sorafenib). TNM stage was III in 66%, and 61% had multiple lesions. Median gross tumor volume was 117.0 mL (range, 1.3 to 1,913.4 mL). Tumor vascular thrombosis (TVT) was present in 55%, and extrahepatic disease was present in 12%. LC1y was 87% (95% CI, 78% to 93%). SBRT dose (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.96; P = .02) and being in Trial 2 (HR = 0.38; P = .03) were associated with LC1y on univariate analysis. Toxicity ≥ grade 3 was seen in 30% of patients. In seven patients (two with TVT PD), death was possibly related to treatment (1.1 to 7.7 months after SBRT). Median overall survival was 17.0 months (95% CI, 10.4 to 21.3 months), for which only TVT (HR = 2.47; P = .01) and being in Trial 2 (HR = 0.49; P = .01) were significant on multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION These results provide strong rationale for studying SBRT for HCC in a randomized trial.

Comparative Prognostic Value of HPV16 E6 mRNA Compared With In Situ Hybridization for Human Oropharyngeal Squamous Carcinoma

PURPOSE A significant proportion of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinomas (OSCC) are associated with the human papilloma virus (HPV), particularly HPV16. The optimal method for HPV determination on archival materials however, remains unclear. We compared a quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) assay for HPV16 mRNA to a DNA in situ hybridization (ISH) method, and evaluated their significance for overall (OS) and disease-free (DFS) survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS Matched, archival biopsies from 111 patients with OSCC were evaluated for HPV16 using a qRT-PCR for E6 mRNA and ISH for DNA. Immunohistochemistry for p16, p53, and epidermal growth factor receptor were also performed. RESULTS HPV16 E6 mRNA was positive in 73 (66%) of 111 samples; ISH was positive in 62 of 106 samples (58%), with 86% concordance. P16 was overexpressed in 72 samples (65%), which was strongly associated with HPV16 status by either method. E6 mRNA presence or p16 overexpression were significantly associated with superior OS; E6 mRNA, HPV16 ISH, or p16 were all significantly associated with DFS. On multivariate analysis adjusted for age, stage, and treatment, positive E6 mRNA was the only independent predictor for superior OS; for DFS, p16 expression or HPV16 status determined by either method was significant. CONCLUSION The prevalence of HPV16 in OSCC ranges from 58% to 66%, in a recently treated Canadian cohort. Classification of HPV-positivity by HPV16 E6 mRNA, HPV16 ISH or p16 immunohistochemistry (IHC) is associated with improved DFS. However, the latter two assays are technically easier to perform; hence, HPV16 ISH or p16 IHC should become standard evaluations for all patients with OSCC.

Tirapazamine, Cisplatin, and Radiation Versus Cisplatin and Radiation for Advanced Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck (TROG 02.02, HeadSTART): A Phase III Trial of the Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group

PURPOSE Promising results in a randomized phase II trial with the hypoxic cytotoxin tirapazamine (TPZ) combined with cisplatin (CIS) and radiation led to this phase III trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with previously untreated stage III or IV (excluding T1-2N1 and M1) squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity, oropharynx, hypopharynx, or larynx were randomly assigned to receive definitive radiotherapy (70 Gy in 7 weeks) concurrently with either CIS (100 mg/m(2)) on day 1 of weeks 1, 4, and 7 or CIS (75 mg/m(2)) plus TPZ (290 mg/m(2)/d) on day 1 of weeks 1, 4, and 7 and TPZ alone (160 mg/m(2)/d) on days 1, 3, and 5 of weeks 2 and 3 (TPZ/CIS). The primary end point was overall survival (OS). The planned sample size was 850, estimated to result in 334 deaths, which would provide 90% power to detect a difference in 2-year survival rates of 60% v 70% for CIS versus TPZ/CIS, respectively (hazard ratio = 0.69). RESULTS Eight hundred sixty-one patients were accrued from 89 sites in 16 countries. In an intent-to-treat analysis, the 2-year OS rates were 65.7% for CIS and 66.2% for TPZ/CIS (TPZ/CIS--CIS: 95% CI, -5.9% to 6.9%). There were no significant differences in failure-free survival, time to locoregional failure, or quality of life as measured by Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Head and Neck. CONCLUSIONS We found no evidence that the addition of TPZ to chemoradiotherapy, in patients with advanced head and neck cancer not selected for the presence of hypoxia, improves OS.

Refining American Joint Committee on Cancer/Union for International Cancer Control TNM Stage and Prognostic Groups for Human Papillomavirus–Related Oropharyngeal Carcinomas

PURPOSE To refine stage and prognostic group for human papillomavirus (HPV) -related nonmetastatic (M0) oropharyngeal cancer (OPC). METHODS All patients with nonmetastatic (M0) p16-confirmed OPC treated with radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy from 2000 to 2010 were included. Overall survival (OS) was compared among TNM stages for patients with HPV-related and HPV-unrelated OPC separately. For HPV-related OPC, recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) derived new RPA stages objectively. Cox regression was used to calculate adjusted hazard ratios (AHRs) to derive AHR stages. The performance of survival prediction of RPA stage and AHR stage was assessed against the current seventh edition TNM stages. Prognostic groups were derived by RPA, combining RPA stage and nonanatomic factors. RESULTS The cohort comprised 573 patients with HPV-related OPC and 237 patients with HPV-unrelated OPC, with a median follow-up of 5.1 years. Lower 5-year OS with higher TNM stage was evident for patients with HPV-unrelated OPC (stage I, II, III, and IV 5-year OS: 70%, 58%, 50%, and 30%, respectively; P = .004) but not for patients with HPV-related OPC (stage I, II, III, and IV 5-year OS: 88%, 78%, 71%, and 74%, respectively; P = .56). RPA divided HPV-related OPC into RPA-I (T1-3N0-2b), RPA-II (T1-3N2c), and RPA-III (T4 or N3; 5-year OS: 82%, 76%, and 54%, respectively; P < .001). AHR also yielded a valid classification, but RPA stage demonstrated better survival prediction. A further RPA (including RPA stage, age, and smoking pack-years [PYs]) derived the following four valid prognostic groups for survival: group I (T1-3N0-N2c_≤ 20 PY), group II (T1-3N0-N2c_> 20 PY), group III (T4 or N3_age ≤ 70), and group IVA (T4 or N3_age > 70; 5-year OS: 89%, 64%, 57%, and 40%, respectively; P < .001). CONCLUSION An RPA-based TNM stage grouping (stage I/II/III: T1-3N0-N2b/T1-3N2c/T4 or N3, with M1 as stage IV) is proposed for HPV-related OPC as a result of significantly improved survival prediction compared with the seventh edition TNM, and prognostication is further improved by an RPA-based prognostic grouping within the American Joint Committee on Cancer/Union for International Cancer Control TNM framework for HPV-related OPC.

A structured review of quality of life instruments for head and neck cancer patients

Quality of life (QOL) is an important treatment outcome for head and neck cancer. Our purpose was to critically review published disease‐specific QOL instruments.

Atypical clinical behavior of p16-confirmed HPV-related oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma treated with radical radiotherapy.

PURPOSE To report atypical clinical behavior observed in human papillomavirus (HPV)-related oropharyngeal carcinoma (OPC) treated with radiotherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS A retrospective cohort study was conducted for all newly diagnosed OPC cases treated with radiotherapy on July 1, 2003 to April 30, 2009. HPV positivity was determined by p16 immunostaining in tumors. The incidence of additional malignancies and the pattern of distant metastases (DMs) were compared between the HPV-positive (HPV+) and HPV-negative (HPV-) cohorts. RESULTS HPV status was evaluated in 318 of 613 consecutive OPC cases (52%), showing 236 HPV+ and 82 HPV- patients. Compared with HPV-, HPV+ cases were less likely to have additional malignancies (prior: 11% vs. 20%, p = 0.038; synchronous: 1% vs. 9%, p = 0.001; metachronous: 6% vs. 16%, p = 0.003). Whereas the majority (10 of 12) of HPV- additional head-and-neck (HN) mucosal malignancies were in the oral cavity, there was none (0 of 7) in the HPV+ cohort (p < 0.001). HPV+ synchronous HN second primaries (SPs) were in the supraglottis, post-cricoid, and nasopharynx; metachronous HN SPs were in the glottis, supraglottis, and ethmoid plus glottis/post-cricoid region. All SPs that could be tested were HPV+. There was no difference in DM rate (10% vs. 15%, p = 0.272), but HPV+ DMs were more likely to involve multiple organs (46% vs. 0%, p = 0.005) and unusual sites. CONCLUSIONS This study reports atypical clinical behavior seen in HPV+ OPC, including multicentric lesions in HN mucosa and DM to multiple organs and unusual sites. The frequency of these events is low, but they may have clinical implications. The routine assessment of HPV status for all OPC is warranted.

Outcomes of HPV-related oropharyngeal cancer patients treated by radiotherapy alone using altered fractionation.

PURPOSE To report outcome of HPV-related [HPV(+)] oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) managed predominantly by altered-fractionation radiotherapy-alone (RT-alone). METHODS OPCs treated with RT-alone (n = 207) or chemoradiotherapy (CRT) (n = 151) from 2001 to 2008 were included. Overall survival (OS), local (LC), regional (RC) and distant (DC) control were compared for HPV(+) vs. HPV-unrelated [HPV(-)], by RT-alone vs. CRT, and by smoking pack-years (≤ 10 vs. >10). Multivariate analysis identified predictors. RESULTS HPV(+) (n = 277) had better OS (81% vs. 44%), LC (93% vs. 76%), RC (94% vs. 79%) (all p < 0.01) but similar DC (89% vs. 86%, p = 0.87) vs. HPV(-) (n = 81). HPV(+) stage IV CRT (n = 125) had better OS (89% vs. 70%, p < 0.01), but similar LC (93% vs. 90%, p = 0.41), RC (94% vs. 90%, p = 0.31) and DC (90% vs. 83%, p = 0.22) vs. RT-alone (n = 96). Both HPV(+) RT-alone (n = 37) and CRT (n = 67) stage IV minimal smokers had favorable OS (86% vs. 88%, p = 0.45), LC (95% vs. 92%, p = 0.52), RC (97% vs. 93%, p = 0.22), and DC (92% vs. 86%, p = 0.37). RT-alone and heavy-smoking were independent predictors for lower OS but not CSS in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS Overall, HPV(+) RT-alone stage IV demonstrated lower survival but comparable disease control vs. CRT, but no difference was apparent among minimal smokers.

Patient Self-Reports of Symptoms and Clinician Ratings as Predictors of Overall Cancer Survival

BACKGROUND The National Cancer Institutes Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI-CTCAE) reporting system is widely used by clinicians to measure patient symptoms in clinical trials. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancers Quality of Life core questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) enables cancer patients to rate their symptoms related to their quality of life. We examined the extent to which patient and clinician symptom scoring and their agreement could contribute to the estimation of overall survival among cancer patients. METHODS We analyzed baseline data regarding six cancer symptoms (pain, fatigue, vomiting, nausea, diarrhea, and constipation) from a total of 2279 cancer patients from 14 closed EORTC randomized controlled trials. In each trial that was selected for retrospective pooled analysis, both clinician and patient symptom scoring were reported simultaneously at study entry. We assessed the extent of agreement between clinician vs patient symptom scoring using the Spearman and kappa correlation statistics. After adjusting for age, sex, performance status, cancer severity, and cancer site, we used Harrell concordance index (C-index) to compare the potential for clinician-reported and/or patient-reported symptom scores to improve the accuracy of Cox models to predict overall survival. All P values are from two-sided tests. RESULTS Patient-reported scores for some symptoms, particularly fatigue, did differ from clinician-reported scores. For each of the six symptoms that we assessed at baseline, both clinician and patient scorings contributed independently and positively to the predictive accuracy of survival prognostication. Cox models of overall survival that considered both patient and clinician scores gained more predictive accuracy than models that considered clinician scores alone for each of four symptoms: fatigue (C-index = .67 with both patient and clinician data vs C-index = .63 with clinician data only; P <.001), vomiting (C-index = .64 vs .62; P = .01), nausea (C-index = .65 vs .62; P < .001), and constipation (C-index = .62 vs .61; P = .01). CONCLUSION Patients provide a subjective measure of symptom severity that complements clinician scoring in predicting overall survival.