Laurie E. Gaspar

Recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) of prognostic factors in three radiation therapy oncology group (RTOG) brain metastases trials

PURPOSE Promising results from new approaches such as radiosurgery or stereotactic surgery of brain metastases have recently been reported. Are these results due to the therapy alone or can the results be attributed in part to patient selection? An analysis of tumor/patient characteristics and treatment variables in previous Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) brain metastases studies was considered necessary to fully evaluate the benefit of these new interventions. METHODS AND MATERIALS The database included 1200 patients from three consecutive RTOG trials conducted between 1979 and 1993, which tested several different dose fractionation schemes and radiation sensitizers. Using recursive partitioning analysis (RPA), a statistical methodology which creates a regression tree according to prognostic significance, eighteen pretreatment characteristics and three treatment-related variables were analyzed. RESULTS According to the RPA tree the best survival (median: 7.1 months) was observed in patients < 65 years of age with a Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) of at least 70, and a controlled primary tumor with the brain the only site of metastases. The worst survival (median: 2.3 months) was seen in patients with a KPS less than 70. All other patients had relatively minor differences in observed survival, with a median of 4.2 months. CONCLUSIONS Based on this analysis, we suggest the following three classes: Class 1: patients with KPS > or = 70, < 65 years of age with controlled primary and no extracranial metastases; Class 3: KPS < 70; Class 2- all others. Using these classes or stages, new treatment techniques can be tested on homogeneous patient groups.

Multi-institutional phase I/II trial of stereotactic body radiation therapy for lung metastases

PURPOSE To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of high-dose stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for the treatment of patients with one to three lung metastases. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with one to three lung metastases with cumulative maximum tumor diameter smaller than 7 cm were enrolled and treated on a multi-institutional phase I/II clinical trial in which they received SBRT delivered in 3 fractions. In phase I, the total dose was safely escalated from 48 to 60 Gy. The phase II dose was 60 Gy. The primary end point was local control. Lesions with at least 6 months of radiographic follow-up were considered assessable for local control. Secondary end points included toxicity and survival. RESULTS Thirty-eight patients with 63 lesions were enrolled and treated at three participating institutions. Seventy-one percent had received at least one prior systemic regimen for metastatic disease and 34% had received at least two prior regimens (range, zero to five). Two patients had local recurrence after prior surgical resection. There was no grade 4 toxicity. The incidence of any grade 3 toxicity was 8% (three of 38). Symptomatic pneumonitis occurred in one patient (2.6%). Fifty lesions were assessable for local control. Median follow-up for assessable lesions was 15.4 months (range, 6 to 48 months). The median gross tumor volume was 4.2 mL (range, 0.2 to 52.3 mL). Actuarial local control at one and two years after SBRT was 100% and 96%, respectively. Local progression occurred in one patient, 13 months after SBRT. Median survival was 19 months. CONCLUSION This multi-institutional phase I/II trial demonstrates that high-dose SBRT is safe and effective for the treatment of patients with one to three lung metastases.

Summary Report on the Graded Prognostic Assessment: An Accurate and Facile Diagnosis-Specific Tool to Estimate Survival for Patients With Brain Metastases

PURPOSE Our group has previously published the Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA), a prognostic index for patients with brain metastases. Updates have been published with refinements to create diagnosis-specific Graded Prognostic Assessment indices. The purpose of this report is to present the updated diagnosis-specific GPA indices in a single, unified, user-friendly report to allow ease of access and use by treating physicians. METHODS A multi-institutional retrospective (1985 to 2007) database of 3,940 patients with newly diagnosed brain metastases underwent univariate and multivariate analyses of prognostic factors associated with outcomes by primary site and treatment. Significant prognostic factors were used to define the diagnosis-specific GPA prognostic indices. A GPA of 4.0 correlates with the best prognosis, whereas a GPA of 0.0 corresponds with the worst prognosis. RESULTS Significant prognostic factors varied by diagnosis. For lung cancer, prognostic factors were Karnofsky performance score, age, presence of extracranial metastases, and number of brain metastases, confirming the original Lung-GPA. For melanoma and renal cell cancer, prognostic factors were Karnofsky performance score and the number of brain metastases. For breast cancer, prognostic factors were tumor subtype, Karnofsky performance score, and age. For GI cancer, the only prognostic factor was the Karnofsky performance score. The median survival times by GPA score and diagnosis were determined. CONCLUSION Prognostic factors for patients with brain metastases vary by diagnosis, and for each diagnosis, a robust separation into different GPA scores was discerned, implying considerable heterogeneity in outcome, even within a single tumor type. In summary, these indices and related worksheet provide an accurate and facile diagnosis-specific tool to estimate survival, potentially select appropriate treatment, and stratify clinical trials for patients with brain metastases.

Diagnosis-specific prognostic factors, indexes, and treatment outcomes for patients with newly diagnosed brain metastases: a multi-institutional analysis of 4,259 patients.

PURPOSE Controversy endures regarding the optimal treatment of patients with brain metastases (BMs). Debate persists, despite many randomized trials, perhaps because BM patients are a heterogeneous population. The purpose of the present study was to identify significant diagnosis-specific prognostic factors and indexes (Diagnosis-Specific Graded Prognostic Assessment [DS-GPA]). METHODS AND MATERIALS A retrospective database of 5,067 patients treated for BMs between 1985 and 2007 was generated from 11 institutions. After exclusion of the patients with recurrent BMs or incomplete data, 4,259 patients with newly diagnosed BMs remained eligible for analysis. Univariate and multivariate analyses of the prognostic factors and outcomes by primary site and treatment were performed. The significant prognostic factors were determined and used to define the DS-GPA prognostic indexes. The DS-GPA scores were calculated and correlated with the outcomes, stratified by diagnosis and treatment. RESULTS The significant prognostic factors varied by diagnosis. For non-small-cell lung cancer and small-cell lung cancer, the significant prognostic factors were Karnofsky performance status, age, presence of extracranial metastases, and number of BMs, confirming the original GPA for these diagnoses. For melanoma and renal cell cancer, the significant prognostic factors were Karnofsky performance status and the number of BMs. For breast and gastrointestinal cancer, the only significant prognostic factor was the Karnofsky performance status. Two new DS-GPA indexes were thus designed for breast/gastrointestinal cancer and melanoma/renal cell carcinoma. The median survival by GPA score, diagnosis, and treatment were determined. CONCLUSION The prognostic factors for BM patients varied by diagnosis. The original GPA was confirmed for non-small-cell lung cancer and small-cell lung cancer. New DS-GPA indexes were determined for other histologic types and correlated with the outcome, and statistical separation between the groups was confirmed. These data should be considered in the design of future randomized trials and in clinical decision-making.

A randomized trial to assess the efficacy of surgery in addition to radiotherapy in patients with a single cerebral metastasis

Cerebral metastasis is a common oncologic problem that occurs in 15–30% of cancer patients; approximately half such metastases are single. Previous retrospective studies and two randomized trials reported that the addition of surgical extirpation prior to radiation therapy increased survival, neurologic function, and quality of life compared with radiation alone in patients with a single brain metastasis.

Validation of the RTOG recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) classification for brain metastases.

PURPOSE The Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) previously developed three prognostic classes for brain metastases using recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) of a large database. These classes were based on Karnofsky performance status (KPS), primary tumor status, presence of extracranial system metastases, and age. An analysis of RTOG 91-04, a randomized study comparing two dose-fractionation schemes with a comparison to the established RTOG database, was considered important to validate the RPA classes. METHODS AND MATERIALS A total of 445 patients were randomized on RTOG 91-04, a Phase III study of accelerated hyperfractionation versus accelerated fractionation. No difference was observed between the two treatment arms with respect to survival. Four hundred thirty-two patients were included in this analysis. The majority of the patients were under age 65, had KPS 70-80, primary tumor controlled, and brain-only metastases. The initial RPA had three classes, but only patients in RPA Classes I and II were eligible for RTOG 91-04. RESULTS For RPA Class I, the median survival time was 6. 2 months and 7.1 months for 91-04 and the database, respectively. The 1-year survival was 29% for 91-04 versus 32% for the database. There was no significant difference in the two survival distributions (p = 0.72). For RPA Class II, the median survival time was 3.8 months for 91-04 versus 4.2 months for the database. The 1-year survival was 12% and 16% for 91-04 and the database, respectively (p = 0.22). CONCLUSION This analysis indicates that the RPA classes are valid and reliable for historical comparisons. Both the RTOG and other clinical trial organizers should currently utilize this RPA classification as a stratification factor for clinical trials.

Consolidation Docetaxel After Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy in Stage IIIB Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Phase II Southwest Oncology Group Study S9504

PURPOSE To test the concept of taxane sequencing in combined-modality therapy, this phase II trial (S9504) evaluated consolidation docetaxel after concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with pathologically documented stage IIIB non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Results were compared with those of the predecessor study (S9019) with identical eligibility, staging criteria, and treatment, excepting docetaxel consolidation. PATIENTS AND METHODS Treatment consisted of cisplatin 50 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, 29, and 36, etoposide 50 mg/m2 on days 1 through 5 and 29 through 33, and concurrent thoracic radiotherapy (total dose of 61 Gy). Consolidation docetaxel started 4 to 6 weeks after chemoradiotherapy at an initial dose of 75 mg/m2. RESULTS Stage subsets (tumor-node-metastasis system) in 83 eligible patients were as follows: T4N0/1, 31 patients (37%); T4N2, 22 patients (27%), and T1-3N3, 30 patients (36%). Concurrent chemoradiotherapy was generally well tolerated, but two patients died from probable radiation-associated pneumonitis. Neutropenia during consolidation docetaxel was common (57% with grade 4) and most frequent during escalation to 100 mg/m2. Median progression-free survival was 16 months, median survival was 26 months, and 1-, 2-, and 3-year survival rates were 76%, 54%, and 37%, respectively. Brain metastasis was the most common site of failure. In S9019, median survival was 15 months and 1-, 2-, and 3-year survival rates were 58%, 34%, and 17%, respectively. CONCLUSION Consolidation docetaxel after concurrent chemoradiotherapy in stage IIIB NSCLC is feasible and generally tolerable, and results compare favorably with the predecessor trial S9019. Nevertheless, this study remains hypothesis-generating and does not provide definitive evidence of the benefit of this approach. Phase III trials evaluating the S9504 regimen have been initiated to validate these results.

Radiotherapeutic and surgical management for newly diagnosed brain metastasis(es): An American Society for Radiation Oncology evidence-based guideline

Purpose To systematically review the evidence for the radiotherapeutic and surgical management of patients newly diagnosed with intraparenchymal brain metastases. Methods and Materials Key clinical questions to be addressed in this evidence-based Guideline were identified. Fully published randomized controlled trials dealing with the management of newly diagnosed intraparenchymal brain metastases were searched systematically and reviewed. The U.S. Preventative Services Task Force levels of evidence were used to classify various options of management. Results The choice of management in patients with newly diagnosed single or multiple brain metastases depends on estimated prognosis and the aims of treatment (survival, local treated lesion control, distant brain control, neurocognitive preservation). Single brain metastasis and good prognosis (expected survival 3 months or more): For a single brain metastasis larger than 3 to 4 cm and amenable to safe complete resection, whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) and surgery (level 1) should be considered. Another alternative is surgery and radiosurgery/radiation boost to the resection cavity (level 3). For single metastasis less than 3 to 4 cm, radiosurgery alone or WBRT and radiosurgery or WBRT and surgery (all based on level 1 evidence) should be considered. Another alternative is surgery and radiosurgery or radiation boost to the resection cavity (level 3). For single brain metastasis (less than 3 to 4 cm) that is not resectable or incompletely resected, WBRT and radiosurgery, or radiosurgery alone should be considered (level 1). For nonresectable single brain metastasis (larger than 3 to 4 cm), WBRT should be considered (level 3). Multiple brain metastases and good prognosis (expected survival 3 months or more): For selected patients with multiple brain metastases (all less than 3 to 4 cm), radiosurgery alone, WBRT and radiosurgery, or WBRT alone should be considered, based on level 1 evidence. Safe resection of a brain metastasis or metastases causing significant mass effect and postoperative WBRT may also be considered (level 3). Patients with poor prognosis (expected survival less than 3 months): Patients with either single or multiple brain metastases with poor prognosis should be considered for palliative care with or without WBRT (level 3). It should be recognized, however, that there are limitations in the ability of physicians to accurately predict patient survival. Prognostic systems such as recursive partitioning analysis, and diagnosis-specific graded prognostic assessment may be helpful. Conclusions Radiotherapeutic intervention (WBRT or radiosurgery) is associated with improved brain control. In selected patients with single brain metastasis, radiosurgery or surgery has been found to improve survival and locally treated metastasis control (compared with WBRT alone).

Cancer Care Ontario and American Society of Clinical Oncology Adjuvant Chemotherapy and Adjuvant Radiation Therapy for Stages I-IIIA Resectable Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer Guideline

PURPOSE To determine the role of adjuvant chemotherapy and radiation therapy in patients with completely resected stage IA-IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS The Cancer Care Ontario Program in Evidence-Based Care and the American Society of Clinical Oncology convened a Joint Expert Panel in August 2006 to review the evidence and draft recommendations for these therapies. RESULTS Available data support the use of adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy in completely resected NSCLC; however, the strength of the data and consequent recommendations vary by disease stage. Adjuvant radiation therapy appears detrimental to survival in stages IB and II, with a possible modest benefit in stage IIIA. CONCLUSION Adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy is recommended for routine use in patients with stages IIA, IIB, and IIIA disease. Although there has been a statistically significant overall survival benefit seen in several randomized clinical trials (RCTs) enrolling a range of people with completely resected NSCLC, results of subset analyses for patient populations with stage IB disease were not significant, and adjuvant chemotherapy in stage IB disease is not currently recommended for routine use. To date, very few patients with stage IA NSCLC have been enrolled onto RCTs of adjuvant therapy; adjuvant chemotherapy is not recommended in these cases. Evidence from RCTs demonstrates a survival detriment for adjuvant radiotherapy with limited evidence for a reduction in local recurrence. Adjuvant radiation therapy appears detrimental to survival in stage IB and II, and may possibly confer a modest benefit in stage IIIA.

Supratentorial malignant glioma: Patterns of recurrence and implications for external beam local treatment

Pre- and postoperative computerized tomography scans, simulator films, and computerized tomography scans documenting tumor recurrence were analyzed on 70 patients with supratentorial malignant glioma treated with whole brain plus boost radiation therapy to determine sites of recurrence in relation to the boost. The boost was planned using the postoperative computerized tomography scan. Tumor recurred in 53 patients--within the boost in 38 (72%), partly outside the boost in 12 (23%), outside the boost but within the brain in one (2%), in the boost and in the spinal cord in one (2%), and in the spinal cord only in one (2%). All recurrences confined to the brain were found within 4 cm of the enhancing tumor as defined by the preoperative computerized tomography scan. Recurrences outside the boost were more common with inadequate boost margins, small boost volumes, temporal lobe tumors, and homolateral wedge pair technique. Survival was not adversely affected by recurrence outside the boost. We recommend that patients with malignant glioma be treated by parallel opposed fields with a margin that is 4 cm beyond the edge of the preoperative enhancing tumor, as seen on computerized tomography scan.