Nicholas Sanfilippo

Phase I/II Study of Biweekly Paclitaxel and Radiation in Androgen-Ablated Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE To determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) of concurrent paclitaxel and radiation therapy (RT) in patients with locally advanced prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS Eligible patients had T2-4 tumors with Gleason scores greater than 7 and/or PSA levels greater than 10 ng/mL and/or had tumors with pathologic stage TxN1. Hormonal ablation was initiated 3 months before RT and was given for 9 months. RT was delivered daily (1.8 Gy) with concurrent twice-weekly paclitaxel (30 mg/m(2)). The whole pelvis was irradiated to 39.6 Gy. The radiation dose was escalated as follows: 63 Gy, 66.6 Gy, 70.2 Gy, and 73.8 Gy. The last RT dose level was fixed at 73.8 Gy. RESULTS Between January 2000 and October 2006, 22 patients were enrolled. The median age was 59 years (range, 48 to 72 years); the median PSA level was 22.4 ng/mL (range, 2.8 to 113 ng/mL). The number of patients per stage was as follows: three with T1, eight with T2, 11 with T3, and five with pN1 = 5. No grade 3 toxicities occurred at 63 Gy. Grade 3 diarrhea occurred in three patients at 66.6 Gy. The protocol then was amended to treat the prostate volume first followed by the whole pelvis. No grade 3 toxicities were observed at 70.2 Gy. One patient experienced grade 3 diarrhea at 73.8 Gy. Five additional patients were treated to 73.8 Gy without grade 3 toxicity, which established the MTD for combined paclitaxel and RT at 73.8 Gy. At 38 months median follow-up (range, 9 to 87 months), 21 (95%) of 22 patients are alive. Six (27%) of 22 experienced recurrence. CONCLUSION Concurrent biweekly paclitaxel with RT is feasible, with an MTD of 73.8 Gy. Recovery of gonadal function occurs in the majority of patients. These results encourage testing in a phase III setting.

Six-month depot formulation of leuprorelin acetate in the treatment of prostate cancer

Hormonal deprivation therapy is well established for the treatment of locally advanced and metastatic prostate cancer, as well as the adjuvant treatment of some patients with localized disease. Long-acting gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists have become a mainstay of androgen deprivation therapy, due to their efficacy, tolerability, and convenience of use. One-month, 3-month, and 4-month depot leuprorelin formulations are well established and widely used to this end. Recently, a 6-month depot leuprorelin has been approved for use in advanced and metastatic prostate cancer patients. With similar efficacy and side effect profiles to earlier formulations, 6-month depot leuprorelin is a convenient treatment option for these patients. This review will highlight the role of GnRH agonists in the treatment of prostate cancer with a focus on the clinical efficacy, pharmacology, and patient-focused outcomes of the newer 6-month 45 mg depot leuprorelin formulation in comparison to available shorter-acting products.

Management of High-Risk Localized Prostate Cancer

Traditionally, patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer have been an extremely challenging group to manage due to a significant likelihood of treatment failure and prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM). The results of multiple large, prospective, randomized trials have demonstrated that men with high-risk features who are treated in a multimodal fashion at the time of initial diagnosis have improved overall survival. Advances in local treatments such as dose-escalated radiotherapy in conjunction with androgen suppression and postprostatectomy adjuvant radiotherapy have also demonstrated benefits to this subset of patients. However, therapeutic enhancement with the addition of chemotherapy to the primary treatment regimen may help achieve optimal disease control.

Toxicity of Head-and-Neck Radiation Therapy in Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Positive Patients

PURPOSE To examine the acute morbidity of high dose head and neck RT and CRT in patients with infected with HIV. METHODS AND MATERIALS All HIV-positive patients who underwent radiation therapy for head and neck cancer in our department between 2004 and 2008 were reviewed. Treatment related data were examined. All treatments were delivered with megavoltage photon beams or electron beams. Patients were evaluated by an attending radiation oncologist for toxicity and response on a weekly basis during therapy and monthly after treatment in a multidisciplinary clinic. Acute toxicities were recorded using the Radiation Therapy and Oncology Group (RTOG) common toxicity criteria. Response to treatment was based on both physical exam as well as post-treatment imaging as indicated. RESULTS Thirteen patients who underwent RT with a diagnosis of HIV were identified. Median age was 53 years and median follow-up was 22 months. Twelve had squamous cell carcinoma and one had lymphoproliferative parotiditis. Median radiation dose was 66.4 Gy and median duration of treatment was 51 days. The median number of scheduled radiotherapy days missed was zero (range 0 to 7). One patient (8%) developed Grade 4 confluent moist desquamation. Eight patients (61%) developed Grade 3 toxicity. CONCLUSION Based on our results, HIV-positive individuals appear to tolerate treatment for head and neck cancer, with toxicity similar to that in HIV-negative individuals.

Predictors of Complete Response and Disease Recurrence Following Chemoradiation for Rectal Cancer

Objective Approximately 10–40% of rectal patients have a complete response (CR) to neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT), and these patients have improved survival. Thus, non-operative management (“watch-and-wait” approach) may be an option for select patients. We aimed to identify clinical predictors of CR following CRT. Methods Patients treated with definitive CRT for T3–T4, locally unresectable T1–T2, low-lying T2, and/or node-positive rectal cancer from August 2004 to February 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. Most patients were treated with 50.4 Gy radiation and concurrent 5-fluoruracil or capecitabine. Patients were considered to have a CR if surgical pathology revealed ypT0N0M0 (operative management), or if they had no evidence of residual disease on clinical and radiographic assessment (non-operative management). Statistical analysis was carried out to determine predictors of CR and long-term outcomes. Results Complete records were available on 138 patients. The median follow-up was 24.5 months. Thirty-six patients (26.3%) achieved a CR; 30/123 operatively managed patients (24.5%) and 6/15 (40%) non-operatively managed patients. None of the 10 patients with mucinous adenocarcinoma achieved a CR. Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) ≥5 μg/L at diagnosis (OR 0.190, 95% CI 0.037–0.971, p = 0.046), tumor size ≥3 cm (OR 0.123, 95% CI 0.020–0.745, p = 0.023), distance of tumor from the anal verge ≥3 cm (OR 0.091, 95% CI 0.013–0.613, p = 0.014), clinically node-positive disease at diagnosis (OR 0.201, 95% CI 0.045–0.895, p = 0.035), and interval from CRT to surgery ≥8 weeks (OR 5.267, 95% CI 1.068–25.961, p = 0.041) were independent predictors of CR. The CR group had longer 3-year distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) (93.7 vs. 63.7%, p = 0.016) and 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) (91.1 vs. 67.8%, p = 0.038). Three-year locoregional control (LRC) (96.6 vs. 81.3%, p = 0.103) and overall survival (97.2 vs. 87.5%, p = 0.125) were higher in the CR group but this did not achieve statistical significance. CR was not an independent predictor of LRC, DMFS, or DFS. Conclusion CEA at diagnosis, tumor size, tumor distance from the anal verge, node positivity at diagnosis, and interval from CRT to surgery were predictors of CR. These clinical variables may offer insight into patient selection and timing of treatment response evaluation in the watch-and-wait approach.

HIV Infection Is Associated With Poor Outcomes for Patients With Anal Cancer in the Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy Era.

BACKGROUND: HIV status may affect outcomes after definitive chemoradiotherapy for anal cancer. OBJECTIVE: Here, we report a large series in the highly active antiretroviral therapy era comparing outcomes between HIV-positive and HIV-negative patients with anal cancer. DESIGN: This was a retrospective chart review. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at an outpatient oncology clinic at large academic center. PATIENTS: A total of 107 patients were reviewed, 39 HIV positive and 68 HIV negative. All of the patients underwent definitive chemoradiation for anal cancer. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Data on patient characteristics, treatment, toxicity, and outcomes were collected. Overall survival, colostomy-free survival, local recurrence-free survival, and distant metastasis-free survival were analyzed. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 15 months. HIV-positive patients were younger (median, 52 vs 64 years; p < 0.001) and predominantly men (82% men vs 49% men; p = 0.001). There were no significant differences in T, N, or stage groups. HIV-positive patients had a significantly longer duration from biopsy to start of chemoradiation (mean number of days, 82 vs 54; p = 0.042). There were no differences in rates of acute toxicities including diarrhea, fatigue, or dermatitis. HIV-positive patients had significantly higher rates of hospitalization (33% vs 15%; p = 0.024). The 3-year overall survival rate was 42% in HIV-positive and 76% in HIV-negative patients (p = 0.037; HR, 2.335 (95% CI, 1.032–5.283)). Three-year colostomy-free survival was 67% in HIV-positive and 88% in HIV-negative patients (p = 0.036; HR, 3.231 (95% CI, 1.014–10.299)). Differences in overall survival rates were not significant on multivariate analysis. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its retrospective design and small patient numbers. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort, HIV-positive patients had significantly worse overall and colostomy-free survival rates than HIV-negative patients. However, differences in survival were not significant on multivariate analysis. Additional studies are necessary to establish the etiology of this difference.

Feasibility and Efficacy of Local Radiotherapy With Concurrent Novel Agents in Patients With Multiple Myeloma

INTRODUCTION This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of radiotherapy (RT) with concurrent novel agents (NAs), cytotoxic therapy (CTx), or both in the management of osteolytic bone lesions in multiple myeloma (MM). PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 39 patients with MM received RT to 64 different bone sites during the 2007-2012 period, with a dose of 8 to 37.5 Gy (mean, 26.8 Gy) delivered in 1 to 15 fractions (median, 10 fractions). Of these patients, 21 also received concurrent NAs or CTx. Pain response, M protein and κ light chain response, and adverse events were evaluated. RESULTS RT was completed in 35 of 39 patients (89.7%) in this study. Pain relief was observed in 30 of 31 patients (96.7%). Hematologic toxicity (grade 3 or 4 by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group system) was seen in 43.2% of treated patients, and NA therapy was stopped in 2 patients owing to grade 4 toxicity. RT adverse effects resolved at 4 to 6 weeks posttreatment. Changes in pre- and posttreatment levels of M protein trended toward significance in patients treated with RT + systemic therapy (ST) versus. RT alone (ΔM ProteinRT+ST = 5.6 g/L; ΔM ProteinRT = 0 g/L; P = .089). CONCLUSION Treating MM with RT concurrently with CTx including NAs was safe and well tolerated in the majority of patients (14 of 16 [87.5%] for those taking NAs and 19 of 21 [90.5%] for all patients). Excellent clinical pain response (> 95%) was also seen in patients regardless if they were treated with RT + ST or RT alone.

Review of Chemoradiotherapy for High-Risk Prostate Cancer

While most newly-diagnosed prostate cancers are well-differentiated tumors that have high probability of cure, there is a subset of patients that present with aggressive malignancies that have significant potential for recurrence and metastasis. Single-modality treatment approaches have demonstrated relatively high failure rates, and multimodality therapy (radiation therapy and hormonal ablation therapy) has become standard of care for these patients. These treatments are not without toxicity, and a significant percentage of patients will become refractory to hormonal therapy. Historically, radiation therapy of prostate cancer was associated with significant genitourinary and gastrointestinal morbidity. With advances in radiation therapy techniques and delivery, the potential for safe dose-escalation has emerged. Further, there is an opportunity for chemotherapeutic agents to play an important syngergistic role in radiosensitizing the tumor cells at the primary site while also addressing micrometastatic disease. Concurrent chemoradiation therapy has become standard treatment for many types of locally advanced tumors, including lung, cervical, esophageal, rectal, and anal malignancies. We present a review of clinical trials examining the role of chemoradiation therapy in high-risk prostate cancer.

Comparison of anal cancer outcomes in public and private hospital patients treated at a single radiation oncology center

OBJECTIVE To compare clinical and treatment characteristics and outcomes in locally advanced anal cancer, a potentially curable disease, in patients referred from a public or private hospital. METHODS We retrospectively reviewed 112 anal cancer patients from a public and a private hospital who received definitive chemoradiotherapy at the same cancer center between 2004 and 2013. Tumor stage, radiotherapy delay, radiotherapy duration, and unplanned treatment breaks ≥10 days were compared using t-test and χ(2) test. Overall survival (OS), disease free survival (DFS), and colostomy free survival (CFS) were examined using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with the log-rank test. Cox proportional hazard models for OS and DFS were developed. RESULTS The follow-up was 14.9 months (range, 0.7-94.8 months). Public hospital patients presented with significantly higher clinical T stage (P<0.05) and clinical stage group (P<0.05), had significantly longer radiotherapy delays (P<0.05) and radiotherapy duration (P<0.05), and had more frequent radiation therapy (RT) breaks ≥10 days (P<0.05). Three-year OS showed a marked trend in favor of private hospital patients for 3-year OS (72.8% vs. 48.9%; P=0.171), 3-year DFS (66.3% vs. 42.7%, P=0.352), and 3-year CFS (86.4% vs. 68.9%, P=0.299). Referral hospital was not predictive of OS or DFS on multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS Public hospital patients presented at later stage and experienced more delays in initiating and completing radiotherapy, which may contribute to the trend in poorer DFS and OS. These findings emphasize the need for identifying clinical and treatment factors that contribute to decreased survival in low socioeconomic status (SES) populations.

Dosimetric assessment of tumor control probability in intensity and volumetric modulated radiotherapy plans

OBJECTIVE: Radiobiological models have been used to calculate the outcomes of treatment plans based on dose-volume relationship. This study examines several radiobiological models for the calculation of tumor control probability (TCP) of intensity modulated radiotherapy plans for the treatment of lung, prostate, and head and neck (H&N) cancers. METHODS: Dose volume histogram (DVH) data from the intensity modulated radiotherapy plans of 36 lung, 26 prostate, and 87  H&N cases were evaluated. The Poisson, Niemierko, and Marsden models were used to calculate the TCP of each disease group treatment plan. The calculated results were analyzed for correlation and discrepancy among the three models, as well as different treatment sites under study. RESULTS: The median value of calculated TCP in lung plans was 61.9% (34.1-76.5%), 59.5% (33.5-73.9%) and 32.5% (0.0-93.9%) with the Poisson, Niemierko, and Marsden models, respectively. The median value of calculated TCP in prostate plans was 85.1% (56.4-90.9%), 81.2% (56.1-88.7%) and 62.5% (28.2-75.9%) with the Poisson, Niemierko, and Marsden models, respectively. The median value of calculated TCP in H&N plans was 94.0% (44.0-97.8%) and 94.3% (0.0-97.8%) with the Poisson and Niemierko models, respectively. There were significant differences between the calculated TCPs with the Marsden model in comparison with either the Poisson or Niemierko model (p < 0.001) for both lung and prostate plans. The TCPs calculated by the Poisson and Niemierko models were significantly correlated for all three tumor sites. CONCLUSION: There are variations with different radiobiological models. Understanding of the correlation and limitation of a TCP model with dosimetric parameters can help develop the meaningful objective functions for plan optimization, which would lead to the implementation of outcome-based planning. More clinical data are needed to refine and consolidate the model for accuracy and robustness. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This study has tested three radiobiological models with varied disease sites. It is significant to compare different models with the same data set for better understanding of their clinical applicability.