Search

Recurrent high-grade intracranial malignancies have a grim prognosis and uniform management guidelines are lacking. Re-irradiation is underused due to concerns about irreversible side effects. Pulsed-reduced dose rate radiotherapy (PRDR) aims to reduce toxicity while improving tumor control by exploiting dose-rate effects. We share our initial experience with temporally modulated pulsed proton re-irradiation (TMPPR), focusing on workflow, safety, feasibility, and outcomes for the first patient cohort. TMPPR was administered to patients with recurrent or progressive central nervous system malignancies using intensity modulated proton therapy with three fields. Patient and treatment data were collected, responses categorized using RANO assessment, and toxicities graded using CTCAE v5.0. Five patients received TMPPR between October 2022 and May 2023, with a median age of 54 years (Range: 32-72), and a median time from initial radiotherapy to re-RT of 23 months (Range 14-40). Treatment was completed without delay, with a median dose of 60 GyRBE in 30 fractions. Initial treatment response assessment showed complete (n = 1) or partial (n = 3) responses. Limited toxicity was observed, primarily grade 2 alopecia and one case of radiation necrosis graded at 2. This early experience demonstrates the feasibility of TMPPR delivery, highlighting the importance of prospective evaluations in the re-irradiation setting.

BACKGROUND: Early palliative/pre-emptive intervention improves clinical outcomes and quality of life for patients with metastatic cancer. A previous signal-seeking randomized controlled trial (RCT) demonstrated that early upfront radiotherapy to asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic high-risk osseous metastases led to reduction in skeletal-related events (SREs), a benefit driven primarily by subgroup of high-risk spine metastasis. The current RCT aims to determine whether early palliative/pre-emptive radiotherapy in patients with high-risk, asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic spine metastases will lead to fewer SREs within 1 year. METHODS: This is a single-center, parallel-arm, in-progress RCT in adults (≥ 18 years) with ECOG performance status 0-2 and asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic (not requiring opioids) high-risk spine metastases from histologically confirmed solid tumor malignancies with > 5 sites of metastatic disease on cross-sectional imaging. High-risk spine metastases are defined by the following: (a) bulkiest disease sites ≥ 2 cm; (b) junctional disease (occiput to C2, C7-T1, T12-L2, L5-S1); (c) posterior element involvement; or (d) vertebral body compression deformity > 50%. Patients are randomized 1:1 to receive either standard-of-care systemic therapy (arm 1) or upfront, early radiotherapy to ≤ 5 high-risk spine lesions plus standard-of-care systemic therapy (arm 2), in the form of 20-30 Gy of radiation in 2-10 fractions. The primary endpoint is SRE, a composite outcome including spinal fracture, spinal cord compression, need for palliative radiotherapy, interventional procedures, or spinal surgery. Secondary endpoints include (1) surrogates of health care cost, including the number and duration of SRE-related hospitalizations; (2) overall survival; (3) pain-free survival; and (4) quality of life. Study instruments will be captured pre-treatment, at baseline, during treatment, and at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months post-treatment. The trial aims to accrue 74 patients over 2 years to achieve > 80% power in detecting difference using two-sample proportion test with alpha

Implementation of standardized protocols in neurooncology during the surgical resection of brain tumors is needed to advance the clinical treatment paradigms that use tissue for diagnosis, prognosis, bio-banking, and treatment. Currently recommendations on intraoperative tissue procurement only exist for diffuse gliomas but management of other brain tumor subtypes can also benefit from these protocols. Fresh tissue from surgical resection can now be used for intraoperative diagnostics and functional precision medicine assays. A multidisciplinary neuro-oncology perspective is critical to develop the best avenues for practical standardization. This perspective from the multidisciplinary Oncology Tissue Advisory Board (OTAB) discusses current advances, future directions, and the imperative of adopting standardized protocols for diverse brain tumor entities. There is a growing need for consistent operating room practices to enhance patient care, streamline research efforts, and optimize outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Hypoxia inducible factor 2-alpha (HIF2α) mediates cellular responses to hypoxia and is over-expressed in glioblastoma (GBM). PT2385 is an oral HIF2α inhibitor with in vivo activity against GBM. METHODS: A two-stage single-arm open-label phase II study of adults with GBM at first recurrence following chemoradiation with measurable disease was conducted through the Adult Brain Tumor Consortium. PT2385 was administered at the phase II dose (800 mg b.i.d.). The primary outcome was objective radiographic response (ORR = complete response + partial response, CR + PR); secondary outcomes were safety, overall survival (OS), and progression free survival (PFS). Exploratory objectives included pharmacokinetics (day 15 Cmin), pharmacodynamics (erythropoietin, vascular endothelial growth factor), and pH-weighted amine- chemical exchange saturation transfer (CEST) MRI to quantify tumor acidity at baseline and explore associations with drug response. Stage 1 enrolled 24 patients with early stoppage for ≤ 1 ORR. RESULTS: Of the 24 enrolled patients, median age was 62.1 (38.7-76.7) years, median KPS 80, MGMT promoter was methylated in 46% of tumors. PT2385 was well tolerated. Grade ≥ 3 drug-related adverse events were hypoxia (n = 2), hyponatremia (2), lymphopenia (1), anemia (1), and hyperglycemia (1). No objective radiographic responses were observed; median PFS was 1.8 months (95% CI 1.6-2.5) and OS was 7.7 months (95% CI 4.9-12.6). Drug exposure varied widely and did not differ by corticosteroid use (p = 0.12), antiepileptics (p = 0.09), or sex (p = 0.37). Patients with high systemic exposure had significantly longer PFS (6.7 vs 1.8 months, p = 0.009). Baseline acidity by pH-weighted CEST MRI correlated significantly with treatment duration (R2 = 0.49, p = 0.017). Non-enhancing infiltrative disease with high acidity gave rise to recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: PT2385 monotherapy had limited activity in first recurrent GBM. Drug exposure was variable. Signals of activity were observed in GBM patients with high systemic exposure and acidic lesions on CEST imaging. A second-generation HIF2α inhibitor is being studied.

Sex differences in glioblastoma (GBM) incidence and outcome are well recognized, and emerging evidence suggests that these extend to genetic/epigenetic and cellular differences, including immune responses. However, the mechanisms driving immunologic sex differences are not fully understood. Here, we demonstrate that T cells play a critical role in driving GBM sex differences. Male mice exhibited accelerated tumor growth, with decreased frequency and increased exhaustion of CD8+ T cells in the tumor. Furthermore, a higher frequency of progenitor exhausted T cells was found in males, with improved responsiveness to anti-PD-1 treatment. Moreover, increased T-cell exhaustion was observed in male GBM patients. Bone marrow chimera and adoptive transfer models indicated that T cell-mediated tumor control was predominantly regulated in a cell-intrinsic manner, partially mediated by the X chromosome inactivation escape gene Kdm6a. These findings demonstrate that sex-biased predetermined behavior of T cells is critical for inducing sex differences in GBM progression and immunotherapy response.SignificanceImmunotherapies in patients with GBM have been unsuccessful due to a variety of factors, including the highly immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment in GBM. This study demonstrates that sex-biased T-cell behaviors are predominantly intrinsically regulated, further suggesting sex-specific approaches can be leveraged to potentially improve the therapeutic efficacy of immunotherapy in GBM. See related commentary by Alspach, p. 1966. This article is featured in Selected Articles from This Issue, p. 1949.

Brain metastases are an increasing global public health concern, even as survival rates improve for patients with metastatic disease. Both metastases and the sequelae of their treatment are key determinants of the inter-related priorities of patient survival, function, and quality of life, mandating a multidimensional approach to clinical care and research. At a virtual National Cancer Institute Workshop in September, 2022, key stakeholders convened to define research priorities to address the crucial areas of unmet need for patients with brain metastases to achieve meaningful advances in patient outcomes. This Policy Review outlines existing knowledge gaps, collaborative opportunities, and specific recommendations regarding consensus priorities and future directions in brain metastases research. Achieving major advances in research will require enhanced coordination between the ongoing efforts of individual organisations and consortia. Importantly, the continual and active engagement of patients and patient advocates will be necessary to ensure that the directionality of all efforts reflects what is most meaningful in the context of patient care.

Gliomas, the most common type of malignant primary brain tumor, were conventionally classified through WHO Grades I-IV (now 1-4), with low-grade gliomas being entities belonging to Grades 1 or 2. While the focus of the WHO Classification for Central Nervous System (CNS) tumors had historically been on histopathological attributes, the recently released fifth edition of the classification (WHO CNS5) characterizes brain tumors, including gliomas, using an integration of histological and molecular features, including their epigenetic changes such as histone methylation, DNA methylation, and histone acetylation, which are increasingly being used for the classification of low-grade gliomas. This review describes the current understanding of the role of DNA methylation, demethylation, and histone modification in pathogenesis, clinical behavior, and outcomes of brain tumors, in particular of low-grade gliomas. The review also highlights potential diagnostic and/or therapeutic targets in associated cellular biomolecules, structures, and processes. Targeting of MGMT promoter methylation, TET-hTDG-BER pathway, association of G-CIMP with key gene mutations, PARP inhibition, IDH and 2-HG-associated processes, TERT mutation and ARL9-associated pathways, DNA Methyltransferase (DNMT) inhibition, Histone Deacetylase (HDAC) inhibition, BET inhibition, CpG site DNA methylation signatures, along with others, present exciting avenues for translational research. This review also summarizes the current clinical trial landscape associated with the therapeutic utility of epigenetics in low-grade gliomas. Much of the evidence currently remains restricted to preclinical studies, warranting further investigation to demonstrate true clinical utility.

Brain metastases occur in almost one-third of adult patients with solid tumor malignancies and lead to considerable patient morbidity and mortality. The rising incidence of brain metastases has been ascribed to the development of better imaging and screening techniques and the formulation of better systemic therapies. Until recently, the multimodal management of brain metastases focused primarily on the utilization of neurosurgical techniques, with varying combinations of whole-brain radiation therapy and stereotactic radio-surgical procedures. Over the past 2 decades, in particular, the increment in knowledge pertaining to molecular genetics and the pathogenesis of brain metastases has led to significant developments in targeted therapies and immunotherapies. This review article highlights the recent updates in the management of brain metastases with an emphasis on novel systemic therapies.

PURPOSE: Patients with lung cancer and brain metastases represent a markedly heterogeneous population. Accurate prognosis is essential to optimally individualize care. In prior publications, we described the graded prognostic assessment (GPA), but a GPA for patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC) has never been reported, and in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the effect of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) was unknown. The 3-fold purpose of this work is to provide the initial report of an SCLC GPA, to evaluate the effect of PD-L1 on survival in patients with NSCLC, and to update the Lung GPA accordingly. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A multivariable analysis of prognostic factors and treatments associated with survival was performed on 4183 patients with lung cancer (3002 adenocarcinoma, 611 nonadenocarcinoma, 570 SCLC) with newly diagnosed brain metastases between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2020, using a multi-institutional retrospective database. Significant variables were used to update the Lung GPA. RESULTS: Overall median survival for lung adenocarcinoma, SCLC, and nonadenocarcinoma was 17, 10, and 8 months, respectively, but varied widely by GPA from 2 to 52 months. In SCLC, the significant prognostic factors were age, performance status, extracranial metastases, and number of brain metastases. In NSCLC, the distribution of molecular markers among patients with lung adenocarcinoma and known primary tumor molecular status revealed alterations/expression in PD-L1 50% to 100%, PD-L1 1% to 49%, epidermal growth factor receptor, and anaplastic lymphoma kinase in 32%, 31%, 30%, and 7%, respectively. Median survival of patients with lung adenocarcinoma and brain metastases with 0, 1% to 49%, and ≥50% PD-L1 expression was 17, 19, and 24 months, respectively (P < .01), confirming PD-L1 is a prognostic factor. Previously identified prognostic factors for NSCLC (epidermal growth factor receptor and anaplastic lymphoma kinase status, performance status, age, number of brain metastases, and extracranial metastases) were reaffirmed. These factors were incorporated into the updated Lung GPA with robust separation between subgroups for all histologies. CONCLUSIONS: Survival for patients with lung cancer and brain metastases has improved but varies widely. The initial report of a GPA for SCLC is presented. For patients with NSCLC-adenocarcinoma and brain metastases, PD-L1 is a newly identified significant prognostic factor, and the previously identified factors were reaffirmed. The updated indices establish unique criteria for SCLC, NSCLC-nonadenocarcinoma, and NSCLC-adenocarcinoma (incorporating PD-L1). The updated Lung GPA, available for free at brainmetgpa.com, provides an accurate tool to estimate survival, individualize treatment, and stratify clinical trials.

Imaging response assessment is a cornerstone of patient care and drug development in oncology. Clinicians/clinical researchers rely on tumor imaging to estimate the impact of new treatments and guide decision making for patients and candidate therapies. This is important in brain cancer, where associations between tumor size/growth and emerging neurological deficits are strong. Accurately measuring the impact of a new therapy on tumor growth early in clinical development, where patient numbers are small, would be valuable for decision making regarding late-stage development activation. Current attempts to measure the impact of a new therapy have limited influence on clinical development, as determination of progression, stability or response does not currently account for individual tumor growth kinetics prior to the initiation of experimental therapies. Therefore, we posit that imaging-based response assessment, often used as a tool for estimating clinical effect, is incomplete as it does not adequately account for growth trajectories or biological characteristics of tumors prior to the introduction of an investigational agent. Here, we propose modifications to the existing framework for evaluating imaging assessment in primary brain tumors that will provide a more reliable understanding of treatment effects. Measuring tumor growth trajectories prior to a given intervention may allow us to more confidently conclude whether there is an anti-tumor effect. This updated approach to imaging-based tumor response assessment is intended to improve our ability to select candidate therapies for later-stage development, including those that may not meet currently sought thresholds for "response" and ultimately lead to identification of effective treatments.

We compared the clinical outcomes of BM treated with mask immobilization with zero-SM (i.e., zero-PTV) to standard zero-SM frame immobilization SRS. Consecutive patients with BM, 0.5−2.0 cm in maximal diameter, treated with single-fraction SRS (22−24 Gy) during March 2019−February 2021 were included. Univariable and multivariable analysis were performed using the Kaplan−Meier method and Cox proportional hazards regression. A total of 150 patients with 453 BM met inclusion criteria. A total of 129 (28.5%) lesions were treated with a zero-SM mask immobilization and 324 (71.5%) with zero-SM frame immobilization. Frame immobilization treatments were associated with a higher proportion of gastrointestinal and fewer breast-cancer metastases (p = 0.024), and a higher number of treated lesions per SRS course (median 7 vs. 3; p < 0.001). With a median follow up of 15 months, there was no difference in FFLF between the mask and frame immobilization groups on univariable (p = 0.29) or multivariable analysis (p = 0.518). Actuarial FFLF at 1 year was 90.5% for mask and 92% for frame immobilization (p = 0.272). Radiation necrosis rates at 1 year were 12.5% for mask and 4.1% for frame immobilization (p = 0.502). For BM 0.5−2.0 cm in maximal diameter treated with single-fraction SRS using 22−24 Gy, mask immobilization with zero SM produces comparable clinical outcomes to frame immobilization. The initial findings support omitting a SM when using mask immobilization with this treatment approach on a Gamma Knife® Icon™.

BackgroundThere is an extensive literature highlighting the utility of blood-based liquid biopsies in several extracranial tumors for diagnosis and monitoring.MethodsThe RANO (Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology) group developed a multidisciplinary international Task Force to review the English literature on liquid biopsy in gliomas focusing on the most frequently used techniques, that is circulating tumor DNA, circulating tumor cells, and extracellular vesicles in blood and CSF.ResultsctDNA has a higher sensitivity and capacity to represent the spatial and temporal heterogeneity in comparison to circulating tumor cells. Exosomes have the advantages to cross an intact blood-brain barrier and carry also RNA, miRNA, and proteins. Several clinical applications of liquid biopsies are suggested: to establish a diagnosis when tissue is not available, monitor the residual disease after surgery, distinguish progression from pseudoprogression, and predict the outcome.ConclusionsThere is a need for standardization of biofluid collection, choice of an analyte, and detection strategies along with rigorous testing in future clinical trials to validate findings and enable entry into clinical practice.

The unique acute effects of the large fractional doses that characterize stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) or radiotherapy (SRT), specifically in terms of antitumor immune cellular processes, vascular damage, tumor necrosis, and apoptosis on brain metastasis have yet to be empirically demonstrated. The objective of this study is to provide the first in-human evaluation of the acute biological effects of SRS/SRT in resected brain metastasis. Tumor samples from patients who underwent dose-escalated preoperative SRT followed by resection with available non-irradiated primary tumor tissues were retrieved from our institutional biorepository. All primary tumors and irradiated metastases were evaluated for the following parameters: tumor necrosis, T-cells, natural killer cells, vessel density, vascular endothelial growth factor, and apoptotic factors. Twenty-two patients with irradiated and resected brain metastases and paired non-irradiated primary tumor samples met inclusion criteria. Patients underwent a median preoperative SRT dose of 18 Gy (Range: 15-20 Gy) in 1 fraction, with 3 patients receiving 27-30 Gy in 3-5 fractions, followed by resection within median interval of 67.8 h (R: 18.25-160.61 h). The rate of necrosis was significantly higher in irradiated brain metastases than non-irradiated primary tumors (p

Therapeutic advances for glioblastoma have been minimal over the past 2 decades. In light of the multitude of recent phase III trials that have failed to meet their primary endpoints following promising preclinical and early-phase programs, a Society for Neuro-Oncology Think Tank was held in November 2020 to prioritize areas for improvement in the conduct of glioblastoma clinical trials. Here, we review the literature, identify challenges related to clinical trial eligibility criteria and trial design in glioblastoma, and provide recommendations from the Think Tank. In addition, we provide a data-driven context with which to frame this discussion by analyzing key study design features of adult glioblastoma clinical trials listed on ClinicalTrials.gov as "recruiting" or "not yet recruiting" as of February 2021.

BackgroundTreatment paradigms for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer are increasingly based on biomarker-driven therapies, with the most common alteration being mutation in the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). Change in expression of such biomarkers could have a profound impact on the choice and efficacy of a selected targeted therapeutic, and hence the objective of this study was to analyze discordance in EGFR status in patients with lung cancer brain metastasis (LCBM).MethodsUsing PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review was performed of series in the Medline database of biopsied or resected LCBM published before May, 2020. Key words included "lung cancer" and "brain metastasis" combined with "epidermal growth factor receptor/EGFR," and "receptor conversion/discordance or concordance." Weighted random effects models were used to calculate pooled estimates.ResultsWe identified 501 patients from 19 full-text articles for inclusion in this study. All patients underwent biopsy or resection of at least one intracranial lesion to compare to the primary tumor. On primary/LCBM comparison, the weighted pooled estimate for overall EGFR receptor discordance was 10% (95% CI 5-17%). The weighted effects model estimated a gain of an EGFR mutation in a brain metastases in patients with negative primary tumors was 7% (95% CI 4-12%). Alternatively, the weighted effects model estimate of loss of an EGFR mutation in patients with detected mutations in the primary tumor was also 7% (95% CI 4-10%). KRAS testing was also performed on both primary tumors and LCBM in a subset of 148 patients. The weighted effects estimate of KRAS-mutation discordance among LCBM compared to primary tumors was 13% (95% CI 5-27%). The weighted effects estimated of KRAS gain and loss in LCBM was 10% (95% CI 6-18%) and 8% (95% CI 4-15%), respectively. Meta-regression analysis did not find any association with any factors that could be associated with discordances.ConclusionsEGFR and KRAS mutation status discordance between primary tumor and LCBM occurs in approximately 10% and 13% of patients, respectively. Evaluation of LCBM receptor status is key to biomarker-driven targeted therapy for intracranial disease and awareness of subtype switching is critical for those patients treated with systemic therapy alone for intracranial disease.

BackgroundThe objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of the time interval between planning imaging and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) delivery on tumor volumes and spatial anatomic displacements of brain metastases (BM).MethodsConsecutive patients diagnosed with BM treated with SRS over a 3-year period were evaluated. Only patients who underwent an institutionally standardized diagnostic MRI (MRI-1) and a treatment planning MRI (MRI-2) were included. The impact of histology, inter-scan time interval, lesion location, tumor volume, and diameter were evaluated on final lesion diameter, volume, anatomic displacement, and ultimate need for change in management (ie, expanding margins, rescanning).Results101 patients (531 lesions) with a median inter-scan time interval of 8 days (range: 1-42 days) met the inclusion criteria. The median percentage increase in BM diameter and volume were 9.5% (IQR: 2.25%-24.0%) and 20% (IQR: 0.7%-66.7%). Overall, 147 lesions (27.7%) in 57 patients (56.4%) required a change in management. There was a statistically significant relationship between initial tumor diameter (cm) and change in management (OR: 2.69, 95% CI: 1.93-3.75; P < .001). Each day between MRI-1 and MRI-2 was associated with a change in management with an OR of 1.05 (95% CI: 1.03-1.07; P < .001).ConclusionsChanges in tumor diameter, volume, and spatial position occur as a function of time. Planning imaging for SRS is recommended to occur in close temporal proximity to treatment; for those with delays, a larger setup margin may need to be used to ensure tumor coverage and account for positional changes.

The purpose of this study was to critically analyze the risk of unplanned readmission following resection of brain metastasis and to identify key risk factors to allow for early intervention strategies in high-risk patients. We analyzed data from the Nationwide Readmissions Database (NRD) from 2010-2014, and included patients who underwent craniotomy for brain metastasis, identified using ICD-9-CM diagnosis (198.3) and procedure (01.59) codes. The primary outcome of the study was unplanned 30-day all-cause readmission rate. Secondary outcomes included reasons and costs of readmissions. Hierarchical logistic regression model was used to identify the factors associated with 30-day readmission following craniotomy for brain metastasis. During the study period, 44,846 index hospitalizations occurred for patients who underwent resection of brain metastasis. In this cohort, 17.8% (n = 7,965) had unplanned readmissions within the first 30 days after discharge from the index hospitalization. The readmission rate did not change significantly during the five-year study period (p-trend = 0.286). The median per-patient cost for 30-day unplanned readmission was $11,109 and this amounted to a total of $26.4 million per year, which extrapolates to a national expenditure of $269.6 million. Increasing age, male sex, insurance status, Elixhauser comorbidity index, length of stay, teaching status of the hospital, neurological complications and infectious complications were associated with 30-day readmission following discharge after an index admission for craniotomy for brain metastasis. Unplanned readmission rates after resection of brain metastasis remain high and involve substantial healthcare expenditures. Developing tools and interventions to prevent avoidable readmissions could focus on the high-risk patients as a future strategy to decrease substantial healthcare expense.

BackgroundNovel immunotherapeutic strategies targeting the programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) axis are often administered when metastatic tumors show PD-L1 positivity, even in the setting of lung cancer brain metastasis (LCBM). However, biological differences exist between primary tumors and metastatic sites. The objective of this study was to analyze rates of PD-L1 receptor discordance between primary tumors and LCBM.MethodsA systematic review of studies of biopsied or resected LCBM evaluating PD-L1 discordance published in the Medline database was performed using PRISMA guidelines. Weighted random effects models were used to calculate pooled estimates.ResultsSix full-text articles (n = 230 patients) with a median of 32 patients in each study (range: 24-73) reported PD-L1 receptor expression analyses of both primary lung tumors and brain metastases and met inclusion criteria. The pooled estimate for tumor cell (TC) PD-L1 receptor discordance between primary tumors and LCBM was 19% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 10-27%). For PD-L1 receptor expression in tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL), the weighted pooled estimate for discordance was 21% (95% CI: 8-44%). For primary versus LCBM, the positive rates by expression levels of 50% were 52% (95% CI: 30-73%) versus 56% (95% CI: 34-76%), 30% (95% CI: 22-40%) versus 20% (95% CI: 10-35%), and 15% (95% CI: 6-36%) versus 22% (95% CI: 15-31%) (P = .425), respectively.ConclusionsPD-L1 discordance occurs in ~20% of LCBM, with the greatest discordance in the 1-50% expression category. Although controversial, confirming discordance might be important for selection of immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy and in the analysis of patterns of failure after treatment.

When the COVID-19 pandemic began, formal frameworks to collect data about affected patients were lacking. The COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) was formed to collect granular data on patients with cancer and COVID-19 at scale and as rapidly as possible. CCC19 has grown from five initial institutions to 125 institutions with >400 collaborators. More than 5,000 cases with complete baseline data have been accrued. Future directions include increased electronic health record integration for direct data ingestion, expansion to additional domestic and international sites, more intentional patient involvement, and granular analyses of still-unanswered questions related to cancer subtypes and treatments.

Building on an initiative to enhance clinical trial participation involving the Society for Neuro-Oncology, the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Working Group, patient advocacy groups, clinical trial cooperative groups, and other partners, we evaluate the impact of eligibility criteria and trial conduct on neuro-oncology clinical trial participation. Clinical trials often carry forward eligibility criteria from prior studies that may be overly restrictive and unnecessary and needlessly limit patient accrual. Inclusion and exclusion criteria should be evaluated based on the goals and design of the study and whether they impact patient safety and/or treatment efficacy. In addition, we evaluate clinical trial conduct as a barrier to accrual and discuss strategies to minimize such barriers for neuro-oncology trials.

Liquid biopsies collect and analyze tumor components in body fluids, and there is an increasing interest in the investigation of liquid biopsies as a surrogate for tumor tissue in the management of both primary and secondary brain tumors. Herein we critically review available literature on spinal fluid and plasma circulating tumor cells (CTCs) and cell-free tumor (ctDNA) for diagnosis and monitoring of leptomeningeal and parenchymal brain metastases. We discuss technical issues and propose several potential applications of liquid biopsies in different clinical settings (ie, for initial diagnosis, for assessment during treatment, and for guidance of treatment decisions). Last, ongoing clinical studies on CNS metastases that include liquid biopsies are summarized, and recommendations for future clinical studies are provided.

BACKGROUND:The Congress of Neurological Surgeons (CNS) has developed a series of guidelines on the treatment of adults with metastatic brain tumors, including systemic therapy and supportive care topics. ASCO has a policy and set of procedures for endorsing clinical practice guidelines that have been developed by other professional organizations. METHODS:Two CNS Guidelines were reviewed for developmental rigor by methodologists and an independent multi-disciplinary Expert Panel was formed to review the content and assess agreement with the recommendations. The expert panel voted to endorse the two guidelines and ASCO and SNO independently reviewed and approved the ASCO/SNO guideline endorsement. RESULTS:The ASCO/SNO Expert Panel determined that the recommendations from the CNS anticonvulsants and steroids guidelines, published January 9, 2019, are clear, thorough, and based upon the most relevant scientific evidence. ASCO/SNO endorsed these two CNS guidelines, with minor alterations. CONCLUSIONS:Key recommendations include: prophylactic anti-epileptic drugs were not recommended for routine use; corticosteroids (specifically dexamethasone) were recommended for temporary symptomatic relief in patients with neurologic symptoms and signs related to mass effect from brain metastases.

Purpose of Review: Advancements in precision medicine have shifted the treatment paradigm of brain metastases (BM) from non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), breast cancer, and melanoma, especially through targeted therapies focused on specific molecular drivers. These novel agents have improved outcomes by overcoming challenges posed by the blood-brain barrier (BBB) and resistance mechanisms, enabling more effective treatment of BM. Recent Findings: In NSCLC, therapies such as osimertinib have improved efficacy in treating EGFR-mutant BM, with emerging combinations such as amivantamab and lazertinib offering promising alternatives for patients resistant to frontline therapies. In HER2-positive breast cancer, significant advancements with tucatinib and trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) have transformed the treatment landscape, achieving improved survival and intracranial control in patients with BM. Similarly, in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), novel therapies such as sacituzumab govitecan (SG) and datopotamab deruxtecan (Dato-DXd) offer new hope for managing BM. For melanoma, the combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors such as nivolumab and ipilimumab has proven effective in enhancing survival for patients with BM, both in BRAF-mutant and wild-type cases. Summary: Developing targeted therapies penetrating the BBB has revolutionized BM treatment by targeting key drivers like EGFR, ALK, HER2, and BRAF. Despite improved survival, challenges persist, particularly for patients with resistant genetic alterations. Future research should optimise combination therapies, overcome resistance, and refine treatment sequencing. Continued emphasis on personalized, biomarker-driven approaches offers the potential to further improve outcomes, even for complex cases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

India has been historically challenged by an insufficient and heterogeneously clustered distribution of healthcare infrastructure. While resource-limited healthcare settings, such as major parts of India, require multidisciplinary approaches for improvement, one key approach is the recruitment and training of a healthcare workforce representative of its population. This requires overcoming barriers to equity and representation in Indian medical education that are multi-faceted, historical, and rooted in inequality. However, literature is lacking regarding the financial or economic barriers, and their implications on equity and representation in the Indian allopathic physician workforce, which this review sought to describe. Keyword-based searches were carried out in PubMed, Google Scholar, and Scopus in order to identify relevant literature published till November 2023. This state-of-the-art narrative review describes the existing multi-pronged economic barriers, recent and forthcoming changes deepening these barriers, and how these may limit opportunities for having a diverse workforce. Three sets of major economic barriers exist to becoming a specialized medical practitioner in India – resources required to get selected into an Indian medical school, resources required to pursue medical school, and resources required to get a residency position. The resources in this endeavor have historically included substantial efforts, finances, and privilege, but rising barriers in the medical education system have worsened the state of inequity. Preparation costs for medical school and residency entrance tests have risen steadily, which may be further exacerbated by recent major policy changes regarding licensing and residency selection. Additionally, considerable increases in direct and indirect costs of medical education have recently occurred. Urgent action in these areas may help the Indian population get access to a diverse and representative healthcare workforce and also help alleviate the shortage of primary care physicians in the country. Discussed are the reasons for rural healthcare disparities in India and potential solutions related to medical education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have become an important treatment for patients with brain metastases from cancers like lung cancer, melanoma, and breast cancer. While ICIs can improve survival, they can also cause immune-related adverse events (irAEs), affecting various organs, including the brain. This review discusses the safety of ICIs when used alone or in combination with other treatments like chemotherapy and radiosurgery. We explain how irAEs occur, their effects on different parts of the body, and how to manage them. Careful monitoring and treatment planning are essential to ensure the best outcomes for patients with brain metastases. Brain metastases (BM) are a frequent and severe complication in patients with lung cancer, breast cancer, and melanoma. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have become a crucial treatment option for BM, whether used alone or in combination with chemotherapy and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). However, ICIs are associated with immune-related adverse events (irAEs) that can affect multiple organ systems, complicating their use in BM patients. This review examines the mechanisms of irAEs and their effects on different organs and evaluates the safety of ICIs across various treatment strategies for BM. Our analysis indicates that ICIs significantly improve survival and disease control in BM patients, but their use increases the risk of irAEs, including dermatologic, gastrointestinal, endocrine, pulmonary, and neurologic toxicities. Neurotoxic events, particularly treatment-associated brain necrosis (TABN) and encephalitis, are more common in BM patients. While the overall incidence of irAEs is similar between patients with and without BM, the neurotoxicity risk is higher in the BM population. Combining ICIs with chemotherapy and SRS enhances efficacy but also heightens the risk of adverse events across organ systems. ICIs offer substantial benefits for BM patients but require careful management to mitigate the risks of irAEs. Close patient monitoring, individualized treatment protocols, and prompt intervention are essential for optimizing the outcomes. Future research should focus on refining combination strategies and improving the management of irAEs, particularly neurotoxicity, to maximize therapeutic benefits for BM patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]