Search

SummaryRadiotherapy (RT) remains an important modality in the modern treatment of lymphomas. In Hodgkin lymphoma (HL), its role is stage-dependent. In early stage favorable HL, RT is an essential component of combined treatment. In early unfavorable and advanced stage HL, RT can be omitted if patients are positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) negative after chemotherapy. In non-Hodgkin lymphomas (NHL), RT can be used as definitive treatment of indolent lymphoma. In aggressive NHL, the role of RT is limited to consolidation therapy of bulky disease, extranodal involvement and in elderly patients. Overall, technology evolved from extended fields to involved-node (INRT) and involved-site radiotherapy (ISRT), with concurrent reduction in doses. This short review summarizes current evidence and provides a future outlook with regard to the role of RT in the treatment of lymphomas.

Personalized medicine aims to match the right drug with the right patient by using specific features of the individual patient's tumor. However, current strategies of personalized therapy matching provide treatment opportunities for less than 10% of patients with cancer. A promising method may be drug profiling of patient biopsy specimens with single-cell resolution to directly quantify drug effects. We prospectively tested an image-based single-cell functional precision medicine (scFPM) approach to guide treatments in 143 patients with advanced aggressive hematologic cancers. Fifty-six patients (39%) were treated according to scFPM results. At a median follow-up of 23.9 months, 30 patients (54%) demonstrated a clinical benefit of more than 1.3-fold enhanced progression-free survival compared with their previous therapy. Twelve patients (40% of responders) experienced exceptional responses lasting three times longer than expected for their respective disease. We conclude that therapy matching by scFPM is clinically feasible and effective in advanced aggressive hematologic cancers.Significance:This is the first precision medicine trial using a functional assay to instruct n-of-one therapies in oncology. It illustrates that for patients lacking standard therapies, high-content assay-based scFPM can have a significant value in clinical therapy guidance based on functional dependencies of each patient's cancer.See related commentary by Letai, p. 290.This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 275

Personalized medicine aims to match the right drug with the right patient by using specific features of the individual patient's tumor. However, current strategies of personalized therapy matching provide treatment opportunities for less than 10% of patients with cancer. A promising method may be drug profiling of patient biopsy specimens with single-cell resolution to directly quantify drug effects. We prospectively tested an image-based single-cell functional precision medicine (scFPM) approach to guide treatments in 143 patients with advanced aggressive hematologic cancers. Fifty-six patients (39%) were treated according to scFPM results. At a median follow-up of 23.9 months, 30 patients (54%) demonstrated a clinical benefit of more than 1.3-fold enhanced progression-free survival compared with their previous therapy. Twelve patients (40% of responders) experienced exceptional responses lasting three times longer than expected for their respective disease. We conclude that therapy matching by scFPM is clinically feasible and effective in advanced aggressive hematologic cancers. Significance: This is the first precision medicine trial using a functional assay to instruct n-of-one therapies in oncology. It illustrates that for patients lacking standard therapies, high-content assay-based scFPM can have a significant value in clinical therapy guidance based on functional dependencies of each patient's cancer. See related commentary by Letai, p. 290. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 275

Background: Aggressive hematological malignancies in relapsed/refractory setting bear a dire prognosis with low cure rates and short survival. Matching these patients to therapies is challenged by complexity due to spatial and temporal tumor evolution and incomplete understanding of genotype to phenotype correlations. Direct functional testing could address these impediments. The EXALT trial is an interventional, one-arm study designed to assess the clinical value of next generation functional drug screening (ngFDS). An interim analysis on 17 patients suggested a clinical benefit (Snijder et al., Lancet Hematol. 2017). Methods: We applied image-based ngFDS to quantify differential ex-vivo sensitivity of primary patient tumor cells to respective non-tumor cells towards 136 small molecule drugs, including EMA approved for any indication or experimental. We screened bone marrow, peripheral blood or lymph node material from 143 patients who suffered from late stage aggressive hematological malignancies (acute leukemias, aggressive B- and T-cell lymphomas) , discussed the results in a multidisciplinary tumor board and recommended treatments to physicians (A). The primary endpoint of this study was the percentage of patients reaching a PFS-ratio (PFS(ngFDS treatment)/PFS(previous treatment)) of ≥1.3 with an H0 hypothesis < 15% patients. The secondary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) defined as proportion of patients reaching complete remission (CR) or partial remission (PR). Additionally, we performed a post hoc analysis to evaluate the matching of ngFDS to drugs used in actual treatment (matching score of received treatment). Results: 56 (39%) patients were evaluable and treated according to ngFDS based recommendations. With 30 of 56 (54%) ngFDS guided patients experiencing a PFS ratio of ≥1.3, the primary study endpoint was reached. 11 patients (37%) had ongoing response at censoring date (B). The median follow-up was 718 days. The median number of days from sampling to treatment was 21 (range 4-77). The ngFDS treatment regimens consisted of a median of 2 drugs (range: 1-6). ORR was 55% for all evaluable ngFDS treated patients, 60% for the lymphoid subgroup and 41% for the myeloid subgroup. Patients on ngFDS guided treatment with performance status ECOG ≤ 1 had a median PFS of 207 days compared to a median PFS of 29 days for patients with higher ECOG (p < 0.001, C). 24 of 39 (62%) patients with ECOG ≤ 1 had a PFS ratio of ≥1.3 (D). In disease specific subgroup analysis median PFS of T-cell lymphoma patients was 235 days versus 60 days for B-cell lymphoma patients (p = 0.018, E). Age (≤60 vs. >60), sex, lineage (myeloid vs. lymphoid), number of previous treatment lines (≤2 vs. >2), and clinical presentation (leukemia vs. lymphoma) did not have an impact on PFS of ngFDS guided treatment. Post hoc analysis including additional 17 non-ngFDS treated patients demonstrated that only patients receiving treatment with a positive ngFDS matching score demonstrated clinical benefit (HR: 0.53, p=0.005; vs. HR: 1.4, p=0.4). ngFDS matched treatments resulted in higher PFS for patients with tumor samples that had a cancer cell fraction of 10-50% in comparison to patients with samples of lower or higher cancer cell percentage (HR:0.35, p=0.01). Conclusion: ngFDS could be integrated in the routine clinical work flow. ngFDS guided treatments led to high rates of PFS prolongation compared to previous treatments of individual patients. ngFDS guided treatment is feasible and effective in patients with late stage aggressive hematological malignancies. These results prompted a prospective randomized trial comparing treatment guidance based on ngFDS or comprehensive genomic profiling or physician's choice (EXALT-2 trial, NCT04470947). Figure Disclosures Vladimer: Allcyte GmbH: Current Employment, Current equity holder in private company, Other: Founder. Jaeger:Karyopharm: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; True North: Honoraria, Research Funding; Miltenyi: Consultancy, Honoraria; CDR Life AG: Consultancy, Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Infinity: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria. Krall:Allcyte GmbH: Current Employment, Current equity holder in private company, Other: Founder. Valent:Allcyte GmbH: Research Funding; Cellgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria. Wolf:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Zielinski:MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Imugene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Ariad: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Merrimack: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Merck KGaA: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Fibrogen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Tesaro: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Servier: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Eli Lilly: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Athenex: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Superti-Furga:Allcyte GmbH: Current equity holder in private company, Other: Founder. Snijder:Allcyte GmbH: Current equity holder in private company, Other: Founder. Staber:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene/ BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; msd: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria.

Aim: The aim of this study was to assess the effects of including somatostatin receptor agonist (SSTR) PET imaging in meningioma radiotherapy planning by means of changes in inter-observer variability (IOV). Further, the possibility of using threshold-based delineation approaches for semiautomatic tumor volume definition was assessed. Patients and Methods: Sixteen patients with meningioma undergoing fractionated radiotherapy were delineated by five radiation oncologists. IOV was calculated by comparing each delineation to a consensus delineation, based on the simultaneous truth and performance level estimation (STAPLE) algorithm. The consensus delineation was used to adapt a threshold-based delineation, based on a maximization of the mean Dice coefficient. To test the threshold-based approach, seven patients with SSTR-positive meningioma were additionally evaluated as a validation group. Results: The average Dice coefficients for delineations based on MRI alone was 0.84 ± 0.12. For delineation based on MRI + PET, a significantly higher dice coefficient of 0.87 ± 0.08 was found (p < 0.001). The Hausdorff distance decreased from 10.96 ± 11.98 mm to 8.83 ± 12.21 mm (p < 0.001) when adding PET for the lesion delineation. The best threshold value for a threshold-based delineation was found to be 14.0% of the SUVmax, with an average Dice coefficient of 0.50 ± 0.19 compared to the consensus delineation. In the validation cohort, a Dice coefficient of 0.56 ± 0.29 and a Hausdorff coefficient of 27.15 ± 21.54 mm were found for the threshold-based approach. Conclusions: SSTR-PET added to standard imaging with CT and MRI reduces the IOV in radiotherapy planning for patients with meningioma. When using a threshold-based approach for PET-based delineation of meningioma, a relatively low threshold of 14.0% of the SUVmax was found to provide the best agreement with a consensus delineation.

Introduction The brain is a common site of metastatic disease for patients with advanced melanoma. Brain metastasis portends a poor prognosis, often causing deterioration in neurological function and quality of life, and leading to neurological death. Treatment approaches including surgery, radiotherapy and systemic therapy can lead to better control of this problem. Therefore, appropriate guidelines for the management of melanoma brain metastases need to be established, with regular updating when new treatment options become available. Methods A multidisciplinary working party established by Cancer Council Australia has produced up-to-date, evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for the management of melanoma. After selecting key clinical questions, a comprehensive literature search for relevant studies was conducted, followed by systematic review of those studies. Data were summarised and the evidence was assessed, leading to the development of recommendations. Main recommendations Symptomatic lesions are best treated with surgery, when possible; this provides safe and effective local control. For patients with single or a small number of asymptomatic brain metastases, stereotactic radiotherapy is recommended, but in asymptomatic patients who have not previously received systemic treatment, drug therapy can be considered as a first-line treatment option. Whole brain radiotherapy may provide palliative benefits in patients with multiple brain metastases. Whenever possible, melanoma patients with brain metastases should be managed by a multidisciplinary team of melanoma specialists that considers the optimal combination and sequencing of surgery, radiotherapy and systemic therapy.

The aim of this work was to characterise actuarial incidence and prevalence of early and late side effects of local versus pelvic three-dimensional conformal postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Based on a risk-adapted protocol, 575 patients received either local (n = 447) or local-plus-pelvic (n = 128) radiotherapy. Gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) side effects (≥grade 2 RTOG/EORTC criteria) were prospectively assessed. Maximum morbidity, actuarial incidence rate, and prevalence rates were compared between the two groups. For local radiotherapy, median follow-up was 68 months, and the mean dose was 66.7 Gy. In pelvic radiotherapy, the median follow-up was 49 months, and the mean local and pelvic doses were 66.9 and 48.3 Gy respectively. Early GI side effects ≥ G2 were detected in 26% and 42% of patients respectively (p < 0.001). Late GI adverse events were detected in 14% in both groups (p = 0.77). The 5‑year actuarial incidence rates were 14% and 14%, while the prevalence rates were 2% and 0% respectively. Early GU ≥ G2 side effects were detected in 15% and 16% (p = 0.96), while late GU morbidity was detected in 18% and 24% (p = 0.001). The 5‑year actuarial incidence rates were 16% and 35% (p = 0.001), while the respective prevalence rates were 6% and 8%. Despite the low prevalence of side effects, postoperative pelvic radiotherapy results in significant increases in the actuarial incidence of early GI and late GU morbidity using a conventional 4‑field box radiotherapy technique. Advanced treatment techniques like intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) or volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT) should therefore be considered in pelvic radiotherapy to potentially reduce these side effects.

Lymphoedema following axillary radiotherapy for breast cancer causes significant morbidity. Our goal was to evaluate the feasibility of sparing the lymph node that drains the arm's lymphatics (ARM node) while achieving standard dose constraints for whole breast and comprehensive lymph node irradiation.Six patients underwent lymphoscintigraphy and SPECT CT to identify the breast sentinel node (SN) and ARM node. The ARM node was contoured on the SPECT CT and deformably registered to the radiotherapy treatment planning CT. Radiotherapy plans (50 Gy in 25 fractions) with VMAT technique were generated, with the aim to spare the ARM node (Mean dose25 Gy) and achieve adequate coverage to the remaining axilla. The plan required the breast SN site (clip + 10 mm surrounding the clip) to achieve D98%47.5 Gy, and axillary nodal CTV excluding ARM node to achieve D90%45 Gy.In one patient, the ARM node was within the volume of breast SN site and sparing was not possible. For the remaining 5 patients, an ARM node-sparing plan could be successfully generated; the mean dose to the ARM node ranged from 11.2 to 23.1 Gy (median 13.8 Gy). In these 5 subjects, D90%45 Gy of axillary nodal CTV (range, 44.9-48.5 Gy, median 46.2 Gy) and D98%47.5 Gy of breast SN site were achieved.In this planning study, ARM node-sparing VMAT of the breast and lymph nodes was feasible, while maintaining adequate dosimetric coverage. However, in some individuals, localization of the ARM node in close proximity to breast SN site precluded the generation of an ARM node-sparing treatment plan.

Background Clinical decision making in oncology is based on both inter- and multidisciplinary approach. Hence teaching future doctors involved in oncology or general health practice is crucial. The aim of the Vienna Summer School on Oncology (VSSO) as an international, integrated, undergraduate oncology course is to teach medical students interdisciplinary team communication and application of treatment concepts/algorithms in a multidisciplinary setting. Method The teaching is based on an inter- and multidisciplinary faculty and a multimodal education approach to address different learning styles. The participants rated their satisfaction of the program voluntarily after finishing the course according to a grading scale from one (not good) to five (very good). The learning success was assessed by a compulsory pre-VSSO and post-VSSO single choice questionnaire. Results Program organisation was rated with a mean score of 4.47 out of 5.0 (SD 0.51), composition of the program and range of topics with a mean score of 4.68 (SD 0.58) and all teachers with a mean score of 4.36 (SD 0.40) points. Student evaluation at the beginning and end of the program indicated significant knowledge acquisition –i.e., general aspects of cancer: median 8.75 points (IQR 7.5–9.4) vs.10.0 points (IQR 9.4–10.0) p = 0.005; specific aspects of cancer: median 4.87 points (IQR 3.33–5.71) vs. 8.72 points (IQR 6.78–9.49) p ≤ 0.001, respectively. Conclusion Even though the participants represent a selection of students with special interest in cancer, the results of the VSSO indicate the benefit of an inter- and multidisciplinary teaching approach within an oncology module. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12909-017-0922-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.