Search

Current risk-stratification systems for prostate cancer (PCa) do not sufficiently reflect the disease heterogeneity. Genomic classifiers (GC) enable improved risk stratification after surgery, but less data exist for patients treated with definitive radiation therapy (RT) or RT in oligo-/metastatic disease stages. To guide future perspectives of GCs for RT, we conducted (1) a systematic review on the evidence of GCs for patients treated with RT and (2) a survey of experts using the Delphi method, addressing the role of GCs in personalized treatments to identify relevant fields of future clinical and translational research. We performed a systematic review and screened ongoing clinical trials on ClinicalTrials.gov. Based on these results, a multidisciplinary international team of experts received an adapted Delphi method survey. Thirty-one and 30 experts answered round 1 and round 2, respectively. Questions with ?75% agreement were considered relevant and included in the qualitative synthesis. Evidence for GCs as predictive biomarkers is mainly available to the postoperative RT setting. Validation of GCs as prognostic markers in the definitive RT setting is emerging. Experts used GCs in patients with PCa with extensive metastases (30%), in postoperative settings (27%), and in newly diagnosed PCa (23%). Forty-seven percent of experts do not currently use GCs in clinical practice. Expert consensus demonstrates that GCs are promising tools to improve risk-stratification in primary and oligo-/metastatic patients in addition to existing classifications. Experts were convinced that GCs might guide treatment decisions in terms of RT-field definition and intensification/deintensification in various disease stages. This work confirms the value of GCs and the promising evidence of GC utility in the setting of RT. Additional studies of GCs as prognostic biomarkers are anticipated and form the basis for future studies addressing predictive capabilities of GCs to optimize RT and, European Union (EU); Horizon 2020; Research and Innovation Programme; German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF); ERA PER Joint Funding Call 2019; A.T. acknowledges support from Cancer Research UK (C33589/A28284 and C7224/A28724 CRUK RadNet). This project represents independent research supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre at the Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and the Institute of Cancer Research, London. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. We thank Fotini Miltiadous for administrative support. ; Funding text 3: Disclosures: A.U.K. reports funding support from grant P50CA09213 from the Prostate Cancer National Institutes of Health Specialized Programs of Research Excellence and grant W81XWH-22-1-0044 from the Department of Defense, as well as grant RSD1836 from the Radiologic Society of North America, the STOP Cancer organization, the Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, and the Prostate Cancer Foundation. C.Z. received funding from the Klaus Tschira foundation, Naslund Medical, and from the German Research Foundation. C.Z. received speaker fees from Johnson & Johnson and Novocure, all outside the submitted work. E.D. is an employee of Veracyte, manufacturer of Decipher. A.R. is a consultant and/or speaker for Astellas, Bayer, Pfizer, Blue Earth, Lantheus, Janssen, Tempus, and Veracyte. X.G. is on the consulting/advisory board for Bayer, Myovant, and Guardant Health.

BACKGROUND: There are various society-specific guidelines addressing adjuvant brachytherapy (BT) after surgery for endometrial cancer (EC). However, these recommendations are not uniform. Against this background, clinicians need to make decisions despite gaps between best scientific evidence and clinical practice. We explored factors influencing decision-making for adjuvant BT in clinical routine among experienced European radiation oncologists in the field of gynaecological radiotherapy (RT). We also investigated the dose and technique of BT. METHODS: Nineteen European experts for gynaecological BT selected by the Groupe Européen de Curiethérapie and the European Society for Radiotherapy & Oncology provided their decision criteria and technique for postoperative RT in EC. The decision criteria were captured and converted into decision trees, and consensus and dissent were evaluated based on the objective consensus methodology. RESULTS: The decision criteria used by the experts were tumour extension, grading, nodal status, lymphovascular invasion, and cervical stroma/vaginal invasion (yes/no). No expert recommended adjuvant BT for pT1a G1-2 EC without substantial LVSI. Eighty-four percent of experts recommended BT for pT1a G3 EC without substantial LVSI. Up to 74% of experts used adjuvant BT for pT1b LVSI-negative and pT2 G1-2 LVSI-negative disease. For 74-84% of experts, EBRT + BT was the treatment of choice for nodal-positive pT2 disease and for pT3 EC with cervical/vaginal invasion. For all other tumour stages, there was no clear consensus for adjuvant treatment. Four experts already used molecular markers for decision-making. Sixty-five percent of experts recommended fractionation regimens of 3 × 7 Gy or 4 × 5 Gy for BT as monotherapy and 2 × 5 Gy for combination with EBRT. The most commonly used applicator for BT was a vaginal cylinder; 82% recommended image-guided BT. CONCLUSIONS: There was a clear trend towards adjuvant BT for stage IA G3, stage IB, and s, Funding agency:Research Committee of the Kantonsspital St. Gallen 21/01

Background: There are various society-specific guidelines addressing adjuvant brachytherapy (BT) after surgery for endometrial cancer (EC). However, these recommendations are not uniform. Against this background, clinicians need to make decisions despite gaps between best scientific evidence and clinical practice. We explored factors influencing decision-making for adjuvant BT in clinical routine among experienced European radiation oncologists in the field of gynaecological radiotherapy (RT). We also investigated the dose and technique of BT. Methods: Nineteen European experts for gynaecological BT selected by the Groupe Européen de Curiethérapie and the European Society for Radiotherapy & Oncology provided their decision criteria and technique for postoperative RT in EC. The decision criteria were captured and converted into decision trees, and consensus and dissent were evaluated based on the objective consensus methodology. Results: The decision criteria used by the experts were tumour extension, grading, nodal status, lymphovascular invasion, and cervical stroma/vaginal invasion (yes/no). No expert recommended adjuvant BT for pT1a G1-2 EC without substantial LVSI. Eighty-four percent of experts recommended BT for pT1a G3 EC without substantial LVSI. Up to 74% of experts used adjuvant BT for pT1b LVSI-negative and pT2 G1–2 LVSI-negative disease. For 74–84% of experts, EBRT + BT was the treatment of choice for nodal-positive pT2 disease and for pT3 EC with cervical/vaginal invasion. For all other tumour stages, there was no clear consensus for adjuvant treatment. Four experts already used molecular markers for decision-making. Sixty-five percent of experts recommended fractionation regimens of 3 × 7 Gy or 4 × 5 Gy for BT as monotherapy and 2 × 5 Gy for combination with EBRT. The most commonly used applicator for BT was a vaginal cylinder; 82% recommended image-guided BT. Conclusion: There was a clear trend towards adjuvant BT for stage IA G3, stage IB, and

Bone-seeking 223Radium-dichloride (223Ra) is an established treatment prolonging survival and reducing morbidity in selected patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) with skeletal involvement. Radioligand therapy with 177Lutetium-PSMA-617 (177Lu-PSMA-617) has been increasingly implemented in patients with mCRPC failing conventional treatment options. In this study, the safety and efficacy of 177Lu-PSMA-617 in patients with progressive bone involvement under treatment with 223Ra was assessed. Twenty-eight men (median age 73 years, range 63–89 years) with progressive mCRPC, who started 177Lu-PSMA-617 within 8 weeks after the last 223Ra administration, received a median of 4 (IQR 3–6) and a total of 120 cycles of 223Ra and a median of 4 (IQR 2–7) cycles 177Lu-PSMA-617 with a mean treatment activity of 6.5 ± 1.2 GBq per cycle, reaching a mean cumulative activity of 30.7 ± 23.4 GBq. A PSA response (≥50% PSA decline 12 weeks after the first 177Lu-PSMA-617 cycle) was observed in 18/28 (64.3%) patients and imaging-based partial remission (PR) was observed in 11/28 (39.3%) patients. Median imaging-based progression-free survival (PFS) was 10 (95% CI, 6–14) months and median overall survival (OS) was 18 (95% CI, 14–22) months. Patients with low bone tumor burden (2–20 lesions) had a significantly longer OS (28 vs. 14 months, p < 0.045) compared to patients with a high tumor burden (>20 lesions). Grade ≥ 3 hematological toxicity was observed in six patients after their last treatment cycle with anemia, leukopenia and thrombocytopenia in 5/28 (17.9%), 4/28 (14.3%) and 6/28 (21.4%) patients, respectively. In progressive bone-metastatic mCRPC patients, prompt initiation of 177Lu-PSMA-617 after failing 223Ra is effective with an acceptable toxicity profile.

We aimed to evaluate the factors associated with hemorrhage (HA) of melanoma brain metastases (MBM) after Cyberknife stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) in the modern era of systemic therapy. A total of 55 patients with 279 MBM were treated in 93 fractions. The median age, SRS dose, radiological follow-up, and time to HA were 60.4 years, 20 Gy, 17.7 months, and 10.7 months, respectively. Radiologically evident HA was documented in 47 (16.8%) metastases. Of the 55 patients, 25 (45.4%) suffered an HA. Among those, HA caused grade 3 toxicity in 10 patients (40%) and grade 1 symptoms in 5 patients (20%). Ten patients (40%) with HA experienced no toxicity. Logistic regression revealed the use of anticoagulants and the administration of systemic therapy within 7/15 days from SRS to be predictive for HA. When considering the HA causing grade 3 symptomatology, only the use of anticoagulants was significant, with the delivery of whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) before the HA narrowly missing statistical significance. Our retrospective analysis showed that the administration of modern systemic therapy within 7/15 days from SRS may contribute to HA of MBM, though it appears safe, at least concerning grade 3 toxicity. The use of anticoagulants by the time of SRS significantly increased the risk of HA.