Local Control and Toxicity of Adaptive Radiotherapy Using Weekly CT Imaging: Results from the LARTIA Trial in Stage III NSCLC

IntroductionAnatomical change of tumor during radiotherapy contributes to target missing. However, in the case of tumor shrinkage, adaptation of volume could result in an increased incidence of recurrence in the area of target reduction. This study aims to investigate the incidence of failure of the adaptive approach and, in particular, the risk for local recurrence in the area excluded after replanning.MethodsIn this prospective study, patients with locally advanced NSCLC treated with concomitant chemoradiation underwent weekly chest computed tomography simulation during treatment. In the case of tumor shrinkage, a new tumor volume was delineated and a new treatment plan outlined (replanning). Toxicity was evaluated with the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group/European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer scale. Patterns of failures were classified as in field (dimensional and/or metabolic progression within the replanning planning target volume [PTV]), marginal (recurrence in initial the PTV excluded from the replanning PTV), and out of field (recurrence outside the initial PTV).ResultsReplanning was outlined in 50 patients selected from a total of 217 patients subjected to weekly simulation computed tomography in our center from 2012 to 2014. With a median follow-up of 20.5 months, acute grade 3 or higher pulmonary and esophageal toxicity were reported in 2% and 4% of cases and late toxicity in 4% and 2%, respectively. Marginal relapse was recorded in 6% of patients, and 20% and 4% of patients experienced in-field and out-of-field local failure, respectively.ConclusionsThe reduced toxicity and the documented low rate of marginal failures make the adaptive approach a modern option for future randomized studies. The best scenario to confirm its application is probably in neoadjuvant chemoradiation trials.     

Decisional Control Preferences,Disclosure of Information Preferences,and Satisfaction Among Hispanic Patients With Advanced Cancer

ContextStudies to determine the decisional control preferences (DCPs) in Hispanic patients receiving palliative care are limited.ObjectivesThe aims of this study were to describe DCPs, disclosure of information, and satisfaction with decision making among Hispanics and to determine the degree of concordance between patients' DCPs and their self-reported decisions.MethodsWe surveyed 387 cancer patients referred to outpatient palliative care clinics in Argentina, Chile, Guatemala, and the U.S. DCPs were measured with the Control Preference Scale, disclosure preferences with the Disclosure of Information Preferences questionnaire, and satisfaction with care with the Satisfaction with Decision Scale.ResultsIn this study, 182 patients (47.6%) preferred shared decisional control, 119 (31.2%) preferred active decisional control, and 81 (21.2%) preferred a passive approach. Concerning their diagnosis and prognosis, 345 (92%) patients wanted to know their diagnosis, and 355 (94%) wanted to know their prognosis. Three hundred thirty-seven (87%) patients were satisfied with the decision-making process. DCPs were concordant with the self-reported decision-making process in 264 (69%) patients (weighted kappa = 0.55). Patients' greater satisfaction with the decision-making process was correlated with older age (P ≤ 0.001) and with a preference for enhanced diagnostic disclosure (P ≤ 0.024). Satisfaction did not correlate with concordance in the decision-making process.ConclusionThe vast majority preferred a shared or active decision-making process and wanted information about their diagnosis and prognosis. Older patients and those who wanted to know their diagnosis seemed to be more satisfied with the way treatment decisions were made.     

A pilot study of nimotuzumab plus single agent chemotherapy as second- or third-line treatment or more in patients with recurrent,persistent or metastatic cervical cancer

Nimotuzumab is a humanized IgG1 monoclonal antibody against the EGFR extracellular domain that has been evaluated in solid tumors as a single agent or in combination with chemotherapy and radiation. Cervical cancer patients who are refractory or progressive to first-line chemotherapy have a dismal prognosis, and no second- or third-line chemotherapy is considered standard. This pilot trial aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of nimotuzumab in 17 patients with pre-treated advanced refractory or progressive cervical cancer. Nimotuzumab was administered weekly at 200 mg/m² as single agent for 4 weeks (induction phase), then concurrent with 6 21-day cycles of gemcitabine (800 mg/m²) or cisplatin (50 mg/m²) for 18 weeks (concurrent phase) and then once every 2 weeks (maintenance phase). Nimotuzumab could be continued beyond disease progression. Seventeen patients were accrued and evaluated for safety and efficacy. The median number of nimotuzumab applications was 20 (5–96). The median number of chemotherapy cycles administered was 6 (1-6). No toxicity occurred during induction and maintenance phases (single agent nimotuzumab). In the concurrent phase, grade 3 toxicity events observed were leucopenia, anemia and diarrhea in 11.7%, 5.8% and 11.7% respectively. No complete or partial responses were observed. The stable disease (SD) rate was 35%. The median PFS and OS rates were163 days (95% CI, 104 to 222), and 299 days (95% IC, 177 to 421) respectively. Nimotuzumab is well tolerated and may have a role in the treatment of advanced cervical cancer.     

Multidisciplinary treatment strategy for locally advanced gastric cancer: A systematic review

BackgroundMultidisciplinary management of patients with locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) remains unstandardized worldwide. We performed a systemic review to summarize the advancements, regional differences, and current recommended multidisciplinary treatment strategies for LAGC.MethodsEligible studies were identified through a comprehensive search of PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library databases and Embase. Phase 3 randomized controlled trials which investigated survival of patients with LAGC who underwent gastrectomy with pre-/perioperative, postoperative chemotherapy, or chemoradiotherapy were included.ResultsIn total, we identified 11 studies of pre-/perioperative chemotherapy, 38 of postoperative chemotherapy, and 14 of chemoradiotherapy. In Europe and the USA, the current standard of care is perioperative chemotherapy for patients with LAGC using the regimen of 5-FU, folinic acid, oxaliplatin and docetaxel (FLOT). In Eastern Asia, upfront gastrectomy and postoperative chemotherapy is commonly used. The S-1 monotherapy or a regimen of capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CapOx) are used for patients with stage II disease, and the CapOx regimen or the S-1 plus docetaxel regimen are recommended for those with stage III Gastric cancer (GC). The addition of postoperative radiotherapy to peri- or postoperative chemotherapy is currently not recommended. Additionally, clinical trials testing targeted therapy and immunotherapy are increasingly performed worldwide.ConclusionsRecent clinical trials showed a survival benefit of peri-over postoperative chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy. As such, this strategy may have a potential as a global standard for patients with LAGC. Outcome of the ongoing clinical trials is expected to establish the global standard of multidisciplinary treatment strategy in patients with LAGC.