1
|
Alden SL, Lee V, Narang AK, Meyer J, Gearhart SL, Christenson ES. Circulating Tumor DNA to Predict Radiographic and Pathologic Response to Total Neoadjuvant Therapy in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer. Oncologist 2024; 29:e414-e418. [PMID: 38180954 PMCID: PMC10911913 DOI: 10.1093/oncolo/oyad336] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/09/2023] [Accepted: 12/04/2023] [Indexed: 01/07/2024] Open
Abstract
Despite advances in treatment and response assessment in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), it is unclear which patients should undergo nonoperative management (NOM). We performed a single-center, retrospective study to evaluate post-total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in predicting treatment response. We found that post-TNT ctDNA had a sensitivity of 23% and specificity of 100% for predicting residual disease upon resection, with a positive predictive value (PPV) of 100% and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 47%. For predicting poor tumor regression on MRI, ctDNA had a sensitivity of 16% and specificity of 96%, with a PPV of 75% and NPV of 60%. A commercially available ctDNA assay was insufficient to predict residual disease after TNT and should not be used alone to select patients for NOM in LARC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stephanie L Alden
- Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Valerie Lee
- Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Amol K Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Jeffrey Meyer
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Susan L Gearhart
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Eric S Christenson
- Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Liu IC, Gearhart S, Ke S, Hu C, Chung H, Efron J, Gabre-Kidan A, Najjar P, Atallah C, Safar B, Christenson ES, Azad NS, Lee V, Zaheer A, Birkness-Gartman JE, Reddy AV, Narang AK, Meyer J. Surgical and local control outcomes after sequential short-course radiation therapy and chemotherapy for rectal cancer. Surg Open Sci 2024; 18:42-49. [PMID: 38318322 PMCID: PMC10838936 DOI: 10.1016/j.sopen.2024.01.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/15/2024] [Accepted: 01/16/2024] [Indexed: 02/07/2024] Open
Abstract
Background Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) is an accepted approach for the management of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) and is associated with a decreased risk of development of metastatic disease compared to standard neoadjuvant therapy. However, questions remain regarding surgical outcomes and local control in patients who proceed to surgery, particularly when radiation is given first in the neoadjuvant sequence. We report on our institution's experience with patients who underwent short-course radiation therapy, consolidation chemotherapy, and surgery. Methods We retrospectively reviewed surgical specimen outcomes, postoperative complications, and local/pelvic control in a large cohort of patients with LARC who underwent neoadjuvant therapy incorporating upfront short-course radiation therapy followed by consolidation chemotherapy. Results In our cohort of 83 patients who proceeded to surgery, a complete/near-complete mesorectal specimen was achieved in 90 % of patients. This outcome was not associated with the time interval from completion of radiation to surgery. Postoperative complications were acceptably low. Local control at two years was 93.4 % for all patients- 97.6 % for those with low-risk disease and 90.4 % for high-risk disease. Conclusion Upfront short-course radiation therapy and consolidation chemotherapy is an effective treatment course. Extended interval from completion of short-course radiation therapy did not impact surgical specimen quality.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- I-Chia Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Susan Gearhart
- Department of Surgery, Colorectal Research Unit, Ravitch Division of Colorectal Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Suqi Ke
- Division of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Chen Hu
- Division of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Haniee Chung
- Department of Surgery, Colorectal Research Unit, Ravitch Division of Colorectal Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Jonathan Efron
- Department of Surgery, Colorectal Research Unit, Ravitch Division of Colorectal Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Alodia Gabre-Kidan
- Department of Surgery, Colorectal Research Unit, Ravitch Division of Colorectal Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Peter Najjar
- Department of Surgery, Colorectal Research Unit, Ravitch Division of Colorectal Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Chady Atallah
- Department of Surgery, Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA
| | - Bashar Safar
- Department of Surgery, Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA
| | - Eric S. Christenson
- Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Nilofer S. Azad
- Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Valerie Lee
- Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Atif Zaheer
- Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | | | - Abhinav V. Reddy
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Amol K. Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Jeffrey Meyer
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Wang J, Gai J, Zhang T, Niu N, Qi H, Thomas DL, Li K, Xia T, Rodriguez C, Parkinson R, Durham J, McPhaul T, Narang AK, Anders RA, Osipov A, Wang H, He J, Laheru DA, Herman JM, Lee V, Jaffee EM, Thompson ED, Zhu Q, Zheng L. Neoadjuvant radioimmunotherapy in pancreatic cancer enhances effector T cell infiltration and shortens their distances to tumor cells. Sci Adv 2024; 10:eadk1827. [PMID: 38324679 PMCID: PMC10849596 DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.adk1827] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/07/2023] [Accepted: 01/08/2024] [Indexed: 02/09/2024]
Abstract
Radiotherapy is hypothesized to have an immune-modulating effect on the tumor microenvironment (TME) of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) to sensitize it to anti-PD-1 antibody (a-PD-1) treatment. We collected paired pre- and posttreatment specimens from a clinical trial evaluating combination treatment with GVAX vaccine, a-PD-1, and stereotactic body radiation (SBRT) following chemotherapy for locally advanced PDACs (LAPC). With resected PDACs following different neoadjuvant therapies as comparisons, effector cells in PDACs were found to skew toward a more exhausted status in LAPCs following chemotherapy. The combination of GVAX/a-PD-1/SBRT drives TME to favor antitumor immune response including increased densities of GZMB+CD8+ T cells, TH1, and TH17, which are associated with longer survival, however increases immunosuppressive M2-like tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs). Adding SBRT to GVAX/a-PD-1 shortens the distances from PD-1+CD8+ T cells to tumor cells and to PD-L1+ myeloid cells, which portends prolonged survival. These findings have guided the design of next radioimmunotherapy studies by targeting M2-like TAM in PDACs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Junke Wang
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- Division of Biliary Tract Surgery, Department of General Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, China
| | - Jessica Gai
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Skip Viragh Pancreatic Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Tengyi Zhang
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Nan Niu
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Hanfei Qi
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- Quantitative Sciences Division, Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Cancer Convergence Institute at Johns Hopkins, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Dwayne L. Thomas
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Keyu Li
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Tao Xia
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Christina Rodriguez
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Skip Viragh Pancreatic Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Rose Parkinson
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Skip Viragh Pancreatic Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Cancer Convergence Institute at Johns Hopkins, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Jennifer Durham
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Skip Viragh Pancreatic Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Cancer Convergence Institute at Johns Hopkins, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Thomas McPhaul
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Amol K. Narang
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Robert A. Anders
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Skip Viragh Pancreatic Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- Department of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Arsen Osipov
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Skip Viragh Pancreatic Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- Cedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, 90048, USA
| | - Hao Wang
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Skip Viragh Pancreatic Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- Quantitative Sciences Division, Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Cancer Convergence Institute at Johns Hopkins, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Jin He
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Skip Viragh Pancreatic Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Daniel A. Laheru
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Skip Viragh Pancreatic Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Cancer Convergence Institute at Johns Hopkins, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Joseph M. Herman
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Skip Viragh Pancreatic Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- Northwell Health System, New Hyde Park, NY, 11042, USA
| | - Valerie Lee
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Elizabeth M. Jaffee
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Skip Viragh Pancreatic Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Cancer Convergence Institute at Johns Hopkins, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Elizabeth D. Thompson
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- Department of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Qingfeng Zhu
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Cancer Convergence Institute at Johns Hopkins, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Lei Zheng
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Skip Viragh Pancreatic Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- The Cancer Convergence Institute at Johns Hopkins, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Chiorean EG, Chiaro MD, Tempero MA, Malafa MP, Benson AB, Cardin DB, Christensen JA, Chung V, Czito B, Dillhoff M, Donahue TR, Dotan E, Fountzilas C, Glazer ES, Hardacre J, Hawkins WG, Klute K, Ko AH, Kunstman JW, LoConte N, Lowy AM, Masood A, Moravek C, Nakakura EK, Narang AK, Nardo L, Obando J, Polanco PM, Reddy S, Reyngold M, Scaife C, Shen J, Truty MJ, Vollmer C, Wolff RA, Wolpin BM, Rn BM, Lubin S, Darlow SD. Ampullary Adenocarcinoma, Version 1.2023, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2023; 21:753-782. [PMID: 37433437 DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2023.0034] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/13/2023]
Abstract
Ampullary cancers refer to tumors originating from the ampulla of Vater (the ampulla, the intraduodenal portion of the bile duct, and the intraduodenal portion of the pancreatic duct), while periampullary cancers may arise from locations encompassing the head of the pancreas, distal bile duct, duodenum, or ampulla of Vater. Ampullary cancers are rare gastrointestinal malignancies, and prognosis varies greatly based on factors such as patient age, TNM classification, differentiation grade, and treatment modality received. Systemic therapy is used in all stages of ampullary cancer, including neoadjuvant therapy, adjuvant therapy, and first-line or subsequent-line therapy for locally advanced, metastatic, and recurrent disease. Radiation therapy may be used in localized ampullary cancer, sometimes in combination with chemotherapy, but there is no high-level evidence to support its utility. Select tumors may be treated surgically. This article describes NCCN recommendations regarding management of ampullary adenocarcinoma.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | - Al B Benson
- Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University
| | | | | | | | | | - Mary Dillhoff
- The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute
| | | | | | | | | | - Jeffrey Hardacre
- Case Comprehensive Cancer Center/University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute
| | - William G Hawkins
- Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine
| | | | - Andrew H Ko
- UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center
| | | | | | | | - Ashiq Masood
- Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center
| | | | | | - Amol K Narang
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Wong SC, Reddy AV, Hacker-Prietz A, Kress L, Pathak P, Hill CS, Lin TA, Herman JM, He J, Zheng L, Brown ME, Narang AK. Effectiveness of the nutrition referral system in a multidisciplinary pancreatic cancer clinic. Support Care Cancer 2023; 31:322. [PMID: 37148382 DOI: 10.1007/s00520-023-07795-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/06/2022] [Accepted: 05/02/2023] [Indexed: 05/08/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Proactive nutrition screening and intervention is associated with improved outcomes for patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC). To better optimize nutrition amongst our PDAC population, we implemented systematic malnutrition screening in the Johns Hopkins pancreas multidisciplinary clinic (PMDC) and assessed the effectiveness of our nutrition referral system. METHODS This was a single institution prospective study of patients seen in the PMDC, screened for malnutrition using the Malnutrition Screening Tool (MST) (score range=0 to 5, score > 2 indicates risk of malnutrition), and offered referrals to the oncology dietitian. Patients that requested a referral but did not attend a nutrition appointment were contacted by phone to assess barriers to seeing the dietitian. Univariate (UVA) and multivariable (MVA) analyses were carried out to identify predictors of referral status and appointment completion status. RESULTS A total of 97 patients were included in the study, of which 72 (74.2%) requested a referral and 25 (25.8%) declined. Of the 72 patients who requested a referral, 31 (43.1%) attended an appointment with the oncology dietitian. Data on information session attendance was available for 35 patients, of which 8 (22.9%) attended a pre-clinic information session in which the importance of optimal nutrition was highlighted. On MVA, information session attendance was significantly associated with requesting a referral (OR: 11.1, 95% CI 1.12-1.0E3, p=0.037) and successfully meeting with the oncology dietitian (OR: 5.88, 95% CI 1.00-33.3, p=0.049). CONCLUSION PMDC teams should institute educational initiatives on the importance of optimal nutrition in order to increase patient engagement with nutrition services.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sydnee C Wong
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Abhinav V Reddy
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Amy Hacker-Prietz
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Laura Kress
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Priya Pathak
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Colin S Hill
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Timothy A Lin
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Joseph M Herman
- Northwell Health Cancer Institute Radiation Medicine, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, New Hyde Park, NY, USA
| | - Jin He
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Lei Zheng
- Department of Medical Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Mary-Eve Brown
- Department of Medical Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Amol K Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Chu LC, Wang ZJ, Kambadakone A, Hecht EM, He J, Narang AK, Laheru DA, Arif-Tiwari H, Bhosale P, Bolan CW, Brook OR, Bezuidenhout AF, Do RKG, Galgano SJ, Goenka AH, Guimaraes AR, Hough DM, Kulkarni N, Le O, Luk L, Mannelli L, Rosenthal M, Sangster G, Shah ZK, Soloff EV, Tolat PP, Zins M, Fishman EK, Tamm EP, Zaheer A. Postoperative surveillance of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) recurrence: practice pattern on standardized imaging and reporting from the society of abdominal radiology disease focus panel on PDAC. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2023; 48:318-339. [PMID: 36241752 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-022-03693-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/09/2022] [Revised: 09/22/2022] [Accepted: 09/26/2022] [Indexed: 01/21/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Surgical resection is the only potential curative treatment for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), but unfortunately most patients recur within 5 years of surgery. This article aims to assess the practice patterns across major academic institutions and develop consensus recommendations for postoperative imaging and interpretation in patients with PDAC. METHODS The consensus recommendations for postoperative imaging surveillance following PDAC resection were developed using the Delphi method. Members of the Society of Abdominal Radiology (SAR) PDAC Disease Focused Panel (DFP) underwent three rounds of surveys followed by live webinar group discussions to develop consensus recommendations. RESULTS Significant variations currently exist in the postoperative surveillance of PDAC, even among academic institutions. Differentiating common postoperative inflammatory and fibrotic changes from tumor recurrence remains a diagnostic challenge, and there is no reliable size threshold or growth rate of imaging findings that can provide differentiation. A new liver lesion or peritoneal nodule should be considered suspicious for tumor recurrence, and the imaging features should be interpreted in the appropriate clinical context (e.g., CA 19-9, clinical presentation, pathologic staging). CONCLUSION Postoperative imaging following PDAC resection is challenging to interpret due to the presence of confounding postoperative inflammatory changes. A standardized reporting template for locoregional findings and report impression may improve communication of relaying risk of recurrence with referring providers, which merits validation in future studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Linda C Chu
- The Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
| | - Zhen J Wang
- Department of Radiology, University of California San Francisco School of Medicine, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Avinash Kambadakone
- Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | - Jin He
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Amol K Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Daniel A Laheru
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Hina Arif-Tiwari
- Department of Medical Imaging, University of Arizona, Tuscon, AZ, USA
| | - Priya Bhosale
- Department of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | | | - Olga R Brook
- Department of Radiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | - Richard K G Do
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Samuel J Galgano
- Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Medicine, Birmingham, AL, USA
| | - Ajit H Goenka
- Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Alexander R Guimaraes
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA
| | - David M Hough
- Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Naveen Kulkarni
- Department of Radiology, Medical College of Wisconsin & Froedtert Health, Milwaukee, WI, USA
| | - Ott Le
- Department of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Lyndon Luk
- Department of Radiology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Lorenzo Mannelli
- Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS) SDN, Naples, Italy
| | - Michael Rosenthal
- Department of Imaging, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Brigham and Women's Hospital, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Guillermo Sangster
- Department of Radiology, Ochsner Louisiana State University Health Shreveport, Shreveport, LA, USA
| | - Zarine K Shah
- Department of Radiology, Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Erik V Soloff
- Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Parag P Tolat
- Department of Radiology, Medical College of Wisconsin & Froedtert Health, Milwaukee, WI, USA
| | - Marc Zins
- Department of Radiology, Hôpital Paris Saint Joseph, Paris, France
| | - Elliot K Fishman
- The Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Eric P Tamm
- Department of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Atif Zaheer
- The Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Li K, Tandurella JA, Gai J, Zhu Q, Lim SJ, Thomas DL, Xia T, Mo G, Mitchell JT, Montagne J, Lyman M, Danilova LV, Zimmerman JW, Kinny-Köster B, Zhang T, Chen L, Blair AB, Heumann T, Parkinson R, Durham JN, Narang AK, Anders RA, Wolfgang CL, Laheru DA, He J, Osipov A, Thompson ED, Wang H, Fertig EJ, Jaffee EM, Zheng L. Multi-omic analyses of changes in the tumor microenvironment of pancreatic adenocarcinoma following neoadjuvant treatment with anti-PD-1 therapy. Cancer Cell 2022; 40:1374-1391.e7. [PMID: 36306792 PMCID: PMC9669212 DOI: 10.1016/j.ccell.2022.10.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/07/2022] [Revised: 08/08/2022] [Accepted: 10/04/2022] [Indexed: 01/21/2023]
Abstract
Successful pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) immunotherapy necessitates optimization and maintenance of activated effector T cells (Teff). We prospectively collected and applied multi-omic analyses to paired pre- and post-treatment PDAC specimens collected in a platform neoadjuvant study of granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor-secreting allogeneic PDAC vaccine (GVAX) vaccine ± nivolumab (anti-programmed cell death protein 1 [PD-1]) to uncover sensitivity and resistance mechanisms. We show that GVAX-induced tertiary lymphoid aggregates become immune-regulatory sites in response to GVAX + nivolumab. Higher densities of tumor-associated neutrophils (TANs) following GVAX + nivolumab portend poorer overall survival (OS). Increased T cells expressing CD137 associated with cytotoxic Teff signatures and correlated with increased OS. Bulk and single-cell RNA sequencing found that nivolumab alters CD4+ T cell chemotaxis signaling in association with CD11b+ neutrophil degranulation, and CD8+ T cell expression of CD137 was required for optimal T cell activation. These findings provide insights into PD-1-regulated immune pathways in PDAC that should inform more effective therapeutic combinations that include TAN regulators and T cell activators.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Keyu Li
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; Department of Pancreatic Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, China
| | - Joseph A Tandurella
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; Quantitative Sciences Division, Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Cancer Convergence Institute at Johns Hopkins, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Jessica Gai
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Skip Viragh Pancreatic Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Qingfeng Zhu
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; Department of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Su Jin Lim
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; Quantitative Sciences Division, Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Cancer Convergence Institute at Johns Hopkins, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Dwayne L Thomas
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Skip Viragh Pancreatic Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Tao Xia
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Guanglan Mo
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Skip Viragh Pancreatic Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Jacob T Mitchell
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; Quantitative Sciences Division, Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Cancer Convergence Institute at Johns Hopkins, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; Department of Genetic Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA
| | - Janelle Montagne
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; Quantitative Sciences Division, Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Cancer Convergence Institute at Johns Hopkins, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Melissa Lyman
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Skip Viragh Pancreatic Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; Quantitative Sciences Division, Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Cancer Convergence Institute at Johns Hopkins, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Ludmila V Danilova
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; Quantitative Sciences Division, Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Cancer Convergence Institute at Johns Hopkins, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Jacquelyn W Zimmerman
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; Quantitative Sciences Division, Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Cancer Convergence Institute at Johns Hopkins, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Benedict Kinny-Köster
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Skip Viragh Pancreatic Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Tengyi Zhang
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Linda Chen
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; Department of Radiation Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Alex B Blair
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Skip Viragh Pancreatic Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Cancer Convergence Institute at Johns Hopkins, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Thatcher Heumann
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Rose Parkinson
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Skip Viragh Pancreatic Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Cancer Convergence Institute at Johns Hopkins, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Jennifer N Durham
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Skip Viragh Pancreatic Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Cancer Convergence Institute at Johns Hopkins, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Amol K Narang
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Skip Viragh Pancreatic Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; Department of Radiation Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Robert A Anders
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Skip Viragh Pancreatic Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; Department of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Christopher L Wolfgang
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Skip Viragh Pancreatic Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Daniel A Laheru
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Skip Viragh Pancreatic Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Cancer Convergence Institute at Johns Hopkins, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Jin He
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Skip Viragh Pancreatic Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Arsen Osipov
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Skip Viragh Pancreatic Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Elizabeth D Thompson
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Skip Viragh Pancreatic Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; Department of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Hao Wang
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; Quantitative Sciences Division, Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Cancer Convergence Institute at Johns Hopkins, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Elana J Fertig
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; Quantitative Sciences Division, Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Cancer Convergence Institute at Johns Hopkins, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; Department of Applied Mathematics and Statistics, Johns Hopkins University Whiting School of Engineering, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA; Department of Biomedical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA.
| | - Elizabeth M Jaffee
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Skip Viragh Pancreatic Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Cancer Convergence Institute at Johns Hopkins, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA.
| | - Lei Zheng
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Skip Viragh Pancreatic Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Pancreatic Cancer Precision Medicine Center of Excellence Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; The Cancer Convergence Institute at Johns Hopkins, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Hill CS, Rosati L, Wang H, Tsai HL, He J, Hacker-Prietz A, Laheru DA, Zheng L, Sehgal S, Bernard V, Le DT, Pawlik TM, Weiss MJ, Narang AK, Herman JM. Multiagent Chemotherapy and Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy in Patients with Unresectable Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: A Prospective Nonrandomized Controlled Trial. Pract Radiat Oncol 2022; 12:511-523. [PMID: 35306231 PMCID: PMC9516435 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2022.02.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/16/2021] [Revised: 01/22/2022] [Accepted: 02/18/2022] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE In a prospective multicenter study, gemcitabine monotherapy followed by stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) was well tolerated with outcomes comparable to chemoradiation for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). Recent trials have reported improved survival with multiagent chemotherapy (MA-CTX) alone. This prospective trial explored whether SBRT could be safely delivered after MA-CTX. Herein, we report the long-term outcomes of adding SBRT after MA-CTX in LAPC patients and evaluate whether genetic profiles of specimens obtained before SBRT influence outcomes. METHODS AND MATERIALS This prospective nonrandomized controlled phase 2 trial enrolled 44 LAPC and 4 locally recurrent patients after multidisciplinary evaluation between 2012 and 2015 at a high-volume pancreatic cancer center. For induction CTX, most received modified FOLFIRINOX (mFFX), or gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel (GnP) followed by 5-fraction SBRT for all. During fiducial placement, biopsies were obtained with DNA extracted for targeted sequencing using the Memorial Sloan Kettering-Integrated Mutation Profiling of Actionable Cancer Targets platform. RESULTS Median induction CTX duration was ≥4 months, and 31 patients received mFFX (65%). Among 44 LAPC patients, 17 (39%) were surgically explored, and 12 of 16 (75%) achieved a R0 resection. Median overall survival (mOS) was 20.2 and 14.6 months from diagnosis and SBRT, respectively. One- and 2-year OS from SBRT was 58% and 28%. The mOS after resection was 28.6 and 22.4 months from diagnosis and SBRT, respectively. Median local progression-free survival was 23.9 and 15.8 months from diagnosis and SBRT, respectively. The mOS for pre-SBRT CA 19-9 ≤180 U/mL versus >180 was 23.1 and 11.3 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.53; P = .04). Only 1 patient (2.1%) had late grade ≥2 gastrointestinal toxic effects attributable to SBRT. Despite significant pretreatment with chemotherapy, 88% of tumor specimens were effectively sequenced; survival outcomes were not significantly associated with specific mutational patterns. Quality of life was prospectively collected pre- and post-SBRT with the EORTC QLQ-C30 and PAN26 questionnaires showing no significant change. CONCLUSIONS SBRT was safely administered with MA-CTX with minimal toxicity. A high proportion of LAPC patients underwent R0 resection with favorable survival outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Colin S Hill
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Lauren Rosati
- University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, South Carolina
| | - Hao Wang
- Division of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Hua-Ling Tsai
- Division of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Jin He
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Amy Hacker-Prietz
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Daniel A Laheru
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Lei Zheng
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Shuchi Sehgal
- Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Vincent Bernard
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Dung T Le
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Timothy M Pawlik
- Department of Surgery, Ohio State Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Matthew J Weiss
- Department of Surgery, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Lake Success, New York
| | - Amol K Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Joseph M Herman
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Northwell Health Cancer Institute, Lake Success and Zucker School of Medicine, Hempstead, New York.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Reddy AV, Hill CS, Zheng L, He J, Narang AK. A safety study of intraoperative radiation therapy following stereotactic body radiation therapy and multi-agent chemotherapy in the treatment of localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma: study protocol of a phase I trial. Radiat Oncol 2022; 17:173. [PMID: 36307845 PMCID: PMC9615352 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-022-02145-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/31/2022] [Accepted: 10/07/2022] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma carries a poor prognosis even after aggressive therapy. Up to 40% of patients may develop locoregional disease as the first site of failure. As such, there may be a role for intensification of local therapy such as radiation therapy. Radiation dose escalation for pancreatic cancer is limited by proximity of the tumor to the duodenum. However, the duodenum is removed during Whipple procedure, allowing the opportunity to dose escalate with intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT). Although prior studies have shown potential benefit of IORT in pancreatic cancer, these studies did not utilize ablative doses (biologically effective dose [BED10] > 100 Gy). Furthermore, the optimal radiation target volume in this setting is unclear. There has been increased interest in a "Triangle Volume" (TV), bordered by the celiac axis, superior mesenteric artery, common hepatic artery, portal vein, and superior mesenteric vein. Dissection of this area, has been advocated for by surgeons from Heidelberg as it contains extra-pancreatic perineural and lymphatic tracts, which may harbor microscopic disease at risk of mediating local failure. Interestingly, a recent analysis from our institution indicated that nearly all local failures occur in the TV. Therefore, the purpose of this protocol is to evaluate the safety of delivering an ablative radiation dose to the TV with IORT following neoadjuvant chemotherapy and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). METHODS Patients with non-metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma centered in the head or neck of the pancreas will be enrolled. Following treatment with multi-agent neoadjuvant chemotherapy, patients will undergo SBRT (40 Gy/5 fractions) followed by IORT (15 Gy/1 fraction) to the TV during the Whipple procedure. The primary objective is acute (< 90 days) toxicity after IORT measured by Clavien-Dindo classification. Secondary objectives include late (> 90 days) toxicity after IORT measured by Clavien-Dindo classification, overall survival, local progression-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival, and progression-free survival. DISCUSSION If the results show that delivering an ablative radiation dose to the TV with IORT after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and SBRT is safe and feasible, it warrants further investigation in a phase II trial to evaluate efficacy of this approach. Trial Registration This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov on 12/2/2021 (NCT05141513). https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05141513.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Abhinav V Reddy
- Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 401 N Broadway, Baltimore, MD, 21231, USA.
| | - Colin S Hill
- Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 401 N Broadway, Baltimore, MD, 21231, USA
| | - Lei Zheng
- Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 401 N Broadway, Baltimore, MD, 21231, USA
| | - Jin He
- Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 401 N Broadway, Baltimore, MD, 21231, USA
| | - Amol K Narang
- Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 401 N Broadway, Baltimore, MD, 21231, USA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Hill CS, Deville C, Kiess A, Narang AK, Ratnanather T, Bienstock J, Brinckerhoff L, Hodukavich A, Anderson R, Alcorn S, DeWeese T, Viswanathan A, Page BR. Creating Inclusive and Accessible Residency Training programs: Lessons Learned from Establishing a Deaf and American Sign Language Inclusive Model for Residency Training. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2022. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.06.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/15/2022]
|
11
|
Reddy AV, Hill CS, Sehgal S, Zheng L, He J, Laheru DA, Jesus-Acosta AD, Herman JM, Meyer J, Narang AK. Post-radiation neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio is a prognostic marker in patients with localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma treated with anti-PD-1 antibody and stereotactic body radiation therapy. Radiat Oncol J 2022; 40:111-119. [PMID: 35796114 PMCID: PMC9262702 DOI: 10.3857/roj.2021.01060] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/05/2021] [Revised: 03/01/2022] [Accepted: 03/04/2022] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To investigate the role of pre- and post-stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) in patients with localized pancreatic cancer treated with anti-PD-1 (programmed cell death protein-1) antibody and SBRT. MATERIALS AND METHODS This was a retrospective review of 68 patients with borderline resectable or locally advanced pancreatic cancer treated with anti-PD-1 antibody and SBRT after multi-agent chemotherapy. Immunotherapy was administered with 5-fraction SBRT in the neoadjuvant, concurrent, or adjuvant/maintenance setting. Clinical outcomes included overall survival (OS), local progression-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival, and progression-free survival. Median pre- and post-SBRT peripheral blood markers were compared with the Mann-Whitney U test. Univariate and multivariable analyses (UVA and MVA) were performed to identify variables associated with clinical outcomes. Linear regression was performed to determine correlations between variables and peripheral blood markers. RESULTS A total of 68 patients were included in the study. The percent change between median pre- and post-SBRT absolute lymphocyte count (ALC), absolute neutrophil count, and NLR were -36.0% (p < 0.001), -5.6% (p = 0.190), and +35.7% (p = 0.003), respectively. Median OS after SBRT was 22.4 months. On UVA, pre-SBRT CA19-9 (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.001; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.000-1.001; p = 0.031), post-SBRT ALC (HR = 0.33; 95% CI, 0.11-0.91; p = 0.031), and post-SBRT NLR (HR = 1.13; 95% CI, 1.04-1.22; p = 0.009) were associated with OS. On MVA, induction chemotherapy duration (HR = 0.75; 95% CI, 0.57-0.99; p = 0.048) and post-SBRT NLR (HR = 1.14; 95% CI, 1.04-1.23; p = 0.002) predicted for OS. Patients with post-SBRT NLR ≥3.2 had a median OS of 15.6 months versus 27.6 months in patients with post-SBRT NLR <3.2 (p = 0.009). On MVA linear regression, log10CTV had a negative correlation with post-SBRT ALC (regression coefficient = -0.314; 95% CI, -0.626 to -0.003; p = 0.048). CONCLUSION Elevated NLR after SBRT is primarily due to depletion of lymphocytes and associated with worse survival outcomes in localized pancreatic cancer treated with anti-PD-1 antibody. Larger CTVs were associated with decreased post-SBRT ALC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Abhinav V. Reddy
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Colin S. Hill
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Shuchi Sehgal
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Lei Zheng
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Jin He
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Daniel A. Laheru
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Ana De Jesus-Acosta
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Joseph M. Herman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Northwell Health, New Hyde Park, NY, USA
| | - Jeffrey Meyer
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Amol K. Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Reddy AV, Hill CS, Sehgal S, He J, Zheng L, Herman JM, Meyer J, Narang AK. Efficacy and Safety of Reirradiation with Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Locally Recurrent Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2022; 34:386-394. [PMID: 34974972 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2021.12.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/19/2021] [Revised: 10/07/2021] [Accepted: 12/17/2021] [Indexed: 11/03/2022]
Abstract
AIMS The purpose of this study was to report on outcomes of a cohort of patients who were treated with reirradiation with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for locally recurrent pancreatic adenocarcinoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS Patients treated with SBRT reirradiation for locally recurrent pancreatic adenocarcinoma from December 2009 to April 2020 were included in the study. Descriptive statistics were used to record patient demographics, tumour and treatment characteristics. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to evaluate overall survival, local progression-free survival (LPFS), distant metastasis-free survival and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS In total, 27 patients were included in the study. The median follow-up time from local recurrence was 19.7 months (range 4.2-43.1 months). Most patients received five-fraction SBRT (26/27, 96%). The median overall survival after local recurrence treatment was 18.3 months (range 3.0-42.6 months), with 6-month, 1-year and 2-year overall survival rates of 88.5%, 73.1% and 33.6%. The median LPFS after local recurrence treatment was 16.2 months (range 2.3-33.6 months), with 6-month, 1-year and 2-year LPFS rates of 95.8%, 62.9% and 27.2%. Peri-SBRT chemotherapy improved LPFS (median 17.5 versus 8.5 months; P = 0.010) and overall survival (median 19.3 versus 5.5 months; P = 0.049). Tumours ≤ 3 cm in the greatest dimension showed better local control (median LPFS 19.2 versus 10.2 months; P = 0.130). There was one case (4%) of acute grade 3 pain and one case (4%) of late grade 3 gastrointestinal toxicity. CONCLUSIONS Reirradiation with five-fraction SBRT is safe, but local control remains suboptimal. Patients with smaller tumours experienced improved outcomes, as did patients whose treatment plan included the administration of peri-SBRT chemotherapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A V Reddy
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
| | - C S Hill
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - S Sehgal
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - J He
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - L Zheng
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - J M Herman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Northwell Health, New Hyde Park, New York, USA
| | - J Meyer
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - A K Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Reddy AV, Hill CS, Sehgal S, He J, Zheng L, Herman JM, Meyer J, Narang AK. Stereotactic body radiation therapy for the treatment of locally recurrent pancreatic cancer after surgical resection. J Gastrointest Oncol 2022; 13:1402-1412. [PMID: 35837183 PMCID: PMC9274026 DOI: 10.21037/jgo-22-38] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/13/2022] [Accepted: 04/07/2022] [Indexed: 11/06/2022] Open
Abstract
Background To report on a cohort of radiation-naïve patients with pancreatic cancer who developed isolated local recurrence following surgical resection and were subsequently treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). Methods Patients with pancreatic cancer who were treated with SBRT for isolated local recurrence after surgical resection were retrospectively reviewed. Clinical outcomes were calculated from completion of SBRT and included overall survival (OS), local progression-free survival (LPFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and progression-free survival (PFS). Univariate (UVA) analysis was performed to identify variables associated with clinical outcomes. Kaplan-Meier method was used for survival outcomes. Toxicity was assessed using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0. Results From September 2012 to November 2018, a total of 19 patients with localized pancreatic cancer were treated with SBRT for isolated local recurrence after initial surgical resection. No patients had prior radiation. The median biologically effective dose (BED10) was 54.8 Gy (range, 37.5-54.8 Gy). Median OS was 17.1 months, with 6-month and 1-year OS rates of 94.4% and 69.6%, respectively. Nine patients (47.4%) developed local failure after SBRT. Pattern of first failure after SBRT was distant in 7 patients (46.7%), local in 5 patients (33.3%), and synchronous distant and local in 3 patients (20.0%). One patient developed local failure after developing distant disease first. Of the 9 local failures, 3 (33.3%) were out-of-field. Median LPFS was 22.2 months, with 6-month and 1-year LPFS rates of 86.9% and 63.2%, respectively. A BED10 <54.8 Gy was associated with inferior LPFS (1-year, 25.0% vs. 80.2%, P<0.009). Median DMFS and PFS were 15.6 months. There was 1 case (5.3 %) of grade 3 gastric perforation. There were no cases of grade 4-5 toxicity events. Conclusions SBRT for locally recurrent pancreatic cancer after initial curative resection is safe and feasible. A BED10 <54.8 Gy was significantly associated with inferior local control. Further studies investigating dose escalation and optimal treatment volumes in the locally recurrent setting are warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Abhinav V. Reddy
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Colin S. Hill
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Shuchi Sehgal
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Jin He
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Lei Zheng
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Joseph M. Herman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Northwell Health, New Hyde Park, NY, USA
| | - Jeffrey Meyer
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Amol K. Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Hill CS, Fu W, Hu C, Sehgal S, Reddy AV, He J, Herman JM, Meyer JJ, Zaheer A, Narang AK. Location, Location, Location: What Should be Targeted Beyond Gross Disease for Localized Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma? Proposal of a Standardized Clinical Tumor Volume for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma of the Head: The "Triangle Volume". Pract Radiat Oncol 2022; 12:215-225. [PMID: 35144016 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2022.01.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/25/2021] [Revised: 11/28/2021] [Accepted: 01/18/2022] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE In patients with borderline resectable or locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma (BRPC/LAPC), local failure rates after resection remain significant, even in the setting of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation. Suboptimal local control may relate to variable radiation target delineation, as no consensus exists around clinical tumor volume (CTV) design in this context. In the surgical literature, recent attention has been given to the "triangle" volume (TV) as a source of subclinical, residual disease. To understand whether the TV can inform optimal CTV design, we mapped locoregional failures after resection in a large cohort of patients with BRPC/LAPC and compared locations of failure to the TV. METHODS AND MATERIALS Patients with BRPC/LAPC of the head or neck diagnosed between 2016 AND 2019 who developed locoregional failure after surgery, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and radiation were identified. Descriptive statistics were generated to report the frequency of locoregional failures located within the TV and the frequency of new vascular involvement at time of failure, compared with vascular involvement at diagnosis. Additionally, dosimetric coverage of the TV with the preoperative radiation plan that had been used was assessed. RESULTS In 31 patients who experienced locoregional failure, the centroid of failure was located within the TV in 28 cases (90%). Extent of vascular involvement at time of locoregional failure included vasculature that had not been involved at diagnosis in 13 cases (42%). The preoperative radiation plan that had been used provided a median V33 Gy and V25 Gy of the TV of only 53% (interquartile range, 34%-72%) and 70% (IQR, 48%-85%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS The TV encompassed the vast majority of locoregional failures, but dosimetric coverage of the TV was poor when only targeting gross disease and the full circumference of involved vasculature. As such, the TV may better serve as a basis for CTV design in patients with BRPC/LAPC undergoing neoadjuvant radiation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Colin S Hill
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
| | - Wei Fu
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Chen Hu
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Shuchi Sehgal
- Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Abhinav V Reddy
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Jin He
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Joseph M Herman
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Northwell Health Cancer Institute, New Hyde Park, New York
| | - Jeffrey J Meyer
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Atif Zaheer
- Department of Radiology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Amol K Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Hill CS, Rosati LM, Hu C, Fu W, Sehgal S, Hacker-Prietz A, Wolfgang CL, Weiss MJ, Burkhart RA, Hruban RH, De Jesus-Acosta A, Le DT, Zheng L, Laheru DA, He J, Narang AK, Herman JM. Neoadjuvant Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy After Upfront Chemotherapy Improves Pathologic Outcomes Compared With Chemotherapy Alone for Patients With Borderline Resectable or Locally Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Without Increasing Perioperative Toxicity. Ann Surg Oncol 2022; 29:2456-2468. [PMID: 35129721 PMCID: PMC8933354 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-021-11202-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/22/2021] [Accepted: 11/15/2021] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) or locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) are at high risk of margin-positive resection. Neoadjuvant stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) may help sterilize margins, but its additive benefit beyond neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) is unclear. The authors report long-term outcomes for BRPC/LAPC patients explored after treatment with either nCT alone or nCT followed by five-fraction SBRT (nCT-SBRT). METHODS Patients with BRPC or LAPC from 2011 to 2016 who underwent resection after nCT alone or nCT-SBRT were retrospectively reviewed. Baseline characteristics were compared, and the propensity score with inverse probability weighting (IPW) was used to compare pathologic/survival outcomes. RESULTS Of 198 patients, 76 received nCT, and 122 received nCT-SBRT. The nCT-SBRT cohort had a higher proportion of LAPC (53% vs 22%; p < 0.001). The duration of nCT was longer for nCT-SBRT (4.6 vs 2.9 months; p = 0.03), but adjuvant chemotherapy was less frequently administered (53% vs 67.1%; p < 0.001). Adjuvant radiation was administered to 30% of the nCT patients. The nCT-SBRT regimen more frequently achieved negative margins (92% vs 70%; p < 0.001), negative nodes (59% vs 42%; p < 0.001), and pathologic complete response (7% vs 0%; p = 0.02). In the multivariate analysis, nCT-SBRT remained associated with R0 resection (p < 0.001). The nCT-SBRT cohort experienced no significant difference in median overall survival (OS) (22.1 vs 24.5 months), local progression-free survival (LPFS) (13.5 vs. 15.4 months), or distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) (11.7 vs 16.3 months) after surgery. After SBRT, 1-year OS was 77.0% and 2-year OS was 50.4%. Perioperative Claven-Dindo grade 3 or greater morbidity did not differ significantly between the nCT and nCT-SBRT cohorts (p = 0.81). CONCLUSIONS Despite having more advanced disease, the nCT-SBRT cohort was still more likely to undergo an R0 resection and experienced similar survival outcomes compared with the nCT alone cohort.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Colin S Hill
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Lauren M Rosati
- University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, SC, USA
| | - Chen Hu
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Wei Fu
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Shuchi Sehgal
- Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Amy Hacker-Prietz
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Christopher L Wolfgang
- Department of Surgery, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA
| | - Matthew J Weiss
- Department of Surgery, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Lake Success, NY, USA
| | - Richard A Burkhart
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Ralph H Hruban
- Department of Pathology, the Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Ana De Jesus-Acosta
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Dung T Le
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Lei Zheng
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Daniel A Laheru
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Jin He
- Department of Surgery, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA
| | - Amol K Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA.
| | - Joseph M Herman
- Radiation Medicine, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Lake Success, NY, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Malik RF, Hasanain A, Lafaro KJ, He J, Narang AK, Fishman EK, Zaheer A. Structured CT reporting of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: impact on completeness of information and interdisciplinary communication for surgical planning. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2022; 47:704-714. [PMID: 34800162 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-021-03353-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/22/2021] [Revised: 11/12/2021] [Accepted: 11/15/2021] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE With the rise in popularity of structured reports in radiology, we sought to evaluate whether free-text CT reports on pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) staging at our institute met published guidelines and assess feedback of pancreatic surgeons comparing free-text and structured report styles with the same information content. METHODS We retrospectively evaluated 298 free-text preoperative CT reports from 2015 to 2017 for the inclusion of key tumor descriptors. Two surgeons independently evaluated 50 free-text reports followed by evaluation of the same reports in a structured format using a 7-question survey to assess the usefulness and ease of information extraction. Fisher's exact test and Chi-square test for independence were utilized for categorical responses and an independent samples t test for comparing mean ratings of report quality as rated on a 5-point Likert scale. RESULTS The most commonly included descriptors in free-text reports were tumor location (99%), liver lesions (97%), and suspicious lymph nodes (97%). The most commonly excluded descriptors were variant arterial anatomy and peritoneal/omental nodularity, which were present in only 23% and 42% of the reports, respectively. For vascular involvement, a mention of the presence or absence of perivascular disease with the main portal vein was most commonly included (87%). Both surgeons' rating of overall report quality was significantly higher for structured reports (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION Our results indicate that free-text reports may not include key descriptors for staging PDAC. Surgeons rated structured reports that presented the same information as free-text reports but in a template format superior for guiding clinical management, convenience of use, and overall report quality.
Collapse
|
17
|
Reddy AV, Hill CS, Sehgal S, He J, Zheng L, Herman JM, Meyer J, Narang AK. High neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio following stereotactic body radiation therapy is associated with poor clinical outcomes in patients with borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancer. J Gastrointest Oncol 2022; 13:368-379. [PMID: 35284125 PMCID: PMC8899739 DOI: 10.21037/jgo-21-513] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/20/2021] [Accepted: 11/24/2021] [Indexed: 10/21/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The purpose of this study is to report on the prognostic role of pre- and post-stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) in a cohort of patients with borderline resectable (BRPC) and locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) who was treated with multi-agent induction chemotherapy followed by five-fraction SBRT. METHODS Patients treated with multi-agent induction chemotherapy followed by SBRT from August 2016 to January 2019 and who had laboratory values available for review were included in the study. Univariate (UVA) and multivariate analyses (MVA) were performed to determine associations between pre-/post-SBRT NLR and overall survival (OS), local progression-free survival (LPFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS A total of 156 patients were treated with multi-agent induction chemotherapy followed by SBRT and had laboratory values available for review. On UVA, chemotherapy duration ≥4 months, poorly differentiated disease, inability to undergo resection, pre-SBRT ANC ≥3.7 No./µL, pre-SBRT NLR ≥2.3, and post-SBRT NLR ≥2.6 were associated with worse OS. Patients with post-SBRT NLR ≥2.6 had a median OS of 16.7 months versus median OS not yet reached in patients with post-SBRT <2.6 (P=0.009). On MVA, poorly differentiated disease [hazard ratio (HR) =1.82, 95% CI: 1.04-3.18, P=0.035], inability to undergo resection (HR =2.17, 95% CI: 1.25-3.70, P=0.006), and post-SBRT NLR ≥2.6 (HR =2.55, 95% CI: 1.20-5.45, P=0.015) were associated with inferior OS. On UVA, baseline CA 19-9 ≥219 U/mL, pre-SBRT platelet count ≥157×1,000/µL, and post-SBRT NLR ≥2.6 were associated with inferior LPFS. Patients with post-SBRT NLR ≥2.6 had a median LPFS of 18.3 months versus median LPFS not yet reached in patients with post-SBRT <2.6 (P=0.028). On MVA, only post-SBRT NLR ≥2.6 was associated with worse LPFS (HR =3.22, 95% CI: 1.04-9.98, P=0.043). CONCLUSIONS Post-SBRT NLR ≥2.6 predicted for inferior OS and LPFS in BRPC/LAPC patients treated with multi-agent chemotherapy and SBRT. These findings highlight the importance of further elucidating the immunologic effects of radiation therapy in this setting, which may have significant implications on both radiation design as well as combination strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Abhinav V. Reddy
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Colin S. Hill
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Shuchi Sehgal
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Jin He
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Lei Zheng
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Joseph M. Herman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Northwell Health, New Hyde Park, NY, USA
| | - Jeffrey Meyer
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Amol K. Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Reddy AV, Sehgal S, Hill CS, Zheng L, He J, Herman JM, Meyer J, Narang AK. Upfront Chemotherapy Followed by Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy with or without Surgery in Older Patients with Localized Pancreatic Cancer: A Single Institution Experience and Review of the Literature. Curr Oncol 2022; 29:308-320. [PMID: 35049702 PMCID: PMC8774377 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol29010028] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/23/2021] [Revised: 12/30/2021] [Accepted: 01/10/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To report on clinical outcomes and toxicity in older (age ≥ 70 years) patients with localized pancreatic cancer treated with upfront chemotherapy followed by stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) with or without surgery. METHODS Endpoints included overall survival (OS), local progression-free survival (LPFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), progression-free survival (PFS), and toxicity. RESULTS A total of 57 older patients were included in the study. Median OS was 19.6 months, with six-month, one-year, and two-year OS rates of 83.4, 66.5, and 42.4%. On MVA, resection status (HR: 0.30, 95% CI 0.12-0.91, p = 0.031) was associated with OS. Patients with surgically resected tumors had improved median OS (29.1 vs. 7.0 months, p < 0.001). On MVA, resection status (HR: 0.40, 95% CI 0.17-0.93, p = 0.034) was also associated with PFS. Patients with surgically resected tumors had improved median PFS (12.9 vs. 1.6 months, p < 0.001). There were 3/57 cases (5.3%) of late grade 3 radiation toxicity and 2/38 cases (5.3%) of Clavien-Dindo grade 3b toxicity in those who underwent resection. CONCLUSION Multimodality therapy involving SBRT is safe and feasible in older patients with localized pancreatic cancer. Surgical resection was associated with improved clinical outcomes. As such, older patients who complete chemotherapy should not be excluded from aggressive local therapy when possible.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Abhinav V. Reddy
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 401 N Broadway, Baltimore, MD 21231, USA; (S.S.); (C.S.H.); (J.M.); (A.K.N.)
| | - Shuchi Sehgal
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 401 N Broadway, Baltimore, MD 21231, USA; (S.S.); (C.S.H.); (J.M.); (A.K.N.)
| | - Colin S. Hill
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 401 N Broadway, Baltimore, MD 21231, USA; (S.S.); (C.S.H.); (J.M.); (A.K.N.)
| | - Lei Zheng
- Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 401 N Broadway, Baltimore, MD 21231, USA;
| | - Jin He
- Department of Surgery, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 401 N Broadway, Baltimore, MD 21231, USA;
| | - Joseph M. Herman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Northwell Health, 450 Lakeville Road, New Hyde Park, NY 11042, USA;
| | - Jeffrey Meyer
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 401 N Broadway, Baltimore, MD 21231, USA; (S.S.); (C.S.H.); (J.M.); (A.K.N.)
| | - Amol K. Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 401 N Broadway, Baltimore, MD 21231, USA; (S.S.); (C.S.H.); (J.M.); (A.K.N.)
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Reddy AV, Deek MP, Jackson JF, Hill CS, Sehgal S, He J, Zheng L, Herman JM, Meyer J, Narang AK. Vertebral body and splenic irradiation are associated with lymphopenia in localized pancreatic cancer treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy. Radiat Oncol 2021; 16:242. [PMID: 34952610 PMCID: PMC8709967 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-021-01969-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/25/2021] [Accepted: 12/15/2021] [Indexed: 01/10/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study was to determine if vertebral body and splenic dosimetry was associated with the development of lymphopenia in patients with borderline resectable (BRPC) and locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). METHODS Patients with BRPC/LAPC who were treated with SBRT and who had lymphocyte counts and radiation treatment plans available for review were included in the study. Vertebral body levels T11-L3 and the spleen were retrospectively contoured for each patient. Univariate (UVA) and multivariable analyses (MVA) were performed to identify associations between vertebral body and splenic dosimetric parameters with absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) and grade ≥ 2 lymphopenia. Receiver operator characteristic curves were generated to identify dose-volume thresholds in predicting grade ≥ 2 lymphopenia. RESULTS A total of 132 patients were included in the study. On UVA and MVA, vertebral V15 (regression coefficient [β]: - 0.026, 95% CI - 0.044 to - 0.009, p = 0.003), vertebral V2.5 (β: - 0.011, 95% CI - 0.020 to - 0.002, p = 0.015), and log10PTV (β: - 0.15, 95% CI - 0.30 to - 0.005, p = 0.042) were associated with post-SBRT ALC. On UVA and MVA, vertebral V15 (odds ratio [OR]: 3.98, 95% CI 1.09-14.51, p = 0.027), vertebral V2.5 (OR: 1.04, 95% CI 1.00-1.09, p = 0.032), and spleen V10 (OR: 1.05, 95% CI 1.09-1.95, p = 0.004) were associated with development of grade ≥ 2 lymphopenia. Development of grade ≥ 2 lymphopenia was more likely in patients with vertebral V15 ≥ 5.84% (65.5% vs 34.0%, p = 0.002), vertebral V2.5 ≥ 48.36% (48.9% vs 23.8%, p = 0.005), and spleen V10 ≥ 4.17% (56.2% vs 26.9%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Increasing radiation dose to vertebral bodies and spleen were associated with the development of lymphopenia in BRPC/LAPC treated with SBRT. Optimization of vertebral body and splenic dosimetry may reduce the risk of developing lymphopenia and improve clinical outcomes in this population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Abhinav V Reddy
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, 401 N Broadway, Baltimore, MD, 21231, USA.
| | - Matthew P Deek
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, 195 Little Albany Street, New Brunswick, NJ, 08901, USA
| | - Juan F Jackson
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, 401 N Broadway, Baltimore, MD, 21231, USA
| | - Colin S Hill
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, 401 N Broadway, Baltimore, MD, 21231, USA
| | - Shuchi Sehgal
- Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine, 4170 City Ave, Philadelphia, PA, 19131, USA
| | - Jin He
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, 401 N Broadway, Baltimore, MD, 21231, USA
| | - Lei Zheng
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, 401 N Broadway, Baltimore, MD, 21231, USA
| | - Joseph M Herman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Northwell Health, 450 Lakeville Road, New Hyde Park, NY, 11042, USA
| | - Jeffrey Meyer
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, 401 N Broadway, Baltimore, MD, 21231, USA
| | - Amol K Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, 401 N Broadway, Baltimore, MD, 21231, USA
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Reddy AV, Hill CS, Sehgal S, Ding D, Hacker-Prietz A, He J, Zheng L, Herman JM, Meyer J, Narang AK. Impact of somatic mutations on clinical and pathologic outcomes in borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and stereotactic body radiotherapy followed by surgical resection. Radiat Oncol J 2021; 39:304-314. [PMID: 34986552 PMCID: PMC8743453 DOI: 10.3857/roj.2021.00815] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/11/2021] [Revised: 10/08/2021] [Accepted: 10/14/2021] [Indexed: 01/05/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to determine if somatic mutations are associated with clinical and pathologic outcomes in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) or locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) who were treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). MATERIALS AND METHODS Patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and SBRT followed by surgical resection from August 2016 to January 2019 and who underwent next generation sequencing of their primary tumor were included in the study. Next-generation sequencing was performed either in-house with a Solid Tumor Panel or with FoundationOne CDx. Univariate (UVA) and multivariable analyses (MVA) were performed to determine associations between somatic mutations and pathologic and clinical outcomes. RESULTS Thirty-five patients were included in the study. Chemotherapy consisted of modified FOLFIRINOX, gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel, or gemcitabine and capecitabine. Patients were treated with SBRT in 33 Gy in 5 fractions. On UVA and MVA, tumors with KRAS G12V mutation demonstrated better pathologic tumor regression grade (TRG) to neoadjuvant therapy when compared to tumors with other KRAS mutations (odds ratio = 0.087; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.009-0.860; p = 0.036). On UVA and MVA, mutations in NOTCH1/2 were associated with worse overall survival (hazard ratio [HR] = 4.15; 95% CI, 1.57-10.95; p = 0.004) and progression-free survival (HR = 3.61; 95% CI, 1.41-9.28; p = 0.008). On UVA, only mutations in NOTCH1/2 were associated with inferior distant metastasis-free survival (HR = 3.38; 95% CI, 1.25-9.16; p = 0.017). CONCLUSION In BRPC and LAPC, the KRAS G12V mutation was associated with better TRG following chemotherapy and SBRT. Additionally, NOTCH1/2 mutations were associated with worse overall survival, distant metastasis-free survival, and progression-free survival.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Abhinav V. Reddy
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Colin S. Hill
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Shuchi Sehgal
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Ding Ding
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Amy Hacker-Prietz
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Jin He
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Lei Zheng
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Joseph M. Herman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Northwell Health Cancer Institute, New Hyde Park, NY, USA
| | - Jeffrey Meyer
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Amol K. Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Tempero MA, Malafa MP, Al-Hawary M, Behrman SW, Benson AB, Cardin DB, Chiorean EG, Chung V, Czito B, Del Chiaro M, Dillhoff M, Donahue TR, Dotan E, Ferrone CR, Fountzilas C, Hardacre J, Hawkins WG, Klute K, Ko AH, Kunstman JW, LoConte N, Lowy AM, Moravek C, Nakakura EK, Narang AK, Obando J, Polanco PM, Reddy S, Reyngold M, Scaife C, Shen J, Vollmer C, Wolff RA, Wolpin BM, Lynn B, George GV. Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma, Version 2.2021, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2021; 19:439-457. [PMID: 33845462 DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2021.0017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 448] [Impact Index Per Article: 149.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
Pancreatic cancer is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death among men and women in the United States. A major challenge in treatment remains patients' advanced disease at diagnosis. The NCCN Guidelines for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma provides recommendations for the diagnosis, evaluation, treatment, and follow-up for patients with pancreatic cancer. Although survival rates remain relatively unchanged, newer modalities of treatment, including targeted therapies, provide hope for improving patient outcomes. Sections of the manuscript have been updated to be concordant with the most recent update to the guidelines. This manuscript focuses on the available systemic therapy approaches, specifically the treatment options for locally advanced and metastatic disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | - Al B Benson
- 5Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Mary Dillhoff
- 11The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute
| | | | | | | | | | - Jeffrey Hardacre
- 16Case Comprehensive Cancer Center/University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute
| | - William G Hawkins
- 17Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine
| | | | - Andrew H Ko
- 1UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Amol K Narang
- 23The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Beth Lynn
- 32National Comprehensive Cancer Network
| | | |
Collapse
|
22
|
Hill CS, Han-Oh S, Cheng Z, Wang KKH, Meyer JJ, Herman JM, Narang AK. Fiducial-based image-guided SBRT for pancreatic adenocarcinoma: Does inter-and intra-fraction treatment variation warrant adaptive therapy? Radiat Oncol 2021; 16:53. [PMID: 33741015 PMCID: PMC7980583 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-021-01782-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/09/2020] [Accepted: 03/10/2021] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Variation in target positioning represents a challenge to set-up reproducibility and reliability of dose delivery with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC). While on-board imaging for fiducial matching allows for daily shifts to optimize target positioning, the magnitude of the shift as a result of inter- and intra-fraction variation may directly impact target coverage and dose to organs-at-risk. Herein, we characterize the variation patterns for PDAC patients treated at a high-volume institution with SBRT. Methods We reviewed 30 consecutive patients who received SBRT using active breathing coordination (ABC). Patients were aligned to bone and then subsequently shifted to fiducials. Inter-fraction and intra-fraction scans were reviewed to quantify the mean and maximum shift along each axis, and the shift magnitude. A linear regression model was conducted to investigate the relationship between the inter- and intra-fraction shifts. Results The mean inter-fraction shift in the LR, AP, and SI axes was 3.1 ± 1.8 mm, 2.9 ± 1.7 mm, and 3.5 ± 2.2 mm, respectively, and the mean vector shift was 6.4 ± 2.3 mm. The mean intra-fraction shift in the LR, AP, and SI directions were 2.0 ± 0.9 mm, 2.0 ± 1.3 mm, and 2.3 ± 1.4 mm, respectively, and the mean vector shift was 4.3 ± 1.8 mm. A linear regression model showed a significant relationship between the inter- and intra-fraction shift in the AP and SI axis and the shift magnitude. Conclusions Clinically significant inter- and intra-fraction variation occurs during treatment of PDAC with SBRT even with a comprehensive motion management strategy that utilizes ABC. Future studies to investigate how these variations could lead to variation in the dose to the target and OAR should be investigated. Strategies to mitigate the dosimetric impact, including real time imaging and adaptive therapy, in select cases should be considered. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13014-021-01782-w.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Colin S Hill
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 401 N. Broadway, Suite 1440, Baltimore, MD, 21231, USA.
| | - Sarah Han-Oh
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 401 N. Broadway, Suite 1440, Baltimore, MD, 21231, USA
| | - Zhi Cheng
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 401 N. Broadway, Suite 1440, Baltimore, MD, 21231, USA
| | - Ken Kang-Hsin Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 401 N. Broadway, Suite 1440, Baltimore, MD, 21231, USA
| | - Jeffrey J Meyer
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 401 N. Broadway, Suite 1440, Baltimore, MD, 21231, USA
| | - Joseph M Herman
- Radiation Medicine, Zucker School of Medicine At Hofstra/Northwell, Lake Success, USA
| | - Amol K Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 401 N. Broadway, Suite 1440, Baltimore, MD, 21231, USA
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Friedes C, Hazell SZ, Fu W, Hu C, Voong RK, Lee B, Feliciano JL, Nicholas LH, McNutt TR, Han P, Narang AK, Hales RK. Longitudinal Trends of Financial Toxicity in Patients With Lung Cancer: A Prospective Cohort Study. JCO Oncol Pract 2021; 17:e1094-e1109. [PMID: 33555936 DOI: 10.1200/op.20.00721] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cancer therapy is associated with severe financial burden. However, the magnitude and longitudinal patient relationship with financial toxicity (FT) in the initial course of therapy is unclear. METHODS Patients with stage II-IV lung cancer were recruited in a prospective longitudinal study between July 2018 and March 2020. FT was measured via the validated COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST) at the time of cancer diagnosis and at 6-month follow-up (6MFU). 6MFU data were compared with corresponding baseline data. A lower COST score indicates increased financial hardship. RESULTS At the time of analysis, 215 agreed to participate. Subsequently, 112 patients completed 6MFU. On average, slightly more FT was observed at diagnosis compared with 6MFU (median COSTbase 25 v COST6M 27; P < .001); however, individual patients experienced large changes in FT. At 6MFU, 27.7% of patients had made financial sacrifices to pay for treatment but only 4.5% refused medical care based on cost. Median reported out-of-pocket (OOP) costs for the initial 6 months of cancer treatment was $2,496 (range, $0-25,900). Risk factors for FT at diagnosis were unique from risk factors at 6MFU. Actual OOP expenses were not correlated with FT; however, inability to predict upcoming treatment expenses resulted in higher FT at 6MFU. DISCUSSION FT is a pervasive challenge during the initiation of lung cancer treatment. Few patients are willing to sacrifice medical care regardless of the cost. Risk factors for FT evolve, resulting in unique interventional targets throughout therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cole Friedes
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | - Sarah Z Hazell
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | - Wei Fu
- Division of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | - Chen Hu
- Division of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | - Ranh K Voong
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | - Beverly Lee
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | | | | | - Todd R McNutt
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | - Peijin Han
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | - Amol K Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | - Russell K Hales
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Tempero MA, Malafa MP, Chiorean EG, Czito B, Scaife C, Narang AK, Fountzilas C, Wolpin BM, Al-Hawary M, Asbun H, Behrman SW, Benson AB, Binder E, Cardin DB, Cha C, Chung V, Dillhoff M, Dotan E, Ferrone CR, Fisher G, Hardacre J, Hawkins WG, Ko AH, LoConte N, Lowy AM, Moravek C, Nakakura EK, O'Reilly EM, Obando J, Reddy S, Thayer S, Wolff RA, Burns JL, Zuccarino-Catania G. Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma, Version 1.2019. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2020; 17:202-210. [PMID: 30865919 DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2019.0014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 241] [Impact Index Per Article: 60.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
The NCCN Guidelines for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma discuss the diagnosis and management of adenocarcinomas of the exocrine pancreas and are intended to assist with clinical decision-making. These NCCN Guidelines Insights discuss important updates to the 2019 version of the guidelines, focusing on postoperative adjuvant treatment of patients with pancreatic cancers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | - Amol K Narang
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins
| | | | | | | | | | - Stephen W Behrman
- St. Jude Children's Research Hospital/The University of Tennessee Health Science Center
| | - Al B Benson
- Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University
| | - Ellen Binder
- Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine
| | | | | | | | - Mary Dillhoff
- The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute
| | | | | | | | - Jeffrey Hardacre
- Case Comprehensive Cancer Center/University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute
| | - William G Hawkins
- Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine
| | - Andrew H Ko
- UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Sushanth Reddy
- University of Alabama at Birmingham Comprehensive Cancer Center
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
25
|
Kerdsirichairat T, Narang AK, Thompson E, Kim SH, Rao A, Ding K, Shin EJ. Feasibility of Using Hydrogel Spacers for Borderline-Resectable and Locally Advanced Pancreatic Tumors. Gastroenterology 2019; 157:933-935. [PMID: 31306631 PMCID: PMC7263852 DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.07.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/30/2019] [Revised: 06/24/2019] [Accepted: 07/01/2019] [Indexed: 01/11/2023]
Abstract
This article has an accompanying continuing medical education activity, also eligible for MOC credit, on page e14 (https://www.gastrojournal.org/cme/home). Learning Objective: Upon completion of this CME activity, successful learners will be able to describe the pharmacokinetics of hydrogel, identify appropriate candidates for hydrogel injection among patients with pancreatic cancer, and describe key techniques to successfully inject hydrogel as well as the histopathologic findings associated with hydrogel.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tossapol Kerdsirichairat
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Amol K. Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Sciences, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Elizabeth Thompson
- Department of Pathology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Seong-Hun Kim
- Department of Internal Medicine, Chonbuk National University Medical School & Hospital, Jeonju, South Korea
| | - Avani Rao
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Sciences, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Kai Ding
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Sciences, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Eun Ji Shin
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland.
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Chen SY, Stem M, Gearhart SL, Safar B, Fang SH, Azad NS, Murphy AG, Narang AK, Wolfgang CL, Efron JE. Readmission Adversely Affects Survival in Surgical Rectal Cancer Patients. World J Surg 2019; 43:2506-2517. [PMID: 31222644 DOI: 10.1007/s00268-019-05053-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Readmission has received attention as a potential healthcare quality metric. No studies have investigated the relationship between readmission and survival in patients undergoing rectal cancer surgery. The aims of this study were to identify factors associated with 30-day readmission after rectal cancer surgery and to determine the impact of readmission on overall survival (OS). METHODS Patients who underwent surgical treatment for rectal/rectosigmoid adenocarcinoma stages I-IV were identified using the National Cancer Database (2004-2014). Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors for readmission. 2:1 nearest neighbor caliper matching without replacement was used to ensure similarity of patients being compared. Survival analyses were performed using Kaplan-Meier method along with log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS Of 110,167 patients, 7045 (6.39%) were readmitted. Factors associated with readmission included higher Charlson comorbidity score, non-private or no insurance, procedure type, hospitals in the Northeast, South, and Midwest regions, and prolonged length of stay. Within the matched cohort (13,756 non-readmitted and 6878 readmitted), readmitted patients had worse 5- and 10-year OS regardless of cancer stage (p < 0.001) and procedure type. Five- and 10-year OS were 58.98% and 41.01% for readmitted patients, 64.96% and 43.50% for non-readmitted patients. Readmitted patients had shorter OS by 13.14 months and increased risk of mortality (HR 1.20, 95% CI 1.15-1.25, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Thirty-day readmission after rectal cancer surgery is associated with decreased OS. Efforts to reduce readmissions should be considered to advance cancer care and enhance the potential for improved patient survival.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sophia Y Chen
- Department of Surgery, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Miloslawa Stem
- Department of Surgery, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Susan L Gearhart
- Department of Surgery, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Bashar Safar
- Department of Surgery, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Sandy H Fang
- Department of Surgery, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Nilofer S Azad
- Department of Oncology, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Adrian G Murphy
- Department of Oncology, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Amol K Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Sciences, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Christopher L Wolfgang
- Department of Surgery, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Jonathan E Efron
- Department of Surgery, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
- Mark M. Ravitch Professor of Surgery, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 733 North Broadway, Suite G-45, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Singh J, Gani F, Shankar N, Canner JK, Overton HN, Blair AB, Lerner L, Narang AK, Johnston FM, Ahuja N. High-Dose Rate Brachytherapy Increases Disease-Free Survival for Retroperitoneal Sarcomas. J Am Coll Surg 2018. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2018.07.629] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/28/2022]
|
28
|
Cheng Z, Rosati LM, Chen L, Mian OY, Cao Y, Villafania M, Nakatsugawa M, Moore JA, Robertson SP, Jackson J, Hacker-Prietz A, He J, Wolfgang CL, Weiss MJ, Herman JM, Narang AK, McNutt TR. Improving prediction of surgical resectability over current staging guidelines in patients with pancreatic cancer who receive stereotactic body radiation therapy. Adv Radiat Oncol 2018; 3:601-610. [PMID: 30370361 PMCID: PMC6200892 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2018.07.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/17/2017] [Revised: 05/10/2018] [Accepted: 07/09/2018] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose For patients with localized pancreatic cancer (PC) with vascular involvement, prediction of resectability is critical to define optimal treatment. However, the current definitions of borderline resectable (BR) and locally advanced (LA) disease leave considerable heterogeneity in outcomes within these classifications. Moreover, factors beyond vascular involvement likely affect the ability to undergo resection. Herein, we share our experience developing a model that incorporates detailed radiologic, patient, and treatment factors to predict surgical resectability in patients with BR and LA PC who undergo stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). Methods and materials Patients with BR or LA PC who were treated with SBRT between 2010 and 2016 were included. The primary endpoint was margin negative resection, and predictors included age, sex, race, treatment year, performance status, initial staging, tumor volume and location, baseline and pre-SBRT carbohydrate antigen 19-9 levels, chemotherapy regimen and duration, and radiation dose. In addition, we characterized the relationship between tumors and key arteries (superior mesenteric, celiac, and common hepatic arteries), using overlap volume histograms derived from computed tomography data. A classification and regression tree was built, and leave-one-out cross-validation was performed. Prediction of surgical resection was compared between our model and staging in accordance with the National Comprehensive Care Network guidelines using McNemar's test. Results A total of 191 patients were identified (128 patients with LA and 63 with BR), of which 87 patients (46%) underwent margin negative resection. The median total dose was 33 Gy. Predictors included the chemotherapy regimen, amount of arterial involvement, and age. Importantly, radiation dose that covers 95% of gross tumor volume (GTV D95), was a key predictor of resectability in certain subpopulations, and the model showed improved accuracy in the prediction of margin negative resection compared with National Comprehensive Care Network guideline staging (75% vs 63%; P < .05). Conclusions We demonstrate the ability to improve prediction of surgical resectabiliy beyond the current staging guidelines, which highlights the value of assessing vascular involvement in a continuous manner. In addition, we show an association between radiation dose and resectability, which suggests the potential importance of radiation to allow for resection in certain populations. External data are needed for validation and to increase the robustness of the model.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zhi Cheng
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
- Corresponding author. Johns Hopkins University, Radiation Oncology, 401 North Broadway, Suite B163, Baltimore, MD 21231
| | - Lauren M. Rosati
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Linda Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Omar Y. Mian
- Translational Hematology and Oncology Research Department, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Yilin Cao
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | | | | | - Joseph A. Moore
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Scott P. Robertson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, York Medical Center, York, Pennsylvania
| | - Juan Jackson
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Amy Hacker-Prietz
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Jin He
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | | | - Matthew J. Weiss
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Joseph M. Herman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Amol K. Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Todd R. McNutt
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
|
30
|
Hayman J, Phillips R, Chen D, Perin J, Narang AK, Trieu J, Radwan N, Greco S, Deville C, McNutt T, Song DY, DeWeese TL, Tran PT. Detectable end of radiation prostate specific antigen assists in identifying men with unfavorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer at high risk of distant recurrence and cancer-specific mortality. Prostate 2018; 78:623-630. [PMID: 29520847 DOI: 10.1002/pros.23507] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/18/2017] [Accepted: 02/20/2018] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Undetectable End of Radiation PSA (EOR-PSA) has been shown to predict improved survival in prostate cancer (PCa). While validating the unfavorable intermediate-risk (UIR) and favorable intermediate-risk (FIR) stratifications among Johns Hopkins PCa patients treated with radiotherapy, we examined whether EOR-PSA could further risk stratify UIR men for survival. METHODS A total of 302 IR patients were identified in the Johns Hopkins PCa database (178 UIR, 124 FIR). Kaplan-Meier curves and multivariable analysis was performed via Cox regression for biochemical recurrence free survival (bRFS), distant metastasis free survival (DMFS), and overall survival (OS), while a competing risks model was used for PCa specific survival (PCSS). Among the 235 patients with known EOR-PSA values, we then stratified by EOR-PSA and performed the aforementioned analysis. RESULTS The median follow-up time was 11.5 years (138 months). UIR was predictive of worse DMFS and PCSS (P = 0.008 and P = 0.023) on multivariable analysis (MVA). Increased radiation dose was significant for improved DMFS (P = 0.016) on MVA. EOR-PSA was excluded from the models because it did not trend towards significance as a continuous or binary variable due to interaction with UIR, and we were unable to converge a multivariable model with a variable to control for this interaction. However, when stratifying by detectable versus undetectable EOR-PSA, UIR had worse DMFS and PCSS among detectable EOR-PSA patients, but not undetectable patients. UIR was significant on MVA among detectable EOR-PSA patients for DMFS (P = 0.021) and PCSS (P = 0.033), while RT dose also predicted PCSS (P = 0.013). CONCLUSIONS EOR-PSA can assist in predicting DMFS and PCSS among UIR patients, suggesting a clinically meaningful time point for considering intensification of treatment in clinical trials of intermediate-risk men.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jonathan Hayman
- Department of Internal Medicine, Johns Hopkins Bayview Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Ryan Phillips
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Di Chen
- Department of Pediatrics, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Jamie Perin
- Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Amol K Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Janson Trieu
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Noura Radwan
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Stephen Greco
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Curtiland Deville
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Todd McNutt
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Daniel Y Song
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland
- Departments of Oncology and Urology, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Theodore L DeWeese
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland
- Departments of Oncology and Urology, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Phuoc T Tran
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland
- Departments of Oncology and Urology, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Rao AD, Liu Y, von Eyben R, Hsu CC, Hu C, Rosati LM, Parekh A, Ng K, Hacker-Prietz A, Zheng L, Pawlik TM, Laheru DA, Jaffee EM, Weiss MJ, Le DT, Hruban RH, De Jesus-Acosta A, Wolfgang CL, Narang AK, Chang DT, Koong AC, Herman JM. Multiplex Proximity Ligation Assay to Identify Potential Prognostic Biomarkers for Improved Survival in Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Patients Treated With Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2018; 100:486-489. [PMID: 29157747 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.10.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/22/2017] [Revised: 09/28/2017] [Accepted: 10/02/2017] [Indexed: 01/05/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE To explore seromarker levels for associations with outcomes in locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) patients who received chemotherapy and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). METHODS AND MATERIALS Serum from LAPC patients in 2 prospective trials of hypofractionated SBRT (5-6.6 Gy × 5) was collected before SBRT. Proximity ligation assay quantified the expression levels of 36 pancreatic cancer-specific candidate seromarkers: Axl, BMP2, CA 125, CA 19-9, CEA, CXCL-1/6/9/10, EGFR, Gas6, Her2, IGF-2, IGFBP-2/3/7, IL-6/6Ra/7/8/12, mesothelin, MMP-1/2/3/7, osteopontin, PDGFRa, PDK1, PF4, RegIV, SPARC, TGF-β, VEGF-A/D, and YKL40. Seromarker values were log transformed owing to log-normal distribution of the values, and Cox regression analysis was performed to assess for any association with overall survival. The Benjamini-Hochberg method was used to control for a false discovery rate (FDR) of only 10%. RESULTS Sixty-four patients with LAPC were included. No clinical factors (including surgical resection, receipt of pre-SBRT chemotherapy, receipt of post-SBRT chemotherapy, performance status, and age) or potential biomarkers in the panel were associated with improved survival in this cohort after application of the FDR correction. Potential prognostic factors for improved survival for future investigation included surgical resection (P=.007, adjusted P=.153) and the serum expression of IL-8 (P=.006, adjusted P=.153), CA 19-9 (P=.031, adjusted P=.377), and MMP-1 (P=.036, adjusted P=.377). CONCLUSIONS These data explore the expression of a panel of proteins in pre-SBRT serum of LAPC patients in the context of a conservative FDR correction. None of the clinical factors or expression levels of the serum proteins were found to be associated with survival; however, IL-8, CA 19-9, and MMP-1 were highlighted as possible candidates warranting inclusion in future seromarker studies in the ongoing efforts to identify tools for risk stratification and treatment allocation in LAPC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Avani D Rao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
| | - Yufei Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California
| | - Rie von Eyben
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California
| | - Charles C Hsu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, Arizona
| | - Chen Hu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Lauren M Rosati
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Arti Parekh
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Kendall Ng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California
| | - Amy Hacker-Prietz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Lei Zheng
- Division of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Timothy M Pawlik
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Daniel A Laheru
- Division of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Elizabeth M Jaffee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland; Division of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Matthew J Weiss
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland; Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Dung T Le
- Division of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Ralph H Hruban
- Department of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Ana De Jesus-Acosta
- Division of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | | | - Amol K Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Daniel T Chang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California
| | - Albert C Koong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California
| | - Joseph M Herman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Kim BH, Kwon J, Chie EK, Kim K, Kim YH, Seo DW, Narang AK, Herman JM. Adjuvant Chemoradiotherapy is Associated with Improved Survival for Patients with Resected Gallbladder Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 2017; 25:255-264. [PMID: 29079926 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-017-6139-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/20/2017] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The impact of adjuvant radiotherapy (ART) on survival from gallbladder carcinoma (GBC) remains underexplored, with conflicting results reported. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to clarify the impact of ART in GBC. METHODS A systematic literature search of several databases was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, from inception to August 2016. Studies that reported survival outcomes for patients with or without ART after curative surgery were included. RESULTS All the inclusion criteria was met by 14 retrospective studies including 9364 analyzable patients, but most of the studies had a moderate risk of bias. Generally, the ART group had more patients with unfavorable characteristics than the group that had surgery alone. Nevertheless, the pooled results showed that ART significantly reduced the risk of death (hazard ratio [HR], 0.54; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.44-0.67; p < 0.001) and recurrence (HR 0.61; 95% CI 0.38-0.98; p = 0.04) of GBC compared with surgery alone. Exploratory analyses demonstrated a survival benefit from ART for a subgroup of patients with lymph node-positive diseases (HR 0.61; p < 0.001) and R1 resections (HR 0.55; p < 0.001), but not for patients with lymph node-negative disease (HR 1.06; p = 0.78). No evidence of publication bias was found (p = 0.663). CONCLUSIONS This study is the first meta-analysis to evaluate the role of ART and to provide supporting evidence that ART may offer survival benefits, especially for high-risk patients. However, further confirmation with a randomized prospective study is needed to clarify the subgroup of GBC patients who would benefit most from ART.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Byoung Hyuck Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Jeanny Kwon
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Chungnam National University College of Medicine, Daejeon, Korea
| | - Eui Kyu Chie
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. .,Institute of Radiation Medicine, Medical Research Center, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.
| | - Kyubo Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ewha Womans University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
| | - Young Hoon Kim
- Department of General Surgery, Dong-A University College of Medicine, Busan, Korea
| | - Dong Wan Seo
- Department of Gastroenterology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan Medical College, Seoul, Korea
| | - Amol K Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Joseph M Herman
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Ryan JF, Groot VP, Rosati LM, Hacker-Prietz A, Narang AK, McNutt TR, Jackson JF, Le DT, Jaffee EM, Zheng L, Laheru DA, He J, Pawlik TM, Weiss MJ, Wolfgang CL, Herman JM. Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Isolated Local Recurrence After Surgical Resection of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Appears to be Safe and Effective. Ann Surg Oncol 2017; 25:280-289. [PMID: 29063299 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-017-6134-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/26/2017] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND A standardized treatment regimen for unresectable isolated local recurrence (ILR) of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma has not been established. This study evaluated the outcomes for patients with ILR who underwent stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). METHODS The records of patients with ILR who underwent SBRT between 2010 and 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Symptom palliation and treatment-related toxicity were recorded. Associations between patient or treatment characteristics and overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and local progression-free survival (LPFS) were assessed. RESULTS The study identified 51 patients who received SBRT for ILR. Of the 51 patients, 26 (51%) had not received radiation therapy before SBRT. The median OS was 36 months after diagnosis. From the first day of SBRT, the median OS, PFS, and LPFS were respectively 16, 7, and 10 months. Patients with a recurrence-free interval of 9 months or longer after surgery had superior OS (P = 0.019). Maintenance chemotherapy after SBRT was associated with superior OS (P < 0.001) and LPFS (P = 0.027). In the multivariable analysis, poorly differentiated tumor grade [hazard ratio (HR) 11.274], positive surgical margins (HR 0.126), and reception of maintenance chemotherapy (HR 0.141) were independently associated with OS. Positive surgical margins (HR 0.255) and maintenance chemotherapy (HR 0.299) were associated with improved LPFS. Of 16 patients, 10 (63%) experienced abdominal pain relief after SBRT. Four patients (8%) experienced grade 3 gastrointestinal toxicity, and one patient experienced grade 4 gastrointestinal toxicity. CONCLUSIONS Use of SBRT for ILR improved pain for a majority of the patients with acceptable acute and late toxicity. The findings show that SBRT is a feasible treatment for select patients with ILR. For those who receive SBRT, maintenance chemotherapy should be considered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- John F Ryan
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Vincent P Groot
- Department of Surgery, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Lauren M Rosati
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Amy Hacker-Prietz
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Amol K Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Todd R McNutt
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Juan F Jackson
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Dung T Le
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Elizabeth M Jaffee
- Department of Oncology, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Lei Zheng
- Department of Oncology, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Daniel A Laheru
- Department of Oncology, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Jin He
- Department of Surgery, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Timothy M Pawlik
- Department of Surgery, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Matthew J Weiss
- Department of Surgery, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Christopher L Wolfgang
- Department of Surgery, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Joseph M Herman
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. .,Director of Clinical Research, Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd. Unit 1422, Houston, TX, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Abstract
Importance Medicare beneficiaries with cancer are at risk for financial hardship given increasingly expensive cancer care and significant cost sharing by beneficiaries. Objectives To measure out-of-pocket (OOP) costs incurred by Medicare beneficiaries with cancer and identify which factors and services contribute to high OOP costs. Design, Setting, and Participants We prospectively collected survey data from 18 166 community-dwelling Medicare beneficiaries, including 1409 individuals who were diagnosed with cancer during the study period, who participated in the January 1, 2002, to December 31, 2012, waves of the Health and Retirement Study, a nationally representative panel study of US residents older than 50 years. Data analysis was performed from July 1, 2014, to June 30, 2015. Main Outcomes and Measures Out-of-pocket medical spending and financial burden (OOP expenditures divided by total household income). Results Among the 1409 participants (median age, 73 years [interquartile range, 69-79 years]; 46.4% female and 53.6% male) diagnosed with cancer during the study period, the type of supplementary insurance was significantly associated with mean annual OOP costs incurred after a cancer diagnosis ($2116 among those insured by Medicaid, $2367 among those insured by the Veterans Health Administration, $5976 among those insured by a Medicare health maintenance organization, $5492 among those with employer-sponsored insurance, $5670 among those with Medigap insurance coverage, and $8115 among those insured by traditional fee-for-service Medicare but without supplemental insurance coverage). A new diagnosis of cancer or common chronic noncancer condition was associated with increased odds of incurring costs in the highest decile of OOP expenditures (cancer: adjusted odds ratio, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.55-2.23; P < .001; chronic noncancer condition: adjusted odds ratio, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.69-1.97; P < .001). Beneficiaries with a new cancer diagnosis and Medicare alone incurred OOP expenditures that were a mean of 23.7% of their household income; 10% of these beneficiaries incurred OOP expenditures that were 63.1% of their household income. Among the 10% of beneficiaries with cancer who incurred the highest OOP costs, hospitalization contributed to 41.6% of total OOP costs. Conclusions and Relevance Medicare beneficiaries without supplemental insurance incur significant OOP costs following a diagnosis of cancer. Costs associated with hospitalization may be a primary contributor to these high OOP costs. Medicare reform proposals that restructure the benefit design for hospital-based services and incorporate an OOP maximum may help alleviate financial burden, as can interventions that reduce hospitalization in this population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amol K Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Lauren Hersch Nicholas
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland3Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland4Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Shen CJ, Hu C, Ladra MM, Narang AK, Pollack CE, Terezakis SA. Socioeconomic factors affect the selection of proton radiation therapy for children. Cancer 2017; 123:4048-4056. [DOI: 10.1002/cncr.30849] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/07/2017] [Accepted: 05/19/2017] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Colette J. Shen
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences; Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine; Baltimore Maryland
| | - Chen Hu
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences; Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine; Baltimore Maryland
- Division of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics; Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine; Baltimore Maryland
| | - Matthew M. Ladra
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences; Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine; Baltimore Maryland
| | - Amol K. Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences; Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine; Baltimore Maryland
| | - Craig E. Pollack
- Department of Medicine; Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine; Baltimore Maryland
| | - Stephanie A. Terezakis
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences; Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine; Baltimore Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Rosati LM, Kummerlowe MN, Poling J, Hacker-Prietz A, Narang AK, Shin EJ, Le DT, Fishman EK, Hruban RH, Yang SC, Weiss MJ, Herman JM. A rare case of esophageal metastasis from pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a case report and literature review. Oncotarget 2017; 8:100942-100950. [PMID: 29246032 PMCID: PMC5725074 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.18458] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/28/2017] [Accepted: 05/20/2017] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose We report a very unique case of an esophageal metastasis from a pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) primary. Methods After obtaining consent from the patient, all relevant records of the case were obtained and retrospectively reviewed. Results At presentation, the patient was diagnosed with synchronous pancreatic and esophageal cancer. He received six months of neoadjuvant therapy including FOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) to the pancreatic tumor followed by a combined pancreaticoduodenectomy and Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. Review of the final esophageal specimen revealed normal overlying squamous mucosa with an underlying focus of metastatic PDAC. The patient remains alive with no evidence of disease 17 months from surgery and 25 months from diagnosis. Conclusions Differentiating an esophageal metastasis from a PDAC primary versus a synchronous esophageal carcinoma is very difficult despite state-of-the-art diagnostic techniques performed at a high-volume tertiary cancer center. Extensive evaluation and continued follow-up of PDAC patients presenting with a synchronous esophageal lesion in a multidisciplinary setting may help ensure efficient and accurate management. In our case, neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX and SBRT to the primary PDAC tumor followed by surgery has been an effective approach for this patient.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lauren M Rosati
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, The Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Megan N Kummerlowe
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, The Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Justin Poling
- Department of Pathology, The Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Amy Hacker-Prietz
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, The Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Amol K Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, The Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Eun J Shin
- Department of Gastroenterology, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Dung T Le
- Department of Oncology, The Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Elliot K Fishman
- Department of Radiology, The Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Ralph H Hruban
- Department of Pathology, The Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Stephen C Yang
- Department of Surgery, The Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Matthew J Weiss
- Department of Surgery, The Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Joseph M Herman
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, The Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.,Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Rosati LM, Torto D, Hacker-Prietz A, Narang AK, Fishman EK, Hruban RH, Klein AP, Jaffee EM, Weiss MJ, Wolfgang CL, Laheru DA, Herman JM. (P028) Patient Retention After Initial Consultation Results in Extended Survival in Pancreatic Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2017. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.02.123] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
|
38
|
Narang AK, Trieu J, Radwan N, Ram A, Robertson SP, He P, Gergis C, Griffith E, Singh H, DeWeese TA, Honig S, Annadanam A, Greco S, DeVille C, McNutt T, DeWeese TL, Song DY, Tran PT. End-of-radiation PSA as a novel prognostic factor in patients undergoing definitive radiation and androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2017; 20:203-209. [PMID: 28094250 PMCID: PMC5429233 DOI: 10.1038/pcan.2016.67] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/31/2016] [Revised: 10/09/2016] [Accepted: 10/07/2016] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
Background In men undergoing definitive radiation for prostate cancer, it is unclear whether early biochemical response can provide additional prognostic value beyond pre-treatment risk stratification. Methods Prostate cancer patients consecutively treated with definitive radiation at our institution by a single provider from 1993–2006 and who had an EOR PSA (n=688, median follow-up 11.2 years). We analyzed the association of an end-of-radiation (EOR) prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, obtained during the last week of radiation, with survival outcomes. Multivariable-adjusted cox proportional hazards models were constructed to assess associations between a detectable EOR PSA (defined as ≥0.1 ng ml−1) and biochemical failure-free survival (BFFS), metastasis-free survival (MFS), prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS), and overall survival (OS). Kaplan-Meier survival curves were constructed, with stratification by EOR PSA. Results At the end of radiation, the PSA level was undetectable in 30% of patients. Men with a detectable EOR PSA experienced inferior 10-year BFFS (49.7% vs. 64.4%, p<0.001), 10-year MFS (84.8% vs. 92.0%, p=0.003), 10-year PCSS (94.3% vs. 98.2%, p=0.007), and 10-year OS (75.8% vs. 82.5%, p=0.01), as compared to men with an undetectable EOR PSA. Among NCCN intermediate- and high-risk men who were treated with definitive radiation and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), a detectable EOR PSA was more strongly associated with PCSS than initial NCCN risk level (EOR PSA: HR 5.89, 95% CI 2.37–14.65, p<0.001; NCCN risk level: HR 2.01, 95% CI 0.74–5.42, p=0.168). Main study limitations are retrospective study design and associated biases. Conclusions EOR PSA was significantly associated with survival endpoints in men who received treated with definitive radiation and ADT. Whether the EOR PSA can be used to modulate treatment intensity merits further investigation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A K Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - J Trieu
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - N Radwan
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - A Ram
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - S P Robertson
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - P He
- Department of Biostatistics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - C Gergis
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - E Griffith
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - H Singh
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - T A DeWeese
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - S Honig
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - A Annadanam
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - S Greco
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - C DeVille
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - T McNutt
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - T L DeWeese
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.,Departments of Oncology and Urology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - D Y Song
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.,Departments of Oncology and Urology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - P T Tran
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.,Departments of Oncology and Urology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Narang AK, Chaichana KL, Weingart JD, Redmond KJ, Lim M, Olivi A, Quinones-Hinojosa A, Kleinberg LR. Progressive Low-Grade Glioma: Assessment of Prognostic Importance of Histologic Reassessment and MRI Findings. World Neurosurg 2016; 99:751-757. [PMID: 27108796 DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2016.04.030] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/18/2015] [Revised: 04/07/2016] [Accepted: 04/08/2016] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND In patients with progressive low-grade glioma (LGG), the presence of new magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) enhancement is commonly used as an indicator of malignant degeneration, but its accuracy in this setting is uncertain. OBJECTIVE We characterize the ability of new MRI enhancement to serve as a surrogate for histologic grade in patients with progressive LGG, and to explore the prognostic value of new MRI enhancement, pathologic grade, and extent of resection. METHODS Patients at our institution with World Health Organization grade II glioma diagnosed between 1994 and 2010 and who underwent repeat biopsy or resection at progression were retrospectively reviewed (n = 108). The positive predictive value, negative predictive value, sensitivity, and specificity of new MRI enhancement were characterized. A multivariable proportional hazards model was used to test associations with overall survival (OS), and Kaplan-Meier curves were constructed to compare OS between patient subsets. RESULTS The positive predictive value, negative predictive value, sensitivity, and specificity of new MRI enhancement were 82%, 77%, 92%, and 57%, respectively. In patients without malignant degeneration, new MRI enhancement was associated with inferior median OS (92.5 months vs. not reached; P = 0.03). In patients with malignant degeneration, gross or near total resection was associated with improved median OS (58.8 vs. 28.8 months; P = 0.02). CONCLUSION In patients with progressive LGG, new MRI enhancement and pathologic grade were discordant in greater than 20% of cases. Pathologic confirmation of grade should therefore be attempted, when safe, to dictate management. Beyond functioning as a surrogate for pathologic grade, new MRI enhancement may predict for worse outcomes, a concept that merits prospective investigation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amol K Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Kaisorn L Chaichana
- Department of Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Jon D Weingart
- Department of Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Kristin J Redmond
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Michael Lim
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA; Department of Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Alessandro Olivi
- Department of Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Alfred Quinones-Hinojosa
- Department of Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Lawrence R Kleinberg
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Narang AK, Wright AA, Nicholas LH. Trends in Advance Care Planning in Patients With Cancer: Results From a National Longitudinal Survey. JAMA Oncol 2016; 1:601-8. [PMID: 26181909 DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.1976] [Citation(s) in RCA: 93] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/10/2023]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Advance care planning (ACP) may prevent end-of-life (EOL) care that is nonbeneficial and discordant with patient wishes. Despite long-standing recognition of the merits of ACP in oncology, it is unclear whether participation in ACP by patients with cancer has increased over time. OBJECTIVES To characterize trends in durable power of attorney (DPOA) assignment, living will creation, and participation in discussions of EOL care preferences and to explore associations between ACP subtypes and EOL treatment intensity as reflected in EOL care decisions and terminal hospitalizations. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS We analyzed prospectively collected survey data from 1985 next-of-kin surrogates of Health and Retirement Study (HRS) participants with cancer who died between 2000 and 2012, including data from in-depth "exit" interviews conducted with the surrogates after the participant's death. The HRS is a nationally representative, biennial, longitudinal panel study of US residents older than 50 years. Trends in ACP subtypes were tested, and multivariable logistic regression models examined for associations between ACP subtypes and measures of treatment intensity. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Trends in the surrogate-reported frequency of DPOA assignment, living will creation, and participation in discussions of EOL care preferences; associations between ACP subtypes and both surrogate-reported EOL care decisions and terminal hospitalizations. RESULTS From 2000 to 2012, there was an increase in DPOA assignment (52% to 74%, P = .03), without significant change in use of living wills (49% to 40%, P = .63) or EOL discussions (68% to 60%, P = .62). Surrogate reports that patients received "all care possible" at EOL increased during the period (7% to 58%, P = .004), and rates of terminal hospitalizations were unchanged (29% to 27%, P = .70). Limiting or withholding treatment was associated with living wills (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 2.51; 95% CI, 1.53-4.11; P < .001) and EOL discussions (AOR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.53-3.14; P = .002) but not with DPOA assignment. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Use of DPOA increased significantly between 2000 and 2012 but was not associated with EOL care decisions. Importantly, there was no growth in key ACP domains such as discussions of care preferences. Efforts that bolster communication of EOL care preferences and also incorporate surrogate decision makers are critically needed to ensure receipt of goal-concordant care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amol K Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Alexi A Wright
- Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts3Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Lauren H Nicholas
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland5Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Narang AK, Terezakis SA. Contemporary radiation therapy in combined modality therapy for Hodgkin lymphoma. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2016; 13:597-605. [PMID: 25964643 DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2015.0077] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
The advent of effective combination chemotherapy markedly changed the management of Hodgkin lymphoma, establishing combined modality therapy as the standard of care for most patients with this disease. In response, significant interest has been shown in refining the delivery of radiation in the combined modality setting such that toxicity is minimized while still preserving disease control. An understanding of the way in which radiation treatment fields, prescription dose, and advanced technology have evolved to accomplish these goals is critical. Moreover, fluency in the clinical literature exploring contemporary questions, such as the omission of radiation and response-based treatment, is equally important. Knowledge of these topics will yield both an appreciation of the value of radiation in the combined modality setting and the ability to better customize treatment regimens to individual patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amol K Narang
- From the Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Stephanie A Terezakis
- From the Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Affiliation(s)
- Amol K Narang
- Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Department of Radiation Oncology &Molecular Radiation Sciences, 1550 Orleans Street, Cancer Research Building 2, Room 406, Baltimore, MD, 21231, USA
| | - Phuoc T Tran
- Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Department of Radiation Oncology &Molecular Radiation Sciences, 1550 Orleans Street, Cancer Research Building 2, Room 406, Baltimore, MD, 21231, USA
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Narang AK, Gergis C, Robertson SP, He P, Ram AN, McNutt TR, Griffith E, DeWeese TA, Honig S, Singh H, Song DY, Tran PT, DeWeese TL. Very High-Risk Localized Prostate Cancer: Outcomes Following Definitive Radiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2016; 94:254-62. [PMID: 26853334 PMCID: PMC5065713 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2015.10.056] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/29/2015] [Revised: 10/11/2015] [Accepted: 10/26/2015] [Indexed: 01/22/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Existing definitions of high-risk prostate cancer consist of men who experience significant heterogeneity in outcomes. As such, criteria that identify a subpopulation of National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) high-risk prostate cancer patients who are at very high risk (VHR) for poor survival outcomes following prostatectomy were recently developed at our institution and include the presence of any of the following disease characteristics: multiple NCCN high-risk factors, primary Gleason pattern 5 disease and/or ≥5 biopsy cores with Gleason sums of 8 to 10. Whether these criteria also apply to men undergoing definitive radiation is unclear, as is the optimal treatment regimen in these patients. METHODS AND MATERIALS All men consecutively treated with definitive radiation by a single provider from 1993 to 2006 and who fulfilled criteria for NCCN high-risk disease were identified (n=288), including 99 patients (34%) with VHR disease. Multivariate-adjusted competing risk regression models were constructed to assess associations between the VHR definition and biochemical failure (BF), distant metastasis (DM), and prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM). Multivariate-adjusted Cox regression analysis assessed the association of the VHR definition with overall mortality (OM). Cumulative incidences of failure endpoints were compared between VHR men and other NCCN high-risk men. RESULTS Men with VHR disease compared to other NCCN high-risk men experienced a higher 10-year incidence of BF (54.0% vs 35.4%, respectively, P<.001), DM (34.9% vs 13.4%, respectively, P<.001), PCSM (18.5% vs 5.9%, respectively, P<.001), and OM (36.4% vs 27.0%, respectively, P=.04). VHR men with a detectable prostate-specific antigen (PSA) concentration at the end of radiation (EOR) remained at high risk of 10-year PCSM compared to VHR men with an undetectable EOR PSA (31.0% vs 13.7%, respectively, P=.05). CONCLUSIONS NCCN high-risk prostate cancer patients who meet VHR criteria experience distinctly worse outcomes following definitive radiation and long-term androgen deprivation therapy, particularly if an EOR PSA is detectable. Optimal use of local therapies for VHR patients should be explored further, as should novel agents.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amol K Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Carol Gergis
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Scott P Robertson
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Pei He
- Department of Statistics, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California
| | - Ashwin N Ram
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Todd R McNutt
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Emily Griffith
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Theodore A DeWeese
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Stephanie Honig
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Harleen Singh
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Danny Y Song
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Phuoc T Tran
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Theodore L DeWeese
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Wang J, Narang AK, Sugar EA, Luber B, Rosati LM, Hsu CC, Fuller CD, Pawlik TM, Miller RC, Czito BG, Tuli R, Crane CH, Ben-Josef E, Thomas CR, Herman JM. Evaluation of Adjuvant Radiation Therapy for Resected Gallbladder Carcinoma: A Multi-institutional Experience. Ann Surg Oncol 2015; 22 Suppl 3:S1100-S1106. [PMID: 26224402 PMCID: PMC9671536 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-015-4685-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/15/2015] [Indexed: 08/10/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE The role of adjuvant radiation for gallbladder carcinoma (GBC) is uncertain. We combine the experience of six National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers to explore the impact of adjuvant radiation following oncologic resection of GBC. METHODS Patients who underwent extended surgery for GBC at Johns Hopkins, Mayo Clinic, Duke University, Oregon Health & Science University, University of Michigan, and University of Texas MD Anderson between 1985 and 2008 were reviewed. Patients with metastatic disease at surgery, gross residual disease, or missing pathologic information were excluded. RESULTS Of the 112 patients identified, 61 % received adjuvant radiation, 93 % of whom received concurrent chemotherapy. Median follow-up of surviving patients was 47.3 (range 2.2-167.7) months. Patients who received adjuvant radiation had a higher rate of advanced T-stage (57 vs. 16 %, p < 0.01), lymph node involvement (63 vs. 18 %, p < 0.01), and positive microscopic margins (37 vs. 9 %, p < 0.01) compared with patients managed with surgery alone, but overall survival (OS) was comparable between the two cohorts (5-year OS: 49.7 vs. 52.5 %, p = 0.20). Lymph node involvement had the strongest association with poor OS (p < 0.01). Adjuvant radiation was associated with decreased isolated local failure (hazard ratio 0.17, 95 % confidence interval 0.05-0.63, p = 0.01). However, 71 % of recurrences included distant failure. CONCLUSIONS Following oncologic resection for GBC, adjuvant radiation may offer improved local control compared with observation. The benefit of adjuvant radiation beyond chemotherapy alone should therefore be explored. Certainly, the high rate of distant failure highlights the need for more effective systemic therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Amol K Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Elizabeth A Sugar
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Brandon Luber
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Lauren M Rosati
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Charles C Hsu
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
- San Francisco School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Clifton D Fuller
- MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
- Uinversity of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, TX, USA
| | - Timothy M Pawlik
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | | | | | - Richard Tuli
- Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | | | - Edgar Ben-Josef
- University of Michigan School of Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Charles R Thomas
- Uinversity of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, TX, USA
- Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA
| | - Joseph M Herman
- Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Wild AT, Ye X, Ellsworth SG, Smith JA, Narang AK, Garg T, Campian J, Laheru DA, Zheng L, Wolfgang CL, Tran PT, Grossman SA, Herman JM. The Association Between Chemoradiation-related Lymphopenia and Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Locally Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma. Am J Clin Oncol 2015; 38:259-65. [PMID: 23648440 DOI: 10.1097/coc.0b013e3182940ff9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 155] [Impact Index Per Article: 17.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/09/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Lymphopenia is a common consequence of chemoradiation therapy yet is seldom addressed clinically. This study was conducted to determine if patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) treated with definitive chemoradiation develop significant lymphopenia and if this affects clinical outcomes. METHODS A retrospective analysis of patients with LAPC treated with chemoradiation at a single institution from 1997 to 2011 was performed. Total lymphocyte counts (TLCs) were recorded at baseline and then monthly during and after chemoradiation. The correlation between treatment-induced lymphopenia, established prognostic factors, and overall survival was analyzed using univariate Cox regression analysis. Important factors identified by univariate analysis were selected as covariates to construct a multivariate proportional hazards model for survival. RESULTS A total of 101 patients met eligibility criteria. TLCs were normal in 86% before chemoradiation. The mean reduction in TLC per patient was 50.6% (SD, 40.6%) 2 months after starting chemoradiation (P<0.00001), and 46% had TLC<500 cells/mm. Patients with TLC<500 cells/mm 2 months after starting chemoradiation had inferior median survival (8.7 vs. 13.3 mo, P=0.03) and PFS (4.9 vs. 9.0 mo, P=0.15). Multivariate analysis revealed TLC<500 cells/mm to be an independent predictor of inferior survival (HR=2.879, P=0.001) along with baseline serum albumin (HR=3.584, P=0.0002), BUN (HR=1.060, P=0.02), platelet count (HR=1.004, P=0.005), and radiation planning target volume (HR=1.003, P=0.0006). CONCLUSIONS Severe treatment-related lymphopenia occurs frequently after chemoradiation for LAPC and is an independent predictor of inferior survival.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aaron T Wild
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
46
|
Narang AK, Herman JM. The promise of modern radiotherapy in resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a response to Bekaii-Saab et al. Ann Surg Oncol 2014; 21:1064-6. [PMID: 24522986 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-013-3344-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/08/2013] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Amol K Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
47
|
Narang AK, Lam E, Makary MA, Deweese TL, Pawlik TM, Pronovost PJ, Herman JM. Accuracy of marketing claims by providers of stereotactic radiation therapy. J Oncol Pract 2013; 9:57-62. [PMID: 23633973 DOI: 10.1200/jop.2012.000693] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Direct-to-consumer advertising by industry has been criticized for encouraging overuse of unproven therapies, but advertising by health care providers has not been as carefully scrutinized. Stereotactic radiation therapy is an emerging technology that has sparked controversy regarding the marketing campaigns of some manufacturers. Given that this technology is also being heavily advertised on the Web sites of health care providers, the accuracy of providers' marketing claims should be rigorously evaluated. METHODS We reviewed the Web sites of all U.S. hospitals and private practices that provide stereotactic radiation using two leading brands of stereotactic radiosurgery technology. Centers were identified by using data from the manufacturers. Centers without Web sites were excluded. The final study population consisted of 212 centers with online advertisements for stereotactic radiation. Web sites were evaluated for advertisements that were inconsistent with advertising guidelines provided by the American Medical Association. RESULTS Most centers (76%) had individual pages dedicated to the marketing of their brand of stereotactic technology that frequently contained manufacturer-authored images (50%) or text (55%). Advertising for the treatment of tumors that have not been endorsed by professional societies was present on 66% of Web sites. Centers commonly claimed improved survival (22%), disease control (20%), quality of life (17%), and toxicity (43%) with stereotactic radiation. Although 40% of Web sites championed the center's regional expertise in delivering stereotactic treatments, only 15% of Web sites provided data to support their claims. CONCLUSION Provider advertisements for stereotactic radiation were prominent and aggressive. Further investigation of provider advertising, its effects on quality of care, and potential oversight mechanisms is needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amol K Narang
- Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21231-2410, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
48
|
Hsu CC, Wolfgang CL, Laheru DA, Pawlik TM, Swartz MJ, Winter JM, Robinson R, Edil BH, Narang AK, Choti MA, Hruban RH, Cameron JL, Schulick RD, Herman JM. Early mortality risk score: identification of poor outcomes following upfront surgery for resectable pancreatic cancer. J Gastrointest Surg 2012; 16:753-61. [PMID: 22311282 PMCID: PMC3561732 DOI: 10.1007/s11605-011-1811-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 45] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/23/2011] [Accepted: 12/28/2011] [Indexed: 01/31/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Identifying pancreatic cancer patients at high risk of early mortality following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is important for treatment decisions in a multidisciplinary setting. This study examines the preoperative predictors of early mortality following PD and combines these variables into an early mortality risk score (EMRS). METHODS Medical records of patients who underwent PD for pancreatic adenocarcinoma at the Johns Hopkins Hospital between 30 August 1993 and 28 February 2005 were reviewed. Cox proportional hazards analysis was performed to identify predictors of early mortality, defined as death at 9 and 12 months. EMRS was constructed from univariate associated risk factors (age >75 years, tumor size ≥ 3 cm, poor differentiation, co-morbid diseases) with each factor assigned 1 point (range of 0-4). EMRS was evaluated as an independent predictor of death at 9 and 12 months. RESULTS On univariate analysis, risk factors for death at 9 months included age ≥ 75 years (RR, 1.6; p = .009), comorbid disease (RR, 1.5; p = 0.020), tumor ≥ 3 cm (RR, 1.4; P = 0.050), and poor differentiation (RR, 2.1; P < 0.001). EMRS was associated with early mortality among those who did (p = 0.038) and did not receive adjuvant treatment (p < 0.001). A modified EMRS without tumor differentiation was also associated with early mortality (p < 0.001). Results persisted when reanalyzed using death at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS EMRS may identify patients at risk of early mortality following PD who may be candidates for alternatively sequenced treatment protocols. Prospective validation of this EMRS is needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charles C. Hsu
- The Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation, Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 410 North Broadway/Suite 1440, Baltimore, MD 21231-2410, USA. The Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Christopher L. Wolfgang
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. The Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Daniel A. Laheru
- Department of Medical Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. The Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Timothy M. Pawlik
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. The Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Michael J. Swartz
- The Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation, Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 410 North Broadway/Suite 1440, Baltimore, MD 21231-2410, USA
| | - Jordan M. Winter
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Raymond Robinson
- The Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation, Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 410 North Broadway/Suite 1440, Baltimore, MD 21231-2410, USA
| | - Barish H. Edil
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. The Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Amol K. Narang
- The Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation, Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 410 North Broadway/Suite 1440, Baltimore, MD 21231-2410, USA
| | - Michael A. Choti
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Ralph H. Hruban
- Department of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. The Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - John L. Cameron
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. The Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Richard D. Schulick
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. The Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Joseph M. Herman
- The Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation, Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 410 North Broadway/Suite 1440, Baltimore, MD 21231-2410, USA. The Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Rudra S, Narang AK, Pawlik TM, Wang H, Jaffee EM, Zheng L, Le DT, Cosgrove D, Hruban RH, Fishman EK, Tuli R, Laheru DA, Wolfgang CL, Diaz LA, Herman JM. Evaluation of predictive variables in locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients receiving definitive chemoradiation. Pract Radiat Oncol 2012; 2:77-85. [PMID: 23585823 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2011.06.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To analyze a single-center experience with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) patients treated with chemoradiation (CRT) and to evaluate predictive variables of outcome. METHODS AND MATERIALS LAPC patients at our institution between 1997 and 2009 were identified (n = 109). Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate predictive factors for survival. Patterns of failure were characterized, and associations between local progression and distant metastasis were explored. RESULTS Median OS was 12.1 months (2.5-34.7 months) and median PFS was 6.7 months (1.1-34.7 months). Poor prognostic factors for OS include Karnofsky performance status ≤80 (P = .0062), treatment interruption (P = .0474), and locally progressive disease at time of first post-therapy imaging (P = .0078). Karnofsky performance status ≤80 (P = .0128), pretreatment CA19-9 >1000 U/mL (P = .0224), and treatment interruption (P = .0009) were poor prognostic factors for PFS. Both local progression (36%) and distant failure (62%) were common. Local progression was associated with a higher incidence of metastasis (P < .0001) and decreased time to metastasis (P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS LAPC patients who suffer local progression following definitive CRT may experience inferior OS and increased risk of metastasis, warranting efforts to improve control of local disease. However, patients with poor pretreatment performance status, elevated CA19-9 levels, and treatment interruptions may experience poor outcomes despite aggressive management with CRT, and may optimally be treated with induction chemotherapy or supportive care. Novel therapies aimed at controlling both local and systemic progression are needed for patients with LAPC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sonali Rudra
- Department of Radiation and Cellular Oncology University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
50
|
Narang AK, Miller RC, Hsu CC, Bhatia S, Pawlik TM, Laheru D, Hruban RH, Zhou J, Winter JM, Haddock MG, Donohue JH, Schulick RD, Wolfgang CL, Cameron JL, Herman JM. Evaluation of adjuvant chemoradiation therapy for ampullary adenocarcinoma: the Johns Hopkins Hospital-Mayo Clinic collaborative study. Radiat Oncol 2011; 6:126. [PMID: 21951377 PMCID: PMC3204241 DOI: 10.1186/1748-717x-6-126] [Citation(s) in RCA: 81] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/16/2011] [Accepted: 09/28/2011] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The role of adjuvant chemoradiation therapy for ampullary carcinoma is unknown. Previous literature suggests that certain populations with high risk factors for recurrence may benefit from adjuvant chemoradiation. We combined the experience of two institutions to better delineate which patients may benefit from adjuvant chemoradiation. Methods Patients who underwent curative surgery for ampullary carcinoma at the Johns Hopkins Hospital (n = 290; 1992-2007) and at the Mayo Clinic (n = 130; 1977-2005) were reviewed. Patients with <60 days of follow-up, metastatic disease at surgery, or insufficient pathologic data were excluded. The final combined study consisted of 186 patients (n = 104 Johns Hopkins, n = 82 Mayo). Most patients received 5-FU based chemoradiation with conformal radiation. Cox proportional hazards models were used for survival analysis. Results Median overall-survival was 39.9 months with 2- and 5-year survival rates of 62.4% and 39.1%. On univariate analysis, adverse prognostic factors for overall survival included T3/T4 stage disease (RR = 1.86, p = 0.002), node positive status (RR = 3.18, p < 0.001), and poor histological grade (RR = 1.69, p = 0.011). Patients who received adjuvant chemoradiation (n = 66) vs. surgery alone (n = 120) showed a higher rate of T3/T4 stage disease (57.6% vs. 30.8%, P < 0.001), lymph node involvement (72.7% vs. 30.0%, P < 0.001), and close or positive margins (4.6% vs. 0.0%, P = 0.019). Five year survival rates among node negative and node positive patients were 58.7% and 18.4% respectively. When compared with surgery alone, use of adjuvant chemoradiation improved survival among node positive patients (mOS 32.1 vs. 15.7 mos, 5 yr OS: 27.5% vs. 5.9%; RR = 0.47, P = 0.004). After adjusting for adverse prognostic factors on multivariate analysis, patients treated with adjuvant chemoradiation demonstrated a significant survival benefit (RR = 0.40, P < 0.001). Disease relapse occurred in 37.1% of all patients, most commonly metastatic disease in the liver or peritoneum. Conclusions Node-positive patients with resected ampullary adenocarcinoma may benefit from 5-FU based adjuvant chemoradiation. Since a significant proportion of patients develop metastatic disease, there is a need for more effective systemic treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amol K Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|