Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Atypical meningiomas are an intermediate grade brain tumour with a recurrence rate of 39–58 %. It is not known whether early adjuvant radiotherapy reduces the risk of tumour recurrence and whether the potential side-effects are justified. An alternative management strategy is to perform active monitoring with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and to treat at recurrence. There are no randomised controlled trials comparing these two approaches. Methods/Design A total of 190 patients will be recruited from neurosurgical/neuro-oncology centres across the United Kingdom, Ireland and mainland Europe. Adult patients undergoing gross total resection of intracranial atypical meningioma are eligible. Patients with multiple meningioma, optic nerve sheath meningioma, previous intracranial tumour, previous cranial radiotherapy and neurofibromatosis will be excluded. Informed consent will be obtained from patients. This is a two-stage trial (both stages will run in parallel): Stage 1 (qualitative study) is designed to maximise patient and clinician acceptability, thereby optimising recruitment and retention. Patients wishing to continue will proceed to randomisation. Stage 2 (randomisation) patients will be randomised to receive either early adjuvant radiotherapy for 6 weeks (60 Gy in 30 fractions) or active monitoring. The primary outcome measure is time to MRI evidence of tumour recurrence (progression-free survival (PFS)). Secondary outcome measures include assessing the toxicity of the radiotherapy, the quality of life, neurocognitive function, time to second line treatment, time to death (overall survival (OS)) and incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Discussion ROAM/EORTC-1308 is the first multi-centre randomised controlled trial designed to determine whether early adjuvant radiotherapy reduces the risk of tumour recurrence following complete surgical resection of atypical meningioma. The results of this study will be used to inform current neurosurgery and neuro-oncology practice worldwide. Trial registration ISRCTN71502099 on 19 May 2014.

Young children with medulloblastoma have a poor overall survival compared with older children, due to use of radiation-sparing therapy in young children. Radiotherapy is omitted or reduced in these young patients to spare them from debilitating long-term side-effects. We aimed to estimate event-free survival and define the molecular characteristics associated with progression-free survival in young patients with medulloblastoma using a risk-stratified treatment strategy designed to defer, reduce, or delay radiation exposure. In this multicentre, phase 2 trial, we enrolled children younger than 3 years with newly diagnosed medulloblastoma at six centres in the USA and Australia. Children aged 3–5 years with newly diagnosed, non-metastatic medulloblastoma without any high-risk features were also eligible. Eligible patients were required to start therapy within 31 days from definitive surgery, had a Lansky performance score of at least 30, and did not receive previous radiotherapy or chemotherapy. Patients were stratified postoperatively by clinical and histological criteria into low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk treatment groups. All patients received identical induction chemotherapy (methotrexate, vincristine, cisplatin, and cyclophosphamide), with high-risk patients also receiving an additional five doses of vinblastine. Induction was followed by risk-adapted consolidation therapy: low-risk patients received cyclophosphamide (1500 mg/m2 on day 1), etoposide (100 mg/m2 on days 1 and 2), and carboplatin (area under the curve 5 mg/mL per min on day 2) for two 4-week cycles; intermediate-risk patients received focal radiation therapy (54 Gy with a clinical target volume of 5 mm over 6 weeks) to the tumour bed; and high-risk patients received chemotherapy with targeted intravenous topotecan (area under the curve 120–160 ng-h/mL intravenously on days 1–5) and cyclophosphamide (600 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1–5). After consolidation, all patients received maintenance chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, topotecan, and erlotinib. The coprimary endpoints were event-free survival and patterns of methylation profiling associated with progression-free survival. Outcome and safety analyses were per protocol (all patients who received at least one dose of induction chemotherapy); biological analyses included all patients with tissue available for methylation profiling. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00602667, and was closed to accrual on April 19, 2017. Between Nov 27, 2007, and April 19, 2017, we enrolled 81 patients with histologically confirmed medulloblastoma. Accrual to the low-risk group was suspended after an interim analysis on Dec 2, 2015, when the 1-year event-free survival was estimated to be below the stopping rule boundary. After a median follow-up of 5·5 years (IQR 2·7–7·3), 5-year event-free survival was 31·3% (95% CI 19·3–43·3) for the whole cohort, 55·3% (95% CI 33·3–77·3) in the low-risk cohort (n=23) versus 24·6% (3·6–45·6) in the intermediate-risk cohort (n=32; hazard ratio 2·50, 95% CI 1·19–5·27; p=0·016) and 16·7% (3·4–30·0) in the high-risk cohort (n=26; 3·55, 1·66–7·59; p=0·0011; overall p=0·0021). 5-year progression-free survival by methylation subgroup was 51·1% (95% CI 34·6–67·6) in the sonic hedgehog (SHH) subgroup (n=42), 8·3% (95% CI 0·0–24·0%) in the group 3 subgroup (n=24), and 13·3% (95% CI 0·0–37·6%) in the group 4 subgroup (n=10). Within the SHH subgroup, two distinct methylation subtypes were identified and named iSHH-I and iSHH-II. 5-year progression-free survival was 27·8% (95% CI 9·0–46·6; n=21) for iSHH-I and 75·4% (55·0–95·8; n=21) for iSHH-II. The most common adverse events were grade 3–4 febrile neutropenia (48 patients [59%]), neutropenia (21 [26%]), infection with neutropenia (20 [25%]), leucopenia (15 [19%]), vomiting (15 [19%]), and anorexia (13 [16%]). No treatment-related deaths occurred. The risk-adapted approach did not improve event-free survival in young children with medulloblastoma. However, the methylation subgroup analyses showed that the SHH subgroup had improved progression-free survival compared with the group 3 subgroup. Moreover, within the SHH subgroup, the iSHH-II subtype had improved progression-free survival in the absence of radiation, intraventricular chemotherapy, or high-dose chemotherapy compared with the iSHH-I subtype. These findings support the development of a molecularly driven, risk-adapted, treatment approach in future trials in young children with medulloblastoma. American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities, St Jude Children's Research Hospital, NCI Cancer Center, Alexander and Margaret Stewart Trust, Sontag Foundation, and American Association for Cancer Research.

Among patients with limited-stage small-cell lung cancer, overall and progression-free survival were significantly longer with durvalumab adjuvant therapy added to standard concurrent chemoradiotherapy.

Background Whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) is the standard therapy for multiple brain metastases. However, WBRT has a poor local tumor control and is associated with a decline in neurocognitive function (NCF). Aim of this trial is to assess the efficacy and safety of a new treatment method, the WBRT with hippocampus avoidance (HA) combined with the simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) on metastases/resection cavities (HA-WBRT+SIB). Methods This is a prospective, randomized, two-arm phase II multicenter trial comparing the impact of HA on NCF after HA-WBRT+SIB versus WBRT+SIB in patients with multiple brain metastases. The study design is double-blinded. One hundred thirty two patients are to be randomized with a 1:1 allocation ratio. Patients between 18 and 80 years old are recruited, with at least 4 brain metastases of solid tumors and at least one, but not exceeding 10 metastases ≥5 mm. Patients must be in good physical condition and have no metastases/resection cavities in or within 7 mm of the hippocampus. Patients with dementia, meningeal disease, cerebral lymphomas, germ cell tumors, or small cell carcinomas are excluded. Previous irradiation and resection of metastases, as well as the number and size of metastases to be boosted have to comply with certain restrictions. Patients are randomized between the two treatment arms: HA-WBRT+SIB and WBRT+SIB. WBRT is to be performed with 30 Gy in 12 daily fractions and the SIB with 51 Gy/42 Gy in 12 daily fractions on 95% of volume for metastases/resection cavities. In the experimental arm, the dose to the hippocampi is restricted to 9 Gy in 98% of the volume and 17Gy in 2% of the volume. NCF testing is scheduled before WBRT, after 3 (primary endpoint), 9, 18 months and yearly thereafter. Clinical and imaging follow-ups are performed 6 and 12 weeks after WBRT, after 3, 9, 18 months and yearly thereafter. Discussion This is a protocol of a randomized phase II trial designed to test a new strategy of WBRT for preventing cognitive decline and increasing tumor control in patients with multiple brain metastases. Trial registration The HIPPORAD trial is registered with the German Clinical Trials Registry ( DRKS00004598 , registered 2 June 2016).

Results from a previous phase 3 study suggested that prophylactic cranial irradiation reduces the incidence of symptomatic brain metastases and prolongs overall survival compared with no prophylactic cranial irradiation in patients with extensive-disease small-cell lung cancer. However, because of the absence of brain imaging before enrolment and variations in chemotherapeutic regimens and irradiation doses, concerns have been raised about these findings. We did a phase 3 trial to reassess the efficacy of prophylactic cranial irradiation in the treatment of extensive-disease small-cell lung cancer. We did this randomised, open-label, phase 3 study at 47 institutions in Japan. Patients with extensive-disease small-cell lung cancer who had any response to platinum-based doublet chemotherapy and no brain metastases on MRI were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive prophylactic cranial irradiation (25 Gy in ten daily fractions of 2·5 Gy) or observation. All patients were required to have brain MRI at 3-month intervals up to 12 months and at 18 and 24 months after enrolment. Randomisation was done by computer-generated allocation sequence, with age as a stratification factor and minimisation by institution, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, and response to initial chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was overall survival, analysed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with the UMIN Clinical Trials Registry, number UMIN000001755, and is closed to new participants. Between April 3, 2009, and July 17, 2013, 224 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned (113 to prophylactic cranial irradiation and 111 to observation). In the planned interim analysis on June 18, 2013, of the first 163 enrolled patients, Bayesian predictive probability of prophylactic cranial irradiation being superior to observation was 0·011%, resulting in early termination of the study because of futility. In the final analysis, median overall survival was 11·6 months (95% CI 9·5–13·3) in the prophylactic cranial irradiation group and 13·7 months (10·2–16·4) in the observation group (hazard ratio 1·27, 95% CI 0·96–1·68; p=0·094). The most frequent grade 3 or worse adverse events at 3 months were anorexia (six [6%] of 106 in the prophylactic cranial irradiation group vs two [2%] of 111 in the observation group), malaise (three [3%] vs one [<1%]), and muscle weakness in a lower limb (one [<1%] vs six [5%]). No treatment-related deaths occurred in either group. In this Japanese trial, prophylactic cranial irradiation did not result in longer overall survival compared with observation in patients with extensive-disease small-cell lung cancer. Prophylactic cranial irradiation is therefore not essential for patients with extensive-disease small-cell lung cancer with any response to initial chemotherapy and a confirmed absence of brain metastases when patients receive periodic MRI examination during follow-up. The Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan.

Abstract BACKGROUND Guidelines regarding stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for brain metastases are missing recently published evidence. OBJECTIVE To conduct a systematic review and provide an objective summary of publications regarding SRS in managing patients with 1 to 4 brain metastases. METHODS Using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a systematic review was conducted using PubMed and Medline up to November 2016. A separate search was conducted for SRS for larger brain metastases. RESULTS Twenty-seven prospective studies, critical reviews, meta-analyses, and published consensus guidelines were reviewed. Four key points came from these studies. First, there is no detriment to survival by withholding whole brain radiation (WBRT) in the upfront management of brain metastases with SRS. Second, while SRS on its own provides a high rate of local control (LC), WBRT may provide further increase in LC. Next, WBRT does provide distant brain control with less need for salvage therapy. Finally, the addition of WBRT does affect neurocognitive function and quality of life more than SRS alone. For larger brain metastases, surgical resection should be considered, especially when factoring lower LC with single-session radiosurgery. There is emerging data showing good LC and/or decreased toxicity with multisession radiosurgery. CONCLUSION A number of well-conducted prospective and meta-analyses studies demonstrate good LC, without compromising survival, using SRS alone for patients with a limited number of brain metastases. Some also demonstrated less impact on neurocognitive function with SRS alone. Practice guidelines were developed using these data with International Stereotactic Radiosurgery Society consensus.

It is unclear whether the benefit of adding whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT) to stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for the control of brain-tumours outweighs the potential neurocognitive risks. We proposed that the learning and memory functions of patients who undergo SRS plus WBRT are worse than those of patients who undergo SRS alone. We did a randomised controlled trial to test our prediction. Patients with one to three newly diagnosed brain metastases were randomly assigned using a standard permutated block algorithm with random block sizes to SRS plus WBRT or SRS alone from Jan 2, 2001, to Sept 14, 2007. Patients were stratified by recursive partitioning analysis class, number of brain metastases, and radioresistant histology. The randomisation sequence was masked until assignation, at which point both clinicians and patients were made aware of the treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was neurocognitive function: objectively measured as a significant deterioration (5-point drop compared with baseline) in Hopkins Verbal Learning Test–Revised (HVLT-R) total recall at 4 months. An independent data monitoring committee monitored the trial using Bayesian statistical methods. Analysis was by intention-to-treat. This trial is registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00548756. After 58 patients were recruited (n=30 in the SRS alone group, n=28 in the SRS plus WBRT group), the trial was stopped by the data monitoring committee according to early stopping rules on the basis that there was a high probability (96%) that patients randomly assigned to receive SRS plus WBRT were significantly more likely to show a decline in learning and memory function (mean posterior probability of decline 52%) at 4 months than patients assigned to receive SRS alone (mean posterior probability of decline 24%). At 4 months there were four deaths (13%) in the group that received SRS alone, and eight deaths (29%) in the group that received SRS plus WBRT. 73% of patients in the SRS plus WBRT group were free from CNS recurrence at 1 year, compared with 27% of patients who received SRS alone (p=0·0003). In the SRS plus WBRT group, one case of grade 3 toxicity (seizures, motor neuropathy, depressed level of consciousness) was attributed to radiation treatment. In the group that received SRS, one case of grade 3 toxicity (aphasia) was attributed to radiation treatment. Two cases of grade 4 toxicity in the group that received SRS alone were diagnosed as radiation necrosis. Patients treated with SRS plus WBRT were at a greater risk of a significant decline in learning and memory function by 4 months compared with the group that received SRS alone. Initial treatment with a combination of SRS and close clinical monitoring is recommended as the preferred treatment strategy to better preserve learning and memory in patients with newly diagnosed brain metastases. No external funding was received.

Objective. Preventive effect of hippocampal sparing on cognitive dysfunction of patients undergoing whole-brain radiotherapy and imaging assessment of hippocampal volume changes. Methods. Forty patients with brain metastases who attended Liaoning Cancer Hospital from January 2018 to December 2019 were identified as research subjects and were randomly divided into a control group and an experimental group, with 20 cases in each group. The control group was treated with whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT), and the experimental group was treated with hippocampal sparing-WBRT (HS-WBRT). The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score, cancer quality-of-life questionnaire (QLQ-C3O) score, hippocampal volume changes, and prognosis of the two groups were compared. Results. The MoCA scores decreased in both groups at 3, 6, and 12 months after radiotherapy, with significantly higher scores in the experimental group than in the control group (P<0.05). After radiotherapy, both groups had lower ECOG scores, with those in the experimental group being significantly lower than those in the control group (P<0.05). After radiotherapy, the QLQ-C30 score was elevated in both groups, and that of the experimental group was significantly higher than that of the control group (P<0.05). The experimental group outperformed the control group in terms of the prognosis (P<0.05). The hippocampal volume of the control group was significantly smaller than that of the experimental group (P<0.05). Conclusion. The application of hippocampal sparing in patients receiving whole-brain radiotherapy is effective in preventing cognitive dysfunction, improving the quality of life and prognosis of patients, and avoiding shrinkage of hippocampal volume.

Background and purpose Chloroquine (CLQ), an antimalarial drug, has a lysosomotropic effect associated with increased radiationsensibility, which is mediated by the leakage of hydrolytic enzymes, increased apoptosis, autophagy and increased oxidative stress in vitro . In this phase II study, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of radiosensibilization using CLQ concomitant with 30 Gray (Gy) of whole-brain irradiation (WBI) to treat patients with brain metastases (BM) from solid tumors. Methods Seventy-three eligible patients were randomized. Thirty-nine patients received WBI (30 Gy in 10 fractions over 2 weeks) concomitant with 150 mg of CLQ for 4 weeks (the CLQ arm). Thirty-four patients received the same schedule of WBI concomitant with a placebo for 4 weeks (the control arm). All the patients were evaluated for quality of life (QoL) using the EORTC Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) (Mexican version) before beginning radiotherapy and one month later. Results The overall response rate (ORR) was 54% for the CLQ arm and 55% for the control arm (p=0.92). The progression-free survival of brain metastases (BMPFS) rates at one year were 83.9% (95% CI 69.4-98.4) for the CLQ arm and 55.1% (95% CI 33.6-77.6) for the control arm. Treatment with CLQ was independently associated with increased BMPFS (RR 0.31,95% CI [0.1-0.9], p=0.046).The only factor that was independently associated with increased overall survival (OS) was the presence of< 4 brain metastases (RR 1.9, 95% CI [1.12-3.3], p=0.017). WBI was associated with improvements in cognitive and emotional function but also with worsened nausea in both patients groups. No differences in QoL or toxicity were found between the study arms. Conclusion Treatment with CLQ plus WBI improved the control of BM (compared with the control arm) with no increase in toxicity; however, CLQ did not improve the RR or OS. A phase III clinical trial is warranted to confirm these findings.

High-dose methotrexate is the standard of care for patients with newly diagnosed primary CNS lymphoma. The role of whole brain radiotherapy is controversial because delayed neurotoxicity limits its acceptance as a standard of care. We aimed to investigate whether first-line chemotherapy based on high-dose methotrexate was non-inferior to the same chemotherapy regimen followed by whole brain radiotherapy for overall survival. Immunocompetent patients with newly diagnosed primary CNS lymphoma were enrolled from 75 centres and treated between May, 2000, and May, 2009. Patients were allocated by computer-generated block randomisation to receive first-line chemotherapy based on high-dose methotrexate with or without subsequent whole brain radiotherapy, with stratification by age (<60 vs ≥60 years) and institution (Berlin vs Tübingen vs all other sites). The biostatistics centre assigned patients to treatment groups and informed local centres by fax; physicians and patients were not masked to treatment group after assignment. Patients enrolled between May, 2000, and August, 2006, received high-dose methotrexate (4 g/m 2) on day 1 of six 14-day cycles; thereafter, patients received high-dose methotrexate plus ifosfamide (1·5 g/m 2) on days 3–5 of six 14-day cycles. In those assigned to receive first-line chemotherapy followed by radiotherapy, whole brain radiotherapy was given to a total dose of 45 Gy, in 30 fractions of 1·5 Gy given daily on weekdays. Patients allocated to first-line chemotherapy without whole brain radiotherapy who had not achieved complete response were given high-dose cytarabine. The primary endpoint was overall survival, and analysis was per protocol. Our hypothesis was that the omission of whole brain radiotherapy does not compromise overall survival, with a non-inferiority margin of 0·9. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00153530. 551 patients (median age 63 years, IQR 55–69) were enrolled and randomised, of whom 318 were treated per protocol. In the per-protocol population, median overall survival was 32·4 months (95% CI 25·8–39·0) in patients receiving whole brain radiotherapy (n=154), and 37·1 months (27·5–46·7) in those not receiving whole brain radiotherapy (n=164), hazard ratio 1·06 (95% CI 0·80–1·40; p=0·71). Thus our primary hypothesis was not proven. Median progression-free survival was 18·3 months (95% CI 11·6–25·0) in patients receiving whole brain radiotherapy, and 11·9 months (7·3–16·5; p=0·14) in those not receiving whole brain radiotherapy. Treatment-related neurotoxicity in patients with sustained complete response was more common in patients receiving whole brain radiotherapy (22/45, 49% by clinical assessment; 35/49, 71% by neuroradiology) than in those who did not (9/34, 26%; 16/35, 46%). No significant difference in overall survival was recorded when whole brain radiotherapy was omitted from first-line chemotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed primary CNS lymphoma, but our primary hypothesis was not proven. The progression-free survival benefit afforded by whole brain radiotherapy has to be weighed against the increased risk of neurotoxicity in long-term survivors. German Cancer Aid.