To Örebro University

INTRODUCTION: Treating localized high-risk prostate cancer with a combination of external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) and high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) is a common approach. Moderately hypofractionated EBRT and a single HDR-BT boost simplifies the treatment. We aim to present our five-year results.

METHODS: In this study, 355 patients treated with moderately hypofractionated EBRT (42 Gy in 14 fractions) and a single HDR-BT boost (14.5 Gy) at Örebro University Hospital between 2008 and 2018 were included. They were followed with regular PSA tests.

RESULTS: The median age of the cohort was 70 years (range: 51-81) and the median follow-up duration was 56 months (range: 6-150). Among them, 45% were classified as very high-risk, 38% as high-risk and 17% as intermediate-risk. Adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with a median duration of 24 months was given to 75% of the patient cohort. The estimated 5-year failure free survival rates were 79% (whole cohort), 66% (very high-risk), 90% (high-risk) and 85% (intermediate-risk), respectively. Initial PSA > 10 ng/mL, Gleason score 9-10 and tumor stage T3 were significantly associated with biochemical failure (BF). A PSA bounce occurred in 53 (15%) cases and was inversely associated with BF (p = 0.001) for patients receiving ADT.

CONCLUSIONS: Moderately hypofractionated EBRT and a single HDR-BT boost seems to be an effective treatment against intermediate- and high-risk localized prostate cancer. Treatment escalation strategies should be investigated for very high-risk patients where the risk of recurrence remains high.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: While the prevalence of older breast cancer patients is rapidly increasing, these patients are greatly underrepresented in clinical trials. We discuss barriers to recruitment of older patients to clinical trials and propose solutions on how to mitigate these challenges and design optimal clinical trials through the paradigm of IMPORTANT trial.

PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a narrative review of the current literature evaluating barriers to including older breast cancer patients in clinical trials and how mitigating strategies can be implemented in a pragmatic clinical trial. RESULTS: The recognized barriers can be roughly divided into trial design-related (e.g. the adoption of strict inclusion criteria, the lack of pre-specified age-specific analysis), patient-related (e.g. lack of knowledge, valuation of the quality-of-life instead of survival, transportation issues), or physician-related (e.g. concern for toxicity). Several strategies to mitigate barriers have been identified and should be considered when designing a clinical trial dedicated to older patients with cancer. The pragmatic, de-centralized IMPORTANT trial focusing on dose optimization of CDK4/6 -inhibitors in older breast cancer patients is a paradigm of a study design where different mitigating strategies have been adopted.

INTERPRETATION: Because of the existing barriers, older adults in clinical trials are considerably healthier than the average older patients treated in clinical practice. Thus, the study results cannot be generalized to the older population seen in daily clinical practice. Broader inclusion/exclusion criteria, offering telehealth visits, and inclusion of patient-reported, instead of physician-reported outcomes may increase older patient participation in clinical trials.

Immunotherapy with PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitors has become an essential treatment strategy for a growing number of malignancies. These treatments have a risk for immune-related adverse events (IRAEs). Pooled analyses based on clinical trials show a favorable toxicity profile for treatment with PD-L1 compared to PD-1 inhibitors. This study aimed to investigate differences in IRAEs between patients with advanced solid malignances treated with PD-L1 and PD-1 inhibitors in a real-world setting. We conducted a retrospective cohort study at four Swedish Regions. Patients (n = 605) treated for advanced cancer with a PD-L1 or PD-1 inhibitor in monotherapy between June 2016 and August 2022 were included. Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) was the most common malignant disease (n = 251; 41.5%), followed by malignant melanoma (n = 173; 28.6%), renal cell carcinoma (n = 71; 11.7%) and urothelial carcinoma (n = 35; 5.8%). Among patients receiving PD-L1 inhibitors, NSCLC (94.4%) was the predominant malignancy, whereas for those treated with PD-1 inhibitor, malignant melanoma constituted the most prevalent malignancy (34.5%). Discontinuation of treatment due to IRAEs overall and IRAEs grade ≥ 2 were significantly less common in patients treated with PD-L1 compared to PD-1 inhibitors [Odds Ratio (OR): 0.38 (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.16-0.88) and OR: 0.63 (95% CI 0.35-0.98) respectively]. Any grade IRAE, IRAE grade ≥ 3 and multiple IRAEs were numerically more frequent in patients treated with PD-1 inhibitors.In conclusion, our study of patients with advanced solid malignancies in a real-world setting supports the results from clinical trials demonstrating a favorable toxicity profile for PD-L1 inhibitors versus PD-1 inhibitors.

Current evidence from both randomized trials and real-world studies suggests that older patients with advanced hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative (HR+/HER2) breast cancer derive clinical benefit from the addition of CDK4/6 inhibitors to endocrine therapy. However, a higher risk for adverse events due to CDK4/6 inhibitors among older patients is evident, leading to a trend of initiating CDK4/6 inhibitors at lower dose in clinical practice, though without evidence. The aim of the IMPORTANT-trial, a pragmatic, multinational, open-label, partly decentralized randomized trial is to investigate whether lower starting dose of CDK4/6 inhibitors combined with endocrine therapy is comparable to full dose in older (≥70 years old) patients with advanced HR+/HER2- breast cancer who are assessed as vulnerable or frail based on comprehensive geriatric assessment.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT06044623 (ClinicalTrials.gov); Registration date: 13 September 2023.

PURPOSE: An increased incidence of hypothyroidism among breast cancer survivors has been observed in earlier studies. The impact of the postoperative treatment modalities and their potential interplay on hypothyroidism development needs to be studied.

METHODS: We conducted a population- and registry-based study using the Breast Cancer Data Base Sweden (BCBaSe) including females diagnosed with breast cancer between 2006 and 2012. In total, 21,268 female patients diagnosed with early breast cancer between 2006 and 2012, with no previous prescription of thyroid hormones and no malignant diagnosis during the last ten years before breast cancer diagnosis, were included in the final analysis.

RESULTS: During the follow-up (median follow-up time 7.9 years), 1212 patients (5.7%) developed hypothyroidism at a median time of 3.45 years from the index date. No association of the systemic oncological treatment in terms of either chemotherapy or endocrine therapy and hypothyroidism development could be identified. A higher risk (HR 1.68;95% CI 1.42-1.99) of hypothyroidism identified among patients treated with radiation treatment of the regional lymph nodes whereas no increased risk in patients treated only with radiation therapy to the breast/chest wall was found (HR 1.01; 95% CI 0.86-1.19). The risk of hypothyroidism in the cohort treated with radiotherapy of the regional lymph nodes was present irrespective of the use of adjuvant chemotherapy treatment.

CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results of our study, the implementation of hypothyroidism surveillance among the breast cancer survivors treated with radiotherapy of the regional lymph nodes can be considered as reasonable in the follow-up program.

PURPOSE: Intraoperative breast cancer radiotherapy (IORT) offers an alternative to external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS). The Intraoperative brachytherapy (IOBT) trial applies high dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy with a new applicator prototype as IORT after BCS. In this interim analysis of the IOBT trial, we present the oncological safety and toxicity of the method.

METHODS: Eligible patients were women, ≥ 50 years old with an unifocal nonlobular, estrogen-receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer, cN0, ≤ 3 cm, treated with BCS and sentinel node biopsy (SNB). Toxicity was registered according to the LENT-SOMA scale. Cumulative incidence of local (LR) and regional recurrence (RR) were calculated through cumulative incidence function whereas overall survival (OS) was illustrated through Kaplan-Meier curve.

RESULTS: Until February 2023, 155 women (median age 68 years) were included in the trial. Twenty-nine women (18.7%) received supplemental EBRT, mostly due to positive SNB. Three-year cumulative incidence of LR and RR were 1.0% (CI 95 % 0.1%-2.3%) and 2.1% (CI 95% 0.8%-4.2%) respectively. Five- year cumulative incidence of LR and RR were 3.9% (CI 95% 1.8%-6.4%) and 2.1% (CI 95% 0.8%-4.2%) respectively. Five-year OS was 96.3% (CI 95% 93.6%-98.4%). Side effects were limited, low grade, and transient.

CONCLUSION: Acknowledging the short median follow-up time at interim analysis, our initial results indicate that delivering IORT through HDR brachytherapy in carefully selected breast cancer patients is feasible and oncological safe so far. A long-term follow-up is essential to confirm the initial results.

Decentralized clinical trials have gained in popularity over the last years due to their advantages related to broadening recruitment strategies and resource saving possibilities. As more clinical trials adopt decentralized strategies, it is essential to share the knowledge about both successful and unsuccessful efforts in the research community. In the present commentary, we explore potential reasons that led to early termination of a decentralized clinical trial in Oncology.

PURPOSE: To comprehensively synthesize the existing evidence concerning mHealth interventions for patients with breast cancer (BC).

DESIGN: On July 30, 2023, we searched PubMed, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar for articles using the following inclusion criteria: evaluation of mHealth interventions in patients with cancer, at least 30 participants with BC, randomized control trials or prospective pre-post studies, determinants of health (patient-reported outcomes [PROs] and quality of life [QoL]) as primary outcomes, interventions lasting at least 8 weeks, publication after January 2015. Publications were excluded if they evaluated telehealth or used web-based software for desktop devices only. The quality of the included studies was analyzed with the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool and the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies.

RESULTS: We included 30 studies (20 focused on BC), encompassing 5,691 patients with cancer (median 113, IQR, 135.5). Among these, 3,606 had BC (median 99, IQR, 75). All studies contained multiple interventions, including physical activity, tailored information for self-management of the disease, and symptom tracker. Interventions showed better results on self-efficacy (3/3), QoL (10/14), and physical activity (5/7). Lifestyle programs (3/3), expert consulting (4/4), and tailored information (10/11) yielded the best results. Apps with interactive support had a higher rate of positive findings, while interventions targeted to survivors showed worse results. mHealth tools were not available to the public in most of the studies (17/30).

CONCLUSION: mHealth interventions yielded heterogeneous results on different outcomes. Identifying lack of evidence on clinical scenarios (eg, patients undergoing systemic therapy other than chemotherapy) could aid in refining strategic planning for forthcoming research endeavors within this field.

BACKGROUND: The benefit of prophylactic whole pelvis radiation therapy (WPRT) in prostate cancer has been debated for decades, with evidence based mainly on conventional fractionation targeting pelvic nodes.

AIM: This retrospective cohort study aimed to explore the impact of adding moderately hypofractionated pelvic radiotherapy to prostate-only irradiation (PORT) on prognosis, toxicity, and quality of life in real-world settings.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with high-risk and conventionally staged prostate cancer (cT1-3N0M0) treated with moderately hypofractionated WPRT or PORT, using external beam radiotherapy alone or combined with high-dose-rate brachytherapy, at Örebro University Hospital between 2008 and 2021 were identified. Biochemical failure-free survival (BFFS), metastasis-free survival (MFS), prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS), and overall survival (OS) were compared using Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards. Toxicity and quality of life measures were also analysed.

RESULTS: Among 516 patients (227 PORT, 289 WPRT), 5-year BFFS rates were 77 % (PORT) and 74 % (WPRT), adjusted HR=1.50 (95 % CI=0.88-2.55). No significant differences were found in MFS, PCSS, or OS in main analyses. WPRT was associated with a higher risk of acute grade ≥ 2 and 3 genitourinary toxicities whereas no differences in late toxicities or quality of life between PORT and WPRT were observed.

CONCLUSION: We found no significant differences in oncological outcomes or quality of life when comparing moderately hypofractionated PORT to WPRT. Some differences in toxicity patterns were observed. Despite caveats related to study design, our findings support the need for further research on WPRT's impact on treatment-related and patient-reported outcomes.