Radiotherapy (RT) has been a fundamental component of the anti-cancer armamentarium for over a century. Approximately half of all cancer patients are treated with radiotherapy during their disease course. Over the two past decades, there has been a growing body of preclinical evidence supporting the immunomodulatory effects of radiotherapy, particularly when combined with immunotherapy, but only anecdotal clinical examples existed until recently. The renaissance of immunotherapy and the recent U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of several immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and other immuno-oncology (IO) agents in multiple cancers provides the opportunity to investigate how localized radiotherapy can induce systemic immune responses. Early clinical experiences have demonstrated feasibility of this approach but additional preclinical and clinical investigation is needed to understand how RT and immunotherapy can be optimally combined.To address questions that are critical to successful incorporation of radiation oncology into immunotherapy, the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) and the National Cancer Institute (NCI) organized a collaborative scientific workshop, Incorporating Radiation Oncology into Immunotherapy, that convened on June 15 and 16 of 2017 at the Natcher Building, NIH Campus in Bethesda, Maryland. This report summarizes key data and highlights from each session.

Study objectives

Solriamfetol, a dopamine/norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, is approved in the United States and European Union for excessive daytime sleepiness in adults with narcolepsy (75-150 mg/day) or obstructive sleep apnea (OSA; 37.5-150 mg/day). In 12-week studies, solriamfetol was associated with improvements in quality of life in participants with narcolepsy or OSA. These analyses evaluated the long-term effects of solriamfetol on quality of life.

Methods

Participants with narcolepsy or OSA who completed previous solriamfetol studies were eligible. A 2-week titration was followed by a maintenance phase ≤ 50 weeks (stable doses: 75, 150, or 300 mg/day). Quality of life assessments included Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire short version, Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire: Specific Health Problem, and 36-Item Short Form Health Survey version 2. Mean (standard deviation) changes from baseline to end of study were evaluated. Data were summarized descriptively. Adverse events were assessed.

Results

Safety population comprised 643 participants (417 OSA, 226 narcolepsy). Solriamfetol improved Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire short version Total scores (mean change [standard deviation], 3.7 [3.0]) and 36-Item Short Form Health Survey version 2 Physical and Mental Component Summary scores (3.1 [6.9] and 4.3 [8.4], respectively); improvements were sustained throughout treatment. On Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire: Specific Health Problem, solriamfetol reduced (improved) % presenteeism, % overall work impairment, and % activity impairment by a minimum of 25%. Common adverse events (≥ 5%): headache, nausea, nasopharyngitis, insomnia, dry mouth, anxiety, decreased appetite, and upper respiratory tract infection.

Conclusions

Long-term solriamfetol treatment was associated with clinically meaningful, sustained improvements in functional status, work productivity, and quality of life for up to 52 weeks. Adverse events were similar between narcolepsy and OSA.

Clinical trial registration

Registry: ClinicalTrials.gov; Name: A Long-Term Safety Study of JZP-110 in the Treatment of Excessive Sleepiness in Subjects with Narcolepsy or OSA; Identifier: NCT02348632; URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02348632.

Citation

Weaver TE, Pepin J-L, Schwab R, et al. Long-term effects of solriamfetol on quality of life and work productivity in participants with excessive daytime sleepiness associated with narcolepsy or obstructive sleep apnea. J Clin Sleep Med. 2021;17(10):1995-2007.

Recent evidence indicates that ionizing radiation can enhance immune responses to tumors. Advances in radiation delivery techniques allow hypofractionated delivery of conformal radiotherapy. Hypofractionation or other modifications of standard fractionation may improve radiation's ability to promote immune responses to tumors. Other novel delivery options may also affect immune responses, including T-cell activation and tumor-antigen presentation changes. However, there is limited understanding of the immunological impact of hypofractionated and unique multifractionated radiotherapy regimens, as these observations are relatively recent. Hence, these differences in radiotherapy fractionation result in distinct immune-modulatory effects. Radiation oncologists and immunologists convened a virtual consensus discussion to identify current deficiencies, challenges, pitfalls and critical gaps when combining radiotherapy with immunotherapy and making recommendations to the field and advise National Cancer Institute on new directions and initiatives that will help further development of these two fields.This commentary aims to raise the awareness of this complexity so that the need to study radiation dose, fractionation, type and volume is understood and valued by the immuno-oncology research community. Divergence of approaches and findings between preclinical studies and clinical trials highlights the need for evaluating the design of future clinical studies with particular emphasis on radiation dose and fractionation, immune biomarkers and selecting appropriate end points for combination radiation/immune modulator trials, recognizing that direct effect on the tumor and potential abscopal effect may well be different. Similarly, preclinical studies should be designed as much as possible to model the intended clinical setting. This article describes a conceptual framework for testing different radiation therapy regimens as separate models of how radiation itself functions as an immunomodulatory 'drug' to provide alternatives to the widely adopted 'one-size-fits-all' strategy of frequently used 8 Gy×3 regimens immunomodulation.

Study objectives

To evaluate long-term safety and maintenance of efficacy of solriamfetol treatment for excessive daytime sleepiness in narcolepsy and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA).

Methods

Participants with narcolepsy or OSA who completed a prior solriamfetol study were eligible. A 2-week titration period was followed by a maintenance phase (up to 50 weeks). Efficacy was assessed by Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) and Patient and Clinical Global Impression of Change (PGI-C and CGI-C, respectively). After approximately 6 months of treatment, a subgroup entered a 2-week placebo-controlled randomized withdrawal (RW) phase. Change in ESS from beginning to end of the RW phase was the primary endpoint; PGI-C and CGI-C were secondary endpoints. Safety was assessed throughout the study.

Results

In the maintenance phase, solriamfetol-treated participants demonstrated clinically meaningful improvements on ESS, PGI-C, and CGI-C. In the RW phase, least squares mean change on ESS was 1.6 in participants continuing solriamfetol versus 5.3 in participants switched to placebo (p < .0001). For both secondary endpoints, higher percentages of participants receiving placebo were reported as worse at the end of the RW phase versus solriamfetol (p < .0001). Common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) with solriamfetol were headache, nausea, nasopharyngitis, insomnia, dry mouth, anxiety, decreased appetite, and upper respiratory tract infection; 27 (4.2%) participants experienced at least one serious TEAE, and 61 (9.5%) withdrew because of TEAEs.

Conclusions

This study demonstrated long-term maintenance of efficacy of solriamfetol under open-label and double-blind, placebo-controlled conditions. Safety profile of solriamfetol was consistent with previous 12-week studies; no new safety concerns were identified.

Trial registration

NCT02348632.

Improved understanding of soft-tissue sarcoma (STS) biology has led to better distinction and subtyping of these diseases with the hope of exploiting the molecular characteristics of each subtype to develop appropriately targeted treatment regimens. In the care of patients with extremity STS, adjunctive radiation therapy (RT) is used to facilitate limb and function, preserving surgeries while maintaining five-year local control above 85%. In contrast, for STS originating from nonextremity anatomical sites, the rate of local recurrence is much higher (five-year local control is approximately 50%) and a major cause of death and morbidity in these patients. Incorporating novel technological advancements to administer accurate RT in combination with novel radiosensitizing agents could potentially improve local control and overall survival. RT efficacy in STS can be increased by modulating biological pathways such as angiogenesis, cell cycle regulation, cell survival signaling, and cancer-host immune interactions. Previous experiences, advancements, ongoing research, and current clinical trials combining RT with agents modulating one or more of the above pathways are reviewed. The standard clinical management of patients with STS with pretreatment biopsy, neoadjuvant treatment, and primary surgery provides an opportune disease model for interrogating translational hypotheses. The purpose of this review is to outline a strategic vision for clinical translation of preclinical findings and to identify appropriate targeted agents to combine with radiotherapy in the treatment of STS from different sites and/or different histology subtypes.

A workshop entitled "Radiation-Induced Fibrosis: Mechanisms and Opportunities to Mitigate" (held in Rockville, MD, September 19, 2016) was organized by the Radiation Research Program and Radiation Oncology Branch of the Center for Cancer Research (CCR) of the National Cancer Institute (NCI), to identify critical research areas and directions that will advance the understanding of radiation-induced fibrosis (RIF) and accelerate the development of strategies to mitigate or treat it. Experts in radiation biology, radiation oncology and related fields met to identify and prioritize the key areas for future research and clinical translation. The consensus was that several known and newly identified targets can prevent or mitigate RIF in pre-clinical models. Further, basic and translational research and focused clinical trials are needed to identify optimal agents and strategies for therapeutic use. It was felt that optimally designed preclinical models are needed to better study biomarkers that predict for development of RIF, as well as to understand when effective therapies need to be initiated in relationship to manifestation of injury. Integrating appropriate endpoints and defining efficacy in clinical trials testing treatment of RIF were felt to be critical to demonstrating efficacy. The objective of this meeting report is to (a) highlight the significance of RIF in a global context, (b) summarize recent advances in our understanding of mechanisms of RIF,

Colorectal cancer (CRC) represents a major public health problem as the second leading cause of cancer-related mortality in the United States. Of an estimated 140,000 newly diagnosed CRC cases in 2018, roughly one-third of these patients will have a primary tumor located in the distal large bowel or rectum. The current standard-of-care approach includes curative-intent surgery, often after preoperative (neoadjuvant) radiotherapy (RT), to increase rates of tumor down-staging, clinical and pathologic response, as well as improving surgical resection quality. However, despite advancements in surgical techniques, as well as sharpened precision of dosimetry offered by contemporary RT delivery platforms, the oncology community continues to face challenges related to disease relapse. Ongoing investigations are aimed at testing novel radiosensitizing agents and treatments that might exploit the systemic antitumor effects of RT using immunotherapies. If successful, these treatments may usher in a new curative paradigm for rectal cancers, such that surgical interventions may be avoided. Importantly, this disease offers an opportunity to correlate matched paired biopsies, radiographic response, and molecular mechanisms of treatment sensitivity and resistance with clinical outcomes. Herein, the authors highlight the available evidence from preclinical models and early-phase studies, with an emphasis on promising developmental therapeutics undergoing prospective validation in larger scale clinical trials. This review by the National Cancer Institute's Radiation Research Program Colorectal Cancer Working Group provides an updated, comprehensive examination of the continuously evolving state of the science regarding radiosensitizer drug development in the curative treatment of CRC.

Myeloid cells are recruited to damaged tissues where they can resolve infections and tumor growth or stimulate wound healing and tumor progression. Recruitment of these cells is regulated by integrins, a family of adhesion receptors that includes integrin CD11b. Here we report that, unexpectedly, integrin CD11b does not regulate myeloid cell recruitment to tumors but instead controls myeloid cell polarization and tumor growth. CD11b activation promotes pro-inflammatory macrophage polarization by stimulating expression of microRNA Let7a. In contrast, inhibition of CD11b prevents Let7a expression and induces cMyc expression, leading to immune suppressive macrophage polarization, vascular maturation, and accelerated tumor growth. Pharmacological activation of CD11b with a small molecule agonist, Leukadherin 1 (LA1), promotes pro-inflammatory macrophage polarization and suppresses tumor growth in animal models of murine and human cancer. These studies identify CD11b as negative regulator of immune suppression and a target for cancer immune therapy.

Cellular senescence is an essential tumor suppressive mechanism that prevents the propagation of oncogenically activated, genetically unstable, and/or damaged cells. Induction of tumor cell senescence is also one of the underlying mechanisms by which cancer therapies exert antitumor activity. However, an increasing body of evidence from preclinical studies demonstrates that radiation and chemotherapy cause accumulation of senescent cells (SnCs) both in tumor and normal tissue. SnCs in tumors can, paradoxically, promote tumor relapse, metastasis, and resistance to therapy, in part, through expression of the senescence-associated secretory phenotype. In addition, SnCs in normal tissue can contribute to certain radiation- and chemotherapy-induced side effects. Because of its multiple roles, cellular senescence could serve as an important target in the fight against cancer. This commentary provides a summary of the discussion at the National Cancer Institute Workshop on Radiation, Senescence, and Cancer (August 10-11, 2020, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD) regarding the current status of senescence research, heterogeneity of therapy-induced senescence, current status of senotherapeutics and molecular biomarkers, a concept of "one-two punch" cancer therapy (consisting of therapeutics to induce tumor cell senescence followed by selective clearance of SnCs), and its integration with personalized adaptive tumor therapy. It also identifies key knowledge gaps and outlines future directions in this emerging field to improve treatment outcomes for cancer patients.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has emerged as a major cause of cancer deaths globally. The landscape of systemic therapy has recently changed, with six additional systemic agents either approved or awaiting approval for advanced stage HCC. While these agents have the potential to improve outcomes, a survival increase of 2-5 months remains poor and falls short of what has been achieved in many other solid tumor types. The roles of genomics, underlying cirrhosis, and optimal use of treatment strategies that include radiation, liver transplantation, and surgery remain unanswered. Here, we discuss new treatment opportunities, controversies, and future directions in managing HCC.