Amelogenesis imperfecta (AI) is a group of inherited disorders with defective tooth enamel formation caused by various gene mutations. One of the mutations substitutes a cytidine to adenine in exon 6 of the X-chromosomal amelogenin gene, which results in a proline to threonine change in the expressed amelogenin. This transformation is four amino acids N terminal to the proteinase cleavage site in amelogenin for enamel matrix metalloproteinase-20 (MMP-20), also known as enamelysin. MMP-20 effects the release of tyrosine rich amelogenin peptide (TRAP) from amelogenin. This study evaluated the rate MMP-20 hydrolyzes the putative mutated amelogenin cleavage site. The proteolytic site was modeled as a substrate by two synthetic peptides, P1 (SYGYEPMGGWLHHQ) and M1 (SYGYETMGGWLHHQ), selected from residue 36-49 of the amino acid sequence for amelogenin and the respective X-linked amelogenin mutant. Recombinant metalloproteinase-20 (rMMP-20) was used to digest the oligopeptides and the truncated peptides were separated by reversed phase HPLC and identified by mass spectrometry. The results demonstrate that both peptides are cleaved between tryptophan and leucine, matching the TRAP cutting site found in tooth enamel. However, the apparent first order rate of digestion of the mutation containing peptide by rMMP-20 was approximately 25 times slower than that of the non-mutated peptide. This study suggests that the reduced rate of TRAP formation due to a single amino acid substitution may alter enamel formation and consequently result in amelogenesis imperfecta.

Purpose

Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 9508 showed a survival advantage for patients with 1 but not 2 or 3 brain metastasis (BM) treated with whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT) and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) versus WBRT alone. An improved prognostic index, the graded prognostic assessment (GPA) has been developed. Our hypothesis was that if the data from RTOG 9508 were poststratified by the GPA, the conclusions may vary.

Methods and materials

In this analysis, 252 of the 331 patients were evaluable by GPA. Of those, 211 had lung cancer. Breast cancer patients were excluded because the components of the breast GPA are not in the RTOG database. Multiple Cox regression was used to compare survival between treatment groups, adjusting for GPA. Treatment comparisons within subgroups were performed with the log-rank test. A free online tool (brainmetgpa.com) simplified GPA use.

Results

The fundamental conclusions of the primary analysis were confirmed in that there was no survival benefit overall for patients with 1 to 3 metastases; however, there was a benefit for the subset of patients with GPA 3.5 to 4.0 (median survival time [MST] for WBRT + SRS vs WBRT alone was 21.0 versus 10.3 months, P=.05) regardless of the number of metastases. Among patients with GPA 3.5 to 4.0 treated with WBRT and SRS, the MST for patients with 1 versus 2 to 3 metastases was 21 and 14.1 months, respectively.

Conclusions

This secondary analysis of predominantly lung cancer patients, consistent with the original analysis, shows no survival advantage for the group overall when treated with WBRT and SRS; however, in patients with high GPA (3.5-4), there is a survival advantage regardless of whether they have 1, 2, or 3 BM. This benefit did not extend to patients with lower GPA. Prospective validation of this survival benefit for patients with multiple BM and high GPA when treated with WBRT and SRS is warranted.

Recurrence of high-grade prostate cancer after radiotherapy is a significant clinical problem, resulting in increased morbidity and reduced patient survival. The molecular mechanisms of radiation resistance are being elucidated through the study of microRNA (miR) that negatively regulate gene expression. We performed bioinformatics analyses of The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) dataset to evaluate the association between miR-106a and its putative target lipopolysaccharide-induced TNF-α factor (LITAF) in prostate cancer. We characterized the function of miR-106a through in vitro and in vivo experiments and employed transcriptomic analysis, western blotting, and 3'UTR luciferase assays to establish LITAF as a bona fide target of miR-106a. Using our well-characterized radiation-resistant cell lines, we identified that miR-106a was overexpressed in radiation-resistant cells compared to parental cells. In the TCGA, miR-106a was significantly elevated in high-grade human prostate tumors relative to intermediate- and low-grade specimens. An inverse correlation was seen with its target, LITAF. Furthermore, high miR-106a and low LITAF expression predict for biochemical recurrence at 5 years after radical prostatectomy. miR-106a overexpression conferred radioresistance by increasing proliferation and reducing senescence, and this was phenocopied by knockdown of LITAF. For the first time, we describe a role for miRNA in upregulating ATM expression. LITAF, not previously attributed to radiation response, mediates this interaction. This route of cancer radioresistance can be overcome using the specific ATM kinase inhibitor, KU-55933. Our research provides the first report of miR-106a and LITAF in prostate cancer radiation resistance and high-grade disease, and presents a viable therapeutic strategy that may ultimately improve patient outcomes.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 is associated with severe disease in patients with hematologic malignancy. We report a series of patients with underlying hematologic malignancy and coronavirus disease of 2019 with discrepancy between radiographic findings and molecular testing. Initial chest x-ray findings should raise suspicion in immunosuppressed patients with typical clinical presentation even with negative initial testing.

Purpose

This study explores whether meningioma expresses epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and determines if there is a correlation between the WHO grade of this tumor and the degree of EGFR expression.

Methods

Following institutional review board approval, 113 meningioma specimens from 89 patients were chosen. Of these, 85 were used for final analysis. After a blinded review, immunohistochemical stains for EGFR were performed. Staining intensity (SI) was scored on a scale 0-3 (from no staining to strong staining). Staining percentage of immunoreactive cells (SP) was scored 1-5 (from the least to the maximum percent of the specimen staining). Immunohistochemical score (IHS) was calculated as the product of SI and SP.

Results

Eighty-five samples of meningioma were classified in accordance with World Health Organization (WHO) criteria: benign 57/85 (67%), atypical 23/85 (27%), and malignant 5/85 (6%). The majority of samples demonstrated a moderate SI for EGFR. IHS for EGFR demonstrated a significant association between SI and histopathologic subtype. Also, there was a correlation between the SP and histopathologic subtype (p = 0.029). A significant association was determined when the benign and the atypical samples were compared to the malignant with respect to the SP (p = 0.009). While there was a range of the IHS for the benign and the atypical histologic subtypes, malignant tumors exhibited the lowest score and were statistically different from the benign and the atypical specimens (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

To our knowledge, this represents the largest series of meningioma samples analyzed for EGFR expression reported in the literature. EGFR expression is greatest in benign meningiomas and may serve a potential target for therapeutic intervention with selective EGFR inhibitors.

Abstract Background Skull base meningiomas commonly present with cranial neuropathies. Fractionated stereotactic radiation therapy (FSRT) has been used to treat these tumors with excellent local control, but rates of improvement in cranial neuropathies have not been well defined. We review the experience at Thomas Jefferson University using FSRT in the management of these patients with a focus on symptom outcomes. Methods We identified 225 cases of skull base meningiomas treated with FSRT at Thomas Jefferson University from 1994 through 2009. The target volume was the enhancing tumor, treated to a standard prescription dose of 54 Gy. Symptoms at the time of RT were classified based on the cranial nerve affected. Logistic regression was performed to determine predictors of symptom improvement after FSRT. Results The median follow-up time was 4.4 years. In 92% of cases, patients were symptomatic at the time of RT; the most common were impaired visual field/acuity (58%) or extraocular movements (34%). After FSRT, durable improvement of at least one symptom occurred in 57% of cases, including 40% of visual acuity/visual field deficits, and 40% of diplopia/ptosis deficits. Of all symptomatic patients, 27% experienced improvement of at least one symptom within 2 months of the end of RT. Conclusions FSRT is very effective in achieving improvement of cranial neuropathies from skull base meningiomas, particularly visual symptoms. Over half of treated patients experience a durable improvement of at least one symptom, frequently within 2 months from the end of RT.

Question

Do steroids improve neurologic symptoms in patients with metastatic brain tumors compared to no treatment? If steroids are given, what dose should be used? Comparisons include: (1) steroid therapy versus none. (2) comparison of different doses of steroid therapy.

Target population

These recommendations apply to adults diagnosed with brain metastases.

Recommendations

Steroid therapy versus no steroid therapy Asymptomatic brain metastases patients without mass effect Insufficient evidence exists to make a treatment recommendation for this clinical scenario. Brain metastases patients with mild symptoms related to mass effect Level 3 Corticosteroids are recommended to provide temporary symptomatic relief of symptoms related to increased intracranial pressure and edema secondary to brain metastases. It is recommended for patients who are symptomatic from metastatic disease to the brain that a starting dose of 4-8 mg/day of dexamethasone be considered. Brain metastases patients with moderate to severe symptoms related to mass effect Level 3 Corticosteroids are recommended to provide temporary symptomatic relief of symptoms related to increased intracranial pressure and edema secondary to brain metastases. If patients exhibit severe symptoms consistent with increased intracranial pressure, it is recommended that higher doses such as 16 mg/day or more be considered. Choice of Steroid Level 3 If corticosteroids are given, dexamethasone is the best drug choice given the available evidence. Duration of Corticosteroid Administration Level 3 Corticosteroids, if given, should be tapered slowly over a 2 week time period, or longer in symptomatic patients, based upon an individualized treatment regimen and a full understanding of the long-term sequelae of corticosteroid therapy. Given the very limited number of studies (two) which met the eligibility criteria for the systematic review, these are the only recommendations that can be offered based on this methodology. Please see "Discussion" and "Summary" section for additional details.

BACKGROUND:The Congress of Neurological Surgeons (CNS) has developed a series of guidelines on the treatment of adults with metastatic brain tumors, including systemic therapy and supportive care topics. ASCO has a policy and set of procedures for endorsing clinical practice guidelines that have been developed by other professional organizations. METHODS:Two CNS Guidelines were reviewed for developmental rigor by methodologists and an independent multi-disciplinary Expert Panel was formed to review the content and assess agreement with the recommendations. The expert panel voted to endorse the two guidelines and ASCO and SNO independently reviewed and approved the ASCO/SNO guideline endorsement. RESULTS:The ASCO/SNO Expert Panel determined that the recommendations from the CNS anticonvulsants and steroids guidelines, published January 9, 2019, are clear, thorough, and based upon the most relevant scientific evidence. ASCO/SNO endorsed these two CNS guidelines, with minor alterations. CONCLUSIONS:Key recommendations include: prophylactic anti-epileptic drugs were not recommended for routine use; corticosteroids (specifically dexamethasone) were recommended for temporary symptomatic relief in patients with neurologic symptoms and signs related to mass effect from brain metastases.

Question

Do prophylactic anticonvulsants decrease the risk of seizure in patients with metastatic brain tumors compared with no treatment?

Target population

These recommendations apply to adults with solid brain metastases who have not experienced a seizure due to their metastatic brain disease.

Recommendation

Level 3 For adults with brain metastases who have not experienced a seizure due to their metastatic brain disease, routine prophylactic use of anticonvulsants is not recommended. Only a single underpowered randomized controlled trial (RCT), which did not detect a difference in seizure occurrence, provides evidence for decision-making purposes.

What evidence is available regarding the use of whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT), stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), surgical resection or chemotherapy for the treatment of recurrent/progressive brain metastases? Target population This recommendation applies to adults with recurrent/progressive brain metastases who have previously been treated with WBRT, surgical resection and/or radiosurgery. Recurrent/progressive brain metastases are defined as metastases that recur/progress anywhere in the brain (original and/or non-original sites) after initial therapy. Recommendation Level 3 Since there is insufficient evidence to make definitive treatment recommendations in patients with recurrent/progressive brain metastases, treatment should be individualized based on a patient’s functional status, extent of disease, volume/number of metastases, recurrence or progression at original versus non-original site, previous treatment and type of primary cancer, and enrollment in clinical trials is encouraged. In this context, the following can be recommended depending on a patient’s specific condition: no further treatment (supportive care), re-irradiation (either WBRT and/or SRS), surgical excision or, to a lesser extent, chemotherapy. Question If WBRT is used in the setting of recurrent/progressive brain metastases, what impact does tumor histopathology have on treatment outcomes? No studies were identified that met the eligibility criteria for this question.