No abstract

Combining radiotherapy with immune checkpoint blockade may offer considerable therapeutic impact if the immunosuppressive nature of the tumor microenvironment (TME) can be relieved. In this study, we used mathematical models, which can illustrate the potential synergism between immune checkpoint inhibitors and radiotherapy. A discrete-time pharmacodynamic model of the combination of radiotherapy with inhibitors of the PD1-PDL1 axis and/or the CTLA4 pathway is described. This mathematical framework describes how a growing tumor first elicits and then inhibits an antitumor immune response. This antitumor immune response is described by a primary and a secondary (or memory) response. The primary immune response appears first and is inhibited by the PD1-PDL1 axis, whereas the secondary immune response happens next and is inhibited by the CTLA4 pathway. The effects of irradiation are described by a modified version of the linearquadratic model. This modeling offers an explanation for the reported biphasic relationship between the size of a tumor and its immunogenicity, as measured by the abscopal effect (an offtarget immune response). Furthermore, it explains why discontinuing immunotherapy may result in either tumor recurrence or a durably sustained response. Finally, it describes how synchronizing immunotherapy and radiotherapy can produce synergies. The ability of the model to forecast pharmacodynamic endpoints was validated retrospectively by checking that it could describe data from experimental studies, which investigated the combination of radiotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors. In summary, a model such as this could be further used as a simulation tool to facilitate decision making about optimal scheduling of immunotherapy with radiotherapy and perhaps other types of anticancer therapies. Cancer Res; 76(17); 4931-40. Ó2016 AACR.

This dose-dense temozolomide regimen resulted in modest antitumor activity with an acceptable safety profile in the neoadjuvant setting, and expression of MGMT correlated with response to temozolomide. However, this treatment approach seems to be inferior to standard concomitant RT plus temozolomide.

FR and GKS radiosurgery are safe and efficient techniques in treatment of CSMs, affording comparable satisfactory long-term tumor control. However, GKS radiosurgery provides better radiological response, is far more convenient, and fits into most patients lives much better than FR. Therefore, in the authors' opinion, GKS radiosurgery should be advocated in first intention for patients with CSMs, whereas conventional radiotherapy should be reserved for cases that are not amenable to this technique, thus making these two therapeutic modalities not alternative but complementary tools in CS meningioma treatment strategy.