Pub Date : 2024-10-06DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100874
Colorectal cancer patients with ≤10 unresectable metastases were treated with single-fraction sub-ablative radiotherapy in addition to standard of care systemic therapy in a single-arm, open-label, multicenter, pilot study (SIRIUS) to assess feasibility and safety. Results indicate that radiotherapy combined with systemic therapy is feasible and safe in this population.
{"title":"Feasibility and safety of single-fraction sub-ablative radiotherapy with systemic therapy in colorectal cancer patients with ≤ 10 metastases: A multicenter pilot study (NCT05375708)","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100874","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100874","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Colorectal cancer patients with ≤10 unresectable metastases were treated with single-fraction sub-ablative radiotherapy in addition to standard of care systemic therapy in a single-arm, open-label, multicenter, pilot study (SIRIUS) to assess feasibility and safety. Results indicate that radiotherapy combined with systemic therapy is feasible and safe in this population.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":10342,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Translational Radiation Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2024-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142427425","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-10-02DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100870
As the treatment for cancer improves and advances are made, the clinical focus is often on treatment response and survival. However, these are not the only factors which are important to patients. More patients are living longer after cancer treatment and therefore it is important that we can describe not only the treatment to patients but also what their life will be like during and after treatment. Patient reported outcomes (PROs) allow us to describe these. Although there are a range of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) available to the clinician to assess these, the use of them in many areas of brachytherapy lags behind ideal levels. Brachytherapy has many features that differ to external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) yet the assessment of quality of life during and after treatment is much more scarce than EBRT. Brachytherapy is often used in the setting of organ preservation or in place of radical surgery, yet there is a paucity of quality of life data comparing the different treatment modalities. This review article will aim to elaborate on the evidence that exists in the use of specific PROMs within prostate, breast and gynaecologic cancers and describe the development of a novel PROMs approach in rectal brachytherapy which aims to identify and resolve symptoms at an early stage.
{"title":"Measuring patient reported outcomes in brachytherapy: Why we should do it and more importantly how","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100870","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100870","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>As the treatment for cancer improves and advances are made, the clinical focus is often on treatment response and survival. However, these are not the only factors which are important to patients. More patients are living longer after cancer treatment and therefore it is important that we can describe not only the treatment to patients but also what their life will be like during and after treatment. Patient reported outcomes (PROs) allow us to describe these. Although there are a range of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) available to the clinician to assess these, the use of them in many areas of brachytherapy lags behind ideal levels. Brachytherapy has many features that differ to external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) yet the assessment of quality of life during and after treatment is much more scarce than EBRT. Brachytherapy is often used in the setting of organ preservation or in place of radical surgery, yet there is a paucity of quality of life data comparing the different treatment modalities. This review article will aim to elaborate on the evidence that exists in the use of specific PROMs within prostate, breast and gynaecologic cancers and describe the development of a novel PROMs approach in rectal brachytherapy which aims to identify and resolve symptoms at an early stage.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":10342,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Translational Radiation Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2024-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142427426","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-10-02DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100871
With the emergence of high-precision radiotherapy technologies such as stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR), MR guided brachytherapy, image guided intensity modulated photon and proton radiotherapy and most recently daily adaptive radiotherapy, reirradiation is increasingly recognized as a viable treatment option for many patients. This includes those with recurrent, metastatic or new malignancies post initial radiotherapy. The primary challenge in reirradiation lies in balancing tumor control against the risk of severe toxicity from cumulative radiation doses to previously irradiated normal tissue.
Although technology for precise delivery has advanced at a fast pace, clinical practice of reirradiation still mostly relies on individual expertise, as prospective evidence is scarce, the level of reporting in clinical studies is not standardized and of low quality − especially with respect to cumulative doses received by organs at risk.
A recent ESTRO/EORTC initiative proposed a standardized definition of reirradiation and formulated general requirements for minimal reporting in clinical studies [1].
As a consequence we found it timely to convene for an international and interdisciplinary meeting with experts in the field to summarize the current evidence, identify knowledge gaps and explore which best practices can be derived for safe reirradiation. The meeting was held on 15.06.2023 in Zurich and was endorsed by the scientific societies SASRO, DEGRO and ESTRO. Here, we report on available evidence and research priorities in the field of reirradiation, as discussed during the meeting.
{"title":"Reirradiation − still navigating uncharted waters?","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100871","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100871","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>With the emergence of high-precision radiotherapy technologies such as stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR), MR guided brachytherapy, image guided intensity modulated photon and proton radiotherapy and most recently daily adaptive radiotherapy, reirradiation is increasingly recognized as a viable treatment option for many patients. This includes those with recurrent, metastatic or new malignancies post initial radiotherapy. The primary challenge in reirradiation lies in balancing tumor control against the risk of severe toxicity from cumulative radiation doses to previously irradiated normal tissue.</div><div>Although technology for precise delivery has advanced at a fast pace, clinical practice of reirradiation still mostly relies on individual expertise, as prospective evidence is scarce, the level of reporting in clinical studies is not standardized and of low quality − especially with respect to cumulative doses received by organs at risk.</div><div>A recent ESTRO/EORTC initiative proposed a standardized definition of reirradiation and formulated general requirements for minimal reporting in clinical studies <span><span>[1]</span></span>.</div><div>As a consequence we found it timely to convene for an international and interdisciplinary meeting with experts in the field to summarize the current evidence, identify knowledge gaps and explore which best practices can be derived for safe reirradiation. The meeting was held on 15.06.2023 in Zurich and was endorsed by the scientific societies SASRO, DEGRO and ESTRO. Here, we report on available evidence and research priorities in the field of reirradiation, as discussed during the meeting.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":10342,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Translational Radiation Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2024-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142427429","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-10-01DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100872
Background and purpose
The use of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) for prostate cancer has increased significantly. However, SABR can elevate the risk of moderate gastrointestinal (GI) side effects. Rectal spacers mitigate this risk by reducing the rectal dose. This study evaluates the impact of rectal spacers in MR-guided adaptive radiotherapy (MRgART) for prostate SABR.
Materials and methods
A retrospective analysis was conducted on twenty patients with localised prostate cancer treated on the Unity MR-Linac at a single centre. Half of the cohort (n = 10) had rectal spacers placed before treatment. The adapt-to-shape strategy was used for online MRgART, and non-adapted plans were later generated offline for comparison. Dosimetric assessments were made between spacer and no-spacer cohorts, and between online adapted and non-adapted plans. Clinician-reported outcomes for genitourinary (GU) and GI toxicity were assessed at 3-, 6-, and 12-months post-treatment using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v.5.0.
Results
No grade 2 or higher toxicity was observed in either cohort. Overall, the dosimetric analysis showed comparable results between the cohorts for target volumes, with D95% of 36.3 Gy in the spacer cohort and 36.0 Gy in the no-spacer cohort (p = 0.08). The spacer cohort demonstrated significant benefits in all rectal dose objectives (p < 0.0001) and in some bladder objectives (V40, p = 0.03; V36, p = 0.03). Failure rates for achieving planning objectives were similar between spacer and no-spacer groups for online adapted plans, with most rates ranging from 0 % to 4 % in both groups.
Conclusion
The findings from this cohort suggest that MRgART is safe and effective for prostate SABR, with comparable toxicity rates in both spacer and no-spacer cohorts. While rectal spacers offer dosimetric advantages, the adaptive nature of MRgART can mitigate some dosimetric disparities, potentially reducing the need for invasive spacer placement. However, further studies with larger patient populations are needed to confirm these results.
{"title":"The impact of rectal spacers in MR-guided adaptive radiotherapy","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100872","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100872","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and purpose</h3><div>The use of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) for prostate cancer has increased significantly. However, SABR can elevate the risk of moderate gastrointestinal (GI) side effects. Rectal spacers mitigate this risk by reducing the rectal dose. This study evaluates the impact of rectal spacers in MR-guided adaptive radiotherapy (MRgART) for prostate SABR.</div></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><div>A retrospective analysis was conducted on twenty patients with localised prostate cancer treated on the Unity MR-Linac at a single centre. Half of the cohort (n = 10) had rectal spacers placed before treatment. The adapt-to-shape strategy was used for online MRgART, and non-adapted plans were later generated offline for comparison. Dosimetric assessments were made between spacer and no-spacer cohorts, and between online adapted and non-adapted plans. Clinician-reported outcomes for genitourinary (GU) and GI toxicity were assessed at 3-, 6-, and 12-months post-treatment using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v.5.0.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>No grade 2 or higher toxicity was observed in either cohort. Overall, the dosimetric analysis showed comparable results between the cohorts for target volumes, with D95% of 36.3 Gy in the spacer cohort and 36.0 Gy in the no-spacer cohort (p = 0.08). The spacer cohort demonstrated significant benefits in all rectal dose objectives (p < 0.0001) and in some bladder objectives (V40, p = 0.03; V36, p = 0.03). Failure rates for achieving planning objectives were similar between spacer and no-spacer groups for online adapted plans, with most rates ranging from 0 % to 4 % in both groups.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The findings from this cohort suggest that MRgART is safe and effective for prostate SABR, with comparable toxicity rates in both spacer and no-spacer cohorts. While rectal spacers offer dosimetric advantages, the adaptive nature of MRgART can mitigate some dosimetric disparities, potentially reducing the need for invasive spacer placement. However, further studies with larger patient populations are needed to confirm these results.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":10342,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Translational Radiation Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142427428","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-09-29DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100869
Purpose
The optimal management of stage II follicular lymphoma (FL) is unclear. Radiation therapy (RT) alone has been the gold standard treatment, but a proportion of patients relapse. We sought to characterize outcomes and prognostic factors for stage II FL treated with RT alone to identify a high-risk subgroup of patients who may benefit from treatment intensification.
Methods
This was a population-based, province-wide, retrospective study. Included patients had grade 1–3A, non-mesenteric, stage IIA or IIAE FL diagnosed between 1986 and 2016 and treated with curative-intent (≥20 Gy) RT alone.
Results
102 patients were included. Median follow-up was 10.4 years (range, 0.3–22.3). Median age was 59 years (range, 33–86). Median greatest disease diameter was 3.6 cm (range, 1.5–11.5). Freedom from progression (FFP) was 60.3% at 5 years and 40.7% at 10 years. Overall survival (OS) was 89.2% at 5 years and 81.8% at 10 years. Greatest disease diameter of >3.6 cm was associated with inferior FFP (10-year FFP 34% vs. 47%, p = 0.013) on univariable analysis and inferior FFP (hazard ratio [HR] 1.87, p = 0.019) and inferior OS (HR 2.12, p = 0.027) on multivariable analysis (MVA). Older age was associated with inferior OS (HR 1.08, unit = 1 year, p < 0.001) on MVA.
Conclusions
40.7% of stage II FL patients treated with RT alone remained disease-free at 10 years. Greatest disease diameter >3.6 cm was associated with inferior FFP and OS, representing a novel prognostic indicator in this population that may help in the decision-making process on whether to complement RT with systemic therapy.
{"title":"Maximum disease diameter is associated with outcomes in stage II follicular lymphoma treated with radiation therapy alone","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100869","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100869","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>The optimal management of stage II follicular lymphoma (FL) is unclear. Radiation therapy (RT) alone has been the gold standard treatment, but a proportion of patients relapse. We sought to characterize outcomes and prognostic factors for stage II FL treated with RT alone to identify a high-risk subgroup of patients who may benefit from treatment intensification.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This was a population-based, province-wide, retrospective study. Included patients had grade 1–3A, non-mesenteric, stage IIA or IIAE FL diagnosed between 1986 and 2016 and treated with curative-intent (≥20 Gy) RT alone.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>102 patients were included. Median follow-up was 10.4 years (range, 0.3–22.3). Median age was 59 years (range, 33–86). Median greatest disease diameter was 3.6 cm (range, 1.5–11.5). Freedom from progression (FFP) was 60.3% at 5 years and 40.7% at 10 years. Overall survival (OS) was 89.2% at 5 years and 81.8% at 10 years. Greatest disease diameter of >3.6 cm was associated with inferior FFP (10-year FFP 34% vs. 47%, <em>p</em> = 0.013) on univariable analysis and inferior FFP (hazard ratio [HR] 1.87, <em>p</em> = 0.019) and inferior OS (HR 2.12, <em>p</em> = 0.027) on multivariable analysis (MVA). Older age was associated with inferior OS (HR 1.08, unit = 1 year, <em>p</em> < 0.001) on MVA.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>40.7% of stage II FL patients treated with RT alone remained disease-free at 10 years. Greatest disease diameter >3.6 cm was associated with inferior FFP and OS, representing a novel prognostic indicator in this population that may help in the decision-making process on whether to complement RT with systemic therapy.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":10342,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Translational Radiation Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2024-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142427427","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-09-28DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100866
Purpose
Trimodality therapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) yields similar oncologic outcomes compared to radical cystectomy in appropriately selected patients; however, data regarding locally advanced MIBC (LA-MIBC) is limited. We explored our experience with LA-MIBC undergoing radiation therapy (RT).
Methods
We retrospectively identified 30 patients from an institutional prospectively collated database with non-metastatic, LA-MIBC. Patients with T3-4 N0 or T2-4 N + treated from 2012 to 2022 with definitive-intent RT, who were not candidates for cystectomy were included. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate time-to-event outcomes, and multivariate analyses were conducted using Cox proportional hazards modeling.
Results
43 % had T3N0 disease, 30 % had T4N0 disease, and 27 % had node positive disease.. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy/systemic therapy was administered in 63 % of patients. Median dose and fractionation of RT was 60 Gy in 30 fractions. 23 % of patients received hypofractionated RT, 57 % received nodal RT.
At a median follow-up of 20 (range, 1–75) months after RT, estimated 1- and 2-year OS was 73 % and 61 %, respectively. Estimated 1-year progression-free survival was 50 %. Local bladder failure was a component of progression in 17 % of patients, and all local bladder failure events occurred within the first 12 months following RT. Lymph node or distant metastases occurred in 23 % of patients. Estimated 1-year OS was 83 % with pure urothelial histology but only 58 % with variant histology (P = 0.001). Late grade 3 + GU and GI toxicity occurred in 7 % and 5 % of patients, respectively.
Conclusions
In this cohort with LA-MIBC treated with RT, distant failures predominate, local failures are less common, and toxicity was minimal. Survival outcomes remain encouraging for RT in this challenging patient population. Further investigation is warranted to identify biomarkers for patient selection and strategies to improve distant control.
目的对于经过适当选择的患者，肌层浸润性膀胱癌（MIBC）的三联疗法与根治性膀胱切除术相比，可获得相似的肿瘤治疗效果；然而，有关局部晚期肌层浸润性膀胱癌（LA-MIBC）的数据却很有限。我们探讨了接受放射治疗（RT）的 LA-MIBC 患者的经验。我们纳入了2012年至2022年期间接受确定性RT治疗的T3-4 N0或T2-4 N +患者，这些患者不适合接受膀胱切除术。采用Kaplan-Meier分析法估算从时间到事件的结果，并采用Cox比例危险模型进行多变量分析。结果43%的患者病情为T3N0，30%的患者病情为T4N0，27%的患者病情为结节阳性。63%的患者接受了新辅助化疗/系统治疗。RT的中位剂量和分次剂量为60 Gy，分30次进行。23%的患者接受了低分量RT，57%的患者接受了结节RT。RT治疗后的中位随访时间为20个月（1-75个月），估计1年和2年的OS分别为73%和61%。估计1年无进展生存率为50%。局部膀胱功能衰竭是17%患者病情进展的一个因素，所有局部膀胱功能衰竭事件都发生在RT术后的前12个月内。23%的患者出现淋巴结或远处转移。纯尿路上皮组织学患者的估计 1 年 OS 为 83%，而变异组织学患者仅为 58%（P = 0.001）。结论 在这组接受 RT 治疗的 LA-MIBC 患者中，远处治疗失败者居多，局部治疗失败者较少，且毒性很小。在这一具有挑战性的患者群体中，RT的生存结果仍然令人鼓舞。有必要进行进一步研究，以确定选择患者的生物标志物和改善远处控制的策略。
{"title":"Bladder-preserving radiation therapy for patients with locally advanced and node-positive bladder cancer","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100866","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100866","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>Trimodality therapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) yields similar oncologic outcomes compared to radical cystectomy in appropriately selected patients; however, data regarding locally advanced MIBC (LA-MIBC) is limited. We explored our experience with LA-MIBC undergoing radiation therapy (RT).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We retrospectively identified 30 patients from an institutional prospectively collated database with non-metastatic, LA-MIBC. Patients with T3-4 N0 or T2-4 N + treated from 2012 to 2022 with definitive-intent RT, who were not candidates for cystectomy were included. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate time-to-event outcomes, and multivariate analyses were conducted using Cox proportional hazards modeling.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>43 % had T3N0 disease, 30 % had T4N0 disease, and 27 % had node positive disease.. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy/systemic therapy was administered in 63 % of patients. Median dose and fractionation of RT was 60 Gy in 30 fractions. 23 % of patients received hypofractionated RT, 57 % received nodal RT.</div><div>At a median follow-up of 20 (range, 1–75) months after RT, estimated 1- and 2-year OS was 73 % and 61 %, respectively. Estimated 1-year progression-free survival was 50 %. Local bladder failure was a component of progression in 17 % of patients, and all local bladder failure events occurred within the first 12 months following RT. Lymph node or distant metastases occurred in 23 % of patients. Estimated 1-year OS was 83 % with pure urothelial histology but only 58 % with variant histology (P = 0.001). Late grade 3 + GU and GI toxicity occurred in 7 % and 5 % of patients, respectively.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>In this cohort with LA-MIBC treated with RT, distant failures predominate, local failures are less common, and toxicity was minimal. Survival outcomes remain encouraging for RT in this challenging patient population. Further investigation is warranted to identify biomarkers for patient selection and strategies to improve distant control.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":10342,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Translational Radiation Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2024-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142358345","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-09-22DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100864
Background
Particle therapy is effective for the treatment of soft tissue sarcomas. However, the clinical outcomes of definitive particle therapy, particularly for dedifferentiated liposarcoma (DDLS), remain unknown.
Purpose
To analyze the treatment outcomes of proton and carbon ion particle therapies for DDLS.
Methods
We retrospectively included patients with DDLS who were treated with particle therapy between 2008 and 2022. The local control (LC), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) rates were evaluated.
Results
Fifty-seven patients were included in this analysis. The median patient age was 68 years (range, 36–91 years). The most common tumor site was the retroperitoneum (n = 37), with a median gross tumor volume (GTV) of 181 cm3. Twenty-nine patients received proton therapy, and 28 patients received carbon ion therapy. The most common fractionation dose was 70.4 Gy (relative biological effectiveness) in 32 fractions (72.7 Gy equivalent dose in 2 Gy fractions [EQD2]). The median follow-up time was 33 months (range, 1–128 months). The 3-year LC, PFS, and OS rates were 73.1 %, 44.6 %, and 70.6 %, respectively. Patients who received a higher prescribed dose (≥72.7 Gy EQD2) showed significantly better LC (p = 0.04) than did those who received a lower prescribed dose. Moreover, those with a larger GTV (≥181 cm3) had significantly worse OS (p = 0.04) than did those with a smaller GTV. Late adverse events occurred in five (9 %) patients.
Conclusions
Particle therapy using protons or carbon ions for the treatment of DDLS is safe and provides good OS and LC. However, further studies with longer follow-up periods and larger cohorts are warranted.
{"title":"Definitive particle therapy using protons or carbon ions for dedifferentiated liposarcoma","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100864","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100864","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Particle therapy is effective for the treatment of soft tissue sarcomas. However, the clinical outcomes of definitive particle therapy, particularly for dedifferentiated liposarcoma (DDLS), remain unknown.</div></div><div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>To analyze the treatment outcomes of proton and carbon ion particle therapies for DDLS.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We retrospectively included patients with DDLS who were treated with particle therapy between 2008 and 2022. The local control (LC), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) rates were evaluated.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Fifty-seven patients were included in this analysis. The median patient age was 68 years (range, 36–91 years). The most common tumor site was the retroperitoneum (n = 37), with a median gross tumor volume (GTV) of 181 cm<sup>3</sup>. Twenty-nine patients received proton therapy, and 28 patients received carbon ion therapy. The most common fractionation dose was 70.4 Gy (relative biological effectiveness) in 32 fractions (72.7 Gy equivalent dose in 2 Gy fractions [EQD2]). The median follow-up time was 33 months (range, 1–128 months). The 3-year LC, PFS, and OS rates were 73.1 %, 44.6 %, and 70.6 %, respectively. Patients who received a higher prescribed dose (≥72.7 Gy EQD2) showed significantly better LC (p = 0.04) than did those who received a lower prescribed dose. Moreover, those with a larger GTV (≥181 cm<sup>3</sup>) had significantly worse OS (p = 0.04) than did those with a smaller GTV. Late adverse events occurred in five (9 %) patients.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Particle therapy using protons or carbon ions for the treatment of DDLS is safe and provides good OS and LC. However, further studies with longer follow-up periods and larger cohorts are warranted.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":10342,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Translational Radiation Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2024-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142324127","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-09-22DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100865
This review explores the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in interventional radiotherapy (IRT), emphasizing its potential to streamline workflows and enhance patient care. Through a systematic analysis of 78 relevant papers spanning from 2002 to 2024, we identified significant advancements in contouring, treatment planning, outcome prediction, and quality assurance. AI-driven approaches offer promise in reducing procedural times, personalizing treatments, and improving treatment outcomes for oncological patients. However, challenges such as clinical validation and quality assurance protocols persist. Nonetheless, AI presents a transformative opportunity to optimize IRT and meet evolving patient needs.
{"title":"Artificial intelligence in interventional radiotherapy (brachytherapy): Enhancing patient-centered care and addressing patients’ needs","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100865","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100865","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This review explores the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in interventional radiotherapy (IRT), emphasizing its potential to streamline workflows and enhance patient care. Through a systematic analysis of 78 relevant papers spanning from 2002 to 2024, we identified significant advancements in contouring, treatment planning, outcome prediction, and quality assurance. AI-driven approaches offer promise in reducing procedural times, personalizing treatments, and improving treatment outcomes for oncological patients. However, challenges such as clinical validation and quality assurance protocols persist. Nonetheless, AI presents a transformative opportunity to optimize IRT and meet evolving patient needs.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":10342,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Translational Radiation Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2024-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142319513","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-09-21DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100867
Purpose
This study represents a prospective phase I clinical research to verify the effectiveness and reliability of hydrogel application in Chinese cervical cancer patients.
Materials and Methods
Eight patients were enrolled in the study. After completing intensity-modulated radiotherapy at 50.4 Gy/28 fractions, a 10 mL injection of hydrogel was administered to each patient through the posterior vaginal fornix under CT-guidance. Image-guided brachytherapy under CT or MRI guidance was given with a target dose of 6 Gy in 5 fractions to the high-risk clinical target volume. Rectal, sigmoid colon, and bladder D2cm3 were recorded for each brachytherapy. MRI scans were performed to measure the distance between the rectum and the cervix or tumor, as well as the spacer gel volume. Patients’ QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CX24 scores were recorded to assess treatment outcomes, and all adverse events were documented.
Results
Among the eight patients, the average D2cc was 60.9 ± 3.4 Gy for the rectum, 64.7 ± 6.8 Gy for sigmoid colon and 77.1 ± 7.4 Gy for bladder, respectively. The distance between the cervix and rectum significantly increased after gel injection. None of the eight patients experienced grade 3 or higher acute toxic reactions during brachytherapy. None patient experienced late rectal toxicity. No adverse events definitively associated with the hydrogel were observed. Patients’ subjective quality of life scores did not significantly change before and after gel injection. The reduction ro the volume of the hydrogel were observed during the 24 to 36 weeks after injection.
Conclusion
The application of the hydrogel effectively increased the distance between the cervix and rectum in brachytherapy for cervical cancer, limiting the rectal dose without increasing doses to other critical organs. In the short term, no severe adverse events were observed, indicating the safety and reliability of this approach. Further research is warranted to confirm its long-term safety and effectiveness.
{"title":"A phase I clinical trial evaluating the application of hydrogel in reducing rectal dose during cervical cancer brachytherapy","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100867","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100867","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>This study represents a prospective phase I clinical research to verify the effectiveness and reliability of hydrogel application in Chinese cervical cancer patients.</div></div><div><h3>Materials and Methods</h3><div>Eight patients were enrolled in the study. After completing intensity-modulated radiotherapy at 50.4 Gy/28 fractions, a 10 mL injection of hydrogel was administered to each patient through the posterior vaginal fornix under CT-guidance. Image-guided brachytherapy under CT or MRI guidance was given with a target dose of 6 Gy in 5 fractions to the high-risk clinical target volume. Rectal, sigmoid colon, and bladder D2cm3 were recorded for each brachytherapy. MRI scans were performed<!--> <!-->to measure the distance between the rectum and the cervix or tumor, as well as the spacer gel volume. Patients’ QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CX24 scores were recorded to assess treatment outcomes, and all adverse events were documented.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Among the eight patients, the average D2cc was 60.9 ± 3.4 Gy for the rectum, 64.7 ± 6.8 Gy for sigmoid colon and 77.1 ± 7.4 Gy for bladder, respectively. The distance between the cervix and rectum significantly increased after gel injection. None of the eight patients experienced grade 3 or higher acute toxic reactions<!--> <!-->during brachytherapy. None patient<!--> <!-->experienced late rectal toxicity. No adverse events definitively associated with the hydrogel were observed. Patients’ subjective quality of life scores did not significantly change before and after gel injection. The reduction ro the volume of the hydrogel were observed during the 24 to 36 <!--> <!-->weeks after injection.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The application of the hydrogel effectively increased the distance between the cervix and rectum in brachytherapy for cervical cancer, limiting the rectal dose without increasing doses to other critical organs. In the short term, no severe adverse events were observed, indicating the safety and reliability of this approach. Further research is warranted to confirm its long-term safety and effectiveness.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":10342,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Translational Radiation Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2024-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405630824001447/pdfft?md5=ed484f6b876ea660f880efcfdaae59cb&pid=1-s2.0-S2405630824001447-main.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142315815","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-09-21DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100868
Purpose
This study aims to address therapy-related toxicities and quality of life in prostate cancer patients undergoing transperineal ultrasound (TPUS) guided radiotherapy (RT).
Methods
Acute and late gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicities were assessed by physicians using CTCAE v5.0. Patient-reported quality of life outcomes were evaluated using EORTC QLQ-C30, -PR25 and IPSS. We utilized Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) or intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) as the RT technique for this study. The assessments were carried out before RT, at RT end, 3 months after RT and subsequently at 1-year intervals. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was also evaluated at each follow-up.
Results
In this study, a total of 164 patients were enrolled, while among them, 112 patients delivered quality-of-life data in a prospective evaluation. The median pre-treatment PSA was 7.9 ng/mL (range: 1.8–169 ng/ml). At the median follow-up of 19 months (3–82 months), the median PSA decreased to 0.22 ng/ml. Acute grade II GI and GU toxicities occurred in 8.6 % and 21.5 % patients at RT end. Regarding late toxicities, 2.2 % patients experienced grade II GI toxicities at 27 months and only one patient at 51 months, whereas no grade II GU late toxicities were reported at these time points. Quality of life scores also indicated a well-tolerated treatment. Patients mainly experienced acute clinically relevant symptoms of fatigue, pain, as well as deterioration in bowel and urinary symptoms. However, most symptoms normalized at 3 months and remained stable thereafter. Overall functioning showed a similar decline at RT end but improved over time.
Conclusion
The outcomes of TPUS-guided RT demonstrated promising results in terms of minimal physician-reported toxicities and satisfactory patient-reported QoL.
{"title":"Physician reported toxicities and patient reported quality of life of transperineal ultrasound-guided radiotherapy of prostate cancer","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100868","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100868","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>This study aims to address therapy-related toxicities and quality of life in prostate cancer patients undergoing transperineal ultrasound (TPUS) guided radiotherapy (RT).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Acute and late gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicities were assessed by physicians using CTCAE v5.0. Patient-reported quality of life outcomes were evaluated using EORTC QLQ-C30, -PR25 and IPSS. We utilized Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) or intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) as the RT technique for this study. The assessments were carried out before RT, at RT end, 3 months after RT and subsequently at 1-year intervals. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was also evaluated at each follow-up.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>In this study, a total of 164 patients were enrolled, while among them, 112 patients delivered quality-of-life data in a prospective evaluation. The median pre-treatment PSA was 7.9 ng/mL (range: 1.8–169 ng/ml). At the median follow-up of 19 months (3–82 months), the median PSA decreased to 0.22 ng/ml. Acute grade II GI and GU toxicities occurred in 8.6 % and 21.5 % patients at RT end. Regarding late toxicities, 2.2 % patients experienced grade II GI toxicities at 27 months and only one patient at 51 months, whereas no grade II GU late toxicities were reported at these time points. Quality of life scores also indicated a well-tolerated treatment. Patients mainly experienced acute clinically relevant symptoms of fatigue, pain, as well as deterioration in bowel and urinary symptoms. However, most symptoms normalized at 3 months and remained stable thereafter. Overall functioning showed a similar decline at RT end but improved over time.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The outcomes of TPUS-guided RT demonstrated promising results in terms of minimal physician-reported toxicities and satisfactory patient-reported QoL.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":10342,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Translational Radiation Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2024-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405630824001459/pdfft?md5=8cd8a86c88fe85607a2c0f9d58438f7f&pid=1-s2.0-S2405630824001459-main.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142315817","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号