Strahlentherapie und Onkologie最新文献

Objective: This study aimed to prospectively assess the visibility of interstitial needles on transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) in cervical cancer brachytherapy patients and evaluate its impact on implant and treatment plan quality.

Material and methods: TRUS was utilized during and after applicator insertion, with each needle's visibility documented through axial images at the high-risk clinical target volume's largest diameter. Needle visibility on TRUS was scored from 0 (no visibility) to 3 (excellent discrimination, margins distinct). Quantitative assessment involved measuring the distance between tandem and each needle on TRUS and comparing it to respective magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) measurements. Expected treatment plan quality based on TRUS images was rated from 1 (meeting all planning objectives) to 4 (violation of High-risk clinical target volume (CTV_HR) and/or organ at risk (OAR) hard constraints) and compared to the final MRI-based plan.

Results: Analysis included 23 patients with local FIGO stage IB2-IVA, comprising 41 applications with a total of 230 needles. A high visibility rate of 99.1% (228/230 needles) was observed, with a mean visibility score of 2.5 ± 0.7 for visible needles. The maximum and mean difference between MRI and TRUS measurements were 8 mm and -0.1 ± 1.6 mm, respectively, with > 3 mm discrepancies in 3.5% of needles. Expected treatment plan quality after TRUS assessment exactly aligned with the final MRI plan in 28 out of 41 applications with only minor deviations in all other cases.

Conclusion: Real-time TRUS-guided interstitial needle placement yielded high-quality implants, thanks to excellent needle visibility during insertion. This supports the potential of TRUS-guided brachytherapy as a promising modality for gynecological indications.

Background and purpose: Comparing oncological outcomes and toxicity after primary treatment of localized prostate cancer using HDR- or LDR-mono-brachytherapy (BT), or conventionally (CF) or moderately hypofractionated (HF) external beam radiotherapy.

Materials and methods: Retrospectively, patients with low- (LR) or favorable intermediate-risk (IR) prostate cancer treated between 03/2000 and 09/2022 in two centers were included. Treatment was performed using either CF with total doses between 74 and 78 Gy, HF with 2.4-2.6 Gy per fraction in 30 fractions, or LDR- or HDR-BT. Biochemical control (BC) according to the Phoenix criteria, and late gastrointestinal (GI), and genitourinary (GU) toxicity according to RTOG/EORTC criteria were assessed.

Results: We identified 1293 patients, 697 with LR and 596 with IR prostate cancer. Of these, 470, 182, 480, and 161 were treated with CF, HF, LDR-BT, and HDR-BT, respectively. For BC, we did not find a significant difference between treatments in LR and IR (p = 0.31 and 0.72). The 5‑year BC for LR was between 93 and 95% for all treatment types. For IR, BC was between 88% in the CF and 94% in the HF group. For CF and HF, maximum GI and GU toxicity grade ≥ 2 was between 22 and 27%. For LDR-BT, we observed 67% grade ≥ 2 GU toxicity. Maximum GI grade ≥ 2 toxicity was 9%. For HDR-BT, we observed 1% GI grade ≥ 2 toxicity and 19% GU grade ≥ 2 toxicity.

Conclusion: All types of therapy were effective and well received. HDR-BT caused the least late toxicities, especially GI.

Background: Although robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy are the leading respective techniques of prostatectomy and radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer, almost no study has directly compared their outcomes; none have compared mortality outcomes.

Methods: We compared 6‑year outcomes of RARP (n = 500) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT, a rotational intensity-modulated radiotherapy, n = 360) in patients with cT1-4N0M0 prostate cancer. We assessed oncological outcomes, namely overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), radiological recurrence-free survival (rRFS), and biochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS), using propensity score matching (PSM). We also assessed treatment-related complication outcomes of prostatectomy and radiotherapy.

Results: The median follow-up duration was 79 months (> 6 years). PSM generated a matched cohort of 260 patients (130 per treatment group). In the matched cohort, RARP and VMAT showed equivalent results for OS, CSS, and rRFS: both achieved excellent 6‑year outcomes for OS (> 96%), CSS (> 98%), and rRFS (> 91%). VMAT had significantly longer bRFS than RARP, albeit based on different definitions of biochemical recurrence. Regarding complication outcomes, patients who underwent RARP had minimal (2.6%) severe perioperative complications and achieved excellent continence recovery (91.6 and 68.8% of the patients achieved ≤ 1 pad/day and pad-free, respectively). Patients who underwent VMAT had an acceptable rate (20.0%) of grade ≥ 2 genitourinary complications and a very low rate (4.4%) of grade ≥ 2 gastrointestinal complications.

Conclusion: On the basis of PSM after a 6-year follow-up, RARP and VMAT showed equivalent and excellent oncological outcomes, as well as acceptable complication profiles.

Purpose: To evaluate the impact of sustained hypogonadism after androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) associated with radiotherapy in prostate cancer (PCa) patients with biochemical relapse-free survival (bRFS).

Methods: A retrospective cohort analysis of 213 consecutive PCa patients referred for radiotherapy plus ADT was carried out. Follow-up times including time to testosterone recovery (TTR) and bRFS were calculated from the end of ADT. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses predicting bRFS were used. The optimal cutoffs for TTR and duration of ADT were determined using the maximally selected rank statistics (MSRS).

Results: After a median follow-up of 104 months, 18 patients relapsed among those who had recovered testosterone levels and 9 among those who did not. Median ADT duration was 36 months. The optimal cutoff for TTR was determined using MSRS. TTR >48 months was significantly associated with better bRFS (logrank, p < 0.0027). Five-year bRFS was 100% for >48 months vs. 85% for <48 months. TTR was the only significant variable for bRFS in multivariate Cox analysis.

Conclusion: Our data show an association between longer TTR and bRFS values among PCa patients treated with ADT.

Background: High-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) plays an important role in the treatment of locally recurrent prostate cancer after definitive treatment. The objective of this study is to summarize the efficacy and toxicity of HDR-BT in these patients.

Methods: We performed a systematic review of PubMed and EMBASE from inception to July 2023. The primary endpoint was relapse-free survival (RFS) in different subgroups, and the secondary endpoint was gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity. A semi-automated tool (WebPlotDigitizer) and a new Shiny application combined with R software (R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria; https://www.R-project.org/ ) helped to reconstruct survival curves.

Results: Twenty-six studies met the inclusion criteria for quantitative analysis, including 1447 patients. A total of 761 patients from 13 studies were included in survival reconstruction, and the median RFS time was 61.2 months (57.6-72.0 months). The estimated 2‑, 3‑, and 5‑year rates were 75.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] 72.8 ~ 79.2%), 66.7% (95% CI 63.0 ~ 70.5%), and 52.3% (95% CI 47.5 ~ 57.4%), respectively. Whole-gland irradiation with multiple fractions (≥ 2 F) resulted in better RFS compared with focal gland irradiation with fewer fractions (1 F mostly; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.60, 95% CI 0.47-0.77, p < 0.0001). According to the different median time from primary treatment to salvage therapy (TRS) and median age at recurrence, short median TRS (56-67.2 months vs. 70-120 months; HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.68-0.40; p < 0.0001) and younger median age (60-70 years vs. 71-75 years; HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.46-0.74; p < 0.0001) were positive factors for RFS. The cumulative incidences estimated for grade ≥ 3 acute and late GU toxicities were 1% (95% CI 0 ~ 1%) and 5% (95% CI 4 ~ 7%), respectively. Three patients (3/992) experienced grade ≥ 3 late GI toxicity, and no cases of grade ≥ 3 acute GI toxicity were reported.

Conclusion: HDR-BT has a high safety profile and good RFS benefit for salvage treatment of radiorecurrent prostate cancer. In terms of RFS, whole-gland irradiation with multiple fractions seems to be better than focal gland irradiation with fewer fractions, while short TRS and younger age are good prognostic factors. In view of the low level of evidence in the included studies and the large heterogeneity of each study, these conclusions still need to be confirmed by randomized controlled trials.

Purpose: Demographic change will lead to an increase in age-associated cancers. The demand for primary treatment, especially oncologic therapies, is difficult to predict. This work is an attempt to project the demand for radiation therapy (RT) in 2030, taking into account demographic changes using prostate cancer (PC) as an example.

Materials and methods: Using the GENESIS database of the Federal Statistical Office, we retrieved demographic population projections for 2030 and retrospective demographic surveys from 1999 to 2019. Additionally, we queried incidence rates for PC in the respective age groups of 50-54, 55-59, 60-64, 65-69, 70-74, 75-79, 80-84, and +85 years from 1999-2019 via the Federal Cancer Registry of the Robert Koch Institute. We used a regression method to determine the age-dependent correlation between the incidence of PC and the population size of the respective age group by combining the data from 1999 to 2019. This information was used to calculate the incidence rates in the age groups of the expected population for 2030 and the expected new cases of PC in 2030. Finally, we extrapolated the indications for the demand for RT based on data from the Report on Cancer Incidence in Germany from 2016.

Results: Considering a population-dependent incidence rate, an increase in new cases of PC is expected. This increase is particularly evident in the age groups of 70-74 and 80-84 years. With regards to RT, the estimate indicates an overall increase of 27.4% in demand. There is also a shift in RT demands towards older patients, especially in the 80- to 84-year-old age group.

Conclusion: We observe an age-associated increase in primary cases of PC. This is likely to result in an increased demand for RT. The exact demand cannot be predicted. However, trends can be estimated to plan for the demand. This, though, requires a good database from cancer registries.

Pulmonary artery intimal sarcoma (PAIS) is a rare and aggressive malignancy originating from the intimal layer of the pulmonary artery with poor prognosis due to its aggressive nature. The management of PAIS poses both diagnostic and therapeutic challenges. It presents with nonspecific symptoms and is often misdiagnosed as pulmonary embolism. While surgical resection is the primary treatment modality, the role of adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy remains uncertain. However, given the high recurrence rate, adjuvant chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy have been utilized in a limited number of case reports. We present the case of a 46-year-old woman who was diagnosed with PAIS and underwent surgical resection followed by adjuvant chemotherapy (ChT) and radiotherapy (RT), demonstrating good tolerance to this multimodal treatment approach.

Background: The effective dose to circulating immune cells (EDIC) is associated with survival in lung and esophageal cancer patients. This study aimed to evaluate the benefit of intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) for EDIC reduction as compared to volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in patients with locally advanced breast cancer (BC).

Materials and methods: Ten BC patients treated with locoregional VMAT after breast-conserving surgery were included. Mean dose to the heart (MHD), lungs (MLD), and liver (MlD), as well as the integral dose to the body (ITD), were retrieved, and we calculated EDIC as 0.12 × MLD + 0.08 × MHD + 0.15 × 0.85 × √(n/45) × MlD + (0.45 + 0.35 × 0.85 × √(n/45)) × ITD/(62 × 10³), where n is the number of fractions. EDIC was compared between VMAT and IMPT plans.

Results: Median EDIC was reduced from 3.37 Gy (range: 2.53-5.99) with VMAT to 2.13 Gy (1.31-3.77) with IMPT (p < 0.01). For left-sided BC patients, EDIC was reduced from 3.15 Gy (2.53-3.78) with VMAT to 1.65 Gy (1.31-3.77) with IMPT (p < 0.01). For right-sided BC patients, EDIC was reduced from 5.60 Gy (5.06-5.99) with VMAT to 3.38 Gy (3.10-3.77) with IMPT (p < 0.01). Right-sided BC patients had a higher EDIC irrespective of the technique. Integral dose reduction was the main driver of EDIC reduction with IMPT and was associated with lung sparing for left-sided BC patients or liver sparing for right-sided BC patients.

Conclusion: IMPT significantly reduced EDIC in BC patients undergoing locoregional adjuvant radiotherapy. Integral total dose reduction, associated with improved lung sparing in left-sided BC patients or liver sparing in right-sided BC patients, mainly drove EDIC reduction with IMPT. The emergence of dynamic models taking into account the circulatory kinetics of immune cells may improve the accuracy of the estimate of the dose received by the immune system compared to calculation of the EDIC, which is based solely on static dosimetric data.