Purpose: Craniospinal irradiation (CSI) improves clinical outcomes at the cost of long-term neuroendocrine and cognitive sequelae. The purpose of this pilot study was to determine whether hypothalamic-pituitary axis (HPA) and hippocampus avoidance (HPA-HA) with intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) can potentially reduce this morbidity compared with standard x-ray CSI.
Materials and methods: We retrospectively evaluated 10 patients with medulloblastoma (mean, 7 years; range, 4-14 years). Target volumes and organs at risk were delineated as per our local protocol and the ACNS0331 atlas. An experienced neuroradiologist verified the HPA and hippocampus contours. The primary objective was CSI and boost clinical target volume (CTV) covering 95% of the volume (D95) > 99% coverage with robustness. Described proton therapy doses in grays are prescribed using a biological effectiveness relative to photon therapy of 1.1. The combined prescribed dose in the boost target was 54 Gy. Secondary objectives included the HPA and hippocampus composite average dose (Dmean ≤ 18 Gy). For each patient, volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT) and tomotherapy (TOMO) plans existed previously, and a new plan was generated with 3 cranial and 1 or 2 spinal beams for pencil-beam scanning delivery. Statistical comparison was performed with 1-way analysis of variance.
Results: Compared with standard CSI, HPA-HA CSI had statistically significant decreases in the composite doses received by the HPA (32.2 versus 17.9 Gy; P < .001) and hippocampi (39.8 versus 22.8 Gy; P < .001). The composite HPA Dmean was lower in IMPT plans (17.9 Gy) compared with that of VMAT (21.8 Gy) and TOMO (21.2 Gy) plans (P = .05). Hippocampi composite Dmean was also lower in IMPT plans (21 Gy) compared with that of VMAT (27.5 Gy) and TOMO (27.2 Gy) plans (P = .02). The IMPT CTV D95 coverage was lower in IMPT plans (52.8 Gy) compared with that of VMAT (54.6 Gy) and TOMO (54.6 Gy) plans (P < .001) The spared mean volume was only 1.35% (19.8 cm3) of the whole-brain CTV volume (1476 cm3).
Conclusion: We found that IMPT has the strong potential to reduce the dose to the HPA and hippocampus, compared with standard x-ray CSI while maintaining target coverage. A prospective clinical trial is required to establish the safety, efficacy, and toxicity of this novel CSI approach.
Purpose: Medulloblastoma is known to be associated with multiple cancer-predisposition syndromes. In this article, we explore a possible association among a patient's Aarskog-Scott syndrome, development of medulloblastoma, and subsequent brainstem radiation necrosis.
Case presentation: A 5-year-old male with Aarskog-Scott syndrome initially presented to his pediatrician with morning emesis, gait instability, and truncal weakness. He was ultimately found to have a posterior fossa tumor with pathology consistent with group 3 medulloblastoma. After receiving a gross total resection and standard proton beam radiation therapy with concurrent vincristine, he was noted to develop brainstem radiation necrosis, for which he underwent therapy with high-dose dexamethasone, bevacizumab, and hyperbaric oxygen therapy with radiographic improvement and clinical stabilization.
Conclusion: Based on several possible pathologic correlates in the FDG1 pathway, there exists a potential association between this patient's Aarskog-Scott syndrome and medulloblastoma, which needs to be investigated further. In patients with underlying, rare genetic syndromes, further caution should be taken when evaluating chemotherapy and radiation dosimetry planning.
Purpose: To determine factors that influence insurance approval for definitive proton therapy (PT) for prostate cancer.
Materials and methods: Between 2014 and 2018, 1592 insured patients with localized prostate cancer were evaluated and recommended to undergo definitive PT; 547 patients (34.4%) had commercial insurance, whereas 1045 patients (65.6%) had Medicare/Medicaid. Of those with Medicare, 164 patients (15.7%) had Medicare alone; 677 (64.8%) had supplemental plans; and 204 (19.5%) had secondary commercial insurance. Insurance that "covered" PT for prostate cancer implied that it was an indication designated in the coverage policy. "Not covered" means that the insurance policy did not list prostate cancer as an indication for PT. Of all 1592 patients, 1263 (79.3%) belonged to plans that covered PT per policy. However, approval for PT was still required via medical review for 619 patients (38.9%), comparative dosimetry for 56 patients (3.5%), peer-to-peer discussion for 234 patients (14.7%), and administrative law judge hearings for 3 patients (<0.1%). Multivariate analyses of factors affecting approval were conducted, including risk group (low/intermediate versus high), insurance type (commercial versus Medicare/Medicaid), whether PT was included as a covered benefit under the plan (covered versus not covered), and time period (2014-16 versus 2017 versus 2018).
Results: On multivariate analysis, factors affecting PT approval for prostate treatment included coverage of PT per policy (97.1% had approval with insurance that covered PT versus 48.6% whose insurance did not cover PT; P < .001); insurance type (32.5% had approval with commercial insurance versus 97.4% with Medicare; P < .001); and time, with 877/987 patients (88.9%) approved between 2014 and 2016, 255/312 patients (81.7%) approved during 2017, and 255/293 patients (87.0%) approved thereafter (P = .02). Clinical factors, including risk group, had no bearing on insurance approval (P = .44).
Conclusion: Proton insurance approval for prostate cancer has decreased, is most influenced by the type of insurance a patient belongs to, and is unrelated to clinical factors (risk group) in this study. More work is needed to help navigate appropriate access to care and to assist patients seeking definitive PT for prostate cancer treatment.
Background: After radiation therapy (RT), circulating plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA) released in response to RT damage to tissue can be measured within hours. We examined for a correlation between cfDNA measured during the first week of therapy and early and late gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity.
Material and methods: Patients were eligible for enrollment if they planned to receive proton or photon RT for nonmetastatic prostate cancer in the setting of an intact prostate or after prostatectomy. Blood was collected before treatment and on sequential treatment days for the first full week of therapy. Toxicity assessments were performed at baseline, weekly during RT, and 6 months and 12 months after RT. Data were analyzed to examine correlations among patient-reported GI and GU toxicities.
Results: Fifty-four patients were evaluable for this study. Four (7%) and 3 (6%) patients experienced acute and late grade 2 GI toxicity, respectively. Twenty-two (41%) and 18 (35%) patients experienced acute and late grade 2 GU toxicity, respectively. No patients developed grade 3 or higher toxicity. Grade 2 acute GI toxicity, but not grade 2 acute GU toxicity, was significantly correlated with pre-RT cfDNA levels and on all days 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 of RT (P < .005). Grade 2 late GI toxicity, but not GU toxicity, was significantly correlated with pre-RT cfDNA levels (P = .021).
Conclusions: Based on this preliminary study, cfDNA levels can potentially predict the subset of patients destined to develop GI toxicity during prostate cancer treatment. Given that the toxicity profiles of the various fractionations and modalities are highly similar, the data support the expectation that cfDNA could provide a biological estimate to complement the dose-volume histogram. A test of this hypothesis is under evaluation in a National Cancer Institute-funded multi-institutional study.
Purpose: Early stage (stages I-II) classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) is a highly curable disease typically diagnosed in adolescents and young adults (AYAs). Proton therapy can also reduce the late toxicity burden in this population, but data on its comparative efficacy with photon radiotherapy in this population are sparse. We assessed outcomes in AYAs with cHL in a multi-institution retrospective review.
Materials and methods: We identified 94 patients aged 15 to 40 years with stages I and II cHL treated with radiotherapy as part of their initial treatment between 2008 and 2017. We used Kaplan-Meier analyses and log-rank testing to evaluate survival differences between groups of patients.
Results: A total of 91 patients were included in the analysis. The 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate was 89%. Of the 12 patients who experienced progression after radiotherapy, 4 occurred out-of-field, 2 occurred in-field, and 6 experienced both in- and out-of-field progression. There was no significant difference in 2-year PFS among AYA patients by radiotherapy dose received (≥ 30 Gy, 91%; < 30 Gy, 86%; P = .82). Likewise, there was no difference in 2-year PFS among patients who received either proton or photon radiotherapy (proton, 94%; photon, 83%; P = .07).
Conclusion: Our cohort of AYA patients had comparable outcomes regardless of radiotherapy dose or modality used. For patients with significant risk of radiation-induced late effects, proton therapy is a reasonable treatment modality.
Purpose: For patients with high-risk bladder cancer (pT3+ or N+), local regional failure remains a challenge after chemotherapy and cystectomy. An ongoing prospective phase 2 trial (NCT01954173) is examining the role of postoperative photon radiation therapy for high-risk patients using volumetric modulated arc therapy. Proton beam therapy (PBT) may be beneficial in this setting to reduce hematologic toxicity. We evaluated for dosimetric relationships with pelvic bone marrow (PBM) and changes in hematologic counts before and after pelvic radiation therapy and explored the potential of PBT treatment plans to achieve reductions in PBM dose.
Materials and methods: All enrolled patients were retrospectively analyzed after pelvic radiation per protocol with 50.4 to 55.8 Gy in 28 to 31 fractions. Comparative PBT plans were generated using pencil-beam scanning and a 3-beam multifield optimization technique. Changes in hematologic nadirs were assessed using paired t test. Correlation of mean nadirs and relative PBM dose levels were assessed using the Pearson correlation coefficient (CC).
Results: Eighteen patients with a median age of 70 were analyzed. Mean cell count values after radiation therapy decreased compared with preradiation therapy values for white blood cells (WBCs), absolute neutrophil count (ANC), absolute lymphocyte count (all P < .001), and platelets (P = .03). Increased mean PBM dose was associated with lower nadirs in WBC (Pearson CC -0.593, P = .02), ANC (Pearson CC -0.597, P = .02), and hemoglobin (Pearson CC -0.506, P = .046), whereas the PBM V30 to V40 correlated with lower WBC (Pearson CC -0.512 to -0.618, P < .05), and V20 to V30 correlated with lower ANC (Pearson CC -0.569 to -0.598, P < .04). Comparative proton therapy plans decreased the mean PBM dose from 26.5 Gy to 16.1 Gy (P < .001) and had significant reductions in the volume of PBM receiving doses from 5 to 40 Gy (P < .001).
Conclusion: Increased PBM mean dose and V20 to V40 were associated with lower hematologic nadirs. PBT plans reduced PBM dose and may be a valuable strategy to reduce the risk of hematologic toxicity in these patients.
Purpose: Radiation therapy (RT) is the standard treatment for patients with inoperable skin malignancies of the head and neck region (H&N), and as adjuvant treatment post surgery in patients at high risk for local or regional recurrence. This study reports clinical outcomes of intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) for these malignancies.
Materials and methods: We retrospectively reviewed cases involving 47 patients with H&N malignancies of the skin (squamous cell, basal cell, melanoma, Merkel cell, angiosarcoma, other) who underwent IMPT for curative intent between July 2016 and July 2019. Overall survival was estimated via Kaplan-Meier analysis, and oncologic outcomes were reported as cumulative incidence with death as a competing risk.
Results: The 2-year estimated local recurrence rate, regional recurrence rate, local regional recurrence rate, distant metastasis rate, and overall survival were 11.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.1%-30.3%), 4.4% (95% CI, 1.1%-17.4%), 15.5% (95% CI, 7%-34.3%), 23.4% (95% CI, 5.8%-95.5%), and 87.2% (95% CI, 75.7%-100%), respectively. No patient was reported to have a grade 3 or higher adverse event during the last week of treatment or at the 3-month follow-up visit.
Conclusion: IMPT is safe and effective in the treatment of skin malignancies of the H&N.
Cancer-related financial toxicity impacts head and neck cancer patients and survivors. With increasing use of proton therapy as a curative treatment for head and neck cancer, the multifaceted financial and economic implications of proton therapy-dimensions of "financial toxicity"-need to be addressed. Herein, we identify knowledge gaps and potential solutions related to the problem of financial toxicity. To date, while cost-effectiveness analysis has been used to assess the value of proton therapy for head and neck cancer, it may not fully incorporate empiric comparisons of patients' and survivors' lost productivity and disability after treatment. A cost-of-illness framework for evaluation could address this gap, thereby more comprehensively identifying the value of proton therapy and distinctly incorporating a measurable aspect of financial toxicity in evaluation. Overall, financial toxicity burdens remain understudied in head and neck cancer patients from a patient-centered perspective. Systematic, validated, and accurate measurement of financial toxicity in patients receiving proton therapy is needed, especially relative to conventional photon-based strategies. This will enrich the evidence base for optimal selection and rationale for payer coverage of available treatment options for head and neck cancer patients. In the setting of cancer care delivery, a combination of conducting proactive screening for financial toxicity in patients selected for proton therapy, initiating early financial navigation in vulnerable patients, engaging stakeholders, improving oncology provider team cost communication, expanding policies to promote price transparency, and expanding insurance coverage for proton therapy are critical practices to mitigate financial toxicity in head and neck cancer patients.

