Search

The use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in radiotherapy planning is becoming more widespread, particularly with the emergence of MRI-guided radiotherapy systems. Existing guidelines for defining the prostate bed clinical target volume (CTV) show considerable heterogeneity. This study aimed to establish baseline interobserver variability (IOV) for prostate bed CTV contouring on MRI, develop international consensus guidelines, and evaluate its effect on IOV. Participants delineated the CTV on 3 MRI scans, obtained from the Elekta Unity MR-Linac, as per their normal practice. Radiation oncologist contours were visually examined for discrepancies, and interobserver comparisons were evaluated against simultaneous truth and performance level estimation (STAPLE) contours using overlap metrics (Dice similarity coefficient and Cohen's kappa), distance metrics (mean distance to agreement and Hausdorff distance), and volume measurements. A literature review of postradical prostatectomy local recurrence patterns was performed and presented alongside IOV results to the participants. Consensus guidelines were collectively constructed, and IOV assessment was repeated using these guidelines. Sixteen radiation oncologists' contours were included in the final analysis. Visual evaluation demonstrated significant differences in the superior, inferior, and anterior borders. Baseline IOV assessment indicated moderate agreement for the overlap metrics while volume and distance metrics demonstrated greater variability. Consensus for optimal prostate bed CTV boundaries was established during a virtual meeting. After guideline development, a decrease in IOV was observed. The maximum volume ratio decreased from 4.7 to 3.1 and volume coefficient of variation reduced from 40% to 34%. The mean Dice similarity coefficient rose from 0.72 to 0.75 and the mean distance to agreement decreased from 3.63 to 2.95 mm. Interobserver variability in prostate bed contouring exists among international genitourinary experts, although this is lower than previously reported. Consensus guidelines for MRI-based prostate bed contouring have been developed, and this has resulted in an improvement in contouring concordance. However, IOV persists and strategies such as an education program, development of a contouring atlas, and further refinement of the guidelines may lead to additional improvements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: CHHiP is a randomized trial evaluating moderately hypofractionated radiation therapy for treatment of localized prostate cancer. Of all participants, 97% of them had concurrent short-course hormone therapy (HT), either luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analog (LHRHa) or 150 mg of bicalutamide daily. This exploratory analysis compares efficacy and side effects in a nonrandomized comparison.Methods and Materials: In our study, 2700 patients received LHRHa and 403 received bicalutamide. The primary endpoint was biochemical/clinical failure. Groups were compared with Cox regression adjusted for various prognostic factors and stratified by radiation therapy dose. A key secondary endpoint was erectile dysfunction (ED) assessed by clinicians (using scores from Late Effects on Normal Tissues: Subjective/Objective/Management [LENT-SOM] subjective erectile function for vaginal penetration) and patients (single items within the University of California-Los Angeles Prostate Cancer Index [UCLA PCI] and Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite [EPIC]-50 questionnaires) at 2 years and compared between HT regimens by χ2 trend test.Results: Bicalutamide patients were significantly younger (median 67 vs 69 years LHRHa). Median follow-up was 9.3 years. There was no difference in biochemical or clinical failure with an adjusted hazard ratio or 0.97 (95% confidence interval, 0.77-1.23; P = .8). At 2 years, grade ≥2 LENT-SOM ED was reported in significantly more LHRHa patients (313 out of 590; 53%) versus bicalutamide (17 out of 68; 25%) (P < .0001). There were no differences in ED seen with UCLA-PCI and EPIC-50 questionnaires.Conclusions: In this nonrandomized comparison, there was no evidence of a difference in efficacy according to type of HT received. Bicalutamide preserved clinician assessed (LENT-SOM) erectile function at 2 years but patient-reported outcomes were similar between groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: High-field magnetic resonance-linear accelerators (MR-Linacs), linear accelerators combined with a diagnostic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanner and online adaptive workflow, potentially give rise to novel online anatomic and response adaptive radiation therapy paradigms. The first high-field (1.5T) MR-Linac received regulatory approval in late 2018, and little is known about clinical use, patient tolerability of daily high-field MRI, and toxicity of treatments. Herein we report the initial experience within the MOMENTUM Study (NCT04075305), a prospective international registry of the MR-Linac Consortium.Methods and Materials: Patients were included between February 2019 and October 2020 at 7 institutions in 4 countries. We used descriptive statistics to describe the patterns of care, tolerability (the percentage of patients discontinuing their course early), and safety (grade 3-5 Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v.5 acute toxicity within 3 months after the end of treatment).Results: A total 943 patients participated in the MOMENTUM Study, 702 of whom had complete baseline data at the time of this analysis. Patients were primarily male (79%) with a median age of 68 years (range, 22-93) and were treated for 39 different indications. The most frequent indications were prostate (40%), oligometastatic lymph node (17%), brain (12%), and rectal (10%) cancers. The median number of fractions was 5 (range, 1-35). Six patients discontinued MR-Linac treatments, but none due to an inability to tolerate repeated high-field MRI. Of the 415 patients with complete data on acute toxicity at 3-month follow-up, 18 (4%) patients experienced grade 3 acute toxicity related to radiation. No grade 4 or 5 acute toxicity related to radiation was observed.Conclusions: In the first 21 months of our study, patterns of care were diverse with respect to clinical utilization, body sites, and radiation prescriptions. No patient discontinued treatment due to inability to tolerate daily high-field MRI scans, and the acute radiation toxicity experience was encouraging. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Many muscle-invasive bladder cancers are hypoxic, which limits the efficacy of radiation therapy. Hypoxia modification using carbogen and nicotinamide has been tested in a phase 3 trial, Bladder Carbogen Nicotinamide. We present mature follow-up data with biomarker predictions of outcomes.Methods and Materials: Bladder Carbogen Nicotinamide is a prospective, phase 3, multicenter, randomized, 2-arm, nonblinded clinical trial. Participants were randomized to receive radical radiation therapy (RT; control arm) alone or with the addition of carbogen (98% O2; 2% CO2) and nicotinamide (CON). Patients with muscle-invasive or high-grade non-muscle invasive bladder cancer were included. Tumor tissue was collected at entry and was analyzed for tumor necrosis, hypoxia (24-gene signature), and basal and luminal tumor molecular subtypes. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival and relationships with biomarker status outcomes are analyzed using multivariable Cox regression and log-rank analysis.Results: We analyzed 333 patients with a median follow-up of 10.3 years. The 10-year OS rates were 30% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.23-0.39) in RT + CON patients and 24% (95% CI, 0.18-0.33) in the RT-alone patients (hazard ratio [HR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.61-1.04; P = .08). The greatest benefit from CON was seen in patients with tumor necrosis (n = 79; 5-year OS, 53% vs. 33% in patients without tumor necrosis; HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.36-0.99; P = .04). Cases with a high hypoxia gene score (n = 75) had a 5-year OS rate of 51%, compared to 34% for a low score (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.38-1.08; P = .09); those with the basal molecular subtype (n = 70) had a 5-year OS rate of 58%, compared to 38% for those with the luminal subtype (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.32-1.06; P = .08).Conclusions: Although the improvement in long-term OS in the whole population is not statistically significant, patients selected by necrosis and high hypoxia gene score benefitted from hypoxia modification. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Broadly, medical education e-learning is equivalent to in-person in student satisfaction, knowledge, skills, and outcomes. However, when e-learning is best used, and in what form is still being determined. For instance, e-learning with greater interactivity, practice, and feedback is associated with improved learner satisfaction and outcomes. Considering the computer-basis of radiation treatment planning, radiation oncology residents plausibly may prefer virtual treatment planning and review formats. We aimed to assess resident use of Virtual, In-Person, or a combination of Both review formats, to elicit their format preferences, and reasons for their preferences. We theorized virtual-preferring residents would endorse areas previously associated with enhanced e-learning outcomes more than in-person peers. Online questionnaires were emailed to current PGY1-PGY5 residents in Canadian radiation oncology programs. Questionnaires examined level of training, typical review format, preferred format, and reasons for format preference. Chi-square tests compared differences in format preference and reasons for preference. 52 respondents were included for analysis; PGY1s were excluded due to limited treatment planning exposure. 76.9% of residents typically review with Both virtual and in-person formats, significantly more than 17.3% who review In-Person (p<0.0001) or 5.8% who review Virtually (p<0.0001). When asked which format they preferred, 44.2% preferred Virtual, 36.5% In-Person, and 19.2% preferred a combination of Both. Preference was significantly greater for Virtual versus Both (p=0.006) and In-Person versus Both (p=0.049). Reasons for preference were thematically grouped, reflecting focus upon Interactivity, Practice, Feedback, Convenience, and Teaching Quality. Significant differences were not found between In-Person and Virtual-preferring respondents in terms of Feedback, Interactivity, or Practice. However, significant within-group differences existed between Convenience versus Teaching Quality (Virtual-preferring: 84.3%>61%, p=0.0198; Both-preferring: 76.7%>40%, p=0.0324; In-person-preferring: 25%<63%, p=0.00214), and between Feedback versus Interactivity (Virtual-preferring: 66.7%>45.4%, p=0.0048; In Person-preferring: 59.7%>37%, p=0.00634). Our results suggest residents review contours and treatment plans with a combination of virtual and in-person formats, more than either format alone, despite low resident preference for this approach. While use of either format appears acceptable to residents, differences in emphasis on convenience with virtual-preferring and teaching quality in residents preferring in-person review suggests that educational priorities may differ between residents. Feedback more than interactivity seems important for residents irrespective of preferred format. Thus, residents and attendings should identify a format that best meets resident's educational needs and priorities. Further research should explore attending preferences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]