Search

• Many head/neck squamous cell cancer patients develop recurrence or second primary. • Re-irradiation is a curative treatment option for these patients. • However, it is associated with significant risk of toxicity. • Pulsed Reduced Dose Rate radiation may reduce re-irradiation toxicity. Pulsed reduced dose rate (PRDR) radiation (RT) is a re-irradiation (Re-RT) technique that potentially overcomes dose/volume constraints in the setting of previous RT. There is minimal data for its use for recurrent or secondary primary head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). In this study, we report preliminary data from our institution of a consecutive cohort of HNSCC patients who received PRDR Re-RT. Nine patients received PRDR Re-RT from August 2020 to January 2023 and had analyzable data. Intensity modulated RT was used for treatment delivery and a wait time between 20 cGy arc/helical deliveries was used to achieve the effective low dose rate. Data collected included patient demographic information, prior interventions, diagnosis, radiation therapy dose and fractionation, progression free survival, overall survival, and toxicity rates. The median time to PRDR-RT from completion of initial RT was 13 months (range, 6–50 months). All but one patient underwent salvage surgery prior to PRDR-RT. The median follow-up after Re-RT was 7 months. The median OS from PRDR-RT was 7 months (range, 1–32 months). Median PFS was 7 months (range, 1–32 months). One patient (11.1 %) had acute grade 3 toxicity, and two patients (22.2 %) had late grade 3 toxicities. There were no grade 4+ toxicities. PRDR Re-RT is a feasible treatment strategy for patients with recurrent or second primary HNSCC. Initial findings from this retrospective review suggest reasonable survival outcomes and potentially improved toxicity; prospective data is needed to establish the safety and efficacy of this technique. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Physicians encourage patients to be informed about their health care options, but much of the online health care-related resources can be beneficial only if patients are capable of comprehending it. This study's aim was to assess the readability level of online patient education resources for radiation oncology to conclude whether they meet the general public's health literacy needs as determined by the guidelines of the United States National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the American Medical Association (AMA).Methods: Radiation oncology-related internet-based patient education materials were downloaded from 5 major professional websites (American Society for Radiation Oncology, American Association of Physicists in Medicine, American Brachytherapy Society, RadiologyInfo.org, and Radiation Therapy Oncology Group). Additional patient education documents were downloaded by searching for key radiation oncology phrases using Google. A total of 135 articles were downloaded and assessed for their readability level using 10 quantitative readability scales that are widely accepted in the medical literature.Results: When all 10 assessment tools for readability were taken into account, the 135 online patient education articles were written at an average grade level of 13.7 ± 2.0. One hundred nine of the 135 articles (80.7%) required a high school graduate's comprehension level (12th-grade level or higher). Only 1 of the 135 articles (0.74%) met the AMA and NIH recommendations for patient education resources to be written between the third-grade and seventh-grade levels.Conclusion: Radiation oncology websites have patient education material written at an educational level above the NIH and AMA recommendations; as a result, average American patients may not be able to fully understand them. Rewriting radiation oncology patient education resources would likely contribute to the patients' understanding of their health and treatment options, making each physician-patient interaction more productive and efficient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To compare brachytherapy to external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) with respect to overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) among NSCLC patients undergoing limited surgical resection. Methods: All cases of T1-4 N0 M0 NSCLC undergoing limited resection and either brachytherapy or EBRT diagnosed between 2004 and 2014 were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Chi-square test and Fisher's exact analysis were used to analyze categorical variables while Student's t-test was used to analyze continuous variables. Univariate analysis to assess for differences in survival with respect to covariates was performed with the log-rank test. Multivariable analysis was performed with Cox proportional hazards regression models among the entire cohort and after sub-stratification by T stage. Results: Among 543 patients, 471 underwent EBRT and 72 underwent brachytherapy. Brachytherapy demonstrated improved OS and DSS on univariate analysis as compared to EBRT (p < 0.05). Cox regression also demonstrated improved OS and DSS with brachytherapy (HR 0.604; 95% CI [0.380; 0.961] and HR 0.524; 95% CI [0.303; 0.908], respectively). Sub-cohort analysis demonstrated significant improvement in survival only among patients with T1 disease with similar survival between brachytherapy and EBRT among higher stage disease. Conclusions: Patients undergoing brachytherapy for T1-T4, N0, M0 NSCLC demonstrated at least similar survival as compared to those undergoing EBRT among patients undergoing limited resection. Improved survival was demonstrated among patients with T1 disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]