Search

PURPOSE: Early-stage cancers are routinely treated with surgery followed by radiotherapy (SR). Radiotherapy before surgery (RS) has been widely ignored for some cancers. We evaluate overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) with SR and RS for different cancer types and simulate the plausibility of RS- and SR-induced antitumor immunity contributing to outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed a SEER data set of early-stage cancers treated with SR or RS. OS and DFS were calculated for cancers with sufficient numbers for statistical power (cancers of lung and bronchus, esophagus, rectum, cervix uteri, corpus uteri, and breast). We simulated the immunologic consequences of SR, RS, and radiotherapy alone in a mathematical model of tumor-immune interactions. RESULTS: RS improved OS for cancers with low 20-year survival rates (lung: hazard ratio [HR], 0.88; P =.046) and improved DFS for cancers with higher survival (breast: HR = 0.64; P <.001). For rectal cancer, with intermediate 20-year survival, RS improved both OS (HR = 0.89; P =.006) and DFS (HR = 0.86; P =.04). Model simulations suggested that RS could increase OS by eliminating cancer for a broader range of model parameters and radiotherapy-induced antitumor immunity compared with SR for selected parameter combinations. This could create an immune memory that may explain increased DFS after RS for certain cancers. CONCLUSION: Study results suggest plausibility that radiation to the bulk of the tumor could induce a more robust immune response and better harness the synergy of radiotherapy and antitumor immunity than postsurgical radiation to the tumor bed. This exploratory study provides motivation for prospective evaluation of immune activation of RS versus SR in controlled clinical studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this study was to use the National Cancer Database to examine the association between radiation therapy (RT) and overall survival (OS) in early-stage nodular lymphocyte-predominant Hodgkin lymphoma (NLPHL) using standard and propensity score (PS)-adjusted Cox proportional hazards models. From 1998–2011, 1915 patients with stage I/II NLPHL were studied, with a median follow-up of 6.6 years (median age = 44). Of the cohort, 1224(64%) received RT (alone or with chemotherapy) to a median dose of 30.6 Gy. Patients were more likely to receive RT if male, younger age, lower stage, no “B”-symptoms, favorably insured, and treatment at comprehensive centers (all p < 0.05). Patients administered RT had an improved 5-year OS (HR = 0.62; 95%CI, 0.43–0.89, p = 0.01). After PS-matching (n = 868) based on all known co-variates, RT use trended towards improved OS (HR = 0.49; 95%CI, 0.23–1.05, p = 0.06). This study represents one of the largest prospective datasets examining the role of RT for stage I/II NLPHL and inclusion of RT may be considered. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Standard of care radiotherapy (RT) doses have been developed as a one-size-fits all approach designed to maximize tumor control rates across a population. Although this has led to high control rates for head and neck cancer with 66–70 Gy, this is done without considering patient heterogeneity. We present a framework to estimate a personalized RT dose for individual patients, based on pre- and early on-treatment tumor volume dynamics—a dynamics-adapted radiotherapy dose (DDARD). We also present the results of an in silico trial of this dose personalization using retrospective data from a combined cohort of n = 39 head and neck cancer patients from the Moffitt and MD Anderson Cancer Centers that received 66–70 Gy RT in 2–2.12 Gy weekday fractions. This trial was repeated constraining DDARD between (54, 82) Gy to test more moderate dose adjustment. DDARD was estimated to range from 8 to 186 Gy, and our in silico trial estimated that 77% of patients treated with standard of care were overdosed by an average dose of 39 Gy, and 23% underdosed by an average dose of 32 Gy. The in silico trial with constrained dose adjustment estimated that locoregional control could be improved by >10%. We demonstrated the feasibility of using early treatment tumor volume dynamics to inform dose personalization and stratification for dose escalation and de-escalation. These results demonstrate the potential to both de-escalate most patients, while still improving population-level control rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes with Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) patients receiving IMRT (intensity-modulated radiation therapy), versus those receiving 2D/3D-CRT (3-dimensional conformal RT) in a large observational cohort. Patients and methods We evaluated patients diagnosed with stage I–IV HL from 1998 to 2011 from the National Cancer Database (NCDB). The association between IMRT use vs. 2D/3D-CRT, co-variables, and outcome was assessed in a Cox proportional hazards model. Propensity score (PS) matching was performed to balance known confounding factors. Survival was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Results Of the 76,672 patients with HL within the NCDB, 12,393 patients with stage I-IV HL received RT (median dose = 30.6 Gy) and were eligible for this study, and 6013 patients analyzed for overall survival. The cohort had a median follow-up of 6.2 years and median age of 37 years (range: 18–90). The RT modalities used were: 2D/3D-CRT ( n = 11,491, 92.7%) or IMRT ( n = 902, 7.3%). Patients were more likely to receive IMRT if they were of male gender, early stage, no “B” symptoms, and treated at comprehensive cancer programs (all p < 0.05). During this time period, there was a significant decrease in use of 2D/3D-CRT from 100% to 81.5%, with a subsequent increase in IMRT utilization from 0% to 18.5%. Five-year overall survival for patients receiving 2D/3D-CRT ( n = 5844) was 89.9% versus 95.2% for those receiving IMRT ( n = 169; HR = 0.45; 95% CI, 0.23–0.91, p = 0.02). After PS-matching based on clinicopathologic characteristics, IMRT use remained associated with improved overall survival (HR = 0.40; 95% CI, 0.16–0.97, p = 0.04). Conclusions Our study reveals that HL patients receiving modern RT techniques were associated with an improvement in overall survival. This may have been related to patient selection, access to improved staging and management, or improvements in treatment technology. This represents the only study examining survival outcomes of advanced RT modalities, which may be considered on a case-by-case basis for highly selected patients with HL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Despite its common use in cancer treatment, radiotherapy has not yet entered the era of precision medicine, and there have been no approaches to adjust dose based on biological differences between or within tumours. We aimed to assess whether a patient-specific molecular signature of radiation sensitivity could be used to identify the optimum radiotherapy dose.Methods: We used the gene-expression-based radiation-sensitivity index and the linear quadratic model to derive the genomic-adjusted radiation dose (GARD). A high GARD value predicts for high therapeutic effect for radiotherapy; which we postulate would relate to clinical outcome. Using data from the prospective, observational Total Cancer Care (TCC) protocol, we calculated GARD for primary tumours from 20 disease sites treated using standard radiotherapy doses for each disease type. We also used multivariable Cox modelling to assess whether GARD was independently associated with clinical outcome in five clinical cohorts: Erasmus Breast Cancer Cohort (n=263); Karolinska Breast Cancer Cohort (n=77); Moffitt Lung Cancer Cohort (n=60); Moffitt Pancreas Cancer Cohort (n=40); and The Cancer Genome Atlas Glioblastoma Patient Cohort (n=98).Findings: We calculated GARD for 8271 tissue samples from the TCC cohort. There was a wide range of GARD values (range 1·66-172·4) across the TCC cohort despite assignment of uniform radiotherapy doses within disease types. Median GARD values were lowest for gliomas and sarcomas and highest for cervical cancer and oropharyngeal head and neck cancer. There was a wide range of GARD values within tumour type groups. GARD independently predicted clinical outcome in breast cancer, lung cancer, glioblastoma, and pancreatic cancer. In the Erasmus Breast Cancer Cohort, 5-year distant-metastasis-free survival was longer in patients with high GARD values than in those with low GARD values (hazard ratio 2·11, 95% 1·13-3·94, p=0·018).Interpretation: A GARD-based clinical model could allow the individualisation of radiotherapy dose to tumour radiosensitivity and could provide a framework to design genomically-guided clinical trials in radiation oncology.Funding: None. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: In this Review, we summarise recent published work on the use of intraoperative radiotherapy to treat common tumour sites in the primary or recurrent setting. Techniques, radiobiology, and the physics of intraoperative radiotherapy are also explored. Disease sites discussed in this Review include head and neck cancer, breast cancer, sarcoma, gastrointestinal cancer, genitourinary cancer, gynaecological cancer, thoracic cancer, and palliative applications. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Summary: Objectives: Radiation induced cranial nerve palsy (RICNP) involving the lower cranial nerves (CNs) is a serious complication of head and neck radiotherapy (RT). Recommendations for delineating the lower CNs on RT planning studies do not exist. The aim of the current study is to develop a standardized methodology for contouring CNs IX–XII, which would help in establishing RT limiting doses for organs at risk (OAR). Methods: Using anatomic texts, radiologic data, and guidance from experts in head and neck anatomy, we developed step-by-step instructions for delineating CNs IX–XII on computed tomography (CT) imaging. These structures were then contoured on five consecutive patients who underwent definitive RT for locally-advanced head and neck cancer (LAHNC). RT doses delivered to the lower CNs were calculated. Results: We successfully developed a contouring atlas for CNs IX–XII. The median total dose to the planning target volume (PTV) was 70Gy (range: 66–70Gy). The median CN (IX–XI) and (XII) volumes were 10c.c (range: 8–12c.c) and 8c.c (range: 7–10c.c), respectively. The median V50, V60, V66, and V70 of the CN (IX–XI) and (XII) volumes were (85, 77, 71, 65) and (88, 80, 74, 64) respectively. The median maximal dose to the CN (IX–XI) and (XII) were 72Gy (range: 66–77) and 71Gy (range: 64–78), respectively. Conclusions: We have generated simple instructions for delineating the lower CNs on RT planning imaging. Further analyses to explore the relationship between lower CN dosing and the risk of RICNP are recommended in order to establish limiting doses for these OARs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To report early outcomes of accelerated whole-breast radiation therapy with concomitant boost. Methods and Materials: This is a prospective, institutional review board-approved study. Eligibility included stage TisN0, T1N0, and T2N0 breast cancer. Patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy were ineligible. The whole breast received 40.5 Gy in 2.7-Gy fractions with a concomitant lumpectomy boost of 4.5 Gy in 0.3-Gy fractions. Total dose to the lumpectomy site was 45 Gy in 15 fractions over 19 days. Results: Between October 2004 and December 2010, 160 patients were treated; stage distribution was as follows: TisN0, n=63; T1N0, n=88; and T2N0, n=9. With a median follow-up of 3.5 years (range, 1.5-7.8 years) the 5-year overall survival and disease-free survival rates were 90% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84-0.94) and 97% (95% CI 0.93-0.99), respectively. Five-year local relapse-free survival was 99% (95% CI 0.96-0.99). Acute National Cancer Institute/Common Toxicity Criteria grade 1 and 2 skin toxicity was observed in 70% and 5%, respectively. Among the patients with ≥2-year follow-up no toxicity higher than grade 2 on the Late Effects in Normal Tissues–Subjective, Objective, Management, and Analytic scale was observed. Review of the radiation therapy dose–volume histogram noted that ≥95% of the prescribed dose encompassed the lumpectomy target volume in >95% of plans. The median dose received by the heart D05 was 215 cGy, and median lung V20 was 7.6%. Conclusions: The prescribed accelerated schedule of whole-breast radiation therapy with concomitant boost can be administered, achieving acceptable dose distribution. With follow-up to date, the results are encouraging and suggest minimal side effects and excellent local control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. DCIS treated by mastectomy ensures high local control rates. There is limited data on risk for relapse and lack of clear indication for adjuvant radiation therapy (RT). We report a retrospective review on a population of DCIS patients treated with mastectomy. The objective was to identify the overall incidence of relapse, risk factors for local recurrence, and accordingly for whom adjuvant postmastectomy RT may be considered. Methods. This is an IRB-approved retrospective study on a prospective breast cancer database. From 1997 to 2007, we identified 969 patients with diagnoses of DCIS, among them 211 breasts in 207 patients were treated with mastectomy and comprise the study group. Results. With a median followup of 55 months (4.6 years) the 10-year relapse-free survival is 97%. Two of 211 breasts (0.9%) treated with mastectomy developed a local-regional recurrence. Both the relapses were among patients defined as having <1mm final mastectomy margin. Conclusions. The rare local relapse after mastectomy limits our ability to reliably identify risk factors for relapse. The consideration for postmastectomy RT should be based on an individualized risk evaluating surgical technique used, presence of BRCA mutation, grade and extent of tumor, and proximity of lesion to the margin of resection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Radiotherapy has long been the mainstay of treatment for patients with head and neck cancer and has traditionally involved a stage-dependent strategy whereby all patients with the same TNM stage receive the same therapy. We believe there is a substantial opportunity to improve radiotherapy delivery beyond just technological and anatomical precision. In this Series paper, we explore several new ideas that could improve understanding of the phenotypic and genotypic differences that exist between patients and their tumours. We discuss how exploiting these differences and taking advantage of precision medicine tools-such as genomics, radiomics, and mathematical modelling-could open new doors to personalised radiotherapy adaptation and treatment. We propose a new treatment shift that moves away from an era of empirical dosing and fractionation to an era focused on the development of evidence to guide personalisation and biological adaptation of radiotherapy. We believe these approaches offer the potential to improve outcomes and reduce toxicity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]