Search

Purpose/objective(s) Sarcoma is a rare, diverse oncologic diagnosis with a complex spectrum of presentation. Advances in multimodality therapy including treatment with radiotherapy have shifted the paradigm from amputation to limb-sparing surgery (LSS) or limited resections. Management of recurrent sarcoma after LSS is challenging and may require subsequent amputation. Here, we sought to identify factors associated with amputation or radical excision as salvage therapy for recurrent sarcoma. Materials/methods Sarcomas treated at a single institution were identified. Patients who required any salvage surgery for recurrent sarcoma were selected. Comparison was made between patients receiving LSS or limited re-excision versus amputation or radical, whole organ excision at the time of first salvage surgery. Demographic, tumor, and treatment characteristics were retrospectively reviewed. Univariate comparison was made using Chi squared test and analysis of variance. Multivariate logistic regression was completed to assess factors associated with salvage surgery type. Results A total 5,774 sarcoma patients were evaluated between 2000 and 2018. Salvage surgery for recurrent sarcoma was required for 519 patients (9%). Patients requiring upfront radical surgery (n = 17) were excluded. The study included 502 patients with 375 (75%) receiving salvage limb sparing surgery and 127 (25%) receiving salvage amputation or radical surgery at the time of their second surgery. Soft tissue sarcoma (STS, n = 455, 91%) was more common than osseous sarcoma (n = 47, 9%), including 173 (34%) STS of extremities. Univariate analysis revealed that age, gender, and race were not associated with amputation or radical surgery; however, higher stage, higher grade, and no radiation in primary treatment were associated with subsequent amputation (P Conclusion In a single institution cohort, need for amputation or radical excision at the time of salvage surgery after LSS for recurrent disease was rare, in keeping with modern sarcoma experiences. Retrospective review suggests that higher stage is associated with radical salvage options while receipt of radiation during primary treatment is inversely related. Further inquiry into the clinical characteristics and the patterns of failure may clarify the relationship between stage, radiation and radical salvage therapy. Future work may aid in avoiding morbid salvage therapy.

PURPOSE To understand trends, pathways, and experiences and to establish a framework for radiation oncology (RO) programs interested in developing global health (GH) initiatives. METHODS An in-depth interview was conducted of all US RO programs with established GH initiatives. Programs were identified by reviewing results of the 2018 Association of Residents in Radiation Oncology Global Health Resident Survey and individualized outreach to screen for additional programs meeting the following criteria: (1) active resident involvement in RO-specific GH opportunities, (2) active faculty involvement in these initiatives, and (3) department chair or program director awareness and support for ongoing opportunities. Among 88 residency programs, 11 were identified. Standardized questions explored the type of initiative, planning, staff and resident involvement, challenges, components to success, and history of programs through December 2018. RESULTS Between 2010 and 2018, 11 programs started initiatives. Total resident participants ranged from one to 13 (median = 3) in each program's history. Initiatives spanned education (n = 9 [82%]), clinical mentorship (73%), innovative technology (55%), bilateral hosting programs (45%), clinical development and equipment (45%), promotion of local research (36%), clinical care (36%), industry partnerships (27%), and remote tumor board (18%). Faculty involvement included radiation oncologists (91%), medical physicists (55%), and non-RO department faculty (27%). Six programs (55%) had faculty with prior GH experience. Four (36%) programs reported medical student involvement in projects. Barriers included international communication (36%), time for faculty (18%), funding (9%), and legal (9%) concerns. Commonest components of success included fostering relationships with international sites and identifying needs before solutions. CONCLUSION RO GH initiatives were reported as positive, educational, and feasible across 11 US residency programs. Growth is expected, representing opportunities for innovation and service among US programs.

Hypofractionated whole-breast radiation therapy (RT) has proved to be equivalent to conventionally fractionated RT in multiple randomized trials. There is controversy regarding its use in younger women because of their underrepresentation in trials and the concern for late toxicity. We evaluated disease control and cosmetic outcomes in patients aged50 years treated with hypofractionated RT in 4 prospective single-institutional trials.From 2003 to 2015, 1313 patients were enrolled in 4 prospective protocols investigating the use of adjuvant hypofractionated RT after breast-conserving surgery with a daily or weekly concomitant boost. We identified the records of 348 patients aged50 years at consultation for this analysis. Overall survival, disease-free survival, and local recurrence-free survival were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method by study and across studies using meta-analytic methods. The late effects of RT, clinician-rated cosmesis, and patient-rated cosmesis were also evaluated.With a median follow-up period of 66.9 months, the overall survival rate was 99.6%, the disease-free survival rate was 96.3%, and the local recurrence-free survival rate was 97.7% at 3 years. Clinician-rated cosmesis (n = 242) was excellent or good in 93.4% of cases and fair or poor in 6.6%. Patient-rated cosmesis (n = 259) was excellent or good in 86.1% and fair or poor in 13.9%. When patients rated themselves differently than their physicians, patients more often rated themselves poorly compared with their physicians (P = .0044, Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test).At a median follow-up of 5 years, an analysis of patients aged 50 years demonstrated that hypofractionated RT was safe and effective, with good to excellent cosmesis as assessed by both clinicians and patients.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S) Patients with large brain metastases may receive fractionated stereotactic radiosurgery (FSRS) if they are not surgical candidates yet still pursuing cancer-directed therapy. FSRS with limited margins can allow for optimal sparing of uninvolved regional brain tissue. However, due to required treatment planning process, there is often elapsed time between MRI brain and treatment start which may contribute to marginal misses. Growth rates of large brain metastases and implications for optimal margin to account for growth rate and time interval between planning MRI and FSRS are incompletely characterized. MATERIALS/METHODS Patients treated at a single institution from 2018-2020 who received frameless FSRS on a Cobalt-60 treatment unit for large (> 2cm diameter) brain metastases were identified. Patients with a prior diagnostic brain MRI scan with technically similar parameters to a second MRI obtained for treatment planning were included. Resection cavities and lesions undergoing re-treatment after prior SRS were excluded. Brain metastasis volumes were obtained by contouring on both diagnostic and planning MRIs. Patient characteristics and treatment details were also collected. Analysis was conducted using paired Student's t test and Pearson's R and growth rate was determined using a linear model. RESULTS Thirty-six patients with 54 brain metastases met inclusion criteria. The most common primary cancer sites were lung (36%), colorectal (14%), and skin (14%), and most common histologies were adenocarcinoma (53%) and melanoma (17%). Nearly half (47%) of patients were on systemic therapy at the time of FSRS and the majority (85%) received steroids prior to starting FSRS. Treatment dose ranged from 24-32.5 Gy in 3-5 fractions, with median of 30 Gy in 5 fractions with zero margin. Median time from diagnostic to planning MRI was 15 days (IQR: 11-21) and planning MRI to FSRS was 1 day (IQR 1-3). The median size of included brain metastases on planning MRI was 7.38cc (IQR: 5.09-11.55) compared to 6.03cc (IQR: 3.87-8.95) on prior diagnostic MRI (P 90% of lesions over 3, 7, 10, and 14 days between planning and treatment, respectively. CONCLUSION In the absence of expedited planning, FSRT for intact large brain metastases with limited margins may result in geometric under treatment. An adaptive margin strategy based upon initial tumor size, and time between planning imaging and treatment delivery may be afforded to maintain ideal conformity, properly targeting a growing target lesion while maximally sparing uninvolved regional brain. AUTHOR DISCLOSURE J. Chew: None. S. Sinha: None. S.J. Liu: None. S.E. Fogh: Independent Contractor; Accuray. L. Boreta: None. D. Raleigh: None. L. Ma: Patent/License Fees/Copyright; University of California Regents. S.E. Braunstein: Advisory Board; Radiation Oncology Questions, LLC.

BACKGROUND WHO grade III meningiomas are rare, and clinical outcomes data are limited. To address this problem, we analyzed a single institution retrospective cohort of patients with WHO grade III meningiomas. METHODS Patients who underwent resection of WHO grade III meningiomas between 1983 and 2019 with available follow-up data were included. Treatment, local recurrence, and overall survival rates were obtained. Kaplan-Meier analysis, log rank tests, and Student’s t tests were used for statistical analyses. RESULTS Ninety consecutive patients met inclusion criteria. Median follow-up was 3.2 years (IQR: 1.2-7.9), median age was 58 years (IQR: 46-67). Twenty-three patients (26%) underwent resection alone, and 58 (64%) underwent resection with adjuvant radiotherapy. Fifty-one patients developed local recurrences, with median time to recurrence of 1.0 year (IQR: 0.6-2.9) and higher MIB-1 labeling index for tumors that recurred within 1 year (25% versus 17%, p=0.04). There was a median of 2 recurrences per patient (IQR: 1-3), with a median of 2 resections and 2 radiotherapy courses for initial and salvage treatments. Thirty-nine patients with recurrences died, with median overall survival of 3.7 years (IQR: 1.8-8.8). Thirty-seven patients (41%) had prior low grade meningioma diagnoses with subsequent transformation to grade III, including 6 (7%) with grade I, 16 (18%) with grade II, and 15 (17%) with unknown grade. There was a median of 1 low grade recurrence per patient (IQR: 0-3) before transformation to grade III, which occurred a median of 4.3 years (IQR: 2.4-9.9) after initial diagnosis. Prior low grade diagnosis was associated with shorter time to recurrence of WHO grade III meningioma (p=0.01), and worse overall survival (p=0.03). CONCLUSION Patients with WHO grade III meningioma have poor outcomes despite aggressive multimodal therapy, and there is an urgent, unmet need for new high grade meningioma treatments.

OBJECTIVES This single institution retrospective study aims to evaluate the association between body mass index (BMI) and survival in glioblastoma (GBM). METHODS Patients were identified using a single institution cancer registry. Baseline height and weight were obtained at first clinical visit after diagnosis. Inclusion criteria were GBM diagnosis after 1999 with available height and weight data. Follow up was through July 2018. RESULTS 779 patients were included who had available BMI data. Median age was 58 (IQR 48–66). 38% of patients were female and 62% were male. Median overall survival (OS) was 1.34 years (IQR 0.78–2.12) and median BMI was 26.01 (IQR 23.3–29.1). There was no strong linear correlation between OS and BMI using Pearson correlation (r=0.045). Patients with higher BMI had significantly improved OS when comparing the top 50% to bottom 50% (2.20 vs 1.89 years, p=0.03) and top 25% to bottom 25% (2.25 vs 1.84 years, p=0.03). When comparing patients classified as overweight or obese (BMI >/= 25) to those within normal range or below (BMI < 25), there was a trend towards increased OS (2.14 vs 1.90 years, p=0.075). There was no significant trend for BMI when comparing patients with higher OS with lower OS. There was also no significance for BMI on Cox proportional hazard multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS There was no significant linear correlation between BMI and survival for GBM patients, although there appears to be statistically significant improved survival benefit for patients with higher BMI compared to patients with lower BMI. Further investigation is warranted to explore this finding and if BMI could be used as a potential prognostic marker for GBM.