Search

Objectives: To compare the results of Gleason Grade Group (GGG) classification following central pathology review with previous local pathology assessment, and to examine the difference between using overall and worst GGG in a large patient cohort treated with radiotherapy and short‐course hormone therapy. Patients and Methods: Patients with low‐ to high‐risk localized prostate cancer were randomized into the multicentre CHHiP fractionation trial between 2002 and 2011. Patients received short‐course hormone therapy (≤6 month) and radical intensity‐modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Of 2749 consented patients, 1875 had adequate diagnostic biopsy tissue for blinded central pathology review. The median follow‐up was 9.3 years. Agreement between local pathology and central pathology‐derived GGG and between central pathology‐derived overall and worst GGG was assessed using kappa (κ) statistics. Multivariate Cox regression and Kaplan–Meier methods were used to compare the biochemical/clinical failure (BCF) and distant metastases (DM) outcomes of patients with GGG 1–5. Results: There was poor agreement between local pathology‐ and central pathology‐derived GGG (κ = 0.19) but good agreement between overall and worst GGG on central pathology review (κ = 0.89). Central pathology‐derived GGG stratified BCF and DM outcomes better than local pathology, while overall and worst GGG on central pathology review performed similarly. GGG 3 segregated with GGG 4 for BCF, with BCF‐free rates of 90%, 82%, 74%, 71% and 58% for GGGs 1–5, respectively, at 8 years when assessed using overall GGG. There was a progressive decrease in DM‐free rates from 98%, 96%, 92%, 88% and 83% for GGGs 1–5, respectively, at 8 years with overall GGG. Patients (n = 57) who were upgraded from GGG 2–3 using worst GS had BCF‐free and DM‐free rates of 74% and 92% at 8 years. CHHiP eligibility criteria limit the interpretation of these results. Conclusion: Contemporary review of International Society of Urological Pathology GGG successfully stratified patients treated with short‐course hormone therapy and IMRT with regard to both BCF‐free and DM‐free outcomes. Patients upgraded from GGG 2 to GGG 3 using worst biopsy GS segregate with GGG 3 on long‐term follow‐up. We recommend that both overall and worst GS be used to derive GGG. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Several lizard species in the Australian scincid genus Egernia have been reported to deposit scats in piles. We show that E. striolata, which does not produce scat piles, and E. inornata, which does not, can both discriminate their own secretions, on paper substrates, from those of unfamiliar conspecifics. This was indicated by elevated tongue flick rates and more time in contact with the unfamiliar stimulus. This was not just a response to a novel stimulus because the secretions for another species (E. stokessii) elicited lower responses. When scats were presented, only striolata demonstrated discrimination between their own scats and those of unfamiliar conspecifics. This suggests that scats could be used to produce individual signals, perhaps indicating residence status, in scat-piling species. for striolata the signal from scats became less effective as the scats became older suggesting the need to pile scats to renew the signal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Local cancer relapse risk after breast conservation surgery followed by radiotherapy has fallen sharply in many countries, and is influenced by patient age and clinicopathological factors. We hypothesise that partial-breast radiotherapy restricted to the vicinity of the original tumour in women at lower than average risk of local relapse will improve the balance of beneficial versus adverse effects compared with whole-breast radiotherapy.Methods: IMPORT LOW is a multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3, non-inferiority trial done in 30 radiotherapy centres in the UK. Women aged 50 years or older who had undergone breast-conserving surgery for unifocal invasive ductal adenocarcinoma of grade 1-3, with a tumour size of 3 cm or less (pT1-2), none to three positive axillary nodes (pN0-1), and minimum microscopic margins of non-cancerous tissue of 2 mm or more, were recruited. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive 40 Gy whole-breast radiotherapy (control), 36 Gy whole-breast radiotherapy and 40 Gy to the partial breast (reduced-dose group), or 40 Gy to the partial breast only (partial-breast group) in 15 daily treatment fractions. Computer-generated random permuted blocks (mixed sizes of six and nine) were used to assign patients to groups, stratifying patients by radiotherapy treatment centre. Patients and clinicians were not masked to treatment allocation. Field-in-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy was delivered using standard tangential beams that were simply reduced in length for the partial-breast group. The primary endpoint was ipsilateral local relapse (80% power to exclude a 2·5% increase [non-inferiority margin] at 5 years for each experimental group; non-inferiority was shown if the upper limit of the two-sided 95% CI for the local relapse hazard ratio [HR] was less than 2·03), analysed by intention to treat. Safety analyses were done in all patients for whom data was available (ie, a modified intention-to-treat population). This study is registered in the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN12852634.Findings: Between May 3, 2007, and Oct 5, 2010, 2018 women were recruited. Two women withdrew consent for use of their data in the analysis. 674 patients were analysed in the whole-breast radiotherapy (control) group, 673 in the reduced-dose group, and 669 in the partial-breast group. Median follow-up was 72·2 months (IQR 61·7-83·2), and 5-year estimates of local relapse cumulative incidence were 1·1% (95% CI 0·5-2·3) of patients in the control group, 0·2% (0·02-1·2) in the reduced-dose group, and 0·5% (0·2-1·4) in the partial-breast group. Estimated 5-year absolute differences in local relapse compared with the control group were -0·73% (-0·99 to 0·22) for the reduced-dose and -0·38% (-0·84 to 0·90) for the partial-breast groups. Non-inferiority can be claimed for both reduced-dose and partial-breast radiotherapy, and was confirmed by the test against the critical HR being more than 2·03 (p=0·003 for the reduced-dose group and p=0·016 for the partial-breast group, compared with the whole-breast radiotherapy group). Photographic, patient, and clinical assessments recorded similar adverse effects after reduced-dose or partial-breast radiotherapy, including two patient domains achieving statistically significantly lower adverse effects (change in breast appearance [p=0·007 for partial-breast] and breast harder or firmer [p=0·002 for reduced-dose and p<0·0001 for partial-breast]) compared with whole-breast radiotherapy.Interpretation: We showed non-inferiority of partial-breast and reduced-dose radiotherapy compared with the standard whole-breast radiotherapy in terms of local relapse in a cohort of patients with early breast cancer, and equivalent or fewer late normal-tissue adverse effects were seen. This simple radiotherapy technique is implementable in radiotherapy centres worldwide.Funding: Cancer Research UK. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The purpose of this UK study was to evaluate interfraction reproducibility and body image score when using ultraviolet (UV) tattoos (not visible in ambient lighting) for external references during breast/chest wall radiotherapy and compare with conventional dark ink., Methods: In this non-blinded, single-centre, parallel group, randomized control trial, patients were allocated to receive either conventional dark ink or UV ink tattoos using computer-generated random blocks. Participant assignment was not masked. Systematic (∑) and random (σ) setup errors were determined using electronic portal images. Body image questionnaires were completed at pre-treatment, 1 month and 6 months to determine the impact of tattoo type on body image. The primary end point was to determine that UV tattoo random error (σ setup ) was no less accurate than with conventional dark ink tattoos, i.e. <2.8 mm., Results: 46 patients were randomized to receive conventional dark or UV ink tattoos. 45 patients completed treatment (UV: n = 23, dark: n = 22). σ setup for the UV tattoo group was <2.8 mm in the u and v directions (p = 0.001 and p = 0.009, respectively). A larger proportion of patients reported improvement in body image score in the UV tattoo group compared with the dark ink group at 1 month [56% (13/23) vs 14% (3/22), respectively] and 6 months [52% (11/21) vs 38% (8/21), respectively]., Conclusion: UV tattoos were associated with interfraction setup reproducibility comparable with conventional dark ink. Patients reported a more favourable change in body image score up to 6 months following treatment. Advances in knowledge: This study is the first to evaluate UV tattoo external references in a randomized control trial.