Search

Obtaining consent to care requires the radiation oncologist to provide loyal information and to ensure that the patient understands it. Proof of such an approach rests with the practitioner. The French Society for Radiation Oncology (SFRO) does not recommend the signature of a consent form by the patient but recommends that the radiation oncologist be able to provide all the elements demonstrating the reality of a complete information circuit., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.)

Background: Gammaknife radiosurgery (GKRS) is a valuable option to control cerebral metastases. However, the risk (adverse radiation effect (ARE))-benefit (local control (LC)) ratio switches when the target is too large., Objective: In order to balance this ratio, two fractions staged GKRS protocol was conducted for "large" cerebral metastases. The aim of this study is to evaluate the outcome (LC, ARE)., Methods: A total of 39 large cerebral metastases in 35 patients were treated. The initial mean tumor volume was 14.6 cc [6.1; 35.8]. The prescription margin dose was 12 Gy on the 50% isodose line, with 2 weeks between them. A majority of primary cancer were from lung (43%), melanoma (20%) or breast (17%) origin. The mean age was 63 years old (31-89). Mean Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA) was 2., Results: At the second fraction, mean tumor volume was 10.3 cc [1.9-27.4]. The mean percentage of volume variation for decreasing lesions was 29%. At last follow-up, mean tumor volume was 7.4 cc [0-25.2]; 34 lesions decreased volume (mean 35%). A decreased volume of more than 45% after first stage GKRS was able to predict a long-term local response to staged GKRS treatment. Local control rate at 6 months and 1 year was 87.3% and 75% respectively. The rate of ARE was 7.7%. No predictive factor of local control or ARE was found in a univariate analysis., Conclusion: The new 2-fractions-dose-staged GKRS concept seems to be a well-tolerated and effective treatment option for large cerebral metastases., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None., (© 2023 Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Purpose: Despite significant advances that have been made in management of metastatic melanoma with immune checkpoint therapy, optimal timing of combination immune checkpoint therapy and stereotactic radiosurgery is unknown. We have reported toxicity and efficiency outcomes of patients treated with concurrent immune checkpoint therapy and stereotactic radiosurgery., Patients and Methods: From January 2014 to December 2016, we analyzed 62 consecutive patients presenting 296 melanoma brain metastases, treated with gamma-knife and receiving concurrent immune checkpoint therapy with anti-CTLA4 or anti-PD1 within the 12 weeks of SRS procedure. Median follow-up time was 18 months (mo) (13-22). Minimal median dose delivered was 18 gray (Gy), with a median volume per lesion of 0.219 cm 3 ., Results: The 1-year control rate per irradiated lesion was 89% (CI 95%: 80.41-98.97). Twenty-seven patients (43.5%) developed distant brain metastases after a median time of 7.6 months (CI 95% 1.8-13.3) after gamma-knife. In multivariate analysis, positive predictive factors for intracranial tumor control were: delay since the initiation of immunotherapy exceeding 2 months before gamma-knife procedure (P=0.003) and use of anti-PD1 (P=0.006). Median overall survival (OS) was 14 months (CI 95%: 11-NR). Total irradiated tumor volume<2.1 cm 3 was a positive predictive factor for overall survival (P=0.003). Ten patients (16.13%) had adverse events following irradiation, with four grade≥3. Predictive factors of all grade toxicity were: female gender (P=0.001) and previous treatment with MAPK (P=0.05)., Conclusion: A long duration of immune checkpoint therapy before stereotactic radiosurgery might improve intracranial tumor control, but this relationship and its ideal timing need to be assessed in prospective trials., (Copyright © 2023 Société française de radiothérapie oncologique (SFRO). Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Head & Neck Paragangliomas have been historically relying on surgery mostly, with worsened quality of life and major sequelae. Conventional external radiation therapy seems to offer an equivalent control rate with a low toxicity profile. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficiency of intensity-modulated radiation therapy in Head & Neck paragangliomas., Methods: This is a retrospective monocentric study conducted in a referral center, including all patients treated with IMRT, whether as an exclusive or post-operative treatment for a tympanic and jugular, carotid, or vagal paraganglioma. Data collection was performed through the manuscript and computerized medical files, including consultation, operative, imaging, pathological analyses, delineation, and treatment planning reports. Success was defined as the complete or partial regression or stabilization without progression, or relapse in accordance with the RECIST criteria. Acute toxicities and long-term sequelae were assessed., Results: Our cohort included 39 patients included between 2011 and 2021: 18 patients treated for a TJ PG (45.9%), 11 patients for a carotid PG (28.4%), and 9 for a vagal PG (23.1%). Twenty-nine patients had IMRT as an exclusive treatment (74.4%), whereas 10 patients had a post-operative complementary treatment (25.6%). Median follow-up in our cohort was 2318 days (average = 2200 days, 237-5690, sd = 1281.9). Among 39 patients, 37 were successfully controlled with IMRT (94.8%), and the toxicity profile was low without any major toxicity., Conclusion: IMRT seems an ideal treatment, whether exclusive or post-operative for Head & Neck paragangliomas., Level of Evidence: 3 Laryngoscope, 133:607-614, 2023., (© 2022 The Authors. The Laryngoscope published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.)

The purpose of the first two editions of the guidelines for external radiotherapy procedures, published in 2007 and 2016 respectively, was to issue recommendations aimed at optimising, harmonising and standardising practices. The purpose of this third edition, which includes brachytherapy, is identical while also taking into account recent technological improvements (intensity modulation radiation therapy, stereotactic radiotherapy, and three-dimension brachytherapy) along with findings from literature. Part one describes the daily use of general principles (quality, security, image-guided radiation therapy); part two describes each treatment step for the main types of cancer., (Copyright © 2021 Société française de radiothérapie oncologique (SFRO). Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Gliomas are the most frequent primary brain tumour. The proximity of organs at risk, the infiltrating nature, and the radioresistance of gliomas have to be taken into account in the choice of prescribed dose and technique of radiotherapy. The management of glioma patients is based on clinical factors (age, KPS) and tumour characteristics (histology, molecular biology, tumour location), and strongly depends on available and associated treatments, such as surgery, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy. The knowledge of molecular biomarkers is currently essential, they are increasingly evolving as additional factors that facilitate diagnostics and therapeutic decision-making. We present the update of the recommendations of the French society for radiation oncology on the indications and the technical procedures for performing radiation therapy in patients with gliomas., (Copyright © 2021 Société française de radiothérapie oncologique (SFRO). Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

The French society of oncological radiotherapy (Société française de radiothérapie oncologique, SFRO) was created in 1990. On the occasion of its thirtieth annual congress, in October 2019, a session was devoted to it, with the objective of exposing its functioning, its actions and its productions during these three decades during which radiotherapy and oncology have undergone unprecedented transformations. We propose in this article to outline the content of this session., (Copyright © 2021 Société française de radiothérapie oncologique (SFRO). Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Background: Randomised, controlled trials and meta-analyses have shown the survival benefit of concomitant chemoradiotherapy or hyperfractionated radiotherapy in the treatment of locally advanced head and neck cancer. However, the relative efficacy of these treatments is unknown. We aimed to determine whether one treatment was superior to the other., Methods: We did a frequentist network meta-analysis based on individual patient data of meta-analyses evaluating the role of chemotherapy (Meta-Analysis of Chemotherapy in Head and Neck Cancer [MACH-NC]) and of altered fractionation radiotherapy (Meta-Analysis of Radiotherapy in Carcinomas of Head and Neck [MARCH]). Randomised, controlled trials that enrolled patients with non-metastatic head and neck squamous cell cancer between Jan 1, 1980, and Dec 31, 2016, were included. We used a two-step random-effects approach, and the log-rank test, stratified by trial to compare treatments, with locoregional therapy as the reference. Overall survival was the primary endpoint. The global Cochran Q statistic was used to assess homogeneity and consistency and P score to rank treatments (higher scores indicate more effective therapies)., Findings: 115 randomised, controlled trials, which enrolled patients between Jan 1, 1980, and April 30, 2012, yielded 154 comparisons (28 978 patients with 19 253 deaths and 20 579 progression events). Treatments were grouped into 16 modalities, for which 35 types of direct comparisons were available. Median follow-up based on all trials was 6·6 years (IQR 5·0-9·4). Hyperfractionated radiotherapy with concomitant chemotherapy (HFCRT) was ranked as the best treatment for overall survival (P score 97%; hazard ratio 0·63 [95% CI 0·51-0·77] compared with locoregional therapy). The hazard ratio of HFCRT compared with locoregional therapy with concomitant chemoradiotherapy with platinum-based chemotherapy (CLRT P ) was 0·82 (95% CI 0·66-1·01) for overall survival. The superiority of HFCRT was robust to sensitivity analyses. Three other modalities of treatment had a better P score, but not a significantly better HR, for overall survival than CLRT P (P score 78%): induction chemotherapy with taxane, cisplatin, and fluorouracil followed by locoregional therapy (IC TaxPF -LRT; 89%), accelerated radiotherapy with concomitant chemotherapy (82%), and IC TaxPF followed by CLRT (80%)., Interpretation: The results of this network meta-analysis suggest that further intensifying chemoradiotherapy, using HFCRT or IC TaxPF -CLRT, could improve outcomes over chemoradiotherapy for the treatment of locally advanced head and neck cancer., Fundings: French Institut National du Cancer, French Ligue Nationale Contre le Cancer, and Fondation ARC., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests CP reports a grant from Fondation ARC during the conduct of the study. J-PP reports grants from Ligue National Contre le Cancer, during the conduct of the study. AA reports grants from Ligue Contre le Cancer and Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique en Cancérologie–Institut National du Cancer, during the conduct of the study; grants from F Hoffmann-La Roche, and from the French Radiation and Oncology Group for Head and Neck (GORTEC), outside the submitted work. EEV and QTL report personal fees AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Biolumina, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, Genentech, Merck, Regeneron, Novartis for EEV, and Grail for QTL outside the submitted work. J-WL reports grants from the US National Institutes of Health, during the conduct of the study. JJCH reports other payment from Sanofi Aventis during the conduct of the study; payment for an advisory role and conferences from Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme España, Novartis, and Roche Pharma outside the submitted work. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background and Purpose: The Meta-Analysis of Chemotherapy in squamous cell Head and Neck Cancer (MACH-NC) demonstrated that concomitant chemotherapy (CT) improved overall survival (OS) in patients without distant metastasis. We report the updated results., Materials and Methods: Published or unpublished randomized trials including patients with non-metastatic carcinoma randomized between 1965 and 2016 and comparing curative loco-regional treatment (LRT) to LRT + CT or adding another timing of CT to LRT + CT (main question), or comparing induction CT + radiotherapy to radiotherapy + concomitant (or alternating) CT (secondary question) were eligible. Individual patient data were collected and combined using a fixed-effect model. OS was the main endpoint., Results: For the main question, 101 trials (18951 patients, median follow-up of 6.5 years) were analyzed. For both questions, there were 16 new (2767 patients) and 11 updated trials. Around 90% of the patients had stage III or IV disease. Interaction between treatment effect on OS and the timing of CT was significant (p < 0.0001), the benefit being limited to concomitant CT (HR: 0.83, 95%CI [0.79; 0.86]; 5(10)-year absolute benefit of 6.5% (3.6%)). Efficacy decreased as patients age increased (p&#95;trend = 0.03). OS was not increased by the addition of induction (HR = 0.96 [0.90; 1.01]) or adjuvant CT (1.02 [0.92; 1.13]). Efficacy of induction CT decreased with poorer performance status (p&#95;trend = 0.03). For the secondary question, eight trials (1214 patients) confirmed the superiority of concomitant CT on OS (HR = 0.84 [0.74; 0.95], p = 0.005)., Conclusion: The update of MACH-NC confirms the benefit and superiority of the addition of concomitant CT for non-metastatic head and neck cancer., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)