Search

Introduction: Partial breast irradiation (PBI) has increased in utilization, with the postoperative lumpectomy cavity and clips used to guide target volumes. The ideal timing to perform computed tomography (CT)-based treatment planning for this technique is unclear. Prior studies have examined change in volume over time from surgery but not the effect of patient characteristics on lumpectomy cavity volume. We sought to investigate patient and clinical factors that may contribute to larger postsurgical lumpectomy cavities and therefore predict for larger PBI volumes. Methods: A total of 351 consecutive women with invasive or in situ breast cancer underwent planning CT after breast-conserving surgery at a single institution during 2019 and 2020. Lumpectomy cavities were contoured, and volume was retrospectively computed using the treatment planning system. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to evaluate the associations between lumpectomy cavity volume and patient and clinical factors. Results: Median age was 61.0 years (range, 30-91), 23.9% of patients were Black people, 52.1% had hypertension, the median body mass index (BMI) was 30.4 kg/m², 11.4% received neoadjuvant chemotherapy, 32.5% were treated prone, mean interval from surgery to CT simulation was 54.1 days ± 45.9, and mean lumpectomy cavity volume was 42.2 cm3 ± 52.0. Longer interval from surgery was significantly associated with smaller lumpectomy cavity volume on univariate analysis, p = 0.048. Race, hypertension, BMI, the receipt of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and prone position remained significant on multivariate analysis (p < 0.05 for all). Prone position vs. supine, higher BMI, the receipt of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, the presence of hypertension, and race (Black people vs. White people) were associated with larger mean lumpectomy cavity volume. Discussion: These data may be used to select patients for which longer time to simulation may result in smaller lumpectomy cavity volumes and therefore smaller PBI target volumes. Racial disparity in cavity size is not explained by known confounders and may reflect unmeasured systemic determinants of health. Larger datasets and prospective evaluation would be ideal to confirm these hypotheses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Our multisite academic radiation department reviewed our experience with transitioning from weekly primarily retrospective to daily primarily prospective peer review to improve plan quality and decrease the rate of plan revisions after treatment start., Methods and Materials: This study was an institutional review board-approved prospective comparison of radiation treatment plan review outcomes of plans reviewed weekly (majority within 1 week after treatment start) versus plans reviewed daily (majority before treatment start, except brachytherapy, frame-based radiosurgery, and some emergent plans). Deviations were based on peer comments and considered major if plan revisions were recommended before the next fraction and minor if modifications were suggested but not required. Categorical variables were compared using χ 2 distribution tests of independence; means were compared using independent t tests., Results: In all, 798 patients with 1124 plans were reviewed: 611 plans weekly and 513 plans daily. Overall, 76 deviations (6.8%) were noted. Rates of any deviation were increased in the daily era (8.6% vs 5.2%; P = .026), with higher rates of major deviations in the daily era (4.1% vs 1.6%; P = .012). Median working days between initial simulation and treatment was the same across eras (8 days). Deviations led to a plan revision at a higher rate in the daily era (84.1% vs 31.3%; P < .001)., Conclusions: Daily prospective peer review is feasible in a multisite academic setting. Daily peer review with emphasis on prospective plan evaluation increased constructive plan feedback, plan revisions, and plan revisions being implemented before treatment start., Competing Interests: 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., (© 2023 The Authors.)

Purpose: To determine factors associated with increased risk of finding new and/or enlarged brain metastases (BM) on GammaKnife™ (GK) MRI and their impact on patient outcomes., Results: 43.9% of patients showed BM growth, 32.9% had additional brain metastases (aBM), and 18.1 % had both. Initial brain metastasis velocity (iBMV) was associated with finding aBM. Time between diagnostic MRI (dMRI) and GK MRI was associated with interval growth and each day increased this risk by 2%. Prior brain metastasectomy and greater time between either dMRI or latest extracranial RT and GK MRI predicted both aBM and BM growth. aBM and/or BM growth led to management change in 1.8% of cases and were not associated with OS or incidence of distant intracranial failure., Conclusions: Number of metastases seen on dMRI and iBMV predicted both aBM and/or BM growth, however, these factors did not significantly affect survival or incidence of distant intracranial failure., (© 2022 Old City Publishing, Inc.)