Search

Background: The impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been overwhelming on patients with cancer, who may be at higher risk of developing severe disease. During the second COVID-19 outbreak in Italy, we planned universal microbiologic screening for patients scheduled for antineoplastic treatment., Methods: All patients with planned active treatment at Brescia University Radiation Oncology Department were screened for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RNA with repeated nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) from October 31, 2020. Treatment continuation, suspension, or delay was modulated for patients testing positive according to clinical presentation., Results: From October 31, 2020, to February 6, 2021, 636 patients were enrolled and 1243 NPS were performed, of which 28 (2.25%) were positive. The infection rate was 2.52%; 81.3% of the patients with a positive NPS were asymptomatic, 2 had mild disease, and 1 severe disease that led to death. All patients already on treatment with mild or asymptomatic COVID-19 carried on the therapy with no or minimal delay. Median delay for patients with infection detected before treatment start was 16.5 days., Conclusions: Detected incidence of COVID-19 was lower during the second outbreak in our patients (2.52% vs 3.23%), despite the extensive testing schedule, and substantiates the high rate of asymptomatic infections and the low mortality among patients with COVID-19 (6.3% vs 38.5% during the first outbreak). Universal SARS-CoV-2 screening for all patients with planned treatment might allow early identification of patients with COVID-19, resulting in timely management that could improve clinical outcomes and prevent spread of the infection.

Background: Malignant meningiomas, rare tumors that account for approximately 1%-3% of all meningioma, have high recurrence, morbidity, and mortality rate and a particularly poor outcome. Surgical excision followed by adjuvant radiotherapy is the current approach for the treatment of these tumors., Methods: In the case reported, the disease, characterized by a high proliferative index (Ki67 60%-70%), was treated with endoscopic surgery limited to the extracranial portion; then the patient underwent radiotherapy, on the residual tumor volume, to a total dose of 66 Gy delivered in 33 fractions (2 Gy/fraction) by helical intensity-modulated radiation therapy with image-guided radiotherapy daily checks (tomotherapy)., Results: Two and a half years after the treatment, the patient is alive and a partial response is maintained. The patient is healthy overall with grade I fatigue and grade II hearing loss as late toxicity (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events 4.1)., Conclusions: Within a multidisciplinary approach, new radiotherapy techniques confirm their effectiveness and reliability for the treatment of malignant meningioma.

Aims and Background: We investigated efficacy, safety, and prognostic factors of reirradiation in patients with recurrent or second primary head and neck cancer., Methods: Records of 75 consecutive patients treated with reirradiation between August 2005 and December 2013 were reviewed., Results: Median overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were 29.5 and 33.6 months. Median local control (LC) and progression-free survival (PFS) were 21.7 and 16.2 months. Univariate analysis showed that patients younger than 70 years, with a Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) >90 or with 2 or less comorbidities at time of reirradiation, have a better OS; KPS >90 and biological equivalent dose (BED) >72 Gy positively influenced the PFS. At multivariate analysis, KPS at reirradiation was an independent predictive factor for OS, while BED was an independent predictive factor for CSS and OS. At univariate analysis, patients with planning target volume (PTV) >221 mL had worse LC and PFS rates, with results confirmed at multivariate analysis. The rate of fatal treatment-related adverse events was 6.7% (3 carotid blowout, 1 soft tissue necrosis, and 1 thromboembolic event)., Conclusions: This study confirms the role and outcomes of reirradiation. A careful selection of patients could minimize acute and late side effects and influence survival: elderly patients, with significant medical comorbidities or poor KPS, are worse candidate for reirradiation. Total dose delivered with reirradiation and PTV appear to be other potential prognostic factors. Further studies of dose escalation are needed to establish the total dose that could achieve better LC rates with a safer toxicity profile.

Aims and Background: To present the Italian state-of-the-art contribution to radiobiology of external beam radiotherapy, brachytherapy, and radionuclide radiotherapy., Methods and Study Design: A survey of the literature was carried out, using PubMed, by some independent researchers of the Italian group of radiobiology. Each paper was reviewed by researchers of centers not comprising its authors. The survey was limited to papers in English published over the last 20 years, written by Italian investigators or in Italian institutions, excluding review articles., Results: A total of 135 papers have been published in journals with an impact factor, with an increase in the number of published papers over time, for external beam radiotherapy rather than radionuclide radiotherapy. The quantity and quality of the papers researched constitutes a proof of the enduring interest in clinical radiobiology among Italian investigators., Conclusions: The survey could be useful to individuate expert partners for an Italian network on clinical radiobiology, addressing future collaborative investigations.

Aims and Background: Radiotherapy is the standard treatment of glioblastoma. Three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy is the standard technique to treat glioblastoma. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy and helical intensity-modulated radiotherapy (tomotherapy) are becoming widely used. The present study compared three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy and tomotherapy in terms of target coverage and preservation of organs at risk., Methods: Ten patients treated with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, with a target volume close to or superimposed to the organs at risk, were retrospectively selected. The plans were re-planned with step-and-shoot 3/5 fields intensity-modulated radiotherapy and tomotherapy. Target coverage and sparing of organs at risk were statistically compared., Results: Mean planning target volume V95% improved with sophisticated techniques (87.2%, 93.2%, 97.6% with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy and tomotherapy, respectively). The comparison of three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy did not show significant differences, whereas differences were significant when three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and tomotherapy as well as intensity-modulated radiotherapy and tomotherapy were compared. Mean planning target volume/clinical target volume D99-D98-D95 were not different between three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy, but they were different between tomotherapy and three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy, with better clinical target volume/and planning target volume coverage with the tomotherapy plans. Brain D33/66 were 31.1/11.8 Gy, 37.5/18.3 Gy and 28.5/14.7 Gy with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy and tomotherapy, respectively. Mean brainstem, optic nerves and chiasma Dmax were always within the defined constraints. The homogeneity index improved with intensity-modulated radiotherapy/tomotherapy compared to three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy. Tomotherapy was better than intensity-modulated radiotherapy in all patients., Conclusions: In this selected group of patients, a significant dosimetric advantage was evident for tomotherapy compared with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Significant advantages were evident in terms of panning target volume coverage (V95), D99, D98 and D95. The clinical significance of the results should be defined.