Search

Background: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide, with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) accounting for most cases. While radiotherapy has historically served as a palliative modality in metastatic NSCLC, considerable advances in its technology and the continuous development of cutting-edge therapeutic agents, such as targeted therapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), are increasing its role in the multi-disciplinary management of the disease.Methods: International radiotherapy experts were convened to consider and reach consensuses on the clinical utilities of radiotherapy in metastatic NSCLC, with the aim to provide patient-focused, up to date, evidence-based, recommendations to assist cancer specialists in the management of patients with metastatic NSCLC worldwide.Results: Timely radiotherapy can offer rapid symptom alleviation and allow subsequent aggressive treatment approaches in patients with heavy tumor burden and/or oncologic emergencies. In addition, appropriate incorporation of radiotherapy as concurrent, consolidation, or salvage therapy makes it possible to achieve long-term survival, or even cure, for patients with oligo-metastatic disease. Cranial radiotherapy plays an important role in the management of brain metastasis, potentially augmenting the response and prolonging survival associated with targeted agents and ICIs. However, key questions remain, such as the appropriate choice of radiation techniques, optimal sequence of systemic therapies and radiotherapy, and optimal patient selection for such combination strategies. Although a strong rationale for combining radiotherapy and ICIs exists, its optimal parameters in this setting remain to be established.Conclusions: In the modern era, radiotherapy serves not only as a palliative tool in metastatic NSCLC, but also plays active roles in patients with oligo-focal disease, CNS metastasis and receiving ICIs.

The major aim of radiation therapy is to provide curative or palliative treatment to cancerous malignancies while minimizing damage to healthy tissues. Charged particle radiotherapy utilizing carbon ions or protons is uniquely suited for this task due to its ability to achieve highly conformal dose distributions around the tumor volume. For these treatment modalities, uncertainties in the localization of patient anatomy due to inter- and intra-fractional motion present a heightened risk of undesired dose delivery. A diverse range of mitigation strategies have been developed and clinically implemented in various disease sites to monitor and correct for patient motion, but much work remains. This review provides an overview of current clinical practices for inter and intra-fractional motion management in charged particle therapy, including motion control, current imaging and motion tracking modalities, as well as treatment planning and delivery techniques. We also cover progress to date on emerging technologies including particle-based radiography imaging, novel treatment delivery methods such as tumor tracking and FLASH, and artificial intelligence and discuss their potential impact towards improving or increasing the challenge of motion mitigation in charged particle therapy.

The major aim of radiation therapy is to provide curative or palliative treatment to cancerous malignancies while minimizing damage to healthy tissues. Charged particle radiotherapy utilizing carbon ions or protons is uniquely suited for this task due to its ability to achieve highly conformal dose distributions around the tumor volume. For these treatment modalities, uncertainties in the localization of patient anatomy due to inter- and intra-fractional motion present a heightened risk of undesired dose delivery. A diverse range of mitigation strategies have been developed and clinically implemented in various disease sites to monitor and correct for patient motion, but much work remains. This review provides an overview of current clinical practices for inter and intra-fractional motion management in charged particle therapy, including motion control, current imaging and motion tracking modalities, as well as treatment planning and delivery techniques. We also cover progress to date on emerging technologies including particle-based radiography imaging, novel treatment delivery methods such as tumor tracking and FLASH, and artificial intelligence and discuss their potential impact towards improving or increasing the challenge of motion mitigation in charged particle therapy.

Purpose: Thoracic reirradiation for non-small cell lung cancer with curative intent is potentially associated with severe toxicity. There are limited prospective data on the best method to deliver this treatment. We sought to develop expert consensus guidance on the safe practice of treating non-small cell lung cancer with radiation therapy in the setting of prior thoracic irradiation.Methods and Materials: Twenty-one thoracic radiation oncologists were invited to participate in an international Delphi consensus process. Guideline statements were developed and refined during 4 rounds on the definition of reirradiation, selection of appropriate patients, pretreatment assessments, planning of radiation therapy, and cumulative dose constraints. Consensus was achieved once >75% of respondents agreed with a statement. Statements that did not reach consensus in the initial survey rounds were revised based on respondents' comments and re-presented in subsequent rounds.Results: Fifteen radiation oncologists participated in the 4 surveys between September 2019 and March 2020. The first 3 rounds had a 100% response rate, and the final round was completed by 93% of participants. Thirty-three out of 77 statements across all rounds achieved consensus. Key recommendations are as follows: (1) appropriate patients should have a good performance status and can have locally relapsed disease or second primary cancers, and there are no absolute lung function values that preclude reirradiation; (2) a full diagnostic workup should be performed in patients with suspected local recurrence and; (3) any reirradiation should be delivered using optimal image guidance and highly conformal techniques. In addition, consensus cumulative dose for the organs at risk in the thorax are described.Conclusions: These consensus statements provide practical guidance on appropriate patient selection for reirradiation, appropriate radiation therapy techniques, and cumulative dose constraints. (C) 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of American Society for Radiation Oncology.

It is not clear as to which is the best treatment among surgery and stereotactic radiotherapy (SBRT) for lung oligometastases. A systematic review of literature with a priori selection criteria was conducted on articles on the treatment of pulmonary metastases with surgery or SBRT. Only original articles with a population of patients of more than 50 were selected. After final selection, 61 articles on surgical treatment and 18 on SBRT were included. No difference was encountered in short-term survival between pulmonary metastasectomy and SBRT. In the long-term surgery seems to guarantee better survival rates. Mortality and morbidity after treatment are 0-4.7% and 0-23% for surgery, and 0-2% and 4-31% for SBRT. Surgical metastasectomy remains the treatment of choice for pulmonary oligometastases.Lay abstract Patients with metastatic cancer with a limited number of deposits may benefit from surgical removal or irradiation of tumor nodules in addiction to chemotherapy. Surgical resection has been demonstrated to improve survival and, in some cases, can be curative. Stereotactic radiotherapy is emerging as a less invasive alternative to surgery, but settings and implications of the two treatments are profoundly different. The two techniques show similar results in the short-term, with lower complications rates for radiotherapy, while in the long-term surgery seems to guarantee higher survival rates.

BACKGROUND: The role of prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) and thoracic radiotherapy (TRT) is unclear in resected small cell lung cancer (SCLC).METHODS: Thirteen European radiotherapy experts on SCLC were asked to describe their strategies on PCI and TRT for patients with resected SCLC. The treatment strategies were converted into decision trees and analyzed for consensus and discrepancies.RESULTS: For patients with resected SCLC and positive lymph nodes most experts recommend prophylactic cranial irradiation and thoracic radiotherapy. For elderly patients with resected node negative SCLC, most experts do not recommend thoracic radiotherapy or prophylactic cranial irradiation.CONCLUSION: PCI and TRT are considered in patients with resected SCLC and these treatments should be discussed with the patient in the context of shared decision-making.

For patients presenting with limited metastatic disease burden, known as the oligometastatic state of disease, a more aggressive treatment approach targeting the new or progressive metastatic lesions might improve patient outcome, with no or only limited toxicity to be expected from the treatment. This review provides an overview of the existing evidence and on-going trials on oligometastatic disease and metastasis-directed therapy in the field of renal, bladder and prostate cancer. ispartof: ECANCERMEDICALSCIENCE vol:14 ispartof: location:England status: published

Stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) is a non-invasive alternative to surgery to control primary renal cell cancer (RCC) in patients that are medically inoperable or at high-risk of post-surgical dialysis. The objective of the FASTRACK II clinical trial is to investigate the efficacy of SABR for primary RCC. FASTRACK II is a single arm, multi-institutional phase II study. Seventy patients will be recruited over 3 years and followed for a total of 5 years. Eligible patients must have a biopsy confirmed diagnosis of primary RCC with a single lesion within a kidney, have ECOG performance ≤2 and be medically inoperable, high risk or decline surgery. Radiotherapy treatment planning is undertaken using four dimensional CT scanning to incorporate the impact of respiratory motion. Treatment must be delivered using a conformal or intensity modulated technique including IMRT, VMAT, Cyberknife or Tomotherapy. The trial includes two alternate fractionation schedules based on tumour size: for tumours ≤4 cm in maximum diameter a single fraction of 26Gy is delivered; and for tumours > 4 cm in maximum diameter 42Gy in three fractions is delivered. The primary outcome of the study is to estimate the efficacy of SABR for primary RCC. Secondary objectives include estimating tolerability, characterising overall survival and cancer specific survival, estimating the distant failure rate, describing toxicity and renal function changes after SABR, and assessment of cost-effectiveness of SABR compared with current therapies. The present study design allows for multicentre prospective validation of the efficacy of SABR for primary RCC that has been observed from prior single institutional and retrospective series. The study also allows assessment of treatment related toxicity, overall survival, cancer specific survival, freedom from distant failure and renal function post therapy. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02613819 , registered Nov 25th 2015.

Stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) is popular because of the high rates of local control with low toxicity seen in lung cancer patients. In this study we compared clinically significant toxicity and overall survival for SABR and non-SABR definitive radiotherapy (conformal radiotherapy) patients. A PUBMED search of all human, English language articles on SABR and non-SABR radically treated early stage lung cancer patients was performed until June 2016. Results of these searches were filtered in accordance with a set of eligibility criteria and analyzed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Eighty-seven SABR and 25 non-SABR articles were reviewed. There was no significant difference in pneumonitis rates between patients receiving SABR (11.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 9.7-13.3) and non-SABR treatment (14.4%; 95% CI, 10.6-18.8; P = .20). Esophagitis was the most common mediastinal toxicity reported with 15% of all non-SABR patients versus 1% of all SABR patients reporting developing Grade >= 2 toxicity. The proportion of patient surviving at 2 and 3 years was superior for SABR patients (P < .001). Treatment-related deaths were rare (approximately 1% for both treatments). Both radiotherapy approaches had low rates of pneumonitis, mediastinal toxicity, and treatment-related deaths. However, significant heterogeneity in the patient population and study regimens limit the power of direct comparison, showing that further high-quality studies are required to define the role of SABR in higher risk and operable patients. Crown Copyright (C) 2017 Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Although the effectiveness of screening for lung cancer remains controversial, it is a fact that most lung cancers are diagnosed at an advanced stage outside of lung cancer screening programs. In 2013, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force revised its lung cancer screening recommendation, now supporting lung cancer screening by low-dose computed tomography in patients at high risk This is also endorsed by many major medical societies and advocacy group stake-holders, albeit with different eligibility criteria. In Europe, population-based lung cancer screening has so far not been recommended or implemented, as some important issues remain unresolved. Among them is the open question of how enlarging pulmonary nodules detected in lung cancer screening should be managed. This article comprises two parts: a review of the current lung cancer screening approaches and the potential therapeutic options for enlarging pulmonary nodules, followed by a meeting report including consensus statements of an interdisciplinary expert panel that discussed the potential of the different therapeutic options.

Although the effectiveness of screening for lung cancer remains controversial, it is a fact that most lung cancers are diagnosed at an advanced stage outside of lung cancer screening programs. In 2013, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force revised its lung cancer screening recommendation, now supporting lung cancer screening by low-dose computed tomography in patients at high risk This is also endorsed by many major medical societies and advocacy group stake-holders, albeit with different eligibility criteria. In Europe, population-based lung cancer screening has so far not been recommended or implemented, as some important issues remain unresolved. Among them is the open question of how enlarging pulmonary nodules detected in lung cancer screening should be managed. This article comprises two parts: a review of the current lung cancer screening approaches and the potential therapeutic options for enlarging pulmonary nodules, followed by a meeting report including consensus statements of an interdisciplinary expert panel that discussed the potential of the different therapeutic options. 2017 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. (C) Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Although the effectiveness of screening for lung cancer remains controversial, it is a fact that most lung cancers are diagnosed at an advanced stage outside of lung cancer screening programs. In 2013, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force revised its lung cancer screening recommendation, now supporting lung cancer screening by low-dose computed tomography in patients at high risk This is also endorsed by many major medical societies and advocacy group stake-holders, albeit with different eligibility criteria. In Europe, population-based lung cancer screening has so far not been recommended or implemented, as some important issues remain unresolved. Among them is the open question of how enlarging pulmonary nodules detected in lung cancer screening should be managed. This article comprises two parts: a review of the current lung cancer screening approaches and the potential therapeutic options for enlarging pulmonary nodules, followed by a meeting report including consensus statements of an interdisciplinary expert panel that discussed the potential of the different therapeutic options. 2017 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. (C) Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Radiomics, the high-throughput mining of quantitative image features from standard-of-care medical imaging that enables data to be extracted and applied within clinical-decision support systems to improve diagnostic, prognostic, and predictive accuracy, is gaining importance in cancer research. Radiomic analysis exploits sophisticated image analysis tools and the rapid development and validation of medical imaging data that uses image-based signatures for precision diagnosis and treatment, providing a powerful tool in modern medicine. Herein, we describe the process of radiomics, its pitfalls, challenges, opportunities, and its capacity to improve clinical decision making, emphasizing the utility for patients with cancer. Currently, the field of radiomics lacks standardized evaluation of both the scientific integrity and the clinical relevance of the numerous published radiomics investigations resulting from the rapid growth of this area. Rigorous evaluation criteria and reporting guidelines need to be established in order for radiomics to mature as a discipline. Herein, we provide guidance for investigations to meet this urgent need in the field of radiomics.

Background. Despite technical developments in treatment delivery, radiation-induced lung toxicity (RILT) remains a crucial problem in thoracic radiotherapy. Clinically based RILT scores have their limitations, and more objective measures such as pulmonary functions tests (PFTs) might help to improve treatment strategies.Purpose. To summarize the available evidence about the effect of dose to the lung in thoracic radiotherapy on forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) and diffusion capacity (DLCO) in patients with lung and esophageal cancer treated with curative intent.Material and methods. A systematic review following the PRISMA guidelines was performed, using MEDLINE and including clinical studies using (chemo) radiotherapy (CRT) or stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) for lung or CRT for esophageal cancer that reported both lung dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters and changes in PFT results. Search terms included lung and esophageal neoplasms, respiratory function tests, and radiotherapy.Results. Fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Seven out of 13 studies on lung cancer reported significant declines (defined as a p value Conclusion. There is evidence that pulmonary function declines after RT in a dose-dependent manner, but solid data about lung DVH parameters predicting changes in PFT results are scarce. A major disadvantage was the wide variety of methods used, frequently lacking multivariable analyses. Studies using prospective high-quality data, analyzed with appropriate statistical methods, are needed.

Background Practice guidelines have been developed for early-stage and locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, many common clinical scenarios still require individualized decision making. This is true for locoregional relapse after initial stereotactic radiotherapy (stereotactic body radiation therapy or stereotactic ablative radiotherapy; SBRT or SABR), an increasingly utilized curative treatment option for stage I NSCLC.Methods A consortium of expert radiation oncologists was established with the aim of providing treatment recommendations. In this scenario, a case was distributed to six radiation oncologists who provided their institutions' treatment recommendations. In this case, a patient developed local and mediastinal relapse after SABR (45Gy, 3 fractions), comparable to the tumor burden in de novo stage IIIA NSCLC. Treatment recommendations were tabulated and a consensus conclusion was developed.Results Three institutions recommended evaluation for surgery. If the patient was not a surgical candidate, and/or refused surgery, definitive chemoradiation was recommended, including retreating the primary to full dose. European participants were more in favor of a non-surgical approach. None of the participants were reluctant to prescribe reirradiation, but two institutions prescribed doses lower than 60Gy. Platinum-based doublets together with intensity-modulated radiotherapy were preferred.Conclusion The institutional recommendations reflect the questions and uncertainties discussed in current stage III guidelines. All institutions agreed that previous SABR is not a contraindication for salvage chemoradiation. In the absence of high-quality prospective trials for recurrent NSCLC, all treatment options recommended in current guidelines for stage III disease can be considered in clinical scenarios such as this.

Background Practice guidelines have been developed for early-stage and locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, many common clinical scenarios still require individualized decision making. This is true for locoregional relapse after initial stereotactic radiotherapy (stereotactic body radiation therapy or stereotactic ablative radiotherapy; SBRT or SABR), an increasingly utilized curative treatment option for stage I NSCLC. Methods A consortium of expert radiation oncologists was established with the aim of providing treatment recommendations. In this scenario, a case was distributed to six radiation oncologists who provided their institutions' treatment recommendations. In this case, a patient developed local and mediastinal relapse after SABR (45Gy, 3 fractions), comparable to the tumor burden in de novo stage IIIA NSCLC. Treatment recommendations were tabulated and a consensus conclusion was developed. Results Three institutions recommended evaluation for surgery. If the patient was not a surgical candidate, and/or refused surgery, definitive chemoradiation was recommended, including retreating the primary to full dose. European participants were more in favor of a non-surgical approach. None of the participants were reluctant to prescribe reirradiation, but two institutions prescribed doses lower than 60Gy. Platinum-based doublets together with intensity-modulated radiotherapy were preferred. Conclusion The institutional recommendations reflect the questions and uncertainties discussed in current stage III guidelines. All institutions agreed that previous SABR is not a contraindication for salvage chemoradiation. In the absence of high-quality prospective trials for recurrent NSCLC, all treatment options recommended in current guidelines for stage III disease can be considered in clinical scenarios such as this.

Radiotherapy (RT) aims to deliver a spatially conformal dose of radiation to tumours while maximizing the dose sparing to healthy tissues. However, the internal patient anatomy is constantly moving due to respiratory, cardiac, gastrointestinal and urinary activity. The long term goal of the RT community to 'see what we treat, as we treat' and to act on this information instantaneously has resulted in rapid technological innovation. Specialized treatment machines, such as robotic or gimbal-steered linear accelerators (linac) with in-room imaging suites, have been developed specifically for real-time treatment adaptation. Additional equipment, such as stereoscopic kilovoltage (kV) imaging, ultrasound transducers and electromagnetic transponders, has been developed for intrafraction motion monitoring on conventional linacs. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been integrated with cobalt treatment units and more recently with linacs. In addition to hardware innovation, software development has played a substantial role in the development of motion monitoring methods based on respiratory motion surrogates and planar kV or Megavoltage (MV) imaging that is available on standard equipped linacs. In this paper, we review and compare the different intrafraction motion monitoring methods proposed in the literature and demonstrated in real-time on clinical data as well as their possible future developments. We then discuss general considerations on validation and quality assurance for clinical implementation. Besides photon RT, particle therapy is increasingly used to treat moving targets. However, transferring motion monitoring technologies from linacs to particle beam lines presents substantial challenges. Lessons learned from the implementation of real-time intrafraction monitoring for photon RT will be used as a basis to discuss the implementation of these methods for particle RT.

Radiotherapy (RT) aims to deliver a spatially conformal dose of radiation to tumours while maximizing the dose sparing to healthy tissues. However, the internal patient anatomy is constantly moving due to respiratory, cardiac, gastrointestinal and urinary activity. The long term goal of the RT community to 'see what we treat, as we treat' and to act on this information instantaneously has resulted in rapid technological innovation. Specialized treatment machines, such as robotic or gimbal-steered linear accelerators (linac) with in-room imaging suites, have been developed specifically for real-time treatment adaptation. Additional equipment, such as stereoscopic kilovoltage (kV) imaging, ultrasound transducers and electromagnetic transponders, has been developed for intrafraction motion monitoring on conventional linacs. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been integrated with cobalt treatment units and more recently with linacs. In addition to hardware innovation, software development has played a substantial role in the development of motion monitoring methods based on respiratory motion surrogates and planar kV or Megavoltage (MV) imaging that is available on standard equipped linacs.In this paper, we review and compare the different intrafraction motion monitoring methods proposed in the literature and demonstrated in real-time on clinical data as well as their possible future developments. We then discuss general considerations on validation and quality assurance for clinical implementation.Besides photon RT, particle therapy is increasingly used to treat moving targets. However, transferring motion monitoring technologies from linacs to particle beam lines presents substantial challenges. Lessons learned from the implementation of real-time intrafraction monitoring for photon RT will be used as a basis to discuss the implementation of these methods for particle RT.

Objectives: Insights regarding utilization and survival of surgery and radiotherapy (stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) or conventional radiotherapy (RT)) are lacking for older patients with stage I and II non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in clinical practice.Methods: Data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry were retrieved for patients >= 65 years with clinical stage I-II NSCLC in 2010-2015. Descriptive analyses, overall survival (OS), and cox regression were stratified for stage I (n = 8742) and II (n = 3439) and compared age groups (65-74 years vs >= 75 years).Results: Patients aged 65-74 underwent surgery significantly more often compared to those aged >= 75 (stage I 55% vs 27%; stage II: 65% vs 35%), and received SBRT less often (I: 29% vs 42%; II: 5% vs 11%), conventional RT less often (I: 6% vs 11%; II 10% vs 24%) and best supportive care alone less often (BSC, I: 8% vs 19%; II: 9% vs 25%). One-year OS was significantly higher in patients aged 65-74 compared to those aged >= 75 (I: 87% vs 78%; II: 74% vs 60%); as was five-year OS (I: 49% vs 31%; II: 36% vs 18%). After adjustment for gender, histology, stage, treatment, and comorbidity, hazard ratio (HR) of death was higher for patients aged >= 75 compared to those aged 65-74 (1: HR 1.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1-1.5; II: HR 1.3 95%CI 1.1-1.7).Conclusion: Patients aged >= 75 with stage I-II NSCLC had poorer OS, underwent surgery less often, and received SBRT, conventional RT, and BSC more often than patients aged 65-74, In both stages, one-year OS within age groups was similar for surgery and SBRT. However, long-term OS adjusted for prognostic factors was superior for surgery compared to SBRT and remained poorer for those aged >= 75. Prospective research should focus on predictive characteristics for treatment selection and patient-centered outcomes. (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Background Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) offers an alternative treatment for pancreatic cancer, with the potential for improved tumour control and reduced toxicity compared with conventional therapies. However, optimal dose planning and delivery strategies are unelucidated and gastro-intestinal (GI) toxicity remains a key concern. Methods Patients with inoperable non-metastatic pancreatic cancer who received CyberKnife® SABR (18–36 Gy) in three fractions as primary, adjuvant, consolidation or re-treatment options were studied. Patient individualised planning and delivery variables were collected and their impact on patient outcome examined. Linear-quadratic (LQ) radiobiology modelling methods were applied to assess SABR parameters against a conventional fractionated radiotherapy schedule. Results In total 42 patients were included, 37 (88%) of whom had stage T4 disease. SABR was used > 6 months post-primary therapy to re-treat residual disease in 11 (26.2%) patients and relapsed disease in nine (21.4%) patients. SABR was an adjuvant to other primary therapy for 14 (33.3%) patients and was the sole primary therapy for eight (19.0%) patients. The mean (95% CI) planning target volume (PTV), prescription isodose, percentage cover, minimum dose to PTV and biological effective dose (BED) were 76.3(63.8–88.7) cc, 67.3(65.2–69.5)%, 96.6(95.5–97.7)%, 22.3(21.0–23.6) Gy and 50.3(47.7–53.0) Gy, respectively. Only 3/37 (8.1%) patients experienced Grade 3 acute toxicities. Two (4.8%) patients converted to resectable status and median freedom-from-local-progression (FFLP) and overall survival (OS) were 9.8 and 8.4 months, respectively. No late toxicity was experienced in 27/32 (84.4%) patients; however, four (12.5%) patients — of whom two had particularly large PTV, two had sub-optimal number of fiducials and three breached organ-at-risk (OAR) constraints—showed Grade 4 duodenal toxicities. Longer delivery time, extended treatment course and reduced percentage coverage additionally associated with late toxicity, likely reflecting parameters typically applied to riskier patients. Larger PTV size and longer treatment course associated with OS. Comparator regimen LQ modelling analysis indicated 50% of patients received minimum PTV doses less potent than a conventional radiotherapy regimen, indicating scope for dose escalation. Conclusion The results demonstrate the value of SABR for a range of indications in pancreatic cancer. Dose escalation to increase BED may improve FFLP and OS in inoperable, non-metastatic disease: however concomitant enhanced stringency for duodenal protection is critical, particularly for patients where SABR is more challenging.

We aimed to identify the fatal pulmonary hemorrhage- (FPH-) related risk factors in stage 3B/C squamous-cell lung carcinoma (SqCLC) patients treated with definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy (C-CRT). Medical records of 505 stage 3B/C SqCLC patients who underwent 66 Gy radiotherapy plus 1-3 cycles of concurrent chemotherapy with available pretreatment thoracic computerized tomography scans were retrospectively analyzed. Primary end-point was the identification of FPH-related risk factors. Examined factors included the basal patient and tumor characteristics with specific emphasis on the tumor cavitation (TC) status, tumor size (TS) and cavitation size (CS), tumor volume and cavitation volume (TV and CV), relative cavitation size (RCS = CS/Ts), and relative cavitation volume (RCV=CV/TV). FPH emerged in 13 (2.6%) patients, with 12 (92.3%) of them being diagnosed 0.14 (37.5% versus 11.1% for RCV 0.14. Diagnosis of >90% FPHs, NA

Introduction: Surgery is the standard treatment for early stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). For medically inoperable patients, stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) has emerged as widely used standard treatment. The aim of this study was to analyze survival and patterns of tumor recurrence in patients with clinical stage I NSCLC treated with surgery or SABR.Methods: Clinical data from all subsequent fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography-based stage I NSCLC patients (cT1-T2aN0M0) treated with surgery or SABR at our center between 2007 and 2010 were collected. Primary end-points were overall survival and tumor recurrences/new primary lung tumors. Treatment groups were compared using multivariable Cox regression and competing risk analyses.Results: Three hundred-forty patients treated with surgery (n = 143) or SABR (n = 197) were included. Surgical patients were younger, had a better WHO performance status and less comorbidities. After adjustment for prognostic covariables, treatment did not influence overall survival (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], SABR versus surgery 1.07; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.74-1.54; p = 0.73). Local control and distant recurrence were equal, whereas locoregional recurrences were significantly more frequent after SABR compared with surgery (adjusted sub-HR 2.51; 95% CI: 1.10-5.70; p = 0.028). Nodal failure (HR: 2.16; 95% CI: 1.34-3.48) and distant metastases (HR: 2.12; 95% CI: 1.52-2.97), but not local failure (HR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.53-1.89) predicted overall survival.Conclusions: In patients with fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography-based stage I NSCLC, SABR confers worse locoregional tumor control because of more nodal failures compared with surgery, stressing the need to improve mediastinal and hilar staging.

Background Practice guidelines have been developed for early-stage and locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, many common clinical scenarios still require individualized decision making. This is true for locoregional relapse after initial stereotactic radiotherapy (stereotactic body radiation therapy or stereotactic ablative radiotherapy; SBRT or SABR), an increasingly utilized curative treatment option for stage I NSCLC. Methods A consortium of expert radiation oncologists was established with the aim of providing treatment recommendations. In this scenario, a case was distributed to six radiation oncologists who provided their institutions' treatment recommendations. In this case, a patient developed local and mediastinal relapse after SABR (45Gy, 3 fractions), comparable to the tumor burden in de novo stage IIIA NSCLC. Treatment recommendations were tabulated and a consensus conclusion was developed. Results Three institutions recommended evaluation for surgery. If the patient was not a surgical candidate, and/or refused surgery, definitive chemoradiation was recommended, including retreating the primary to full dose. European participants were more in favor of a non-surgical approach. None of the participants were reluctant to prescribe reirradiation, but two institutions prescribed doses lower than 60Gy. Platinum-based doublets together with intensity-modulated radiotherapy were preferred. Conclusion The institutional recommendations reflect the questions and uncertainties discussed in current stage III guidelines. All institutions agreed that previous SABR is not a contraindication for salvage chemoradiation. In the absence of high-quality prospective trials for recurrent NSCLC, all treatment options recommended in current guidelines for stage III disease can be considered in clinical scenarios such as this.

Purpose: To investigate survival and local recurrence after stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) or threedimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) administered for early-stage primary lung cancer and to investigate longitudinal changes of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) parameters after either treatment.Methods and Materials: Two prospective cohorts of inoperable patients with T1-2N0M0 primary lung tumors were analyzed. Patients received 70 Gy in 35 fractions with 3D-CRT or 60 Gy in three to eight fractions with SABR. Global quality of life (GQOL), physical functioning (PF), and patient-rated dyspnea were assessed using the respective dimensions of European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Questionnaire-C30 and LC13. HRQOL was analyzed using multivariate linear mixed-effects modeling, survival and local control (LC) using the Kaplan-Meier method, Cox proportional hazards analysis, and Fine and Gray multivariate competing risk analysis as appropriate.Results: Overall survival (OS) was better after SABR compared with 3D-CRT with a HR of 2.6 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.5-4.8; p Conclusion: In this nonrandomized comparison of two prospective cohorts of medically inoperable patients with Stage I lung cancer, OS and LC were better after SABR. GQOL, PF, and patient-rated dyspnea were stable after SABR, whereas PF decreased after 3D-CRTapproaching clinical significance already at 1 year. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc.