Search

What are the factors that physicians could consider in an academic radiation oncology practice job offer? In this minireview, we discuss how prospective academic faculty could evaluate the "big 3" domains: (1) the compensation, including the direct and indirect payments; (2) the daily job, including aspects of the clinic, research, and education; and (3) the location, including geography, atmosphere, environment, and culture. If a prospective academic radiation oncologist believes that the academic practice is "great" in at least 2 of the 3 and "good" in the remaining 1, then they should likely sign the contract. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for comparative-effectiveness research (CER). Since the 1980s, there has been a rise in the creation and utilization of large national cancer databases to provide readily accessible "real-world data" (RWD). This review article discusses the role of RCTs in oncology, and the role of RWD from the national cancer database in CER. RCTs remain the preferred study type for CER because they minimize confounding and bias. RCTs have challenges to conduct, including extensive time and resources, but these factors do not impact the internal validity of the result. Generalizability and external validity are potential limitations of RCTs. RWD is ideal for studying cancer epidemiology, patterns of care, disparities in care delivery, quality-of-care evaluation, and applicability of RCT data in specific populations excluded from RCTs. However, retrospective databases with RWD have limitations in CER due to unmeasured confounders and are often suboptimal in identifying causal treatment effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Our retrospective analysis focuses on improving prognostication. The National Cancer Database was queried from 2010 to 2015 for men diagnosed with castration-sensitive metastatic prostate cancer. We developed and validated several prognostic phenotypes that can aid in risk stratification to potentially personalize therapy. We also performed a literature review of related works. Our nomogram (https://tinyurl.com/prostate-met) may be used to predict survival. Introduction: Castration-sensitive metastatic prostate cancer is heterogeneous. Our objective is to identify metastatic prostate cancer phenotypes and their prognostic impact on survival. Materials and Methods: The National Cancer Database was queried. The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database was used for validation. Patterns were split into: nonregional lymph node, bone only, and visceral (any brain/liver/lung). Hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for the univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression models, odds ratios were calculated, Kaplan-Meier curves were generated, and a nomogram of the multivariate regression model was created. Results: The training set included 13,818 men; bone only was most common (n = 11,632, 84.2%), then nonregional lymph node (n = 1388, 10.0%), and any visceral (brain/liver/lung; n = 798, 5.8%). Risk of death was increased by metastases to a visceral organ versus nonregional lymph node (HR = 2.26; 95% CI [2.00, 2.56]), bone only metastases versus nonregional lymph node (HR = 1.57; 95% CI [1.43, 1.72]), T-stage 4 versus 1 (HR = 1.27; 95% CI [1.17, 1.36]), Grade Group 5 versus 1 (HR = 1.93; 95% CI [1.61, 2.31]), PSA > 20 ng/mL versus < 10 ng/mL (HR = 1.32; 95% CI [1.23, 1.42]), and age = 80 versus < 50 (HR = 1.96; 95% CI [1.69, 2.29]). On internal validation, the model had C-indices 20.5%, 22.7%, and 14.6% higher than the current staging system for overall survival, 1-year, and 5-year survival, respectively. Conclusion: We developed and validated prognostic metastatic prostate cancer phenotypes that can assist risk stratification to potentially personalize therapy. Our nomogram (https://tinyurl.com/prostate-met) may be used to predict survival. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are a heterogeneous group of tumors that originate in endocrine tissues throughout the body. Though most are indolent, clinical outcomes vary greatly based on histologic differentiation and grade. Peptide receptor radionuclide therapy has emerged as a promising treatment for patients with locally advanced and/or metastatic disease refractory to standard of care treatment. The phase III NETTER-1 trial found that [177Lu] Lu-DOTA-[Tyr 3 ]-octreotate improved disease-free survival versus octreotide alone for somatostatin receptor-positive gastroenteropancreatic NETs and had a favorable toxicity profile, leading to Food and Drug Administration approval. [177Lu] Lu-DOTA-[Tyr 3 ]-octreotate is an important new treatment that expands the role of radiation in the treatment of NETs. Several important trials are ongoing to better elucidate the role of this treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prostate-specific membrane antigen is a transmembrane protein found predominately on prostate epithelium and is expressed at high levels in prostate cancer. In this review, we discuss the background, clinical data, patient selection, side effects, and necessary resources to deliver lutetium-177 prostate-specific membrane antigen in the research setting, or as standard of care if approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration. Targeted radionuclide therapeutics require understanding of fundamental principles of radiobiology and physics, and radiation oncologists and medical physicists are well-suited to play an integral role in their delivery and treatment response monitoring as key components of a multidisciplinary care team. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is an integral component in the management of prostate cancer across multiple disease states. Traditionally, luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists constituted the backbone of ADT. However, gonadotropin-releasing hormone receptor hormone (GnRH) antagonists also are available, which offer faster testosterone suppression and reduced likelihood of ADT-related adverse effects compared with LHRH agonists, including the potential for fewer ADT-associated major cardiac events. Until recently, all forms of LHRH agonists and GnRH antagonist formulations were of parenteral administration. However, recently relugolix gained Food and Drug Administration approval as the first oral GnRH antagonist. Relugolix achieves faster and more complete testosterone suppression compared with an LHRH agonist. This translates to more rapid prostate-specific antigen response compared with LHRH agonists. After discontinuation of relugolix, testosterone recovers faster than after GnRH agonists or injectable GnRH antagonist therapy. Overall, these factors provide opportunities for more precisely defined ADT duration when combined with radiation therapy. The rapid onset and offset of testosterone suppression with relugolix may require physicians to rethink the mechanism and goals of ADT when prescribing. As an oral formulation, relugolix enables patients to avoid pain and injection site reactions, limit extra office visits for injections, and achieve a shorter duration of experiencing the side effects of castrate testosterone levels. This convenience and tolerability may enhance physicians' willingness to prescribe ADT and patients' feeling of control during their ADT course, but the potential advantages are accompanied by the risks of patients choosing to discontinue therapy to escape side effects of ADT. This article focuses on different aspects of what is known and unknown regarding the optimal use of ADT and radiation therapy, and how relugolix, due to its properties, fit into our current treatment paradigms for localized prostate cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The role of adjuvant radiotherapy for high-risk cutaneous squamous cell carcinomas after surgery with negative margins is unclear.Objective: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis examining the risk of poor outcomes for patients treated with surgery alone versus surgery and adjuvant radiotherapy.Methods: A comprehensive search of articles was executed in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Database. Random-effected meta-analyses were conducted.Results: Thirty-three studies comprising 3867 high-risk cutaneous squamous cell carcinomas were included. There were no statistically significant differences in poor outcomes between the surgery only group and surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy group. Estimates for local recurrence for the surgery alone group versus the surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy group were 15.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.3%-27%) versus 8.8% (95% CI, 1.6%-20.9%); for regional metastases, 11.5% (95% CI, 7.2%-16.7%) versus 4.4% (95% CI, 0%-18%); for distant metastases, 2.6% (95% CI, 0.6%-6%) versus 1.7% (95% CI, 0.2%-4.5%); and for disease-specific deaths, 8.2% (95% CI, 1.2%-20.6%) versus 19.7% (95% CI, 3.8%-43.7%), respectively.Limitations: Retrospective nature of most studies with the lack of sufficient patient-specific data.Conclusions: For patients with high-risk cutaneous squamous cell carcinomas treated with margin-negative resection, there were no significant differences in poor outcomes between the surgery only group and the surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy group. Randomized controlled trials are necessary to define the benefit of adjuvant radiotherapy in this setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Exercise therapy (ET) is shown to improve toxicity and surrogates of survival for patients receiving chemotherapy. Current National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines lack recommendations for concurrent radiation therapy (RT) and ET. The main objective was to determine the impact of concurrent ET + RT with respect to (1) acceptability, feasibility, safety; and (2) to demonstrate how incorporating ET in cancer treatment can enhance patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and physical function-defined as strength or exercise capacity.Methods and Materials: A PICOS/PRISMA selection protocol was used to search PubMed, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and Cochrane Review for prospective randomized controlled trials evaluating concurrent ET + RT, including >10 patients and with 1 or more study arms. Acceptability, feasibility, and safety rates were calculated. PROs were assessed with study-specific metrics. Physical function was defined as improvements in strength or range of motion. Statistically significant improvement was defined by P <.05.Results: Twenty-six of 693 screened studies including 1563 patients (831 receiving exercise, 732 controls) with localized breast cancer (67.1% of patients), prostate cancer (27.4%), head and neck cancers (2.8%), and spinal metastases (2.8%) were assessed. Objective 1: Among 3385 patients approached for ET, 1864 (55.1%) accepted the treatment; of those, 1563 patients (83.9%) completed the trials. Objective 2: Statistical improvements were noted in these PROs: quality of life (14 of 15 studies), fatigue (12 of 16 studies), mood/depression (9 of 13), and anxiety (6 of 7). Physical function improved statically in 16 of 16 studies.Conclusions: Combination ET + RT is safe and well-tolerated with improvements in PROs and physical function. Additional studies are needed in patients with metastatic cancers to assess survival and to compare effectiveness of different exercise regimens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Patients with the greatest number of risk factors have shorter expected survival. • Predictive nomogram for survival of patients receiving palliative radiotherapy. • Nomogram can be used to choose treatments that better align with patient prognosis. We propose a predictive model that identifies patients at greatest risk of death after palliative radiotherapy, and subsequently, can help medical professionals choose treatments that better align with patient choice and prognosis. The National Cancer Database was queried for recipients of palliative radiotherapy during first course of treatment. Cox regression models and adjusted hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals were used to evaluate survival predictors. The mortality risk index was calculated using predictors from the estimated Cox regression model, with higher values indicating higher mortality risk. Based on tertile cutpoints, patients were divided into low, medium, and high risk groups. A total of 68,505 patients were included from 2010-2014, median age 65.7 years. Several risk factors were found to predict survival: (1) location of metastases (liver, bone, lung, and brain); (2) age; (3) tumor primary (prostate, breast, lung, other); (4) gender; (5) Charlson-Deyo comorbidity score; and (6) radiotherapy site. The median survival times were 11.66 months, 5.09 months, and 3.28 months in the low (n=22,621), medium (n=22,638), and high risk groups (n=22,611), respectively. A nomogram was created and validated to predict survival, available online, https://tinyurl.com/METSSSmodel. Harrel's C-index was 0.71 and receiver operator characteristic area under the curve was 0.76 at 4 years. We created a predictive nomogram for survival of patients receiving palliative radiotherapy during their first course of treatment (named METSSS), based on Metastases location, Elderly (age), Tumor primary, Sex, Sickness/comorbidity, and Site of radiotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Industry payments to physicians are financial conflicts of interest and may influence research findings and medical decisions. We aim to (1) characterize industry payments within radiation oncology; and (2) explore the potential correlation between receiving disclosed industry payments and academic productivity.Materials/methods: CMS database was used to extract 2015 industry payments. For academic radiation oncologists, research productivity was characterized by h- and m-indices, as well as receipt of National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding, which is not an industry payment. Logistic regression models were used to determine whether publication metrics (m-index, h-index) and other study characteristics such as gender, PhD status, NIH institution funding status, were associated with the endpoints, research and general payments. Associations between the amount of payments (if any) and publication metrics were further studied using linear regression models.Results: A total of 22,543 individual payments totaling $25,532,482 to 2,995 radiation oncologists were included. Among the 1,189 academic radiation oncologists, 75% received less than $167; on the other hand, 10 (<1%) individuals received $6,425,728 (51%) of payments. On multiple logistic regression, research payments were significantly associated with the m-index, odds ratio 2.86 (95% confidence interval, 1.84-4.45, p-value <0.0001); as well as with the h-index, odds ratio 1.03 (95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.05, p-value <0.0001). The linear regression model shows that both m-index and h-index were significantly positively associated with the amount of general payments (p-values <0.0001).Conclusion: There is an association between disclosed payment from the industry and increased individual research productivity metrics. Further research to find the cause behind this association is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Splenic irradiation (SI) is a palliative treatment option for symptomatic splenomegaly (i.e. for pain, early satiety, pancytopenia from sequestration) secondary to hematologic malignancies and disorders. The purpose of the current article is to review the literature on SI for hematologic malignancies and disorders, including: (1) patient selection and optimal technique; (2) efficacy of SI; and (3) toxicities of SI. PICOS/PRISMA methods are used to select 27 articles including 766 courses of SI for 486 patients from 1960 to 2016. The most common cancers treated included chronic lymphocytic leukemia and myeloproliferative disorders; the most common regimen was 10Gy in 1Gy fractions over two weeks, and 27% of patients received retreatment. A partial or complete response (for symptoms, lab abnormalities) was obtained in 85-90% of treated patients, and 30% were retreated within 6-12months. There was no correlation between biologically equivalent dose of radiation therapy and response duration, pain relief, spleen reduction, or cytopenia improvement (r2 all <0.4); therefore, lower doses (e.g. 5Gy in 5 fractions) may be as effective as higher doses. Grade 3-4 toxicity (typically leukopenia, infection) was noted in 22% of courses, with grade 5 toxicity in 0.7% of courses. All grade 5 toxicities were due to either thrombocytopenia with hemorrhage or leukopenia with sepsis (or a combination of both); they were sequelae of cancer and not directly caused by SI. In summary, SI is generally a safe and efficacious method for treating patients with symptomatic splenomegaly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Approximately 50% of newly diagnosed cancer patients start taking dietary supplements. Men's health supplements (MHSs), which we define as supplements that are specifically marketed with the terms men's health and prostate health (or similar permutations), are often mislabeled as having potential anticancer benefits. Objective: We evaluated the effects of MHSs on patient outcomes and toxicities in patients who were undergoing definitive intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for localized prostate cancer. Design: This retrospective analysis included patients who were being treated at a National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center and consented to have information stored in a prospective database. MHSs were queried online. Outcome measures were freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF) (biochemical failure was defined with the use of the prostate-specific antigen nadir + 2-ng/mL definition), freedom from distant metastasis (FFDM), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS) as well as toxicities. Kaplan-Meier analysis, log-rank tests, Fine and Gray competing-risk regression (to adjust for patient and lifestyle factors), and Cox models were used. Results: From 2001 to 2012, 2207 patients were treated with IMRT with a median dose of 78 Gy, and a median follow-up of 46 mo. Of these patients, 43% were low risk, 37% were intermediate risk, and 20% were high risk; 10% used MHSs. MHSs contained a median of 3 identifiable ingredients (range: 0-78 ingredients). Patients who were taking an MHS compared with those who were not had improved 5-y OS (97% compared with 92%, respectively; P = 0.01), but there were no differences in the FFBF (94% compared with 89%, respectively; P = 0.12), FFDM (96% compared with 97%, respectively; P = 0.32), or CSS (100% compared with 99%, respectively; P = 0.22). The unadjusted association between MHS use and improved OS was attenuated after adjustment for patient lifestyle factors and comorbidities. There was no difference in toxicities between the 2 groups (late-grade 3-4 genitourinary <3%; gastrointestinal <4%). Conclusion: The use of MHSs is not associated with outcomes or toxicities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We review radiation therapy (RT) options available for prostate cancer, including external beam (EBRT; with conventional fractionation, hypofractionation, stereotactic body RT [SBRT]) and brachytherapy (BT), with an emphasis on the outcomes, toxicities, and contraindications for therapies. PICOS/PRISMA methods were used to identify published English-language comparative studies on PubMed (from 1980 to 2015) that included men treated on prospective studies with a primary endpoint of patient outcomes, with ⩾70 patients, and ⩾5year median follow up. Twenty-six studies met inclusion criteria; of these, 16 used EBRT, and 10 used BT. Long-term freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF) rates were roughly equivalent between conventional and hypofractionated RT with intensity modulation (evidence level 1B), with 10-year FFBF rates of 45-90%, 40-60%, and 20-50% (for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups, respectively). SBRT had promising rates of BF, with shorter follow-up (5-year FFBF of >90% for low-risk patients). Similarly, BT (5-year FFBF for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk patients have generally been >85%, 69-97%, 63-80%, respectively) and BT+EBRT were appropriate in select patients (evidence level 1B). Differences in overall survival, distant metastasis, and cancer specific mortality (5-year rates: 82-97%, 1-14%, 0-8%, respectively) have not been detected in randomized trials of dose escalation or in studies comparing RT modalities. Studies did not use patient-reported outcomes, through Grade 3-4 toxicities were rare (<5%) among all modalities. There was limited evidence available to compare proton therapy to other modalities. The treatment decision for a man is usually based on his risk group, ability to tolerate the procedure, convenience for the patient, and the anticipated impact on quality of life. To further personalize therapy, future trials should report (1) race; (2) medical comorbidities; (3) psychiatric comorbidities; (4) insurance status; (5) education status; (6) marital status; (7) income; (8) sexual orientation; and (9) facility-related characteristics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The purposes of this study were to assess the exposure that medical students (MSs) have to radiation oncology (RO) during the course of their medical school career, as evidenced by 2 time points in current medical training (ie, first vs fourth year; MS1s and MS4s, respectively) and to assess the knowledge of MS1s, MS4s, and primary care physicians (PCPs) about the appropriateness of RT in cancer management in comparison with RO attendings.Methods: We developed and beta tested an electronic survey divided into 3 parts: RO job descriptions, appropriateness of RT, and toxicities of RT. The surveys were distributed to 7 medical schools in the United States. A concordance of >90% (either yes or no) among RO attendings in an answer was necessary to determine the correct answer and to compare with other subgroups using a χ(2) test (P<.05 was significant).Results: The overall response rate for ROs, MS1s, MS4s, and PCPs was 26%; n (22 + 315 + 404 + 43)/3004. RT misconceptions decreased with increasing level of training. More than 1 of 10 MSs did not believe that RT alone could cure cancer. Emergent oncologic conditions for RT (eg, spinal cord compression, superior vena cava syndrome) could not be identified by >1 of 5 respondents. Multiple nontoxicities of RT (eg, emitting low-level radiation from the treatment site) were incorrectly identified as toxicities by >1 of 5 respondents. MS4s/PCPs with an RO rotation in medical school had improved scores in all prompts.Conclusions: Although MS knowledge of general RT principles improves from the first to the fourth year, a large knowledge gap still exists between MSs, current PCPs, and ROs. Some basic misconceptions of RT persist among a minority of MSs and PCPs. We recommend implementing formal education in RO fundamentals during the core curriculum of medical school. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose To determine if increasing the biologically equivalent dose (BED) via various radiation fractionation regimens is correlated with clinical outcomes or toxicities for prostate cancer. Methods and materials We performed a meta-analysis that included 12,756 prostate cancer patients from 55 studies published from 2003 to 2013 who were treated with non-dose-escalated conventionally fractionated external beam radiation therapy (non-DE-CFRT), DE-CFRT, hypofractionated RT, and high dose rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT; either mono or boost) with ⩾5-year actuarial follow-up. BEDs were calculated based on the following formula: ( nd [1 + d /( α / β )]), where n is the number of fractions, and d is dose per fraction; assuming an α / β of 1.5 for prostate cancer and 3.0 for late toxicities. Mixed effects meta-regression models were used to estimate weighted linear relationships between BED and the observed percentages of patients experiencing late toxicities or 5-year freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF). Results Increases in 10 Gy increments in BED (at α / β of 1.5) from 140 to 200 Gy were associated with 5-unit improvements in percent FFBF. Dose escalation of BED above 200 Gy was not correlated with FFBF. Increasing BED (at α / β of 3.0) from 98 to 133 Gy was associated with increased gastrointestinal toxicity. Dose escalation above 133 Gy was not correlated with toxicity. Conclusions An increase in the BED to 200 Gy (at α / β of 1.5) was associated with increased disease control. Doses above 200 Gy did not result in additional clinical benefit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose Sparing the hippocampus during whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) offers potential neurocognitive benefits. However, previously reported intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plans use multiple noncoplanar beams for treatment delivery. An optimized coplanar IMRT template for hippocampal-sparing WBRT would assist in clinical workflow and minimize resource utilization. In this study, we sought to determine the optimal patient position to facilitate coplanar treatment planning and delivery of hippocampal-sparing WBRT using IMRT. Methods and materials A variable angle, inclined board was utilized for patient positioning. An anthropomorphic phantom underwent computed tomography simulation at various head angles. The IMRT goals were designed to achieve target coverage of the brain while maintaining hippocampal dose–volume constraints designed to conform to the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0933 protocol. Optimal head angle was then verified using data from 8 patients comparing coplanar and noncoplanar WBRT IMRT plans. Results Hippocampal, hippocampal avoidance region, and whole brain mean volumes were 1.1 cm 3 , 12.5 cm 3 , and 1185.1 cm 3 , respectively. The hippocampal avoidance region occupied 1.1% of the whole brain planning volume. For the 30-degree head angle, a 7-field coplanar IMRT plan was generated, sparing the hippocampus to a maximum dose of 14.7 Gy; D100% of the hippocampus was 7.4 Gy and mean hippocampal dose was 9.3 Gy. In comparison, for flat head positioning the hippocampal Dmax was 22.9 Gy with a D100% of 9.2 Gy and mean dose of 11.7 Gy. Target coverage and dose homogeneity was comparable with previously published noncoplanar IMRT plans. Conclusions Compared with conventional supine positioning, an inclined head board at 30 degrees optimizes coplanar whole brain IMRT treatment planning. Clinically acceptable hippocampal-sparing WBRT dosimetry can be obtained using a simplified coplanar plan at a 30-degree head angle, thus obviating the need for complex and time consuming noncoplanar IMRT plans. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Studies of dose-escalated external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) and low dose rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT) have shown excellent rates of tumor control and cancer specific survival. Moreover, LDR-BT combined with EBRT (i.e. “LDR-BT boost”) is hypothesized to improve local control. While phase II trials with LDR-BT boost have produced mature data of outcomes and toxicities, high dose rate (HDR)-BT has been growing in popularity as an alternative boost therapy. Boost from HDR-BT has theoretical advantages over LDR-BT, including improved cancer cell death and better dose distribution from customization of catheter dwell times, locations, and inverse dose optimization. Freedom from biochemical failure rates at five years for low-, intermediate-, high-risk, and locally advanced patients have generally been 85–100%, 80–98%, 59–96%, and 34–85%, respectively. Late Radiation Therapy Oncology Group grade 3–4 toxicities have also been encouraging with <6% of patients experiencing any toxicity. Limitations of current HDR-BT boost studies include reports of only single-institution experiences, and unrefined reports of toxicity or patient quality of life. Comparative effectiveness research will help guide clinicians in selecting the most appropriate treatment option for individual patients based on risk-stratification, expected outcomes, toxicities, quality of life, and cost. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Prostate cancer is the second most prevalent solid tumor diagnosed in men in the United States and Western Europe. Conventionally fractionated external beam radiation therapy (1.8–2.0Gy/fraction) is an established treatment modality for men in all disease risk groups. Emerging evidence from experimental and clinical studies suggests that the α/β ratio for prostate cancer may be as low as 1.5Gy, which has prompted investigators around the world to explore moderately hypofractionated radiation therapy (2.1–3.5Gy/fraction). We review the impetus behind moderate hypofractionation and the current clinical evidence supporting moderate hypofractionated radiation therapy for prostate cancer. Although hypofractionated radiation therapy has many theoretical advantages, there is no clear evidence from prospective, randomized, controlled trials showing that hypofractionated schedules have improved outcomes or lower toxicity than conventionally fractionated regimens. Currently, hypofractionated schedules should only be used in the context of clinical trials. High dose rate brachytherapy and stereotactic body radiation therapy (fraction size 3.5Gy and greater) are alternative approaches to hypofractionation, but are beyond the scope of this report. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Prostate cancer is the second most prevalent solid tumor diagnosed in men in the United States and Western Europe. Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is touted as a superior type of external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) for the treatment of various tumors. SBRT developed from the theory that high doses of radiation from brachytherapy implant seeds could be recapitulated from advanced technology of radiation treatment planning and delivery. Moreover, SBRT has been theorized to be advantageous compared to other RT techniques because it has a treatment course shorter than that of conventionally fractionated EBRT (a single session, five days per week, for about two weeks vs. eight weeks), is non-invasive, is more effective at killing tumor cells, and is less likely to cause damage to normal tissue. In areas of the US and Europe where there is limited access to RT centers, SBRT is frequently being used to treat prostate cancer, even though long-term data about its efficacy and safety are not well established. We review the impetus behind SBRT and the current clinical evidence supporting its use for prostate cancer, thus providing oncologists and primary care physicians with an understanding of the continually evolving field of prostate radiation therapy. Studies of SBRT provide encouraging results of biochemical control and late toxicity. However, they are limited by a number of factors, including short follow-up, exclusion of intermediate- and high-risk patients, and relatively small number of patients treated. Currently, SBRT regimens should only be used in the context of clinical trials. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Background: This retrospective study evaluates the efficacy and safety of surgery and chemotherapy (S +CT) vs. radiotherapy and CT (RT+CT) in patients with limited stage small cell esophageal cancer (LS-SCEC). Patients and methods: Patients included in analysis (from our hospital and the literature) were treated with S+CT or RT+CT between 1989 and 2012. The primary end point was overall survival (OS); secondary end points included tumor response and toxicity. Kaplan–Meier OS curves were compared with the log-rank test. Cox regression analysis was used to determine prognosticators for OS. Results: A total of 127 patients were included: 14 from our hospital and 113 from the literature. Fifty-four (43%) and 73 (57%) patients received S+CT or RT+CT, respectively. The median OS of all patients was 21.0months. OS was longer for those who received RT+CT rather than S+CT (33.0 vs. 17.5months, p =0.02), especially those with N1 disease. Uni- and multi-variate analyses showed tumor location (upper 1/3rd of esophagus) and type of treatment (S+CT) were poor prognostic factors of OS. Conclusion: LS-SCEC patients treated with RT+CT had an improved OS compared to those treated with S+RT. Thus, RT+CT should be considered as a primary approach for these patients. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Adding high-dose-rate brachytherapy (BT) boost to external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) improves biochemical control but may affect patient-reported quality of life (QOL). We sought to determine long-term QOL outcomes for EBRT+BT versus EBRT alone. This was a post hoc analysis of the Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group 03.04 Randomized Androgen Deprivation and Radiotherapy (TROG 03.04 RADAR) trial. Only patients who received 74 Gy conventionally fractionated EBRT (n = 260) or 46 Gy conventionally fractionated EBRT plus 19.5 Gy in 3 fractions high-dose-rate BT boost (n = 237) were included in this analysis. The primary endpoint was patient-reported QOL measured using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QOL (EORTC QLQ-C30) and prostate-specific QOL module (EORTC QLQ-PR25) questionnaires. We evaluated temporal changes in QOL scores, rates of symptom resolution, and the proportion of men who had decrements from baseline of >2 × the threshold for minimal clinically important change (2 × MCIC) for each domain. At 5, 17, and 29 months after radiation therapy, the EBRT+BT group had 2.5 times (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4-4.2; P <.001), 2.9 times (95% CI, 1.7-4.9; P <.001), and 2.6 times (95% CI, 1.4-4.6; P =.002) greater odds of reporting 2 × MCIC in urinary QOL score compared with EBRT. There were no differences beyond 29 months. EBRT+BT led to a slower rate of urinary QOL symptom score resolution up to 17 months after radiation therapy compared with EBRT (P <.001) but not at later intervals. In contrast, at the end of the radiation therapy period and at 53 months after radiation therapy, the EBRT+BT group had 0.65 times (95% CI, 0.44-0.96; P =.03) and 0.51 times (95% CI, 0.32-0.79; P =.003) the odds of reporting 2 × MCIC in bowel QOL symptom scores compared with EBRT. There were no significant differences in the rate of bowel QOL score resolution. There were no significant differences in global health status or sexual activity scores between the 2 groups. There were no persistent differences in patient-reported QOL measures between EBRT alone and EBRT+BT. BT boost does not appear to negatively affect long-term, patient-reported QOL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recognizing sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) is paramount in the management of genitourinary cancers, as sexual and gender minority (SGM) individuals encounter unique healthcare challenges leading to disparities. SGM patients often confront systemic barriers, provider biases, and scarcity of tailored resources, resulting in diminished satisfaction and adverse health outcomes. The evaluation and treatment of genitourinary cancers in SGM patients demand a nuanced, multidisciplinary approach that focuses on the unique health determinants often overlooked by the healthcare system. This review highlights recommendations for the inclusivity of SGM patients within the clinic, from inclusive signage to gender inclusive language. For the evaluation and treatment of SGM patients with genitourinary cancers, it is recommended to employ organ-based language, to utilize validated questionnaires encompassing mental health, sexual behavior, and patient-reported outcomes, and to provide timely referrals to social work and onco-fertility when appropriate. Ultimately, approaching inclusivity through education targeted at both SGM patients and healthcare providers is pivotal for centering care around the patient, improving the quality of life and outcomes for SGM patients facing genitourinary cancers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To determine the prevalence and severity of SpaceOAR-related adverse events using the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database. We analyzed SpaceOAR-related adverse event reports in the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database from January 2015 to May 2023. For each report, the event type, associated device and patient problems, event description, event timing, and event severity stratified by the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0 (CTCAE) grading system were recorded. From 2015 to 2022, 206,619 SpaceOAR devices were sold. From January 2015 to May 2023, we identified 981 reports describing 990 SpaceOAR-related adverse events. Malfunctions were the most common event type (N = 626), followed by patient injuries (N = 350) with few reported deaths (N = 5). Device positioning problems were the most frequent device issue (N = 686). Pain was the most reported patient problem (N = 216). Abscesses and fistulas related to the device were each reported in 91 events. A noteworthy portion of relevant adverse events occurred before the initiation of radiation (N = 35, 22.4%), suggesting the device, rather than the radiation, was responsible. In total, 470 (50.2%) and 344 (36.7%) of the adverse events were CTCAE grade 1 and 2, respectively. There were 123 (13.1%) events that were CTCAE grade ≥3. We identified multiple reports of SpaceOAR-related adverse events, many of which are more serious than have been reported in clinical trials. While SpaceOAR use is common, suggesting these events are rare, these data highlight the need for continued postmarket surveillance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Pelvic radiation therapy may lead to decreased bone mineral density (BMD) and increased risk of fracture that could be of particular concern in patients with prostate cancer who also receive androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). We performed an exploratory analysis of a randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled trial to determine whether exposure to prior pelvic external beam radiation therapy (XRT) affects BMD and risk of fracture in patients with prostate cancer treated with ADT. Patients with nonmetastatic prostate cancer aged ≥70 years or <70 years with low BMD (T-score < –1) or osteoporotic fracture who had been receiving ADT for ≥12 months were randomly assigned to receive densoumab or placebo every 6 months for 3 years. BMD was measured at baseline and at months 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, and 36. We applied multivariable linear mixed-effects models with an interaction term between the treatment arm and exposure to prior pelvic XRT to evaluate differential XRT effect on percent BMD change between the 2 treatment arms. Among 1407 eligible patients, 31% (n = 447) received prior pelvic XRT. There was no significant difference in any clinical fractures among patients with (5.8%, 26 of 447) or without (5.2%, 50 of 960) prior pelvic XRT (P =.42). Prior pelvic XRT was associated with a significant (0.54%) improvement in BMD (95% CI, 0.05-1.02) in the placebo group and a nonsignificant (0.04%) decline in BMD (95% CI, –0.47 to –0.35) in the denosumab group (interaction P =.007). There was no significant difference in pelvic XRT effect on percent BMD change in the lumbar spine (P =.65) or total hip (P =.39) between the 2 treatment groups. We did not find sufficient evidence to suggest any detrimental effect of pelvic XRT on the treatment effect from denosumab on percent BMD change, with only an approximately 5% incidence of clinical fractures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]