Search

The initial favorable efficacy and safety profile for Alpha DaRT have been demonstrated (NCT04377360); however, the longer-term safety and durability of the treatment are unknown. This pooled analysis of four prospective trials evaluated the long-term safety and efficacy of Alpha DaRT for the treatment of head and neck or skin tumors. A total of 81 lesions in 71 patients were treated across six international institutions, with a median follow-up of 14.1 months (range: 2-51 months). Alpha DaRT sources were delivered via a percutaneous interstitial technique and placed to irradiate the tumor volume with the margin. The sources were removed two to three weeks following implantation. A complete response was observed in 89% of treated lesions (n = 72) and a partial response in 10% (n = 8). The two-year actuarial local recurrence-free survival was 77% [95% CI 63-87]. Variables, including recurrent versus non-recurrent lesions, baseline tumor size, or histology, did not impact long-term outcomes. Twenty-seven percent of patients developed related acute grade 2 or higher toxicities, which resolved with conservative measures. No grade 2 or higher late toxicities were observed. These data support the favorable safety profile of Alpha DaRT, which is currently being explored in a pivotal US trial.

Importance: Patients with recurrent or unresectable skin cancers have limited treatment options. Diffusing alpha-emitter radiation therapy (DaRT), a novel solid tumor management strategy using alpha-particle interstitial brachytherapy, may address this challenge., Objective: To evaluate the feasibility and safety of using DaRT to manage recurrent or unresectable skin cancers., Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective cohort study of patients who received a 2-week to 3-week treatment course and were followed up for 24 weeks after treatment during 2021 and 2022 at 2 sites in the US. Patients with malignant skin tumors or soft tissue tumors were recruited if they had limited treatment options for tumors recurrent after prior surgery or external beam radiotherapy or unresectable tumors., Intervention: Patients underwent DaRT to deliver a physical dose of 10 Gy (equivalent weighted dose of 200 CGE) to the tumor., Main Outcomes and Measures: Feasibility of the DaRT procedure was evaluated based on the ability of investigators to successfully deliver radiation to the tumor. Patients were followed up for adverse events (AEs) for 24 weeks and for tumor response by physicians' physical examination and imaging 12 weeks after device removal., Results: This study included 10 participants with recurrent or unresectable skin cancer (median [IQR] age, 72 [68-75] years; 6 males [60%]; 4 females [40%]). Six patients (60%) had recurrent disease, and 4 (40%) had tumors that were deemed unresectable. Tumors were located on the nose, chin, eyelid, scalp, neck, trunk, and extremities. Median (range) tumor volume before treatment was 2.1 cm3 (0.65-12.65 cm3). The mean (SD) prescription dose coverage of the gross tumor volume was 91% (2.8%) with all tumors having coverage of 85% or more. No device-related grade 3 AEs were noted. Common AEs were grade 1 to 2 erythema, edema, and pruritus. At 12 weeks following treatment, there was a 100% complete response rate. Nine of 10 complete responses (90%) were confirmed by CT imaging., Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study suggests the feasibility and preliminary safety of DaRT in the management of recurrent or unresectable skin cancers. The favorable safety profile and high response rates are promising. A US trial for marketing approval based on this pilot study is under way., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04377360.

Purpose/objectives: Three-dimensional (3D) printing is recognized as an effective clinical and educational tool in procedurally intensive specialties. However, it has a nascent role in radiation oncology. The goal of this investigation is to clarify the extent to which 3D printing applications are currently being used in radiation oncology through a systematic review of the literature., Materials/methods: A search protocol was defined according to preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Included articles were evaluated using parameters of interest including: year and country of publication, experimental design, sample size for clinical studies, radiation oncology topic, reported outcomes, and implementation barriers or safety concerns., Results: One hundred and three publications from 2012 to 2019 met inclusion criteria. The most commonly described 3D printing applications included quality assurance phantoms (26%), brachytherapy applicators (20%), bolus (17%), preclinical animal irradiation (10%), compensators (7%), and immobilization devices (5%). Most studies were preclinical feasibility studies (63%), with few clinical investigations such as case reports or series (13%) or cohort studies (11%). The most common applications evaluated within clinical settings included brachytherapy applicators (44%) and bolus (28%). Sample sizes for clinical investigations were small (median 10, range 1-42). A minority of articles described basic or translational research (11%) and workflow or cost evaluation studies (3%). The number of articles increased over time (P < 0.0001). While outcomes were heterogeneous, most studies reported successful implementation of accurate and cost-effective 3D printing methods., Conclusions: Three-dimensional printing is rapidly growing in radiation oncology and has been implemented effectively in a diverse array of applications. Although the number of 3D printing publications has steadily risen, the majority of current reports are preclinical in nature and the few clinical studies that do exist report on small sample sizes. Further dissemination of ongoing investigations describing the clinical application of developed 3D printing technologies in larger cohorts is warranted., (© 2020 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine.)

Purpose: To develop an Eclipse plug-in (MLC&#95;MODIFIER) that automatically modifies control points to expose fiducials obscured by MLC during VMAT, thereby facilitating tracking using periodic MV/kV imaging., Method: Three-dimensional fiducial tracking was performed during VMAT by pairing short-arc (3°) MV digital tomosynthesis (DTS) images to triggered kV images. To evaluate MLC&#95;MODIFIER efficacy, two cohorts of patients were considered. For first 12 patients, plans were manually edited to expose one fiducial marker. Next for 15 patients, plans were modified using MLC&#95;MODIFIER script. MLC&#95;MODIFIER evaluated MLC apertures at appropriate angles for marker visibility. Angles subtended by control points were compressed and low-dose "imaging" control points were inserted and exposed one marker with 1 cm margin. Patient's images were retrospectively reviewed to determine rate of MV registration failures. Failure categories were poor DTS image quality, MLC blockage of fiducials, or unknown reasons. Dosimetric differences in rectum, bladder, and urethra D1 cc, PTV maximum dose, and PTV dose homogeneity (PTV HI) were evaluated. Statistical significance was evaluated using Fisher's exact and Student's t test., Result: Overall MV registration failures, failures due to poor image quality, MLC blockage, and unknown reasons were 33% versus 8.9% (P < 0.0001), 8% versus 6.4% (P < 0.05), 13.6% versus 0.1% (P < 0.0001), and 7.6% versus 2.4% (P < 0.0001) for manually edited and MLC&#95;MODIFIER plans, respectively. PTV maximum and HI increased on average from unmodified plans by 2.1% and 0.3% (P < 0.004) and 22.0% and 3.3% (P < 0.004) for manually edited and MLC&#95;MODIFIED plans, respectively. Changes in bladder, rectum, and urethra D1CC were similar for each method and less than 0.7%., Conclusion: Increasing fiducial visibility via an automated process comprised of angular compression of control points and insertion of additional "imaging" control points is feasible. Degradation of plan quality is minimal. Fiducial detection and registration success rates are significantly improved compared to manually edited apertures., (© 2019 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine.)

Purpose: In this study, we present the clinical implementation of a novel transoral balloon centering esophageal applicator (BCEA) and the initial clinical experience in high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy treatment of esophageal cancer, using this applicator., Material and Methods: Acceptance testing and commissioning of the BCEA were performed prior to clinical use. Full performance testing was conducted including measurements of the dimensions and the catheter diameter, evaluation of the inflatable balloon consistency, visibility of the radio-opaque markers, congruence of the markers, absolute and relative accuracy of the HDR source in the applicator using the radiochromic film and source position simulator, visibility and digitization of the applicator on the computed tomography (CT) images under the clinical conditions, and reproducibility of the offset. Clinical placement of the applicator, treatment planning, treatment delivery, and patient's response to the treatment were elaborated as well., Results: The experiments showed sub-millimeter accuracy in the source positioning with distal position at 1270 mm. The digitization (catheter reconstruction) was uncomplicated due to the good visibility of markers. The treatment planning resulted in a favorable dose distribution. This finding was pronounced for the treatment of the curvy anatomy of the lesion due to the improved repeatability and consistency of the delivered fractional dose to the patient, since the radioactive source was placed centrally within the lumen with respect to the clinical target due to the five inflatable balloons., Conclusions: The consistency of the BCEA positioning resulted in the possibility to deliver optimized non-uniform dose along the catheter, which resulted in an increase of the dose to the cancerous tissue and lower doses to healthy tissue. A larger number of patients and long-term follow-up will be required to investigate if the delivered optimized treatment can lead to improved clinical outcomes.

Objective: Lower extremity lymphedema adversely affects quality of life by causing discomfort, impaired mobility and increased risk of infection. The goal of this study is to investigate factors that influence the likelihood of lymphedema in patients with endometrial cancer who undergo adjuvant radiation with or without chemotherapy., Methods: A retrospective chart review identified all stage I-III endometrial cancer patients who had a hysterectomy with or without complete staging lymphadenectomy and adjuvant radiation therapy between January 2006 and February 2013. Patients with new-onset lymphedema after treatment were identified. Logistic regression was used to find factors that influenced lymphedema risk., Results: Of 212 patients who met inclusion criteria, 15 patients (7.1%) developed new-onset lymphedema. Lymphedema was associated with lymph-node dissection (odds ratio [OR], 5.6; 95% CI, 1.01 to 105.5; p=0.048) and with the presence of pathologically positive lymph nodes (OR, 4.1; 95% CI, 1.4 to 12.3; p=0.01). Multivariate logistic regression confirmed the association with lymph-node positivity (OR, 3.2; 95% CI, 1.0007 to 10.7; p=0.0499) when controlled for lymph-node dissection. Median time to lymphedema onset was 8 months (range, 1 to 58 months) with resolution or improvement in eight patients (53.3%) after a median of 10 months., Conclusion: Lymph-node positivity was associated with an increased risk of lymphedema in endometrial cancer patients who received adjuvant radiation. Future studies are needed to explore whether node-positive patients may benefit from early lymphedema-controlling interventions.

Purpose: To investigate the dose distributions associated with a novel balloon sleeve placed over a standard cylinder applicator., Material and Methods: A computed tomography (CT) scan of a sleeve balloon shaped to inflate into the vaginal fornices was used to digitize 1-, 3-, and 5-catheter configurations. Point doses for rectum, apex, and fornix were calculated and compared to the values associated with a standard cylinder plan not targeting the vaginal fornices. Inflation of the sleeve balloon in the vaginal fornices and dose coverage with constraints to the rectum, bladder, and sigmoid D2cc were evaluated., Results: Rectum, apex, and fornix doses were respectively 76%, 119%, and 44% for a standard cylinder; 190%, 310%, and 93% for a 1-catheter configuration; 98%, 109%, and 109% for a 3-catheter configuration; and 91%, 107%, and 96% for the 5-catheter configuration. In a patient analysis, expansion of the sleeve balloon into the vaginal fornices was confirmed. The 5-catheter configurations were associated with best coverage of the fornices and acceptable doses to rectum, bladder, and sigmoid., Conclusions: A 1-catheter configuration cannot be used clinically due to high rectal and apex dose. In theoretical analysis, the 3- and 5-catheter configurations showed > 96% coverage to the vaginal fornices with a clinically acceptable rectal dose. In a treatment simulation in a patient, a 5-catheter configuration showed 90% coverage of the fornices with acceptable doses to the organs at risk. The treatment of deep vaginal fornices results in an increased rectal dose compared to a standard cylinder plan.

Background: Prostate volume can affect whether patients qualify for brachytherapy (desired size ≥20 mL and ≤60 mL) and/or active surveillance (desired PSA density ≤0.15 for very low risk disease). This study examines variability in prostate volume measurements depending on imaging modality used (ultrasound versus MRI) and volume calculation technique (contouring versus ellipsoid) and quantifies the impact of this variability on treatment recommendations for men with favorable-risk prostate cancer., Methods: We examined 70 patients who presented consecutively for consideration of brachytherapy for favorable-risk prostate cancer who had volume estimates by three methods: contoured axial ultrasound slices, ultrasound ellipsoid (height × width × length × 0.523) calculation, and endorectal coil MRI (erMRI) ellipsoid calculation., Results: Average gland size by the contoured ultrasound, ellipsoid ultrasound, and erMRI methods were 33.99, 37.16, and 39.62 mLs, respectively. All pairwise comparisons between methods were statistically significant (all p < 0.015). Of the 66 patients who volumetrically qualified for brachytherapy on ellipsoid ultrasound measures, 22 (33.33%) did not qualify on ellipsoid erMRI or contoured ultrasound measures. 38 patients (54.28%) had PSA density ≤0.15 ng/dl as calculated using ellipsoid ultrasound volumes, compared to 34 (48.57%) and 38 patients (54.28%) using contoured ultrasound and ellipsoid erMRI volumes, respectively., Conclusions: The ultrasound ellipsoid and erMRI ellipsoid methods appeared to overestimate ultrasound contoured volume by an average of 9.34% and 16.57% respectively. 33.33% of those who qualified for brachytherapy based on ellipsoid ultrasound volume would be disqualified based on ultrasound contoured and/or erMRI ellipsoid volume. As treatment recommendations increasingly rely on estimates of prostate size, clinicians must consider method of volume estimation.