Search

Highlights • IMRT is associated with favorable toxicity rates for patients with anal cancer. • Outcomes were favorable for those with T3-4 tumors or lymph node involvement. • Current smokers are at a higher risk of severe dermatologic toxicity. • Overall treatment duration greater than 39 days is associated with recurrence., Introduction To report long-term efficacy and adverse events (AEs) associated with intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for patients with anal canal squamous cell carcinoma (ASCC). Materials and methods This was a retrospective review of patients with ASCC who received curative-intent IMRT and concurrent chemotherapy (98%) between 2003 and 2019. Overall survival (OS), colostomy-free survival (CFS), and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The cumulative incidence of local recurrence (LR), locoregional recurrence (LRR), and distant metastasis (DM) were reported. Acute and late AEs were recorded per National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for AEs. Results 127 patients were included. The median patient age was 63 years (interquartile range [IQR] 55–69) and 79% of patients were female. 33% of patients had T3-4 disease and 68% had clinically involved pelvic or inguinal lymph nodes (LNs). The median patient follow-up was 47 months (IQR: 28–89 months). The estimated 4-year OS, CFS, and PFS were 81% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 73%–89%), 77% (95% CI: 68%–86%), and 78% (95% CI: 70%–86%), respectively. The 4-year cumulative incidences of LR, LRR, and DM were 3% (95% CI: 1%–9%), 9% (95% CI: 5%–17%), and 10% (95% CI: 6%–18%), respectively. Overall treatment duration greater than 39 days was associated with an increased risk of LRR (Hazard Ratio [HR]: 5.2, 95% CI: 1.4–19.5, p = 0.015). The most common grade 3+ acute AEs included hematologic (31%), gastrointestinal (GI) (17%), dermatologic (16%), and pain (15%). Grade 3+ late AEs included: GI (3%), genitourinary (GU) (2%), and pain (1%). Current smokers were more likely to experience grade 3+ acute dermatologic toxicity compared to former or never smokers (34% vs. 7%, p

Purpose Optimal clinical target volume (CTV) for inguinal lymph node irradiation in anal cancer remains uncertain. This study documents the location of radiographically involved inguinal lymph nodes and proposes guidelines for CTV delineation. Materials and Methods Patients with anal canal squamous cell carcinoma with inguinal lymph node metastases were identified. Criteria for lymph node involvement included: >15 mm short axis or suspicious morphology on CT or MRI, increased avidity on 18-FDG-PET, or positive biopsy. Distances from center of involved nodes to femoral vessels and inferior pubic symphysis were measured. Results Forty patients with 79 inguinal lymph nodes were included. Relative to right femoral vessels, nodes were located: 12:00 (n = 6); 1:00 (n = 28); 2:00 (n = 35), 3:00 (n = 5); 4:00 (n = 1); 10:00 (n = 1); 11:00 (n = 3). No nodes were identified lateral or posterior to vessels. Published AGITG guidelines covered 68% of nodes anteriorly and 85% medially. Margins from nearest femoral vessel to cover 95% of nodes were 30 mm anteriorly and 26 mm medially. Inferior margin to cover 95% of nodes was 14 mm below inferior pubic symphysis. Proposed borders include cranial, where external iliac vessels leave bony pelvis; caudal, 14 mm below inferior pubic symphysis; posterior, posterior border of femoral vessels; lateral, lateral border of femoral vessels; anterior, 30 mm margin on femoral vessels and medial, 26 mm margin on femoral vessels, including radiographically suspicious nodes. Conclusions Published guidelines for inguinal CTV in anal cancer may result in inadequate coverage of high risk areas. Updated guidelines based on this study ensure coverage of at-risk areas.

Lymph node (LN)–positive cervical cancer is associated with a poor prognosis. We report outcomes for women with LN-positive cervical cancer treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with dose-escalated simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) to involved LNs. Between 2005 and 2017, 59 women with LN-positive, non-metastatic, cervical cancer underwent definitive chemoradiotherapy (CRT) with an image-guided LN boost to a median dose of 56.25 Gy in 25 fractions. Acute and late adverse events (AEs) were recorded per common terminology criteria for adverse events. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and locoregional control (LRC). Median age was 49 years (IQR 37–56). Women had involved LNs in the pelvis (56%) or pelvis and para-aortic (PA) LNs (44%), with a median of 3 (IQR 2–6) grossly involved LNs per patient. Median follow-up was 30 months (IQR 11–45). Estimated 3-year OS, PFS, and LRC were 67% (95% CI, 51%–84%), 60% (95% CI, 45%–76%), and 89% (95% CI, 76%–99%), respectively. PA LN involvement (HR 2.51; 95% CI, 1.05–5.99; p = 0.04) and the presence of ≥ 4 grossly involved LNs (HR 2.79; 95% CI, 1.16–6.71; p = 0.02) were associated with a higher risk of disease progression on univariate analysis. The incidence of treatment-related acute grade 3+ acute GI or GU AEs was 3%, while late GI or GU treatment-related AEs occurred in 12%. Chemoradiation with a LN-directed SIB for women with LN-positive cervical cancer is well tolerated and is associated with excellent oncologic outcomes. In this report, we evaluated the oncologic efficacy and adverse events associated with definitive chemoradiotherapy with a simultaneous integrated boost to grossly involved lymph nodes for women with lymph node–positive cervical cancer. We have identified acceptable rates of adverse events and excellent oncologic outcomes, even in a very high risk cohort of women with cervical cancer.

Background Clinical pathways outline criteria for dose homogeneity and critical organ dosimetry. Based upon an internal audit showing suboptimal compliance with dosimetric parameters in whole breast irradiation (WBI), we conducted a mandatory web-based teaching conference for the network. This study reports the impact of this initiative on subsequent treatment plans. Methods Radiation treatment plans were collected for the 10 most recent patients receiving WBI at 16 institutions within the UPMC Hillman Cancer Center network. Subsequently, a web-based conference was conducted to educate staff physicians, physicists, and dosimetrists with goals for dose homogeneity and critical organ dosimetry. Six months post-conference, another 10 plans were collected from each site and compared to pre-conference plans for deviations from dosimetric criteria. Results Dose homogeneity significantly improved after the conference with breast V105% decreasing from 15.6% to 11.2% (p = 0.004) and breast V110% decreasing from 1.3% to 0.04% (p = 0.008). A higher percentage of cases were compliant with dosimetric criteria, with breast V105% > 20% decreasing from 22.5% to 7.5% of cases (p = 0.0002) and breast V110% > 0% decreasing from 13.8% to 4.4% of cases (p = 0.003). Conclusions Implementation of a web-based teaching conference helped improve adherence to clinical pathway dosimetric guidelines for WBI. In radiation oncology networks, this may be an effective model to ensure quality in routine practice and can be extrapolated to other disease sites.

Purpose/Objective(s) To compare acute skin toxicity following post-mastectomy photon (XRT) and skin-sparing proton radiotherapy (PRT). Materials/Methods 179 consecutive women with unilateral, non-inflammatory breast cancer were treated with conventionally fractionated post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) between 2015 and 2019. Prescription was 50 Gy (RBE) in 25 fractions to the chest wall and regional lymph nodes. PRT was administered with a median of two multi-field optimized fields (intensity modulated proton therapy). The chest wall skin was defined as the first 3 mm from the external body surface. XRT and PRT planning objectives with respect to skin were to achieve microscopic disease target coverage while limiting surface hot spots. For XRT 3-5 mm daily bolus was most commonly employed to achieve these objectives. PRT planning objectives were V90% > 90% and D1cc Results Treatment was PRT in 96 and XRT in 83 (95% 3D conformal radiotherapy with a wide tangent technique, 5% intensity modulated radiotherapy). There was no significant difference between the two groups with respect to age, stage, receipt of chemotherapy, immediate breast reconstruction, diabetes mellitus, body mass index (BMI), or current or former smoking history. 65% PRT and 61% XRT pts had immediate breast reconstruction. Median follow-up was 25 months. There was no significant difference in grade ≥2 or grade 3 dermatitis between PRT and XRT at 47% vs 48%, P = 0.86 and 3% vs 7%, P = 0.22, respectively. There was a trend for higher grade ≥2 dermatitis in current or former smokers vs never smokers (60% vs 43%, P = 0.06). BMI (P = 0.11), diabetes (P = 0.41), and breast reconstruction (P = 0.63) were also not associated with grade ≥2 dermatitis. Dosimetric parameters including the skin dose to 1 cc (P Conclusion Post-mastectomy PRT administered with our skin-sparing technique is not associated with higher rates of acute dermatitis than XRT.