Search

Funding Information: The authors thank ESGO, ESTRO, and ESP for their support. The authors also thank the 155 international reviewers (physicians and patient representatives, see Appendix 2 in Online Supplemental File 2) for their valuable comments and suggestions. The authors thank the ESGO office, especially Kamila Macku, Tereza Cicakova, and Kateřina Šibravová, provided invaluable logistical and administrative support throughout the process. The development group (including all authors) is collectively responsible for the decision to submit for publication. DC (chair), JL (chair), MRR (chair) and FP (methodologist) wrote the first draft of the manuscript. All other contributors have actively given personal input, reviewed the manuscript, and have given final approval before submission. DC is responsible for the overall content as the guarantor. Initiated through the ESGO the decision to develop multidisciplinary guidelines was made jointly by the ESGO, ESTRO, and ESP. The ESGO provided administrative support. The ESGO, ESTRO and ESP are nonprofit knowledgeable societies. *These guidelines were developed by ESGO, ESTRO and ESP and are published in the Int J Gynecol Cancer, Radiother Oncol and Virchows Archiv. CCh has reported advisory boards for GSK, MSD and EISAI; SFL has reported advisory boards for MSD, GSK, AstraZeneca and Novartis; DL has reported consultant honoria from AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, GSK, MSD, Immunogen, Genmab, Amgen, Seagen and PharmaMar, advisory boards for AstraZeneca, Merck Serono, Seagen, Immunogen, Genmab, Oncoinvest, Corcept and Sutro, research institutional funding from Clovis Oncology, GSK, MSD and PharmaMar, research sponsored by AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, Genmab, GSK, Immunogen, Incyte, MSD, Roche, Seagen and Novartis, and speakers’ bureau activities for AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, GSK, MSD and PharmaMar; UM has reported advisory boards for AstraZeneca (Steering committee member for CALLA Study); RN has reported research grants from Elekta, Varian, Accuray, Dutch Research Council, and Dutch Cancer Society; AO has reported personal fees for advisory board membersip from Agenus, AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, Corcept Therapeutics, Deciphera Pharmaceuticals, Eisai, EMD Serono, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Genmab/Seagen, GSK, ImmunoGen, Itheos, Merck Sharp & Dohme de Espana, SA, Mersana Thereapeutics, Novocure, PharmaMar, piIME Oncology, Roche, Sattucklabs, Sutro Biopharma and Tesaro, and personal fees for travel/accomodation from AstraZeneca, PharmaMar and Roche; DQ has reported advisory boards for Mimark inc; MPS has reported research grants and personal fees for workshops from Elekta AB; DC, MRR, FP, CC, AF, DF, DJK, FJ, CK, PM, RN, FPec, JP, SR, AS, VS, KT, IZ and JCL have reported no conflicts of interest. Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed. Not applicable. Not applicable. David Cibula, Maria Rosaria Raspollini, François Planchamp, Carlos Centeno, Cyrus Chargari, Ana Felix, Daniela Fischerova, Daniela Jahn-Kuch, Florence Joly, Christhardt Kohler, Sigurd F. Lax, Domenica Lorusso, Umesh Mahantshetty, Patrice Mathevet, Raj Naik, Remi Nout, Ana Oaknin, Fedro Peccatori, Jan Persson, Denis Querleu, Sandra Rubio, Maximilian Paul Schmid, Artem Stepanyan, Valentyn Svintsitskyi, Karl Tamussino, Ignacio Zapardiel, Jacob Christian Lindegaard. All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information. Funding Information: CCh has reported advisory boards for GSK, MSD and EISAI; SFL has reported advisory boards for MSD, GSK, AstraZeneca and Novartis; DL has reported consultant honoria from AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, GSK, MSD, Immunogen, Genmab, Amgen, Seagen and PharmaMar, advisory boards for AstraZeneca, Merck Serono, Seagen, Immunogen, Genmab, Oncoinvest, Corcept and Sutro, research institutional funding from Clovis Oncology, GSK, MSD and PharmaMar, research sponsored by AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, Genmab, GSK, Immunogen, Incyte, MSD, Roche, Seagen and Novartis, and speakers’ bureau activities for AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, GSK, MSD and PharmaMar; UM has reported advisory boards for AstraZeneca (Steering committee member for CALLA Study); RN has reported research grants from Elekta, Varian, Accuray, Dutch Research Council, and Dutch Cancer Society; AO has reported personal fees for advisory board membersip from Agenus, AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, Corcept Therapeutics, Deciphera Pharmaceuticals, Eisai, EMD Serono, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Genmab/Seagen, GSK, ImmunoGen, Itheos, Merck Sharp & Dohme de Espana, SA, Mersana Thereapeutics, Novocure, PharmaMar, piIME Oncology, Roche, Sattucklabs, Sutro Biopharma and Tesaro, and personal fees for travel/accomodation from AstraZeneca, PharmaMar and Roche; DQ has reported advisory boards for Mimark inc; MPS has reported research grants and personal fees for workshops from Elekta AB; DC, MRR, FP, CC, AF, DF, DJK, FJ, CK, PM, RN, FPec, JP, SR, AS, VS, KT, IZ and JCL have reported no conflicts of interest. Publisher Copyright: © 2023 ESGO, ESTRO, ESP In 2018, the European Society of Gynecological Oncology (ESGO) jointly with the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) and the European Society of Pathology (ESP) published evidence-based guidelines for the management of patients with cervical cancer. Given the large body of new evidence addressing the management of cervical cancer, the three sister societies jointly decided to update these evidence-based guidelines. The update includes new topics to provide comprehensive guidelines on all relevant issues of diagnosis and treatment in cervical cancer. To serve on the expert panel (27 experts across Europe) ESGO/ESTRO/ESP nominated practicing clinicians who are involved in managing patients with cervical cancer and have demonstrated leadership through their expertise in clinical care and research, national and international engagement, profile, and dedication to the topics addressed. To ensure the statements were evidence based, new data identified from a systematic search was reviewed and critically appraised. In the absence of any clear scientific evidence, judgment was based on the professional experience and consensus of the international development group. Before publication, the guidelines were reviewed by 155 independent international practitioners in cancer care delivery and patient representatives. These updated guidelines are comprehensive and cover staging, management, follow-up, long-term survivorship, quality of life and palliative care. Management includes fertility sparing treatment, early and locally advanced cervical cancer, invasive cervical cancer diagnosed on a simple hysterectomy specimen, cervical cancer in pregnancy, rare tumors, recurrent and metastatic diseases. The management algorithms and the principles of radiotherapy and pathological evaluation are also defined. publishersversion published

Purpose The aim of this study was to evaluate whether (preoperative) plasma levels of fibrinogen, an essential clotting and acute phase protein, are associated with the prognosis of patients with a liposarcoma, a subtype of sarcoma derived from adipose tissue. Methods We performed a retrospective cohort study of 158 patients with liposarcoma treated at the Department of Orthopaedics of the Medical University of Vienna in Austria from May 1994 to October 2021. Kaplan-Meier curves as well as uni- and multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were performed to evaluate the association between fibrinogen levels and overall survival. Results Elevated fibrinogen was associated with adverse overall survival in cause specific hazards analysis of mortality (hazard ratio [HR] per 10g/L increase: 1,04; 95% CI 1,02–1,06; p

Purpose: To quantify the association of persistent morbidity with different aspects of quality of life (QOL) in locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC) survivors.Material and methods: Longitudinal outcome from the EMBRACE-I study was evaluated. Patient-reported symptoms and QOL were prospectively scored (EORTC-C30/CX24) at baseline and regular follow-ups. Physician-assessed symptoms were also reported (CTCAEv.3). Persistent symptoms were defined if present in at least half of the follow-ups. QOL items were linearly transformed into a continuous scale. Linear mixed-effects models (LMM) were applied to evaluate and quantify the association of persistent symptoms with QOL. Overall QOL deterioration was evaluated by calculating the integral difference in QOL over time obtained with LMM for patients without and with persistent symptoms.Results: Out of 1416 patients enrolled, 741 with baseline and >= 3 late follow-ups were analyzed (median 59 months). Proportions of persistent EORTC symptoms ranged from 21.8 % to 64.9 % (bowel control and tiredness). For CTCAE the range was 11.3-28.6 % (limb edema and fatigue). Presence of any persistent symptom was associated with QOL, although with varying magnitude. Role functioning and Global health/QOL were the most impaired aspects. Fatigue and pain showed large differences, with reductions of around 20 % for most of the QOL aspects. Among organ-related symptoms, abdominal cramps showed the largest effect.Conclusion: Persistent symptoms are associated with QOL reductions in LACC survivors. Organ-related symptoms showed smaller differences than general symptoms such as fatigue and pain. In addition to optimizing treatment to minimize organ-related morbidity, effort should be directed towards a more comprehensive and targeted morbidity management.(c) 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. Radiotherapy and Oncology 181 (2023) 109501 This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Purpose: To report dosimetric characteristics and early clinical outcomes in patients with pelvic Ewing sarcoma undergoing particle therapy. Methods: Patients ≥ 18 years old with pelvic Ewing sarcoma treated in adjuvant or definitive settings were considered for this retrospective analysis. Proton therapy was carried out with 45–60 Gy (RBE) (1.5–2 Gy (RBE) per fraction) and carbon ion therapy for recurrent disease with 51 Gy (RBE) (3 Gy (RBE) per fraction). Local control (LC), disease control (DC) and overall survival (OS) were calculated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Results: For our sample, 21 patients were available, 18 of whom were treated for primary, 3 for locally recurrent and 16 for inoperable disease. The median CTV and PTV were 1215 cm3 and 1630 cm3. Median Dmean values for the PTV, bladder and rectum and median V40 Gy for the bowel for patients undergoing proton therapy were 56 Gy (RBE), 0.6 Gy (RBE), 9 Gy (RBE) and 15 cm3, respectively. At the end of particle therapy, G 1–2 skin reactions (n = 16/21) and fatigue (n = 9/21) were the main reported symptoms. After a median follow-up of 21 months, the 2-year LC, DC and OS were 76%, 56% and 86%, respectively. Conclusions: Particle therapy in adult pelvic Ewing sarcoma is feasible and provides excellent dosimetric results. First clinical outcomes are promising; however, further long-term follow-up is needed.

Purpose: The purpose was to evaluate patient-and treatment-related risk factors for physician-assessed and patient-reported gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms after radio(chemo)therapy and image guided adaptive brachytherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer.Methods and Materials: Of 1416 patients from the EMBRACE-I study, 1199 and 1002 were prospectively evaluated using physician-assessed (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [CTCAE]) and patient-reported (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer [EORTC]) GI symptoms, respectively. CTCAE severe grade (grade [G] >3) events were pooled according to the location in the GI tract (anus/rectum, sigmoid, and colon/small bowel). CTCAE G >2 and EORTC "very much" and "quite a bit" plus "very much" scores (> "quite a bit") were analyzed for individual symptoms with Cox regression. Logistic regression was used for persistent G >1 and EORTC > "quite a bit" symptoms, defined if present in at least half of follow-ups.Results: The incidence of G >3 events was 2.8%, 1.8%, and 2.3% for G >3 anus/rectum, sigmoid, and colon/small bowel events, respectively. Among G >2 symptoms, diarrhea and flatulence were the most prevalent (8.5% and 9.9%, respectively). Among patient-related factors, baseline morbidity, increasing age, smoking status, and low body mass index were associated with GI symptoms to varying degrees. Among treatment-related factors, rectum D-2cm3 and the International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements recto-vaginal reference point (ICRU RV-RP) correlated with G >3 anus/rectum events and moderate/persistent diarrhea, proctitis, bleeding, abdominal cramps, and difficulty in bowel control. Bowel D-2cm3 correlated with G >3 sigmoid and colon/small bowel events and moderate/persistent diarrhea and flatulence. For external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), prescription dose correlated with G >3 anus/rectum, diarrhea, and difficulty in bowel control. Patients with large lymph-node boost (V57Gy) were at higher risk for G >3 sigmoid events, moderate/persistent diarrhea, proctitis, and cramps.Conclusions: The analysis showed that both EBRT and image guided adaptive brachytherapy contribute to GI symptoms after locally advanced cervical cancer treatment. Rectum D-2cm3, ICRU RV-RP , and bowel D2cm3 are risk factors for GI morbidity. The risk for various symptoms was lower with an EBRT prescription of 45 Gy than 50 Gy and increased with larger V57Gy. (C) 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Aim: to report clinical outcome in patients with acinic cell carcinoma of the salivary glands treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and carbon ion radiotherapy (CIRT) boost. Materials and Methods: all patients with acinic cell carcinoma of the salivary glands treated at the Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center were considered for this retrospective analysis. All patients received a CIRT boost with 18&ndash, 24 Gy radiobiologic effectiveness (RBE)-weighted dose in 3 Gy RBE-weighted dose per fraction followed by IMRT, with 50&ndash, 54 Gy in 2 Gy per fraction. Disease outcome was evaluated for local (LR), nodal (NR), distant recurrence (DR), and disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Morbidity was scored based on Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 5. Descriptive statistics and the Kaplan-Meier method were used for analysis. Results: fifteen patients were available for analysis. Median follow-up after radiotherapy was 43 months. Six patients were treated for primary disease and nine for recurrent disease. Eight patients were treated with radiotherapy for macroscopic disease. Disease recurrence was observed in four patients: 1 LR, 2 NR, and 2 DR, 5-year local control, DFS, and OS were 80%, 52%, and 80%, respectively. No radiotherapy-related G3-5 morbidity was observed. Conclusion: In acinic cell carcinoma, IMRT with carbon ion radiotherapy boost leads to excellent results after R1-resection and is a promising treatment modality for definitive treatment in inoperable patients.