Search

01 juli 2023, Item does not contain fulltext, PET imaging with 2'-deoxy-2'-[18F]fluoro-D-glucose ([18F]FDG) has become one of the pillars in the management of malignant diseases. It has proven value in diagnostic workup, treatment policy, follow-up, and as prognosticator for outcome. [18F]FDG is widely available and standards have been developed for PET acquisition protocols and quantitative analyses. More recently, [18F]FDG-PET is also starting to be appreciated as a decision aid for treatment personalization. This review focuses on the potential of [18F]FDG-PET for individualized radiotherapy dose prescription. This includes dose painting, gradient dose prescription, and [18F]FDG-PET guided response-adapted dose prescription. The current status, progress, and future expectations of these developments for various tumor types are discussed.

Item does not contain fulltext, BACKGROUND: Local treatment improves the outcomes for oligometastatic disease (OMD, i.e. an intermediate state between locoregional and widespread disseminated disease). However, consensus about the definition, diagnosis and treatment of oligometastatic oesophagogastric cancer is lacking. The aim of this study was to develop a multidisciplinary European consensus statement on the definition, diagnosis and treatment of oligometastatic oesophagogastric cancer. METHODS: In total, 65 specialists in the multidisciplinary treatment for oesophagogastric cancer from 49 expert centres across 16 European countries were requested to participate in this Delphi study. The consensus finding process consisted of a starting meeting, 2 online Delphi questionnaire rounds and an online consensus meeting. Input for Delphi questionnaires consisted of (1) a systematic review on definitions of oligometastatic oesophagogastric cancer and (2) a discussion of real-life clinical cases by multidisciplinary teams. Experts were asked to score each statement on a 5-point Likert scale. The agreement was scored to be either absent/poor (<50%), fair (50%-75%) or consensus (≥75%). RESULTS: A total of 48 experts participated in the starting meeting, both Delphi rounds, and the consensus meeting (overall response rate: 71%). OMD was considered in patients with metastatic oesophagogastric cancer limited to 1 organ with ≤3 metastases or 1 extra-regional lymph node station (consensus). In addition, OMD was considered in patients without progression at restaging after systemic therapy (consensus). For patients with synchronous or metachronous OMD with a disease-free interval ≤2 years, systemic therapy followed by restaging to consider local treatment was considered as treatment (consensus). For metachronous OMD with a disease-free interval >2 years, either upfront local treatment or systemic treatment followed by restaging was considered as treatment (fair agreement). CONCLUSION: The OMEC project has resul

Contains fulltext : 296146.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access), PURPOSE: Involved internal iliac and obturator lateral lymph nodes (LLNs) are a known risk factor for the occurrence of ipsilateral local recurrences (LLR) in rectal cancer. This study examined coverage of LLNs with routine radiation therapy practice in the Netherlands and associated LLR rates. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with a primary tumor ≤8 cm of the anorectal junction, cT3-4 stage, and at least 1 internal iliac or obturator LLN with short axis ≥5 mm who received neoadjuvant (chemo)radiation therapy, were selected from a national, cross-sectional study of patients with rectal cancer treated in the Netherlands in 2016. Magnetic resonance images and radiation therapy treatment plans were reviewed regarding segmented LLNs as gross tumor volume (GTV), location of LLNs within clinical target volume (CTV), and received proportion of the planned radiation therapy dose. RESULTS: A total of 223 out of 3057 patients with at least 1 LLN ≥5 mm were selected. Of those, 180 (80.7%) LLNs were inside the CTV, of which 60 (33.3%) were segmented as GTV. Overall, 202 LLNs (90.6%) received ≥95% of the planned dose. Four-year LLR rates were not significantly higher for LLNs situated outside the CTV compared with those inside (4.0% vs 12.5%, P = .092) or when receiving <95% versus ≥95% of the planned radiation therapy dose (7.1% vs 11.3%, P = .843), respectively. Two of 7 patients who received a dose escalation of 60 Gy developed an LLR (4-year LLR rate of 28.6%). CONCLUSIONS: This evaluation of routine radiation therapy practice showed that adequate coverage of LLNs was still associated with considerable 4-year LLR rates. Techniques resulting in better local control for patients with involved LLNs need to be explored further.

Item does not contain fulltext, BACKGROUND: For cancer patients to effectively engage in decision making, they require comprehensive and understandable information regarding treatment options and their associated outcomes. We developed an online prediction tool and supporting communication skills training to assist healthcare providers (HCPs) in this complex task. This study aims to assess the impact of this combined intervention (prediction tool and training) on the communication practices of HCPs when discussing treatment options. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter intervention trial using a pragmatic stepped wedge design (NCT04232735). Standardized Patient Assessments (simulated consultations) using cases of esophageal and gastric cancer patients, were performed before and after the combined intervention (March 2020 to July 2022). Audio recordings were analyzed using an observational coding scale, rating all utterances of treatment outcome information on the primary outcome-precision of provided outcome information-and on secondary outcomes-such as: personalization, tailoring and use of visualizations. Pre vs. post measurements were compared in order to assess the effect of the intervention. FINDINGS: 31 HCPs of 11 different centers in the Netherlands participated. The tool and training significantly affected the precision of the overall communicated treatment outcome information (p = 0.001, median difference 6.93, IQR (-0.32 to 12.44)). In the curative setting, survival information was significantly more precise after the intervention (p = 0.029). In the palliative setting, information about side effects was more precise (p < 0.001). INTERPRETATION: A prediction tool and communication skills training for HCPs improves the precision of treatment information on outcomes in simulated consultations. The next step is to examine the effect of such interventions on communication in clinical practice and on patient-reported outcomes. FUNDING: Financial support for this study was provided entirely by

Item does not contain fulltext, BACKGROUND: Consensus about the definition and treatment of oligometastatic oesophagogastric cancer is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To assess the definition and treatment of oligometastatic oesophagogastric cancer across multidisciplinary tumour boards (MDTs) in Europe. MATERIAL AND METHODS: European expert centers (n = 49) were requested to discuss 15 real-life cases in their MDT with at least a medical, surgical, and radiation oncologist present. The cases varied in terms of location and number of metastases, histology, timing of detection (i.e. synchronous versus metachronous), primary tumour treatment status, and response to systemic therapy. The primary outcome was the agreement in the definition of oligometastatic disease at diagnosis and after systemic therapy. The secondary outcome was the agreement in treatment strategies. Treatment strategies for oligometastatic disease were categorised into upfront local treatment (i.e. metastasectomy or stereotactic radiotherapy), systemic therapy followed by restaging to consider local treatment or systemic therapy alone. The agreement across MDTs was scored to be either absent/poor (<50%), fair (50%-75%), or consensus (≥75%). RESULTS: A total of 47 MDTs across 16 countries fully discussed the cases (96%). Oligometastatic disease was considered in patients with 1-2 metastases in either the liver, lung, retroperitoneal lymph nodes, adrenal gland, soft tissue or bone (consensus). At follow-up, oligometastatic disease was considered after a median of 18 weeks of systemic therapy when no progression or progression in size only of the oligometastatic lesion(s) was seen (consensus). If at restaging after a median of 18 weeks of systemic therapy the number of lesions progressed, this was not considered as oligometastatic disease (fair agreement). There was no consensus on treatment strategies for oligometastatic disease. CONCLUSION: A broad consensus on definitions of oligometastatic oesophagogastric cancer was found among MDTs of oeso

Contains fulltext : 242806.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access)

Item does not contain fulltext

Item does not contain fulltext

Item does not contain fulltext

Contains fulltext : 171846.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), BACKGROUND: Local recurrence after rectal cancer treatment occurs in approximately 5% to 10% of patients. Neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy for primary rectal cancer renders treatment of recurrent disease more difficult. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to review contemporary multimodality therapies, including their outcome, for locally recurrent rectal carcinoma after (chemo)radiotherapy and complete surgical resection of primary rectal cancer. DATA SOURCES: A comprehensive literature search of PubMed and EMBASE was performed. STUDY SELECTION: All English language articles presenting original patient data regarding treatment and the respective outcome of previously irradiated locally recurrent rectal cancer were included. INTERVENTIONS: All of the treatment modalities for locally recurrent rectal cancer were reviewed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome parameters were local control, metastasis-free survival, and overall survival. Secondary outcome parameters were perioperative morbidity and mortality, and prognostic factors for treatment outcome. RESULTS: Of 854 studies, 9 studies and 474 patients with locally recurrent rectal carcinoma were included. Various treatment regimens were used, most with curative intent. Reirradiation was composed of (neo-)adjuvant external beam radiotherapy (with or without concurrent chemotherapy), additional intraoperative radiotherapy, or intraoperative radiotherapy only. Surgical technique highly varied, depending on the extent of the lesion. Radiation toxicity, perioperative morbidity, and mortality were generally acceptable. Outcome was better after curative intent treatment, any surgical resection, and R0 resections in particular. Moreover, reirradiation is associated with increased complete resection rates, which in turn positively affected local control and overall survival. LIMITATIONS: Most studies were retrospectively designed, with highly variable therapies, patient populations, and duration of follow-up. CONCLUSI

Item does not contain fulltext, PURPOSE: To analyze recurrence patterns in patients with cancer of the esophagus or gastroesophageal junction treated with either preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) plus surgery or surgery alone. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Recurrence pattern was analyzed in patients from the previously published CROSS I and II trials in relation to radiation target volumes. CRT consisted of five weekly courses of paclitaxel and carboplatin combined with a concurrent radiation dose of 41.4 Gy in 1.8-Gy fractions to the tumor and pathologic lymph nodes with margin. RESULTS: Of the 422 patients included from 2001 to 2008, 418 were available for analysis. Histology was mostly adenocarcinoma (75%). Of the 374 patients who underwent resection, 86% were allocated to surgery and 92% to CRT plus surgery. On January 1, 2011, after a minimum follow-up of 24 months (median, 45 months), the overall recurrence rate in the surgery arm was 58% versus 35% in the CRT plus surgery arm. Preoperative CRT reduced locoregional recurrence (LRR) from 34% to 14% (P < .001) and peritoneal carcinomatosis from 14% to 4% (P < .001). There was a small but significant effect on hematogenous dissemination in favor of the CRT group (35% v 29%; P = .025). LRR occurred in 5% within the target volume, in 2% in the margins, and in 6% outside the radiation target volume. In 1%, the exact site in relation to the target volume was unclear. Only 1% had an isolated infield recurrence after CRT plus surgery. CONCLUSION: Preoperative CRT in patients with esophageal cancer reduced LRR and peritoneal carcinomatosis. Recurrence within the radiation target volume occurred in only 5%, mostly combined with outfield failures.