Search

Purpose: Proton therapy is an emerging therapy for several malignancies owing to its favorable therapeutic ratio. There are very limited data on the use of proton therapy in the management of thyroid carcinoma. Our objective was to review the safety, feasibility, and outcomes of proton therapy for patients with thyroid cancer treated to the head and neck. Methods: From our institution's proton database from 2012 to 2021, we identified 22 patients with thyroid cancer treated with proton beam therapy. We evaluated outcomes and toxicities. Results: Median follow-up was 26 months. Of the 22 patients, 50% were female. The mean age was 65 years. Three patients had anaplastic cancer; 13, papillary carcinoma; 2, follicular carcinoma; and 2, poorly differentiated carcinoma. Forty-six percent had T4 disease. Primary targets were the central neck compartment, level VI, and upper mediastinum. Radiation dose was 60 GyRBE adjuvantly, and 70 GyRBE for gross disease (range, 6000-7600 GyRBE). Eight patients underwent upfront adjuvant radiation, and 3 received definitive radiation for unresectable disease upfront. Eleven patients received either salvage or palliative radiation. Fifty-nine percent of patients had extrathyroidal extension, and 64% of patients had gross disease in the neck before treatment. Fifty percent of patients had metastatic disease before treatment. Sixteen patients received concurrent chemotherapy, 63% of these patients received doxorubicin. For all patients, 1-year local regional recurrence (LRR) was 0%, and overall survival (OS) was 90%. Acute grade 3+ toxicities occurred in 27% of patients, the most frequent being dermatitis (27%). Three patients required a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube after radiation therapy (RT), 2 owing to progression. There were no grade 4+ toxicities. Conclusions: Proton therapy for thyroid cancer appears feasible and effective with minimal toxicities. Prospective studies comparing proton therapy with intensity-modulated RT, to evaluate the clinical efficacy of using proton therapy to reduce toxicities in patients undergoing radiation for thyroid cancer, are warranted.

Purpose: Reports of proton beam therapy (PBT) utilization for cutaneous melanoma of the head and neck (HN) region is virtually non-existent. This study reports on the efficacy and acute toxicities of PBT for primary HN cutaneous melanoma. Materials and Methods: We queried the prospectively collected, multi-institutional Proton Collaborative Group registry for all consecutive patients with HN cutaneous melanoma receiving PBT from May 2010 to December 2019. Kaplan-Meier methods were used to estimate overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS), and local regional recurrence free survival (LRFS). Toxicity was reported per CTCAE version 4.0. Results: A total of 8 patients were identified with a median age of 69 (range, 37-88). All patients (100%) underwent surgery followed with postoperative PBT. There were 3 patients (37.5%) with T3 or T4 disease and 4 (50%) with N2 or N3 disease. The median radiation dose was 46 GyRBE (range, 27-70) and median dose per fraction was 2.4 GyRBE (range, 2.0-6.0) with the most common dose fractionation being 44 or 48 GyRBE in 20 fractions (n = 4). At a median follow-up of 40.1 months (range, 1.6-62.4) the 1 and 3 year OS rates were 85.7% and 35.7%, respectively. The median PFS was 25.40 months (95% CI, 2.53-58.70) while PFS at 1 year and 3 years was 85.7% and 35.7%, respectively. LRFS was 100% at 1 year and 85.7% at 3 years. Five of the 8 patients developed distant metastases, of which 3 received immunotherapy. Acute G2+ and G3+ toxicities occurred in 5 of 8 patients and 2 of 8 patients, respectively. G3 toxicities included radiation dermatitis (n = 1) and immunotherapy-related rash (n = 1). No G4+ toxicities were reported. Conclusion: Single modality PBT for HN melanomas in the definitive setting provides effective and durable local control rates with tolerable acute toxicity. Distant failure remains the primary pattern of failure.

Purpose: For patients with high-risk bladder cancer (pT3+ or N+), local regional failure remains a challenge after chemotherapy and cystectomy. An ongoing prospective phase 2 trial (NCT01954173) is examining the role of postoperative photon radiation therapy for high-risk patients using volumetric modulated arc therapy. Proton beam therapy (PBT) may be beneficial in this setting to reduce hematologic toxicity. We evaluated for dosimetric relationships with pelvic bone marrow (PBM) and changes in hematologic counts before and after pelvic radiation therapy and explored the potential of PBT treatment plans to achieve reductions in PBM dose. Materials and Methods: All enrolled patients were retrospectively analyzed after pelvic radiation per protocol with 50.4 to 55.8 Gy in 28 to 31 fractions. Comparative PBT plans were generated using pencil-beam scanning and a 3-beam multifield optimization technique. Changes in hematologic nadirs were assessed using paired t test. Correlation of mean nadirs and relative PBM dose levels were assessed using the Pearson correlation coefficient (CC). Results: Eighteen patients with a median age of 70 were analyzed. Mean cell count values after radiation therapy decreased compared with preradiation therapy values for white blood cells (WBCs), absolute neutrophil count (ANC), absolute lymphocyte count (all P < .001), and platelets (P = .03). Increased mean PBM dose was associated with lower nadirs in WBC (Pearson CC − 0.593, P = .02), ANC (Pearson CC –0.597, P = .02), and hemoglobin (Pearson CC –0.506, P = .046), whereas the PBM V30 to V40 correlated with lower WBC (Pearson CC –0.512 to –0.618, P < .05), and V20 to V30 correlated with lower ANC (Pearson CC –0.569 to –0.598, P < .04). Comparative proton therapy plans decreased the mean PBM dose from 26.5 Gy to 16.1 Gy (P < .001) and had significant reductions in the volume of PBM receiving doses from 5 to 40 Gy (P < .001). Conclusion: Increased PBM mean dose and V20 to V40 were associated with lower hematologic nadirs. PBT plans reduced PBM dose and may be a valuable strategy to reduce the risk of hematologic toxicity in these patients.

Radiotherapy is a common treatment modality in the management of head and neck malignancies. In select clinical scenarios of well-lateralized tumors, radiotherapy can be delivered to the primary tumor or tumor bed and the ipsilateral nodal regions, while intentional irradiation of the contralateral neck is omitted. Proton beam therapy is an advanced radiotherapy modality that allows for the elimination of exit-dose through nontarget tissues such as the oral cavity. This dosimetric advantage is apt for unilateral treatments. By eliminating excess dose to midline and contralateral organs at risk and conforming dose around complex anatomy, proton beam therapy can reduce the risk of iatrogenic toxicities. Currently, there is no level I evidence comparing proton beam therapy to conventional photon radiation modalities for unilateral head and neck cancers. However, a growing body of retrospective and prospective evidence is now available describing the dosimetric and clinical advantages of proton beam therapy. Subsequently, the intent of this clinical review is to summarize the current evidence supporting the use of proton beam therapy in unilateral irradiation of head and neck cancers, including evaluation of disease site-specific evidence, unique challenging clinical scenarios, and ongoing clinical trials.

Purpose: The novel coronavirus (COVID-19) forced radiation oncology clinics to overhaul operational policies, but the effect on employee safety has not, to our knowledge, been reported. The New York Proton Center (NYPC), a large freestanding clinic in New York City, New York, presents a 1-month experience of employee-reported health outcomes after the infiltration of COVID-19 and enforcement of policies designed to mitigate its impact. Materials and Methods: In March 2020, new operational policies were implemented, including rigorous and frequent sanitation, visitor and treatment restrictions, distribution of personal protective equipment, work-from-home orders, and isolated nursing and radiation therapy teams. Employees of NYPC were prospectively monitored for exposure and symptoms of COVID-19. Work hours lost because of illness or quarantines were quantified from March 1, 2020, to March 31, 2020. Results: Among 95 total employees, 23 (24%) were quarantined because of symptoms (n = 15; 65%), high-risk exposure (n = 5; 22%), or self-quarantined with personal concern (n = 3; 13%). Of 44 full-time, on-site employees, 39% (n = 17, including 6 therapists and 5 nurses) missed significant work time, including 6 (14%) with confirmed COVID-19. At full capacity, NYPC would have used 7260 work hours during March 2020 from the full-time, on-site staff, which was reduced by 18.8% overall (25.2% of nursing and 13.3% of therapy work hours), all in the latter half of the month. Among the therapist lost work hours, 92% were from 2 of 7 distinct, isolated therapy teams (29%). Without isolation, the exposure was modeled to have been 100%. Conclusion: Despite losing significant staff hours in our department because of COVID- 19, early and aggressive adoption of current, recommended policy guidelines outlined in this manuscript allowed NYPC to continue patient operations at full capacity.

Purpose: Postoperative stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is associated with up to 30% risk of subsequent leptomeningeal disease (LMD). Radiographic patterns of LMD (classical sugarcoating [cLMD] vs. nodular [nLMD]) in this setting has been shown to be prognostic. However, the association of these findings with neurologic death (ND) is not well described. Methods and Materials: The records for patients with brain metastases who underwent surgical resection and adjunctive SRS to 1 lesion (SRS to other intact lesions was allowed) and subsequently developed LMD were combined from 7 tertiary care centers. Salvage radiation therapy (RT) for LMD was categorized according to use of whole-brain versus focal cranial RT. Results: The study cohort included 125 patients with known cause of death. The ND rate in these patients was 79%, and the rate in patients who underwent LMD salvage treatment (n = 107) was 76%. Univariate logistic regression demonstrated radiographic pattern of LMD (cLMD vs. nLMD, odds ratio: 2.9; P = .04) and second LMD failure after salvage treatment (odds ratio: 3.9; P = .02) as significantly associated with ND. The ND rate was 86% for cLMD versus 68% for nLMD. Whole-brain RT was used in 95% of patients with cLMD and 52% with nLMD. In the nLMD cohort (n = 58), there was no difference in ND rate based on type of salvage RT (whole-brain RT: 67% vs. focal cranial RT: 68%, P = .92). Conclusions: LMD after surgery and SRS for brain metastases is a clinically significant event with high rates of ND. Classical LMD pattern (vs. nodular) and second LMD failure after salvage treatment were significantly associated with a higher risk of ND. Patients with nLMD treated with salvage focal cranial RT did not have higher ND rates compared with WBRT. Methods to decrease LMD and the subsequent high risk of ND in this setting warrant further investigation.

Purpose: The emergence of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) global pandemic has led to a significant shift in the delivery of health care, including an explosive growth of telemedicine services. This reverberated in the field of radiation oncology, with a recent American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) nationwide survey reporting 89% of surveyed clinics began to offer telemedicine programs to patients because of the pandemic. However, this survey did not study the perceptions and experiences of those clinicians delivering telemedicine services. Methods and Materials: We investigated through a national physician survey the merits and limitations of radiation oncology tele-consultations. An anonymous web-based survey was distributed using SurveyMonkey (www.surveymonkey.com) via email. Results: Seventy six respondents (16.1% overall response rate) completed the survey, with broad representation from both academic and community-based practices. Many respondents agreed that transitioning to tele-consultations was a needed step given the emergence of the pandemic, despite most having never previously offered this service. Despite many radiation oncologists having little prior experience with tele-consultations, a majority were satisfied in being able to explain the details of a medical diagnosis, provide results of imaging and bloodwork, and discuss recommendations around radiation treatments through this format. Nearly half of the respondents agreed that tele-consultations felt impersonal, with the inability to complete physical examinations noted as a contributor to the impersonality. Nevertheless, respondents still agreed that telemedicine will play an important role going forward, and almost 90% agreed that they would offer tele-consultations even after the pandemic has resolved.