Stereotactic MR-guided adaptive radiotherapy (SMART) for primary rectal cancer: evaluation of early toxicity and pathological response.

Background: The purpose of this study is to measure the effects of stereotactic MR-guided adaptive radiotherapy (SMART) for rectal cancer patients in terms of early toxicity and pathological response. Materials and methods: For this prospective pilot study, patients diagnosed with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) with positive lymph node clinical staging underwent SMART on rectal lesion and mesorectum using hybrid MR-Linac (MRIdian ViewRay). Dose prescription at 80% isodose for the rectal lesion and mesorectum was 40 Gy (8 Gy/fr) and 25 Gy (5 Gy/fr), respectively, delivered on 5 days (3 fr/week). Response assessment by MRI was performed 3 weeks after SMART, then patients fit for surgery underwent total mesorectal excision. Primary endpoint was evaluation of adverse effect of radiotherapy. Secondary endpoint was pathological complete response rate. Early toxicity was graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE v5.0). Results: From October 2020 to January 2022, twenty patients underwent rectal SMART. No grade 3-5 toxicity was recorded. Twelve patients were eligible for total mesorectal excision (TME). Mean interval between the completion of SMART and surgery was 4 weeks. Pathological downstaging occurred in all patients; rate of pathological complete response (pCR) was 17%. pCR occurred with a prolonged time to surgery (> 7 weeks). Conclusion: To our knowledge, this is the first study to use stereotactic radiotherapy for primary rectal cancer. SMART for rectal cancer is well tolerated and effective in terms of tumor regression, especially if followed by delayed surgery.

Initial Experience With Single-Isocenter Radiosurgery to Target Multiple Brain Metastases Using an Automated Treatment Planning Software: Clinical Outcomes and Optimal Target Volume Margins Strategy.

PURPOSE: Our purpose was to assess the clinical outcomes and target positioning accuracy of frameless linear accelerator single-isocenter multiple-target (SIMT) dynamic conformal arc (DCA) stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for multiple brain metastases (BM). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between October 2016 and September 2018, 31 consecutive patients ≥18 years old with 204 BM <3 cm in maximum size receiving SIMT DCA SRS were retrospectively evaluated. All plans were created using a dedicated automated treatment planning software (Brainlab, Munich, Germany), and treatments were performed with a Truebeam STx or a Novalis Tx (Brainlab and Varian Medical Systems, CA). The accuracy of setup and interfraction patient repositioning was assessed by Brainlab ExacTrac radiograph 6-dimensional image system and the risk of compromised target dose coverage evaluated. Brain control and overall survival were estimated by Kaplan-Meier method calculated from the time of SRS. RESULTS: Fourteen patients were treated for 4 to 6 and 17 patients for 7 to 10 BM. The mean gross tumor volume (GTV) was 0.65 cm3 and the mean planning target volume (PTV) was 0.89 cm3. Mean V95 (the volume of the PTV covered by 95% of the prescription dose) and D95 (the prescription dose covering 95% of the PTV) were 99.5% and 21.1 Gy, respectively. With a median clinical follow-up of 11 months (range, 4-26 months), the 1-year survival was 68% and local control was 89%. As a consequence of plan isocenter residual errors, a loss of target coverage, defined as V95 < 95%, occurred in 28 PTVs (10 patients); using a 1 mm GTV-to-PTV margin, adequate dose coverage was maintained for all lesions. CONCLUSIONS: SIMT DCA SRS represents a fast and effective approach for patients with up to 10 BM. The dosimetric effects of residual set-up and intrafraction positioning errors are modest, although a GTV-to-PTV margin of 1 mm is recommended.

Neurological outcome and memory performance in patients with 10 or more brain metastases treated with frameless linear accelerator (LINAC)-based stereotactic radiosurgery.

PURPOSE: To assess the neurocognitive function and neurological toxicity of frameless linear accelerator (LINAC)-based stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) in patients with 10 or more brain metastases (BM). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty consecutive adult patients who received SRS for ten or more 10 BM < 3 cm in maximum size were evaluated. All plans were generated using a single-isocenter multiple-target (SIMT) SRS technique with doses of 22 Gy for lesions < 2 cm and 16-18 Gy for those ≥ 2 cm in size. Survival analyses were estimated by Kaplan-Meier method from the date of SRS. Neurocognitive function using the Hopkins verbal learning test-revised (HVLT-R) and activity of daily living scale (ADLS) were collected prospectively at baseline and at 3,6 and 12-month follow-up. Toxicity was assessed by the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events (Version 5.0). RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 10.8 months, 1-year survival and local control rates were 65% and 86%, respectively. Grade 2 or 3 toxicity occurred in eleven patients, being associated with radiological changes suggestive of radiation necrosis in seven patients. Three months after SRS, the mean relative decline was 14.2% for HVLT-R delayed recall, 12.3% for HVLT-R recognition, and 9.8% for HVLT-R total recall. A significant deterioration of HVLT-R scores ranged from 5.5 to 18.7% of patients at different time points. ADLS scores declined over time, but changes were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: SRS is an effective and safe approach for patients with 10 or more BM able to maintain the pretreatment neurocognitive function in the majority of patients.

Stereotactic ablative radiation therapy as a potential curative treatment in duodenal adenocarcinoma: a case report.

PURPOSE: One of the rarest gastrointestinal neoplasm is small bowel cancer. Experience with its treatment modalities is limited. Stereotactic ablative radiation therapy (SABR) has improved, with image-guided radiation therapy becoming a curative option in many tumors. Especially when surgery cannot be performed due to comorbidities, SABR provides a good toxicity profile and an excellent tumor control rate owing to its specific schedule: high dose on a limited and well-defined area. METHODS: An 83-year-old man had arterial hypertension and congestive cardiomyopathy, with recent history of upper abdominal pain, weight loss over 10 kg, and progressive severe fatigue. The patient underwent endoscopy that showed a large mass partially obstructing the second part of the duodenum; a biopsy revealed a moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma. A staging CT scan confirmed localized disease. Due to the patient's age and comorbidities, a SABR was proposed as the preferred treatment. In order to localize the tumor during radiotherapy sessions, surgical clips were placed endoscopically next to the lesion as fiducial markers. The patient received 25 Gy in 5 fractions on alternate days. RESULTS: Resolution of duodenal obstruction and bleeding lasted for 14 months. The patient died of myocardial infarction. CONCLUSIONS: This case suggests that SABR could have a role in the palliative treatment of small bowel cancers, with good toxicity profile, particularly in patients for whom surgical treatment is not a viable option.

Lung stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy: A large scale multi-institutional planning comparison for interpreting results of multi-institutional studies.

PURPOSE: A large-scale multi-institutional planning comparison on lung cancer SABR is presented with the aim of investigating possible criticism in carrying out retrospective multicentre data analysis from a dosimetric perspective. METHODS: Five CT series were sent to the participants. The dose prescription to PTV was 54Gy in 3 fractions of 18Gy. The plans were compared in terms of PTV-gEUD2 (generalized Equivalent Uniform Dose equivalent to 2Gy), mean dose to PTV, Homogeneity Index (PTV-HI), Conformity Index (PTV-CI) and Gradient Index (PTV-GI). We calculated the maximum dose for each OAR (organ at risk) considered as well as the MLD2 (mean lung dose equivalent to 2Gy). The data were stratified according to expertise and technology. RESULTS: Twenty-six centers equipped with Linacs, 3DCRT (4% - 1 center), static IMRT (8% - 2 centers), VMAT (76% - 20 centers), CyberKnife (4% - 1 center), and Tomotherapy (8% - 2 centers) collaborated. Significant PTV-gEUD2 differences were observed (range: 105-161Gy); mean-PTV dose, PTV-HI, PTV-CI, and PTV-GI were, respectively, 56.8±3.4Gy, 14.2±10.1%, 0.70±0.15, and 4.9±1.9. Significant correlations for PTV-gEUD2 versus PTV-HI, and MLD2 versus PTV-GI, were observed. CONCLUSIONS: The differences in terms of PTV-gEUD2 may suggest the inclusion of PTV-gEUD2 calculation for retrospective data inter-comparison.