[Ethical stakes of information in radiation oncology: Thinking the risk and building the therapeutic alliance]. / Enjeux éthiques de l'information en oncologie radiothérapie : penser le risque et construire l'alliance thérapeutique.

Informing patients before receiving radiation therapy is a fundamental ethical imperative. As a condition of the possibility of autonomy, information allows people to make health decisions concerning themselves, which is required by French law. This information includes in particular the potential risks due to radiation therapy. It is therefore necessary to think about what risk is, and how to define and assess it, in order to finally communicate it. The practice of informing people involves many ethical issues relating to the very content of the information, the form in which it is transmitted or even the intention that leads the health professional to say (or not to say) the risk. The transmission of information also questions the way to build a relationship of trust with the patients and how to integrate their own representations about these treatments. Between the risks of paternalism or even defensive medicine, this practice is at the heart of our professional practice.

[Crisis situations: Ethical reflection on prioritization of care access in radiation oncology]. / Situations de crise : réflexion éthique sur la priorisation de l'accès aux soins en oncologie radiothérapie.

Understood as a disruption of the conditions of care practice according to established protocols or procedures, crisis situations in radiation oncology departments can have multiple causes. Their seriousness can sometimes impose changes in the decision-making, organizational or technical paradigms. A possible consequence may be the need to make prioritization decisions in access to care, when there is a mismatch between the care needs of a population and the available health resources (whether technical or human). The specificities of care pathways and the wide variety of clinical situations in radiation oncology make these ethical decisions particularly difficult. Anticipation, collegial and multi-professional decision-making procedures or the integration of patient representatives in these prioritization processes are essential tools. Particular attention must be paid to the information to be provided to patients in a concern of transparency and respect. Prioritization situations are real tests for our departments. They go beyond the purely technical aspect of radiation oncology. They can lead to real ethical suffering for health professionals when their values come up against the limits imposed by crisis situations.

Dose-escalation in prostate cancer: Results of randomized trials.

In 1998, an editorial from the International Journal of Radiation Oncology - Biology - Physics (IJROBP) on the occasion of the publication of Phase I by Zelefsky et al. on 3D radiotherapy dose escalation asked the question: "will more prove better?". More than 20 years later, several prospective studies have supported the authors' conclusions, making dose escalation a new standard in prostate cancer. The data from prospective randomized studies were ultimately disappointing in that they failed to show an overall survival benefit from dose escalation. However, there is a clear and consistent benefit in biochemical recurrence-free survival, which must be weighed on an individual patient basis against the potential additional toxicity of dose escalation. Techniques and concepts have become more and more precise, such as intensity modulated irradiation, simultaneous integrated boost, hypofractionated dose-escalation, pelvic irradiation with involved node boost or focal dose-escalation on gross recurrence after prostatectomy. The objective here was to summarize the prospective data on dose escalation in prostate cancer and in particular on recent advances in the field. In 2022, can we finally say that more has proven better?

[Ethical stakes in palliative care in radiation oncology]. / Enjeux éthiques de la pratique des soins à visée palliative en oncologie radiothérapique.

In 2021, the Ethics Commission of the SFRO has chosen the issue of the practice of palliative care in radiotherapy oncology. Radiation oncology plays a central role in the care of patients with cancer in palliative phase. But behind the broad name of palliative radiotherapy, we actually find a large variety of situations involving diverse ethical issues. Radiation oncologists have the delicate task to take into account multiple factors throughout a complex decision-making process. While the question of the therapeutic indication and the technical choice allowing it to be implemented remains central, reflection cannot be limited to these decision-making and technical aspects alone. It is also a question of being able to create the conditions for a singularity focused care and to build an authentic care relationship, beyond technicity. It is through this daily ethical work, in close collaboration with patients, and under essential conditions of multidisciplinarity and multiprofessionalism, that our fundamental role as caregiver can be deployed.

Whole brain radiotherapy with concurrent temozolomide in multifocal and/or multicentric newly diagnosed glioblastoma.

The standard medical care of glioblastoma (GBM) patients with good performance status is based on focal brain radiotherapy (40-60 Gy) with concurrent temozolomide (TMZ) followed by adjuvant TMZ. Newly diagnosed multifocal and/or multicentric GBM (M/M GBM) cases are usually treated with TMZ alone: whole brain chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is avoided for safety reasons. To our knowledge, no study has investigated the safety and efficacy of whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) with concurrent TMZ in M/M GBM patients. This retrospective study sought to assess the role of WBRT associated with concurrent TMZ followed by TMZ alone in this population. Eleven patients with pathologically proven M/M GBM (≥3 lobes) were treated with WBRT between April 2009 and September 2017. The median age was 50 years [34-74]. The median dose of radiotherapy was 45 Gy at 1.8 Gy per fraction over 37 days [29-41], with concurrent daily TMZ at the dose of 75 mg/m2. This treatment was followed by adjuvant monthly TMZ (150 mg/m2-D1-D5). All pathology slides and radiology images were reviewed. The median overall and progression-free survival times for all patients were 10 months [4-25] and 5 months [3-21], respectively. There was no grade 3-4 toxicity due to radiotherapy. One patient stopped the TMZ during the radiochemotherapy period and 9 patients received adjuvant TMZ with a median number of 5 cycles [2-8]. Our study supports the safety and the efficacy of WBRT with TMZ in newly diagnosed M/M GBM. Larger prospective studies are needed to support our results.

[Advances in the management of cervical lymphadenopathies of unknown primary with intensity modulated radiotherapy: Doses and target volumes]. / Évolutions dans la prise en charge des métastases ganglionnaires cervicales sans cancer primitif retrouvé : doses et volumes cibles de la radiothérapie avec modulation d'intensité.

The definition of nodal and/or mucosal target volumes for radiation therapy for lymphadenopathies of unknown primary is controversial. Target volumes may include all nodal areas bilaterraly and be pan-mucosal or unilateral, selective, including the sole oropharyngeal mucosa. This review presents current recommendations in light of changes in the TNM classification, Human papillomavirus status and therapeutic advances. We conducted a systematic review of the literature with the following keywords: lymphadenopathy; head and neck; unknown primary and radiation therapy. There are no direct comparative studies between unilateral or bilateral nodal irradiation or pan-mucosal and selective mucosal irradiation. Contralateral lymph node failure rates range from 0 to 6% after unilateral nodal irradiation and 0 and 31% after bilateral irradiation. Occurrence of a mucosal primary varies between 0 and 19.2%. Initial clinical presentation and Human papillomavirus status are critical to define mucosal target volumes. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy is recommended (rather than three-dimensional irradiation) to avoid toxicities. Systemic treatments have similar indications as for identified primary head and neck cancers. Failures do not appear superior in case of unilateral nodal irradiation but comparative studies are warranted due to major biases hampering direct comparisons. Human papillomavirus status should be incorporated into the therapeutic strategy and practice-changing TNM staging changes will need to be evaluated.