A meta-analysis comparing efficacy and safety between proton beam therapy versus carbon ion radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare the outcomes of proton beam therapy (PBT) and carbon ion radiotherapy (CIRT) by a systematic review and meta-analysis of the existing clinical evidence. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed to identify studies comparing the clinical outcomes of PBT and CIRT. The included studies were required to report oncological outcomes (local control [LC], progression-free survival [PFS], or overall survival [OS]) or adverse events. RESULTS: Eighteen articles comprising 1857 patients (947 treated with PBT and 910 treated with CIRT) were included in the analysis. The pooled analysis conducted for the overall population yielded average hazard ratios of 0.690 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.493-0.967, p = 0.031) for LC, 0.952 (95% CI, 0.604-1.500, p = 0.590) for PFS, and 1.183 (0.872-1.607, p = 0.281) for OS with reference to CIRT. The subgroup analyses included patients treated in the head and neck, areas other than the head and neck, and patients with chordomas and chondrosarcomas. These analyses revealed no significant differences in most outcomes, except for LC in the subgroup of patients treated in areas other than the head and neck. Adverse event rates were comparable in both groups, with an odds ratio (OR) of 1.097 (95% CI, 0.744-1.616, p = 0.641). Meta-regression analysis for possible heterogeneity did not demonstrate a significant association between treatment outcomes and the ratio of biologically effective doses between modalities. CONCLUSION: This study highlighted the comparability of PBT and CIRT in terms of oncological outcomes and adverse events.

Predicting outcomes for locally advanced rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation with CT-based radiomics.

A feasibility study was performed to determine if CT-based radiomics could play an augmentative role in predicting neoadjuvant rectal score (NAR), locoregional failure free survival (LRFFS), distant metastasis free survival (DMFS), disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). The NAR score, which takes into account the pathological tumour and nodal stage as well as clinical tumour stage, is a validated surrogate endpoint used for early determination of treatment response whereby a low NAR score (< 8) has been correlated with better outcomes and high NAR score (> 16) has been correlated with poorer outcomes. CT images of 191 patients with LARC were used in this study. Primary tumour (GTV) and mesorectum (CTV) were contoured separately and radiomics features were extracted from both segments. Two NAR models (NAR > 16 and NAR < 8) models were constructed using Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) and the survival models were constructed using regularized Cox regressions. Area under curve (AUC) and time-dependent AUC were used to quantify the performance of the LASSO and Cox regression respectively, using ten folds cross validations. The NAR > 16 and NAR < 8 models have an average AUCs of 0.68 ± 0.13 and 0.59 ± 0.14 respectively. There are statistically significant differences between the clinical and combined model for LRFFS (from 0.68 ± 0.04 to 0.72 ± 0.04), DMFS (from 0.68 ± 0.05 to 0.70 ± 0.05) and OS (from 0.64 ± 0.06 to 0.66 ± 0.06). CTV radiomics features were also found to be more important than GTV features in the NAR prediction model. The most important clinical features are age and CEA for NAR > 16 and NAR < 8 models respectively, while the most significant clinical features are age, surgical margin and NAR score across all the four survival models.

Cardiovascular toxicities of androgen deprivation therapy in Asian men with localized prostate cancer after curative radiotherapy: a registry-based observational study.

BACKGROUND: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and radiotherapy (RT) are the mainstay treatment for localized prostate cancer and recurrence after surgery. Cardiovascular (CV) toxicity of ADT is increasingly recognized, and the risk relates to pre-existing risk factors and ADT modalities. Despite ethnic differences in the prevalence of CV risk factors and variations of CV mortality, data on ADT-related cardiotoxicities in the Asian population remain inconclusive. Our registry-based study investigated ADT-related major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) after primary or salvage RT. METHODS: Our study combined two prospectively established registry databases from National Cancer Center Singapore and National Heart Center Singapore. The primary endpoint is time to first MACE after treatment. MACE is defined as myocardial infarction, stroke, unstable angina, or cardiovascular death. Two types of propensity score adjustments, including ADT propensity score as a covariate in the multivariable regression model and propensity score weighting, were applied to balance baseline features and CV risk factors between RT alone and RT + ADT groups. RESULTS: From 2000 to 2019, 1940 patients received either RT alone (n = 494) or RT + ADT (n = 1446) were included. After a median follow-up of 10 years (RT) and 7.2 years (RT+ ADT), the cumulative incidence of MACE at 1, 3 and 9 years was 1.2, 5 and 16.2% in RT group, and 1.1, 5.2 and 17.6% in RT + ADT group, respectively. There were no differences in the incidence of MACE between 2 groups (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.78-1.30, p = 0.969). Pre-treatment CV risk factors were common (80%), and CV disease (15.9%) was the second leading cause of death after prostate cancer (21.1%). On univariate analysis, older age, Indians and Malays, pre-existing CV risk factors, and history of MACE were associated with higher MACE risk. After propensity score adjustments, there remained no significant differences in MACE risk between RT + ADT and RT group on multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: In our registry-based study, ADT is not associated with increased risk of major cardiovascular events among Southeast Asian men with prostate cancer after curative radiotherapy.

Technical considerations for positioning and placement of a transperineal ultrasound probe during prostate radiotherapy.

This technical evaluation aims to provide practice 'how to' guidelines for radiation therapists (RTs) when positioning a transperineal ultrasound (TPUS) probe during prostate radiotherapy. Recommendations and practical tips will be provided for the best practice in TPUS-guided workflow to obtain optimal ultrasound images for accurate interpretation and registration of the prostate gland. This will assist the RTs in making consistent and accurate clinical decision in an ultrasound-guided radiotherapy workflow for prostate treatment. The implementation process and the associated successes and challenges will also be described to assist institutions who may be investigating the potential of implementing this system.

Duration-dependent margins for prostate radiotherapy-a practical motion mitigation strategy.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The magnitude of intra-fractional prostate displacement (change from initial position over time) is associated with the duration of the patient lying on the radiotherapy treatment couch. This study reports a minute-by-minute association and calculates the impact of this displacement on duration-dependent margins using real-time intra-fractional position data monitored by four-dimensional transperineal ultrasound (4D TPUS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 55 patients were recruited prospectively. Intra-fractional position of the prostate was monitored in real-time using a 4D TPUS Clarity® system. A total of 1745 monitoring sessions were analysed. Van Herk's margin recipe (2.5∑ + 1.64((σ2 + σp2)1/2 - σp)) was used to estimate the duration-dependant margins for every minute, up to the 15th minute. Linear regression analysis was then performed on the overall margins against time and direction. RESULTS: The mean intra-fractional position was 0.76 mm Inferior (Inf), 0 mm Lateral (Lat) and 0.94 mm Posterior (Post) at the 15th minute. A minimum margin expansion of 2.42 mm (Superior/Inf), 1.02 mm (Left/Right) and 2.65 mm (Anterior/Post) was required for an 8­minute treatment compared to 4.29 mm (Sup/Inf), 1.84 mm (Lt/Rt) and 4.63 mm (Ant/Post) for a 15-minute treatment. The required margin expansion increased linearly (R2 = 0.99) in all directions (p < 0.01). However, while there was no statistically significant difference (p = 0.10) in the required margin expansion in the Sup/Inf and Ant/Post directions respective of the time duration, the margins were much bigger compared to those in the Lt/Rt direction (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: We report our experience in deriving the minimum duration-dependant margin to generate the required planning target volume for prostate radiotherapy. The required margin increases linearly in all directions within the 15-min duration; thus, the margin will depend on the duration of the technique chosen (IMRT/VMAT/3DCRT/proton).

Consensus for Radiotherapy in Hepatocellular Carcinoma from The 5th Asia-Pacific Primary Liver Cancer Expert Meeting (APPLE 2014): Current Practice and Future Clinical Trials.

A consensus meeting to develop practice guidelines and to recommend future clinical trials for radiation therapy (RT), including external beam RT (EBRT), and selective internal RT (SIRT) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) was held at the 5th annual meeting of the Asia-Pacific Primary Liver Cancer Expert consortium. Although there is no randomized phase III trial evidence, the efficacy and safety of RT in HCC has been shown by prospective and retrospective studies using modern RT techniques. Based on these results, the committee came to a consensus on the utility and efficacy of RT in the management of HCC according to each disease stage as follows: in early and intermediate stage HCC, if standard treatment is not compatible, RT, including EBRT and SIRT can be considered. In locally advanced stage HCC, combined EBRT with transarterial chemoembolization or hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy, and SIRT can be considered. In terminal stage HCC, EBRT can be considered for palliation of symptoms and reduction of morbidity caused by the primary tumor or its metastases. Despite the currently reported benefits of RT in HCC, the committee agreed that there is a compelling need for large prospective studies, including randomized phase III trial evidence evaluating the role of RT. Specifically studies evaluating the efficacy and safety of sequential combination of EBRT and SIRT are strongly recommended.

Capecitabine with radiation is an effective adjuvant therapy in gastric cancers.

AIM: To analyze the outcome of patients who received concurrent capecitabine (Xeloda) and radiation (XRT) compared to the established concurrent 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) with radiation (5FU-RT) and fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy alone as adjuvant treatment in gastric cancers. METHODS: All patients with gastric cancers who received adjuvant treatment at the National Cancer Centre Singapore between 1996 and 2006 were reviewed. Treatment outcomes of patients who received XRT were compared with those who had 5FU-RT or chemotherapy alone as adjuvant therapy for gastric cancers. RESULTS: A total of 108 patients were reviewed. Median age at diagnosis was 60. The majority of the patients (64.8%) had advanced stage III and IV disease (with no distant metastasis). All except 4 patients had D2 gastrectomy. Twenty one patients (19.4%) had positive surgical resection margins. Thirty three patients received XRT compared with 52 who had 5FU-RT and 23 who received chemotherapy alone. For the patients in the chemotherapy-only group, all had fluoropyrimidine-based therapy, with added cisplatin in 7 patients and epirubicin in 2 patients. Median recurrence-free survival was longer for the XRT group (52 mo) compared to the 5FU-RT (35 mo) and chemotherapy-only groups (25 mo) (P = 0.48). The patients in the XRT group achieved similar median overall survival (53 mo) as the 5FU-RT (54 mo) and the chemotherapy-only groups (44 mo) (P = 0.5). CONCLUSION: Capecitabine with concurrent radiation was as effective as concurrent 5FU with radiation or fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy alone when used as adjuvant treatment in patients with gastric cancers.