A systematic review of stage IVA cervical cancer treatment: Challenges in the management of an understudied group.

OBJECTIVE: Stage IVA patients comprise a small proportion of participants in cervical cancer trials, yet survival outcomes are disproportionately poor. We aim to perform a systematic review evaluating stage IVA cervical cancer. METHODS: This systematic review was completed via PRISMA 2020 guidelines using two databases. Inclusion criteria comprised Phase III trials (2004-2024) assessing stage IVA cervical cancer including patients by stage. Searches had MeSH terms: ((cervical cancer) AND (stage IVA) AND (locally advanced)). 761 were articles identified, including books, trials, reviews, and meta-analyses. Of the articles identified, 12 met inclusion criteria. RESULTS: A total of 133 (3.8% of study populations) stage IVA and 818 (40% of study populations) stage III-IVA cervical cancer patients were analyzed. Two studies (stage IVA n = 15; 3.1%) established cisplatin as chemoradiotherapy agent of choice, while one study (stage IVA n = 2; 1%) showed no benefit with cisplatin versus radiotherapy alone. Four studies (stage IVA n = 32; 3.6%; stages IIIB-IVA n = 220; 24%) found no benefit with adjuvant chemotherapy, with one analyzing stage IIIB-IVA patients (progression-free survival (PFS) hazard ratio (HR) = 0.84; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.57-1.23). Three studies (stage IVA n = 71; 5%) found no benefit adding immunomodulator (stage IVA overall survival HR = 3.48; 95% CI: 0.52-23.29), hypoxic cell sensitizer, or immunotherapy (stage III-IVA PFS HR = 0.71; 95% CI: 0.49-1.03) to chemoradiotherapy. One study (stages III-IVA n = 598; 56%) found benefit adding immunotherapy to chemoradiotherapy (stage III-IVA PFS HR = 0.58; 95% CI: 0.42-0.8). One study (stage IVA n = 13; 3.5%) showed benefit with induction chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: Trials have not included substantial IVA patients to draw reasonable conclusions. Despite mixed results for immunotherapy, adjuvant chemotherapy, and induction chemotherapy, the exact benefit for stage IVA patients remains unknown. Future clinical trials should include a greater number of stage IVA cervical cancer patients and analyze them individually.

Treatment of node-positive endometrial cancer: chemotherapy, radiation, immunotherapy, and targeted therapy.

OPINION STATEMENT: The standard of treatment for node-positive endometrial cancer (FIGO Stage IIIC) in North America has been systemic therapy with or without additional external beam radiation therapy (RT) given as pelvic or extended field RT. However, this treatment paradigm is rapidly evolving with improvements in systemic chemotherapy, the emergence of targeted therapies, and improved molecular characterization of these tumors. The biggest question facing providers regarding management of stage IIIC endometrial cancer at this time is: what is the best management strategy to use with regard to combinations of cytotoxic chemotherapy, immunotherapy, other targeted therapeutics, and radiation that will maximize clinical benefit and minimize toxicities for the best patient outcomes? While clinicians await the results of ongoing clinical trials regarding combined immunotherapy/RT as well as management based on molecular classification, we must make decisions regarding the best treatment combinations for our patients. Based on the available literature, we are offering stage IIIC patients without measurable disease postoperatively both adjuvant chemotherapy and IMRT with carboplatin, paclitaxel, and with or without pembrolizumab/dostarlimab as primary adjuvant therapy. Patients with measurable disease post operatively, high risk histologies, or stage IV disease receive chemoimmunotherapy, and vaginal brachytherapy is added for those with uterine risk factors for vaginal recurrence. In the setting of endometrioid EC recurrence more than 6 months after treatment, patients with pelvic nodal and vaginal recurrence are offered IMRT and brachytherapy without chemotherapy. For measurable recurrence not suitable for pelvic radiation alone, chemoimmunotherapy is preferred as standard of care.

Chromosomal instability drives metastasis through a cytosolic DNA response.

Chromosomal instability is a hallmark of cancer that results from ongoing errors in chromosome segregation during mitosis. Although chromosomal instability is a major driver of tumour evolution, its role in metastasis has not been established. Here we show that chromosomal instability promotes metastasis by sustaining a tumour cell-autonomous response to cytosolic DNA. Errors in chromosome segregation create a preponderance of micronuclei whose rupture spills genomic DNA into the cytosol. This leads to the activation of the cGAS-STING (cyclic GMP-AMP synthase-stimulator of interferon genes) cytosolic DNA-sensing pathway and downstream noncanonical NF-κB signalling. Genetic suppression of chromosomal instability markedly delays metastasis even in highly aneuploid tumour models, whereas continuous chromosome segregation errors promote cellular invasion and metastasis in a STING-dependent manner. By subverting lethal epithelial responses to cytosolic DNA, chromosomally unstable tumour cells co-opt chronic activation of innate immune pathways to spread to distant organs.

Acute and long-term toxicity of whole pelvis proton radiation therapy for definitive or adjuvant management of gynecologic cancers.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize long-term toxicity and disease outcomes with whole pelvis (WP) pencil beam scanning proton radiation therapy (PBS PRT) for gynecologic malignancies. METHODS: We reviewed 23 patients treated from 2013 to 2019 with WP PBS PRT for endometrial, cervical, and vaginal cancer. We report acute and late Grade (G)2+ toxicities, graded by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, Version 5. Disease outcomes were assessed by Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Median age was 59 years. Median follow up was 4.8 years. 12 (52.2%) had uterine cancer, 10 (43.5%) cervical, 1 (4.3%) vaginal. 20 (86.9%) were treated post-hysterectomy. 22 (95.7%) received chemotherapy, 12 concurrently (52.2%). The median PBS PRT dose was 50.4GyRBE (range, 45-62.5). 8 (34.8% had para-aortic/extended fields. 10 (43.5%) received brachytherapy boost. Median follow up was 4.8 years. 5-year actuarial local control was 95.2%, regional control 90.9%, distant control 74.7%, both disease control and progression-free survival 71.2%. Overall survival was 91.3%. In the acute period, 2 patients (8.7%) had G2 genitourinary (GU) toxicity, 6 (26.1%) had gastrointestinal (GI) G2-3 toxicity, 17 (73.9%) had G2-4 hematologic (H) toxicity. In the late period, 3 (13.0%) had G2 GU toxicity, 1 (4.3%) had G2 GI toxicity, 2 (8.7%) had G2-3H toxicity. The mean small bowel V15Gy was 213.4 cc. Mean large bowel V15 Gy was 131.9 cc. CONCLUSIONS: WP PBS PRT for gynecologic malignancies delivers favorable locoregional control. Rates of GU and GI toxicity are low. Acute hematologic toxicity was most common, which may be related to the large proportion of patients receiving chemotherapy.

Oncologic outcomes of surgical para-aortic lymph node staging in patients with advanced cervical carcinoma undergoing chemoradiation.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate the utilization and impact of surgical para-aortic lymph node staging on the survival of patients with locally advanced stage cervical carcinoma receiving definitive chemoradiation. METHODS: We identified patients in the National Cancer Database diagnosed between January 2010 and December 2015 with locally advanced (FIGO 2009 stage IB2-IVA) cervical carcinoma who did not undergo hysterectomy, received primary chemoradiation and had at least 1 month of follow-up. Two groups of patients were formed based on the assessment method of para-aortic lymph node status - radiologic assessment only versus surgical lymphadenectomy. Overall survival was compared with the log-rank test after Kaplan-Meier curves were generated. A Cox model was constructed to control for a priori selected confounders. RESULTS: We identified a total of 3540 patients who met the inclusion criteria. Para-aortic staging was performed in 333 (9.4%) patients. These patients were younger (median age 46 vs 52 years, p<0.001), less likely to have co-morbidities (8.7% vs 15.6%, p<0.001), more likely to have private insurance (48.9% vs 37.8%, p<0.001) and receive brachytherapy (76.9% vs 70.9%, p=0.022). The rate of para-aortic lymphadenectomy was comparable between patients with stage IB2-II and III-IVA disease (9.4% for both groups, p=0.98). Patients who underwent para-aortic lymphadenectomy were also more likely to have lymph nodes categorized as positive compared with those who had imaging only (27.3% vs 13.2%, p<0.001). There was no difference in overall survival between patients who underwent radiologic only or surgical para-aortic lymph node assessment (p=0.80 from log-rank test); 4 year overall survival rates were 62.9% and 63%. After controlling for confounders, performance of para-aortic lymphadenectomy was not associated with a survival benefit (HR 1.07, 95% CIs: 0.88 to 1.31). CONCLUSIONS: In a large cohort of patients with locally advanced stage cervical carcinoma, para-aortic lymphadenectomy was rarely performed and not associated with a survival benefit.

Immediate Breast Reconstruction for Inflammatory Breast Cancer: Trends in Use and Clinical Outcomes 2004-2016.

INTRODUCTION: National guidelines specify against immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) among inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) patients. However, limited data exist regarding this practice. We report practice patterns and oncologic outcomes among nonmetastatic IBC patients receiving trimodality therapy, with or without IBR. METHODS: Using the National Cancer Database, we identified nonmetastatic IBC patients treated with trimodality therapy from 2004 to 2016. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS), assessed on unadjusted analysis using Kaplan-Meier estimates and on adjusted analysis using multivariable Cox proportional hazards and inverse probability weighting (IPW) models. OS analysis was also conducted with propensity score matched (PSM) cohorts. Secondary outcomes included IBR utilization rates, time to postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT), and surgical outcomes. RESULTS: 6589 women were included, including 5954 (90.4%) non-reconstructed and 635 (9.6%) IBR. Among IBR recipients, 250 (39.4%) underwent autologous reconstruction, 171 (26.9%) underwent implant-based reconstruction, and 214 (33.7%) unspecified. IBR utilization increased from 6.3% to 10.1% from 2004 to 2016 at a 4% average annual growth rate (P < 0.001). Median follow-up was 43 and 45 months for IBR and non-reconstructed patients, respectively (P = 0.29). On Cox multivariable analysis, IBR was associated with improved OS (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.44-0.90, P = 0.01), but this association was not significant on IPW analysis (P = 0.06). In PSM cohorts, this association remained significant (HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.40-0.92, P = 0.02). Margin status, time to PMRT, 30-day readmission, and 30-/90-day mortality did not differ between groups (all P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Although not endorsed by national guidelines, IBR is increasing among IBC patients; however, more granular data are needed to determine oncologic safety.

Stereotactic body radiation therapy for oligometastatic gynecologic malignancies: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for oligometastatic gynecologic malignancies. METHOD: A comprehensive search of the PubMed, Medline, and EMBASE databases was conducted using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. "Oligometastatic" was defined as a limited number of uncontrolled/untreated metastatic lesions (typically ≤ 5), including regional nodal metastases. Primary outcomes were response rate (complete response or partial response), local control of oligometastatic lesions, and toxicity. RESULTS: Of 716 screened records, 17 studies (13 full length articles, 4 conference abstracts) were selected and analyzed as 16 unique studies. A total of 667 patients were treated with ~1071 metastatic lesions identified. Primary sites included ovarian (57.6%), cervical (27.1%), uterine (11.1%), vaginal (0.4%), vulvar (0.3%), and other/unspecified (3.4%). Most patients (65.4%) presented with a single metastatic lesion. Metastatic lesion sites included the abdomen (44.2%), pelvis (18.8%), thorax (15.5%), neck (4.6%), central nervous system (4.3%), bone (1.6%), and other/unspecified (11%). Of the lesions, 64% were nodal. Response rate (among 8 studies) ranged from 49% to 97%, with 7/8 studies reporting > 75% response rate. Local control ranged from 71% to 100%, with 14/16 studies reporting ≥ 80% local control. No grade ≥ 3 toxicities were observed in 9/16 (56%) studies. Median progression-free survival (PFS) (among 10 studies) ranged from 3.3 months to 21.7 months. Disease progression most commonly occurred outside of the SBRT radiation field (79% to 100% of failures). CONCLUSIONS: SBRT for oligometastatic gynecologic malignancies is associated with favorable response and local control rates but a high rate of out-of-field progression and heterogeneous PFS. Additional study into rational combinations of SBRT and systemic therapy appears warranted to further improve patient outcomes.

The efficacy and safety of hypofractionated radiotherapy with concurrent anti-HER-2 therapy following breast-conserving therapy for breast cancer.

The purpose of this study was to report rates and severities of radiation-related toxicities and analyze disease-control outcomes in patients who have received hypofractionated whole breast radiation (HF) with concurrent trastuzumab with or without pertuzumab. We conducted a retrospective cohort study including women with stage I-III HER2-positive breast cancer who received HF at the University of Pennsylvania between 1/2005 and 5/2018 with concurrent trastuzumab with or without pertuzumab. Fractionation was 266 cGy daily to a total dose of 4256 cGy with or without a sequential tumor bed boost. Eighty patients were included in the cohort with a median follow-up time of 21.44 months. There was one grade 3 acute toxicity (fatigue) and no grade 3 late toxicities. 91% and 25% of patients experienced grade 1-2 acute and late skin reactions, respectively. An excellent-good cosmetic outcome was reported by 74% and 95% of patients and physicians, respectively. No patients experienced tumor recurrences, and the only death was due to a secondary cause. These results suggest that hypofractionated whole breast radiation administered concurrently with anti-HER-2 therapies is efficacious and has acceptable toxicity in early-stage breast cancer patients treated with lumpectomy. Continued follow-up is warranted to evaluate long-term outcomes.

The relationship of study and authorship characteristics on trial sponsorship and self-reported conflicts of interest among neuro-oncology clinical trials.

PROPOSE: To examine the association between trial sponsorship sources, self-reported conflicts of interest (COI), and study and author characteristics in central nervous system (CNS) oncology clinical trials (CT). METHODS: MEDLINE search was performed for original CT on "Central Nervous System Neoplasms"[Mesh]. The investigators assessed for relationships between funding source (industry, academic or cooperative, none, not described), COI (presented, none, or not reported), CT, and author characteristics. RESULTS: From 2010 to 2015, 319 CT were considered eligible. The majority of the studies involved primary gliomas (55.2%) and were Phase II CT (59.2%). Drug therapy was investigated in 83.0% of the CT. The remaining studies investigated surgery or radiotherapy. A minority of papers were published in journals with impact factor (IF) higher than > 10 (16%) or in regions other than North America and Europe (20.4%). Overall, 83.1% of studies disclosed funding sources: 32.6% from industry alone, 33.9% from an academic or cooperative group, and 10.7% from a mixed funding model. COI data was reported by 85.9% of trials, of which 56.2% reported no COI and 43.8% reported a related COI. Significant predictors for sponsorship (industry and/or academia) on univariate analysis were study design, type of intervention, journal impact factor, study conclusion, transparency of COI and presence of COI. On multivariate analysis, type of intervention, (P < 0.001), journal impact factor (IF) (P = 0.003), presence of COI (P < 0.001) and study conclusion (P = 0.003) remained significant predictors of sponsorship. For predicting COI, significant variables on univariate analysis were disease type, type of intervention, journal IF, funding source, and intervention arm being related to sponsor. On multivariate analysis, disease type (P = 0.003), journal IF (P < 0.001), type of intervention (P = 0.001), and funding source (P = 0.008) remained significant. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of CNS CT reported some external funding sources and non-related COI. We identified that drug trials, higher IF, presence of COI, and a neutral or negative study conclusion are associated with external funding. Likewise drug trials, higher IF, and glioma trials are associated with presence of COI.

Funding source, conflict of interest and positive conclusions in neuro-oncology clinical trials.

We aimed to test any association between authors' conclusions and self-reported COI or funding sources in central nervous system (CNS) studies. A review was performed for CNS malignancy clinical trials published in the last 5 years. Two investigators independently classified study conclusions according to authors' endorsement of the experimental therapy. Statistical models were used to test for associations between positive conclusions and trials characteristics. From February 2010 to February 2015, 1256 articles were retrieved; 319 were considered eligible trials. Positive conclusions were reported in 56.8% of trials with industry-only, 55.6% with academia-only, 44.1% with academia and industry, 77.8% with none, and 76.4% with not described funding source (p = 0.011). Positive conclusions were reported in 60.4% of trials with unrelated COI, 60% with related COI, and 60% with no COI reported (p = 0.997). Factors that were significantly associated with the presence of positive conclusion included trials design (phase 1) [OR 11.64 (95 CI 4.66-29.09), p < 0.001], geographic location (outside North America or Europe) [OR 1.96 (95 CI 1.05-3.79), P = 0.025], primary outcomes (non-overall or progression free survival) [OR 3.74 (95 CI 2.27-6.18), p < 0.001], and failure to disclose funding source [OR 2.45 (95 CI 1.22-5.22), p = 0.011]. In a multivariable regression model, all these factors remained significantly associated with trial's positive conclusion. Funding source and self-reported COI did not appear to influence the CNS trials conclusion. Funding source information and COI disclosure were under-reported in 14.1 and 17.2% of the CNS trials. Continued efforts are needed to increase rates of both COI and funding source reporting.

Anatomic and functional imaging in the diagnosis of spine metastases and response assessment after spine radiosurgery.

Spine stereotactic radiosurgery (SSRS) has recently emerged as an increasingly effective treatment for spinal metastases. Studies performed over the past decade have examined the role of imaging in the diagnosis of metastases, as well as treatment response following SSRS. In this paper, the authors describe and review the utility of several imaging modalities in the diagnosis of spinal metastases and monitoring of their response to SSRS. Specifically, we review the role of CT, MRI, and positron emission tomography (PET) in their ability to differentiate between osteoblastic and osteolytic lesions, delineation of initial bony pathology, detection of treatment-related changes in bone density and vertebral compression fracture after SSRS, and tumor response to therapy. Validated consensus guidelines defining the imaging approach to SSRS are needed to standardize the diagnosis and treatment response assessment after SSRS. Future directions of spinal imaging, including advances in targeted tumor-specific molecular imaging markers demonstrate early promise for advancing the role of imaging in SSRS.

The Rationale for Targeted Therapies and Stereotactic Radiosurgery in the Treatment of Brain Metastases.

UNLABELLED: Brain metastases are the most common intracranial malignancy. Many approaches, including radiation therapy, surgery, and cytotoxic chemotherapy, have been used to treat patients with brain metastases depending on the patient's disease burden and symptoms. However, stereotactic surgery (SRS) has revolutionized local treatment of brain metastases. Likewise, targeted therapies, including small-molecule inhibitors and monoclonal antibodies that target cancer cell metabolism or angiogenesis, have transformed managing systemic disease. Prospective data on combining these treatments for synergistic effect are limited, but early data show favorable safety and efficacy profiles. The combination of SRS and targeted therapy will further individualize treatment, potentially obviating the need for cytotoxic chemotherapy or whole-brain radiation. There is a great need to pursue research into these exciting modalities and novel combinations to further improve the treatment of patients with brain metastases. This article discusses reported and ongoing clinical trials assessing the safety and efficacy of targeted therapy during SRS. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Treatment of patients with brain metastases requires a multidisciplinary approach. Stereotactic radiosurgery is increasingly used in the upfront setting to treat new brain metastasis. Targeted therapies have revolutionized systemic treatment of many malignancies and may sometimes be used as initial treatment in metastatic patients. There is sparse literature regarding safety and efficacy of combining these two treatment modalities. This article summarizes the supporting literature and highlights ongoing clinical trials in combining radiosurgery with targeted therapy.

Short-Interval Retreatment With Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) for Pediatric Neuroblastoma Resulting in Severe Myositis.

We report a severe and not previously reported toxicity after short-interval retreatment with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in a pediatric patient with neuroblastoma. This patient experienced Grade III radiation myositis after treatment with conventional radiation therapy followed by high-dose SBRT for persistent disease a short interval after the initial radiotherapy course. While SBRT shows outstanding rates of local control in adult disease, data in pediatric cancers are extremely limited. In this report, we discuss the rationale of SBRT in this patient's multimodality neuroblastoma treatment, management of the toxicity, and future perspectives on the use of SBRT in pediatric cancer.

Spine Radiosurgery in the Management of Renal Cell Carcinoma Metastases.

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) presents an interesting challenge in radiation oncology. Improved systemic therapy has significantly prolonged survival. Modern imaging has allowed practitioners to effectively identify patients with oligometastatic disease. Conventionally fractionated radiation therapy is a first-line treatment option for palliation of bone metastases, including the spine, but has limited efficacy and durability. Conventional treatment may not be sufficient in metastatic RCC because of the disease's relative radioresistance. Improved technology, including custom immobilization and on-board treatment imaging, has allowed ultra-high-dose radiation therapy, or stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), to effectively treat metastatic disease in the spine. Safety and efficacy have already been established for intracranial disease and data are emerging for extracranial metastasis. Spine SRS offers local control rates and durable pain improvement in up to 90% of patients. Many series have already reported its effectiveness, and prospective multi-institutional trials are underway. Spine SRS should be strongly considered in select patients with refractory or oligometastatic disease.

Management of Dry Eye Toxicity After Treatment With 177Lu-PSMA-617 Radioligand Therapy.

Treatment options for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer include use of radioligand therapy with 177Lu-PSMA-617. 177Lu-PSMA-617 is used to target prostate cancer cells selectively by targeting prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA); however, PSMA is also expressed on lacrimal glands among other tissues. Herein, we report on a case of a Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5 grade 3 dry eye event with concomitant blepharitis after administration of 177Lu-PSMA-617. The patient was managed with neomycin-polymyxin-dexamethasone 3.5-10000-0.1 ophthalmic suspension, artificial tears, lubricating ointments, lid scrubs, and oral antihistamines.

Radiopharmaceuticals for Cancer Diagnosis and Therapy: New Targets, New Therapies-Alpha-Emitters, Novel Targets.

ABSTRACT: Radiopharmaceutical therapy has emerged as a promising approach for the treatment of various cancers. The exploration of novel targets such as tumor-specific antigens, overexpressed receptors, and intracellular biomolecules using antibodies, peptides, or small molecules has expanded the scope of radiopharmaceutical therapy, enabling precise and effective cancer treatment for an increasing number of tumor types. Alpha emitters, characterized by their high linear energy transfer and short path length, offer unique advantages in targeted therapy due to their potent cytotoxicity against cancer cells while sparing healthy tissues. This article reviews recent advancements in identifying novel targets for radiopharmaceutical therapy and applications in utilizing α-emitters for targeted treatment.

Hormone Replacement Therapy in Patients with Gynecologic Cancer and Radiation-Induced Premature Ovarian Insufficiency.

Patients with gynecological, gastrointestinal, or genitourinary malignancy are at elevated risk for developing premature ovarian insufficiency (POI) from the multimodality therapies used to treat their cancers. POI can result in long term decrements to all-cause mortality, bone density, cardiovascular health, sexual health, cognitive health, and body mass. HRT has been demonstrated to reverse these long term sequalae with the goal of restoring estrogen concentrations to physiological levels. Herein, we discuss a practical approach for initiation of HRT as well as challenges to consider.

Update on 18F-Fluoroestradiol.

18F-16α-Fluoroestradiol (18F-FES) is a radiolabeled estrogen analogue positron emission tomography (PET) imaging agent that binds to the estrogen receptor (ER) in the nucleus of ER-expressing cells. Proof-of-concept studies of 18F-FES demonstrated expected correlation between tumoral 18F-FES-positivity on PET-imaging and ER+ status assessed on biopsy samples by radioligand binding and immunohistochemistry. After decades of study, 18F-FES PET/CT gained clinical approval in 2016 in France and 2020 in the United States for use in patients with ER+ metastatic or recurrent breast cancer. ER+ as assessed by 18F-FES PET/CT has been shown to serve as a biomarker, identifying metastatic breast cancer patients who may respond to endocrine therapy and those who are unlikely to respond. In 2023, the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (SNMMI) published Appropriate Use Criteria for 18F-FES PET/CT, identifying four indications in which use of 18F-FES PET/CT was "appropriate": (1) To assess functional ER status in metastatic lesions unfavorable to biopsy or when biopsy is nondiagnostic, (2) To detect ER status when other imaging tests are equivocal or suspicious, and at (3) initial diagnosis of metastatic disease or (4) progression of metastatic disease, for considering endocrine therapy. This article reviews the foundations of 18F-FES imaging, including normal distribution, false positives, and false negatives, and describes the most up-to-date clinical uses as well as emerging research in breast cancer and other patient populations.

Five-Year Outcomes of a Phase 1/2 Trial of Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation Using Proton Therapy for Women With Stage 0-IIA Breast Cancer.

Purpose: We report the results of a phase 1/2 trial of external beam partial breast radiation using proton therapy. Methods and Materials: Eligible patients included stage 0-IIA breast cancer pTis-T2, N0, and size ≤3 cm. Proton beam radiation was used to deliver 3.85 Gy twice daily to 38.5 Gy. The phase 1 portion determined feasibility based on criteria of successful plan creation, treatment delivery, and acute toxicity grade ≥3 in ≤20% of patients. The phase 2 portion had efficacy goals of acute toxicity grade ≥3 in ≤20% of patients and observing physician-rated cosmesis of excellent or good >85% of patients at 2 years. Results: From April 2013 to March 2015, there were 12 patients enrolled onto the phase 1 portion, and the preplanned analysis of feasibility was met in all 4 required criteria. From July 2015 through December 2019 there were 28 patients with 29 treated breasts (1 bilateral) enrolled onto the phase 2 portion of the trial out of 45 originally planned. The trial was closed to accrual because of the coronavirus pandemic and not reopened. Thirty-eight breasts were treated with double-scattering and 3 pencil-beam scanning protons. The median follow-up of the 40 patients is 5.4 years (range, 2.3-8.6 years). There was 1 local recurrence. There was no grade ≥3 acute or late toxicity. At baseline all patients had physician-rated cosmesis good or excellent but at 2 years was excellent in 56%, good in 19%, and fair in 25%. Conclusions: Proton-accelerated partial breast irradiation delivered with a twice-daily fractionation was feasible and associated with very low acute and long-term toxicity. However, the trial did not meet goals for cosmesis outcomes and was closed prematurely. Future study is needed to determine whether pencil-beam scanning protons or different fractionation could improve these outcomes.