A Randomised Phase II Trial to Evaluate the Feasibility of Radiotherapy Dose Escalation, Facilitated by Intensity-Modulated Arc Radiotherapy Techniques, in High-Risk Neuroblastoma.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: For high-risk neuroblastoma, planning target volume coverage is often compromised to respect adjacent kidney tolerance. This trial investigated whether intensity-modulated arc radiotherapy techniques (IMAT) could facilitate dose escalation better than conventional techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Children with high-risk abdominal neuroblastoma referred for radiotherapy to the primary tumour site and involved regional lymph nodes were randomised to receive either standard dose (21 Gy in 14 fractions) or escalated dose (36 Gy in 24 fractions) radiotherapy. Dual planning with both a conventional anterior-posterior parallel opposed pair radiotherapy technique and an IMAT technique was performed. The quality of target volume and organ-at-risk delineation, and dosimetric plans, were externally reviewed. Dosimetric parameters were used to judge the superior technique for treatment. This feasibility trial was not powered to detect improvement in outcome with dose escalation. RESULTS: Between 2017 and 2020, 50 patients were randomised and dual-planned. The IMAT technique was judged more favourable in 48 patients. In all patients randomised to receive 36 Gy, IMAT would have permitted delivery of the full dose (median D50% 36.0 Gy, inter-quartile range 36.0-36.1 Gy) to the target volume, whereas dose compromise would have been required with conventional planning (median D50% 35.6 Gy, inter-quartile range 28.7-35.9 Gy). CONCLUSION: IMAT facilitates safe dose escalation to 36 Gy in patients receiving radiotherapy for neuroblastoma. The value of dose escalation is now being evaluated in a current prospective phase III randomised trial.

Paediatric radiotherapy in the United Kingdom: an evolving subspecialty and a paradigm for integrated teamworking in oncology.

Many different malignancies occur in children, but overall, cancer in childhood is rare. Survival rates have improved appreciably and are higher compared with most adult tumour types. Treatment schedules evolve as a result of clinical trials and are typically complex and multi-modality, with radiotherapy an integral component of many. Risk stratification in paediatric oncology is increasingly refined, resulting in a more personalized use of radiation. Every available modality of radiation delivery: simple and advanced photon techniques, proton beam therapy, molecular radiotherapy, and brachytherapy, have their place in the treatment of children's cancers. Radiotherapy is rarely the sole treatment. As local therapy, it is often given before or after surgery, so the involvement of the surgeon is critically important, particularly when brachytherapy is used. Systemic treatment is the standard of care for most paediatric tumour types, concomitant administration of chemotherapy is typical, and immunotherapy has an increasing role. Delivery of radiotherapy is not done by clinical or radiation oncologists alone; play specialists and anaesthetists are required, together with mould room staff, to ensure compliance and immobilization. The support of clinical radiologists is needed to ensure the correct interpretation of imaging for target volume delineation. Physicists and dosimetrists ensure the optimal dose distribution, minimizing exposure of organs at risk. Paediatric oncology doctors, nurses, and a range of allied health professionals are needed for the holistic wrap-around care of the child and family. Radiographers are essential at every step of the way. With increasing complexity comes a need for greater centralization of services.

Intensity-modulated arc therapy to improve radiation dose delivery in the treatment of abdominal neuroblastoma.

The standard European radiotherapy technique for children with neuroblastoma is a conventional parallel opposed pair. This frequently results in compromise on planning target volume coverage to stay within normal tissue tolerances. This study investigates the use of an intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMAT) technique to improve dose distribution and allow better protocol compliance. Among 20 previously treated patients, ten had received the full prescribed dose with conventional planning (protocol compliant) and ten had a compromise on planning target volume coverage (protocol noncompliant). All patients were replanned with IMAT. Dosimetric parameters of the conventional radiotherapy and IMAT were compared. The dose received by 98% of the planning target volume, homogeneity and conformity indices were all improved with IMAT (p < 0.001). IMAT would have enabled delivery of the full protocol dose in eight out of ten protocol-noncompliant patients. IMAT may improve outcomes through improved protocol compliance and better dose distributions.

The spleen as an organ at risk in paediatric radiotherapy: A SIOP-Europe Radiation Oncology Working Group report.

BACKGROUND: Radiation may cause long-term splenic dysfunction, risking potentially fatal late sepsis. We aimed to review this complication's magnitude in paediatric radiotherapy and gauge the level of awareness of the spleen as an organ at risk. METHODS: Clinical trial protocols and radiotherapy guidelines, patient/parent information sheets, and professional guidance documents were reviewed to assess the perceived risk of radiotherapy-related splenic dysfunction. Paediatric oncologists and paediatric radiation oncologists across Europe were surveyed to estimate the level of understanding of this risk and to ascertain current practice. Spleen doses received in practice were examined. A systematic review of relevant publications was undertaken. RESULTS: The risk is not mentioned in most clinical trials, patient information leaflets, or professional guidance documents. When mentioned, a threshold dose of 40 Gy is cited. The survey showed only limited awareness. More than half of patients assessed received spleen doses in excess of 10 Gy. The systematic review identified one paper reporting a relative mortality risk of 5.5 with spleen doses in the 10-20 Gy range. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of mortality from overwhelming infection is poorly recognised. We therefore recommend routine delineation of the spleen. Protocols and guidelines should give a spleen dose objective as low as reasonably achievable, ideally mean <10 Gy without compromise to target volumes. Revised evidence-based guidelines and continuing professional development activities should inform oncologists. Patient/parent information should mention the risk and the dose received be communicated to colleagues. Antibiotic prophylaxis and/or (re)vaccination should be considered if the mean spleen dose is ≥10 Gy.

Feasibility of dosimetry-based high-dose 131I-meta-iodobenzylguanidine with topotecan as a radiosensitizer in children with metastatic neuroblastoma.

INTRODUCTION: (131)I-meta iodobenzylguanidine ((131)I-mIBG) therapy is established palliation for relapsed neuroblastoma. The topoisomerase-1 inhibitor, topotecan, has direct activity against neuroblastoma and acts as a radiation sensitiser. These 2 treatments are synergistic in laboratory studies. Theoretically, the benefit of (131)I-mIBG treatment could be enhanced by dose escalation and combination with topotecan. Haematological support would be necessary to overcome the myelosuppression, which is the dose-limiting toxicity. AIMS: Firstly, one aim of this study was to establish whether in vivo dosimetry could be used to guide the delivery of a precise total whole-body radiation-absorbed dose of 4 Gy accurately from 2 (131)I-mIBG treatments. Secondly, the other aim of this study was to determine whether it is feasible to combine this treatment with the topotecan in children with metastatic neuroblastoma. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An activity of (131)I-mIBG (12 mCi/kg, 444 MBq/kg), estimated to give a whole-body absorbed-radiation dose of approximately 2 Gy, was administered on day 1, with topotecan 0.7 mg/m(2) administered daily from days 1-5. In vivo dosimetry was used to calculate a 2nd activity of (131)I-mIBG, to be given on day 15 which would give a total whole-body dose of 4 Gy. A further 5 doses of topotecan were given from days 15-19. The myeloablative effect of this regimen was circumvented by peripheral blood stem cell or bone marrow support. RESULTS: Eight children with relapsed stage IV neuroblastoma were treated. The treatment was delivered according to protocol in all patients. There were no unanticipated side-effects. Satisfactory haematological reconstitution occurred in all patients. The measured total whole-body radiation-absorbed dose ranged from 3.7 Gy to 4.7 Gy (mean, 4.2 Gy). CONCLUSIONS: In vivo dosimetry allows for a specified total whole-body radiation dose to be delivered accurately. This schedule of intensification of (131)I-mIBG therapy by dose escalation and radiosensitization with topotecan with a haemopoietic autograft is safe and practicable. This approach should now be tested for efficacy in a phase II clinical trial.

Adverse events of local treatment in long-term head and neck rhabdomyosarcoma survivors after external beam radiotherapy or AMORE treatment.

BACKGROUND: Radiotherapy is a well-known cause of adverse events (AEs). To reduce AEs, an innovative local treatment was developed in Amsterdam: Ablative surgery, MOuld brachytherapy and surgical REconstruction (AMORE). AIMS: (1) to determine the prevalence of AEs in HNRMS survivors and (2) to compare AEs between survivors treated with the international standard: external beam radiotherapy (EBRT-based: London) and survivors treated with AMORE if feasible, otherwise EBRT (AMORE-based: Amsterdam). METHODS: All HNRMS survivors, treated in London or Amsterdam between January 1990 and December 2010 (n = 153), and alive ⩾ 2 years post-treatment were eligible (n = 113). A predefined list of AEs was assessed in a multidisciplinary clinic and graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. RESULTS: Eighty HNRMS survivors attended the clinic (median follow-up 10.5 years); 63% experienced ⩾ 1 severe or disabling event, and 76% had ⩾ 5 AEs (any grade). Survivors with EBRT-based treatment were, after adjustment for site, age at diagnosis, and follow-up duration, at increased risk to develop any grade 3/4 event or ⩾ 5 AEs (any grade) compared with survivors with AMORE-based treatments (p = 0.032 and 0.01, respectively). Five year overall survival (source population) after EBRT-based treatment was 75.0%, after AMORE-based treatment 76.9%, p = 0.56. CONCLUSION: This study may serve as a baseline inventory and can be used in future studies for prospective assessments of AEs following the introduction of novel local treatment modalities. AMORE-based local treatment resulted in similar overall survival and a reduction of AEs secondary to local treatment.