Single vs. multiple fraction non-inferiority trial of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for the comprehensive treatment of oligo-metastases/progression: SIMPLIFY-SABR-COMET.

BACKGROUND: Radiotherapy delivery regimens can vary between a single fraction (SF) and multiple fractions (MF) given daily for up to several weeks depending on the location of the cancer or metastases. With limited evidence comparing fractionation regimens for oligometastases, there is support to explore toxicity levels to nearby organs at risk as a primary outcome while using SF and MF stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) as well as explore differences in patient-reported quality of life and experience. METHODS: This study will randomize 598 patients in a 1:1 ratio between the standard arm (MF SABR) and the experimental arm (SF SABR). This trial is designed as two randomized controlled trials within one patient population for resource efficiency. The primary objective of the first randomization is to determine if SF SABR is non-inferior to MF SABR, with respect to healthcare provider (HCP)-reported grade 3-5 adverse events (AEs) that are related to SABR. Primary endpoint is toxicity while secondary endpoints include lesional control rate (LCR), and progression-free survival (PFS). The second randomization (BC Cancer sites only) will allocate participants to either complete quality of life (QoL) questionnaires only; or QoL questionnaires and a symptom-specific survey with symptom-guided HCP intervention. The primary objective of the second randomization is to determine if radiation-related symptom questionnaire-guided HCP intervention results in improved reported QoL as measured by the EuroQoL-5-dimensions-5levels (EQ-5D-5L) instrument. The primary endpoint is patient-reported QoL and secondary endpoints include: persistence/resolution of symptom reporting, QoL, intervention cost effectiveness, resource utilization, and overall survival. DISCUSSION: This study will compare SF and MF SABR in the treatment of oligometastases and oligoprogression to determine if there is non-inferior toxicity for SF SABR in selected participants with 1-5 oligometastatic lesions. This study will also compare patient-reported QoL between participants who receive radiation-related symptom-guided HCP intervention and those who complete questionnaires alone. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT05784428. Date of Registration: 23 March 2023.

Key factors for establishing and sustaining a successful palliative radiation oncology program: a survey of the Society for Palliative Radiation Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Dedicated palliative radiation oncology programs (PROPs) within radiation oncology (RO) practices have been shown to improve quality and decrease costs of radiation therapy (RT) in advanced cancer patients. Despite this, relatively few PROPs currently exist, highlighting an unmet need to understand characteristics of the few existing PROPs and the potential barriers and facilitators that exist in starting and maintaining a successful PROP. We sought to assess the attributes of existing PROPs, the facilitators and barriers to establishing these programs, and the resources needed to create and maintain a successful program. METHODS: A 15-item online survey was sent to 157 members of the Society of Palliative Radiation Oncology (SPRO) in July 2019. RESULTS: Of the 157 members, 48 (31%) responded. Most practiced in an academic center (71% at main center and 15% at satellite) and 75% were from a larger group practice (≥6 physicians). Most (89%) believed the development and growth of a dedicated PROPs was either important (50%) or most important (39%) to the field of RO. Only 36% of respondents had a PROP, 38% wanted to establish one, and 13% were currently developing one. Of those with PROPs (N=16), 75% perceived an increase in the number of referrals for palliative RT since starting the program. A majority had an ability to refer to an outside palliative care specialist (64%), an outpatient RO service (53%), and specialized clinical processes for managing palliative radiotherapy patients (53%), with 41% having an inpatient RO consult service. Resources considered most essential were access to specialist-level palliative care, advanced practice provider support, a radiation oncologist with an interest in palliative care, having an outpatient palliative RO clinic, an emphasis on administering short radiation courses, and opportunities for educational development. Of those with a PROP or those who have tried to start one, the greatest perceived barriers to initiating a PROP were committed resources (83%), blocked out clinical time (61%), challenges coordinating management of patients (61%), and support from leaders/colleagues (61%). Perceived barriers to sustaining a PROP were similar. For those without a PROP, the perceived most important resources for starting one included access to palliative care specialist by referral (83%), published guidelines with best practices (80%), educational materials for referring physicians and patients (80%), educational sessions for clinical staff (83%), and standardized clinical pathways (80%). CONCLUSIONS: PROPs are not widespread, exist mainly within academic centers, are outpatient, have access to palliative care specialists by referral, and have specialized clinical processes for palliative radiation patients. Lack of committed resources was the single most important perceived barrier for initiating or maintaining a PROP. Best practice guidelines, educational resources, access to palliative care specialists and standardized pathways are most important for those who wish to develop a PROP. These insights can inform discussions and help align resources to develop, grow, and maintain a successful PROP.

Can I Leave? Perspectives on Parental Leave and Parenthood in Medical Training Among Program Directors and Trainees in Oncologic Specialties.

Purpose: Peak fertility commonly occurs during medical training, and delaying parenthood can complicate pregnancies. Trainee parental leave policies are varied and lack transparency. Research on the impacts of parenthood on trainee education is limited. Methods: A Qualtrics-based survey was distributed via e-mail/social media to program directors (PDs) within oncologic specialties with a request to forward a parallel survey to trainees. Questions assessed awareness of parental leave policies, supportiveness of parenthood, and impacts on trainee education. Statistical analyses included descriptive frequencies and bivariable comparisons by key groups. Results: A total of 195 PDs and 286 trainees responded. Twelve percent and 29% of PDs were unsure of maternity/paternity leave options, respectively. PDs felt they were more supportive of trainee parenthood than trainees perceived they were. Thirty-nine percent of nonparent trainees (NPTs) would have children already if not in medicine, and >80% of women trainees were concerned about declining fertility. Perceived impacts of parenthood on trainee overall education and academic productivity were more negative for women trainees when rated by PDs and NPTs; however, men/women parents self-reported equal impacts. Leave burden was perceived as higher for women trainees. Conclusions: A significant portion of PDs lack awareness of parental leave policies, highlighting needs for increased transparency. Trainees' perception of PD support for parenthood is less than PD self-reported support. Alongside significant rates of delayed parenthood and fertility concerns, this poses a problem for trainees seeking to start a family, particularly women who are perceived more negatively. Further work is needed to create a supportive culture for trainee parenthood.

Omission of Radiotherapy After Breast-Conserving Surgery for Women With Breast Cancer With Low Clinical and Genomic Risk: 5-Year Outcomes of IDEA.

PURPOSE: Multiple studies have shown a low risk of ipsilateral breast events (IBEs) or other recurrences for selected patients age 65-70 years or older with stage I breast cancers treated with breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and endocrine therapy (ET) without adjuvant radiotherapy. We sought to evaluate whether younger postmenopausal patients could also be successfully treated without radiation therapy, adding a genomic assay to classic selection factors. METHODS: Postmenopausal patients age 50-69 years with pT1N0 unifocal invasive breast cancer with margins ≥2 mm after BCS whose tumors were estrogen receptor-positive, progesterone receptor-positive, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative with Oncotype DX 21-gene recurrence score ≤18 were prospectively enrolled in a single-arm trial of radiotherapy omission if they consented to take at least 5 years of ET. The primary end point was the rate of locoregional recurrence 5 years after BCS. RESULTS: Between June 2015 and October 2018, 200 eligible patients were enrolled. Among the 186 patients with clinical follow-up of at least 56 months, overall and breast cancer-specific survival rates at 5 years were both 100%. The 5-year freedom from any recurrence was 99% (95% CI, 96 to 100). Crude rates of IBEs for the entire follow-up period for patients age 50-59 years and age 60-69 years were 3.3% (2/60) and 3.6% (5/140), respectively; crude rates of overall recurrence were 5.0% (3/60) and 3.6% (5/140), respectively. CONCLUSION: This trial achieved a very low risk of recurrence using a genomic assay in combination with classic clinical and biologic features for treatment selection, including postmenopausal patients younger than 60 years. Long-term follow-up of this trial and others will help determine whether the option of avoiding initial radiotherapy can be offered to a broader group of women than current guidelines recommend.

External Beam Radiation Therapy for Palliation of Symptomatic Bone Metastases: An ASTRO Clinical Practice Guideline.

PURPOSE: This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for palliative external beam radiation therapy (RT) in symptomatic bone metastases. METHODS: The ASTRO convened a task force to address 5 key questions regarding palliative RT in symptomatic bone metastases. Based on a systematic review by the Agency for Health Research and Quality, recommendations using predefined consensus-building methodology were established; evidence quality and recommendation strength were also assessed. RESULTS: For palliative RT for symptomatic bone metastases, RT is recommended for managing pain from bone metastases and spine metastases with or without spinal cord or cauda equina compression. Regarding other modalities with RT, for patients with spine metastases causing spinal cord or cauda equina compression, surgery and postoperative RT are conditionally recommended over RT alone. Furthermore, dexamethasone is recommended for spine metastases with spinal cord or cauda equina compression. Patients with nonspine bone metastases requiring surgery are recommended postoperative RT. Symptomatic bone metastases treated with conventional RT are recommended 800 cGy in 1 fraction (800 cGy/1 fx), 2000 cGy/5 fx, 2400 cGy/6 fx, or 3000 cGy/10 fx. Spinal cord or cauda equina compression in patients who are ineligible for surgery and receiving conventional RT are recommended 800 cGy/1 fx, 1600 cGy/2 fx, 2000 cGy/5 fx, or 3000 cGy/10 fx. Symptomatic bone metastases in selected patients with good performance status without surgery or neurologic symptoms/signs are conditionally recommended stereotactic body RT over conventional palliative RT. Spine bone metastases reirradiated with conventional RT are recommended 800 cGy/1 fx, 2000 cGy/5 fx, 2400 cGy/6 fx, or 2000 cGy/8 fx; nonspine bone metastases reirradiated with conventional RT are recommended 800 cGy/1 fx, 2000 cGy/5 fx, or 2400 cGy/6 fx. Determination of an optimal RT approach/regimen requires whole person assessment, including prognosis, previous RT dose if applicable, risks to normal tissues, quality of life, cost implications, and patient goals and values. Relatedly, for patient-centered optimization of treatment-related toxicities and quality of life, shared decision making is recommended. CONCLUSIONS: Based on published data, the ASTRO task force's recommendations inform best clinical practices on palliative RT for symptomatic bone metastases.

Radiation Therapy at the End of-Life: Quality of Life and Financial Toxicity Considerations.

In patients with advanced cancer, radiation therapy is considered at various time points in the patient's clinical course from diagnosis to death. As some patients are living longer with metastatic cancer on novel therapeutics, radiation oncologists are increasingly using radiation therapy as an ablative therapy in appropriately selected patients. However, most patients with metastatic cancer still eventually die of their disease. For those without effective targeted therapy options or those who are not candidates for immunotherapy, the time frame from diagnosis to death is still relatively short. Given this evolving landscape, prognostication has become increasingly challenging. Thus, radiation oncologists must be diligent about defining the goals of therapy and considering all treatment options from ablative radiation to medical management and hospice care. The risks and benefits of radiation therapy vary based on an individual patient's prognosis, goals of care, and the ability of radiation to help with their cancer symptoms without undue toxicity over the course of their expected lifetime. When considering recommending a course of radiation, physicians must broaden their understanding of risks and benefits to include not only physical symptoms, but also various psychosocial burdens. These include financial burdens to the patient, to their caregiver and to the healthcare system. The burden of time spent at the end-of-life receiving radiation therapy must also be considered. Thus, the consideration of radiation therapy at the end-of-life can be complex and requires careful attention to the whole patient and their goals of care.

Overcoming Burnout and Promoting Wellness in Radiation Oncology: A Report From the ACR Commission on Radiation Oncology.

Burnout, defined by the presence of emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and decreased sense of personal accomplishment, impacts a significant portion of radiation oncologists. This has been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, is notably worse for women, and has been identified as an international concern. Key contributors to burnout within radiation oncology include inadequate clinical and administrative support, imbalanced personal and professional lives including time with family and for self-care, decreased job satisfaction secondary to increased electronic medical record and decreased patient time, unsupportive organizational culture, lack of transparency from leadership and inclusion in administrative decisions, emotionally intensive patient interactions, challenges within the radiation oncology workforce, financial security related to productivity-based compensation and increasing medical training-related debt, limited education on wellness, and fear of seeking mental health services due to stigma and potential negative impacts on the trajectory of one's career. Limited data exist to quantify the impacts of these factors on the overall levels of burnout within radiation oncology specifically, and additional efforts are needed to understand and address root causes of burnout within the field. Strategies should focus on improving the systems in which physicians work and providing the necessary skills and resources to thrive in high-stress, high-stakes work environments.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy for metastatic sarcoma to the lung: adding to the arsenal of local therapy.

INTRODUCTION: Conventional treatment of pulmonary metastatic sarcoma primarily involves surgery, with systemic therapy added in select patients. However, broader applications of radiation therapy techniques have prompted investigation into the use of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for treatment of metastatic sarcoma, an attractive non-invasive intervention with potential for lower rates of adverse events than surgery. Current data are limited to retrospective analyses. This study analyzed 2-year local control and overall survival and adverse events in patients prospectively treated with SBRT to pulmonary sarcoma metastases. METHODS: Patients prospectively treated with SBRT to the lung for biopsy-proven metastatic sarcoma at a single institution from 2010 to 2022 were included. SBRT dose/fractionation treatment regimens ranged from 34 to 54 Gy in 1-10 fractions using photons. Local recurrence, local progression-free survival (LPFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated from the end of SBRT. Univariable analysis (UVA) was performed using the log-rank test. Multivariable analysis (MVA) was performed using the Cox proportional hazards model. Adverse events due to SBRT were graded based on the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0. RESULTS: Eighteen patients with metastatic sarcoma were treated to 26 pulmonary metastases. The median local progression-free survival was not met. The median overall survival was not met. The local control rate at 2 years was 96%. 2-year LPFS was 95.5% and OS was 74%. Three patients (16.7%) developed grade 1 adverse events from SBRT. There were no adverse events attributed to radiation that were grade 2 or higher. CONCLUSION: We report prospective data demonstrating that SBRT for sarcoma pulmonary metastases affords a high rate of local control and low toxicity, consistent with prior sarcoma SBRT retrospective data. This study adds to the wealth of information on SBRT in a radioresistant tumor. Though largely limited to retrospective reviews, current data indicate high rates of local control with favorable toxicity profiles. Therefore, SBRT for pulmonary sarcoma metastases may be considered for properly selected patients.

Definitive Chemoradiation Associated with Improved Survival Outcomes in Patients with Synchronous Oligometastatic Esophageal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The study of oligometastatic esophageal cancer (EC) is relatively new. Preliminary data suggests that more aggressive treatment regimens in select patients may improve survival rates in oligometastatic EC. However, the consensus recommends palliative treatment. We hypothesized that oligometastatic esophageal cancer patients treated with a definitive approach (chemoradiotherapy [CRT]) would have improved overall survival (OS) compared to those treated with a purely palliative intent and historical controls. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with synchronous oligometastatic (any histology, ≤5 metastatic foci) esophageal cancer treated in a single academic hospital were retrospectively analyzed and divided into definitive and palliative treatment groups. Definitive CRT was defined as radiation therapy to the primary site with ≥40 Gy and ≥2 cycles of chemotherapy. RESULTS: Of 78 Stage IVB (AJCC 8th ed.) patients, 36 met the pre-specified oligometastatic definition. Of these, 19 received definitive CRT, and 17 received palliative treatment. With a median follow-up of 16.5 months (Range: 2.3-95.0 months), median OS for definitive CRT and palliative groups were 90.2 and 8.1 months (p < 0.01), translating into 5-year OS of 50.5% (95%CI: 32.0-79.8%) vs. 7.5% (95%CI: 1.7-48.9%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Oligometastatic EC patients treated with definitive CRT benefited from that approach with survival rates (50.5%) that vastly exceeded historical standards of 5% at 5 years for metastatic EC. Oligometastatic EC patients treated with definitive CRT had significantly improved OS compared to those treated with palliative-only intent within our cohort. Notably, definitively treated patients were generally younger and with better performance status versus those palliatively treated. Further prospective evaluation of definitive CRT for oligometastatic EC is warranted.

Appropriateness of the 30-day expected mortality metric in palliative radiation treatment: a narrative review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The 30-day expected mortality rate is frequently used as a metric to determine which patients benefit from palliative radiation treatment (RT). We conducted a narrative review to examine whether its use as a metric might be appropriate for patient selection. METHODS: A literature review was conducted to identify relevant studies that highlight the benefits of palliative RT in timely symptom management among patients with a poor performance status, the accuracy of predicting survival near the end of life and ways to speed up the process of RT administration through rapid response clinics. KEY CONTENT AND FINDINGS: Several trials have demonstrated substantial response rates for pain and/or bleeding by four weeks and sometimes within the first two weeks after RT. Models of patient survival have limited accuracy, particularly for predicting whether patients will die within the next 30 days. Dedicated Rapid Access Palliative RT (RAPRT) clinics, in which patients are assessed, simulated and treated on the same day, reduce the number of patient visits to the radiation oncology department and hence the burden on the patient as well as costs. CONCLUSIONS: Single-fraction palliative RT should be offered to eligible patients if they are able to attend treatment and could potentially benefit from symptom palliation, irrespective of predicted life expectancy. We discourage the routine use of the 30-day mortality as the only metric to decide whether to offer RT. More common implementation of RAPRT clinics could result in a significant benefit for patients of all life expectancies, but particularly those having short ones.

Stereotactic body radiation therapy versus conventional external beam radiotherapy for spinal metastases: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to compare SBRT and cEBRT for treating spinal metastases through a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were searched up to 6 May 2023 for RCTs comparing SBRT and cEBRT for spinal metastases. Overall and complete pain response, local progression, overall survival, quality of life and adverse events were extracted. Data were pooled using random-effects models. Results were reported as risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes, and hazard ratios (HRs) for time-to-event outcomes, along with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was evaluated using the I2 statistic. RESULTS: Three RCTs were identified involving 642 patients. No differences were seen in overall pain response comparing SBRT and cEBRT (RR at 3 months: 1.12, 95% CI, 0.74-1.70, p = 0.59; RR at 6 months: 1.29, 95% CI, 0.97-1.72, p = 0.08). Only two of three studies presented complete pain response data. SBRT demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in complete pain response compared to cEBRT (RR at 3 months: 2.52; 95% CI, 1.58-4.01; P < 0.0001; RR at 6 months: 2.48; 95% CI, 1.23-4.99; P = 0.01). There were no significant differences in local progression and overall survival. Adverse events were similar, except for any grade radiation dermatitis, which was significantly lower in SBRT arm (RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.03-0.96, P = 0.04). CONCLUSION: SBRT is a safe treatment option for spine metastases. It may provide better complete pain response compared to cEBRT. Additional trials are needed to determine the potential benefits of SBRT in specific patient subsets.

A critical appraisal of the four systematic reviews and meta-analysis on stereotactic body radiation therapy versus external beam radiotherapy for painful bone metastases and where we go from here.

Radiotherapy is an important treatment modality for pain control in patients with bone metastases. Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), which allows delivering a much higher dose per fraction while sparing critical structures compared to conventional external beam radiotherapy (cEBRT), has become more widely used, especially in the oligometastatic setting. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the pain response rate of SBRT and cEBRT for bone metastases have shown conflicting results, as have four recent systematic reviews with meta-analyses of these trials. Possible reasons for the different outcomes between these reviews include differences in methodology, which trials were included, and the endpoints examined and how they were defined. We suggest ways to improve analysis of these RCTs, particularly performing an individual patient-level meta-analysis since the trials included heterogeneous populations. The results of such studies will help guide future investigations needed to validate patient selection criteria, optimize SBRT dose schedules, include additional endpoints (such as the time to onset of pain response, durability of pain response, quality of life (QOL), and side effects of SBRT), and better assess the cost-effectiveness and trade-offs of SBRT compared to cEBRT. An international Delphi consensus to guide selection of optimal candidates for SBRT is warranted before more prospective data is available.

Palliative radiation for bone metastases from hepatocellular carcinoma: practice patterns and the amount of remaining life spent receiving treatment.

BACKGROUND: Palliative radiation therapy (RT) for bone metastases (BMs) is a common practice. Wide variation exists in clinically used dose schema despite numerous studies demonstrating palliative equipoise between single and multifraction courses. We hypothesize that fraction scheme for palliating BMs for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) significantly affects how patients spend their remaining time. METHODS: Patients with osseous HCC metastases who received RT were identified from the National Cancer Database [2004-2013]. The percentage of remaining life spent receiving radiation therapy (PRLSRT) and the number of incomplete RT courses were calculated. Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate trends and predictors. RESULTS: A total of 1,331 patients met the inclusion criteria. Median overall survival (OS) was 3.3 months. Just 49 (3.7%) of patients received single fraction RT and 34% received >10 fractions. The mean and median PRLSRT were as follows: 1 fraction (8.9% and 3.0%), 2-5 fractions (32.9% and 24.3%), 6-10 fractions (27.2% and 15.9%), and >10 fractions (24.1% and 14.4%). Of the patients with PRLSRT >50%, 99.6% received multifraction RT. The proportion of incomplete RT courses increased as fraction size decreased from 17.6% with 4 Gy to 34% with 2 Gy. CONCLUSIONS: Single fraction palliative RT is vastly underutilized despite no additional palliative benefit with multifraction RT. PRLSRT significantly increased with multifraction RT. In the palliative treatment of painful BMs from HCC, single fraction treatment reduces time spent receiving radiation treatments and maximizes the number of patients who complete the prescribed treatment.

Society for Palliative Radiation Oncology: Report from the Ninth Annual Meeting (2022).

The Society for Palliative Radiation Oncology (SPRO) is an international group of clinicians whose primary aim is to advance the field of palliative radiation oncology by promoting evidence-based palliative radiation therapy and excellence in primary palliative care through research, education, collaboration, and patient advocacy. SPRO held its 9th Annual Meeting on October 23, 2022 in association with the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) 64th Annual Meeting. Accomplishments and goals from the previous year were discussed and newly appointed officers were announced. Dr. Dirk Rades from the University of Lubeck in Germany gave the keynote address, reviewing critical trials and evidence for the use of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in the palliative and oligometastatic settings. Recipients of the Lifetime Service Award and the Rising Star Award were announced and presented. This Meeting Report summarizes the proceedings of SPRO's 9th Annual Meeting.

Is 5 the New 25? Long-Term Oncologic Outcomes From a Phase II, Prospective, 5-Fraction Preoperative Radiation Therapy Trial in Patients With Localized Soft Tissue Sarcoma.

Purpose: Management of adult soft tissue sarcomas entails a multidisciplinary approach with surgery and radiation therapy with or without chemotherapy. The use of preoperative irradiation has been well established, and although conventional fractionation involves daily treatments over the course of 5 weeks, higher doses per fraction may be beneficial due to the radiobiologic profile of sarcoma. In this study we report long-term oncologic outcomes from a single-institution, phase II study evaluating a 5-fraction hypofractionated course of preoperative radiation. Methods and materials: Preoperative hypofractionated radiation therapy was administered to 35 Gy in 5 fractions every other day followed by resection 4 to 6 weeks later. If given, chemotherapy consisted of a doxorubicin-ifosfamide-based regimen delivered neoadjuvantly. The primary endpoint was local control. Additional survival and pathologic outcomes, including overall and distant metastasis-free survival, tumor, and treatment-related pathology, as well as acute and late toxicity were examined. Results: Thirty-two patients were enrolled in this prospective, single-arm phase II trial. At a median follow-up of 36.4 months (range, 3-56), no patient developed a local recurrence, and the 3-year overall and distant metastasis-free survival was 82.2% and 69%, respectively. Major acute postoperative wound complications occurred in 25% of patients. Grade 2 and 3 fibrosis occurred in 21.7% and 13% of patients, respectively. The 2-year median and mean Musculoskeletal Tumor Society score for all patients was 28 and 27.4, respectively. Conclusions: A condensed course of preoperative hypofractionated radiation therapy leads to excellent rates of local control and survival with acceptable toxicity profiles. Potential studies ideally with phase II or III randomized trials would help corroborate these findings and other preoperative hypofractionated results in soft tissue sarcomas.

Society for palliative radiation oncology: report from the Seventh Annual Meeting (2020).

The Society for Palliative Radiation Oncology (SPRO) is an international professional group dedicated to advancing the field of palliative radiation oncology by promoting evidence-based palliative radiotherapy and excellence in primary palliative care through research, education, collaboration, and patient advocacy. SPRO held its 7th Annual Meeting on October 28, 2020 over a virtual platform in association with the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) 62nd Annual Meeting. Short and long-term goals for the Society were detailed and the accomplishments since SPRO's 6th Annual Meeting were reviewed. New research was presented during a series of two-minute rapid fire educational sessions given by speakers selected to present in the scientific palliative care track at the ASTRO Annual Meeting. Recipients of the Lifetime Service Award and the Rising Star Award were announced and presented. This Meeting Report summarizes the proceedings of the 7th Annual Meeting and describes future directions for SPRO.

Society for palliative radiation oncology: report from the Eighth Annual Meeting (2021).

The Society for Palliative Radiation Oncology (SPRO) is an international group of clinicians whose primary aim is to advance the field of palliative radiation oncology by promoting evidence-based palliative radiation therapy and excellence in primary palliative care through research, education, collaboration, and patient advocacy. SPRO held its 8th Annual Meeting on November 4th, 2021 in association with the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) 63rd Annual Meeting. Accomplishments and goals from the prior year, including SPRO gaining official non-profit status, were discussed. Dr. Dirk Rades from University of Lubeck in Germany gave the keynote address, reviewing critical trials on spinal cord compression and encouraging collaboration on future trials. Recipients of the Lifetime Service Award and the Rising Star Award were announced and presented. This Meeting Report summarizes the proceedings of SPRO's 8th Annual Meeting.

Preoperative Radiation Performed at a Nonsarcoma Center May Lead to Increased Wound Complications Following Resection in Patients With Soft Tissue Sarcomas.

OBJECTIVES: Preoperative radiation therapy (RT) followed by wide-local excision with or without chemotherapy is widely accepted as management for soft tissue sarcomas (STS). Although studies have demonstrated excellent local control with this technique, there can be significant morbidity with the development of wound complications. It has been shown that sarcoma resections performed at a high-volume center lead to improved survival and functional outcomes. It is unclear, however, if radiation performed in a high-volume center leads to improved outcomes especially related to morbidity. The goal of this study was to determine whether preoperative RT performed at an academic cancer center have lower rates of wound complication compared with RT performed in community cancer centers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 204 patients with STS were treated with preoperative RT±chemotherapy followed by limb-sparing resection. Of these, 150 patients had preoperative RT performed at an academic sarcoma center. wound complication were defined as those requiring secondary operations or prolonged wound care for 4 months following surgery. Predictors for wound complication were evaluated using a Fisher exact test for univariate analysis and logistic regression for multivariate analysis. RESULTS: The overall incidence of wound complication was 28.3%. Significant predictors for wound complication include tumor location and radiation delivered at a community hospital. The postoperative incidence of wound complication was 21% when the preoperative RT was performed at an academic cancer center versus 39% when performed at a community cancer center (P=0.009). On multivariate analysis, both tumor location (P=0.0012, 95% confidence interval: 0.03-0.45, odds ratio: 0.13) and RT performed at a community cancer center (P=0.02, 95% confidence interval: 1.13-4.48, odds ratio: 2.25) remained significant in correlation with postoperative wound complication. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative RT performed at an academic cancer center led to lower rates of postoperative wound complication. This may support the recommendation that preoperative RT and resection of STS be performed at an experienced sarcoma center.

Clinical Implementation and Initial Experience of Real-Time Motion Tracking With Jaws and Multileaf Collimator During Helical Tomotherapy Delivery.

PURPOSE: This work reports the clinical implementation of a real-time motion tracking and correction system using dynamic multileaf collimator and jaws during helical tomotherapy delivery (Synchrony on Radixact; Accuray, Inc). METHODS AND MATERIALS: The first clinical Synchrony on Radixact system was recently installed and tested at our institution. Various clinical workflows, including fiducial implantation, computed tomography simulation, treatment planning, delivery quality assurance, treatment simulation, and delivery, for both fiducial-free and fiducial-based motion tracking methods were developed. Treatment planning and delivery data from initial patients, including dosimetric benefits, real-time target detection, model building, motion tracking accuracy, delivery smoothness, and extra dose from real-time radiographic imaging, were analyzed. RESULTS: The Synchrony on Radixact system was tested to be within its performance specifications and has been used to treat 10 lung (fiducial-free) and 5 prostate (fiducial-based) patients with cancer so far in our clinic. The success of these treatments, especially for fiducial-free tracking, depends on multiple factors, including careful selection of the patient, appropriate setting of system parameters, appropriate positioning of the patient and skin markers, and use of treatment simulation. For the lung tumor cases, difficulties in model building, due primarily to the changes of target detectability or respiration patterns, were observed, which led to important system upgrades, including the addition of a treatment delivery simulation capability. Motion tracking metrics for all treated patients were within specifications, for example, (1) delivery quality assurance passing rates >95%; (2) extra dose from radiograph <0.5% of the prescription dose; and (3) average Potential Diff, measured Δ, and Rigid Body were within 6.5, 2.9, and 3.9 mm, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Practical workflows for the use of the first clinical motion tracking and correction system in helical tomotherapy delivery have been developed, and the system has now been successfully implemented in our clinic for treating patients with lung and prostate cancer.

Long-Term Outcomes of Dose-Escalated Pelvic Lymph Node Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) With a Simultaneous Hypofractionated Boost to the Prostate for Very High-Risk Adenocarcinoma of the Prostate: A Prospective Phase II Clinical Trial.

PURPOSE: There remains limited data as to the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of higher doses of elective radiation therapy to the pelvic lymph nodes in men with high-risk prostate cancer. We conducted a phase II study to evaluate moderate dose escalation to the pelvic lymph nodes using a simultaneous integrated boost to the prostate. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients were eligible with biopsy-proven adenocarcinoma of the prostate, a calculated lymph node risk of at least 25%, Karnofsky performance scale ≥70, and no evidence of M1 disease. Acute and late toxicity were prospectively collected at each follow-up using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0 (CTCAE v4.0). The pelvic lymph nodes were treated to a dose of 56 Gy over 28 fractions with a simultaneous integrated boost to the prostate to a total dose of 70 Gy over 28 fractions using intensity-modulated radiation therapy. RESULTS: Thirty patients were prospectively enrolled from October 2010 to August 2014. Median patient age was 70 years (57-83), pretreatment prostate-specific antigen was 11.5 ng/mL (3.23-111.5), T stage was T2c (T1c-T3b), and Gleason score was 9 (6-9). CTCAE v4.0 rate of any grade 1 or 2 genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity were 55% and 44%, respectively, and there was 1 reported acute grade 3 genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity, both unrelated to protocol therapy. With a median follow-up of 6.4 years, the biochemical failure free survival rate was 80.2%, and mean biochemical progression free survival was 8.3 years (95% confidence interval [CI], 7.2-9.4). The prostate cancer specific survival was 95.2%, and mean prostate cancer specific survival was 8.7 years (95% CI, 8.0-9.4). Five-year distant metastases free survival was 96%. Medians were not reached. CONCLUSIONS: In this single arm, small, prospective feasibility study, nodal radiation therapy dose escalation was safe, feasible, and seemingly well tolerated. Rates of progression free survival are highly encouraging in this population of predominately National Comprehensive Cancer Network very high-risk patients.