Accelerated partial breast irradiation using sole interstitial multicatheter brachytherapy compared with whole-breast irradiation with boost for early breast cancer: 10-year results of a GEC-ESTRO randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Several randomised, phase 3 trials have investigated the value of different techniques of accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) for patients with early breast cancer after breast-conserving surgery compared with whole-breast irradiation. In a phase 3 randomised trial, we evaluated whether APBI using multicatheter brachytherapy is non-inferior compared with whole-breast irradiation. Here, we present the 10-year follow-up results. METHODS: We did a randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority trial at 16 hospitals and medical centres in Austria, Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary, Poland, Spain, and Switzerland. Patients aged 40 years or older with early invasive breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ treated with breast-conserving surgery were centrally randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either whole-breast irradiation or APBI using multicatheter brachytherapy. Whole-breast irradiation was delivered in 25 daily fractions of 50 Gy over 5 weeks, with a supplemental boost of 10 Gy to the tumour bed, and APBI was delivered as 30·1 Gy (seven fractions) and 32·0 Gy (eight fractions) of high-dose-rate brachytherapy in 5 days or as 50 Gy of pulsed-dose-rate brachytherapy over 5 treatment days. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was ipsilateral local recurrence, analysed in the as-treated population; the non-inferiority margin for the recurrence rate difference (defined for 5-year results) was 3 percentage points. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00402519; the trial is complete. FINDINGS: Between April 20, 2004, and July 30, 2009, 1328 female patients were randomly assigned to whole breast irradiation (n=673) or APBI (n=655), of whom 551 in the whole-breast irradiation group and 633 in the APBI group were eligible for analysis. At a median follow-up of 10·36 years (IQR 9·12-11·28), the 10-year local recurrence rates were 1·58% (95% CI 0·37 to 2·8) in the whole-breast irradiation group and 3·51% (1·99 to 5·03) in the APBI group. The difference in 10-year rates between the groups was 1·93% (95% CI -0·018 to 3·87; p=0·074). Adverse events were mostly grade 1 and 2, in 234 (60%) of 393 participants in the whole-breast irradiation group and 314 (67%) of 470 participants in the APBI group, at 7·5-year or 10-year follow-up, or both. Patients in the APBI group had a significantly lower incidence of treatment-related grade 3 late side-effects than those in the whole-breast irradiation group (17 [4%] of 393 for whole-breast irradiation vs seven [1%] of 470 for APBI; p=0·021; at 7·5-year or 10-year follow-up, or both). At 10 years, the most common type of grade 3 adverse event in both treatment groups was fibrosis (six [2%] of 313 patients for whole-breast irradiation and three [1%] of 375 patients for APBI, p=0·56). No grade 4 adverse events or treatment-related deaths have been observed. INTERPRETATION: Postoperative APBI using multicatheter brachytherapy after breast-conserving surgery in patients with early breast cancer is a valuable alternative to whole-breast irradiation in terms of treatment efficacy and is associated with fewer late side-effects. FUNDING: German Cancer Aid, Germany.

Survey on brachytherapy training among radiation oncology residents in the German-speaking regions of Europe.

PURPOSE: This survey aimed to determine the perception of brachytherapy training among residents in the DACH region, consisting of Austria, Germany and Switzerland. MATERIAL & METHODS: An online questionnaire containing 22 questions related to trainee demographics (n = 5) and to brachytherapy training (n = 17) was sent in two iterations in 11/2019 and 02/2020. The following topics were evaluated: institutional support, barriers to training, extent of training, site-specific training (prostate, gynaecology, breast, gastrointestinal and skin), preferences for further training and outlook on overall development of brachytherapy. The responses were mostly based on a Likert scale of 1 to 5, thereby reflecting strength of opinion. Descriptive statistics were used to describe frequencies. RESULTS: Among the 108 respondents, approximately 69% of residents considered the ability to perform brachytherapy independently to be important or somewhat important. However, only 31% of respondents reported to have a dedicated brachytherapy training during residency. The major limitation to achieve independence in performing brachytherapy was seen in a low case load in Austria, in the lack of training in Switzerland and in both of them in Germany. CONCLUSION: The interest in brachytherapy training among residents in German-speaking countries was generally high, but there is a perceived lack of sufficient case volumes and partially also in formal training opportunities. Fellowships at departments with a high case load as part of a formalised curriculum and dedicated hands-on workshops at national or international conferences might help to overcome these issues.

Quality-of-life results for accelerated partial breast irradiation with interstitial brachytherapy versus whole-breast irradiation in early breast cancer after breast-conserving surgery (GEC-ESTRO): 5-year results of a randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Previous results from the GEC-ESTRO trial showed that accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) using multicatheter brachytherapy in the treatment of early breast cancer after breast-conserving surgery was non-inferior to whole-breast irradiation in terms of local control and overall survival. Here, we present 5-year results of patient-reported quality of life. METHODS: We did this randomised controlled phase 3 trial at 16 hospitals and medical centres in seven European countries. Patients aged 40 years or older with 0-IIA breast cancer were randomly assigned (1:1) after breast-conserving surgery (resection margins ≥2 mm) to receive either whole-breast irradiation of 50 Gy with a boost of 10 Gy or APBI using multicatheter brachytherapy. Randomisation was stratified by study centre, tumour type, and menopausal status, with a block size of ten and an automated dynamic algorithm. There was no masking of patients or investigators. The primary endpoint of the trial was ipsilateral local recurrence. Here, we present 5-year results of quality of life (a prespecified secondary endpoint). Quality-of-life questionnaires (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30, breast cancer module QLQ-BR23) were completed before radiotherapy (baseline 1), immediately after radiotherapy (baseline 2), and during follow-up. We analysed the data according to treatment received (as-treated population). Recruitment was completed in 2009, and long-term follow-up is continuing. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00402519. FINDINGS: Between April 20, 2004, and July 30, 2009, 633 patients had accelerated partial breast irradiation and 551 patients had whole-breast irradiation. Quality-of-life questionnaires at baseline 1 were available for 334 (53%) of 663 patients in the APBI group and 314 (57%) of 551 patients in the whole-breast irradiation group; the response rate was similar during follow-up. Global health status (range 0-100) was stable in both groups: at baseline 1, APBI group mean score 65·5 (SD 20·6) versus whole-breast irradiation group 64·6 (19·6), p=0·37; at 5 years, APBI group 66·2 (22·2) versus whole-breast irradiation group 66·0 (21·8), p=0·94. The only moderate, significant difference (difference of 10-20 points) between the groups was found in the breast symptoms scale. Breast symptom scores were significantly higher (ie, worse) after whole-breast irradiation than after APBI at baseline 2 (difference of means 13·6, 95% CI 9·7-17·5; p<0·0001) and at 3-month follow-up (difference of means 12·7, 95% CI 9·8-15·6; p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: APBI with multicatheter brachytherapy was not associated with worse quality of life compared with whole-breast irradiation. This finding supports APBI as an alternative treatment option after breast-conserving surgery for patients with early breast cancer. FUNDING: German Cancer Aid.

Bone in the breast? Long term toxicity 21 years after interstitial brachytherapy as a boost.

An 81-year-old patient developed an exulcerous tumor in her left breast 21 years after breast cancer treatment with lumpectomy and adjuvant radiotherapy. At the time of the initial treatment 21 years ago, whole breast irradiation was performed with a prescribed dose of 48 Gy and a maximal dose of 69 Gy. In addition, the patient received a 14.7 Gy boost with multicatheter brachytherapy as partial breast irradiation. In general, fat necrosis after radiotherapy, surgery or trauma is a minor problem for patients, but can lead to diagnostic difficulties. The incidence varies: the literature indicates that it occurs in up to 34% of cases. The direct pathogenesis is not clear; it can be due to high radiation dose to the breast, dosimetric inhomogeneities or surgical complications (seromas and inflammation). The tumor in the case described here, occurring more than two decades after the primary treatment, is a rarity in this extent and is an unusual clinical, radiological, and histological finding. It provides a good example of the need for an individualized approach to treatment.

Late side-effects and cosmetic results of accelerated partial breast irradiation with interstitial brachytherapy versus whole-breast irradiation after breast-conserving surgery for low-risk invasive and in-situ carcinoma of the female breast: 5-year results of a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: We previously confirmed the non-inferiority of accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) with interstitial brachytherapy in terms of local control and overall survival compared with whole-breast irradiation for patients with early-stage breast cancer who underwent breast-conserving surgery in a phase 3 randomised trial. Here, we present the 5-year late side-effects and cosmetic results of the trial. METHODS: We did this randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial at 16 centres in seven European countries. Women aged 40 years or older with stage 0-IIA breast cancer who underwent breast-conserving surgery with microscopically clear resection margins of at least 2 mm were randomly assigned 1:1, via an online interface, to receive either whole-breast irradiation of 50 Gy with a tumour-bed boost of 10 Gy or APBI with interstitial brachytherapy. Randomisation was stratified by study centre, menopausal status, and tumour type (invasive carcinoma vs ductal carcinoma in situ), with a block size of ten, according to an automated dynamic algorithm. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint of our initial analysis was ipsilateral local recurrence; here, we report the secondary endpoints of late side-effects and cosmesis. We analysed physician-scored late toxicities and patient-scored and physician-scored cosmetic results from the date of breast-conserving surgery to the date of onset of event. Analysis was done according to treatment received (as-treated population). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00402519. FINDINGS: Between April 20, 2004, and July 30, 2009, we randomly assigned 1328 women to receive either whole-breast irradiation (n=673) or APBI with interstitial brachytherapy (n=655); 1184 patients comprised the as-treated population (551 in the whole-breast irradiation group and 633 in the APBI group). At a median follow-up of 6·6 years (IQR 5·8-7·6), no patients had any grade 4 toxities, and three (<1%) of 484 patients in the APBI group and seven (2%) of 393 in the whole-breast irradiation group had grade 3 late skin toxicity (p=0·16). No patients in the APBI group and two (<1%) in the whole-breast irradiation group developed grade 3 late subcutaneous tissue toxicity (p=0·10). The cumulative incidence of any late side-effect of grade 2 or worse at 5 years was 27·0% (95% CI 23·0-30·9) in the whole-breast irradiation group versus 23·3% (19·9-26·8) in the APBI group (p=0·12). The cumulative incidence of grade 2-3 late skin toxicity at 5 years was 10·7% (95% CI 8·0-13·4) in the whole-breast irradiation group versus 6·9% (4·8-9·0) in the APBI group (difference -3·8%, 95% CI -7·2 to 0·4; p=0·020). The cumulative risk of grade 2-3 late subcutaneous tissue side-effects at 5 years was 9·7% (95% CI 7·1-12·3) in the whole-breast irradiation group versus 12·0% (9·4-14·7) in the APBI group (difference 2·4%; 95% CI -1·4 to 6·1; p=0·28). The cumulative incidence of grade 2-3 breast pain was 11·9% (95% CI 9·0-14·7) after whole-breast irradiation versus 8·4% (6·1-10·6) after APBI (difference -3·5%; 95% CI -7·1 to 0·1; p=0·074). At 5 years' follow-up, according to the patients' view, 413 (91%) of 454 patients had excellent to good cosmetic results in the whole-breast irradiation group versus 498 (92%) of 541 patients in the APBI group (p=0·62); when judged by the physicians, 408 (90%) of 454 patients and 503 (93%) of 542 patients, respectively, had excellent to good cosmetic results (p=0·12). No treatment-related deaths occurred, but six (15%) of 41 patients (three in each group) died from breast cancer, and 35 (85%) deaths (21 in the whole-breast irradiation group and 14 in the APBI group) were unrelated. INTERPRETATION: 5-year toxicity profiles and cosmetic results were similar in patients treated with breast-conserving surgery followed by either APBI with interstitial brachytherapy or conventional whole-breast irradiation, with significantly fewer grade 2-3 late skin side-effects after APBI with interstitial brachytherapy. These findings provide further clinical evidence for the routine use of interstitial multicatheter brachytherapy-based APBI in the treatment of patients with low-risk breast cancer who opt for breast conservation. FUNDING: German Cancer Aid.

5-year results of accelerated partial breast irradiation using sole interstitial multicatheter brachytherapy versus whole-breast irradiation with boost after breast-conserving surgery for low-risk invasive and in-situ carcinoma of the female breast: a randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: In a phase 3, randomised, non-inferiority trial, accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) for patients with stage 0, I, and IIA breast cancer who underwent breast-conserving treatment was compared with whole-breast irradiation. Here, we present 5-year follow-up results. METHODS: We did a phase 3, randomised, non-inferiority trial at 16 hospitals and medical centres in seven European countries. 1184 patients with low-risk invasive and ductal carcinoma in situ treated with breast-conserving surgery were centrally randomised to either whole-breast irradiation or APBI using multicatheter brachytherapy. The primary endpoint was local recurrence. Analysis was done according to treatment received. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00402519. FINDINGS: Between April 20, 2004, and July 30, 2009, 551 patients had whole-breast irradiation with tumour-bed boost and 633 patients received APBI using interstitial multicatheter brachytherapy. At 5-year follow-up, nine patients treated with APBI and five patients receiving whole-breast irradiation had a local recurrence; the cumulative incidence of local recurrence was 1.44% (95% CI 0.51-2.38) with APBI and 0.92% (0.12-1.73) with whole-breast irradiation (difference 0.52%, 95% CI -0.72 to 1.75; p=0.42). No grade 4 late side-effects were reported. The 5-year risk of grade 2-3 late side-effects to the skin was 3.2% with APBI versus 5.7% with whole-breast irradiation (p=0.08), and 5-year risk of grade 2-3 subcutaneous tissue late side-effects was 7.6% versus 6.3% (p=0.53). The risk of severe (grade 3) fibrosis at 5 years was 0.2% with whole-breast irradiation and 0% with APBI (p=0.46). INTERPRETATION: The difference between treatments was below the relevance margin of 3 percentage points. Therefore, adjuvant APBI using multicatheter brachytherapy after breast-conserving surgery in patients with early breast cancer is not inferior to adjuvant whole-breast irradiation with respect to 5-year local control, disease-free survival, and overall survival. FUNDING: German Cancer Aid.

[Autologous Breast Reconstruction and Radiotherapy: Consensus Report of the German-Speaking Society for Reconstructive Microsurgery (GSRM)]. / Autologe Brustrekonstruktion und Bestrahlung: Konsensus-Bericht der Deutschsprachigen Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Mikrochirurgie (DAM).

Autologous postmastectomy breast reconstruction is associated with favourable long-term clinical outcomes and superior patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) compared with implant-based reconstruction. However, adjuvant radiotherapy has traditionally been considered a relative contraindication to immediate flap-based reconstruction due to its unpredictable effects on the reconstructive outcome. While modern adjuvant postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) has been able to significantly reduce acute and chronic radiation-induced complications, plastic surgeons still hesitate to offer immediate autologous reconstruction to patients expected to undergo adjuvant radiotherapy. More recently, evidence has emerged suggesting a paradigm shift in favour of immediate autologous reconstruction despite subsequent radiotherapy. At the 44th Annual Meeting of the German-speaking Society for Reconstructive Microsurgery (GSRM) in Bern, Switzerland, a workshop discussed the literature on PMRT and autologous breast reconstruction, aiming to establish consensus among the participants. Several areas of agreement were identified, including the goals of postmastectomy reconstruction, specifically the creation of a soft and sensitive breast symmetrical in shape and size to the unaffected breast via the safest procedure possible. The importance of preserving the maximum amount of native breast skin envelope through skin- and nipple-sparing approaches was emphasised. Finally, a consensus was reached that PMRT should no longer be considered a contraindication to immediate autologous breast reconstruction.

Role of Brachytherapy in the Postoperative Management of Endometrial Cancer: Decision-Making Analysis among Experienced European Radiation Oncologists.

BACKGROUND: There are various society-specific guidelines addressing adjuvant brachytherapy (BT) after surgery for endometrial cancer (EC). However, these recommendations are not uniform. Against this background, clinicians need to make decisions despite gaps between best scientific evidence and clinical practice. We explored factors influencing decision-making for adjuvant BT in clinical routine among experienced European radiation oncologists in the field of gynaecological radiotherapy (RT). We also investigated the dose and technique of BT. METHODS: Nineteen European experts for gynaecological BT selected by the Groupe Européen de Curiethérapie and the European Society for Radiotherapy & Oncology provided their decision criteria and technique for postoperative RT in EC. The decision criteria were captured and converted into decision trees, and consensus and dissent were evaluated based on the objective consensus methodology. RESULTS: The decision criteria used by the experts were tumour extension, grading, nodal status, lymphovascular invasion, and cervical stroma/vaginal invasion (yes/no). No expert recommended adjuvant BT for pT1a G1-2 EC without substantial LVSI. Eighty-four percent of experts recommended BT for pT1a G3 EC without substantial LVSI. Up to 74% of experts used adjuvant BT for pT1b LVSI-negative and pT2 G1-2 LVSI-negative disease. For 74-84% of experts, EBRT + BT was the treatment of choice for nodal-positive pT2 disease and for pT3 EC with cervical/vaginal invasion. For all other tumour stages, there was no clear consensus for adjuvant treatment. Four experts already used molecular markers for decision-making. Sixty-five percent of experts recommended fractionation regimens of 3 × 7 Gy or 4 × 5 Gy for BT as monotherapy and 2 × 5 Gy for combination with EBRT. The most commonly used applicator for BT was a vaginal cylinder; 82% recommended image-guided BT. CONCLUSIONS: There was a clear trend towards adjuvant BT for stage IA G3, stage IB, and stage II G1-2 LVSI-negative EC. Likewise, there was a non-uniform pattern for BT dose prescription but a clear trend towards 3D image-based BT. Finally, molecular characteristics were already used in daily decision-making by some experts under the pretext that upcoming trials will bring more clarity to this topic.

[Preimplantation genetic testing].

Preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) for known familial monogenetic disease (PGT-M) or structural chromosomal rearrangements (PGT-SR) has evolved into a well-established alternative to prenatal diagnosis. PGT significantly reduces the risk of a pregnancy with an affected foetus. Screening for aneuploidy (PGT-A) used as an add-on to standard IVF treatment of infertile couples is widely used internationally, although its benefit is highly debated. PGT combines genetic counselling and testing with assisted reproductive technology including ovarian stimulation, egg retrieval, and embryo biopsy, as discussed in this review.

[Cosmetic results after breast conserving carcinoma treatment in patients with intramammarian seromas]. / Kosmetische Ergebnisse nach brusterhaltender, radiologischer Mammakarzinomtherapie bei patientinnen mit intramammären seromen.

INTRODUCTION: There were 373 patients irradiated after breast conserving carcinoma treatment. A planning computed tomography revealed in 97 of these patients seromas and tissue defects exceeding 2cm in diameter. The cosmetic results in those patients and the impact of seromas herein had to be evaluated. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Mean age was 59 years. A quadrant resection was performed in 17.5 percent of the patients, a segmental resection in 27.8 percent and a tumour excision in 54.6 percent. Radiation therapy was applied with the Linear accelerator and 6 MeV photons up to a total dose in the residual breast of 50 Gy followed by a boost dose to the former tumour bed of 10 Gy. A distinct evaluation and documentation of therapy related side effects and the resulting cosmesis was done in 51 patients. RESULTS: In all the examined seroma patients there were moderate acute skin reactions grade 1 to 3. As late effects in 82.3 percent scar indurations were noticed. At the skin 51 percent showed enhanced pigmentation, 68.6 percent atrophia and only 11 percent teleangiectasia. Subcutaneous fibrosis occurred in 56,9 percent of the patients, 78.4 percent of the women had breast asymmetries. In 41.2 percent there were a lymphedema subcutaneously, in 72.5 percent impaired sensibility. The overall cosmetic result documented with a 5 point score was "very good" (score 1) in 19.6 percent and "good" (score 2) in 33.3 percent, 37.3 percent were "satisfactory" (score 3) and 9.8 percent "bad" (score 4) respectively. No "very bad" results (score 5) were seen. CONCLUSIONS: The cosmetic results in the examined group of seroma and hematoma patients were inferior to those reported in the literature. We conclude that postoperative seroma and hematoma have an adverse effect on the resulting cosmesis and that their frequency and extent have to be reduced in future by the responsible surgeons.

ESTRO-ACROP guideline: Interstitial multi-catheter breast brachytherapy as Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation alone or as boost - GEC-ESTRO Breast Cancer Working Group practical recommendations.

PURPOSE: This consensus statement from the Breast Cancer Working Group of Groupe Européen de Curiethérapie of European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (GEC-ESTRO) aims at generating practical guidelines for multi-catheter image-guided brachytherapy in the conservative management of breast cancer patients used for either Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation (APBI) or for a breast boost. METHODS: Recent advances in techniques of multi-catheter brachytherapy were summarized and all the relevant literature was reviewed by a panel of experts. Panel members of the GEC-ESTRO experts participated in a series of conferences, supplemented their clinical experience, were surveyed to determine their current practices and patterns, performed a literature review, and formulated recommendations for implementing APBI with multi-catheter brachytherapy, focusing on treatment planning issues, catheter insertion, dosimetry and quality assurance. This document was reviewed and approved by the full panel, the GEC-ESTRO executive board and by the ACROP (Advisory Committee on Radiation Oncology Practice). RESULTS: Three-dimensional (3D) treatment planning, catheter insertion techniques, dosimetry and methods of quality assurance for APBI and boost with multi-catheter image-guided brachytherapy after breast conserving surgery are described. Detailed recommendations for daily practice including dose constraints are given. CONCLUSIONS: Recent standards and guidelines for the use of APBI with different multi-catheter image-guided brachytherapy techniques have been defined. Different techniques are used to insert the catheters. Guidelines are mandatory to assure precise catheter insertion for coverage of the target volume and to guarantee high-quality dosimetry. The same rules apply for brachytherapy based boost irradiation for breast cancer after whole breast irradiation as well as for partial breast re-irradiation.

Highly conformal combined radiotherapy with cisplatin and gemcitabine for treatment of loco-regionally advanced cervical cancer - a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Cisplatin and gemcitabine combined with conventional radiation therapy in the treatment of cervical cancer patients results in a favorable outcome but with excess toxicity. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the toxicity profile of dual chemotherapy and highly conformal external beam radiotherapy with image guided adaptive brachytherapy. METHODS: Seventeen patients with cervical carcinoma FIGO stage IB2-IIIB were treated with curative intent between 2011 and 2015. A total dose of 50.4 Gy was prescribed to the elective pelvic nodal volume. Patients with 18FDG-PET/CT positive lymph nodes (n = 15; 83.3%) received an additional boost to a total dose of 62 Gy. Chemotherapy prescription goals were: concomitant during 5 weeks of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) 40 mg/m2 cisplatin and 125 mg/m2 gemcitabine, followed by adjuvant chemotherapy from week 10 (2 cycles 50 mg/m2 cisplatin and 1000 mg/m2 gemcitabine). EBRT was followed by 3-4 fractions (6 Gy per fraction) of intrauterine image guided adaptive brachytherapy. Toxicities were graded according to the common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE v 4.0). RESULTS: One (6%) patient developed acute grade 3 diarrhea. We did not record any other acute or late gastrointestinal or urogenital toxicity higher that grade 3. Most common acute hematological toxicity was anemia grade 2 recorded in 10 (59%) patients. There was only one case of grade 3 neutropenia (6%). The number of patients that received the complete chemotherapy regimen was gradually declining during the course of therapy. From week 2 to 5, gemcitabine was omitted in 4 (24%),7 (41%), 8 (47%), and 12 (71%) patients respectively, similarly, cisplatin was omitted in 2 (12%),3 (18%),1 (6%) and 7 (41%) patients respectively. Adjuvant chemotherapy was omitted in 8 patients (47%). During a median follow-up time of 20 months (5 to 63 months) 6 (35%) patients developed disease relapse with 5 (29%) of them in the form of systemic disease. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to previous findings cisplatin and gemcitabine in combination with highly conformal radiation therapy seems to have an acceptable toxicity profile. Further studies are needed to determine the optimal dosage of the proposed therapy concept.

Current status and perspectives of interventional clinical trials for glioblastoma - analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov.

The records of 208.777 (100%) clinical trials registered at ClinicalTrials.gov were downloaded on the 19th of February 2016. Phase II and III trials including patients with glioblastoma were selected for further classification and analysis. Based on the disease settings, trials were classified into three groups: newly diagnosed glioblastoma, recurrent disease and trials with no differentiation according to disease setting. Furthermore, we categorized trials according to the experimental interventions, the primary sponsor, the source of financial support and trial design elements. Trends were evaluated using the autoregressive integrated moving average model. Two hundred sixteen (0.1%) trials were selected for further analysis. Academic centers (investigator initiated trials) were recorded as primary sponsors in 56.9% of trials, followed by industry 25.9%. Industry was the leading source of monetary support for the selected trials in 44.4%, followed by 25% of trials with primarily academic financial support. The number of newly initiated trials between 2005 and 2015 shows a positive trend, mainly through an increase in phase II trials, whereas phase III trials show a negative trend. The vast majority of trials evaluate forms of different systemic treatments (91.2%). In total, one hundred different molecular entities or biologicals were identified. Of those, 60% were involving drugs specifically designed for central nervous system malignancies. Trials that specifically address radiotherapy, surgery, imaging and other therapeutic or diagnostic methods appear to be rare. Current research in glioblastoma is mainly driven or sponsored by industry, academic medical oncologists and neuro-oncologists, with the majority of trials evaluating forms of systemic therapies. Few trials reach phase III. Imaging, radiation therapy and surgical procedures are underrepresented in current trials portfolios. Optimization in research portfolio for glioblastoma is needed.

Portfolio of prospective clinical trials including brachytherapy: an analysis of the ClinicalTrials.gov database.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the current status of prospective interventional clinical trials that includes brachytherapy (BT) procedures. METHODS: The records of 175,538 (100 %) clinical trials registered at ClinicalTrials.gov were downloaded on September 2014 and a database was established. Trials using BT as an intervention were identified for further analyses. The selected trials were manually categorized according to indication(s), BT source, applied dose rate, primary sponsor type, location, protocol initiator and funding source. We analyzed trials across 8 available trial protocol elements registered within the database. RESULTS: In total 245 clinical trials were identified, 147 with BT as primary investigated treatment modality and 98 that included BT as an optional treatment component or as part of the standard treatment. Academic centers were the most frequent protocol initiators in trials where BT was the primary investigational treatment modality (p < 0.01). High dose rate (HDR) BT was the most frequently investigated type of BT dose rate (46.3 %) followed by low dose rate (LDR) (42.0 %). Prostate was the most frequently investigated tumor entity in trials with BT as the primary treatment modality (40.1 %) followed by breast cancer (17.0 %). BT was rarely the primary investigated treatment modality for cervical cancer (6.8 %). CONCLUSION: Most clinical trials using BT are predominantly in early phases, investigator-initiated and with low accrual numbers. Current investigational activities that include BT mainly focus on prostate and breast cancers. Important questions concerning the optimal usage of BT will not be answered in the near future.

GEC-ESTRO multicenter phase 3-trial: Accelerated partial breast irradiation with interstitial multicatheter brachytherapy versus external beam whole breast irradiation: Early toxicity and patient compliance.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To compare early side effects and patient compliance of accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) with multicatheter brachytherapy to external beam whole breast irradiation (WBI) in a low-risk group of patients with breast cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Between April 2004 and July 2009, 1328 patients with UICC stage 0-IIA breast cancer were randomized to receive WBI with 50Gy and a boost of 10Gy or APBI with either 32.0Gy/8 fractions, or 30.1Gy/7 fractions (HDR-brachytherapy), or 50Gy/0.60-0.80Gy per pulse (PDR-brachytherapy). This report focuses on early side-effects and patient compliance observed in 1186 analyzable patients. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00402519. RESULTS: Patient compliance was excellent in both arms. Both WBI and APBI were well tolerated with moderate early side-effects. No grade 4 toxicity had been observed. Grade 3 side effects were exclusively seen for early skin toxicity (radiation dermatitis) with 7% vs. 0.2% (p<0.0001), and breast infection with 0% vs. 0.2% (p=n.s.) for patients treated with WBI and APBI. The incidence of grades 1-2 early side effects for WBI and APBI was 86% vs. 21% (p<0.0001) for skin toxicity, 2% vs. 20% (p<0.0001) for mild hematoma, and 2% vs. 5% (p=0.01) for mild breast infection rates, respectively. No differences had been found regarding grades 1-2 early breast pain (26% vs. 29%, p=0.23). CONCLUSIONS: APBI with interstitial multicatheter brachytherapy was tolerated very well and dramatically reduced early skin toxicity in comparison to standard WBI.

Dose escalated intensity modulated radiotherapy in the treatment of cervical cancer.

PURPOSE: Standard dose of external beam radiotherapy seems to be insufficient for satisfactory control of loco-regionally advanced cervical cancer. Aim of our study is to evaluate the outcome as well as early and chronic toxicities in patients with loco-regionally advanced cervical cancer, treated with dose escalated intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) combined with cisplatin chemotherapy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty-nine patients with cervical carcinoma FIGO stage IB2 - IVA were treated with curative intent between 2006 and 2010. The dose of 50.4 Gy was prescribed to the elective pelvic nodal volume. Primary tumors < 4 cm in diameter (n = 6; 15.4 %) received an external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) boost of 5.4 Gy, primary tumors > 4 cm in diameter (n = 33; 84.6 %) received an EBRT boost of 9 Gy. Patients with positive lymph nodes detected with (18)FDG-PET/CT (n = 22; 56.4 %) received a boost to a total dose of 59.4 - 64.8 Gy. The para-aortic region was included in the radiation volume in 8 (20.5 %) patients and in 5 (12.8 %) patients the para-aortic macroscopic lymph nodes received an EBRT boost. IMRT was followed with a 3D planned high dose rate intrauterine brachytherapy given to 36 (92.3 %) patients with a total dose ranging between 15-18 Gy in three fractions (single fraction: 4-6.5 Gy). Patients without contraindications (n = 31/79.5 %) received concomitantly a cisplatin-based chemotherapy (40 mg/kg) weekly. Toxicities were graded according to the common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE v 4.0). RESULTS: Mean overall survival for the entire cohort was 61.1 months (±3.5 months). Mean disease free survival was 47.2 months (±4.9 months) and loco-regional disease free survival was 55.2 months (±4.4 months). 65 % of patients developed radiotherapy associated acute toxicities grade 1, ca. 30 % developed toxicities grade 2 and just two (5.2 %) patients developed grade 3 toxicities, one acute diarrhea and one acute cystitis. 16 % of patients had chronic toxicities grade 1, 9 % grade 2 and one patient (2.6 %) toxicities grade 3 in the form of vaginal dryness. CONCLUSION: Dose escalated IMRT appears to have a satisfactory outcome with regards to mean overall survival, disease free and loco-regional disease free survival, whereas the treatment-related toxicities remain reasonably low.

Recommendations from GEC ESTRO Breast Cancer Working Group (I): Target definition and target delineation for accelerated or boost Partial Breast Irradiation using multicatheter interstitial brachytherapy after breast conserving closed cavity surgery.

OBJECTIVE: The aim was to develop a delineation guideline for target definition for APBI or boost by consensus of the Breast Working Group of GEC-ESTRO. PROPOSED RECOMMENDATIONS: Appropriate delineation of CTV (PTV) with low inter- and intra-observer variability in clinical practice is complex and needs various steps as: (1) Detailed knowledge of primary surgical procedure, of all details of pathology, as well as of preoperative imaging. (2) Definition of tumour localization before breast conserving surgery inside the breast and translation of this information in the postoperative CT imaging data set. (3) Calculation of the size of total safety margins. The size should be at least 2 cm. (4) Definition of the target. (5) Delineation of the target according to defined rules. CONCLUSION: Providing guidelines based on the consensus of a group of experts should make it possible to achieve a reproducible and consistent definition of CTV (PTV) for Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation (APBI) or boost irradiation after breast conserving closed cavity surgery, and helps to define it after selected cases of oncoplastic surgery.

Computed tomography after breast conserving carcinoma treatment: recognition of surgically induced lesions prior to radiation therapy.

To introduce computed tomography for the detection of post-surgical intramammarian lesions, exposing risk factors for subsequent radiation therapy. 104 patients with breast cancer were treated. They previously underwent breast conserving carcinoma treatment and were subsequently irradiated. The techniques were planned individually based on a CTdata set. All the acquired slices were evaluated with regard to seromas, larger tissue defects or organized hematomas. Seromas and tissue defects are raising the rate of byeffects during radiation therapy and deteriorating the cosmetic results. Pretherapeutical CT allows the puncture of hidden seromas and the individual adaptation of the irradiation technique in order to avoid overdosage due to tissue defects. Therefore CT is valuable for all patients prior to radiation therapy.