Conventional versus hypofractionated postmastectomy proton radiotherapy in the USA (MC1631): a randomised phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Proton therapy is under investigation in breast cancer as a strategy to reduce radiation exposure to the heart and lungs. So far, studies investigating proton postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) have used conventional fractionation over 25-28 days, but whether hypofractionated proton PMRT is feasible is unclear. We aimed to compare conventional fractionation and hypofractionation in patients with indications for PMRT, including those with immediate breast reconstruction. METHODS: We did a randomised phase 2 trial (MC1631) at Mayo Clinic in Rochester (MN, USA) and Mayo Clinic in Arizona (Phoenix, AZ, USA) comparing conventional fractionated (50 Gy in 25 fractions of 2 Gy [relative biological effectiveness of 1·1]) and hypofractionated (40·05 Gy in 15 fractions of 2·67 Gy [relative biological effectiveness of 1·1]) proton PMRT. All patients were treated with pencil-beam scanning. Eligibility criteria included age 18 years or older, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, and breast cancer resected by mastectomy with or without immediate reconstruction with indications for PMRT. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either conventional fractionation or hypofractionation, with presence of immediate reconstruction (yes vs no) as a stratification factor, using a biased-coin minimisation algorithm. Any patient who received at least one fraction of protocol treatment was evaluable for the primary endpoint and safety analyses. The primary endpoint was 24-month complication rate from the date of first radiotherapy, defined as grade 3 or worse adverse events occurring from 90 days after last radiotherapy or unplanned surgical interventions in patients with immediate reconstruction. The inferiority of hypofractionation would not be ruled out if the upper bound of the one-sided 95% CI for the difference in 24-month complication rate between the two groups was greater than 10%. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02783690, and is closed to accrual. FINDINGS: Between June 2, 2016, and Aug 23, 2018, 88 patients were randomly assigned (44 to each group), of whom 82 received protocol treatment (41 in the conventional fractionation group and 41 in the hypofractionation group; median age of 52 years [IQR 44-64], 79 [96%] patients were White, two [2%] were Black or African American, one [1%] was Asian, and 79 [96%] were not of Hispanic ethnicity). As of data cutoff (Jan 30, 2023), the median follow-up was 39·3 months (IQR 37·5-61·2). The median mean heart dose was 0·54 Gy (IQR 0·30-0·72) for the conventional fractionation group and 0·49 Gy (0·25-0·64) for the hypofractionation group. Within 24 months of first radiotherapy, 14 protocol-defined complications occurred in six (15%) patients in the conventional fractionation group and in eight (20%) patients in the hypofractionation group (absolute difference 4·9% [one-sided 95% CI 18·5], p=0·27). The complications in the conventionally fractionated group were contracture (five [12%] of 41 patients]) and fat necrosis (one [2%] patient) requiring surgical intervention. All eight protocol-defined complications in the hypofractionation group were due to infections, three of which were acute infections that required surgical intervention, and five were late infections, four of which required surgical intervention. All 14 complications were in patients with immediate expander or implant-based reconstruction. INTERPRETATION: After a median follow-up of 39·3 months, non-inferiority of the hypofractionation group could not be established. However, given similar tolerability, hypofractionated proton PMRT appears to be worthy of further study in patients with and without immediate reconstruction. FUNDING: The Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, the Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA, and the US National Cancer Institute.

Unplanned implant removal in locally advanced breast cancer.

Study conducted to determine frequency and timing of unplanned breast implant removal after mastectomy, reconstruction, and postmastectomy radiation (PMRT). From 2010-2017, 52 patients underwent mastectomy, reconstruction, and PMRT. With median follow-up of 3.1 years, 23 patients (44%) experienced implant removal. Implant removal occurred in 9 (17%) patients before starting PMRT and 14 (27%) patients after starting PMRT. Implant removal rates were similar for hypofractionated PMRT compared with standard fractionation and for proton compared with photon PMRT. Implant removal is common for women undergoing mastectomy and reconstruction followed by PMRT. The risk is clinically significant even before starting radiation.

Acute toxicities after proton beam therapy following breast-conserving surgery for breast cancer: Multi-institutional prospective PCG registry analysis.

We investigated adverse events (AEs) and clinical outcomes for proton beam therapy (PBT) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for breast cancer. From 2012 to 2016, 82 patients received PBT in the prospective multi-institutional Proton Collaborative Group registry. AEs were recorded prospectively at each institution. Median follow-up was 8.1 months. Median dose was 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions. Most patients received a lumpectomy bed boost (90%) and regional nodal irradiation (RNI)(83%). Six patients (7.3%) experienced grade 3 AEs (5 with dermatitis, 5 with breast pain). Body mass index (BMI) was associated with grade 3 dermatitis (P = .015). Fifty-eight patients (70.7%) experienced grade ≥2 dermatitis. PBT including RNI after BCS is well-tolerated. Elevated BMI is associated with grade 3 dermatitis.

Proton beam therapy reirradiation for breast cancer: Multi-institutional prospective PCG registry analysis.

To investigate adverse events (AEs, CTCAE v4.0) and clinical outcomes for proton beam therapy (PBT) reirradiation (reRT) for breast cancer. From 2011 to 2016, 50 patients received PBT reRT for breast cancer in the prospective Proton Collaborative Group (PCG) registry. Acute AEs occurred within 180 days from start of reRT. Late AEs began or persisted beyond 180 days. Fisher's exact and Mann-Whitney rank-sum tests were utilized. Kaplan-Meier methods were used to estimate overall survival (OS) and local recurrence-free survival (LFRS). Median follow-up was 12.7 months (0-41.8). Median prior RT dose was 60 Gy (10-96.7). Median reRT dose was 55.1 Gy (45.1-76.3). Median cumulative dose was 110.6 Gy (70.6-156.8). Median interval between RT courses was 103.8 months (5.5-430.8). ReRT included regional nodes in 84% (66% internal mammary node [IMN]). Surgery included the following: 44% mastectomy, 22% wide local excision, 6% lumpectomy, 2% reduction mammoplasty, and 26% no surgery. Grade 3 AEs were experienced by 16% of patients (10% acute, 8% late) and were associated with body mass index (BMI) > 30 kg/m2 (P = 0.04), bilateral recurrence (P = 0.02), and bilateral reRT (P = 0.004). All grade 3 AEs occurred in patients receiving IMN reRT (P = 0.08). At 1 year, LRFS was 93%, and OS was 97%. Patients with gross disease at time of PBT trended toward worse 1-year LRFS (100% without vs. 84% with, P = 0.06). PBT reRT is well tolerated with favorable local control. BMI > 30, bilateral disease, and IMN reRT were associated with grade 3 AEs. Toxicity was acceptable despite median cumulative dose > 110 Gy.

Testing and Validation of a Custom Retrained Large Language Model for the Supportive Care of HN Patients with External Knowledge Base.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to develop a retrained large language model (LLM) tailored to the needs of HN cancer patients treated with radiotherapy, with emphasis on symptom management and survivorship care. METHODS: A comprehensive external database was curated for training ChatGPT-4, integrating expert-identified consensus guidelines on supportive care for HN patients and correspondences from physicians and nurses within our institution's electronic medical records for 90 HN patients. The performance of our model was evaluated using 20 patient post-treatment inquiries that were then assessed by three Board certified radiation oncologists (RadOncs). The rating of the model was assessed on a scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) based on accuracy, clarity of response, completeness s, and relevance. RESULTS: The average scores for the 20 tested questions were 4.25 for accuracy, 4.35 for clarity, 4.22 for completeness, and 4.32 for relevance, on a 5-point scale. Overall, 91.67% (220 out of 240) of assessments received scores of 3 or higher, and 83.33% (200 out of 240) received scores of 4 or higher. CONCLUSION: The custom-trained model demonstrates high accuracy in providing support to HN patients offering evidence-based information and guidance on their symptom management and survivorship care.

Impact of Relative Biologic Effectiveness for Proton Therapy for Head and Neck and Skull-Base Tumors: A Technical and Clinical Review.

Proton therapy has emerged as a crucial tool in the treatment of head and neck and skull-base cancers, offering advantages over photon therapy in terms of decreasing integral dose and reducing acute and late toxicities, such as dysgeusia, feeding tube dependence, xerostomia, secondary malignancies, and neurocognitive dysfunction. Despite its benefits in dose distribution and biological effectiveness, the application of proton therapy is challenged by uncertainties in its relative biological effectiveness (RBE). Overcoming the challenges related to RBE is key to fully realizing proton therapy's potential, which extends beyond its physical dosimetric properties when compared with photon-based therapies. In this paper, we discuss the clinical significance of RBE within treatment volumes and adjacent serial organs at risk in the management of head and neck and skull-base tumors. We review proton RBE uncertainties and its modeling and explore clinical outcomes. Additionally, we highlight technological advancements and innovations in plan optimization and treatment delivery, including linear energy transfer/RBE optimizations and the development of spot-scanning proton arc therapy. These advancements show promise in harnessing the full capabilities of proton therapy from an academic standpoint, further technological innovations and clinical outcome studies, however, are needed for their integration into routine clinical practice.

Elective Irradiation of Retropharyngeal Lymph Nodes as an Indication for Adjuvant Radiation Therapy After Transoral Surgery for Tonsil Cancer.

Treatment of squamous cell carcinoma of the tonsil involves primary radiation therapy (RT) or surgical resection. Historically, if RT was the primary or adjuvant treatment modality, most of the bilateral retropharyngeal lymph nodes (RPLNs) were treated electively with a therapeutic dose for subclinical disease, regardless of whether radiographically pathologic lymph nodes were seen on initial diagnostic imaging. De-escalation strategies include the incorporation of transoral surgery with the goal to either eliminate or reduce the dose of adjuvant RT or chemotherapy. Transoral surgery does not include elective removal of the RPLNs, and no guideline or outcome paper recommends adjuvant RT specifically to electively treat RPLNs. In this Topic Discussion, we discuss pertinent literature and suggest management decisions. The management decisions discussed in this Topic Discussion pertain to only tonsillar primaries and not those of the soft palate or base of the tongue.

Stereotactic Body Proton Therapy Versus Conventionally Fractionated Proton Therapy for Early Prostate Cancer: A Randomized, Controlled, Phase 3 Trial.

PURPOSE: We aimed to determine if ultra-hypofractionated proton therapy delivered via stereotactic body proton therapy (SBPT) is non-inferior to conventionally fractionated proton therapy (CFPT) in patients with early prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was a multicenter, randomized, controlled, non-inferiority phase 3 trial that included patients with histologically confirmed low-risk prostate adenocarcinoma defined by Gleason score grouping 1, PSA <10 ng/mL, and clinical stage T1-2a N0 M0 according to AJCC 7th ed. Eligible participants were randomly assigned initially at a 1:1 ratio and later at a 2:1 ratio to SBPT (38 Gy in 5 fractions) or CFPT (79.2 Gy in 44 fractions). The primary endpoint was freedom from failure (FFF) at 2 years from the date of randomization. Non-inferiority for FFF was determined based on one-sided confidence intervals. Toxicities were compared at different time points using Fisher's Exact test. Health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) was analyzed at different time points using a mixed-effects linear model. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01230866, and is closed to accrual. RESULTS: Between December 10, 2010, and September 29, 2020, 144 patients were enrolled and 135 were randomly assigned (90 to the SBPT group and 45 to the CFPT group). The median follow-up was 5 years (IQR 3.9-5.2). The 2-year FFF was 100% for both groups, with the one-sided 5-year risk difference in FFF between groups reported as 2.63% (90% CI: -1.70%-6.96%), favoring the SBRT arm, thus fulfilling the pre-specified criteria for non-inferiority of SBPT compared to CFPT. Rates of gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) G2 and G3 toxicities did not differ significantly between groups but the the study was not powered to detect significant toxicity differences. Also, HRQoL metrics did not differ significantly between groups over the study median follow up. CONCLUSIONS: SBPT is non-inferior to CFPT regarding FFF, with similar long-term GU and GI toxicity rates and minimal impact in patient reported HRQoL over time.

Physician- and Patient-Reported Outcomes of the MC1635 Phase 3 Trial of Ultrahypofractionated Versus Moderately Hypofractionated Adjuvant Radiation Therapy After Breast-Conserving Surgery.

PURPOSE: Our aim was to report physician- and patient-reported outcomes of patients with localized breast cancer treated with moderate versus ultrahypofractionated whole breast irradiation (WBI) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between February 2018 and February 2020, patients with localized breast cancer (pT0-3 pN0-1 M0) were offered participation in a phase 3 randomized clinical trial assessing adjuvant moderate hypofractionation (MHF) to 40 Gy in 15 fractions versus ultrahypofractionation (UHF) to 25 Gy in 5 fractions after BCS, with an optional simultaneously integrated boost. Toxicities, cosmesis, and quality of life were assessed at baseline, end of treatment (EOT), and 3 months, 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years from irradiation using validated metric tools. RESULTS: One hundred seven patients were randomized to MHF (n = 54) or UHF (n = 53) adjuvant WBI. The median follow-up was 42.8 months. Grade 2 radiation dermatitis was experienced by 4 patients (7.4%) in the MHF arm and 2 patients (3.7%) in the UHF arm at EOT (P = .726). No grade 3 or higher toxicities were observed. Deterioration of cosmesis by physician assessment was observed in 2 (6.7%) patients treated in the UHF arm and 1 (1.9%) patient treated in the MHF arm at EOT (P = .534), whereas at 3 months, only 1 (1.8%) patient treated in the MHF arm demonstrated deterioration of cosmesis (P = .315). At EOT, 91% and 94% of patients reported excellent/good cosmesis among those treated with MHF and UHF regimens, respectively (P = .550). At 3 months, more patients within the MHF arm reported excellent/good cosmesis compared with those in the UHF arm (100% vs 91%; P = .030). However, the difference in patient-reported cosmesis disappeared at the 1-, 2-, and 3-year time points. CONCLUSIONS: UHF WBI showed similar treatment-related late toxicities and similar provider-scored cosmesis compared with MHF radiation in patients treated adjuvantly after BCS.

Mean Oral Cavity Organ-at-Risk Dose Predicts Opioid Use and Hospitalization during Radiotherapy for Patients with Head and Neck Tumors.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 75% of all head and neck cancer patients are treated with radiotherapy (RT). RT to the oral cavity results in acute and late adverse events which can be severe and detrimental to a patient's quality of life and function. The purpose of this study was to explore associations between RT dose to a defined oral cavity organ-at-risk (OAR) avoidance structure, provider- and patient-reported outcomes (PROs), opioid use, and hospitalization. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively obtained outcomes using multivariable modeling. The study included 196 patients treated with RT involving the oral cavity for a head and neck tumor. A defined oral cavity OAR avoidance structure was used in all patients for RT treatment planning. Validated PROs were collected prospectively. Opioid use and hospitalization were abstracted electronically from medical records. RESULTS: Multivariable modeling revealed the mean dose to the oral cavity OAR was significantly associated with opioid use (p = 0.0082) and hospitalization (p = 0.0356) during and within 30 days of completing RT. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study may be valuable in RT treatment planning for patients with tumors of the head and neck region to reduce the need for opioid use and hospitalization during treatment.

Evaluating large language models on a highly-specialized topic, radiation oncology physics.

Purpose: We present the first study to investigate Large Language Models (LLMs) in answering radiation oncology physics questions. Because popular exams like AP Physics, LSAT, and GRE have large test-taker populations and ample test preparation resources in circulation, they may not allow for accurately assessing the true potential of LLMs. This paper proposes evaluating LLMs on a highly-specialized topic, radiation oncology physics, which may be more pertinent to scientific and medical communities in addition to being a valuable benchmark of LLMs. Methods: We developed an exam consisting of 100 radiation oncology physics questions based on our expertise. Four LLMs, ChatGPT (GPT-3.5), ChatGPT (GPT-4), Bard (LaMDA), and BLOOMZ, were evaluated against medical physicists and non-experts. The performance of ChatGPT (GPT-4) was further explored by being asked to explain first, then answer. The deductive reasoning capability of ChatGPT (GPT-4) was evaluated using a novel approach (substituting the correct answer with "None of the above choices is the correct answer."). A majority vote analysis was used to approximate how well each group could score when working together. Results: ChatGPT GPT-4 outperformed all other LLMs and medical physicists, on average, with improved accuracy when prompted to explain before answering. ChatGPT (GPT-3.5 and GPT-4) showed a high level of consistency in its answer choices across a number of trials, whether correct or incorrect, a characteristic that was not observed in the human test groups or Bard (LaMDA). In evaluating deductive reasoning ability, ChatGPT (GPT-4) demonstrated surprising accuracy, suggesting the potential presence of an emergent ability. Finally, although ChatGPT (GPT-4) performed well overall, its intrinsic properties did not allow for further improvement when scoring based on a majority vote across trials. In contrast, a team of medical physicists were able to greatly outperform ChatGPT (GPT-4) using a majority vote. Conclusion: This study suggests a great potential for LLMs to work alongside radiation oncology experts as highly knowledgeable assistants.

Pilot/Phase II Trial of Hypofractionated Radiation Therapy to the Whole Breast Alone Before Breast Conserving Surgery.

Purpose: Our purpose was to report the results of a phase II trial of patients with breast cancer treated with hypofractionated whole breast radiation therapy (RT) before breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Methods and materials: Between 2019 and 2020, patients with cT0-T2, N0, M0 breast cancer were enrolled. Patients were treated with hypofractionated whole breast RT, 25 Gy in 5 fractions, 4 to 8 weeks before BCS. Pathologic assessment was performed using the residual cancer burden (RCB). Toxicities were assessed according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 4). Quality of life was assessed with Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, The Breast Cancer Treatment Outcome Scale, Linear Analogue Self-Assessment, and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System. Results: Twenty-two patients were enrolled. Median follow-up was 7.6 months (range, 0.2-16.8). Seven (32%) and 2 (9%) patients experienced grade 2+ or 3 toxicities, respectively. Overall quality of life Linear Analogue Self-Assessment and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System did not change significantly from baseline (P = .21 and P = .72, respectively). There was no clinically significant change (≥1 point) in any of The Breast Cancer Treatment Outcome Scale domains. Only 1 (5%) patient experienced a clinical deterioration that corresponded to a "fair" outcome on the Harvard Cosmesis Scale. At pathologic evaluation, 14 (64%) patients had RCB-0 or RCB-I, including 3 (14%) patients with a pathologic complete response (RCB-0). Eight patients (36%) had RCB-II. No local or distant recurrences have been observed. Conclusions: Extremely hypofractionated whole breast RT before BCS is a feasible approach. There were low rates of toxicities and good cosmesis. Further investigation into this approach with RT before BCS is warranted.

Adenoid cystic carcinoma of the head and neck: Patterns of recurrence and implications for intensity-modulated radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: We seek to inform radiotherapy (RT) delivery for adenoid cystic carcinoma of the head and neck (ACC) by evaluating RT techniques and recurrence patterns. METHODS: We identified patients with ACC treated with curative-intent RT from 2005 to 2021. Imaging was reviewed to determine local recurrence (LR). RESULTS: Ninety-one patients were included. The 5-year LR risk was 12.2% (6.6-22.7). One patient each experienced a marginal and out-of-field recurrence. Patients receiving >60 Gy postoperatively had a 5-year LR risk of 0% compared to 10.7% (4.2-27.2) with ≤60 Gy. Those receiving 70 and <70 Gy definitively had a 5-year LR risk of 15.2% (2.5-91.6) and 33.3% (6.7-100.0), respectively. No patients had regional nodal failure. CONCLUSIONS: Modern, conformal RT for ACC results in low rates of LR. Doses >60 and 70 Gy may improve control in the postoperative and definitive settings, respectively. Elective nodal treatment can be omitted in well-selected patients.

Dose delivery reproducibility for PBS proton treatment of breast cancer patients with and without mask immobilization.

BACKGROUND: Setup reproducibility of the tissue in the proton beam path is critical in maintaining the planned clinical target volume (CTV) dose coverage and sparing the organs at risk (OAR). In this study, we retrospectively evaluated radiation therapy dose reproducibility for proton pencil beam scanning (PBS) treatment of breast cancer patients with and without mask immobilization. METHODS: Ninety-four patients treated between January 2019 and September 2022 with at least one verification CT scan (V-CT) in treatment position were included for this study. All patients were set up with arms up using the Orfit AIO patient positioning system, with (69 patients) or without (25 patients) mask immobilization in chin, neck, shoulder, upper arm, and chest areas. Two to three enface or near enface single field uniform dose PBS beams were optimized using a commercial treatment planning system. Prescription doses were 25 to 60 GyRBE in 5 to 45 fractions. Treatment plan doses re-calculated on V-CTs were compared to the corresponding planned doses. Cumulative doses were also calculated for patients with at least 3 V-CTs by deform and weighted sum doses from V-CTs to corresponding P-CTs. CTV D95%, ipsilateral-lung V40%, esophagus D0.01cc, and heart mean dose were evaluated and reported as percentages of prescription doses. Differences were large dose deteriorations (LDD) if: (1) CTV (V-CT/cumulative D95%) - (Planned D95%) < - 5%; or (2) Ipsilateral-lung (V-CT/cumulative V40%) - (Planned V40%) > 5%; or (3) Esophagus (V-CT/cumulative D0.01cc) - (Planned D0.01cc) > 10%; or (4) Heart (V-CT/cumulative mean) - (Planned mean) > 1.5%. RESULTS: On average, V-CT/cumulative and planned CTV/OAR dose parameter differences were less than 2.2%/1.7% and 3.4%/3.7% for masked and maskless patients, respectively. The percentages of patients with at least one CTV or OAR V-CT/cumulative dose LDD were 20.3%/25.0% and 72.0%/54.0% for masked and maskless patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: On average, masked/maskless setups achieved delivered and planned CTV/OAR dose parameters agreed within 2.2%/3.7% for PBS treatment of breast cancer patients in this study. Maskless patients had higher rate of CTV/OAR LDDs compared to masked patients. Dosimetric differences large enough to raise clinical concerns in either group were able to be addressed with replannings.

A Prospective Study of Mucosal Sparing Radiation Therapy in Resected Oropharyngeal Cancer Patients.

PURPOSE: Our objective was to report the prospective results of mucosal sparing radiation therapy in human papillomavirus-related oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma. METHODS AND MATERIALS: From March 2016 through May 2019, patients were enrolled in this institutional review board-approved prospective cohort study at a multisite institution. Inclusion criteria included p16+ American Joint Committee on Cancer seventh edition pathologic T1 or T2, N1 to N3, and M0 oropharyngeal cancers. Proton therapy (PT) was delivered to at-risk nodal regions, excluding the primary mucosal site. Secondary to insurance denial for PT, intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) was allowed. European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Head and Neck Module and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System surveys (quality of life [QOL]) and modified barium swallowing impairment profiles (MBSImP) were obtained at baseline before radiation therapy, then 3 and 12 months after radiation therapy. Kaplan-Meier estimates were calculated for time-to-event clinical outcomes, and repeated measures mixed models were used to explore changes in QOL over time. A comparison of QOL and swallowing outcomes with standard-of-care treatment was analyzed. RESULTS: There were 61 evaluable patients with a median follow-up of 38 months (range, 10-64); 44 (72%) were treated with PT and 17 (28%) were treated with IMRT. The 2-year local control, locoregional control, distant metastasis-free survival, and overall survival were 98%, 97%, 98%, and 100%, respectively. There were 6 grade ≥3 events related to treatment. Two IMRT patients required percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement during treatment secondary to significant nausea due to dysgeusia. Patients noted significant QOL improvement over time in the pain, swallowing, speech, social eating, social contact, mouth opening, and use of pain medication domains (all P < .02). The MBSImP overall severity score as well as oral and pharyngeal impairment scores showed stability with no significant change over time. For the 44 patients treated with PT, the mean D95 to the primary target was 10.7 Gy (standard deviation = 12.5 Gy). CONCLUSIONS: Mucosal sparing radiation is well tolerated in select resected human papillomavirus-related oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma with a low risk of recurrence at the mucosal primary site, a low rate of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement, and few radiation-related grade ≥3 adverse events.

Clinicopathologic Factors and Their Association with Outcomes of Salivary Duct Carcinoma: A Multicenter Experience.

Purpose: This series reports long-term clinical outcomes of patients with salivary duct carcinoma (SDC), which is associated with a poor prognosis. Methods and Materials: Eighty-nine patients with SDC were treated with curative intent from February 5, 1971, through September 15, 2018. Kaplan-Meier and competing risk analyses were used to estimate locoregional control, distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), progression-free survival, and overall survival (OS). Cox regression analyses of disease and treatment characteristics were performed to discover predictors of locoregional control, DMFS, and OS. Results: Median follow-up was 44.1 months (range, 0.23-356.67). The median age at diagnosis was 66 years (interquartile range, 57-75). Curative surgery followed by adjuvant radiation therapy was performed in 73 patients (82%). Chemotherapy was delivered in 26 patients (29.2%). The 5-year local recurrence and distant metastasis rates were 27% and 44%, respectively, with death as a competing risk. Distant metastasis was associated with lymph node-positive disease (hazard ratio [HR], 3.16; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.38-7.23; P = .006), stage IV disease (HR, 4.78; 95% CI, 1.14-20.11; P = .033), perineural invasion (HR, 4.56; 95% CI, 1.74-11.97; P = .002), and positive margins (HR, 9.06; 95% CI, 3.88-21.14; P < .001). Median OS was 4.84 years (95% CI, 3.54-7.02). The 5-year OS was 42%. Reduced OS was associated with lymphovascular space invasion (HR, 3.49; 95% CI, 1.2-10.1; P = .022), perineural invasion (HR, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.06-3.97; P = .033), positive margins (HR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.3-5.6; P = .011), N2 disease (HR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.03-3.43; P = .04), and N3 disease (HR, 11.76; 95% CI, 3.19-43.3; P < .001). Conclusions: In this single-institution, multicenter retrospective study, the 5-year survival was 42% in patients with SDC. Lymphovascular space invasion, lymph node involvement, and higher staging at diagnosis were associated with lower DMFS and OS.

Patterns and distribution of regional nodal involvement and recurrence in a surgically treated oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma cohort at a tertiary center.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate and describe the patterns of regional metastases and recurrences after surgical treatment of oropharyngeal squamous cell cancer (OPSCC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective study of patients diagnosed with OPSCC from 2006 to 2021 at a tertiary referral center. Only patients treated with surgery including a neck dissection were included. Patients with unknown human papillomavirus (HPV) status, prior head and neck cancer, distant metastases, or synchronous head and neck cancer were excluded. RESULTS: A total of 928 patients were included. 89% were males, the average age was 58.6 years (range: 25.2-87.5), 874 (94%) were HPV(+), and 513 (55.3%) had a tonsil cancer. Among cN + patients, the most commonly involved levels at presentation were level II (85.2%), level III (33.3%), and level IV (9.4%). In cN0 patients, metastases were only observed in level II (16.2%) and level III (9.2%). Nodal recurrence occurred in 48 (5.2%) patients after a median time of 1.0 years (interquartile range: 0.6-2.0). Nodal recurrence incidence was similar in HPV(+) and HPV(-) patients (5.0% vs. 7.4%, p = 0.44). The most common levels for regional recurrence were ipsilateral level II (45.8%), contralateral level II (43.8%), and ipsilateral level V (25.0%). Multivariable analysis revealed that pN was a significant predictor for regional recurrence (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: There is no difference in the distribution of regional metastases and recurrences in HPV(+) and HPV(-) OPSCC patients. Our findings align with the established understanding that regional metastases predominantly manifest in the ipsilateral level II-IV at presentation. Moreover, the data support the clinical recommendation to restrict elective neck dissection in cN0 patients to ipsilateral levels IIa and III, excluding level IIb. Regional recurrence is significantly associated with pN status.

An comparison of acute toxicities and patient-reported outcomes between intensity-modulated proton therapy and volumetric-modulated arc therapy after ipsilateral radiation for head and neck cancers.

BACKGROUND: Intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) demonstrates superior dose distribution over volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for sparing organs-at-risk (OARs) in ipsilateral radiotherapy. To determine a clinical benefit, assessment of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) and physician-reported toxicities alongside a dosimetric analysis is needed. METHODS: Plans were analyzed for dosimetric differences. PROs were compared for patients undergoing ipsilateral curative-intent radiotherapy for tonsil and salivary gland cancers with VMAT or IMPT from 2015 to 2020. Physician-reported toxicities were compared. RESULTS: In 40 patients, IMPT was associated with decreased dose to multiple OARs and less deterioration in the following PROs: pain, swallowing function, dry mouth, sticky saliva, sensory change, cough, speech, feeling ill, and social eating. Physician-reported toxicities demonstrated less oral pain. CONCLUSION: IMPT is associated with decreased dose to OARs and less patient-reported acute deterioration in multiple head and neck domains. A strong consideration for IMPT in ipsilateral head and neck patients with cancer is warranted.

Empirical Relative Biological Effectiveness (RBE) for Mandible Osteoradionecrosis (ORN) in Head and Neck Cancer Patients Treated With Pencil-Beam-Scanning Proton Therapy (PBSPT): A Retrospective, Case-Matched Cohort Study.

Purpose: To retrospectively investigate empirical relative biological effectiveness (RBE) for mandible osteoradionecrosis (ORN) in head and neck (H&N) cancer patients treated with pencil-beam-scanning proton therapy (PBSPT). Methods: We included 1,266 H&N cancer patients, of which, 931 patients were treated with volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and 335 were treated with PBSPT. Among them, 26 VMAT and 9 PBSPT patients experienced mandible ORN (ORN group), while all others were included in the control group. To minimize the impact of the possible imbalance in clinical factors between VMAT and PBSPT patients in the dosimetric comparison between these two modalities and the resulting RBE quantification, we formed a 1:1 case-matched patient cohort (335 VMAT patients and 335 PBSPT patients including both the ORN and control groups) using the greedy nearest neighbor matching of propensity scores. Mandible dosimetric metrics were extracted from the case-matched patient cohort and statistically tested to evaluate the association with mandibular ORN to derive dose volume constraints (DVCs) for VMAT and PBSPT, respectively. We sought the equivalent constraint doses for VMAT so that the critical volumes of VMAT were equal to those of PBSPT at different physical doses. Empirical RBEs of PBSPT for ORN were obtained by calculating the ratio between the derived equivalent constraint doses and physical doses of PBSPT. Bootstrapping was further used to get the confidence intervals. Results: Clinical variables of age, gender, tumor stage, prescription dose, chemotherapy, hypertension or diabetes, dental extraction, smoking history, or current smoker were not statistically related to the incidence of ORN in the overall patient cohort. Smoking history was found to be significantly associated with the ORN incidence in PBSPT patients only. V40Gy[RBE], V50Gy[RBE], and V60Gy[RBE] were statistically different (p<0.05) between the ORN and control group for VMAT and PBSPT. Empirical RBEs of 1.58(95%CI: 1.34-1.64), 1.34(95%CI: 1.23-1.40), and 1.24(95%: 1.15-1.26) were obtained for proton dose at 40 Gy[RBE=1.1], 50 Gy[RBE=1.1] and 60 Gy[RBE=1.1], respectively. Conclusions: Our study suggested that RBEs were larger than 1.1 at moderate doses (between 40 and 60 Gy[RBE=1.1]) with high LET for mandible ORN. RBEs are underestimated in current clinical practice in PBSPT. The derived DVCs can be used for PBSPT plan evaluation and optimization to minimize the incidence rate of mandible ORN.