Treatment of COVID-19 pneumonia with low-dose radiotherapy plus standard of care versus standard of care alone in frail patients : The SEOR-GICOR IPACOVID comparative cohort trial.

PURPOSE: To assess the efficacy of lung low-dose radiotherapy (LD-RT) in the treatment of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ambispective study with two cohorts to compare treatment with standard of care (SoC) plus a single dose of 0.5 Gy to the whole thorax (experimental prospective cohort) with SoC alone (control retrospective cohort) for patients with COVID-19 pneumonia not candidates for admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) for mechanical ventilation. RESULTS: Fifty patients treated with LD-RT were compared with 50 matched controls. Mean age was 85 years in both groups. An increase in arterial oxygen partial pressure (PaO2)/fraction of inspired oxygen (PAFI) in the experimental LD-RT-treated group compared to the control group could not be found at 48 h after LD-RT, which was the primary endpoint of the study. However, PAFI values significantly improved after 1 month (473 vs. 302 mm Hg; p < 0.0001). Pulse oxymetric saturation/fraction of inspired oxygen (SAFI) values were also significantly higher in LD-RT-treated patients than in control patients at 1 week (405 vs. 334 mm Hg; p = 0.0157) and 1 month after LD-RT (462 vs. 326 mm Hg; p < 0.0001). All other timepoint measurements of the respiratory parameters were similar across groups. Patients in the experimental group were discharged from the hospital significantly earlier (23 vs. 31 days; p = 0.047). Fifteen and 26 patients died due to COVID-19 pneumonia in the experimental and control cohorts, respectively (30% vs. 48%; p = 0.1). LD-RT was associated with a decreased odds ratio (OR) for 1­month COVID-19 mortality (OR = 0.302 [0.106-0.859]; p = 0.025) when adjusted for potentially confounding factors. Overall survival was significantly prolonged in the LD-RT group compared to the control group (log-rank p = 0.027). No adverse events related to radiation treatment were observed. CONCLUSION: Treatment of frail patients with COVID-19 pneumonia with SoC plus single-dose LD-RT of 0.5 Gy improved respiratory parameters, reduced the period of hospitalization, decreased the rate of 1­month mortality, and prolonged actuarial overall survival compared to SoC alone.

Intraoperative irradiation in breast cancer: preliminary results in 80 patients as partial breast irradiation or anticipated boost prior to hypo-fractionated whole breast irradiation.

PURPOSE: To present the first results of intraoperative irradiation (IORT) in breast cancer with a low-energy photon system used as partial breast irradiation (PBI) or as an anticipated boost before whole breast hypo-fractionated irradiation (IORT + WBI), concerning tolerance, side effects, quality of life, and patient-reported outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty patients treated with an Intrabeam® system of 50 kV X-rays received a 20 Gy dose intraoperatively were included. Moderate daily hypofractionation of 2.7 Gy in 15 fractions up to 40.5 Gy was administered if high-risk factors were present. Acute post-operative toxicity, surgery complications, chronic toxicity, patient-reported cosmesis and Breast-Q questionnaire were performed at follow-up visits. RESULTS: Thirty-one patients were treated as PBI and the remaining 49 as IORT + WBI. Only the IORT + WBI group presented acute toxicity, mainly mild acute dermatitis (11 patients) and one subacute mastitis. A total of 20 patients presented fibrosis (18 patients grade I, 2 patients grade II), 15 (30.5%) patients in the IORT + WBI group and 3 (9.6%) patients in the group of PBI. The cosmesis evaluation in 73 patients resulted poor, fair, good or excellent in 2, 7, 38 and 26 patients, respectively. In PBI group Breast-Q scored higher, especially in terms of their psychosocial well-being (78 vs 65) and satisfaction with radiation-induced toxicity (77 vs 72, respectively) compared to IORT + WBI group. CONCLUSION: IORT is a well-tolerated procedure with low toxicity, good cosmesis and favorable patient-reported outcomes mainly when administered as PBI.

Quantitative assessments of late radiation-induced skin and soft tissue toxicity and correlation with RTOG scales and biological equivalent dose in breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Radiation-induced toxicity (RIT) is usually assessed by inspection and palpation. Due to their subjective and unquantitative nature, objective methods are required. This study aimed to determine whether a quantitative tool is able to assess RIT and establish an underlying BED-response relationship in breast cancer. METHODS: Patients following seven different breast radiation protocols were recruited to this study for RIT assessment with qualitative and quantitative examination. The biologically equivalent dose (BED) was used to directly compare different radiation regimens. RIT was subjectively evaluated by physicians using the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) late toxicity scores. Simultaneously an objective multiprobe device was also used to quantitatively assess late RIT in terms of erythema, hyperpigmentation, elasticity and skin hydration. RESULTS: In 194 patients, in terms of the objective measurements, treated breasts showed higher erythema and hyperpigmentation and lower elasticity and hydration than untreated breasts (p < 0.001, p < 0.001, p < 0.001, p = 0.019, respectively). As the BED increased, Δerythema and Δpigmentation gradually increased as well (p = 0.006 and p = 0.002, respectively). Regarding the clinical assessment, the increase in BED resulted in a higher RTOG toxicity grade (p < 0.001). Quantitative assessments were consistent with RTOG scores. As the RTOG toxicity grade increased, the erythema and pigmentation values increased, and the elasticity index decreased (p < 0.001, p = 0.016, p = 0.005, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The multiprobe device can be a sensitive and simple tool for research purpose and quantitatively assessing RIT in patients undergoing radiotherapy for breast cancer. Physician-assessed toxicity scores and objective measurements revealed that the BED was positively associated with the severity of RIT.

Effects of radiation on toxicity, complications, revision surgery and aesthetic outcomes in breast reconstruction: An argument about timing and techniques.

BACKGROUND: Radiotherapy (RT) combined with breast reconstruction can reduce the risk of cancer recurrence and increase the survival rate. However, this approach seems to worsen aesthetic outcomes and increase complication rates. The impact of breast reconstruction timing and techniques on clinical outcomes, however, remains unclear. For this reason, we aimed to perform a more comprehensive analysis of a series of patients undergoing RT and breast reconstruction. METHODS: Patients were divided into 4 groups according to the timing of reconstruction (before RT and after RT) and surgical technique (heterologous reconstruction and autologous reconstruction (AR)). The median time between RT and reconstruction, number of revision surgeries, incidence of complications, toxicity, aesthetics and associated clinical risk factors were used to assess the clinical outcomes. An objective system of skin toxicity evaluation was performed. RESULTS: Ninety-five patients were included in this study. No significant differences in the median time between RT and reconstruction, incidence of complications, toxicity or aesthetics were noted between different timings or techniques of reconstruction. Patients undergoing AR needed more revision surgeries to complete reconstruction. However, the total number of surgical procedures was similar between the groups. In a comparison between the treated and untreated breasts by an objective system, RT produced an increase in erythema and pigmentation and a decrease in elasticity in the treated breast (p<0.05 for all parameters). On multivariate analysis, smoking was a significant predictor associated with complications. CONCLUSIONS: Combined breast reconstruction and RT seem to be successful regardless of the order of treatment or the type of reconstruction.

Could pulmonary low-dose radiation therapy be an alternative treatment for patients with COVID-19 pneumonia? Preliminary results of a multicenter SEOR-GICOR nonrandomized prospective trial (IPACOVID trial).

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of lung low-dose radiation therapy (LD-RT) for pneumonia in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Inclusion criteria comprised patients with COVID-19-related moderate-severe pneumonia warranting hospitalization with supplemental O2 and not candidates for admission to the intensive care unit because of comorbidities or general status. All patients received single lung dose of 0.5 Gy. Respiratory and systemic inflammatory parameters were evaluated before irradiation, at 24 h and 1 week after LD-RT. Primary endpoint was increased in the ratio of arterial oxygen partial pressure (PaO2) or the pulse oximetry saturation (SpO2) to fractional inspired oxygen (FiO2) ratio of at least 20% at 24 h with respect to the preirradiation value. RESULTS: Between June and November 2020, 36 patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and a mean age of 84 years were enrolled. Seventeen were women and 19 were men and all of them had comorbidities. All patients had bilateral pulmonary infiltrates on chest X­ray. All patients received dexamethasone treatment. Mean SpO2 pretreatment value was 94.28% and the SpO2/FiO2 ratio varied from 255 mm Hg to 283 mm Hg at 24 h and to 381 mm Hg at 1 week, respectively. In those who survived (23/36, 64%), a significant improvement was observed in the percentage of lung involvement in the CT scan at 1 week after LD-RT. No adverse effects related to radiation treatment have been reported. CONCLUSIONS: LD-RT appears to be a feasible and safe option in a population with COVID-19 bilateral interstitial pneumonia in the presence of significant comorbidities.

Saving time in the radiotherapy procedures for COVID-19 pneumonia treatment. A single-institution experience.

BACKGROUND: The use of low dose radiotherapy (LD-RT) for the treatment of COVID-19 pneumonia is supported by biological rationale for its immunomodulatory effect. Some institutions have started to treat these patients showing encouraging results. To shorten procedure times is crucial for the comfort of symptomatic patients receiving respiratory support and to optimize institutional facilities. PATIENTS AND METHODS: At our institution, LD-RT is offered to hospitalized patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and signs of early cytokine-released syndrome on behalf of a multicenter study. We designed a coordinated process flow starting from the patient transfer to the simulation CT-scan (first-step), to the end of the LD-RT treatment (last step). The times spent on each step of the process flow were evaluated. RESULTS: Mean age of treated patients was 83 (72-91) years-old. The timing parameters of the first 10 consecutive patients were analyzed. Except for the first (dummy run), patients were managed from the first to the last step in a median of 38 min (25-58, SD 10.67). The most time-consuming sub-process was the contouring of the treatment volumes and dosimetry. CONCLUSIONS: LD-RT is not only an encouraging option for COVID-19 pneumonia patients, but a convenient and feasible procedure if performed in a coordinated way by reducing procedure times.

Long-term results of a randomized partial irradiation trial compared to whole breast irradiation in the early stage and low-risk breast cancer patients after conservative surgery.

PURPOSE: To report long-term results of a randomized trial comparing accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) to whole-breast irradiation (WBI) in terms of efficacy, toxicity, and cosmesis. METHODS AND MATERIALS: WBI group was treated with 3D conformal external irradiation, 2 Gy daily/fraction, 5 fractions/week, to a total dose of 50 Gy. APBI group was treated with 3D conformal external irradiation 3.75 Gy/fraction, twice a day, 5 fractions/week, to a total dose of 37.5 Gy in the APBI group. Patients were followed up every 6 months up to 5 years and yearly thereafter. During follow-up visits, the clinician evaluated chronic toxicity and scored cosmetic results with a four-scale system. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 10.3 years, 43 patients in each group (84%) are alive without disease. One patient died after disease progression in the APBI arm, and there was no death in the WBI arm. The rest of the patients died from another disease different than breast cancer, similarly between groups. There was greater fibrosis in the APBI group (9 patients grade 1 and one grade 2) compared to WBI (3 patients grade 1 and one grade 2); p = 0.18. Regarding cosmesis, in APBI group, 19 and 21 (43.2 and 47%) patients had excellent or good results, similar to the WBI group with 18 patients (40.9%) in each cosmesis outcome. The WBI group did not have any patient with poor cosmesis but the APBI had 3 (6.8%; p = 0.24). CONCLUSION: After a follow-up of 10 years, there were no differences in efficacy between the 2 treatment arms. Despite slight greater toxicity in the APBI group, the cosmesis was similar and satisfactory in both groups.

Low dose anti-inflammatory radiotherapy for the treatment of pneumonia by covid-19: A proposal for a multi-centric prospective trial.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is a highly contagious viral infection with high morbidity that is draining health resources. The biggest complication is pneumonia, which has a serious inflammatory component, with no standardized treatment. Low-dose radiation therapy (LD-RT) is non-invasive and has anti-inflammatory effects that can interfere with the inflammatory cascade, thus reducing the severity of associated cytokine release and might be useful in the treatment of respiratory complications caused by COVID-19. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This multicentric prospective clinical trial seeks to evaluate the efficacy of bilateral lung LD-RT therapy as a treatment for interstitial pneumonia in patients with COVID-19 for improving respiratory function.This prospective study will have 2 phases: I) an exploratory phase enrolling 10 patients, which will assess the feasibility and efficacy of low-dose lung irradiation, evaluated according to an increase in the PaO2/FiO2 ratio of at least 20% at 48-72 h with respect to the pre-irradiation value. If a minimum efficiency of 30% of the patients is not achieved, the study will not be continued. II) Non-randomized comparative phase in two groups: a control group, which will only receive pharmacological treatment, and an experimental arm with pharmacological treatment and LD-RT. It will include 96 patients, the allocation will be 1: 2, that is, 32 in the control arm and 64 in the experimental arm. The primary end-point will be the efficacy of LD-RT in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia according to an improvement in PaO2/FiO2. Secondary objectives will include the safety of bilateral lung LD-RT, an improvement in the radiology image, overall mortality rates at 15 and 30 days after irradiation and characterizing anti-inflammatory mechanisms of LD-RT by measuring the level of expression of adhesion molecules, anti-inflammatory cytokines and oxidative stress mediators.Trial registration: ClinicalTrial.gov NCT-04380818 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04380818?term=RADIOTHERAPY&cond=COVID&draw=2&rank=4.

Are there enough radiation oncologists to lead the new Spanish radiotherapy?

AIM: Radiation oncology services in Spain are undergoing a process of technical modernization, but-in a context of increasing demand by an ageing population-it is unclear whether there are enough radiation oncologists to staff the newly equipped units. This study aims to assess the number of specialists working in radiation oncology services in Spain relative to current and future needs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In the second half of 2017, the Commission on Infrastructures of the Spanish Society for Radiation Oncology (SEOR) sent a questionnaire on radiation oncology staff to the heads of all 122 public (n = 76, 62%) and private (n = 46, 38%) radiation oncology services in Spain. Data collected were the number of professionals, their position, and their year of birth for specialists and residents in each service. In the descriptive analysis, for continuous variables we calculated means, standard deviations and ranges for each Spanish region and work post. For qualitative variables, we constructed frequency tables. All analyses were performed with R statistical software, version 3.5.1. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 100% among service heads across all 122 centers. The total number of radiation oncologists working in these centers is 721, or 15.4 per million population, with considerable variations between regions. Given the national recommendations to have 20 radiation oncologists per million population, there is currently a deficit of 204 specialists. If the 163 upcoming retirements are also taken into account, there will be 367 fewer radiation oncologists than required to meet the 25% increase in indications for radiotherapy projected for 2025. CONCLUSIONS: The classic model for calculating staff needs based on the number of treatments is outdated, and recommendations should be revised to reflect the current reality. A new model should integrate the most complex technological advances and emerging plans in radiotherapy, without neglecting the other activities carried out in radiation oncology services that are not directly linked to patient care.

Correction to: Recommendations for the follow-up care of female breast cancer survivors: a guideline of the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM), Spanish Society of Primary Care Physicians (SEMERGEN), Spanish Society for Family and Community Medicine (SEMFYC), Spanish Society for General and Family Physicians (SEMG), Spanish Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology (SEGO), Spanish Society of Radiation Oncology (SEOR), Spanish Society of Senology and Breast Pathology (SESPM), and Spanish Society of Cardiology (SEC).

Correction to: Clin Transl Oncol https://doi.org/10.1007/s12094-017-1801-4.

Infrastructure and equipment for radiation oncology in the Spanish National Health System: analysis of external beam radiotherapy 2015-2020.

PURPOSE: Planning for radiation oncology requires reliable estimates of both demand for radiotherapy and availability of technological resources. This study compares radiotherapy resources in the 17 regions of the decentralised Spanish National Health System (SNHS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Sociedad Española de Oncología Radioterápica (SEOR) performed a cross-sectional survey of all Spanish radiation oncology services (ROS) in 2015. We collected data on SNHS radiotherapy units, recording the year of installation, specific features of linear accelerators (LINACs) and other treatment units, and radiotherapeutic techniques implemented by region. Any machine over 10 years old or lacking a multileaf collimator or portal imaging system was considered obsolete. We performed a k-means clustering analysis using the Hartigan-Wong method to test associations between the gross domestic regional product (GDRP), the number of LINACs per million population and the percentage of LINACs over 10 years old. RESULTS: The SNHS controls 72 (61%) of the 118 Spanish ROS and has 180 LINACs, or 72.5% of the total public and private resources. The mean rate of LINACs per million population is 3.9 for public ROS, and 42% (n = 75) of the public accelerators were obsolete in 2015: 61 due to age and 14 due to technological capability. There was considerable regional variation in terms of the number and technological capacity of radiotherapy units; correlation between GRDP and resource availability was moderate. CONCLUSION: Despite improvements, new investments are still needed to replace obsolete units and increase access to modern radiotherapy. Regular analysis of ROS in each Spanish region is the only strategy for monitoring progress in radiotherapy capacity.

Recommendations for the follow-up care of female breast cancer survivors: a guideline of the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM), Spanish Society of General Medicine (SEMERGEN), Spanish Society for Family and Community Medicine (SEMFYC), Spanish Society for General and Family Physicians (SEMG), Spanish Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology (SEGO), Spanish Society of Radiation Oncology (SEOR), Spanish Society of Senology and Breast Pathology (SESPM), and Spanish Society of Cardiology (SEC).

The increased incidence and decreased mortality of breast cancer have produced an increased number of breast cancer survivors. The type of sequelae and comorbidities that these patients present call for a collaborative follow-up by hospital-based specialized care and primary care. In this document, we present a guideline drafted and agreed among scientific societies whose members care for breast cancer survivors. The purpose of this guideline is to achieve the shared and coordinated follow-up of these patients by specialized care and primary care professionals. In it, we review the health issues derived from the treatments performed, with recommendations about the therapeutic approach to each of them, as well as a proposal for joint follow-up by primary and specialized care.

Influence of incidental radiation dose in the subventricular zone on survival in patients with glioblastoma multiforme treated with surgery, radiotherapy, and temozolomide.

PURPOSE: To determine if there is an association between the incidental radiation dose to the subventricular zone and survival in patients with glioblastoma multiforme treated with surgery, radiotherapy and temozolomide. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Sixty-five patients, treated between 2006 and 2015, were included in this retrospective study. The doses (75th percentile; p75) administered to the ipsilateral, contralateral and bilateral subventricular zone were compared to overall survival and progression-free survival using Cox proportional hazards models. Covariates included: age, sex, surgery, tumor location, and concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide. RESULTS: Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 11.5 ± 9.96 and 18.8 ± 18.5 months, respectively. The p75 doses to the ipsilateral, contralateral and bilateral subventrivular zone were, respectively, 57.30, 48.8, and 52.7 Gy. Patients who received a dose ≥48.8 Gy in the contralateral subventricular zone had better progression-free survival than those who received lower doses (HR 0.46; 95% CI 0.23-0.91 P = 0.028). This association was not found for overall survival (HR 0.60; 95% CI 0.30-1.22 P = 0.16). Administration of adjuvant temozolomide was significantly associated with improved progression-free survival (HR 0.19; 95% CI 0.09-0.41 P < 0.0001) and overall survival (HR 0.11; 95% CI 0.05-0.24 P = 0.001). In the subgroup of 46 patients whose O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase gene promoter status was known, the methylation had no effect on either progression-free survival (P = 0.491) or overall survival (P = 0.203). CONCLUSION: High-dose radiation in the contralateral subventricular zone was associated with a significant improvement in progression-free survival but not overall survival in patients treated for glioblastoma multiforme.

Predictive factors for survival in neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy for advanced rectal cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy followed by radical surgery is the standard approach in advanced rectal carcinoma. Tumor response is determined in histological specimen. OBJECTIVE: To assess predictive factors for survival in 115 patients. PATIENTS AND METHOD: 115 patients treated with neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy followed by radical surgery with total mesorectal excision, in our hospital from January 2007 to December 2014. All patients received pelvic radiotherapy with concomitant chemotherapy, followed by radical surgery and in some adjuvant chemotherapy. RESULTS: In univariate analysis, distance to anal verge, radial margin, perineural invasion, and good grade regression are predictive factors for both, specific and disease free survival; and in multivariant, only radial margin and perineural invasion were predictive factors for survival. We found distance to anal verge (<5 cm) as the only clinical factor to predict a positive margin in the histologic specimen. CONCLUSIONS: Perineural invasion and positive radial margin are predictive factors for both specific and disease free survival.

Hypofractionated boost after whole breast irradiation in breast carcinoma: chronic toxicity results and cosmesis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of hypofractionated boost after hypofractionated whole breast irradiation in breast carcinoma. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients after breast conservative surgery were treated all time with hypofractionation of 2.67 Gy/day. Whole breast dose was 40.05 Gy followed in case of risk of local relapse by a boost of 16.02 Gy or 8.01 Gy. Acute and chronic toxicity results were evaluated including cosmetic software-assisted assessment and objective evaluation of fibrosis parameters (elasticity and hydration) by means of a skin tester. RESULTS: A total of 362 patients were evaluated. Acute toxicities comprised grade 1 dermatitis in 48.1 %, grade 2 in 44.5 % and grade 3 in 17 patients 4.7 %, respectively. After a median follow-up of 4.5 years, in 308 cases (86.6 %) there was no chronic skin or subcutaneous changes. In the first consecutive 50 patients, measures with skin tester showed no statistical differences in parameters for skin and subcutaneous fibrosis. Cosmetic results were considered excellent and good in 26 and 62 %, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Boost to tumour bed with hypofractionated doses is well tolerated and acute and chronic toxicities are mild with good cosmetic results. Objective systems are encouraging methods to assess skin quality and cosmesis.

Accelerated hypofractionated radiation therapy (AHRT) for non-small-cell lung cancer: can we leave standard fractionation?

PURPOSE: To report interim results from a single-institution study conducted to assess accelerated hypofractionated radiotherapy (AHRT) delivered with 3D conformal radiotherapy in two groups of patients with non-small cell lung cancer: (1) patients with early stage disease unable to tolerate surgery and ineligible for stereotactic body radiation therapy, and (2) patients with locally advanced disease unsuitable for concurrent chemoradiotherapy. METHODS/PATIENTS: A total of 83 patients (51 stage I-II, 32 stage III) were included. Radiotherapy targets included the primary tumor and positive mediastinal areas identified on the pre-treatment PET-CT. Mean age was 77.8 ± 7.8 years. ECOG performance status (PS) was ≥2 in 50.6 % of cases. Radiotherapy was delivered in daily fractions of 2.75 Gy to a total dose of 66 Gy (BED10 84 Gy). Acute and late toxicities were evaluated according to NCI CTC criteria. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 42 months, median overall survival (OS) and cause-specific survival (CSS) were 23 and 36 months, respectively. On the multivariate analysis, PS [HR 4.14, p = 0.0001)], stage [HR 2.51, p = 0.005)], and maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax) [HR 1.04, p = 0.04)] were independent risk factors for OS. PS [HR 5.2, p = 0.0001)] and stage [HR 6.3, p = 0.0001)] were also associated with CSS. No cases of severe acute or late treatment-related toxicities were observed. CONCLUSIONS: OS and CSS rates in patients treated with AHRT for stage I-II and stage III NSCLC were good. Treatment was well tolerated with no grade three or higher treatment-related toxicity. PS, stage, and SUV max were predictive for OS and CSS.

Demand for radiotherapy in Spain.

AIM: Assessing the demand for radiotherapy in Spain based on existing evidence to estimate the human resources and equipment needed so that every person in Spain has access to high-quality radiotherapy when they need it. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We used data from the European Cancer Observatory on the estimated incidence of cancer in Spain in 2012, along with the evidence-based indications for radiotherapy developed by the Australian CCORE project, to obtain an optimal radiotherapy utilisation proportion (OUP) for each tumour. RESULTS: About 50.5 % of new cancers in Spain require radiotherapy at least once over the course of the disease. Additional demand for these services comes from reradiation therapy and non-melanoma skin cancer. Approximately, 25-30 % of cancer patients with an indication for radiotherapy do not receive it due to factors that include access, patient preference, familiarity with the treatment among physicians, and especially resource shortages, all of which contribute to its underutilisation. CONCLUSIONS: Radiotherapy is underused in Spain. The increasing incidence of cancer expected over the next decade and the greater frequency of reradiations necessitate the incorporation of radiotherapy demand into need-based calculations for cancer services planning.

The position and current status of radiation therapy after primary systemic therapy in breast cancer: a national survey-based expert consensus statement.

BACKGROUND: Primary systemic therapy (PST) is changing the role of radiation therapy (RT) in breast cancer. Without randomized studies, the optimal indications for RT after PST and surgery are not clear. The present study provides consensus-based recommendations to clarify the role of RT. METHODS: Radiation oncologists (n = 82; 77 % response rate) in Spain were surveyed to determine their recommendations for locoregional RT following PST and surgery. RESULTS: Most (98 %) specialists support whole breast irradiation after breast-conserving surgery (BCS), regardless of pathologic response to PST. In T1-T2 and T3-T4 tumours with sentinel node biopsy (SNB) prior to PST, 91 and 56 % of respondents, respectively, recommend irradiating the supraclavicular (level IV) and axillary level III nodes when nodal involvement is detected (9 and 44 % of respondents recommend irradiating these areas by independent of nodal status). If SNB is not available, 57 and 30 % of specialists agreed that the aforementioned nodal regions should be irradiated (33 and 65 % of respondents recommend irradiating these areas by independent of nodal status). Between 58 and 76 % of specialists agreed that nodal levels I and II should be irradiated in cases of insufficient lymphadenectomy or when >75 % of the resected nodes are involved. CONCLUSION: Agreement is strong regarding the indications for local RT after PST and surgery, but less so for nodal irradiation. All patients who undergo BCS should receive RT, even with complete pathologic response. After mastectomy, RT is recommended in all node-positive stage III cases. Prospective studies will clarify indications for RT in this patient population.

Consensus on the regional lymph nodes irradiation in breast cancer.

Standard locoregional treatment of early-stage breast cancer currently consists of the conservative surgery and sentinel lymph node biopsy. In the event of positive sentinel node biopsy, an axillary level I-II lymphadenectomy should be carried out. However, recent publications have increasingly supported a tendency not to apply the surgical lymphadenectomy, but simultaneously, it has been developed a new role of regional radiotherapy, even if there is only 1-3 axillary lymph nodes involved. Given these new trends, radiation oncologists are facing the dilemma with regard to deciding about regional irradiation of breast cancer. For such purpose, The Spanish Group of Breast Cancer Radiation Oncology (GEORM as per its Spanish acronym) decided to reach a consensus to issue the respective guidelines for such types of cases. GEORM Managing Commission, gathering 13 members of different Spanish regional communities, issued a questionnaire including different clinical situations. These questions were set as key questions seeking responses, which were answered by 66 % out of the 75 members of the group. Following the response, the guidelines were drafted based on the replies to the mentioned questionnaire. All the respective issues were discussed by means of a virtual platform. In this article, we show the levels of consensus for different clinical situations, depending on the number of nodes involved and the type of surgical procedure performed on the axillary lymph nodes. The ongoing evolution of the oncological treatments obliges the radiation oncologists to take decisions without any existing clarifying evidence, and therefore, the consensus is necessary, which can assist in the decision-making process by the practitioners in such kinds of clinical situations.