Development and validation of an MR-driven dose-of-the-day procedure for online adaptive radiotherapy in upper gastrointestinal cancer patients.

Objective.To develop and validate a dose-of-the-day (DOTD) treatment plan verification procedure for liver and pancreas cancer patients treated with an magnetic resonance (MR)-Linac system.Approach.DOTD was implemented as an automated process that uses 3D datasets collected during treatment delivery. Particularly, the DOTD pipeline's input included the adapt-to-shape (ATS) plan-i.e. 3D-MR dataset acquired at beginning of online session, anatomical contours, dose distribution-and 3D-MR dataset acquired during beam-on (BON). The DOTD automated analysis included (a) ATS-to-BON image intensity-based deformable image registration (DIR), (b) ATS-to-BON contours mapping via DIR, (c) BON-to-ATS contours copying through rigid registration, (d) determining ATS-to-BON dosimetric differences, and (e) PDF report generation. The DIR process was validated by two expert reviewers. ATS-plans were recomputed on BON datasets to assess dose differences. DOTD analysis was performed retrospectively for 75 treatment fractions (12-liver and 5-pancreas patients).Main results.The accuracy of DOTD process relied on DIR and mapped contours quality. Most DIR-generated contours (99.6%) were clinically acceptable. DICE correlated with depreciation of DIR-based region of interest mapping process. The ATS-BON plan difference was found negligible (<1%). The duodenum and large bowel exhibited highest variations, 24% and 39% from fractional values, for 5-fraction liver and pancreas. For liver 1-fraction, a 62% variation was observed for duodenum.Significance.The DOTD methodology provides an automated approach to quantify 3D dosimetric differences between online plans and their delivery. This analysis offers promise as a valuable tool for plan quality assessment and decision-making in the verification stage of the online workflow.

Celiac plexus radiosurgery for pain management in advanced cancer: a multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Refractory upper abdominal pain or lower back pain (retroperitoneal pain syndrome) related to celiac plexus involvement characterises pancreatic and other upper gastrointestinal malignancies and is an unmet need. We hypothesised that ablative radiation delivered to the celiac plexus would decrease pain. METHODS: This multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 study was done at eight hospitals in five countries (Israel, Poland, Canada, the USA, and Portugal). Eligible patients aged 18 years or older with an average pain level of 5-10 on the Brief Pain Inventory short form (BPI-SF), an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0-2, and either pancreatic cancer or other tumours involving the celiac axis, received a single fraction of 25 Gy of external-beam photons to the celiac plexus. The primary endpoint was complete or partial pain response based on a reduction of the BPI-SF average pain score of 2 points or more from baseline to 3 weeks after treatment. All evaluable patients with stable pain scores were included in response assessment. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03323489, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Jan 3, 2018, and Dec 28, 2021, 125 patients were treated, 90 of whom were evaluable. Patients were followed up until death. Median age was 65·5 years (IQR 58·3-71·8), 50 (56%) were female and 40 (44%) were male, 83 (92%) had pancreatic cancer, and 77 (86%) had metastatic disease. Median baseline BPI-SF average pain score was 6 (IQR 5-7). Of the 90 evaluable patients at 3 weeks, 48 (53%; 95% CI 42-64) had at least a partial pain response. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events, irrespective of attribution, were abdominal pain (35 [28%] of 125) and fatigue (23 [18%]). 11 serious adverse events of grade 3 or worse were recorded. Two grade 3 serious adverse events were probably attributed to treatment by the local investigators (abdominal pain [n=1] and nausea [n=1]), and nine were possibly attributed to treatment (seven were grade 3: blood bilirubin increased [n=1], duodenal haemorrhage [n=2], abdominal pain [n=2], and progressive disease [n=2]; and two were grade 5: gastrointestinal bleed from suspected varices 24 days after treatment [n=1] and progressive disease [advanced pancreatic cancer] 89 days after treatment [n=1]). INTERPRETATION: Celiac plexus radiosurgery could potentially be a non-invasive palliative option for patients with retroperitoneal pain syndrome. Further investigation by means of a randomised comparison with conventional celiac block or neurolysis is warranted. FUNDING: Gateway for Cancer Research and the Israel Cancer Association.

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

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

Defining Minimum Treatment Parameters of Ablative Radiation Therapy in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma: An Expert Consensus.

PURPOSE: External beam radiation therapy (EBRT) is a highly effective treatment in select patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer system does not recommend the use of EBRT in HCC due to a lack of sufficient evidence and intends to perform an individual patient level meta-analysis of ablative EBRT in this population. However, there are many types of EBRT described in the literature with no formal definition of what constitutes "ablative." Thus, we convened a group of international experts to provide consensus on the parameters that define ablative EBRT in HCC. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Fundamental parameters related to dose, fractionation, radiobiology, target identification, and delivery technique were identified by a steering committee to generate 7 Key Criteria (KC) that would define ablative EBRT for HCC. Using a modified Delphi (mDelphi) method, experts in the use of EBRT in the treatment of HCC were surveyed. Respondents were given 30 days to respond in round 1 of the mDelphi and 14 days to respond in round 2. A threshold of ≥70% was used to define consensus for answers to each KC. RESULTS: Of 40 invitations extended, 35 (88%) returned responses. In the first round, 3 of 7 KC reached consensus. In the second round, 100% returned responses and consensus was reached in 3 of the remaining 4 KC. The distribution of answers for one KC, which queried the a/b ratio of HCC, was such that consensus was not achieved. Based on this analysis, ablative EBRT for HCC was defined as a BED10 ≥80 Gy with daily imaging and multiphasic contrast used for target delineation. Treatment breaks (eg, for adaptive EBRT) are allowed, but the total treatment time should be ≤6 weeks. Equivalent dose when treating with protons should use a conversion factor of 1.1, but there is no single conversion factor for carbon ions. CONCLUSIONS: Using a mDelphi method assessing expert opinion, we provide the first consensus definition of ablative EBRT for HCC. Empirical data are required to define the a/b of HCC.