Palliative Care as a Component of High-Value and Cost-Saving Care During Hospitalization for Metastatic Cancer.

PURPOSE: Randomized controlled trials have demonstrated that palliative care (PC) can improve quality of life and survival for outpatients with advanced cancer, but there are limited population-based data on the value of inpatient PC. We assessed PC as a component of high-value care among a nationally representative sample of inpatients with metastatic cancer and identified hospitalization characteristics significantly associated with high costs. METHODS: Hospitalizations of patients 18 years and older with a primary diagnosis of metastatic cancer from the National Inpatient Sample from 2010 to 2019 were analyzed. We used multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression to assess medical services, patient demographics, and hospital characteristics associated with higher charges billed to insurance and hospital costs. Generalized linear mixed-effects models were used to determine cost savings associated with provision of PC. RESULTS: Among 397,691 hospitalizations from 2010 to 2019, the median charge per admission increased by 24.9%, from $44,904 in US dollars (USD) to $56,098 USD, whereas the median hospital cost remained stable at $14,300 USD. Receipt of inpatient PC was associated with significantly lower charges (odds ratio [OR], 0.62 [95% CI, 0.61 to 0.64]; P < .001) and costs (OR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.58 to 0.61]; P < .001). Factors associated with high charges were receipt of invasive medical ventilation (P < .001) or systemic therapy (P < .001), Hispanic patients (P < .001), young age (18-49 years, P < .001), and for-profit hospitals (P < .001). PC provision was associated with a $1,310 USD (-13.6%, P < .001) reduction in costs per hospitalization compared with no PC, independent of the receipt of invasive care and age. CONCLUSION: Inpatient PC is associated with reduced hospital costs for patients with metastatic cancer, irrespective of age and receipt of aggressive interventions. Integration of inpatient PC may de-escalate costs incurred through low-value inpatient interventions.

Standard-of-care systemic therapy with or without stereotactic body radiotherapy in patients with oligoprogressive breast cancer or non-small-cell lung cancer (Consolidative Use of Radiotherapy to Block [CURB] oligoprogression): an open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with metastatic cancer eventually develop resistance to systemic therapy, with some having limited disease progression (ie, oligoprogression). We aimed to assess whether stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) targeting oligoprogressive sites could improve patient outcomes. METHODS: We did a phase 2, open-label, randomised controlled trial of SBRT in patients with oligoprogressive metastatic breast cancer or non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after having received at least first-line systemic therapy, with oligoprogression defined as five or less progressive lesions on PET-CT or CT. Patients aged 18 years or older were enrolled from a tertiary cancer centre in New York, NY, USA, and six affiliated regional centres in the states of New York and New Jersey, with a 1:1 randomisation between standard of care (standard-of-care group) and SBRT plus standard of care (SBRT group). Randomisation was done with a computer-based algorithm with stratification by number of progressive sites of metastasis, receptor or driver genetic alteration status, primary site, and type of systemic therapy previously received. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, measured up to 12 months. We did a prespecified subgroup analysis of the primary endpoint by disease site. All analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03808662, and is complete. FINDINGS: From Jan 1, 2019, to July 31, 2021, 106 patients were randomly assigned to standard of care (n=51; 23 patients with breast cancer and 28 patients with NSCLC) or SBRT plus standard of care (n=55; 24 patients with breast cancer and 31 patients with NSCLC). 16 (34%) of 47 patients with breast cancer had triple-negative disease, and 51 (86%) of 59 patients with NSCLC had no actionable driver mutation. The study was closed to accrual before reaching the targeted sample size, after the primary efficacy endpoint was met during a preplanned interim analysis. The median follow-up was 11·6 months for patients in the standard-of-care group and 12·1 months for patients in the SBRT group. The median progression-free survival was 3·2 months (95% CI 2·0-4·5) for patients in the standard-of-care group versus 7·2 months (4·5-10·0) for patients in the SBRT group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·53, 95% CI 0·35-0·81; p=0·0035). The median progression-free survival was higher for patients with NSCLC in the SBRT group than for those with NSCLC in the standard-of-care group (10·0 months [7·2-not reached] vs 2·2 months [95% CI 2·0-4·5]; HR 0·41, 95% CI 0·22-0·75; p=0·0039), but no difference was found for patients with breast cancer (4·4 months [2·5-8·7] vs 4·2 months [1·8-5·5]; 0·78, 0·43-1·43; p=0·43). Grade 2 or worse adverse events occurred in 21 (41%) patients in the standard-of-care group and 34 (62%) patients in the SBRT group. Nine (16%) patients in the SBRT group had grade 2 or worse toxicities related to SBRT, including gastrointestinal reflux disease, pain exacerbation, radiation pneumonitis, brachial plexopathy, and low blood counts. INTERPRETATION: The trial showed that progression-free survival was increased in the SBRT plus standard-of-care group compared with standard of care only. Oligoprogression in patients with metastatic NSCLC could be effectively treated with SBRT plus standard of care, leading to more than a four-times increase in progression-free survival compared with standard of care only. By contrast, no benefit was observed in patients with oligoprogressive breast cancer. Further studies to validate these findings and understand the differential benefits are warranted. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute.

Osteoradionecrosis of the Jaw Following Proton Radiation Therapy for Patients With Head and Neck Cancer.

Importance: Proton radiation therapy (PRT) has reduced radiation-induced toxic effects, such as mucositis and xerostomia, over conventional photon radiation therapy, leading to significantly improved quality of life in patients with head and neck cancers. However, the prevalence of osteoradionecrosis (ORN) of the jaw following PRT in these patients is less clear. Objective: To report the prevalence and clinical characteristics of ORN in patients with oral and oropharyngeal cancer (OOPC) treated with PRT. Design, Setting, and Participants: This case series reports a single-institution experience (Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York) between November 2013 and September 2019 and included 122 radiation therapy-naive patients with OOPC treated with PRT. Data were analyzed from 2013 to 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: Clinical parameters, including sex, age, comorbidities, tumor histology, concurrent chemotherapy, smoking, comorbidities, and preradiation dental evaluation, were obtained from the medical record. Patients with clinical or radiographic signs of ORN were identified and graded using the adopted modified Glanzmann and Grätz grading system. Characteristics of ORN, such as location, clinical presentation, initial stage at diagnosis, etiology, time to diagnosis, management, and clinical outcome at the last follow-up, were also collected. Results: Of the 122 patients (mean [SD] age, 63 [13] years; 45 [36.9%] women and 77 [63.1%] men) included in this study, 13 (10.6%) developed ORN following PRT during a median (range) follow-up time of 40.6 (<1-101) months. All patients had spontaneous development of ORN. At the time of initial diagnosis, grade 0, grade 1, grade 2, and grade 3 ORN were seen in 2, 1, 9, and 1 patient, respectively. The posterior ipsilateral mandible within the radiation field that received the full planned PRT dose was the most involved ORN site. At a median (range) follow-up of 13.5 (0.2-58.0) months from the time of ORN diagnosis, complete resolution, stable condition, and progression of ORN were seen in 3, 6, and 4 patients, respectively. The 3-year rates of ORN and death in the total cohort were 5.2% and 21.5%, while the 5-year rates of ORN and death were 11.5% and 34.4%, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: In this case series, the prevalence of ORN following PRT was found to be 10.6%, indicating that ORN remains a clinical challenge even in the era of highly conformal PRT. Clinicians treating patients with OOPC with PRT should be mindful of this complication.

Circulating insulin-like growth factors and risks of overall, aggressive and early-onset prostate cancer: a collaborative analysis of 20 prospective studies and Mendelian randomization analysis.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies had limited power to assess the associations of circulating insulin-like growth factors (IGFs) and IGF-binding proteins (IGFBPs) with clinically relevant prostate cancer as a primary endpoint, and the association of genetically predicted IGF-I with aggressive prostate cancer is not known. We aimed to investigate the associations of IGF-I, IGF-II, IGFBP-1, IGFBP-2 and IGFBP-3 concentrations with overall, aggressive and early-onset prostate cancer. METHODS: Prospective analysis of biomarkers using the Endogenous Hormones, Nutritional Biomarkers and Prostate Cancer Collaborative Group dataset (up to 20 studies, 17 009 prostate cancer cases, including 2332 aggressive cases). Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for prostate cancer were estimated using conditional logistic regression. For IGF-I, two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis was undertaken using instruments identified using UK Biobank (158 444 men) and outcome data from PRACTICAL (up to 85 554 cases, including 15 167 aggressive cases). Additionally, we used colocalization to rule out confounding by linkage disequilibrium. RESULTS: In observational analyses, IGF-I was positively associated with risks of overall (OR per 1 SD = 1.09: 95% CI 1.07, 1.11), aggressive (1.09: 1.03, 1.16) and possibly early-onset disease (1.11: 1.00, 1.24); associations were similar in MR analyses (OR per 1 SD = 1.07: 1.00, 1.15; 1.10: 1.01, 1.20; and 1.13; 0.98, 1.30, respectively). Colocalization also indicated a shared signal for IGF-I and prostate cancer (PP4: 99%). Men with higher IGF-II (1.06: 1.02, 1.11) and IGFBP-3 (1.08: 1.04, 1.11) had higher risks of overall prostate cancer, whereas higher IGFBP-1 was associated with a lower risk (0.95: 0.91, 0.99); these associations were attenuated following adjustment for IGF-I. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support the role of IGF-I in the development of prostate cancer, including for aggressive disease.

Toxicity Profiles and Survival Outcomes Among Patients With Nonmetastatic Oropharyngeal Carcinoma Treated With Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy vs Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy.

Importance: Patients with oropharyngeal carcinoma (OPC) treated with radiotherapy often experience substantial toxic effects, even with modern techniques such as intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) has a potential advantage over IMRT due to reduced dose to the surrounding organs at risk; however, data are scarce given the limited availability and use of IMPT. Objective: To compare toxic effects and oncologic outcomes among patients with newly diagnosed nonmetastatic OPC treated with IMPT vs IMRT with or without chemotherapy. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study included patients aged 18 years or older with newly diagnosed nonmetastatic OPC who received curative-intent radiotherapy with IMPT or IMRT at a single-institution tertiary academic cancer center from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2021, with follow-up through December 31, 2021. Exposures: IMPT or IMRT with or without chemotherapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were the incidence of acute and chronic (present after ≥6 months) treatment-related adverse events (AEs) and oncologic outcomes, including locoregional recurrence (LRR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Fisher exact tests and χ2 tests were used to evaluate associations between toxic effects and treatment modality (IMPT vs IMRT), and the Kaplan-Meier method was used to compare LRR, PFS, and OS between the 2 groups. Results: The study included 292 patients with OPC (272 [93%] with human papillomavirus [HPV]-p16-positive tumors); 254 (87%) were men, 38 (13%) were women, and the median age was 64 years (IQR, 58-71 years). Fifty-eight patients (20%) were treated with IMPT, and 234 (80%) were treated with IMRT. Median follow-up was 26 months (IQR, 17-36 months). Most patients (283 [97%]) received a dose to the primary tumor of 70 Gy. Fifty-seven of the patients treated with IMPT (98%) and 215 of those treated with IMRT (92%) had HPV-p16-positive disease. There were no significant differences in 3-year OS (97% IMPT vs 91% IMRT; P = .18), PFS (82% IMPT vs 85% IMRT; P = .62), or LRR (5% IMPT vs 4% IMRT; P = .59). The incidence of acute toxic effects was significantly higher for IMRT compared with IMPT for oral pain of grade 2 or greater (42 [72%] IMPT vs 217 [93%] IMRT; P < .001), xerostomia of grade 2 or greater (12 [21%] IMPT vs 68 [29%] IMRT; P < .001), dysgeusia of grade 2 or greater (16 [28%] IMPT vs 134 [57%] IMRT; P < .001), grade 3 dysphagia (4 [7%] IMPT vs 29 [12%] IMRT; P < .001), mucositis of grade 3 or greater (10 [53%] IMPT vs 13 [70%] IMRT; P = .003), nausea of grade 2 or greater (0 [0%] IMPT vs 18 [8%] IMRT; P = .04), and weight loss of grade 2 or greater (22 [37%] IMPT vs 138 [59%] IMRT; P < .001). There were no significant differences in chronic toxic effects of grade 3 or greater, although there was a significant difference for chronic xerostomia of grade 2 or greater (6 IMPT [11%] vs 22 IMRT [10%]; P < .001). Four patients receiving IMRT (2%) vs 0 receiving IMPT had a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube for longer than 6 months. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, curative-intent radiotherapy with IMPT for nonmetastatic OPC was associated with a significantly reduced acute toxicity burden compared with IMRT, with few chronic toxic effects and favorable oncologic outcomes, including locoregional recurrence of only 5% at 2 years. Prospective randomized clinical trials comparing these 2 technologies and of patient-reported outcomes are warranted.

Safety and Tolerability of Metastasis-Directed Radiation Therapy in the Era of Evolving Systemic, Immune, and Targeted Therapies.

AbstractPurpose: Systemic, immune, and target therapies are growing in use in the management of metastatic cancers. The aim of this review was to describe up-to-date published data on the safety and tolerability of metastasis-directed hypofractionated radiation therapy (RT) when combined with newer systemic, immune, and targeted therapies and to provide suggested strategies to mitigate potential toxicities in the clinical setting. Methods and Materials: A comprehensive search was performed for the time period between 1946 and August 2021 using predetermined keywords describing the use of noncentral nervous system palliative RT with commonly used targeted systemic therapies on PubMed and Medline databases. A total of 1022 articles were screened, and 130 met prespecified criteria to be included in this review. Results: BRAF and MEK inhibitors are reported to be toxic when given concurrently with RT; suspension 3 days and 1 to 2 days, respectively, prior and post-RT is suggested. Cetuximab, erlotinib/gefitinib, and osimertinib were generally safe to use concomitantly with conventional radiation. But in a palliative/hypofractionated RT setting, suspending cetuximab during radiation week, erlotinib/gefitinib 1 to 2 days, and osimertinib ≥2 days pre- and post-RT is suggested. Vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors such as bevacizumab reported substantial toxicities, and the suggestion is to suspend 4 weeks before and after radiation. Less data exist on sorafenib and sunitinib; 5 to 10 days suspension before and after RT should be considered. As a precaution, until further data are available, for cyclin-dependent kinase 4-6 inhibitors, consideration of suspending treatment 1 to 2 days before and after RT should be given. Ipilimumab should be suspended 2 days before and after RT, and insufficient data exist for other immunotherapy agents. Trastuzumab and pertuzumab are generally safe to use in combination with RT, but insufficient data exist for other HER2 target therapy. Conclusions: Suggested approaches are described, using up-to-date literature, to aid clinicians in navigating the integration of newer targeted agents with hypofractionated palliative and/or ablative metastatic RT. Further prospective studies are required.

Impact of the Early COVID-19 Pandemic on Gender Participation in Academic Publishing in Radiation Oncology.

PURPOSE: There is a known gender gap in oncology publishing with worse disparities within specialty fields such as radiation oncology. There has been a significant increase in the number of articles submitted to academic journals during the pandemic. Several analyses have suggested that the pandemic has had a disproportionate effect on academic productivity of women in academia, as measured by article publication rates. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The gender of first/co-first and corresponding/co-corresponding authors, as well as nonsenior versus senior status and manuscript type, for all articles published by Advances from its inception in December 2015 to the end of February 2020 was compared with those published between March 1, 2020, and May 31, 2020: the months during which the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in North America began. RESULTS: This examination of papers published during COVID-19 did not indicate a statistically significant decrease in the overall proportion of women publishing in Advances (P = .76). For nonsenior female authors, this proportion fell just short of statistical significance (39% vs 19%, P = .051). When only scientific manuscripts were considered, there was a statistically significant decrease in publications by nonsenior female first authors during the early months of the pandemic (37% vs 11%, P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: During the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, nonsenior female researchers participated less in article publishing in radiation oncology.

Evaluating Bias in Speaker Introductions at the American Society for Radiation Oncology Annual Meeting.

PURPOSE: Introducing a physician without a professional title may reinforce bias in medicine by influencing perceived credibility. We evaluated differences in the use of professional titles in introductions of speakers at recent American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) Annual Meetings. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We reviewed recordings from the 2017 to 2019 ASTRO Annual Meetings and included complete introductions of speakers with a doctoral degree. Professional introduction was defined as "Doctor" or "Professor" followed by the speaker's full or last name. We collected use of professional introduction, introducer gender, speaker gender, and speaker professional and demographic variables. Identified speakers were sent surveys to collect self-reported demographic data. Analysis was performed using χ2 tests and multivariable logistic regression (MVA). RESULTS: Of 3267 presentations reviewed, 1226 (38%) met the inclusion criteria. Overall, 805 (66%) speakers and 710 (58%) introducers were men. Professional introductions were used in 74% (2017), 71% (2018), and 69% (2019) of the presentations. There was no difference in the use of professional introductions for male and female speakers (71% vs 73%; P = .550). On MVA, male introducers were associated with decreased use of professional address (odds ratio [OR], 0.36; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.26-0.49; P < .001). At the 2019 conference, professional introduction was less likely to be used (2019 vs 2017: OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.49-0.96; P = 0.026). Those who self-identified as Asian/Pacific Islander were twice as likely to receive a professional introduction compared with those who identified as white (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.07-3.64; P = .033). CONCLUSION: Male introducers were significantly less likely to introduce any speaker, regardless of gender, by their professional title, and overall use of professional introductions decreased from 2017 to 2019. Furthermore, no difference in professional introduction use by speaker gender was identified at the recent ASTRO meetings. Implementing speaker guidelines could increase the use of professional introductions and raise awareness of unconscious bias at future ASTRO meetings.

Beyond reirradiation: Efficacy and safety of three or more courses of radiation for head and neck malignancies.

PURPOSE: Recurrent head and neck cancers are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Outcomes of multiple courses of radiation have not yet been described. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A single institution database was queried to retrospectively review treatment plans and select patients who underwent ≥ 3 courses of radiation to the head and neck region. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients were found to have ≥ 3 courses of radiation with overlapping fields. Median local recurrence free survival after last course of reirradiation was 9.1 months and median overall survival was 10 months. Grade 3 and above toxicities were reported in 15 patients (45%). Grade 4 and above toxicities were reported in seven patients (21%). There was no grade 5 toxicity. 20 patients (61%) underwent subsequent therapies following completion of repeat reirradiation. CONCLUSIONS: Repeat reirradiation to the head and neck region is feasible and carries significant risks that are most appropriately managed with a multi-disciplinary team and must be balanced against the potential for local control and opportunities for emerging systemic therapies.

Outcomes and toxicities of definitive radiotherapy and reirradiation using 3-dimensional conformal or intensity-modulated (pencil beam) proton therapy for patients with nasal cavity and paranasal sinus malignancies.

BACKGROUND: Proton therapy (PT) improves outcomes in patients with nasal cavity (NC) and paranasal sinus (PNS) cancers. Herein, the authors have reported to their knowledge the largest series to date using intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) in the treatment of these patients. METHODS: Between 2013 and 2018, a total of 86 consecutive patients (68 of whom were radiation-naive and 18 of whom were reirradiated) received PT to median doses of 70 grays and 67 grays relative biological effectiveness, respectively. Approximately 53% received IMPT. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 23.4 months (range, 1.7-69.3 months) for all patients and 28.1 months (range, 2.3-69.3 months) for surviving patients. The 2-year local control (LC), distant control, disease-free survival, and overall survival rates were 83%, 84%, 74%, and 81%, respectively, for radiation-naive patients and 77%, 80%, 54%, and 66%, respectively for reirradiated patients. Among radiation-naive patients, when compared with 3-dimensional conformal proton technique, IMPT significantly improved LC (91% vs 72%; P < .01) and independently predicted LC (hazard ratio, 0.14; P = .01). Sixteen radiation-naive patients (24%) experienced acute grade 3 toxicities; 4 (6%) experienced late grade 3 toxicities (osteoradionecrosis, vision loss, soft-tissue necrosis, and soft tissue fibrosis) (grading was performed according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [version 5.0]). Slightly inferior LC was noted for patients undergoing reirradiation with higher complications: 11% experienced late grade 3 toxicities (facial pain and brain necrosis). Patients treated with reirradiation had more grade 1 to 2 radionecrosis than radiation-naive patients (brain: 33% vs 7% and osteoradionecrosis: 17% vs 3%). CONCLUSIONS: PT achieved remarkable LC for patients with nasal cavity and paranasal sinus cancers with lower grade 3 toxicities relative to historical reports. IMPT has the potential to improve the therapeutic ratio in these malignancies and is worthy of further investigation.

Detection of Early Human Papillomavirus-Associated Cancers by Liquid Biopsy.

PURPOSE: A circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) test to detect plasma Epstein-Barr viral DNA can be used to screen for early nasopharyngeal cancers; however, the reported sensitivity of viral ctDNA tests to detect human papillomavirus (HPV)-associated cancers is modest. We assessed the utility of droplet digital polymerase chain reaction (ddPCR) to detect early-stage HPV-associated cancers using sequential HPV16 and HPV33 assays that account for HPV subtype distribution and subtype sequence variants. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We collected plasma specimens from 97 HPV-positive patients with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma and eight patients with HPV-positive anal squamous cell carcinoma, each with locoregionally confined disease. Negative controls included samples from seven patients with HPV-negative head and neck cancers and 20 individuals without cancer. RESULTS: Of 97 patients with nonmetastatic, locoregionally confined oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma, 90 patients had detectable HPV16 ctDNA and three patients had HPV33 ctDNA, indicating an overall sensitivity of 95.6%. Seven of eight patients with early anal cancer were HPV16 ctDNA positive. No HPV ctDNA was detected in 27 negative controls, indicating 100% specificity. HPV16 ctDNA was detected in 19 of 19 patients with low-volume disease, defined as patients with a single, asymptomatic positive lymph node (N1) or an isolated T1-2 asymptomatic primary tumor. HPV16 ctDNA levels directly corresponded to tumor responses to chemoradiation and surgery. CONCLUSION: With an updated understanding of HPV subtypes and sequence variation, HPV ctDNA by ddPCR is highly sensitive and specific, identifying HPV16 and HPV33 subtypes in a similar distribution as reported in major genomic profiling studies. The detection of small tumors indicates that HPV16 and HPV33 ctDNA ddPCR could be readily used in early detection screening trials and in disease response monitoring, analogous to Epstein-Barr virus DNA.

Big Data in Cancer Research: Real-World Resources for Precision Oncology to Improve Cancer Care Delivery.

In oncology, the term "big data" broadly describes the rapid acquisition and generation of massive amounts of information, typically from population cancer registries, electronic health records, or large-scale genetic sequencing studies. The challenge of using big data in cancer research lies in interdisciplinary collaboration and information processing to unify diverse data sources and provide valid analytics to harness meaningful information. This article provides an overview of how big data approaches can be applied in cancer research, and how they can be used to translate information into new ways to ultimately make informed decisions that improve cancer care and delivery.

Predicting radiation dosimetric distribution in different regions of the jaw in patients receiving radiotherapy for squamous cell carcinoma of the tonsil.

BACKGROUND: Radiotherapy (RT), the main treatment for patients with head and neck cancer, can lead to dental complications. METHODS: We identified 244 patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the tonsil treated with RT from 2004 to 2013. For each patient, we contoured the 10 tooth-bearing regions and calculated the radiation dose (gray, Gy) to each region. From this data set, we built two predictive models to determine the expected maximum radiation dose, one for the non-molar regions and another for the molar regions. RESULTS: For the non-molars, the final model included location, T-classification, and overall stage, with a median absolute prediction error of 7.0 Gy. For the molars, the final model included location, T-classification, overall stage, and treatment year, with a median absolute error of 6.0 Gy. CONCLUSIONS: Our current model offers a good estimation of the maximum radiation dose delivered to different regions of the jaw; future work will independently validate these models.

Microsatellite Instability and Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Stage II Colon Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Randomized control trials and population-based studies do not demonstrate a definitive benefit for adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) in stage II colon cancer (CC). Tumor sidedness and microsatellite instability (MSI) status may predict response to ACT, but previous studies have limited microsatellite data. We assessed the efficacy of ACT and possible interaction with MSI status and tumor sidedness in patients with resected stage II CC diagnosed between 2010 and 2013 using the National Cancer Database. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Overall survival was evaluated with the Kaplan-Meier method and multivariate and propensity score matched Cox proportional hazards models. The interaction between receipt of ACT, MSI status, and tumor sidedness was evaluated. The efficacy of ACT was assessed in patient subgroups by MSI status and tumor sidedness. RESULTS: Among 6964 stage II CC patients with known MSI status, 1497 (21.5%) received ACT, 843 had MSI tumors, and 6121 had microsatellite stable (MSS) tumors. In multivariate and propensity score matched analyses, ACT was associated with improved survival after adjusting for factors including high-risk features, MSI status, and tumor sidedness (multivariate hazard ratio, 0.52; P<0.001). There was no interaction between receipt of ACT and MSI status (P=0.25). Patients with MSS tumors benefitted from ACT (multivariate hazard ratio, 0.47; P<0.001), even without other high-risk features. Patients with MSI tumors did not (P=0.671). ACT was associated with improved survival regardless of tumor sidedness. CONCLUSIONS: MSS alone may warrant ACT in stage II CC while patients with MSI tumors may not derive significant benefit from ACT.

Proton Radiotherapy for Recurrent or Metastatic Head and Neck Cancers with Palliative Quad Shot.

PURPOSE: Some patients with previously treated, unresectable, recurrent or metastatic head and neck malignancies are not amenable to curative-intent treatment. Here, we investigated the quad-shot (RTOG 8502) regimen of hypofractionated proton radiotherapy (RT) in that patient population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 2013 to 2015, 26 patients with recurrent or metastatic cancers were treated with palliative proton RT to the head and neck with quad shot (3.7 Gy twice daily for 2 days). Patient characteristics and survival data were reviewed. RESULTS: Seventeen (65%) patients received ≥ 3 quad-shot cycles and 23 (88%) had prior head and neck RT. Overall palliative response was 73% (n = 19). The most common presenting symptom was pain (50%; n = 13), which improved in 85% (n = 22) of all patients. The overall grade-1 acute-toxicity rate was 58% (n = 15), and no acute grade 3 to 5 toxicities were observed. CONCLUSIONS: The proton quad-shot regimen demonstrates favorable palliative response and toxicity profile, even in patients that received prior RT.

Proton Therapy for Head and Neck Cancer.

OPINION STATEMENT: The application of proton beam radiation therapy in the treatment of head and neck cancer has grown tremendously in the past few years. Globally, widespread interest in proton beam therapy has led to multiple research efforts regarding its therapeutic value and cost-effectiveness. The current standard of care using modern photon radiation technology has demonstrated excellent treatment outcomes, yet there are some situations where disease control remains suboptimal with the potential for detrimental acute and chronic toxicities. Due to the advantageous physical properties of the proton beam, proton beam therapy may be superior to photon therapy in some patient subsets for both disease control and patient quality of life. As enthusiasm and excitement for proton beam therapy continue to increase, clinical research and widespread adoption will elucidate the true value of proton beam therapy and give a greater understanding of the full risks and benefits of proton therapy in head and neck cancer.