Predicting future cancer incidence by age, race, ethnicity, and sex.

INTRODUCTION: Cancer remains a substantial burden on society. Our objective was to update projections on the number of new cancer diagnoses in the United States by age, race, ethnicity, and sex through 2040. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Population-based cancer incidence data were obtained using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) data. Population estimates were made using the 2010 US Census data population projections to calculate future cancer incidence. Trends in age-adjusted incidence rates for 23 cancer types along with total cancers were calculated and incorporated into a second projection model. RESULTS: If cancer incidence remains stable, annual cancer diagnoses are projected to increase by 29.5% from 1.86 million to 2.4 million between 2020 and 2040. This increase outpaces the projected US population growth of 12.3% over the same period. The population of older adults is projected to represent an increasing proportion of total cancer diagnoses with patients ≥65 years old comprising 69% of all new cancer diagnoses and patients ≥85 years old representing 13% of new diagnoses by 2040. Cancer diagnoses are projected to increase in racial minority groups, with a projected 44% increase in Black Americans (from 222,000 to 320,000 annually), and 86% in Hispanic Americans (from 175,000 to 326,000 annually). DISCUSSION: The landscape of cancer care will continue to change over the next several decades. The burden of disease will remain substantial, and the growing proportion of older and minority patients with cancer remains of particular interest. These projections should help guide future health policy and research priorities.

Defining Radiation Treatment Interruption Rates During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Findings From an Academic Center in an Underserved Urban Setting.

PURPOSE: Our purpose was to characterize radiation treatment interruption (RTI) rates and their potential association with sociodemographic variables in an urban population before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Electronic health records were retrospectively reviewed for patients treated between January 1, 2015, and February 28, 2021. Major and minor RTI were defined as ≥5 and 2 to 4 unplanned cancellations, respectively. RTI was compared across demographic and clinical factors and whether treatment started before or after COVID-19 onset (March 15, 2020) using multivariate logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Of 2,240 study cohort patients, 1,938 started treatment before COVID-19 and 302 started after. Patient census fell 36% over the year after COVID-19 onset. RTI rates remained stable or trended downward, although subtle shifts in association with social and treatment factors were observed on univariate and multivariate analysis. Interaction of treatment timing with risk factors was modest and limited to treatment length and minor RTI. Despite the stability of cohort-level findings showing limited associations with race, geospatial mapping demonstrated a discrete geographic shift in elevated RTI toward Black, underinsured patients living in inner urban communities. Affected neighborhoods could not be predicted quantitatively by local COVID-19 transmission activity or social vulnerability indices. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first United States institutional report to describe radiation therapy referral volume and interruption patterns during the year after pandemic onset. Patient referral volumes did not fully recover from an initial steep decline, but local RTI rates and associated risk factors remained mostly stable. Geospatial mapping suggested migration of RTI risk toward marginalized, minority-majority urban ZIP codes, which could not otherwise be predicted by neighborhood-level social vulnerability or pandemic activity. These findings signal that detailed localization of highest-risk communities could help focus radiation therapy access improvement strategies during and after public health emergencies. However, this will require replication to validate and broaden relevance to other settings.

Independent Predictors for Hospitalization-Associated Radiation therapy Interruptions.

Purpose: Radiation treatment interruption associated with unplanned hospitalization remains understudied. The intent of this study was to benchmark the frequency of hospitalization-associated radiation therapy interruptions (HARTI), characterize disease processes causing hospitalization during radiation, identify factors predictive for HARTI, and localize neighborhood environments associated with HARTI at our academic referral center. Methods and Materials: This retrospective review of electronic health records provided descriptive statistics of HARTI event rates at our institutional practice. Uni- and multivariable logistic regression models were developed to identify significant factors predictive for HARTI. Causes of hospitalization were established from primary discharge diagnoses. HARTI rates were mapped according to patient residence addresses. Results: Between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2017, 197 HARTI events (5.3%) were captured across 3729 patients with 727 total missed treatments. The 3 most common causes of hospitalization were malnutrition/dehydration (n = 28; 17.7%), respiratory distress/infection (n = 24; 13.7%), and fever/sepsis (n = 17; 9.7%). Factors predictive for HARTI included African-American race (odds ratio [OR]: 1.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-2.06; P = .018), Medicaid/uninsured status (OR: 2.05; 95% CI, 1.32-3.15; P = .0013), Medicare coverage (OR: 1.7; 95% CI, 1.21-2.39; P = .0022), lung (OR: 5.97; 95% CI, 3.22-11.44; P < .0001), and head and neck (OR: 5.6; 95% CI, 2.96-10.93; P < .0001) malignancies, and prescriptions >20 fractions (OR: 2.23; 95% CI, 1.51-3.34; P < .0001). HARTI events clustered among Medicaid/uninsured patients living in urban, low-income, majority African-American neighborhoods, and patients from middle-income suburban communities, independent of race and insurance status. Only the wealthiest residential areas demonstrated low HARTI rates. Conclusions: HARTI disproportionately affected socioeconomically disadvantaged urban patients facing a high treatment burden in our catchment population. A complementary geospatial analysis also captured the risk experienced by middle-income suburban patients independent of race or insurance status. Confirmatory studies are warranted to provide scale and context to guide intervention strategies to equitably reduce HARTI events.

Risk factors associated with metastatic site failure in patients with high-risk neuroblastoma.

Purpose: This retrospective study sought to identify predictors of metastatic site failure (MSF) at new and/or original (present at diagnosis) sites in high-risk neuroblastoma patients. Methods and materials: Seventy-six high-risk neuroblastoma patients treated on four institutional prospective trials from 1997 to 2014 with induction chemotherapy, surgery, myeloablative chemotherapy, stem-cell rescue, and were eligible for consolidative primary and metastatic site (MS) radiotherapy were eligible for study inclusion. Computed-tomography and I-123 MIBG scans were used to assess disease response and Curie scores at diagnosis, post-induction, post-transplant, and treatment failure. Outcomes were described using the Kaplan-Meier estimator. Cox proportional hazards frailty (cphfR) and CPH regression (CPHr) were used to identify covariates predictive of MSF at a site identified either at diagnosis or later. Results: MSF occurred in 42 patients (55%). Consolidative MS RT was applied to 30 MSs in 10 patients. Original-MSF occurred in 146 of 383 (38%) non-irradiated and 18 of 30 (60%) irradiated MSs (p = 0.018). Original- MSF occurred in post-induction MIBG-avid MSs in 68 of 81 (84%) non-irradiated and 12 of 14 (85%) radiated MSs (p = 0.867). The median overall and progression-free survival rates were 61 months (95% CI 42.6-Not Reached) and 24.1 months (95% CI 16.5-38.7), respectively. Multivariate CPHr identified inability to undergo transplant (HR 32.4 95%CI 9.3-96.8, p < 0.001) and/or maintenance chemotherapy (HR 5.2, 95%CI 1.7-16.2, p = 0.005), and the presence of lung metastases at diagnosis (HR 4.4 95%CI 1.7-11.1, p = 0.002) as predictors of new MSF. The new MSF-free survival rate at 3 years was 25% and 87% in patients with and without high-risk factors. Conclusions: Incremental improvements in systemic therapy influence the patterns and type of metastatic site failure in neuroblastoma. Persistence of MIBG-avidity following induction chemotherapy and transplant at MSs increased the hazard for MSF.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Canadian Radiation Oncology Practices.

PURPOSE: To survey Canadian radiation oncology (RO) practice leaders to determine the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on radiation services and patient and staff issues in the early phase of the pandemic and 1 year later. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The RO leader (department or division head) from every Canadian cancer center with radiation services was identified. Two surveys were circulated to the identified leader via email from the Canadian Association of Radiation Oncology central office, using the SurveyMonkey survey tool: the first closed in June 2020 and the second (expanded) survey in June 2021, representing 2 points in time of the COVID-19 pandemic. Questions included patient volume, service interruptions and delays, and changes in scheduling and telemedicine use. Additional questions were included in the follow-up survey to determine further effects on disease presentation, volume, vaccination and access, and personnel issues. RESULTS: Telemedicine was widely adopted early in the pandemic and continued to be a common technique to communicate and connect with patients. Although many centers were deferring or delaying certain disease sites early in the pandemic, this was not as prevalent 1 year later. Reduced cancer screening and patients presenting with more advanced disease were concerns documented in the 2021 survey. A high level of concern regarding stress among health care professionals was identified. CONCLUSIONS: Canadian RO centers have faced numerous challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic but continued to provide timely and essential cancer care for patients with cancer. Future evaluation of RO center practices will be important to continue to document and address the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on issues relevant to RO leaders, patients, and staff.

Variable Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Radiation Oncology Practices in the United States.

PURPOSE: Early in the pandemic, the American Society for Radiation Oncology surveyed physician leaders at radiation oncology practices in the United States to understand how the field was responding to the outbreak of COVID-19. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Surveys were repeated at multiple points during the pandemic, with a response rate of 43% in April 2020 and 23% in January 2021. To our knowledge, this is the only longitudinal COVID-19 practice survey in oncology in the United States. RESULTS: The surveys indicate that patient access to essential radiation oncology services in the United States has been preserved throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Safety protocols were universally adopted, telehealth was widely adopted and remains in use, and most clinics no longer deferred or postponed radiation treatments as of early 2021. Late-stage disease presentation, treatment interruptions, shortages of personal protective equipment, and vaccination barriers were reported significantly more at community-based practices than at academic practices, and rural practices appear to have faced increased obstacles. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings provide unique insights into the initial longitudinal effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the delivery of radiation therapy in the United States. Downstream lessons in service adaptation and improvement can potentially be guided by formal concepts of resilience, which have been broadly embraced across the US economy.

Disparities in older adult accrual to cancer trials: Analysis from the alliance for clinical trials in oncology (A151736).

BACKGROUND: Older adults are under-represented in cancer clinical trials. However, it remains unclear which types of trials under-enroll aging patients. We aimed to identify associations between trial characteristics and disparate enrollment of older adults onto trials sponsored by the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology (Alliance). METHODS: Actual age ≥ 65 percentage and trial data were extracted from the Alliance closed study list. Each trial, based on its cancer type and years of enrollment, was assigned an expected age ≥ 65 percentage extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) US population-based database. Enrollment disparity difference (EDD), the difference between the expected age ≥ 65 percentage and the actual age ≥ 65 percentage, was calculated for each trial. Linear regression determined trial variables associated with larger EDDs and variables with an overall association p-value <0.20 were included in a multivariable fixed-effects linear model. RESULTS: The median age of 66,708 patients across 237 trials was 60 years (range 18-102). The average actual age ≥ 65 percentage enrolled per trial was lower than each trial's expected age ≥ 65 percentage average (39% vs. 58%; EDD 19, 95% CI 17.1-21.3%, p < 0.0001). In multivariable analyses, non-genitourinary (GU) cancer types (p < 0.001), trimodality+ trials (estimate 8.78, 95%CI 2.21-15.34, p = 0.009), and phase 2 trials (estimate 4.43 95% CI -0.06-8.91; p = 0.05) were all associated with larger EDDs. CONCLUSIONS: Disparate enrollment of older adults is not equal across cancer trials. Future strategies to improve older adult inclusion should focus on trial types associated with the highest disparate enrollment.

Frameworks for Radiation Oncology Global Health Initiatives in US Residency Programs.

PURPOSE: To understand trends, pathways, and experiences and to establish a framework for radiation oncology (RO) programs interested in developing global health (GH) initiatives. METHODS: An in-depth interview was conducted of all US RO programs with established GH initiatives. Programs were identified by reviewing results of the 2018 Association of Residents in Radiation Oncology Global Health Resident Survey and individualized outreach to screen for additional programs meeting the following criteria: (1) active resident involvement in RO-specific GH opportunities, (2) active faculty involvement in these initiatives, and (3) department chair or program director awareness and support for ongoing opportunities. Among 88 residency programs, 11 were identified. Standardized questions explored the type of initiative, planning, staff and resident involvement, challenges, components to success, and history of programs through December 2018. RESULTS: Between 2010 and 2018, 11 programs started initiatives. Total resident participants ranged from one to 13 (median = 3) in each program's history. Initiatives spanned education (n = 9 [82%]), clinical mentorship (73%), innovative technology (55%), bilateral hosting programs (45%), clinical development and equipment (45%), promotion of local research (36%), clinical care (36%), industry partnerships (27%), and remote tumor board (18%). Faculty involvement included radiation oncologists (91%), medical physicists (55%), and non-RO department faculty (27%). Six programs (55%) had faculty with prior GH experience. Four (36%) programs reported medical student involvement in projects. Barriers included international communication (36%), time for faculty (18%), funding (9%), and legal (9%) concerns. Commonest components of success included fostering relationships with international sites and identifying needs before solutions. CONCLUSION: RO GH initiatives were reported as positive, educational, and feasible across 11 US residency programs. Growth is expected, representing opportunities for innovation and service among US programs.

Novel Use of Biphasic Cuirass Ventilation During Definitive Radiation Therapy: A Technical Report.

The use of biphasic cuirass ventilator supported radiation therapy has never been documented. We present the first technical report here. A 57-year-old man with obstructive sleep apnea presented with a T0N1M0 right sided, human papillomavirus related head and neck cancer diagnosed on excisional lymph node biopsy. On further workup, the cancer was found to have originated in the right tonsil and was staged as T1N1. The patient started definitive treatment with concurrent chemo-radiation therapy, but after 5 treatments was no longer able to lay in a supine position for treatment. Diagnostic imaging workup eventually revealed an idiopathic right sided hemi-diaphragm eventration. After consultation with cardiology, pulmonology, and head and neck surgery, recommendation was made for tracheostomy to tolerate supine radiotherapy position, but the patient refused. Instead, computed tomography simulation for radiotherapy replanning was performed using a combination of biphasic cuirass ventilation, home continuous positive airway pressure and oxygen. The patient then tolerated definitive treatment to a dose of 69.96 Gray in 33 fractions with concurrent chemotherapy and experienced no unexpected side effects. Although complex, daily treatment setup was consistent. Daily onboard imaging was precise and accurate. The patient continues to follow up with radiation oncology, medical oncology, and pulmonology. This is the first use of biphasic cuirass ventilator supported radiotherapy reported in the scientific literature. Although daily treatment setup is complex, its use could be considered in patients unable to tolerate radiation therapy treatment positioning as an alternative to tracheostomy.

Initial Impact and Operational Responses to the COVID-19 Pandemic by American Radiation Oncology Practices.

PURPOSE: In February 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic reached the United States. The impact of the pandemic on the US radiation oncology field remains unknown. The American Society for Radiation Oncology surveyed US radiation oncology practice leaders to gauge initial impact and immediate operational responses to the pandemic. METHODS AND MATERIALS: From April 16 to April 30, 2020, the American Society for Radiation Oncology surveyed US radiation oncology practice leaders by email to gauge initial impact and immediate operational responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-two (43%) of 517 leaders responded from community and academic practices (62% and 34%, respectively), hospital-based and free-standing centers (69% and 29%), and metro and rural locations (88% and 12%). Practices reported treating an average of 1086 patients per year in 2019 (range, 0-7900) with an average daily treatment volume of 70 patients (range, 5-400). All practices reported uninterrupted operation. On average, practices were treating 68% of their typical volume (range, 10%-95%), with 92% implementing planned treatment postponement for lower risk patients. An estimated revenue decrease of 20% or more was experienced by 71% of practices. Confirmed COVID-19 patient cases were treated by 39% of practices. Seventy percent experienced staff shortages. Almost all (98%) practices implemented formal operational procedures to protect patients and staff, although personal protective equipment/infection control supply shortages were reported by 78% of practices. Seventy-four percent used telemedicine for virtual follow-up surveillance, and 15% leveraged telemedicine for on-treatment assessment. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical and financial impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on US radiation oncology were deep and broad. Despite reported shortages in personal protective equipment, declines in revenue, and reduced patient volumes, practices adapted quickly by refining standard processes of care, implementing recommended safety measures, and employing telemedicine to facilitate treatment continuity. Patients with higher risk disease experienced uninterrupted access to care. We plan to continue regular surveying across the lifespan of the pandemic to document the geographic and temporal impact of COVID-19 on the field and its patients.

COVID's Impact on Radiation Oncology: A Latin American Survey Study.

PURPOSE: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Latin American radiation therapy services has not yet been widely assessed. In comparison to centers in Europe or the United States, the scarcity of data on these terms might impair design of adequate measures to ameliorate the pandemic's potential damage. The first survey-based analysis revealing regional information is herein presented. METHODS AND MATERIALS: From May 6 to May 30, 2020, the American Society for Radiation Oncology's COVID-19 Survey was distributed across Latin America with support of the local national radiation therapy societies. Twenty-six items, including facility demographic and financial characteristics, personnel and patient features, current and expected impact of the pandemic, and research perspectives, were included in the questionnaire. RESULTS: Complete responses were obtained from 115 (50%) of 229 practices across 15 countries. Only 2.6% of centers closed during the pandemic. A median of 4 radiation oncologists (1-27) and 9 (1-100) radiation therapists were reported per center. The median number of new patients treated in 2019 was 600 (24-6200). A median 8% (1%-90%) decrease in patient volume was reported, with a median of 53 patients (1-490) remaining under treatment. Estimated revenue reduction was 20% or more in 53% of cases. Shortage of personal protective equipment was reported in 51.3% of centers, and 27% reported personnel shortage due to COVID-19. Reported delays in treatment for low-risk entities included early stage breast cancer (42.6%), low-risk status prostate cancer (67%), and nonmalignant conditions (42.6%). Treatment of COVID-19 patients at designated treatment times and differentiated bunkers were reported in 22.6% and 10.4% of centers, respectively. Telehealth initiatives have been started in 64.3% of facilities to date for on-treatment (29.6%) and posttreatment (34.8%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: Regional information regarding COVID-19 pandemic in Latin America may help elucidate suitable intervention strategies for personnel and patients. Follow-up surveys will be performed to provide dynamic monitoring the pandemic's impact on radiation therapy services and adoption of ameliorating measures.

Impact of a global radiation oncology scholarship for trainees: An evaluation of early outcomes.

Global Oncology capacity in Radiation Oncology (RO) needs development. We report on early outcomes of a Canadian Global Oncology elective scholarship program for trainees (2014-2019). The number of global oncology electives increased. Academic deliverables and collaborations were observed. There was evidence of personal and professional development.

Effect of COVID-19 pandemic on practice in European radiation oncology centers.

ESTRO surveyed European radiation oncology department heads to evaluate the impact of COVID-19. Telemedicine was used in 78% of the departments, and 60% reported a decline in patient volume. Use of protective measures was implemented on a large scale, but shortages of personal protective equipment were present in more than half of the departments.

Location as Destiny: Identifying Geospatial Disparities in Radiation Treatment Interruption by Neighborhood, Race, and Insurance.

PURPOSE: Radiation therapy interruption (RTI) worsens cancer outcomes. Our purpose was to benchmark and map RTI across a region in the United States with known cancer outcome disparities. METHODS AND MATERIALS: All radiation therapy (RT) treatments at our academic center were cataloged. Major RTI was defined as ≥5 unplanned RT appointment cancellations. Univariate and multivariable logistic and linear regression analyses identified associated factors. Major RTI was mapped by patient residence. A 2-sided P value <.0001 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Between 2015 and 2017, a total of 3754 patients received RT, of whom 3744 were eligible for analysis: 962 patients (25.8%) had ≥2 RT interruptions and 337 patients (9%) had major RTI. Disparities in major RTI were seen across Medicaid versus commercial/Medicare insurance (22.5% vs 7.2%; P < .0001), low versus high predicted income (13.0% vs 5.9%; P < .0001), Black versus White race (12.0% vs 6.6%; P < .0001), and urban versus suburban treatment location (12.0% vs 6.3%; P < .0001). On multivariable analysis, increased odds of major RTI were seen for Medicaid patients (odds ratio [OR], 3.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.25-5.00; P < .0001) versus those with commercial/Medicare insurance and for head and neck (OR, 3.74; 95% CI, 2.56-5.46; P < .0001), gynecologic (OR, 3.28; 95% CI, 2.09-5.15; P < .0001), and lung cancers (OR, 3.12; 95% CI, 1.96-4.97; P < .0001) compared with breast cancer. Major RTI was mapped to urban, majority Black, low-income neighborhoods and to rural, majority White, low-income regions. CONCLUSIONS: Radiation treatment interruption disproportionately affects financially and socially vulnerable patient populations and maps to high-poverty neighborhoods. Geospatial mapping affords an opportunity to correlate RT access on a neighborhood level to inform potential intervention strategies.

Global Health Perspectives Among Radiation Oncology Residency Program Directors: A Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices Survey.

PURPOSE: Interest in global health has risen among medical students applying to and residents training in radiation oncology, often outpacing available educational offerings. The Association of Residents in Radiation Oncology Global Health Subcommittee sought to determine the perceptions of program directors (PDs) in radiation oncology and their current or planned global health curricular opportunities. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A standardized, Knowledge-Attitudes-Practices survey composed of 32 binary items was sent to PDs for all Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited radiation oncology programs. RESULTS: The program response rate was 60% (55 of 91). Responding programs were distributed evenly geographically and included a range of training program sizes. Most PDs (77%) knew that most nations did not meet standard minimum benchmarks for radiation therapy access. Although 89% would support residents in pursuing global health rotations, only 22% would support departmental funding of such rotations. Furthermore, 94% believed that global health was a field worthy of an academic career, but only 39% believed that it had appropriate rigor. Only 8% of programs had dedicated global health rotations. CONCLUSIONS: Radiation oncology PDs largely expressed favorable views of global health as a pursuit and affirmed a high degree of resident and medical student interest. However, faculty commitment and program offerings currently lag behind the interest level. In particular, a substantial number of PDs do not perceive global health to be a rigorous academic endeavor. Future progress in academic global health in radiation oncology will require strategies to systematically support pathways for the development of experience and scholarship both within and beyond residency.

Insurance status and head and neck radiotherapy interruption disparities in the Mid-Southern United States.

BACKGROUND: Relationships between health insurance coverage and radiotherapy (RT) interruption rates in patients with head and neck (H&N) cancer remain unclear. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study at our academic center. Days of RT interruption for individual patients were tabulated, analyzed for explanatory variables, and geographically mapped. RESULTS: 894 of 7526 (11.9%) scheduled treatment days were interrupted, impacting 149 of 216 (69%) patients. Medicaid/uninsured patients experienced a 7.3 day mean interruption (SD = 9.9) vs 3.4 days (SD = 5.2) for Medicare/private patients (P < .001). RT interruption was predicted by insurance status in multivariate analysis (P = .008). Higher RT interruption rates overlapped geospatially with low predicted median household income and racial minority neighborhoods. CONCLUSION: Unplanned treatment interruptions are a key source for H&N RT quality shortfalls in Medicaid/uninsured patients. This is the first geographic benchmarking of H&N RT delivery disparities across a complete metropolitan region, and will guide interventions studies to reduce interruption risk.

"Eat to Live"-Piloting a Culinary Medicine Program for Head & Neck Radiotherapy Patients.

BACKGROUND: Head and neck radiotherapy (H&N RT) patients are at risk for malnutrition following treatment due to dysphagia and alterations in taste quality. This project studied feasibility of a food skills intervention strategy support food preparation, cooking confidence, and individualized dietary choices to support nutritional status in this patient population. METHODS: We piloted a monthly cooking class (called "Eat to Live") from November 2018 to January 2019. Every class included cooking and nutrition domains, organized around a specific meal of the day (i.e., breakfast, lunch, or dinner). Seven participants (4 patients, 3 caregivers) attended at least one class, with four participants (3 patients, 1 caregiver) completing all three classes. Pre- and post-study measures (self-administered questionnaires) assessed changes in cooking behavior, dietary choices, and taste sensation before and after the intervention. RESULTS: Healthful eating scores increased modestly from start to finish of the class (1.5 to 1.7 on a 3-point scale), with averaged patient preference scores for healthy foods increasing incrementally. This took place despite physical taste scores declining across the 3-month study. After completing the class, participants were more likely to select fresh fruits and vegetables, grains, lean cuts of meat, and dairy products. Patients also adopted positive behavioral modifications to their diets, such as eating out at restaurants less often and baking/grilling foods instead of frying. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first published report on feasibility and patient acceptance of an evidence-based culinary medicine intervention in H&N RT patients. We observed objective improvements in dietary choices and cooking confidence in a small cohort of patient/caregiver dyads. This pilot work justifies follow-on development of a more comprehensive intervention optimized for patient convenience and longitudinal support.

Implications of Image-Defined Risk Factors and Primary-Site Response on Local Control and Radiation Treatment Delivery in the Management of High-Risk Neuroblastoma: Is There a Role for De-escalation of Adjuvant Primary-Site Radiation Therapy?

PURPOSE: The predictive value of Image-Defined Risk Factors (IDRFs) developed by the International Neuroblastoma Risk Group Task Force as it relates to primary-site management is undefined and may aid patient selection for de-escalation of adjuvant radiation therapy to the primary site in high-risk neuroblastoma. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients (N = 76) with high-risk neuroblastoma treated on prospective trials at our institution from 1997 to 2014 were eligible for inclusion. IDRFs were defined based on pretherapy imaging. Overall survival, progression-free survival, and locoregional failure-free survival (LRFFS) were described using the Kaplan-Meier estimator and tested across strata by using the log-rank test. RESULTS: Twenty of 76 patients (26%) experienced local (n = 6), regional (n = 6), or combined locoregional failure (n = 8) with or without distant failure. Ten (50%) of the locoregional failures had concurrent distant relapse. Of patients who completed all therapy, both those with no IDRFs and those with >90% resection had a 3-year LRFFS of 100%, with or without radiation therapy. Patients with either ≥1 IDRF or 90% tumor resection and no primary site IDRFs at diagnosis may be candidates for de-escalation of adjuvant primary-site radiation therapy, although validation of these findings in future studies is required.

Managing local-regional failure in children with high-risk neuroblastoma: A single institution experience.

BACKGROUND: Intensification of systemic therapy for high-risk neuroblastoma (HRNB) has resulted in improved local control and overall survival (OS) leaving potential for de-escalation of primary site radiotherapy. The utility of primary site de-escalation should be evaluated in the context of potential for successful local-regional salvage. We evaluated salvage strategies and outcomes in patients with HRNB with local-regional recurrence as a component of first failure. METHODS: Twenty of 89 patients with HRNB experienced local-regional recurrence as a component of first relapse after chemotherapy, radiotherapy, surgery, and stem cell transplant from 1997 to 2013. We reviewed salvage therapy strategies and disease control, and report on the impact of local therapy as salvage for local-regional relapse. RESULTS: Six of 20 patients with local-regional failure (LRF) were alive after a median follow-up of 13 years (range, 0.9-25.2 years). Median OS was 4.6 years (95% CI, 0.6 to not reached) versus 0.6 years (95% CI, 0.05-2.6) after LRF with and without distant failure, respectively (P = 0.03). OS in patients receiving salvage radiotherapy was comparable to those receiving initial adjuvant but no salvage radiotherapy. Time to first failure and death was significantly impacted by the intensity of frontline systemic therapy (P = 0.03). Salvage radiotherapy reduced the hazard for subsequent LRF (hazard ratio 0.3, 95% CI 0.1-0.9, P = 0.04) but not OS (P = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights the potential of local control strategies at first failure in patients with LRF when primary site radiotherapy was initially omitted, and delineates potential selection factors which may further improve the therapeutic ratio.

Is there a role for salvage re-irradiation in pediatric patients with locoregional recurrent rhabdomyosarcoma? Clinical outcomes from a multi-institutional cohort.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Limited data exist detailing the role of salvage reirradiation following local-regional recurrence (LR) in previously irradiated pediatric patients with rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated outcomes and prognostic factors in a multi-institutional cohort of 23 patients with LR-only (N = 19) or LR with distant failure (N = 4) RMS managed with (N = 12) or without (N = 11) re-irradiation who were treated from 1996 to 2012. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 4.6 years from LR, 7 (30%) patients were alive and 5 (22%) had no evidence of disease. Median OS and PFS from LR were 19.3 and 16.9 months, respectively. LFFS and DFFS at 3 years from relapse were 54% and 56%, respectively. Salvage re-irradiation occurred in 12 (52%) patients, with 9 (75%) receiving resection before re-irradiation. Patients classified as low-risk at diagnosis with favorable primary tumor location had improved 3-year PFS 80% (95% CI 51.6-100%) vs. 47.1% (95% CI 27.3-81.2%), p = 0.066], and OS 80% [(95% CI 22.4-100%) vs. 47.1% (95% CI 27.3-81.3%), p = 0.051] following LR. Median LFFS and OS in unirradiated vs. re-irradiated patients was 12.4 vs. 19.6 (p = 0.1) and 18.8 vs. 26.1 months (p = 0.46). No patients experienced ≥grade 4 acute toxicity from re-irradiation. LR failure was a component of cancer-related death in 60% vs. 40% of the unirradiated and re-irradiated group (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Salvage re-irradiation appears tolerable with acceptable morbidity and may reduce the risk of subsequent LR as a component of death in patients with LR RMS.