RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Patients with polymetastatic cancer are most often treated with systemic therapy to improve overall survival and/or delay progression, with palliative radiotherapy reserved for sites of symptomatic disease. Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) has shown promise in the treatment of oligometastatic disease, but the utility of SABR in treating all sites of polymetastatic disease has yet to be evaluated. This study aims to evaluate the maximally tolerated dose (MTD) of SABR in patients with polymetastatic disease. METHODS: Up to 48 patients with polymetastatic cancer (> 10 sites) will be enrolled on this phase I, modified 3 + 3 design trial. Eligible patients will have exhausted (or refused) standard systemic therapy options. SABR will be delivered as an escalating number of weekly fractions of 6 Gy, starting at 6 Gy × 2 weekly fractions (dose level 1). The highest dose level (dose level 4) will be 6 Gy × 5 weekly fractions. Feasibility and safety of SABR will be evaluated 6 weeks following treatment using a composite endpoint of successfully completing treatment as well as toxicity outcomes. DISCUSSION: This study will be the first to explore delivering SABR in patients with polymetastatic disease. SABR will be planned using the guiding principles of: strict adherence to dose constraints, minimization of treatment burden, and minimization of toxicity. As this represents a novel use of radiotherapy, our phase I study will allow for careful selection of the MTD for exploration in future studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was prospectively registered in ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT04530513 on August 28, 2020.
Asunto(s)
Protocolos Clínicos , Neoplasias/patología , Neoplasias/radioterapia , Radiocirugia/métodos , Fraccionamiento de la Dosis de Radiación , Humanos , Metástasis de la Neoplasia , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Radiocirugia/efectos adversos , Dosificación Radioterapéutica , Proyectos de InvestigaciónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The oligometastatic paradigm suggests that some patients with a limited number of metastases might be cured if all lesions are eradicated. Evidence from randomised controlled trials to support this paradigm is scarce. We aimed to assess the effect of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) on survival, oncological outcomes, toxicity, and quality of life in patients with a controlled primary tumour and one to five oligometastatic lesions. METHODS: This randomised, open-label phase 2 study was done at 10 hospitals in Canada, the Netherlands, Scotland, and Australia. Patients aged 18 or older with a controlled primary tumour and one to five metastatic lesions, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score of 0-1, and a life expectancy of at least 6 months were eligible. After stratifying by the number of metastases (1-3 vs 4-5), we randomly assigned patients (1:2) to receive either palliative standard of care treatments alone (control group), or standard of care plus SABR to all metastatic lesions (SABR group), using a computer-generated randomisation list with permuted blocks of nine. Neither patients nor physicians were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was overall survival. We used a randomised phase 2 screening design with a two-sided α of 0·20 (wherein p<0·20 designates a positive trial). All analyses were intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01446744. FINDINGS: 99 patients were randomised between Feb 10, 2012, and Aug 30, 2016. Of 99 patients, 33 (33%) were assigned to the control group and 66 (67%) to the SABR group. Two (3%) patients in the SABR group did not receive allocated treatment and withdrew from the trial; two (6%) patients in the control group also withdrew from the trial. Median follow-up was 25 months (IQR 19-54) in the control group versus 26 months (23-37) in the SABR group. Median overall survival was 28 months (95% CI 19-33) in the control group versus 41 months (26-not reached) in the SABR group (hazard ratio 0·57, 95% CI 0·30-1·10; p=0·090). Adverse events of grade 2 or worse occurred in three (9%) of 33 controls and 19 (29%) of 66 patients in the SABR group (p=0·026), an absolute increase of 20% (95% CI 5-34). Treatment-related deaths occurred in three (4·5%) of 66 patients after SABR, compared with none in the control group. INTERPRETATION: SABR was associated with an improvement in overall survival, meeting the primary endpoint of this trial, but three (4·5%) of 66 patients in the SABR group had treatment-related death. Phase 3 trials are needed to conclusively show an overall survival benefit, and to determine the maximum number of metastatic lesions wherein SABR provides a benefit. FUNDING: Ontario Institute for Cancer Research and London Regional Cancer Program Catalyst Grant.
Asunto(s)
Metástasis de la Neoplasia/radioterapia , Cuidados Paliativos , Radiocirugia , Anciano , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Fraccionamiento de la Dosis de Radiación , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Metástasis de la Neoplasia/terapia , Radiocirugia/efectos adversos , Radiocirugia/métodos , Radiocirugia/mortalidad , Análisis de Supervivencia , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Patients with high-risk prostate cancer are at increased risk of lymph node metastasis and are thought to benefit from whole pelvis radiotherapy (WPRT). There has been recent interest in the use of hypofractionated radiotherapy in treating prostate cancer. However, toxicity and cancer outcomes associated with hypofractionated WPRT are unclear at this time. This phase II study aims to investigate the impact in quality of life associated with hypofractionated WPRT compared to conventionally fractionated WPRT. METHODS: Fifty-eight patients with unfavourable intermediate-, high- or very high-risk prostate cancer will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio between high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) + conventionally fractionated (45 Gy in 25 fractions) WPRT vs. HDR-BT + hypofractionated (25 Gy in 5 fractions) WPRT. Randomization will be performed with a permuted block design without stratification. The primary endpoint is late bowel toxicity and the secondary endpoints include acute and late urinary and sexual toxicity, acute bowel toxicity, biochemical failure-, androgen deprivation therapy-, metastasis- and prostate cancer-free survival of the hypofractionated arm compared to the conventionally fractionated arm. DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, this is the first study to compare hypofractionated WPRT to conventionally fractionated WPRT with HDR-BT boost. Hypofractionated WPRT is a more attractive and convenient treatment approach, and may become the new standard of care if demonstrated to be well-tolerated and effective. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was prospectively registered in ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT04197141 on December 12, 2019.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Próstata/radioterapia , Hipofraccionamiento de la Dosis de Radiación/normas , Humanos , Masculino , Estudios Prospectivos , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) has emerged as a new treatment option for patients with oligometastatic disease. SABR delivers precise, high-dose, hypofractionated radiotherapy, and achieves excellent rates of local control for primary tumors or metastases. A recent randomized phase II trial evaluated SABR in a group of patients with a small burden of oligometastatic disease (mostly with 1-3 metastatic lesions), and found that SABR was associated with benefits in progression-free survival and overall survival. The goal of this phase III trial is to assess the impact of SABR in patients with 4-10 metastatic cancer lesions. METHODS: One hundred and fifty-nine patients will be randomized in a 1:2 ratio between the control arm (consisting of standard of care palliative-intent treatments), and the SABR arm (consisting of standard of care treatment + SABR to all sites of known disease). Randomization will be stratified by two factors: histology (Group 1: prostate, breast, or renal; Group 2: all others), and type of pre-specified systemic therapy (Group 1: immunotherapy/targeted; Group 2: cytotoxic; Group 3: observation). SABR is to be completed within 2 weeks, allowing for rapid initiation of systemic therapy. Recommended SABR doses are 20 Gy in 1 fraction, 30 Gy in 3 fractions, or 35 Gy in 5 fractions, chosen to minimize risks of toxicity. The primary endpoint is overall survival, and secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, time to development of new metastatic lesions, quality of life, and toxicity. Translational endpoints include assessment of circulating tumor cells, cell-free DNA, and tumor tissue as prognostic and predictive markers, including assessment of immunological predictors of response and long-term survival. DISCUSSION: This study will provide an assessment of the impact of SABR on clinical outcomes and quality of life, to determine if long-term survival can be achieved for selected patients with 4-10 oligometastatic lesions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03721341 . Date of registration: October 26, 2018.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias/radioterapia , Células Neoplásicas Circulantes/efectos de la radiación , Radiocirugia , Biomarcadores de Tumor/sangre , Fraccionamiento de la Dosis de Radiación , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética , Masculino , Neoplasias/sangre , Selección de Paciente , Pronóstico , Supervivencia sin Progresión , Calidad de Vida , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X , Carga TumoralRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Increasingly, patient- and family-centered care (PFCC) is recognized as a valuable component of healthcare reform with rich opportunities for improvement within oncology. Shifting toward PFCC requires physician buy-in; however, research examining their perspectives on PFCC is lacking. We sought to explore oncologists' perspectives on PFCC to identify factors that influence their ability to practice PFCC. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 18 oncologists (8 radiation, 4 medical, 4 surgical, 2 hematologist-oncologists) at a single Canadian academic cancer institution. Interview data were analyzed using thematic analysis and principles drawn from grounded theory. Subsequently, focus groups consisting of the interviewed participants were facilitated to confirm and elaborate on our findings. Constant comparisons were used to identify recurring themes. RESULTS: Three dominant themes emerged. First, physicians displayed cautious engagement in their approach to PFCC. Collectively, participants understood the general principles of PFCC. However, there was a limited understanding of the value, implications, and motivation for improving PFCC which may create reluctance with physician buy-in. Second, both individual and system barriers to practicing PFCC were identified. A lack of physician acknowledgement and engagement and competing responsibilities emerged as provider-level challenges. System barriers included impaired clinic workflow, physical infrastructure constraints, and delays in access to care. Third, physicians were able to identify existing and potential PFCC behaviors that were feasible within existing system constraints. CONCLUSIONS: Advancing PFCC will require continued physician education regarding the value of PFCC, acknowledgement and preservation of effective patient- and family-centered strategies, and creative solutions to address the system constraints to delivering PFCC.
Asunto(s)
Actitud del Personal de Salud , Oncólogos/psicología , Atención Dirigida al Paciente , Adulto , Canadá , Femenino , Grupos Focales , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Investigación Cualitativa , Flujo de TrabajoRESUMEN
Three dimensional (3D) manual segmentation of the prostate on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a laborious and time-consuming task that is subject to inter-observer variability. In this study, we developed a fully automatic segmentation algorithm for T2-weighted endorectal prostate MRI and evaluated its accuracy within different regions of interest using a set of complementary error metrics. Our dataset contained 42 T2-weighted endorectal MRI from prostate cancer patients. The prostate was manually segmented by one observer on all of the images and by two other observers on a subset of 10 images. The algorithm first coarsely localizes the prostate in the image using a template matching technique. Then, it defines the prostate surface using learned shape and appearance information from a set of training images. To evaluate the algorithm, we assessed the error metric values in the context of measured inter-observer variability and compared performance to that of our previously published semi-automatic approach. The automatic algorithm needed an average execution time of â¼60 s to segment the prostate in 3D. When compared to a single-observer reference standard, the automatic algorithm has an average mean absolute distance of 2.8 mm, Dice similarity coefficient of 82%, recall of 82%, precision of 84%, and volume difference of 0.5 cm3 in the mid-gland. Concordant with other studies, accuracy was highest in the mid-gland and lower in the apex and base. Loss of accuracy with respect to the semi-automatic algorithm was less than the measured inter-observer variability in manual segmentation for the same task.
Asunto(s)
Procesamiento de Imagen Asistido por Computador/métodos , Imagenología Tridimensional/métodos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética/métodos , Reconocimiento de Normas Patrones Automatizadas/métodos , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico por imagen , Algoritmos , Humanos , Masculino , Variaciones Dependientes del Observador , Próstata/diagnóstico por imagen , Reproducibilidad de los ResultadosRESUMEN
Whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) is associated with memory dysfunction. As part of NRG Oncology RTOG 0933, a phase II study of WBRT for brain metastases that conformally avoided the hippocampal stem cell compartment (HA-WBRT), memory was assessed pre- and post-HA-WBRT using both traditional and computerized memory tests. We examined whether the computerized tests yielded similar findings and might serve as possible alternatives for assessment of memory in multi-institution clinical trials. Adult patients with brain metastases received HA-WBRT to 30 Gy in ten fractions and completed Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised (HVLT-R), CogState International Shopping List Test (ISLT) and One Card Learning Test (OCLT), at baseline, 2 and 4 months. Tests' completion rates were 52-53 % at 2 months and 34-42 % at 4 months. All baseline correlations between HVLT-R and CogState tests were significant (p ≤ 0.003). At baseline, both CogState tests and one component of HVLT-R differentiated those who were alive at 6 months and those who had died (p ≤ 0.01). At 4 months, mean relative decline was 7.0 % for HVLT-R Delayed Recall and 18.0 % for ISLT Delayed Recall. OCLT showed an 8.0 % increase. A reliable change index found no significant changes from baseline to 2 and 4 months for ISLT Delayed Recall (z = -0.40, p = 0.34; z = -0.68, p = 0.25) or OCLT (z = 0.15, p = 0.56; z = 0.41, p = 0.66). Study findings support the possibility that hippocampal avoidance may be associated with preservation of memory test performance, and that these computerized tests also may be useful and valid memory assessments in multi-institution adult brain tumor trials.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Encefálicas/psicología , Neoplasias Encefálicas/radioterapia , Neoplasias Encefálicas/secundario , Memoria/efectos de la radiación , Pruebas Neuropsicológicas , Traumatismos por Radiación/psicología , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Recuerdo Mental/efectos de la radiación , Persona de Mediana Edad , Aprendizaje Verbal/efectos de la radiaciónRESUMEN
PURPOSE: This phase 1 study aimed to assess the safety and feasibility of SABR therapy delivery to all sites of polymetastatic disease (>10 metastases). METHODS AND MATERIALS: A 3 + 3 study design was used with 5 dose levels from 6 Gy (6 Gy × 1) to 30 Gy (6 Gy weekly × 5). Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined as any grade 4 or 5 toxicity or more than 3 grade 3 toxicities within 6 weeks of treatment. The primary endpoint was the maximal tolerated dose, defined as the dose level where ≥2/6 of patients experienced DLT. Secondary endpoints included quality of life (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General and European Quality of Life 5 Dimension 5 Level) at 6 weeks posttreatment, progression-free survival, and overall survival. RESULTS: Thirteen patients were accrued: 12 Gy (n = 3), 18 Gy (n = 3), 24 Gy (n = 4), and 30 Gy (n = 3), and 207 lesions were treated. Nine patients (69%) had acute toxicity: grade 1 (n = 6, 46%), grade 2 (n = 2, 15%; n = 1 pneumonitis and n = 1 fatigue), and grade 3 (n = 1, 7.7% neutropenia). There were no grade 4 or 5 toxicities. Mean ± SD quality of life (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General and European Quality of Life 5 Dimension 5 Level health state) was 80.4 ± 21.9 and 77.4 ± 20.9 at baseline versus 76.4 ± 21.8 and 68.0 ± 24.2 at 6-week follow-up, respectively (p = .009 and p = .055, respectively). With a median follow-up of 8.7 months posttreatment (IQR, 2.4-24 months), 8 of 13 patients had disease progression (62%). The median and 12-month progression-free survival were 3.6 months and 11.3%, respectively. The median and 12-month overall survival were 13.8 months and 62%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this phase 1 trial, SABR therapy for polymetastatic disease was technically feasible with acceptable acute toxicity at dose levels up to 30 Gy (6 Gy weekly × 5). DLT was not observed.
RESUMEN
Purpose: The aim of this study was to comprehensively review all studies examining clinical outcomes of craniospinal irradiation with proton radiotherapy for medulloblastoma (MB) to determine whether theoretical dosimetric advantages have translated into superior clinical outcomes (including survival and toxicities) compared with traditional photon-based techniques. Methods and Materials: We performed a systematic review based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Articles reporting on clinical outcomes of pediatric and/or adult patients with MB treated with proton radiotherapy were included. Evidence quality was assessed using a modified Newcastle Ottawa scale and GRADE score. Results: Thirty-five studies were included, with a total of 2059 patients reported (representing an estimated 630-654 unique patients). None of the studies were randomized, 12 were comparative, 9 were prospective, 3 were mixed, and 22 were retrospective. Average mean/median follow-up was 5.0 years (range, 4 weeks to 12.6 years). The majority of studies (n = 19) reported on treatment with passive scatter proton beams exclusively. Average study quality was 6.0 out of 9 (median, 6; standard deviation, 1.6). Nine studies scored ≥8 out of 9 on the modified Newcastle Ottawa Scale; an overall "moderate" GRADE score was assigned. Well-designed comparative cohort studies with adequate follow-up demonstrate superior neurocognitive outcomes, lower incidence of hypothyroidism (23% vs 69%), sex hormone deficiency (3% vs 19%), greater heights, and reduced acute toxicities in patients treated with protons compared to photons. Overall survival (up to 10 years), progression-free survival (up to 10 years), brain stem injury, and other endocrine outcomes were similar to those reported for photon radiation. There was insufficient evidence to make conclusions on endpoints of quality of life, ototoxicity, secondary malignancy, alopecia, scoliosis, cavernomas, and cerebral vasculopathy. Conclusions: Moderate-grade evidence supports proton radiotherapy as a preferred treatment for craniospinal irradiation of MB based on equivalent disease control and comparable-to-improved toxicity versus photon beam radiation therapy.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Our objective was to assess the effect of 18F-DCFPyL prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET) on the management and outcomes of patients receiving salvage radiotherapy following biochemical failure (BF) post-radical prostatectomy (RP) using a matched cohort analysis. METHODS: A PSMA-PET cohort of patients with BF post-RP was identified through a prospective registry. Patients from this registry were included if they did not have disease outside of the pelvis and underwent salvage radiotherapy to the prostate and/or pelvis. Case-control matching was performed with a contemporary cohort of patients with BF post-RP without PSMA-PET information. RESULTS: Forty-four patients were included in the PSMA-PET cohort and 80 were analyzed in the non-PSMA-PET cohort. The PSMA-PET cohort had a significantly higher pre-radiotherapy median prostate-specific antigen (PSA) of 0.48 ng/mL compared to 0.20 ng/mL in the non-PSMA-PET cohort (p<0.001), but these levels were similar after matching. The PSMA-PET cohort had a higher proportion of patients receiving radiotherapy to pelvic lymph nodes (n=27 [61.4%] vs. n=16 [20.0%], p<0.001). Median followup was 26 months (interquartile range 18.8-33) for both cohorts. BF-free survival and event-free survival were not significantly different between the two cohorts for all (p=0.662 and >0.99) and matched patients (p=0.808 and 0.808), respectively. Metastasis-free survival was significantly higher in the matched PSMA-PET cohort compared to the matched non-PSMA-PET cohort (p=0.046), although a higher proportion of patients in the non-PSMA-PET cohort underwent PSMA-PET restaging after BF (52% vs. 20%, p=0.08726). CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that patients undergoing PSMA-PET scans after BF post-RP had a higher likelihood of pelvic nodal treatment at the time of salvage RT. Despite higher PSA levels at salvage, we identified no recurrence or survival differences.
RESUMEN
Purpose: The goal of this study was to assess the potential real-world effect of the recently reported SC.24 trial on spine stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) utilization. We estimated the proportion of patients treated with conventional radiation therapy (CRT) who would have been eligible for spine SBRT per trial inclusion criteria and analyzed the potential estimated increased costs to our institution. Methods and Materials: This was a retrospective review of patients who received spine CRT at our institution between August and October 2020. Data abstracted included demographics, SC.24 eligibility criteria, provider-reported pain response, and survival. A cost analysis and time survey was performed using institutional and provincial data. Results: Of 73 patients reviewed, 24 patients (33%) were eligible. The most common exclusion factors included irradiation of ≥3 consecutive spinal segments (n = 32, 44%), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status >2 (n = 17, 23%), and symptomatic spinal cord compression (n = 13, 18%). Of eligible patients, the mean age was 68.92 years, median spinal instability in neoplasia score was 8 (interquartile range, 7-9), and median Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status was 2 (interquartile range, 1-2). The most common primary cancer types among eligible patients were lung (n = 10) and breast (n = 4). The median survival of eligible patients was 10 months (95% confidence interval, 4 months to not reached) with 58% surviving longer than 3 months. Of patients who had subjective pain documented after CRT, 54% had at least some response. The cost of spine SBRT was estimated at CA$4764.80 compared with $3589.10 for CRT, and tasks for spine SBRT took roughly 3 times as long as those for CRT. Conclusions: One-third of patients who received palliative spine CRT met eligibility criteria for SC.24. This possible expanded indication for spine SBRT can have a substantial effect on resource utilization. These data may be useful in guiding resource planning at institutions looking to commence a spine SBRT program.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this work was to evaluate the acute toxicity and quality-of-life (QOL) impact of ultrahypofractionated whole pelvis radiation therapy (WPRT) compared with conventional WPRT fractionation after high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy (HDR-BT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: The HOPE trial is a phase 2, multi-institutional randomized controlled trial of men with prostate-confined disease and National Comprehensive Cancer Network unfavorable intermediate-, high-, or very-high-risk prostate cancer. Patients were randomly assigned to receive conventionally fractionated WPRT (standard arm) or ultrahypofractionated WPRT (experimental arm) in a 1:1 ratio. All patients underwent radiation therapy with 15 Gy HDR-BT boost in a single fraction followed by WPRT delivered with conventional fractionation (45 Gy in 25 daily fractions or 46 Gy in 23 fractions) or ultrahypofractionation (25 Gy in 5 fractions delivered on alternate days). Acute toxicities measured during radiation therapy and at 6 weeks posttreatment were assessed using the clinician-reported Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0, and QOL was measured using the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC-50) and International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS). RESULTS: A total of 80 patients were enrolled and treated across 3 Canadian institutions, of whom 39 and 41 patients received external radiation therapy with conventionally fractionated and ultrahypofractionated WPRT, respectively. All patients received androgen deprivation therapy except for 2 patients treated in the ultrahypofractionated arm. The baseline clinical characteristics of the 2 arms were similar, with 51 (63.8%) patients having high or very-high-risk prostate cancer disease. Treatment was well tolerated with no significant differences in the rate of acute adverse events between arms. No grade 4 adverse events or treatment-related deaths were reported. Ultrahypofractionated WPRT had a less detrimental impact on the EPIC-50 bowel total, function, and bother domain scores compared with conventional WPRT in the acute setting. By contrast, more patients treated with ultrahypofractionated WPRT reached the minimum clinical important difference on the EPIC-50 urinary domains. No significant QOL differences between arms were noted in the sexual and hormonal domains. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrahypofractionated WPRT after HDR-BT is a well-tolerated treatment strategy in the acute setting that has less detrimental impact on bowel QOL domains compared with conventional WPRT.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: To present and evaluate a method for registration of whole-mount prostate digital histology images to ex vivo magnetic resonance (MR) images. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Nine radical prostatectomy specimens were marked with 10 strand-shaped fiducial markers per specimen, imaged with T1- and T2-weighted 3T MRI protocols, sliced at 4.4-mm intervals, processed for whole-mount histology, and the resulting histological sections (3-5 per specimen, 34 in total) were digitized. The correspondence between fiducial markers on histology and MR images yielded an initial registration, which was refined by a local optimization technique, yielding the least-squares best-fit affine transformation between corresponding fiducial points on histology and MR images. Accuracy was quantified as the postregistration 3D distance between landmarks (3-7 per section, 184 in total) on histology and MR images, and compared to a previous state-of-the-art registration method. RESULTS: The proposed method and previous method had mean (SD) target registration errors of 0.71 (0.38) mm and 1.21 (0.74) mm, respectively, requiring 3 and 11 hours of processing time, respectively. CONCLUSION: The proposed method registers digital histology to prostate MR images, yielding 70% reduced processing time and mean accuracy sufficient to achieve 85% overlap on histology and ex vivo MR images for a 0.2 cc spherical tumor.
Asunto(s)
Biopsia/instrumentación , Marcadores Fiduciales , Interpretación de Imagen Asistida por Computador/métodos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética/instrumentación , Reconocimiento de Normas Patrones Automatizadas/métodos , Próstata/patología , Técnica de Sustracción , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Algoritmos , Biopsia/métodos , Diseño de Equipo , Análisis de Falla de Equipo , Humanos , Aumento de la Imagen/métodos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética/métodos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Sensibilidad y Especificidad , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
The landmark Stupp study demonstrated a survival advantage with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide (TMZ) with standard radiotherapy (RT) in glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) patients but excluded those older than 70 years. The prospective Roa study of older GBM patients treated with hypofractionated 3-week course RT demonstrated equivalence to standard 6-week course RT. Taken together, these trials suggest hypofractionated RT with TMZ may be a reasonable treatment option for elderly GBM patients. We conducted a retrospective review of GBM patients (age ≥60 years) treated with hypofractionated RT and temozolomide at our institution between 2000 and 2010. We identified 112 patients who received hypofractionated RT, with 57 receiving concurrent and adjuvant TMZ and 55 without concurrent chemotherapy. Of the 55 patients who received hypofractionated RT alone initially, 24 subsequently received TMZ as salvage treatment at time of progression. Among the concurrent RT + TMZ patients, mean age was 70 years (range 60-86), median KPS was 80 (range 30-100) and 24/57 (42%) received prior debulking surgery. Median overall survival (OS) among the RT + TMZ patients was 6.9 months (95% CI, 4.5-8.6). Patients without concurrent chemotherapy were similar in demographics (age, sex, corticosteroid use, KPS) except 34/55 (62%) were debulked (P-value 0.045.) Median OS was 9.3 months (95% CI, 5.9-11.8) (P-value 0.351). Sub-group analysis revealed patients treated with initial hypofractionated radiation with salvage TMZ had increased median OS of 13.3 months (95% CI, 9.9-19.3) (P-value 0.012). Our results suggest concurrent and adjuvant TMZ does not confer a survival benefit in elderly GBM patients. A sequential approach may be a more effective and efficient strategy by selecting responding patients who may benefit most from subsequent salvage chemotherapy.
Asunto(s)
Antineoplásicos Alquilantes/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias Encefálicas/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Encefálicas/cirugía , Dacarbazina/análogos & derivados , Glioblastoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Glioblastoma/cirugía , Radioterapia Asistida por Computador/métodos , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Dacarbazina/uso terapéutico , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Relación Dosis-Respuesta en la Radiación , Femenino , Humanos , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Estudios Longitudinales , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Temozolomida , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos XRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) is emerging as a useful tool for prostate cancer (PCa) detection but currently has unaddressed limitations. Computer aided diagnosis (CAD) systems have been developed to address these needs, but many approaches used to generate and validate the models have inherent biases. METHOD: All clinically significant PCa on histology was mapped to mp-MRI using a previously validated registration algorithm. Shape and size matched non-PCa regions were selected using a proposed sampling algorithm to eliminate biases towards shape and size. Further analysis was performed to assess biases regarding inter-zonal variability. RESULTS: A 5-feature Naïve-Bayes classifier produced an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.80 validated using leave-one-patient-out cross-validation. As mean inter-class area mismatch increased, median AUC trended towards positively biasing classifiers to producing higher AUCs. Classifiers were invariant to differences in shape between PCa and non-PCa lesions (AUC: 0.82 vs 0.82). Performance for models trained and tested only in the peripheral zone was found to be lower than in the central gland (AUC: 0.75 vs 0.95). CONCLUSION: We developed a radiomics based machine learning system to classify PCa vs non-PCa tissue on mp-MRI validated on accurately co-registered mid-gland histology with a measured target registration error. Potential biases involved in model development were interrogated to provide considerations for future work in this area.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: Although several different contouring instructional programs are available to radiation oncologists and trainees, very little is known about which methods and resources benefit learners most, and whether some learners may need alternate forms of instruction. This study aimed to determine the factors that were predictors of learners' success in anatomy, radiology, and contouring education. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Participants in the online and face-to-face Anatomy and Radiology Contouring (ARC) Bootcamp completed pre- and postintervention evaluations that assessed anatomy/radiology knowledge, contouring skills, self-confidence, and spatial ability. Baseline factors were assessed as predictors of outcomes across multiple educational domains. RESULTS: One hundred and eighty (face-to-face: n = 40; online: n = 140) participants enrolled in the ARC Bootcamp, and 57 (face-to-face: n = 30; online: n = 27) participants completed both evaluations. Of the participants enrolled, 37% were female, and most were radiation oncology residents (62%). In the anatomy/radiology knowledge testing, all quartiles (based on baseline performance) improved numerically; however, the largest improvements occurred in learners with the lowest baseline scores (P < .001). At the end of the Bootcamp, learners with lower-performing scores did not reach the level of learners with the highest baseline scores (Bonferroni-corrected P < .001). Regarding the contouring assessment, improvements were only evident for the participants with lower-performing baseline scores (P < .05). Spatial anatomy skills, as measured by the spatial anatomy task, were correlated to contouring ability. Overall, the greatest improvements were seen for learners in postgraduate year 1 to 3, those with no previous rotation experience in a given discipline, and those who attended from other programs (ie, medical physics residents and medical students). CONCLUSIONS: The ARC Bootcamp improved all levels of performers' anatomy and radiology knowledge but only lower-performers' contouring ability. The course alone does not help lower-performing learners reach the abilities of higher-performers. The ARC Bootcamp tends to be most beneficial for participants with less radiation oncology experience. Curriculum modifications can be made to help support ARC Bootcamp participants with lower performing scores.
Asunto(s)
Internado y Residencia , Oncología por Radiación , Radiología , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Oncología por Radiación/educación , Evaluación Educacional , Radiología/educación , Curriculum , RadiografíaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has demonstrated the ability to localize intraprostatic lesions. It is our goal to determine how to optimally target the underlying histopathological cancer within the setting of high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Ten prostatectomy patients had pathologist-annotated mid-gland histology registered to pre-procedural mpMRI, which were interpreted by four different observers. Simulated HDR-BT plans with realistic catheter placements were generated by registering the mpMRI lesions and corresponding histology annotations to previously performed clinical HDR-BT implants. Inverse treatment planning was used to generate treatment plans that treated the entire gland to a single dose of 15 Gy, as well as focally targeted plans that aimed to escalate dose to the mpMRI lesions to 20.25 Gy. Three margins to the lesion were explored: 0 mm, 1 mm, and 2 mm. The analysis compared the dose that would have been delivered to the corresponding histologically-defined cancer with the different treatment planning techniques. RESULTS: mpMRI-targeted plans delivered a significantly higher dose to the histologically-defined cancer (p < 0.001), in comparison to the standard treatment plans. Additionally, adding a 1 mm margin resulted in significantly higher D98, and D90 to the histologically-defined cancer in comparison to the 0 mm margin targeted plans (pâ¯=â¯0.019 & pâ¯=â¯0.0026). There was no significant difference between plans using 1 mm and 2 mm margins. CONCLUSIONS: Adding a 1 mm margin to intraprostatic mpMRI lesions significantly increased the dose to histologically-defined cancer, in comparison applying no margin. No significant effect was observed by further expanding the margins.
Asunto(s)
Braquiterapia , Imágenes de Resonancia Magnética Multiparamétrica , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Braquiterapia/métodos , Humanos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética/métodos , Masculino , Márgenes de Escisión , Próstata/diagnóstico por imagen , Próstata/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/radioterapia , Dosificación Radioterapéutica , Planificación de la Radioterapia Asistida por Computador/métodosRESUMEN
PURPOSE: The Anatomy and Radiology Contouring (ARC) Bootcamp was a face-to-face (F2F) intervention providing integrated education for radiation oncology (RO) residents and medical physicists. To increase access, we launched an online offering in 2019. We evaluated the effect of the online course on participants' knowledge acquisition, contouring skills, and self-confidence by comparing it with the F2F course. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Using modules, the online course offers content similar to that of the F2F comparator. Participants from the 2019 F2F and the 2019-2020 online course completed pre- and postevaluations assessing anatomy and radiology knowledge, contouring skills, self-confidence, and course satisfaction. RESULTS: There were 180 individuals enrolled (F2F: n = 40; online: n = 140); 57 participants (F2F: n = 30; online: n = 27) completed both evaluations. The online course had a wider geographic participation (19 countries) than F2F (4 countries). F2F had primarily RO resident participation (80%), compared with online (41%). Both cohorts demonstrated similar improvements in self-confidence pertaining to anatomy and radiology knowledge, contouring skills, and interpreting radiology images (all P < .001). Both the online (mean ± SD improvement: 6.6 ± 6.7 on a 40-point scale; P < .001) and F2F (3.7 ± 5.7; P = .002) groups showed anatomy and radiology knowledge improvement. Only the F2F group demonstrated improvement with the contouring assessment (F2F: 0.10 ± 0.17 on a 1-point Dice scale; P = .004; online: 0.07 ± 0.16; P = .076). Both cohorts perceived the course as a positive experience (F2F: 4.8 ± 0.4 on a 5-point scale; online: 4.5 ± 0.6), stated it would improve their professional practice (F2F: 4.6 ± 0.5; online: 4.2 ± 0.8), and said they would recommend it to others (F2F: 4.8 ± 0.4; online: 4.4 ± 0.6). CONCLUSIONS: The online ARC Bootcamp demonstrated improved self-confidence, knowledge scores, and high satisfaction levels among participants. The offering had lower completion rates but was more accessible to geographic regions, provided a flexible learning experience, and allowed for ongoing education during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Asunto(s)
Educación a Distancia , Oncología por Radiación/educación , Humanos , Estudios ProspectivosRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Long-term randomized data assessing the effect of ablative therapies in patients with oligometastases are lacking. The Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy for the Comprehensive Treatment of Oligometastases (SABR-COMET) randomized phase 2 trial was originally designed with 5 years of follow-up, but the trial was amended in 2016 to extend follow-up to 10 years. Herein we report oncologic outcomes beyond 5 years. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients were eligible if they had a controlled primary tumor and 1 to 5 metastases, with all metastases amenable to SABR. Patients were randomized in a 1:2 ratio between palliative standard-of-care treatment (control arm) versus SABR to all metastases plus standard of care (SABR arm). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) and secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), toxicity, quality of life (using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy: General [FACT-G]), and time to new metastases. RESULTS: Ninety-nine patients were randomized between 2012 and 2016 (n = 33 in arm 1 vs n = 66 in arm 2). Primary tumor sites included lung (n = 18), breast (n = 18), colon (n = 18), prostate (n = 16), and other (n = 29). Eight-year OS was 27.2% in the SABR arm versus 13.6% in the control arm (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% confidence interval, 0.30-0.84; P = .008). Eight-year PFS estimates were 21.3% versus 0.0%, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% confidence interval, 0.28-0.72; P < .001). Rates of grade ≥ 2 acute or late toxic effects were 30.3% versus 9.1% (P = .019), with no new grade 3 to 5 toxic effects. FACT-G quality of life scores declined over time in both arms, but there were no differences in quality of life scores between arms. The use of systemic therapy overall was similar between arms, but patients in the SABR arm were less likely to require cytotoxic chemotherapy (33.3% vs 54.6%, respectively, P = .043). CONCLUSIONS: SABR achieved durable improvements in OS and PFS, with no new major toxicity signals with extended follow-up. A minority of patients randomized to the SABR arm (21.3%) achieved > 5 years of survival without recurrence.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias , Radiocirugia , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Fraccionamiento de la Dosis de Radiación , Humanos , Masculino , Neoplasias/patología , Supervivencia sin Progresión , Calidad de Vida , Radiocirugia/efectos adversosRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Phase 2 randomized trials suggest that stereotactic ablative radiation therapy improves progression-free and overall survival in patients with oligometastatic cancer, with phase 3 trials currently testing stereotactic ablative radiation therapy in up to 10 metastases. Whether stereotactic radiation therapy could provide similar benefits in polymetastatic disease (>10 metastases) is unknown. We sought to evaluate the dosimetric feasibility of using stereotactic radiation therapy in polymetastatic disease in preparation for a phase 1 trial. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Five craniospinal computed tomography simulations were used to simulate 24 metastatic targets (n = 2 patients), 30 targets (n = 2 patients), and 50 targets (n = 1 patient) that were not present on the initial scan. Creation of radiation therapy plans was attempted for doses up to 30 Gy in 5 fractions, with de-escalation to 24 Gy/4, 18 Gy/3, 12 Gy/2, or 6 Gy/1 if not feasible based on standardized dose constraints. Plans were created using Raystation for delivery on linear accelerators using volumetric modulated arc therapy and validated using Mobius 3D. RESULTS: A stereotactic radiation therapy treatment plan was generated for each simulated patient. Dose constraints were met to a dose of 30 Gy in 5 fractions for the patients with 24 and 30 lesions. For the patient with 50 targets, dose de-escalation to 12 Gy in 2 fractions was required to meet lung constraints. Estimated beam-on time varied between 18 and 29 minutes per fraction of 6 Gy. Median D95 planning target volume dosimetry ranged from 96.6% to 97.7% of the prescription dose. The conformity index (R100) range was 0.89 to 0.95, and R50 range was 6.84 to 8.72. CONCLUSIONS: Stereotactic radiation therapy treatment plans meeting standardized dose constraints could be created in the setting of 24 to 50 metastatic lesions using volumetric modulated arc therapy. This safety of this approach is being evaluated in a phase 1 trial (NCT04530513).