Impact of individualized treatment on recovery from fatigue and return to work in survivors of advanced-stage Hodgkin's lymphoma: results from the randomized international GHSG HD18 trial.

BACKGROUND: Persisting cancer-related fatigue impairs health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and social reintegration in patients with Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL). The GHSG HD18 trial established treatment de-escalation for advanced-stage HL guided by positron emission tomography after two cycles (PET-2) as new standard. Here, we investigate the impact of treatment de-escalation on long-term HRQoL, time to recovery from fatigue (TTR-F), and time to return to work (TTR-W). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) and life situation questionnaires at baseline, interim, end of treatment, and yearly follow-up. TTR-F was defined as time from the end of chemotherapy until the first fatigue score <30. TTR-W was analyzed in previously working or studying patients and measured from the end of treatment until the first documented work or education. We compared duration of treatment on TTR-F and TTR-W using Cox proportional hazards regression adjusted for confounding variables. RESULTS: HRQoL questionnaires at baseline were available in 1632 (83.9%) of all randomized patients. Overall, higher baseline fatigue and age were significantly associated with longer TTR-F and TTR-W and male sex with shorter TTR-W. Treatment reduction from eight to four chemotherapy cycles led to a significantly shorter TTR-F [hazard ratio (HR) 1.41, P = 0.008] and descriptively shorter TTR-W (HR 1.24, P = 0.084) in PET-2-negative patients. Reduction from six to four cycles led to non-significant but plausible intermediate accelerations. The addition of rituximab caused significantly slower TTR-F (HR 0.70, P = 0.0163) and TTR-W (HR 0.64, P = 0.0017) in PET-2-positive patients. HRQoL at baseline and age were the main determinants of 2-year HRQoL. CONCLUSIONS: Individualized first-line treatment in patients with advanced-stage HL considerably shortens TTR-F and TTR-W in PET-2-negative patients. Our results support the use of response-adapted shortened treatment duration for patients with HL.

Re-irradiation for recurrent glioblastoma multiforme: a critical comparison of different concepts.

PURPOSE: Purpose of this study was to investigate outcome and toxicity of re-irradiation for recurrent primary glioblastoma (rGBM). We evaluated a group of patients with rGBM and identical primary treatment comprising adjuvant radiotherapy (30â€¯× 2 Gy) with concurrent temozolomide (TMZ). METHODS: In this retrospective study of 46 patients, all received adjuvant or definitive normofractionated radiotherapy to a pretreated area, some with concurrent chemotherapy. Impact of different clinical, histological, or epidemiological factors on survival and radiation toxicity was reviewed. RESULTS: Of 46 patients, 40 completed the intended therapy. Overall survival (OS) was 20 months (range 6-72 months). Overall survival and progression-free survival after re-irradiation (OS2 and PFS2) were 9.5 and 3.4 months (range 2-40 and 0.7-44 months). Simultaneous systemic therapy improved PFS2 and OS2 (4.3 vs. 2.0, p < 0.001 and 12 vs. 4 months, p = 0.13, respectively). Therapy with TMZ or bevacizumab improved PFS2 vs. nitrosureas (6.6 vs. 2.9, p = 0.03 and 5.1 vs. 2.9 months, p = 0.035, respectively). TMZ also improved PFS2 and OS2 vs. all other systemic therapies (6.6 vs. 4, p < 0.001 and 17 vs. 10 months, p = 0.1). In a subgroup analysis for patients with methylation of the MGMT promoter, doses of >36 Gy as well as TMZ vs. no systemic therapy improved PFS2 (p = 0.045 and p = 0.03, respectively). 27.5% of all patients had no acute toxicity. Three patients with acute and four patients with late grade 3 toxicities were reported. CONCLUSION: Normofractionated radiotherapy is a feasible option for rGBM with a good toxicity profile. Simultaneously applied systemic therapy was associated with improved outcome. For MGMT promoter-methylated histology, higher radiation doses improved survival.

Radiation treatment of hemato-oncological patients in times of the COVID-19 pandemic : Expert recommendations from the radiation oncology panels of the German Hodgkin Study Group and the German Lymphoma Alliance.

PURPOSE: The coronavirus pandemic is affecting global health systems, endangering daily patient care. Hemato-oncological patients are particularly vulnerable to infection, requiring decisive recommendations on treatment and triage. The aim of this survey amongst experts on radiation therapy (RT) for lymphoma and leukemia is to delineate typical clinical scenarios and to provide counsel for high-quality care. METHODS: A multi-item questionnaire containing multiple-choice and free-text questions was developed in a peer-reviewed process and sent to members of the radiation oncology panels of the German Hodgkin Study Group and the German Lymphoma Alliance. Answers were assessed online and analyzed centrally. RESULTS: Omission of RT was only considered in a minority of cases if alternative treatment options were available. Hypofractionated regimens and reduced dosages may be used for indolent lymphoma and fractures due to multiple myeloma. Overall, there was a tendency to shorten RT rather than to postpone or omit it. Even in case of critical resource shortage, panelists agreed to start emergency RT for typical indications (intracranial pressure, spinal compression, superior vena cava syndrome) within 24 h. Possible criteria to consider for patient triage are the availability of (systemic) options, the underlying disease dynamic, and the treatment rationale (curative/palliative). CONCLUSION: RT for hemato-oncological patients receives high-priority and should be maintained even in later stages of the pandemic. Hypofractionation and shortened treatment schedules are feasible options for well-defined constellations, but have to be discussed in the clinical context.

Induction chemotherapy (IC) followed by radiotherapy (RT) versus cetuximab plus IC and RT in advanced laryngeal/hypopharyngeal cancer resectable only by total laryngectomy-final results of the larynx organ preservation trial DeLOS-II.

Background: The German multicenter randomized phase II larynx organ preservation (LOP) trial DeLOS-II was carried out to prove the hypothesis that cetuximab (E) added to induction chemotherapy (IC) and radiotherapy improves laryngectomy-free survival (LFS; survival with preserved larynx) in locally advanced laryngeal/hypopharyngeal cancer (LHSCC). Patients and methods: Treatment-naïve patients with stage III/IV LHSCC amenable to total laryngectomy (TL) were randomized to three cycles IC with TPF [docetaxel (T) and cisplatin (P) 75 mg/m2/day 1, 5-FU (F) 750 mg/m2/day days 1-5] followed by radiotherapy (69.6 Gy) without (A) or with (B) standard dose cetuximab for 16 weeks throughout IC and radiotherapy (TPFE). Response to first IC-cycle (IC-1) with ≥30% endoscopically estimated tumor surface shrinkage (ETSS) was used to define early responders; early salvage TL was recommended to non-responders. The primary objective was 24 months LFS above 35% in arm B. Results: Of 180 patients randomized (July 2007 to September 2012), 173 fulfilled eligibility criteria (A/B: larynx 44/42, hypopharynx 41/46). Because of 4 therapy-related deaths among the first 64 randomized patients, 5-FU was omitted from IC in the subsequent 112 patients reducing further fatal toxicities. Thus, IC was TPF in 61 patients and TP in 112 patients, respectively. The primary objective (24 months LFS above 35%) was equally met by arms A (40/85, 47.1%) as well as B (41/88, 46.6%). One hundred and twenty-three early responders completed IC+RT; their overall response rates (TPF/TP) were 94.7%/87.2% in A versus 80%/86.0% in B. The 24 months overall survival (OS) rates were 68.2% and 69.3%. Conclusions: Despite being accompanied by an elevated frequency in adverse events, the IC with TPF/TP plus cetuximab was feasible but showed no superiority to IC with TPF/TP regarding LFS and OS at 24 months. Both early response and 24 months LFS compare very well to previous LOP trials and recommend effective treatment selection and stratification by ETSS. Clinical trial information: NCT00508664.

Early-stage mantle cell lymphoma: a retrospective analysis from the International Lymphoma Radiation Oncology Group (ILROG).

BACKGROUND: Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) rarely presents as early-stage disease, but clinical observations suggest that patients who present with early-stage disease may have better outcomes than those with advanced-stage disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this 13-institution study, we examined outcomes among 179 patients with early-stage (stage I or II) MCL in an attempt to identify prognostic factors that influence treatment selection and outcome. Variables examined included clinical characteristics, treatment modality, response to therapy, sites of failure, and survival. RESULTS: Patients were predominantly male (78%) with head and neck being the most common presenting sites (75%). Most failures occurred outside the original disease site (79%). Although the administration of radiation therapy, either alone or with chemotherapy, reduced the risk of local failure, it did not translate into an improved freedom from progression or overall survival (OS). The treatment outcomes were independent of treatment modality. The 10-year OS for patients treated with chemotherapy alone, chemo-radiation therapy and radiation therapy alone were 69%, 62%, and 74% (P = 0.79), and the 10-year freedom from progression were 46%, 43%, and 31% (P = 0.64), respectively. CONCLUSION: Given the excellent OS rates regardless of initial therapy in patients with early-stage MCL, de-intensified therapy to limit treatment-related toxicity is a reasonable approach.

New quality assurance program integrating "modern radiotherapy" within the German Hodgkin Study Group.

INTRODUCTION: Field design changed substantially from extended-field RT (EF-RT) to involved-field RT (IF-RT) and now to involved-node RT (IN-RT) and involved-site RT (IS-RT) as well as treatment techniques in radiotherapy (RT) of Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL). The purpose of this article is to demonstrate the establishment of a quality assurance program (QAP) including modern RT techniques and field designs within the German Hodgkin Study Group (GHSG). METHODS: In the era of modern conformal RT, this QAP had to be fundamentally adapted and a new evaluation process has been intensively discussed by the radiotherapeutic expert panel of the GHSG. RESULTS: The expert panel developed guidelines and criteria to analyse "modern" field designs and treatment techniques. This work is based on a dataset of 11 patients treated within the sixth study generation (HD16-17). CONCLUSION: To develop a QAP of "modern RT", the expert panel defined criteria for analysing current RT procedures. The consensus of a modified QAP in ongoing and future trials is presented. With this schedule, the QAP of the GHSG could serve as a model for other study groups.

Quality control of involved field radiotherapy in the HD 13 and HD 14 trials : Report of the radiotherapy panel of the German Hodgkin Study Group (GHSG).

INTRODUCTION: As part of the foundation of the German Hodgkin Study Group (GHSG) in 1978, a central radiotherapy (RT) reference centre was established to evaluate and to improve the quality of treatment. During the study generations, the quality assurance programs (QAP) were continued and adapted to the demands of each study. The purpose of this article is to demonstrate the results of the fifth study generation and to compare them to the previous findings. METHODS: With the start of the fourth GHSG study generation (HD10-12), a central prospective review of all diagnostic images was established to create an individual treatment plan for each early stage study patient. The quality of involved field RT was retrospectively evaluated by an expert panel of radiation oncologists. In the fifth study generation (HD13-15), the retrospective review of radiotherapy performed was refined and the results were compared with the findings of the fourth generation. RESULTS: The expert panel analyzed the RT planning and application of 1037 (28 %) patients (HD13 n = 465, HD14 n = 572). Simulation films were available in 85 % of cases and verification films in 87 %. RT was assessed as major violation in 46 % (HD13 = 38 %, HD14 = 52 %), minor violation in 9 % (HD13 = 9 %, HD14 = 9 %) and according to the protocol in 45 % (HD13 = 52 %, HD14 = 38 %). CONCLUSION: The value for QAP of RT within the GHSG trials is well known. Still there were several protocol violations. In the future, the QAP program has to be adapted to the requirements of "modern RT" in malignant lymphoma.

Radiosensitization by BRAF inhibitor therapy-mechanism and frequency of toxicity in melanoma patients.

BACKGROUND: Recent evidence suggests that ionizing radiation may be associated with unexpected side-effects in melanoma patients treated with concomitant BRAF inhibitors. A large multicenter analysis was carried out to generate reliable safety data and elucidate the mechanism. METHODS: A total of 161 melanoma patients from 11 European skin cancer centers were evaluated for acute and late toxicity, of whom 70 consecutive patients received 86 series of radiotherapy with concomitant BRAF inhibitor therapy. To further characterize and quantify a possible radiosensitization by BRAF inhibitors, blood samples of 35 melanoma patients were used for individual radiosensitivity testing by fluorescence in situ hybridization of chromosomal breaks after ex vivo irradiation. RESULTS: With radiotherapy and concomitant BRAF inhibitor therapy the rate of acute radiodermatitis ≥2° was 36% and follicular cystic proliferation was seen in 13% of all radiotherapies. Non-skin toxicities included hearing disorders (4%) and dysphagia (2%). Following whole-brain radiotherapy, rates of radiodermatitis ≥2° were 44% and 8% (P < 0.001) for patients with and without BRAF inhibitor therapy, respectively. Concomitant treatment with vemurafenib induced acute radiodermatitis ≥2° more frequently than treatment with dabrafenib (40% versus 26%, P = 0.07). In line with these findings, analysis of chromosomal breaks ex vivo indicated significantly increased radiosensitivity for patients under vemurafenib (P = 0.004) and for patients switched from vemurafenib to dabrafenib (P = 0.002), but not for patients on dabrafenib only. No toxicities were reported after stereotactic treatment. CONCLUSION: Radiotherapy with concomitant BRAF inhibitor therapy is feasible with an acceptable increase in toxicity. Vemurafenib is a more potent radiosensitizer than dabrafenib.

Impact of risk factors on outcomes in early-stage Hodgkin's lymphoma: an analysis of international staging definitions.

BACKGROUND: In early-stage Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL), treatment according to the early favorable or unfavorable subgroup is guided by staging definitions, which differ between various study groups worldwide. We analyzed risk factors used in different international staging systems and their impact on the outcome of early-stage HL patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In 1173 early-stage HL patients treated homogenously within the German Hodgkin Study Group (GHSG) trials HD10 and HD11, the impact of three staging systems developed and used by the GHSG, the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC), and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) in discriminating risk groups for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was assessed and the relevance of their single risk factors was investigated. RESULTS: All the three staging systems defined an unfavorable risk group out of early-stage patients of comparable size (56%, 55%, and 57%), having a significantly poorer PFS and OS as compared with the corresponding favorable group; 5-year differences between early favorable and early unfavorable in terms of PFS were 9.4% (HR 2.61, 95% CI 1.74-3.91), 6.7% (HR 2.10, 95% CI 1.41-3.13), and 8.6% (HR 2.14, 95% CI 1.45-3.16) with the GHSG, EORTC, and NCCN definition, respectively. Sensitivity was high for all systems (84%, 79%, and 83%); however, there was a low specificity with high rates of false-positive results (1-specificity 54%, 53%, and 55%, respectively). Models of high sensitivity included risk factors associated with large tumor burden and high tumor activity. Most risk factors for tumor-specific end points were also predictive of OS. CONCLUSIONS: Differentiating between a favorable and an unfavorable risk group has significant impact on PFS and OS in early-stage HL patients in the modern treatment era. Risk-adapted treatment strategies using new risk factors with higher specificity are needed.

An individual patient-data comparison of combined modality therapy and ABVD alone for patients with limited-stage Hodgkin lymphoma.

BACKGROUND: Treatment options for patients with nonbulky stage IA-IIA Hodgkin lymphoma include combined modality therapy (CMT) using doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine and dacarbazine (ABVD) plus involved-field radiation therapy (IFRT), and chemotherapy with ABVD alone. There are no mature randomized data comparing ABVD with CMT using modern radiation techniques. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using German Hodgkin Study Group HD10/HD11 and NCIC Clinical Trials Group HD.6 databases, we identified 588 patients who met mutually inclusive eligibility criteria from the preferred arms of HD10 or 11 (n = 406) and HD.6 (n = 182). We evaluated time to progression (TTP), progression-free (PFS) and overall survival, including in three predefined exploratory subset analyses. RESULTS: With median follow-up of 91 (HD10/11) and 134 (HD.6) months, respective 8-year outcomes were for TTP, 93% versus 87% [hazard ratio (HR) 0.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.24-0.78]; for PFS, 89% versus 86% (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.42-1.18) and for overall survival, 95% versus 95% (HR 1.09, 95% CI 0.49-2.40). In the exploratory subset analysis including HD10 eligible patients who achieved complete response (CR) or unconfirmed complete response (CRu) after two cycles of ABVD, 8-year PFS was 87% (HD10) versus 95% (HD.6) (HR 2.8; 95% CI 0.64-12.5) and overall survival 96% versus 100%. In contrast, among those without CR/CRu after two cycles of ABVD, 8-year PFS was 88% versus 74% (HR 0.35; 95% CI 0.16-0.79) and overall survival 95% versus 91%, respectively (HR 0.42; 95% CI 0.12-1.44). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with nonbulky stage IA-IIA Hodgkin lymphoma, CMT provides better disease control than ABVD alone, especially among those not achieving complete response after two cycles of ABVD. Within the follow-up duration evaluated, overall survivals were similar. Longer follow-up is required to understand the implications of radiation and chemotherapy-related late effects. CLINICAL TRIALS: The trials included in this analysis were registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: HD10 - NCT00265018, HD11 - NCT00264953, HD.6 - NCT00002561.

Pelvic Ewing sarcomas. Three-dimensional conformal vs. intensity-modulated radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: The goal of the present work was to assess the potential advantage of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) over three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) planning in pelvic Ewing's sarcoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 8 patients with Ewing sarcoma of the pelvis undergoing radiotherapy were analyzed. Plans for 3D-CRT and IMRT were calculated for each patient. Dose coverage of the planning target volume (PTV), conformity and homogeneity indices, as well as further parameters were evaluated. RESULTS: The average dose coverage values for PTV were comparable in 3D-CRT and IMRT plans. Both techniques had a PTV coverage of V95 > 98 % in all patients. Whereas the IMRT plans achieved a higher conformity index compared to the 3D-CRT plans (conformity index 0.79 ± 0.12 vs. 0.54 ± 0.19, p = 0.012), the dose distribution across the target volumes was less homogeneous with IMRT planning than with 3D-CRT planning. This difference was statistically significant (homogeneity index 0.11 ± 0.03 vs. 0.07 ± 0.0, p = 0.035). For the bowel, Dmean and D1%, as well as V2 to V60 were reduced in IMRT plans. For the bladder and the rectum, there was no significant difference in Dmean. However, the percentages of volumes receiving at least doses of 30, 40, 45, and 50 Gy (V30 to V50) were lower for the rectum in IMRT plans. The volume of normal tissue receiving at least 2 Gy (V2) was significantly higher in IMRT plans compared with 3D-CRT, whereas at high dose levels (V30) it was significantly lower. CONCLUSION: Compared to 3D-CRT, IMRT showed significantly better results regarding dose conformity (p = 0.012) and bowel sparing at dose levels above 30 Gy (p = 0.012). Thus, dose escalation in the radiotherapy of pelvic Ewing's sarcoma can be more easily achieved using IMRT.

The German evidence-based guidelines for Hodgkin's lymphoma. Aspects for radiation oncologists.

This report reviews aspects of the German evidence-based guidelines for Hodgkin's lymphoma relevant to radiation oncologists. Stage-adapted treatment is discussed with the focus on radiotherapy. Up-to-date literature citations provide an overview of current recommendations.

Comparing long-term toxicity and efficacy of combined modality treatment including extended- or involved-field radiotherapy in early-stage Hodgkin's lymphoma.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate long-term toxicity and efficacy of a combined modality strategy including extended-field radiotherapy (EF-RT) or involved-field radiotherapy (IF-RT), the German Hodgkin Study Group carried out a follow-up analysis in patients with early unfavorable Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: One thousand two hundred and four patients were randomized to four cycles of chemotherapy followed by either 30 Gy EF- or 30 Gy IF-RT (HD8 trial); 532 patients in each treatment arm were eligible. RESULTS: At 10 years, no arm differences were revealed with respect to freedom from treatment failure (FFTF) (79.8% versus 79.7%), progression-free survival (79.8% versus 80.0%), and overall survival (86.4% versus 87.3%). Non-inferiority of IF-RT was demonstrated for the primary end point FFTF (95% confidence interval for hazard ratio 0.72-1.25). Elderly patients had a poorer outcome when treated with EF-RT. So far, 15.0% of patients in arm A and 12.2% in arm B died, mostly due to secondary malignancies (5.3% versus 3.4%) or HL (3.2% versus 3.4%). After EF-RT, there were more secondary malignancies overall (58 versus 45), especially acute myeloid leukemias (11 versus 4). CONCLUSION: Radiotherapy intensity reduction to IF-RT does not result in poorer long-term outcome but is associated with less acute toxicity and might be associated with less secondary malignancies.

Survivin, a target to modulate the radiosensitivity of Ewing's sarcoma.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Radiotherapy constitutes an essential element in the multimodal therapy of Ewing's sarcoma. Compared to other sarcomas, Ewing tumors normally show a good response to radiotherapy. However, there are consistently tumors with a radioresistant phenotype, and the underlying mechanisms are not known in detail. Here we investigated the association between survivin protein expression and the radiosensitivity of Ewing's sarcoma in vitro. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An siRNA-based knockdown approach was used to investigate the influence of survivin expression on cell proliferation, double-strand break (DSB) induction and repair, apoptosis and colony-forming ability in four Ewing's sarcoma cell lines with and without irradiation. RESULTS: Survivin protein and mRNA were upregulated in all cell lines tested in a dose-dependent manner. As a result of survivin knockdown, STA-ET-1 cells showed reduced cell proliferation, an increased number of radiation-induced DSBs, and reduced repair. Apoptosis was increased by knockdown alone and increased further in combination with irradiation. Colony formation was significantly reduced by survivin knockdown in combination with irradiation. CONCLUSION: Survivin is a radiation-inducible protein in Ewing's sarcoma and its down-regulation sensitizes cells toward irradiation. Survivin knockdown in combination with radiation inhibits cell proliferation, repair, and colony formation significantly and increases apoptosis more than each single treatment alone. This might open new perspectives in the radiation treatment of Ewing's sarcoma.

Large mediastinal tumor mass as a prognostic factor in Hodgkin's lymphoma. Is the definition on the basis of a chest radiograph in the era of CT obsolete?

PURPOSE: The risk factor "large mediastinal tumor mass" is an internationally accepted unfavorable prognostic factor in the staging of Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL). The definition of this risk factor varies considerably between large cooperative study groups. The purpose of the present analysis was to determine to which degree data obtained from chest radiograph (CRX) give the same results as those from CT scans (CT). METHODS: A total of 145 de novo HL patients in early unfavorable and advanced stages were included in this study. A total of 94 patients had a large mediastinal tumor mass according to the guidelines of the German Hodgkin Study Group (GHSG), while 51 had mediastinal lymph node involvement only. The size of mediastinal involvement and the thoracic diameter were measured on CRX and CT. Agreement between CRX and CT was determined by sensitivity and specificity analysis as well as descriptive statistics and correlations. RESULTS: The correlation of the diameters on CRX with those of CT was 0.95 for the tumor size and 0.77 for the thoracic diameter. The diagnostic decision-large mediastinal mass or not-correlated with 0.81 between CRX and CT and was identical in 90.3% of cases. The sensitivity was 0.87 and the specificity 0.96 for CRX, which is considered the current standard. CONCLUSION: The results show that there is a high agreement between the measurements of CRX and CT. Diagnosis of a large mediastinal mass disagreed in 10% of patients. Since the correct diagnosis of this risk factor is decisive for the adequate multimodal treatment choice, CRX should not be omitted.

Clinical relevance of different dose calculation strategies for mediastinal IMRT in Hodgkin's disease.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Conventional algorithms show uncertainties in dose calculation already for three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT). Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) might even increase these. We wanted to assess differences in dose distribution for pencil beam (PB), collapsed cone (CC), and Monte Carlo (MC) algorithm for both 3D-CRT and IMRT in patients with mediastinal Hodgkin lymphoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Based on 20 computed tomograph (CT) datasets of patients with mediastinal Hodgkin lymphoma, we created treatment plans according to the guidelines of the German Hodgkin Study Group (GHSG) with PB and CC algorithm for 3D-CRT and with PB and MC algorithm for IMRT. Doses were compared for planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk. RESULTS: For 3D-CRT, PB overestimated PTV(95) and V(20) of the lung by 6.9% and 3.3% and underestimated V(10) of the lung by 5.8%, compared to the CC algorithm. For IMRT, PB overestimated PTV(95), V(20) of the lung, V(25) of the heart and V(10) of the female left/right breast by 8.1%, 25.8%, 14.0% and 43.6%/189.1%, and underestimated V(10) of the lung, V(4) of the heart and V(4) of the female left/right breast by 6.3%, 6.8% and 23.2%/15.6%, compared to MC. CONCLUSION: The PB algorithm underestimates low doses to the organs at risk and overestimates dose to PTV and high doses to the organs at risk. For 3D-CRT, a well-modeled PB algorithm is clinically acceptable; for IMRT planning, however, an advanced algorithm such as CC or MC should be used at least for part of the plan optimization.

Quality control of involved-field radiotherapy for patients with early stage Hodgkin's lymphoma based on a central prospective review. Comparison of the results between two study generations of the German Hodgkin Study Group.

PURPOSE: Based on experience in trials HD10 and HD11 (1998-2003), the radiotherapy reference center of the German Hodgkin Study Group (GHSG) continued their central prospective radiation oncological review in trials HD13 and HD14. The purpose of this analysis was to identify the impact of this procedure on radiotherapeutic management and to compare findings with former trials. METHODS: Between 2003 and 2009, 1,710 patients were enrolled in the HD13 trial (early favorable stages) and 2,039 patients in the HD14 trial (early unfavorable stages). All patients received a total of 30 Gy involved-field (IF) radiotherapy within a combined modality approach. RESULTS: For patients in HD13, there was a correction of disease involvement in 847/1,518 patients (56%), and for patients in HD14 in 1,370/1,905 patients (72%). Most discrepancies were observed in the lower mediastinum (19.2%), infraclavicular (31.7%), upper cervical (12.7%), and supraclavicular (10.8%) lymph nodes. This resulted in a change of disease stage in 241 (7%) patients and a shift into another study protocol in 66 (2%) patients. Due to the incorrect lymph node documentation of the participating study centers, the IF radiotherapy volume had to be enlarged in 1,063/3,423 patients (31%) and reduced in 244/3,423 patients (7.1%). These findings are comparable to the results of the quality control in the trials HD10 and HD11 (2,611 patients reviewed). CONCLUSION: Central review of the diagnostic imaging and clinical findings of Hodgkin's lymphoma patients shows a considerable number of discrepancies compared with the local evaluation. Thus, meticulous evaluation of all imaging information in close collaboration between the radiation oncologist and diagnostic radiologist is mandatory.

Managing hematological cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: an ESMO-EHA Interdisciplinary Expert Consensus.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has created enormous challenges for the clinical management of patients with hematological malignancies (HMs), raising questions about the optimal care of this patient group. METHODS: This consensus manuscript aims at discussing clinical evidence and providing expert advice on statements related to the management of HMs in the COVID-19 pandemic. For this purpose, an international consortium was established including a steering committee, which prepared six working packages addressing significant clinical questions from the COVID-19 diagnosis, treatment, and mitigation strategies to specific HMs management in the pandemic. During a virtual consensus meeting, including global experts and lead by the European Society for Medical Oncology and the European Hematology Association, statements were discussed and voted upon. When a consensus could not be reached, the panel revised statements to develop consensual clinical guidance. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The expert panel agreed on 33 statements, reflecting a consensus, which will guide clinical decision making for patients with hematological neoplasms during the COVID-19 pandemic.