Stereotactic radiotherapy for head and neck paragangliomas: How long should we wait for treatment response?

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) is an effective treatment for head & neck (H&N) paragangliomas. Nevertheless, the timeline for achieving a tumor-volume-reduction (TVR) remains unclear. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-three cases with H&N paragangliomas received definitive SRT and were evaluated retrospectively. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) v23.0 (IBM, Armonk, NY, USA) was used for statistics. RESULTS: Sixty-eight lesions were irradiated, with glomus jugulotympanicum being the most common location (44 %). Median tumor diameter and volume were 3 cm (range, 1-7.6 cm) and 15.4 cm3 (range,1-185 cm3), respectively. Median dose was 25 Gy (range, 12-37.5 Gy) in 5 fractions (range, 1-5 fractions). Median follow-up was 40 months (range, 3-184 months). Treatment response, evaluated at a median 4.6 months post-SRT (range: 3-11 months), revealed TVR in 26 cases (41 %). During follow-up, 13 additional cases showed TVR, resulting in an overall TVR rate of 62 %. The median duration for attaining TVR was 9 months (range, 3-36 months) after SRT, and TVR occurred ≥ 12 months in 42 % of cases. Patients without prior surgery (p = 0.03) and with a longer follow-up (p = 0.04) demonstrated a higher rate of TVR. The likelihood of TVR tends to increase as the SRT dose increases (p = 0.06). Overall local control (LC) rate was 100 %. No ≥ grade 3 acute or late toxicities were observed. CONCLUSION: While SRT demonstrates an excellent LC rate for H&N paragangliomas, it's important to note that the response to treatment may require time. TVR may last beyond the initial year of treatment in a substantial proportion of patients.

A prospective study of wake-up stroke patients presenting to the emergency department: a single-center cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to prospectively examine patients with ischemic wake-up stroke (WUS) presenting to the emergency department, to investigate the risk factors affecting the mortality occurring within 28, 90, and 180 days, and to create a new scoring system for the prediction of 28-day mortality. MATERIALS AND METHOD: Patients who presented to the emergency department with WUS findings between 01.07.2019 and 30.06.2020 were prospectively analyzed. Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the factors affecting mortality and the modified Rankin scale (mRS). RESULTS: A total of 161 patients were included. Of the patients, 22.4% died within 28 days and 40.4% within 180 days. The presence of coronary artery disease (CAD) increased the 28-day mortality risk (p = 0.009) 3.57 times, 90-day mortality risk 2.15 times (p = 0.033), and 180-day mortality risk 2.18 times (p = 0.045). In order to be used in the prediction of 28-day mortality in patients with WUS, we developed the ischemic WUS mortality score (IWUSMOS), which consists of the middle cerebral artery (45 points), internal carotid artery (60 points), basilar artery (39 points), superior cerebellar artery (66 points) occlusion, hypertension (33 points), CAD (28 points), malignancy (100 points), and arrhythmia (23 points). With this scoring system, the 28-day mortality risk was determined as 0.05% when the total score was "43" whereas the mortality risk was found to be 95.0% when the total score was "187." CONCLUSION: We propose that IWUSMOS, a new scoring system, can be used to predict the 28-day mortality risk of patients with WUS.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy boost in patients with cervical cancer.

Our aim was to evaluate the oncological outcomes of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) boost in patients with cervical cancer. The data of 21 patients who received SBRT boost after definitive radiotherapy (RT) or chemoradiotherapy (CRT) between March 2012 and April 2019 were retrospectively evaluated. External beam radiotherapy (EBRT) was applied to patients with a total dose of 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions. Kaplan-Meier method was used for survival analysis (IBM SPSS 23 software) and p < .05 value was considered significant. After definitive RT or CRT, there was a complete response in 9 (43%) patients, partial response in 11 (52%) patients and stable disease in 1 (5%) patient. The median follow-up period was 28 months (range, 7.5-88 months). Two-years cancer-specific survival rate was 80%. While 2-year LC rate was 75% in patients with residual tumour size <4 cm, it was 50% when there was ≥4 cm residual tumour after definitive CRT (p = .1). The treatment was well-tolerated and no acute or late toxicity was observed. Although brachytherapy (BRT) is an essential part of the treatment in locally advanced cervical cancer, SBRT may be used in patients with small residual disease who are not candidate for BRT. IMPACT STATEMENTCervical cancer is one of the most common cancers in the world, and external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and brachytherapy (BRT) are the main treatment options. However, in rare cases where BRT is not feasible, it has been questioned whether stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) as an alternative to BRT.What is already known on this subject? Nowadays, BRT still appears to be the gold standard treatment. However, studies with a small number of patients and short follow-up periods in the literature show that SBRT can be a good alternative in cases where BRT cannot be performed.What do the results of this study add? Our study is one of the series with the largest number of patients in the literature and with the longest follow-up period. In this area where there is no prospective study, we think that retrospective data with high patient numbers are enlightening.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? Our study shows that SBRT is an alternative option in cases with small residual disease where BRT cannot be applied, and it provides a basis for a prospective randomised study.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy in patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer: Does beam-on time matter?

PURPOSE: Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is an effective treatment option for patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In this study, we evaluated the treatment results using two different SBRT techniques and the effect of beam-on time (BOT) on treatment outcomes. METHODS: Between July 2007 and January 2018, 142 patients underwent SBRT for primary NSCLC. We have delivered SBRT using either respiratory tracking system (RTS) or internal-target-volume (ITV)-based motion management techniques. The effect of age, tumor size, pretreatment tumor SUVmax value, presence of tissue diagnosis, histopathological subtype, operability status, tumor location, motion management technique, BED10 value, BOT on overall survival (OS), loco-regional control (LRC), event-free survival (EFS) and primary tumor control (PTC) were evaluated. RESULTS: Median age of the patients was 70 years (range, 39-91 years). Most of the patients were inoperable (90%) at the time of SBRT. Median BED10 value was 112.5 Gy. With a median follow-up of 25 months, PTC was achieved in 91.5% of the patients. Two-year estimated OS, LRC, PTC and EFS rates were 68, 63, 63 and 53%, respectively. For the entire group, OS was associated with BOT (P = 0.027), and EFS was associated with BOT (P = 0.027) and tumor size (P = 0.015). For RTS group, OS was associated with age (P = 0.016), EFS with BOT (P = 0.05) and tumor size (P = 0.024), LRC with BOT (P = 0.008) and PTC with BOT (P = 0.028). The treatment was well tolerated in general. CONCLUSION: SBRT is an effective and safe treatment with high OS, LRC, EFS and PTC rates in patients with primary NSCLC. Protracted BOT might deteriorate SBRT outcomes.

Evaluation of MLC leaf positioning accuracy for static and dynamic IMRT treatments using DAVID in vivo dosimetric system.

Accuracy and precision of leaf positioning in multileaf collimators (MLCs) are significant factors for the accuracy of IMRT treatments. This study aimed to inves-tigate the accuracy and repeatability of the MLC leaf positioning via the DAVID invivo dosimetric system for dynamic and static MLC systems. The DAVID system was designed as multiwire transmission ionization chamber which is placed in accessory holder of linear accelerators. Each wire of DAVID system corresponds to a MLC leaf-pair to verify the leaf positioning accuracy during IMRT treatment and QA. In this study, verifications of IMRT plans of five head and neck (H&N) and five prostate patients treated in a Varian DHX linear accelerator with 80-leaf MLC were performed using DAVID system. Before DAVID-based dosimetry, Electronics Portal Imaging Device (EPID) and PTW 2D ARRAY dosimetry system were used for 2D verification of each plan. The measurements taken by DAVID system in the first day of the treatments were used as reference for the following measurements taken over the next four weeks. The deviations in leaf positioning were evaluated by "Total Deviation (TD)" parameter calculated by DAVID software. The delivered IMRT plans were originally prepared using dynamic MLC method. The same plans were subsequently calculated based on static MLC method with three different intensity levels of five (IL5), 10 (IL10) and 20 (IL20) in order to compare the performances of MLC leaf positioning repeatability for dynamic and static IMRT plans. The leaf positioning accuracy is also evaluated by analyzing DynaLog files based on error histograms and root mean square (RMS) errors of leaf pairs' positions. Moreover, a correlation analysis between simultaneously taken DAVID and EPID measurements and DynaLog file recordings was subsequently performed. In the analysis of DAVID outputs, the overall deviations of dynamic MLC-based IMRT calculated from the deviations of the four weeks were found as 0.55% ± 0.57% and 1.48% ± 0.57% for prostate and H&N patients, respectively. The prostate IMRT plans based on static MLC method had the overall deviations of 1.23% ± 0.69%, 3.07% ± 1.07%, and 3.13% ± 1.29% for intensity levels of IL5, IL10, and IL20, respectively. Moreover, the overall deviations for H&N patients were found as 1.87% ± 0.86%, 3.11% ± 1.24%, and 2.78% ± 1.31% for the static MLC-based IMRT plans with intensity levels of IL5, IL10 and IL20, respectively. Similar with the DAVID results, the error rates in DynaLog files showed upward movement comparing the dynamic IMRT with static IMRT with high intensity levels. In respect to positioning errors higher than 0.005 cm, static prostate IMRT plans with intensity levels of IL10 and IL20 had 1.5 and 2.6 times higher error ratios than dynamic prostate IMRT plans, respectively, while these values stepped up to 8.4 and 12.0 for H&N cases. On the other hand, according to the leaf pair readings, reconstructed dose values from DynaLog files had significant correlation (r = 0.80) with DAVID and EPID readings while a stronger relationship (r = 0.98) was found between the two dosimetric systems. The correlation coefficients for deviations from reference plan readings were found in the interval of -0.21-0.16 for all three systems. The dynamic MLC method showed higher performance in repeatability of leaf positioning than static MLC methods with higher intensity levels even though the deviations in the MLC leaf positioning were found to be under the acceptance threshold for all MLC methods. The high intensity levels increased the position-ing deviations along with the delivery complexity of the static MLC-based IMRT plans. Moreover, DAVID and EPID readings and DynaLog recordings showed mutually strong correlation, while no significant relationship was found between deviations from reference values.

Robotic stereotactic body radiotherapy in the treatment of sinonasal mucosal melanoma: report of four cases.

BACKGROUND: Sinonasal mucosal melanoma (SNMM) is a rare entity originating from melanocytes of the sinonasal mucosa. Postoperative radiotherapy is recommended in all cases to increase local control. However, external radiotherapy is rarely used as a definitive treatment modality. In this report, we present 4 cases of SNMM treated with CyberKnife (Accuray, Sunnyvale, CA). METHODS: All patients were immobilized with a thermoplastic mask. A planning CT scan with 1-mm thickness was obtained, and these images were fused with MRI for the contouring procedure. Multiplan (Accuray) inverse planning software was used for treatment planning. Robotic stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) was delivered with CyberKnife. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 26 months. Three patients had complete response to CyberKnife, and 1 patient had partial response. CONCLUSION: Robotic SBRT seems to be an appealing treatment option for local control. Effective systemic treatment is required to prevent distant metastases.

A retrospective comparison of robotic stereotactic body radiotherapy and three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy for the reirradiation of locally recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

PURPOSE: We assessed therapeutic outcomes of reirradiation with robotic stereotactic radiotherapy (SBRT) for locally recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma (LRNPC) patients and compared those results with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (CRT) with or without brachytherapy (BRT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Treatment outcomes were evaluated retrospectively in 51 LRNPC patients receiving either robotic SBRT (24 patients) or CRT with or without BRT (27 patients) in our department. CRT was delivered with a 6-MV linear accelerator, and a median total reirradiation dose of 57 Gy in 2 Gy/day was given. Robotic SBRT was delivered with CyberKnife (Accuray, Sunnyvale, CA). Patients in the SBRT arm received 30 Gy over 5 consecutive days. We calculated actuarial local control and cancer-specific survival rates for the comparison of treatment outcomes in SBRT and CRT arms. The Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v3.0 was used for toxicity evaluation. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 24 months for all patients. Two-year actuarial local control rates were 82% and 80% for SBRT and CRT arms, respectively (p = 0.6). Two-year cancer-specific survival rates were 64% and 47% for the SBRT and CRT arms, respectively (p = 0.4). Serious late toxicities (Grade 3 and above) were observed in 21% of patients in the SBRT arm, whereas 48% of patients had serious toxicity in the CRT arm (p = 0.04). Fatal complications occurred in three patients (12.5%) of the SBRT arm, and four patients (14.8%) of the CRT arm (p = 0.8). T stage at recurrence was the only independent predictor for local control and survival. CONCLUSION: Our robotic SBRT protocol seems to be feasible and less toxic in terms of late effects compared with CRT arm for the reirradiation of LRNPC patients.