Assessment of Radiation Induced Pneumonitis and Pericarditis in Patients Undergoing Breast Conservative Treatment Using Hypofractionated Simultaneous Integrated Boost Technique.

INTRODUCTION: To determine the proportion of radiationinduced pneumonitis and pericarditis in patients who have received Hypo-fractionated Radiation along with simultaneous integrated boost technique after breast conservative surgery using a prospective observational study from a tertiary hospital. MATERIALS & METHODS: The incidence of radiationinduced pneumonitis and pericarditis was evaluated in all adult patients with biopsy-proven early-stage unilateral breast cancer who underwent breast-conserving surgery followed by hypo-fractionated radiation with a simultaneous integrated boost technique. Baseline assessments including a six-minute walk test, highresolution computed tomography (HRCT), pulmonary function tests (PFTs), electrocardiography (ECG) and echocardiography (ECHO) were performed. At three months post-radiation treatment, patients underwent follow-up assessments with a six-minute walk test, ECG and ECHO. At six months post-radiation treatment, patients underwent further assessments with a six-minute walk test, ECG, ECHO, PFTs, and HRCT of the thorax. Data analysis was performed using SPSS version 19. RESULTS: Our study investigated the incidence of acute radiation-induced pneumonitis and pericarditis in patients treated with hypofractionated VMAT-SIB technique in 20 eligible early breast cancer patients. The study found that the technique is feasible and achieves encouraging dosimetric parameters, including well achieved ipsilateral lung and heart doses. The reduced treatment time of 3-4 weeks compared to the previous 6-7 weeks with sequential boost was also found to be desirable in resource-constrained settings. The incidence of acute radiation pneumonitis and pericarditis was acceptable and comparable to existing data, with 90% of patients experiencing grade 1 radiation pneumonitis according to CTCAE v5.0. Post-treatment pulmonary function tests showed significant changes, particularly in patients who had received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and nodal irradiation. The six-minute walk test and Borg scale also showed a significant positive correlation with pulmonary function tests. There was no significant pericarditis during the follow-up. The study proposes that the hypofractionated radiotherapy using VMAT-SIB is a suitable alternative to conventional fractionation, with acceptable acute toxicities, but longer follow-up is required to assess the impact on late toxicities. CONCLUSION: Our research has shown that hypofractionated adjuvant radiotherapy with SIB is a safe and feasible treatment for patients with early breast cancer. This treatment method doesn't pose any significant short-term risks to the lungs or heart, and the SIB technique provides better coverage, conformity and sparing of organs at risk. Additionally, patients have reported positive cosmetic outcomes with this treatment. However, to make more accurate conclusions, we need to conduct further studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up periods to evaluate the potential longterm side effects of this treatment using VMAT in whole breast radiation.

Real-World Use of Hypofractionated Radiotherapy for Primary CNS Tumors in the Elderly, and Implications on Medicare Spending.

BACKGROUND: For elderly patients with high-grade gliomas, 3-week hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT) is noninferior to standard long-course radiotherapy (LCRT). We analyzed real-world utilization of HFRT with and without systemic therapy in Medicare beneficiaries treated with RT for primary central nervous system (CNS) tumors using Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services data. METHODS: Radiation modality, year, age (65-74, 75-84, or ≥85 years), and site of care (freestanding vs hospital-affiliated) were evaluated. Utilization of HFRT (11-20 fractions) versus LCRT (21-30 or 31-40 fractions) and systemic therapy was evaluated by multivariable logistic regression. Medicare spending over the 90-day episode after RT planning initiation was analyzed using multivariable linear regression. RESULTS: From 2015 to 2019, a total of 10,702 RT courses (ie, episodes) were included (28% HFRT; 65% of patients aged 65-74 years). A considerable minority died within 90 days of RT planning initiation (n=1,251; 12%), and 765 (61%) of those received HFRT. HFRT utilization increased (24% in 2015 to 31% in 2019; odds ratio [OR], 1.2 per year; 95% CI, 1.1-1.2) and was associated with older age (≥85 vs 65-74 years; OR, 6.8; 95% CI, 5.5-8.4), death within 90 days of RT planning initiation (OR, 5.0; 95% CI, 4.4-5.8), hospital-affiliated sites (OR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.3-1.6), conventional external-beam RT (vs intensity-modulated RT; OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 2.3-3.1), and no systemic therapy (OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.1-1.3; P<.001 for all). Increasing use of HFRT was concentrated in hospital-affiliated sites (P=.002 for interaction). Most patients (69%) received systemic therapy with no differences by site of care (P=.12). Systemic therapy utilization increased (67% in 2015 to 71% in 2019; OR, 1.1 per year; 95% CI, 1.0-1.1) and was less likely for older patients, patients who died within 90 days of RT planning initiation, those who received conventional external-beam RT, and those who received HFRT. HFRT significantly reduced spending compared with LCRT (adjusted ß for LCRT = +$8,649; 95% CI, $8,544-$8,755), whereas spending modestly increased with systemic therapy (adjusted ß for systemic therapy = +$270; 95% CI, $176-$365). CONCLUSIONS: Although most Medicare beneficiaries received LCRT for primary brain tumors, HFRT utilization increased in hospital-affiliated centers. Despite high-level evidence for elderly patients, discrepancy in HFRT implementation by site of care persists. Further investigation is needed to understand why patients with short survival may still receive LCRT, because this has major quality-of-life and Medicare spending implications.

Introduction of ultra-hypofractionation in breast cancer: Implications for costs and resource use.

PURPOSE: A shift towards (ultra-)hypofractionated breast irradiation can have important implications for the practice of contemporary radiation oncology. This paper presents a systematic analysis of the impact of different fractionation schedules on multiple key performance indicators, namely resource use, costs, work times, throughput and waiting times. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Time-driven activity-based costing (TD-ABC) is applied to calculate the costs and resources consumed where the perspective of the radiotherapy department in adopted. Three fractionation regimens are considered: ultra-hypofractionation (5 x 5.2 Gy, UHF), moderate hypofractionation (15 x 2.67 Gy, HF) and conventional fractionation (25 x 2 Gy, CF). Subsequently, a discrete event simulation (DES) model of the radiotherapy care pathway is developed and scenarios are compared in which the following factors are varied: distribution of fractionation regimens, patient volume and operating hours. RESULTS: The application of (U)HF can permit radiotherapy departments to reduce the use of scarce resources, realise work time and cost savings, increase throughput and reduce waiting times. The financial advantages of (U)HF are, however, reduced in cases of excess capacity and cost savings may therefore be limited in the short-term. Moreover, although an extension of operating hours has favourable effects on throughput and waiting times, it may also reduce cost differences between fractionation schedules by increasing the capacity of resources. CONCLUSION: By providing an in-depth analysis of the consequences associated with a shift towards (U)HF in breast cancer, the present study demonstrates how a DES model based on TD-ABC costing can assist radiotherapy professionals in making data-driven decisions.

One versus three weeks hypofractionated whole breast radiotherapy for early breast cancer treatment: the FAST-Forward phase III RCT.

Background: FAST-Forward aimed to identify a 5-fraction schedule of adjuvant radiotherapy delivered in 1 week that was non-inferior in terms of local cancer control and as safe as the standard 15-fraction regimen after primary surgery for early breast cancer. Published acute toxicity and 5-year results are presented here with other aspects of the trial. Design: Multicentre phase III non-inferiority trial. Patients with invasive carcinoma of the breast (pT1-3pN0-1M0) after breast conservation surgery or mastectomy randomised (1 : 1 : 1) to 40 Gy in 15 fractions (3 weeks), 27 Gy or 26 Gy in 5 fractions (1 week) whole breast/chest wall (Main Trial). Primary endpoint was ipsilateral breast tumour relapse; assuming 2% 5-year incidence for 40 Gy, non-inferiority pre-defined as < 1.6% excess for 5-fraction schedules (critical hazard ratio = 1.81). Normal tissue effects were assessed independently by clinicians, patients and photographs. Sub-studies: Two acute skin toxicity sub-studies were undertaken to confirm safety of the test schedules. Primary endpoint was proportion of patients with grade ≥ 3 acute breast skin toxicity at any time from the start of radiotherapy to 4 weeks after completion. Nodal Sub-Study patients had breast/chest wall plus axillary radiotherapy testing the same three schedules, reduced to the 40 and 26 Gy groups on amendment, with the primary endpoint of 5-year patient-reported arm/hand swelling. Limitations: A sequential hypofractionated or simultaneous integrated boost has not been studied. Participants: Ninety-seven UK centres recruited 4096 patients (1361:40 Gy, 1367:27 Gy, 1368:26 Gy) into the Main Trial from November 2011 to June 2014. The Nodal Sub-Study recruited an additional 469 patients from 50 UK centres. One hundred and ninety and 162 Main Trial patients were included in the acute toxicity sub-studies. Results: Acute toxicity sub-studies evaluable patients: (1) acute grade 3 Radiation Therapy Oncology Group toxicity reported in 40 Gy/15 fractions 6/44 (13.6%); 27 Gy/5 fractions 5/51 (9.8%); 26 Gy/5 fractions 3/52 (5.8%). (2) Grade 3 common toxicity criteria for adverse effects toxicity reported for one patient. At 71-month median follow-up in the Main Trial, 79 ipsilateral breast tumour relapse events (40 Gy: 31, 27 Gy: 27, 26 Gy: 21); hazard ratios (95% confidence interval) versus 40 Gy were 27 Gy: 0.86 (0.51 to 1.44), 26 Gy: 0.67 (0.38 to 1.16). With 2.1% (1.4 to 3.1) 5-year incidence ipsilateral breast tumour relapse after 40 Gy, estimated absolute differences versus 40 Gy (non-inferiority test) were -0.3% (-1.0-0.9) for 27 Gy (p = 0.0022) and -0.7% (-1.3-0.3) for 26 Gy (p = 0.00019). Five-year prevalence of any clinician-assessed moderate/marked breast normal tissue effects was 40 Gy: 98/986 (9.9%), 27 Gy: 155/1005 (15.4%), 26 Gy: 121/1020 (11.9%). Across all clinician assessments from 1 to 5 years, odds ratios versus 40 Gy were 1.55 (1.32 to 1.83; p < 0.0001) for 27 Gy and 1.12 (0.94-1.34; p = 0.20) for 26 Gy. Patient and photographic assessments showed higher normal tissue effects risk for 27 Gy versus 40 Gy but not for 26 Gy. Nodal Sub-Study reported no arm/hand swelling in 80% and 77% in 40 Gy and 26 Gy at baseline, and 73% and 76% at 24 months. The prevalence of moderate/marked arm/hand swelling at 24 months was 10% versus 7% for 40 Gy compared with 26 Gy. Interpretation: Five-year local tumour incidence and normal tissue effects prevalence show 26 Gy in 5 fractions in 1 week is a safe and effective alternative to 40 Gy in 15 fractions for patients prescribed adjuvant local radiotherapy after primary surgery for early-stage breast cancer. Future work: Ten-year Main Trial follow-up is essential. Inclusion in hypofractionation meta-analysis ongoing. A future hypofractionated boost trial is strongly supported. Trial registration: FAST-Forward was sponsored by The Institute of Cancer Research and was registered as ISRCTN19906132. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 09/01/47) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 25. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Patients diagnosed with early breast cancer are often recommended to have radiotherapy after surgery because research has shown that it lowers the risk of the cancer returning. However, it may cause some short- and long-term side effects. Previous clinical trials showed that the same, or even better, outcomes with a lower total dose of radiotherapy given in fewer, larger daily doses compared with older historical treatment schedules. The National Institute for Health and Care Research Health Technology Assessment Programme-funded FAST-Forward Trial aimed to see whether the number of doses could be reduced further without reducing the beneficial effects of radiotherapy. Between November 2011 and June 2014, 4096 patients agreed to take part in the FAST-Forward Main Trial testing three schedules of radiotherapy to the breast. Standard treatment given on 15 days over 3 weeks (Control Group) was compared with two different lower dose schedules where treatment was given on 5 days over 1 week (lower dose Test Groups). An additional 469 patients entered a sub-study where the gland area under the arm also received radiotherapy (Nodal Sub-Study). Main Trial 5-year results reported in April 2020 showed that the number of patients whose cancer had returned in the treated breast was low in all groups: around 2 in 100 (2.1%) for the Control Group, and 1.7% in the higher dose and 1.4% in the lower dose Test Groups. The majority of reported side effects assessed by patients and doctors up to 5 years after radiotherapy were mild for all treatment groups. Patients in the Control Group and in the lower dose Test Group experienced similar levels of side effects. More side effects were reported in the higher dose Test Group, although differences were small. Overall, the FAST-Forward findings suggest that the lower dose 1-week schedule gave similar results in terms of the cancer returning and side effects to the standard 3-week treatment and this schedule can now be used to help treat future patients.

Hypofractionation and SABR: 25 years of evolution in medical physics and a glimpse of the future.

As we were invited to write an article for celebrating the 50th Anniversary of Medical Physics journal, on something historically significant, commemorative, and exciting happening in the past decades, the first idea came to our mind is the fascinating radiotherapy paradigm shift from conventional fractionation to hypofractionation and stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR). It is historically and clinically significant since as we all know this RT treatment revolution not only reduces treatment duration for patients, but also improves tumor control and cancer treatment outcomes. It is also commemorative and exciting for us medical physicists since the technology development in medical physics has been the main driver for the success of this treatment regimen which requires high precision and accuracy throughout the entire treatment planning and delivery. This article provides an overview of the technological development and clinical trials evolvement in the past 25 years for hypofractionation and SABR, with an outlook to the future improvement.

Radiotherapy for elderly patients with glioblastoma: an assessment of hypofractionation and modern treatment techniques.

Glioblastoma (GBM) is a disease with a poor prognosis. For decades, radiotherapy has played a critical role in the management of GBM. The standard of care radiation prescription is 60 Gy in 30 fractions, but landmark trials have historically excluded patients older than 70 years. Currently, there is considerable variation in the management of elderly patients with GBM. Shortened radiation treatment (hypofractionated) regimens have been explored since conventional treatment schedules are lengthy and many elderly patients have functional, cognitive, and social limitations. Clinical trials have demonstrated the effectiveness of hypofractionated radiotherapy (40 Gy in 15 fractions) to treat elderly or frail patients with GBM. Although previous studies have suggested these unique hypofractionation prescriptions effectively treat these patients, there are many avenues for improvement in this patient population. Herein, we describe the unique tumor biology of glioblastoma, key hypofractionated radiotherapy studies, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) studies for elderly patients with GBM. Hypofractionated radiation has emerged as a shortened alternative and retrospective studies have suggested survival outcomes are similar for elderly patients with GBM. Prospective studies comparing hypofractionation with conventional treatment regiments are warranted. In addition to evaluating survival outcomes, HRQOL endpoints should be incorporated into future studies.

Radiothérapie adjuvante pour le traitement du cancer du sein de stade précoce: efficacité et innocuité d'une irradiation complète du sein en 5 fractions (ultrahypofractionnement) / Adjuvant radiation therapy for treatment early-stage breast cancer: efficacy and safety of whole breast irradiation in 5 fractions (ultrahypofractionation)

CONTEXTE: Le présent document ainsi que les constats qu'il énonce ont été rédigés par l'INESSS en concertation avec le Comité de l'évolution des pratiques en oncologie (CEPO) dans une volonté d'évaluer les plus récentes données publiées en lien avec les pratiques de la radiothérapie pour le traitement du cancer du sein de stade précoce. L'objectif est de réaliser une recension des données publiées et de mobiliser les savoirs clés afin d'informer les décideurs publics et les professionnels de la santé et des services sociaux. Depuis quelques années, le traitement standard du cancer du sein de stade précoce repose sur la chirurgie conservatrice suivie d'une radiothérapie hypofractionnée en 15 ou 16 fractions (40 - 42,5 Gy) et d'un traitement systémique au besoin. L'administration d'un traitement à fractionnement réduit (15 - 16 fractions) a permis de diminuer le nombre de visites en milieu de soins, l'utilisation des équipements d'irradiation et des ressources humaines par patient, ainsi que les coûts associés au traitement d'irradiation, sans que l'efficacité clinique et l'innocuité ne soient compromises comparativement au fractionnement de 50 Gy en 25 fractions. Une réduction supplémentaire du fractionnement (ultra-hypofractionnement en 5 fractions) pourrait accroitre ces bénéfices si l'efficacité clinique et l'innocuité ne sont pas compromises. PRÉSENTATION DE LA DEMANDE: Au Canada, le cancer du sein est la néoplasie la plus fréquente et la deuxième plus importante cause de décès par cancer chez la femme. Il représente 25 % de tous les

Variable and fixed costs in NHS radiotherapy; consequences for increasing hypo fractionation.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: The increased use of hypofractionated radiotherapy changes department activity. While expected to be cost-effective, departments' fixed costs may impede savings. Understanding radiotherapy's cost-drivers, to what extent these are fixed and consequences of reducing activity can help to inform reimbursement strategies. MATERIAL/METHODS: We estimate the cost of radiotherapy provision, using time-driven activity-based costing, for five bone metastases treatment strategies, in a large NHS provider. We compare these estimations to reimbursement tariff and assess their breakdown by cost types: fixed (buildings), semi-fixed (staff, linear accelerators) and variable (materials) costs. Sensitivity analyses assess the cost-drivers and impact of reducing departmental activity on the costs of remaining treatments, with varying disinvestment assumptions. RESULTS: The estimated radiotherapy cost for bone metastases ranges from 430.95€ (single fraction) to 4240.76€ (45 Gy in 25#). Provider costs align closely with NHS reimbursement, except for the stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) strategy (tariff exceeding by 15.3%). Semi-fixed staff costs account for 28.1-39.7% and fixed/semi-fixed equipment/space costs 38.5-54.8% of provider costs. Departmental activity is the biggest cost-driver; reduction in activity increasing cost, predominantly in fractionated treatments. Decommissioning linear accelerators ameliorates this, although can only be realised at equipment capacity thresholds. CONCLUSION: Hypofractionation is less burdensome to patients and long-term offers a cost-efficient mechanism to treat an increasing number of patients within existing capacity. As a large majority of treatment costs are fixed/semi-fixed, disinvestment is complex, within the life expectancy of a linac, imbalances between demand and capacity will result in higher treatment costs. With a per-fraction reimbursement, this may disincentivise delivery of hypofractionated treatments.

Practical considerations for prostate hypofractionation in the developing world.

External beam radiotherapy is an effective curative treatment option for localized prostate cancer, the most common cancer in men worldwide. However, conventionally fractionated courses of curative external beam radiotherapy are usually 8-9 weeks long, resulting in a substantial burden to patients and the health-care system. This problem is exacerbated in low-income and middle-income countries where health-care resources might be scarce and patient funds limited. Trials have shown a clinical equipoise between hypofractionated schedules of radiotherapy and conventionally fractionated treatments, with the advantage of drastically shortening treatment durations with the use of hypofractionation. The hypofractionated schedules are supported by modern consensus guidelines for implementation in clinical practice. Furthermore, several economic evaluations have shown improved cost effectiveness of hypofractionated therapy compared with conventional schedules. However, these techniques demand complex infrastructure and advanced personnel training. Thus, a number of practical considerations must be borne in mind when implementing hypofractionation in low-income and middle-income countries, but the potential gain in the treatment of this patient population is substantial.

Cost-effectiveness of postmastectomy hypofractionated radiation therapy vs conventional fractionated radiation therapy for high-risk breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The phase 3 NCT00793962 trial demonstrated that postmastectomy hypofractionated radiation therapy (HFRT) was noninferior to conventional fractionated radiation therapy (CFRT) in patients with high-risk breast cancer. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of postmastectomy HFRT vs CFRT based on the NCT00793962 trial. METHODS: A Markov model was adopted to synthesize the medical costs and health benefits of patients with high-risk breast cancer based on data from the NCT00793962 trial. Main outcomes were discounted lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). We employed a time-dependent horizon from Chinese, French and USA payer perspectives. Model robustness was evaluated with one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: Patients receiving CFRT versus HFRT gained an incremental 0.0163 QALYs, 0.0118 QALYs and 0.0028 QALYs; meanwhile an incremental cost of $2351.92, $4978.34 and $8812.70 from Chinese, French and USA payer perspectives, respectively. Thus CFRT versus HFRT yielded an ICER of $144,281.47, $420,636.10 and $3,187,955.76 per QALY from Chinese, French and USA payer perspectives, respectively. HFRT could maintain a trend of >50% probabilities of cost-effectiveness below a willingness-to-pay (WTP) of $178,882.00 in China, while HFRT was dominant relative to CFRT, regardless of the WTP values in France and the USA. Sensitivity analyses indicated that the ICERs were most sensitive to the parameters of overall survival after radiotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Postmastectomy HFRT could be used as a cost-effective substitute for CFRT in patients with high-risk breast cancer and should be considered in appropriately selected patients.

Five-Year Longitudinal Analysis of Patient-Reported Outcomes and Cosmesis in a Randomized Trial of Conventionally Fractionated Versus Hypofractionated Whole-Breast Irradiation.

PURPOSE: There are limited prospective data on predictors of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after whole-breast irradiation (WBI) plus a boost. We sought to characterize longitudinal PROs and cosmesis in a randomized trial comparing conventionally fractionated (CF) versus hypofractionated (HF) WBI. METHODS AND MATERIALS: From 2011 to 2014, women aged ≥40 years with Tis-T2 N0-N1a M0 breast cancer who underwent a lumpectomy with negative margins were randomized to CF-WBI (50 Gray [Gy]/25 fractions plus boost) versus HF-WBI (42.56 Gy/16 fractions plus boost). At baseline (pre-radiation), at 6 months, and yearly thereafter through 5 years, PROs included the Breast Cancer Treatment Outcome Scale (BCTOS), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B), and Body Image Scale; cosmesis was reported by the treating physician using Radiation Therapy Oncology Group cosmesis values. Multivariable mixed-effects growth curve models evaluated associations of the treatment arm and patient factors with outcomes and tested for relevant interactions with the treatment arm. RESULTS: A total of 287 patients were randomized, completing a total of 14,801 PRO assessments. The median age was 60 years, 37% of patients had a bra cup size ≥D, 44% were obese, and 30% received chemotherapy. Through 5 years, there were no significant differences in PROs or cosmesis by treatment arm. A bra cup size ≥D was associated with worse BCTOS cosmesis (P < .001), BCTOS pain (P = .001), FACT-B Trial Outcome Index (P = .03), FACT-B Emotional Well-being (P = .03), and Body Image Scale (P = .003) scores. Physician-rated cosmesis was worse in patients who were overweight (P = .02) or obese (P < .001). No patient subsets experienced better PROs or cosmesis with CF-WBI. CONCLUSIONS: Both CF-WBI and HF-WBI confer similar longitudinal PROs and physician-rated cosmesis through 5 years of follow-up, with no relevant subsets that fared better with CF-WBI. This evidence supports broad adoption of hypofractionation with boost, including in patients receiving chemotherapy and in a population with a high prevalence of obesity. The associations of large breast size and obesity with adverse outcomes across multiple domains highlight the opportunity to engage at-risk patients in lifestyle intervention strategies, as well as to consider alternative radiation treatment regimens.

Assessment of Simulated SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Mortality Risk Associated With Radiation Therapy Among Patients in 8 Randomized Clinical Trials.

Importance: During the COVID-19 pandemic, cancer therapy may put patients at risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality. The impacts of proposed alternatives on reducing infection risk are unknown. Objective: To investigate how the COVID-19 pandemic is associated with the risks and benefits of standard radiation therapy (RT). Design, Setting, and Participants: This comparative effectiveness study used estimated individual patient-level data extracted from published Kaplan-Meier survival figures from 8 randomized clinical trials across oncology from 1993 to 2014 that evaluated the inclusion of RT or compared different RT fractionation regimens. Included trials were Dutch TME and TROG 01.04 examining rectal cancer; CALGB 9343, OCOG hypofractionation trial, FAST-Forward, and NSABP B-39 examining early stage breast cancer, and CHHiP and HYPO-RT-PC examining prostate cancer. Risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality associated with receipt of RT in the treatment arms were simulated and trials were reanalyzed. Data were analyzed between April 1, 2020, and June 30, 2020. Exposures: COVID-19 risk associated with treatment was simulated across different pandemic scenarios, varying infection risk per fractions (IRFs) and case fatality rates (CFRs). Main Outcomes and Measures: Overall survival was evaluated using Cox proportional hazards modeling under different pandemic scenarios. Results: Estimated IPLD from a total of 14 170 patients were included in the simulations. In scenarios with low COVID-19-associated risks (IRF, 0.5%; CFR, 5%), fractionation was not significantly associated with outcomes. In locally advanced rectal cancer, short-course RT was associated with better outcomes than long-course chemoradiation (TROG 01.04) and was associated with similar outcomes as RT omission (Dutch TME) in most settings (eg, TROG 01.04 median HR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.46-0.96]; Dutch TME median HR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.80-1.03] in a scenario with IRF 5% and CFR 20%). Moderate hypofractionation in early stage breast cancer (OCOG hypofractionation trial) and prostate cancer (CHHiP) was not associated with survival benefits in the setting of COVID-19 (eg, OCOG hypofractionation trial median HR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.74-1.06]; CHHiP median HR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.75-1.01] under high-risk scenario with IRF 10% and CFR 30%). More aggressive hypofractionation (FAST-Forward, HYPO-RT-PC) and accelerated partial breast irradiation (NSABP B-39) were associated with improved survival in higher risk scenarios (eg, FAST-Forward median HR, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.49-0.68]; HYPO-RT-PC median HR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.48-0.75] under scenario with IRF 10% and CFR 30%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this comparative effectiveness study of data from 8 clinical trials of patients receiving radiation therapy to simulate COVID-19 risk and mortality rates, treatment modification was not associated with altered risk from COVID-19 in lower-risk scenarios and was only associated with decreased mortality in very high COVID-19-risk scenarios. This model, which can be adapted to dynamic changes in COVID-19 risk, provides a flexible, quantitative approach to assess the potential impact of treatment modifications and supports the continued delivery of standard evidence-based care with appropriate precautions against COVID-19.

Assessment of Toxic Effects Associated With Dose-Fractionated Radiotherapy Among Patients With Cancer and Comorbid Collagen Vascular Disease.

Importance: The adoption of alternative fractionated radiotherapy regimens for the treatment of patients with cancer and comorbid collagen vascular disease (CVD) is controversial among oncologists because of concerns about potentially severe toxic effects; however, the association between fractionated radiotherapy and toxic effects in the modern era has not been well studied. Objective: To compare acute and late toxic effects among patients with cancer and comorbid CVD who received dose-fractionated radiotherapy. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study examined 197 adult patients with cancer and CVD who received radiotherapy at a single-institution tertiary academic center over a 12-year period (February 1, 2007, to April 30, 2019), with a median follow-up of 23 months (range, 0-108 months). Data were analyzed from February 1 to August 31, 2020. Exposures: Three dose-fractionated radiotherapy regimens: conventional fractionation (CF; ≤2 Gy per fraction), moderate hypofractionation (MH; >2 Gy to <5 Gy per fraction), and ultrahypofractionation (UH; ≥5 Gy per fraction). Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were the incidence and severity of acute and late radiotherapy-associated toxic effects, which were assessed separately by dose-fractionation regimen. Toxic effects occurring within 90 days after radiotherapy completion were considered acute, and toxic effects occurring after that 90-day period were considered late. Secondary goals were to identify covariates associated with toxic effects and to characterize the incidence of CVD symptom flares (defined as worsening clinical symptoms and/or worsening results [transient or permanent] on associated blood tests compared with baseline, as documented by managing physicians) after radiotherapy. Results: Of 197 patients with cancer and comorbid CVD (mean [SD] age, 69 [12] years; 134 women [68.0%]; and 149 White participants [75.6%]), 80 patients (40.6%) received CF radiotherapy, 55 patients (27.9%) received MH radiotherapy, and 62 patients (31.5%) received UH radiotherapy. The most common CVD diagnoses were rheumatoid arthritis (74 patients [37.6%]), psoriasis (54 patients [27.4%]), systemic lupus erythematosus (34 patients [17.3%]), and scleroderma (8 patients [4.1%]). The most common radiotherapy sites were the breast (48 patients [24.4%]), thorax (25 patients [12.7%]), central nervous system (24 patients [12.2%]), and prostate (23 patients [11.7%]). Data on acute toxic effects were available for 188 patients (95.4%) and missing for 9 patients (4.6%). Data on late toxic effects were available for 142 patients (72.1%) and missing for 55 patients (27.9%). Over 12 years, the unadjusted incidences of severe acute toxic effects associated with CF, MH, and UH radiotherapy were 5.4% (95% CI, 0.3%-10.5%), 7.4% (95% CI, 0.4%-14.4%), and 1.7% (95% CI, 0%-5.0%), respectively. The incidences of severe late toxic effects associated with CF, MH, and UH radiotherapy were 8.3% (95% CI, 1.3%-15.3%), 0%, and 2.2% (95% CI, 0%-6.4%), respectively. No significant associations were found between severe acute or late toxic effects by dose fractionation regimen. In the multivariable analysis, MH radiotherapy was associated with a lower likelihood of developing late toxic effects (odds ratio [OR], 0.21; 95% CI, 0.05-0.83; P = .03) compared with CF radiotherapy. Those who received UH radiotherapy had a lower likelihood of experiencing late toxic effects (OR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.04-1.21; P = .08). A total of 19 of 80 patients (23.8%), 15 of 55 patients (27.3%), and 10 of 62 patients (16.1%) experienced CVD symptom flares after receiving CF, MH, and UH radiotherapy, respectively (P = .33). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, the incidences of unadjusted severe toxic effects over 12 years were less than 10% and were not significantly associated with dose fractionation. When clinically indicated, patients with cancer and comorbid CVD may not require immediate exclusion from the receipt of currently used hypofractionated radiotherapy regimens.

Cost Minimization Analysis of Hypofractionated Radiotherapy.

Early-stage breast cancer patients comprise a large proportion of patients treated with radiotherapy in Canada. Proponents have suggested that five-fraction hypofractionated radiotherapy for these patients would result in significant cost savings. An assessment of this argument is thus warranted. The FAST-Forward and UK FAST clinical trials each demonstrated that their respective hypofractionated regimens provided equivalent outcomes compared with standard regimens. Thus, a cost-minimization analysis was performed to quantify the potential savings associated with these regimens, which were designated as FAST-Forward 1 (26 Gy/5 fractions/1 week) and FAST-Forward 2 (27 Gy/5 fractions/1 week), and UK FAST 1 (28.5 Gy/5 fractions/5 weeks) and UK FAST 2 (30 Gy/5 fractions/5 weeks). A standard regimen of 42.5 Gy/16 fractions/5 weeks was also included. A comprehensive model of radiotherapy costs for a Canadian cancer centre was created. Time, labour costs, and capital costs were calculated for each regimen and applied using established measures. The total costs per patient for the FAST-Forward trials were $851.77 for FAST-Forward 1 and $874.77 for FAST-Forward 2, providing a total savings of $487.99 and $464.99, respectively. Similarly, the total costs per patient for the FAST trials were $979.75 for UK FAST 1 and $1017.70 for UK FAST 2, providing savings of $360.01 and $322.06, respectively. Following the FAST-Forward 1 regimen results in the greatest reduction of infrastructure and human resources costs at 36.42% compared with the standard. Sensitivity analysis shows a maximum per-patient costs savings ranging from $474.60 to $508.53 for the FAST-Forward 1 trial, which translates to an annual savings of $174,700/year locally and $2.06 million/year province-wide, based on a moderate-to-large size department workload. Compared with a standard radiotherapy regimen, all FAST-Forward and UK FAST hypofractionated regimens provide cost savings for the treatment of early-stage breast cancer. The cost savings associated with each of these equivalent regimens can be directly calculated; activities in this model can easily be adjusted to account for cost variations, allowing other centres to calculate cost impacts specific to their own centres.

Optimizing proton minibeam radiotherapy by interlacing and heterogeneous tumor dose on the basis of calculated clonogenic cell survival.

Proton minibeam radiotherapy (pMBRT) is a spatial fractionation method using sub-millimeter beams at center-to-center (ctc) distances of a few millimeters to widen the therapeutic index by reduction of side effects in normal tissues. Interlaced minibeams from two opposing or four orthogonal directions are calculated to minimize side effects. In particular, heterogeneous dose distributions applied to the tumor are investigated to evaluate optimized sparing capabilities of normal tissues at the close tumor surrounding. A 5 cm thick tumor is considered at 10 cm depth within a 25 cm thick water phantom. Pencil and planar minibeams are interlaced from two (opposing) directions as well as planar beams from four directions. An initial beam size of σ0 = 0.2 mm (standard deviation) is assumed in all cases. Tissue sparing potential is evaluated by calculating mean clonogenic cell survival using a linear-quadratic model on the calculated dose distributions. Interlacing proton minibeams for homogeneous irradiation of the tumor has only minor benefits for the mean clonogenic cell survival compared to unidirectional minibeam irradiation modes. Enhanced mean cell survival, however, is obtained when a heterogeneous dose distribution within the tumor is permitted. The benefits hold true even for an elevated mean tumor dose, which is necessary to avoid cold spots within the tumor in concerns of a prescribed dose. The heterogeneous irradiation of the tumor allows for larger ctc distances. Thus, a high mean cell survival of up to 47% is maintained even close to the tumor edges for single fraction doses in the tumor of at least 10 Gy. Similar benefits would result for heavy ion minibeams with the advantage of smaller minibeams in deep tissue potentially offering even increased tissue sparing. The enhanced mean clonogenic cell survival through large ctc distances for interlaced pMBRT with heterogeneous tumor dose distribution results in optimum tissue sparing potential. The calculations show the largest enhancement of the mean cell survival in normal tissue for high-dose fractions. Thus, hypo-fractionation or even single dose fractions become possible for tumor irradiation. A widened therapeutic index at big cost reductions is offered by interlaced proton or heavy ion minibeam therapy.

The Financial Impact on Reimbursement of Moderately Hypofractionated Postoperative Radiation Therapy for Breast Cancer: An International Consortium Report.

AIMS: Moderately hypofractionated breast irradiation has been evaluated in several prospective studies, resulting in wide acceptance of shorter treatment protocols for postoperative breast irradiation. Reimbursement for radiation therapy varies between private and public systems and between countries, impacting variably financial considerations in the use of hypofractionation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the financial impact of moderately hypofractionated breast irradiation by reimbursement system in different countries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was designed by an international group of radiation oncologists. A web-questionnaire was distributed to representatives from each country. The participants were asked to involve the financial consultant at their institution. RESULTS: Data from 13 countries from all populated continents were collected (Europe: Denmark, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, UK; North America: Canada, USA; South America: Brazil; Africa: South Africa; Oceania: Australia; Asia: Israel, Taiwan). Clinicians and/or departments in most of the countries surveyed (77%) receive remuneration based on the number of fractions delivered to the patient. The financial loss per patient estimated resulting from applying moderately hypofractionated breast irradiation instead of conventional fractionation ranged from 5-10% to 30-40%, depending on the healthcare provider. CONCLUSION: Although a generalised adoption of moderately hypofractionated breast irradiation would allow for a considerable reduction in social and economic burden, the financial loss for the healthcare providers induced by fee-for-service remuneration may be a factor in the slow uptake of these regimens. Therefore, fee-for-service reimbursement may not be preferable for radiation oncology. We propose that an alternative system of remuneration, such as bundled payments based on stage and diagnosis, may provide more value for all stakeholders.

Hypofractionated Postprostatectomy Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer to Reduce Toxicity and Improve Patient Convenience: A Phase 1/2 Trial.

PURPOSE: The phase 1 portion of this multicenter, phase 1/2 study of hypofractionated (HypoFx) prostate bed radiation therapy (RT) as salvage or adjuvant therapy aimed to identify the shortest dose-fractionation schedule with acceptable toxicity. The phase 2 portion aimed to assess the health-related quality of life (QoL) of using this HypoFx regimen. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Eligibility included standard adjuvant or salvage prostate bed RT indications. Patients were assigned to receive 1 of 3 daily RT schedules: 56.6 Gy in 20 Fx, 50.4 Gy in 15 Fx, or 42.6 Gy in 10 Fx. Regional nodal irradiation and androgen deprivation therapy were not allowed. Participants were followed for 2 years after treatment with outcome measures based on prostate-specific antigen levels, toxicity assessments (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, v4.0), QoL measures (the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite [EPIC] and EuroQol EQ-5D instruments), and out-of-pocket costs. RESULTS: There were 32 evaluable participants, and median follow-up was 3.53 years. The shortest dose-fractionation schedule with acceptable toxicity was determined to be 42.6 Gy in 10 Fx, with most patients (23) treated with this schedule. Grade 3 genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities occurred in 3 patients and 1 patient, respectively. There was 1 grade 4 sepsis event. Higher dose to the hottest 25% of the rectum was associated with increased risk of grade 2+ GI toxicity; no dosimetric factors were found to predict for GU toxicity. There was a significant decrease in the mean bowel, but not bladder, QoL score at 1 year compared with baseline. Prostate-specific antigen failure occurred in 34.3% of participants, using a definition of nadir plus 2 ng/mL. Metastases were more likely to occur in regional lymph nodes (5 of 7) than in bones (2 of 7). The mean out-of-pocket cost for patients during treatment was $223.90. CONCLUSIONS: We identified 42.6 Gy in 10 fractions as the shortest dose-fractionation schedule with acceptable toxicity in this phase 1/2 study. There was a higher than expected rate of grade 2 to 3 GU and GI toxicity and a decreased EPIC bowel QoL domain with this regimen. Future studies are needed to explore alternative adjuvant/salvage HypoFx RT schedules after radical prostatectomy.