Genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity among patients with localized prostate cancer treated with conventional versus moderately hypofractionated radiation therapy: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hypofractionated (HRT) prostate radiation therapy has the potential to deliver a higher biologically effective dose over a shorter time compared with conventional fractionation (CRT). HRT, giving fewer fractions each with higher dose, might improve the therapeutic ratio, resource use and patient convenience but the toxicity is still controversial. Our objective was to compare the gastroinstestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity of HRT versus CRT. METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials studies in PubMed, Cochrane and EMBASE databases published through December 2016 was done. Only randomized trials that evaluated patients with localized prostate cancer (PCa) undergoing CRT or HRT were included. In these studies, the daily dose was 1.8 Gy or 2 Gy per day for CRT and 2.4 to 3.4 Gy for HRT. RESULTS: 7317 patients in nine studies were analyzed. Six studies included acute GU toxicity data which showed similar rates for both HRT and CRT (32.6vs. 31.9%; RD 0.00; 95% CI; -0.03,0.03; p = .81; I2 = 0%). Similarly, seven studies showed no difference in late GU toxicity based on treatment schedule (28.7 vs. 28.0%; RD -0.01; 95% CI; -0.04,0.03; p = .67; I2 = 52%). GI toxicity at three months after radiotherapy was higher in patients treated with HRT in six studies (27.5 vs. 21.9%; RD 0.06; 95% CI; 0.02,0.10; p = .004; I2 = 39%); however, eight studies showed GI toxicity 12 months or more after radiotherapy that was statistically the same (12.9 HRT vs. 16.2% CRT; RD -0.01; 95% CI; -0.04,0.02; p = .41; I2 = 58%). CONCLUSION: In meta-analysis of the available randomized trials on moderate HRT versus CRT for prostate cancer, acute and late GU toxicity were similar for both treatment schemes. While HRT was associated with higher acute GI toxicity, late toxicity was similar.

Radiotherapy-related toxicity for localized prostate cancer: meta-analysis comparing conventional or moderately hypofractionated vs. ultrahypofractionated protocols.

BACKGROUND: To compare toxicities in relation to standard radiation treatments [conventional fractionation RT (CRT) and moderate hypofractionated RT (MRT)] with ultrahypofractionated RT (URT) in the treatment of patients with localized PCa. METHODS: A searched was performed in Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, and LILACS to January 2020 for studies comparing URT to CRT and/or MRT in relation to genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity in the treatment of patients with localized PCa. URT, MRT and CRT were defined as protocols delivering a daily dose of ≥5 Gy, 2.4-4.9 Gy, and <2.4 Gy per fractions regardless total dose, respectively. RESULTS: Eight studies with 2929 patients with localized PCa were included in the analysis. These eight studies did not find any difference between URT and MRT/CRT groups in relation to acute GU toxicity (21.0% × 23.8%, RD -0.04; 95% CI -0.13, 0.06; p = 0.46; I2 = 89%) and acute GI toxicity (4.9% × 6.9%, RD -0.03; 95% CI -0.07, 0.01; p = 0.21; I2 = 79%). Six studies did not find any difference between URT and MRT/CRT groups in relation to late GU toxicity (3.9% × 4.7%, RD -0.01; 95% CI -0.03, 0.00; p = 0.16; I2 = 19%) and late GI toxicity (2.1% × 3.5%, RD -0.01; 95% CI -0.03, 0.00; p = 0.05; I2 = 22%). CONCLUSION: The present study suggests that acute GU/GI and late GU/GI toxicity are similar between URT and standard protocols. More studies with longer follow-ups directed to oncology outcomes are warranted before any recommendation on this topic.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Radiation Oncology Departments in Brazil.

Purpose: The COVID-19 pandemic brought several challenges to cancer practice, especially in ensuring continuity of treatment during this period while minimizing the risks of transmission to a vulnerable population. For radiation oncology departments in Brazil, this contingency has become even more complex owing to the significant effect observed in different sectors of society and the large number of COVID-19 cases and deaths. This study estimated the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on Brazilian radiation oncology departments and the coping measures used in the country. Methods and Materials: The Brazilian Radiotherapy Society developed a questionnaire, with 14 questions, that were sent to all heads of radiation oncology departments in the country between May and June 2020. These data were evaluated regarding cases confirmed and deaths by COVID-19 in epidemiologic week 28, on July 11, 2020. Results: One hundred twenty-six questionnaires from different regions were answered, representing 44% of the country's services. A drop in the number of patients was observed in 61% of services. This drop was observed both in patients from the public and supplementary private health insurance systems. Regarding patients and employees with COVID-19, we observed that services that primarily treat Unified Health System patients reported significantly fewer cases of the disease. About half of the services had collaborators and patients during radiation therapy with a positive diagnosis of COVID-19. Among the coping measures, the services used intensified hygiene and cleanliness practices, interpersonal distancing, restrictions on access to companions, and other changes in daily practice. Conclusions: Thus, there was an important drop in the number of radiation therapy patients in the country during the pandemic, and this effect was similar among the services, regardless of the characteristics of the patients and the departments' coping measures adopted during the pandemic.

Pros and cons of radiotherapy omission in elderly breast cancer patients following breast conservative surgery.

Breast cancer is a highly prevalent disease worldwide, with adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) being considered standard of care after breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Older patient population can present multiple running comorbidities and less aggressive tumor behavior, and the absolute impact of adjuvant RT on local control can be low. This article aims to review the available literature about the impact of adjuvant RT, discussing characteristics to identify lower risk cases, and advantages and disadvantages of the omission of adjuvant radiotherapy in this group.

Evaluation of a new predictor of heart and left anterior descending artery dose in patients treated with adjuvant radiotherapy to the left breast.

BACKGROUND: Heart-sparing techniques are time and resource intensive, although not all patients require the use of these strategies. This study evaluates the performance of different distance metrics in predicting the need for breath-hold radiotherapy in left-sided breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant radiotherapy. METHODS: Fifty left-sided breast cancer patients treated with breast conserving surgery and adjuvant radiotherapy to the breast from a single institution were retrospectively studied. The left breast and organs at risk were contoured in accordance to guidelines and a plan with tangents was obtained using the free-breathing CT in supine position. Heart (mean heart dose (MHD), heart V25 Gy) and left anterior descending artery dosimetry were computed and compared against distance metrics under investigation (Contact Heart, 4th Arch and 5th Arch). Recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) was used to determine optimal cut-points for distance metrics for dosimetric end points. Receiver operating characteristic curves and Pearson correlation coefficients were used to evaluate the association between distance metrics and dosimetric endpoints. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify significant predictors of dosimetric end points. RESULTS: The mean MHD and heart V25 Gy were 2.3 Gy and 10.4 cm3, respectively. With tangents, constraints for MHD (< 1.7 Gy and V25 Gy < 10 cm3) were unattainable in 80% and 46% of patients, respectively. Optimal RPA thresholds included: Contact Heart (73 mm), 4th Arch (7 mm) and 5th Arch (41 mm). Of these, the 4th Arch had the highest overall accuracy, sensitivity, concordance index and correlation coefficient. All metrics were statistically significant predictors for MHD ≥ 1.7 Gy based on univariable logistic regression. Fifth Arch did not reach significance for heart V25 Gy ≥ 10 cm3. Fourth Arch was the only predictor to remain statistically significant after multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: We propose a novel "4th Arch" metric as an accurate and practical tool to determine the need for breath-hold radiotherapy for left-sided breast cancer patients undergoing adjuvant radiotherapy with standard tangents. Further validation in an external cohort is necessary.