Noninvasive inter- and intrafractional motion control in ultrahypofractionated radiation therapy of prostate cancer using RayPilot HypoCath™-a substitute for gold fiducial-based IGRT?

PURPOSE: In ultrahypofractionated radiation concepts, managing of intrafractional motion is mandatory because tighter margins are used and random errors resulting from prostate movement are not averaged out over a large number of fractions. Noninvasive live monitoring of prostate movement is a desirable asset for LINAC-based prostate stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). METHODS: We prospectively analyzed a novel live tracking device (RayPilot HypoCath™; Micropos Medical AB, Gothenburg, Sweden) where a transmitter is noninvasively positioned in the prostatic urethra using a Foley catheter in 12 patients undergoing ultrahypofractionated intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) of the prostate. Gold fiducials (Innovative Technology Völp, Innsbruck, Austria) were implanted to allow comparison of accuracy and positional stability of the HypoCath system and its ability to be used as a standalone IGRT method. Spatial stability of the transponder was assessed by analyzing transmitter movement in relation to gold markers (GM) in superimposed kV image pairs. Inter- and intrafractional prostate movement and the impact of its correction were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 64 fractions were analyzed. The average resulting deviation vector compared to the GM-based position was 1.2 mm and 0.7 mm for inter- and intrafractional motion, respectively. The mean intrafractional displacement vector of the prostate was 1.9 mm. Table readjustment due to exceeding the threshold of 3 mm was required in 18.8% of fractions. Repositioning reduced the time spent outside the 3­mm margin from 7.9% to 3.8% of beam-on time. However, for individual patients, the time spent outside the 3­mm margin was reduced from to 49% to 19%. CONCLUSION: the HypoCath system allows highly accurate and robust intrafractional motion monitoring. In conjunction with cone beam CT (CBCT) for initial patient setup, it could be used as a standalone image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT) system.

Radiotherapy for hormone-sensitive prostate cancer with synchronous low burden of distant metastases.

PURPOSE: The DEGRO Expert Commission on Prostate Cancer has revised the indication for radiation therapy of the primary prostate tumor in patients with synchronous distant metastases with low metastatic burden. METHODS: The current literature in the PubMed database was reviewed regarding randomized evidence on radiotherapy of the primary prostate tumor with synchronous low metastatic burden. RESULTS: In total, two randomized trials were identified. The larger study, the STAMPEDE trial, demonstrated an absolute survival benefit of 8% after 3 years for patients with low metastatic burden treated with standard of care (SOC) and additional radiotherapy (RT) (EQD2 ≤ 72 Gy) of the primary tumor. Differences in the smaller Horrad trial were not statistically significant, although risk reduction in the subgroup (< 5 bone metastases) was equal to STAMPEDE. The STOPCAP meta-analysis of both trials demonstrated the benefit of local radiotherapy for up to 4 bone lesions and an additional subanalysis of STAMPEDE also substantiated this finding in cases with M1a-only metastases. CONCLUSION: Therefore, due to the survival benefit after 3 years, current practice is changing. New palliative SOC is radiotherapy of the primary tumor in synchronously metastasized prostate cancer with low metastatic burden (defined as ≤ 4 bone metastases, with or without distant nodes) or in case of distant nodes only detected by conventional imaging.

Oligometastasis in breast cancer-current status and treatment options from a radiation oncology perspective.

Evidence from a few small randomized trials and retrospective cohorts mostly including various tumor entities indicates a prolongation of disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) from local ablative therapies in oligometastatic disease (OMD). However, it is still unclear which patients benefit most from this approach. We give an overview of the several aspects of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in extracranial OMD in breast cancer from a radiation oncology perspective. A PubMed search referring to this was conducted. An attempt was made to relate the therapeutic efficacy of SBRT to various prognostic factors. Data from approximately 500 breast cancer patients treated with SBRT for OMD in mostly in small cohort studies have been published, consistently indicating high local tumor control rates and favorable progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Predictors for a good prognosis after SBRT are favorable biological subtype (hormone receptor positive, HER2 negative), solitary metastasis, bone-only metastasis, and long metastasis-free interval. However, definitive proof that SBRT in OMD breast cancer prolongs DFS or OS is lacking, since, with the exception of one small randomized trial (n = 22 in the SBRT arm), none of the cohort studies had an adequate control group. Further studies are needed to prove the benefit of SBRT in OMD breast cancer and to define adequate selection criteria. Currently, the use of local ablative SBRT should always be discussed in a multidisciplinary tumor board.

IOERT versus external beam electrons for boost radiotherapy in stage I/II breast cancer: 10-year results of a phase III randomized study.

BACKGROUND: Intraoperative radiotherapy with electrons (IOERT) boost could be not inferior to external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) boost in terms of local control and tissue tolerance. The aim of the study is to present the long-term follow-up results on local control, esthetic evaluation, and toxicity of a prospective study on early-stage breast cancer patients treated with breast-conserving surgery with an IOERT boost of 10 Gy (experimental group) versus 5 × 2 Gy EBRT boost (standard arm). Both arms received whole-breast irradiation (WBI) with 50 Gy (2 Gy single dose). METHODS: A single-institution phase III randomized study to compare IOERT versus EBRT boost in early-stage breast cancer was conducted as a non-inferiority trial. Primary endpoints were the evaluation of in-breast true recurrences (IBTR) and out-field local recurrences (LR) as well as toxicity and cosmetic results. Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and patient's grade of satisfaction with cosmetic outcomes. RESULTS: Between 1999 and 2004, 245 patients were randomized: 133 for IOERT and 112 for EBRT. The median follow-up was 12 years (range 10-16 years). The cumulative risk of IBTR at 5-10 years was 0.8% and 4.3% after IOERT, compared to 4.2% and 5.3% after EBRT boost (p = 0.709). The cumulative risk of out-field LR at 5-10 years was 4.7% and 7.9% for IOERT versus 5.2% and 10.3% for EBRT (p = 0.762). All of the IOERT arm recurrences were observed at > 100 months' follow-up, whereas the mean time to recurrence in the EBRT group was earlier (55.2 months) (p < 0.05). No late complications associated with IOERT were observed. The overall cosmetic results were scored as good or excellent in physician and patient evaluations for both IOERT and EBRT. There were significantly better scores for IOERT at all time points in physician and patient evaluations with the greatest difference at the end of EBRT (p = 0.006 objective and p = 0.0004 subjective) and most narrow difference at 12 months after the end of EBRT (p = 0.08 objective and p = 0.04 subjective analysis). CONCLUSION: A 10-Gy IOERT boost during breast-conserving surgery provides high local control rates without significant morbidity. Although not significantly superior to external beam boosts, the median time to local recurrences after IOERT is prolonged by more than 4 years.

Post-neoadjuvant treatment with capecitabine and trastuzumab emtansine in breast cancer patients-sequentially, or better simultaneously?

PURPOSE: Following neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer, postoperative systemic therapy, also called post-neoadjuvant treatment, has been established in defined risk settings. We reviewed the evidence for sequencing of postoperative radiation and chemotherapy, with a focus on a capecitabine and trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1)-based regimen. METHODS: A systematic literature search using the PubMed/MEDLINE/Web of Science database was performed. We included prospective and retrospective reports published since 2015 and provided clinical data on toxicity and effectiveness. RESULTS: Six studies were included, five of which investigated capecitabine-containing regimens. Of these, four were prospective investigations and one a retrospective matched comparative analysis. One randomized prospective trial was found for T­DM1 and radiotherapy. In the majority of these reports, radiation-associated toxicities were not specifically addressed. CONCLUSION: Regarding oncologic outcome, the influence of sequencing radiation therapy with maintenance capecitabine chemotherapy in the post-neoadjuvant setting is unclear. Synchronous administration of capecitabine is feasible, but reports on possible excess toxicities are partially conflicting. Dose reduction of capecitabine should be considered, especially if normofractionated radiotherapy is used. In terms of tolerance, hypofractionated schedules seem to be superior in terms of toxicity in concurrent settings. T­DM1 can safely be administered concurrently with radiotherapy.

Radiotherapy in nodal oligorecurrent prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The current article encompasses a literature review and recommendations for radiotherapy in nodal oligorecurrent prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature review focused on studies comparing metastasis-directed stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) vs. external elective nodal radiotherapy (ENRT) and studies analyzing recurrence patterns after local nodal treatment was performed. The DEGRO Prostate Cancer Expert Panel discussed the results and developed treatment recommendations. RESULTS: Metastasis-directed radiotherapy results in high local control (often > 90% within a follow-up of 1-2 years) and can be used to improve progression-free survival or defer androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) according to prospective randomized phase II data. Distant progression after involved-node SABR only occurs within a few months in the majority of patients. ENRT improves metastases-free survival rates with increased toxicity in comparison to SABR according to retrospective comparative studies. The majority of nodal recurrences after initial local treatment of pelvic nodal metastasis are detected within the true pelvis and common iliac vessels. CONCLUSION: ENRT with or without a boost should be preferred to SABR in pelvic nodal recurrences. In oligometastatic prostate cancer with distant (extrapelvic) nodal recurrences, SABR alone can be performed in selected cases. Application of additional systemic treatments should be based on current guidelines, with ADT as first-line treatment for hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. Only in carefully selected patients can radiotherapy be initially used without additional ADT outside of the current standard recommendations. Results of (randomized) prospective studies are needed for definitive recommendations.

Moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy as definitive treatment for localized prostate cancer: Pattern of practice in German-speaking countries : A survey of the Prostate Cancer Expert Panel of the German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO) and the Working Party on Radiation Oncology of the German Cancer Society (DKG-ARO).

PURPOSE: Various randomized phase III clinical trials have compared moderately hypofractionated to normofractionated radiotherapy (RT). These modalities showed similar effectiveness without major differences in toxicity. This project was conducted by the Prostate Cancer Expert Panel of the German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO) and the Working Party on Radiation Oncology of the German Cancer Society. We aimed to investigate expert opinions on the use of moderately hypofractionated RT as a definitive treatment for localized prostate cancer in German-speaking countries. METHODS: A 25-item, web-based questionnaire on moderate-hypofractionation RT was prepared by an internal committee. The experts of the DEGRO were asked to complete the questionnaire. RESULTS: Fourteen active members of DEGRO completed the questionnaire. The questions described indications for selecting patients eligible to receive moderate hypofractionation based on clinical and pathological factors such as age, urinary symptoms, and risk-group. The questions also collected information on the technical aspects of selection criteria, including the definition of a clinical target volume, the use of imaging, protocols for bladder and rectal filling, the choice of a fractionation schedule, and the use of image guidance. Moreover, the questionnaire collected information on post-treatment surveillance after applying moderately hypofractionated RT. CONCLUSION: Although opinions varied on the use of moderate-hypofractionation RT, the current survey reflected broad agreement on the notion that moderately hypofractionated RT could be considered a standard treatment for localized prostate cancer in German-speaking countries.

Moderate hypofractionation remains the standard of care for whole-breast radiotherapy in breast cancer: Considerations regarding FAST and FAST-Forward.

Moderate hypofractionation is the standard of care for adjuvant whole-breast radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery for breast cancer. Recently, 10-year results from the FAST and 5­year results from the FAST-Forward trial evaluating adjuvant whole-breast radiotherapy in 5 fractions over 5 weeks or 1 week have been published. This article summarizes recent data for moderate hypofractionation and results from the FAST and FAST-Forward trial on ultra-hypofractionation. While the FAST trial was not powered for comparison of local recurrence rates, FAST-Forward demonstrated non-inferiority for two ultra-hypofractionated regimens in terms of local control. In both trials, the higher-dose experimental arms resulted in elevated rates of late toxicity. For the lower dose experimental arms of 28.5 Gy over 5 weeks and 26 Gy over 1 week, moderate or marked late effects were similar in the majority of documented items compared to the respective standard arms, but significantly worse in some subdomains. The difference between the standard arm and the 26 Gy of the FAST-Forward trial concerning moderate or marked late effects increased with longer follow-up in disadvantage of the experimental arm for most items. For now, moderate hypofractionation with 40-42.5 Gy over 15-16 fractions remains the standard of care for the majority of patients with breast cancer who undergo whole-breast radiotherapy without regional nodal irradiation after breast-conserving surgery.

Ultrahypofractionation of localized prostate cancer : Statement from the DEGRO working group prostate cancer.

Due to its low fractionation sensitivity, also known as "alpha/beta ratio," in relation to its surrounding organs at risk, prostate cancer is predestined for hypofractionated radiation schedules assuming an increased therapeutic ratio compared to normofractionated regimens. While moderate hypofractionation (2.2-4 Gy) has been proven to be non-inferior to normal fractionation in several large randomized trials for localized prostate cancer, level I evidence for ultrahypofractionation (>4 Gy) was lacking until recently. An accumulating body of non-randomized evidence has recently been strengthened by the publication of two randomized studies comparing ultrahypofractionation with a normofractionated schedule, i.e., the Scandinavian HYPO-RT trial by Widmark et al. and the first toxicity results of the PACE­B trial. In this review, we aim to give a brief overview of the current evidence of ultrahypofractionation, make an overall assessment of the level of evidence, and provide recommendations and requirements that should be followed before introducing ultrahypofractionation into routine clinical use.

Treatment strategies to prevent and reduce gynecomastia and/or breast pain caused by antiandrogen therapy for prostate cancer : Statement from the DEGRO working group prostate cancer.

AIM: To provide an overview on the available treatments to prevent and reduce gynecomastia and/or breast pain caused by antiandrogen therapy for prostate cancer. METHODS: The German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO) expert panel summarized available evidence published and assessed the validity of the information on efficacy and treatment-related toxicity. RESULTS: Eight randomized controlled trials and one meta-analysis were identified. Two randomized trials demonstrated that prophylactic radiation therapy (RT) using 1â€¯× 10 Gy or 2â€¯× 6 Gy significantly reduced the rate of gynecomastia but not breast pain, as compared to observation. A randomized dose-finding trial identified the daily dose of 20 mg tamoxifen (TMX) as the most effective prophylactic dose and another randomized trial described that daily TMX use was superior to weekly use. Another randomized trial showed that prophylactic daily TMX is more effective than TMX given at the onset of gynecomastia. Two other randomized trials described that TMX was clearly superior to anastrozole in reducing the risk for gynecomastia and/or breast pain. One comparative randomized trial between prophylactic RT using 1â€¯× 12 Gy and TMX concluded that prophylactic TMX is more effective compared to prophylactic RT and furthermore that TMX appears to be more effective to treat gynecomastia and/or breast pain when symptoms are already present. A meta-analysis confirmed that both prophylactic RT and TMX can reduce the risk of gynecomastia and/or breast pain with TMX being more effective; however, the rate of side effects after TMX including dizziness and hot flushes might be higher than after RT and must be taken into account. Less is known regarding the comparative effectiveness of different radiation fractionation schedules and more modern RT techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic RT as well as daily TMX can significantly reduce the incidence of gynecomastia and/or breast pain. TMX appears to be an effective alternative to RT also as a therapeutic treatment in the presence of gynecomastia but its side effects and off-label use must be considered.

Role of combined radiation and androgen deprivation therapy in intermediate-risk prostate cancer : Statement from the DEGRO working group on prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE: This article aims to provide an overview of the role of combined radiation and androgen deprivation (ADT) therapy in patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The current German, European, and NCCN (National Comprehensive Cancer Network) guidelines as well as relevant literature in the PubMed database which provide information on sub-classification within the intermediate-risk group and the use of ADT in terms of oncological outcome were reviewed. RESULTS: Different recommendations for risk-group assessment of patients with localized prostate cancer are available. Subdivision of intermediate risk into a favorable and an unfavorable group seems to be justified to allow for a more individualized therapy in a quite heterogenous group of patients. So far, multiple randomized trials have shown a benefit when radiation therapy (RT) is combined with ADT. The use of dose-escalated RT without ADT also appears to be an adequate therapy associated with a very low rate of cancer-specific deaths. Therefore, taking into account the increased rate of toxicity associated with ADT, dose-escalated RT alone might be justified, especially in favorable intermediate-risk patients. CONCLUSION: Dose-escalated RT alone appears to be an appropriate treatment in favorable intermediate-risk patients. Addition of short course ADT (4-6 months) might improve outcomes in unfavorable intermediate-risk patients.

Risk-adapted moderate hypofractionation of prostate cancer : A prospective analysis of acute toxicity, QOL and outcome in 221 patients.

PURPOSE: Prostate cancer (PCA) is highly heterogeneous in terms of its oncologic outcome. We therefore aimed to tailor radiation treatment to the risk status by using three different hypofractionated radiation regimen differing in applied dose, use of rectum spacer, inclusion of pelvic lymph nodes (pLN) and use of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Here we report on acute toxicity, quality of life (QOL) and oncologic outcome at a median follow-up of 12 months. METHODS: A total of 221 consecutive PCA patients received hypofractionated intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Low-risk (LR) patients were planned to receive 60 Gy in 20 fractions (EQD2α/ß1.5 = 77.1 Gy), intermediate-risk (IR) patients 63 Gy in 21 fractions (EQD2α/ß1.5 = 81 Gy), and high-risk (HR) patients 67.5 Gy in 25 fractions (EQD2α/ß1.5 = 81 Gy) to the prostate and 50 Gy in 25 fractions to the pLN. Acute rectal toxicity was assessed by endoscopy. In addition, toxicity was scored using CTC-AE 4.0 and IPSS score, while QOL was assessed using QLQ-PR25 questionnaires. RESULTS: Acute CTC reactions were slightly higher in the HR regimen but reverted to baseline at 3 months. GI G2 toxicity was 4%, 0% and 12% for the LR, IR and HR regimen. Compared to IR patients, the increase in toxicity in HR patients was statistically significant (p = 0.002) and mainly caused by a higher incidence of diarrhea presumably due to pelvic EBRT. QOL scores of all domains were worse for the HR regimen (not significant). CONCLUSION: Risk-adapted moderate hypofractionation is associated with low GI/GU toxicity. Given the higher rate of pelvic metastases in HR patients, slightly higher transient acute reactions should be outweighed by possible oncological benefits.

Heart-sparing radiotherapy techniques in breast cancer patients: a recommendation of the breast cancer expert panel of the German society of radiation oncology (DEGRO).

PURPOSE: The aim of this review was to analyze the respective efficacy of various heart-sparing radiotherapy techniques. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Heart-sparing can be performed in three different ways in breast cancer radiotherapy: by seeking to keep the heart out of treated volumes (i.e. by prone position or specific breathing techniques such as deep inspiration breath-hold [DIBH] and/or gating), by solely irradiating a small volume around the lumpectomy cavity (partial breast irradiation, PBI), or by using modern radiation techniques like intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) or protons. This overview presents the available data on these three approaches. RESULTS: Studies on prone position are heterogeneous and most trials only refer to patients with large breasts; therefore, no definitive conclusion can be drawn for clinical routine. Nonetheless, there seems to be a trend toward better sparing of the left anterior descending artery in supine position even for these selected patients. The data on the use of DIBH for heart-sparing in breast cancer patients is consistent and the benefit compared to free-breathing is supported by several studies. In comparison with whole breast irradiation (WBI), PBI has an advantage in reducing the heart dose. Of note, DIBH and PBI with multicatheter brachytherapy are similar with regard to the dose reduction to heart structures. WBI by IMRT/VMAT techniques without DIBH is not an effective strategy for heart-sparing in breast cancer patients with "standard" anatomy. A combination of DIBH and IMRT may be used for internal mammary radiotherapy. CONCLUSION: Based on the available findings, the DEGRO breast cancer expert panel recommends the use of DIBH as the best heart-sparing technique. Nonetheless, depending on the treatment volume and localization, other techniques may be employed or combined with DIBH when appropriate.

Heart toxicity from breast cancer radiotherapy : Current findings, assessment, and prevention.

BACKGROUND: Late cardiac toxicities caused by (particularly left-sided) breast radiotherapy (RT) are now recognized as rare but relevant sequelae, which has prompted research on risk structure identification and definition of threshold doses to heart subvolumes. The aim of the present review was to critically discuss the clinical evidence on late cardiac reactions based on dose-dependent outcome reports for mean heart doses as well as doses to cardiac substructures. METHODS: A literature review was performed to examine clinical evidence on radiation-induced heart toxicities. Mean heart doses and doses to cardiac substructures were focused upon based on dose-dependent outcome reports. Furthermore, an overview of radiation techniques for heart protection is given and non-radiotherapeutic aspects of cardiotoxicity in the multimodal setting of breast cancer treatment are discussed. RESULTS: Based on available findings, the DEGRO breast cancer expert panel recommends the following constraints: mean heart dose <2.5 Gy; DmeanLV (mean dose left ventricle) < 3 Gy; V5LV (volume of LV receiving ≥5 Gy) < 17%; V23LV (volume of LV receiving ≥23 Gy) < 5%; DmeanLAD (mean dose left descending artery) < 10 Gy; V30LAD (volume of LAD receiving ≥30 Gy) < 2%; V40LAD (volume of LAD receiving ≥40 Gy) < 1%. CONCLUSION: In addition to mean heart dose, breast cancer RT treatment planning should also include constraints for cardiac subvolumes such as LV and LAD. The given constraints serve as a clinicians' aid for ensuring adequate heart protection. The individual decision between sufficient protection of cardiac structures versus optimal target volume coverage remains in the physician's hand. The risk of breast cancer-specific mortality and a patient's cardiac risk factors must be individually weighed up against the risk of radiation-induced cardiotoxicity.

Radiotherapy after skin-sparing mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction in intermediate-risk breast cancer : Indication and technical considerations.

BACKGROUND: Skin-sparing (SSME) and nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSME) were developed to improve the cosmetic results for breast cancer (BC) patients, both allowing for immediate breast reconstruction. Recommendations for post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) are primarily derived from trials where patients were treated by standard mastectomies. Due to their more conservative character, SSME and especially NSME potentially leave more glandular tissue at risk for subclinical disease. METHODS: Rates and sites of locoregional failures following SSME and NSME plus/minus reconstruction were analyzed regarding tumor stage and biological risk factors. In particular, the role of PMRT in "intermediate"-risk and early stage high-risk breast cancer patients was revisited. Implications on targeting and dose delivery of PMRT were critically reviewed. RESULTS: The value of PMRT in stage III BC remains undisputed. For node-negative BC patients, the majority of reports classify clinical and biological features such as tumor size, close surgical margins, premenopausal status, multicentricity, lymphangiosis, triple-negativity, HER2-overexpression, and poor tumor grading as associated with higher rates of locoregional relapse, thus, building an "intermediate" risk group. Surveys revealed that the majority of radiation oncologists use risk-adaptive models also considering the number of coinciding factors for the estimation of recurrence probability following SSME and NSME. Constellations with a 10-year locoregional recurrence risk of >10% are usually triggering the indication for PMRT. There was no common belief that the amount of residual tissue, e.g., tissue thickness over flaps, serves as additional decision aid. Modern treatment planning can ensure optimal dose distribution for PMRT in almost all patients with SSME. There are no reliable data supporting a reduction of the treatment volume from the CTV chest wall, e.g., to the nipple-areola complex, to the dorsal aspect behind the implant volume, the pectoralis muscle, nor the regional interpectoral, axillary, or complete regional lymph nodes only. The omission of a skin bolus in intermediate-risk BC does not compromise oncological safety. CONCLUSIONS: For intermediate-risk as well as early stage high-risk BC patients, the DEGRO Breast Cancer Expert Panel recommends the use of PMRT following SSME and NSME when a 10-year locoregional recurrence risk is likely to be greater than 10%, as estimated by clinical and biological risk factors. Subvolume-only radiation is discouraged outside of trials. The impact of adequate systemic treatment and the value of radiotherapy on optimal locoregional tumor control, with the goal of less than 5% LRR at 10-years follow-up, has to be verified in prospective trials.

Nonmetastatic pancreatic cancer : Improved survival with chemoradiotherapy > 40 Gy after systemic treatment.

PURPOSE: The role of radiotherapy (RT) for nonmetastatic pancreatic cancer is still a matter of debate since randomized control trials have shown inconsistent results. The current retrospective single-institution study includes both resected and unresected patients with nonmetastasized pancreatic cancer. The aim is to analyze overall survival (OS) after irradiation combined with induction chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Of the 73 patients with nonmetastatic pancreatic cancer eligible for the present analysis, 42 (58%) patients had adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT), while 31 (42%) received CRT as primary treatment. In all, 65 (89%) had chemotherapy at any time before, during, or after RT, and 39 (53%) received concomitant CRT. The median total dose was 50 Gy (range 12-77 Gy), while 61 (84%) patients received >40 Gy. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 22 months (range 1.2-179.8 months), 14 (19%) are still alive and 59 (81%) of the patients have died, whereby 51 (70%) were cancer-related deaths. Median OS and the 2­year survival rate were 22.9 months (1.2-179.8 months) and 44%, respectively. In addition, 61 (84%) patients treated with >40 Gy had a survival advantage (median OS 23.7 vs. 17.3 months, p = 0.026), as had patients with 4 months minimum of systemic treatment (median OS 27.5 vs. 14.3 months, p = 0.0004). CONCLUSION: CRT with total doses >40 Gy after induction chemotherapy leads to improved OS in patients with nonmetastatic pancreatic cancer.

The potential predictive value of tumor budding for neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy response in locally advanced rectal cancer.

PURPOSE: This study was conducted to investigate the potential predictive value of tumor budding for neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy response in locally advanced rectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Surgical specimens of 128 ypUICC (Union for International Cancer Control) stage 0-III mid-to-low rectal cancer patients were identified from a prospectively maintained colorectal cancer database and classified into two groups using the 10 high-power field average method: none/mild tumor budding (BD-0) and moderate/severe tumor budding (BD-1). Overall survival, relapse-free survival (RFS), and recurrence estimates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with the log-rank test. For RFS, a multivariable Cox's proportional hazards regression analysis was performed. RESULTS: No (n = 20) or mild (n = 27) tumor budding (BD-0) was identified in 47 (37%) and moderate (n = 52) or severe (n = 29) tumor budding (BD-1) in 81 (63%) surgical specimens. Positive tumor budding (BD-1) was associated with significantly reduced T­level downstaging (P < 0.001) and tumor regression (P < 0.001). After a median follow-up time of 7 years (range 2.9-146.7 months), BD-0 patients had more favorable 5­year RFS (90 vs. 71%, P = 0.02) and distant recurrence (2 vs. 12%, P = 0.03) estimates. Multivariable analyses confirmed BD-1 as a negative predictive parameter for RFS (hazard ratio = 3.44, 95% confidence interval 1.23-9.63, P = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: Our data confirm tumor budding as a strong prognostic factor and its potential predictive value for neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy response in locally advanced rectal cancer patients. This provides the opportunity to modify and individualize neoadjuvant therapy regimens for non-responders.

Individualization of post-mastectomy radiotherapy and regional nodal irradiation based on treatment response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer : A systematic review.

PURPOSE: To review the evidence regarding post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) and regional nodal irradiation (RNI) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) for breast cancer, with a special focus on individualization of adjuvant radiotherapy based on treatment response. METHODS: A systematic literature search using the PubMed/Medline database was performed. We included prospective and retrospective reports with a minimum of 10 patients that had been published since 1st January 2000, and provided clinical outcome data analyzed by treatment response and radiotherapy. RESULTS: Out of 763 articles identified via PubMed/Medline and hand search, 68 full text-articles were assessed for eligibility after screening of title and abstract. 13 studies were included in the systematic review, 9 for PMRT and 5 for RNI. All included studies were retrospective reports. CONCLUSIONS: There is a considerable lack of evidence regarding the role of adjuvant radiotherapy and its individualization based on treatment response after NACT. Results of prospective randomized trials such as NSABP B­51/RTOG 1304 and Alliance A11202 are eagerly awaited.

Use of androgen deprivation and salvage radiation therapy for patients with prostate cancer and biochemical recurrence after prostatectomy.

AIM: Overview on the use of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) added to salvage radiation therapy (SRT) for prostate cancer patients with biochemical recurrence after prostatectomy. METHODS: The German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO) expert panel summarized available evidence published between January 2009 and May 2017, and assessed the validity of the information on outcome parameters including overall survival (OS) and treatment-related toxicity. RESULTS: Two randomized controlled trials and nine relevant retrospective analyses were identified. The RTOG 9601 trial showed an OS improvement for the combination of 2 years of bicalutamide and SRT compared to SRT alone after a median follow-up of 13 years. This improvement appeared to be restricted to those patients with a prostate specific antigen (PSA) level before SRT of ≥0.7 ng/mL. The GETUG AFU-16 trial showed that after a median follow-up of 5 years, the addition of 6 months of goserelin to SRT improved progression-free survival (PFS; based on biochemical recurrence) as compared to SRT alone. ADT in both trials was not associated with increased major late toxicities. Results of retrospective series were inconsistent with a suggestion that the addition of ADT improved biochemical PFS especially in patients with high-risk factors such as Gleason Score ≥8 and in the group with initially negative surgical margins. CONCLUSIONS: ADT combined with SRT appears to improve OS in patients with a PSA level before SRT of ≥0.7 ng/mL. In patients without persistent PSA after prostatectomy and PSA levels of <0.7 ng/mL, ADT should not routinely be used, but may be considered in patients with additional risk factors such as Gleason Score ≥8 and negative surgical margins.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer-background for the indication of locoregional treatment.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) has been widely adopted into the multidisciplinary management of breast cancer. The prognostic impact of treatment response has been clearly demonstrated. However, the impact of treatment response on the indication for adjuvant radiotherapy is unclear. This review summarizes important implications of NACT and treatment response on the risk of recurrence and locoregional multidisciplinary management from the standpoint of radiation oncology.