Unplanned implant removal in locally advanced breast cancer.

Study conducted to determine frequency and timing of unplanned breast implant removal after mastectomy, reconstruction, and postmastectomy radiation (PMRT). From 2010-2017, 52 patients underwent mastectomy, reconstruction, and PMRT. With median follow-up of 3.1 years, 23 patients (44%) experienced implant removal. Implant removal occurred in 9 (17%) patients before starting PMRT and 14 (27%) patients after starting PMRT. Implant removal rates were similar for hypofractionated PMRT compared with standard fractionation and for proton compared with photon PMRT. Implant removal is common for women undergoing mastectomy and reconstruction followed by PMRT. The risk is clinically significant even before starting radiation.

Impact of adjuvant trastuzumab on locoregional failure rates in a randomized clinical trial: North Central Cancer Treatment Group N9831 (alliance) study.

BACKGROUND: The goal of this study was to assess the impact of trastuzumab on locoregional failure. METHODS: The analysis included 2763 patients with HER2-positive (HER2+) breast cancer who were randomly assigned to adjuvant doxorubicin (A), cyclophosphamide (C), paclitaxel (T) and trastuzumab (H) (arm A, AC→T [n = 922]; arm B, AC→T→H [n = 988]; arm C, AC→T+H→H [n = 853]). Radiotherapy was given after AC→T concurrently with H. Radiotherapy was given after lumpectomy (L) or after mastectomy (M) with ≥4 positive lymph nodes but was optional for 1 to 3 positive lymph nodes. Locoregional failures at 10 years (LFR10) as first events were compared using competing risk analysis. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 13.0 years. The first site of failure was local-only in 96 cases, locoregional in 16 cases, regional in 32 cases, and not specified in 2 cases; LFR10 was 4.8% (95% CI 4.1%-5.7%). LFR10 was 5.5% (95% CI 4.3%-7.2%), 4.9% (95% CI 3.7%-6.4%), and 2.8% (95% CI 1.9%-4.1%) in arms A, B, and C (B vs A: hazard ratio [HR] 0.91, P = .62; C vs A: HR 0.72, P = .12). For estrogen receptor-positive patients, LFR10 was 3.7% (95% CI 2.8%-4.8%) and for estrogen receptor-negative patients, it was 6.1% (95% CI 5.0%-7.4%; HR 0.61, P = .004). Local treatment included L+RT (n = 1044 [38%]), M+RT (n = 1025 [37%]), and M (n = 694 [25%]). LFR10 was 6.% (95% CI 5.0%-7.8%), 3.0% (95% CI 2.1%-4.3%), and 5.5% (95% CI 4.0%-7.4%) for L+RT, M+RT, and M, respectively (M+RT vs L+RT: HR 0.43, P < .001; M vs L+RT: HR 0.88, P = .57). For 1 to 3 positive lymph nodes, LFR10 was 6.5% (95% CI 4.8%-8.9%), 4.1% (95% CI 2.4%-7.0%), and 4.3% (95% CI 2.9%-6.5%) in L+RT, M+RT, and M, respectively (M vs L+RT: HR 0.68, P = .14; M vs M+RT: HR 1.2, P = .6). CONCLUSION: Low 10-year LFRs were seen regardless of trastuzumab use. Differences in local therapy in patients with 1 to 3 positive lymph nodes did not appear to improve local control. Local therapy studies for HER2+ and other tumor characteristics are important as the role of local therapies continues to evolve.

Electronic patient-reported outcomes and toxicities during radiotherapy for head-and-neck cancer.

PURPOSE: To characterize quality of life (QOL) using real-time, electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) and to evaluate adverse events (AEs) and supportive care during head-and-neck radiotherapy (RT) and concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT). METHODS: Sixty-five patients undergoing head-and-neck RT completed electronic, real-time, 12-item linear analog self-assessments (LASA) at baseline, before biweekly appointments, and at the last week of RT. Changes in QOL domains between time points were calculated. Clinical data were collected from the institutional medical record. AEs were recorded at the same time points as the LASA and graded. RESULTS: During head-and-neck RT, most patients had clinically meaningful decreases in all QOL domains except level of support, financial concerns, and legal concerns. QOL domains with the most prevalent, clinically meaningful decreases were fatigue (75.4% of patients; 95% CI, 62.9-84.9%), social activity (70.8%; 95% CI, 58.0-81.1%), and overall QOL (70.8%; 95% CI, 58.0-81.1%). All patients had grade 2 AEs; 35.4% had grade 3 (50.0%, CCRT; 12.0%, RT; P = .002). Weight loss averaged 5.5 kg (6.9 kg, CCRT; 2.8 kg, RT; P < .001). Intravenous hydration was needed in 52.3% (77.5%, CCRT; 12.0%, RT; P < .001); feeding tube placement 40.0% (57.5%, CCRT; 12.0%, RT; P = .001); emergency department visits without hospitalization, 10.8%; and emergent hospitalization, 27.7% (37.5%, CCRT; 12.0%, RT; P = .04). CONCLUSIONS: Head-and-neck RT, particularly CCRT, negatively impacts patients' overall QOL, social activity, and fatigue, with frequent grade 3 AEs, weight loss, intravenous hydration, feeding tube placement, ED visits, and hospitalization. Real-time ePROs allow providers to monitor QOL at multiple time points during RT, potentially allowing early intervention to improve QOL and mitigate AEs.

Exploratory study of the association of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plan robustness with local failure in head and neck cancer.

This work is to show which is more relevant to cause local failures (LFs) due to patient setup uncertainty between the planning target volume (PTV) underdosage and the potential target underdosage subject to patient setup uncertainties in head and neck (H&N) cancer treated with volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Thirteen LFs in 10 H&N patients treated by VMAT were analyzed. Measures have been taken to minimize the chances of insufficient target delineation for these patients and the patients were clinically determined to have LF based on the PET/CT scan results by an experienced radiologist and then reviewed by a second experienced radiation oncologist. Two methods were used to identify the possible locations of LF due to underdosage: (a) examining the standard VMAT plan, in which the underdosed volume in the nominal dose distribution (UVN) was generated by subtracting the volumes receiving the prescription doses from PTVs, and (b) plan robustness analysis, in which in addition to the nominal dose distribution, six perturbed dose distributions were created by translating the CT iso-center in three cardinal directions by the PTV margin. The coldest dose distribution was represented by the minimum of the seven doses in each voxel. The underdosed volume in the coldest dose distribution (UVC) was generated by subtracting the volumes receiving the prescription doses in the coldest dose distribution from the volumes receiving the prescription doses in the nominal dose distribution. UVN and UVC were subsequently examined for spatial association with the locations of LF. The association was tested using the binominal distribution and the Fisher's exact test of independence. We found that of 13 LFs, 11 were associated with UVCs (P = 0.011), while three were associated with UVNs (P = 0.99). We concluded that the possible target underdosage due to patient setup uncertainties appeared to be a more relevant factor associated with LF in VMAT for H&N cancer than the compromised PTV coverage at least for the patients included in this study.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Ductal Carcinoma in Situ.

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a breast neoplasm with potential for progression to invasive cancer. Management commonly involves excision, radiotherapy, and hormonal therapy. Surgical assessment of regional lymph nodes is rarely indicated except in cases of microinvasion or mastectomy. Radiotherapy is employed for local control in breast conservation, although it may be omitted for select low-risk situations. Several radiotherapy techniques exist beyond standard whole-breast irradiation (ie, partial-breast irradiation [PBI], hypofractionated whole-breast radiation); evidence for these is evolving. We present an update of the American College of Radiology (ACR) Appropriateness Criteria® for the management of DCIS. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria® are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions, which are reviewed every 3 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review includes an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi technique) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria local-regional recurrence (LRR) and salvage surgery-breast cancer.

Although both breast-conserving surgery and mastectomy generally provide excellent local-regional control of breast cancer, local-regional recurrence (LRR) does occur. Predictors for LRR include patient, tumor, and treatment-related factors. Salvage after LRR includes coordination of available modalities, including surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, and hormonal therapy, depending on the clinical scenario. Management recommendations for breast cancer LRR, including patient scenarios, are reviewed, and represent evidence-based data and expert opinion of the American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria Expert Panel on LRR.The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel.The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In instances in which evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.

Six-year outcome of a prospective study evaluating tumor bed boost with intra-operative electron irradiation followed by whole-breast irradiation for early-stage breast cancer.

A prospective study was performed for patients with early-stage breast cancer in which a single fraction of intraoperative electron irradiation (IOERT) was given to the tumor bed, followed by conventional fractionated whole-breast irradiation (WBRT). Patients with T1/T2N0 breast cancer underwent lumpectomy and sentinel lymph node biopsy. A tumor bed boost of 10 Gy of IOERT using 6-12 MeV electrons was administered by a dedicated mobile linear accelerator in the operating room. After adequate wound healing, 48 Gy WBRT was given to the whole breast in 24 fractions. Fifty-two patients were enrolled between February 2003 and January 2005. At a median follow-up of 79 months, there were two local relapses. The 6-year actuarial overall survival and distant control rates were 89% and 96%, respectively. At last follow-up, cosmesis was graded as excellent or good in 45 (87%), fair in five (10%), and poor in two patients (4%), respectively. Difficulty in wound healing occurred in two patients who had additional surgery later. One patient developed significant fibrosis after aspiration of a symptomatic seroma. The result of this pilot study shows the feasibility of using IOERT as the tumor bed boost in lieu of 6-8 days of standard electron beam treatment with good local control and cosmetic results. However, late surgical intervention of the lumpectomy bed may result in more pronounced tissue fibrosis and wound healing difficulty.

Relapse patterns after transoral laser microsurgery and postoperative irradiation for squamous cell carcinomas of the tonsil and tongue base.

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated relapse patterns after transoral laser microsurgery (TLM) in squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the tonsil and tongue base and evaluated the indications for adjuvant irradiation. METHODS: Between December 1, 1996, and December 31, 2005, 79 patients with previously untreated SCC of the tonsil or tongue base underwent TLM with or without neck dissection. Thirty-eight patients (48%) underwent postoperative irradiation (median, 62 Gy) to the primary site and the neck. Analysis of relapse patterns was performed on the basis of adverse risk factors and the presence or absence of adjuvant irradiation. RESULTS: The median follow-up for living patients was 47 months (range, 10 to 107 months), and patients were monitored for at least 2 years or until recurrence or death. Local, regional, and distant treatment failures numbered 4, 6, and 4 for surgery alone (n = 41) and 0, 2, and 6 for adjuvant irradiation (n = 38), respectively. Patients with high-risk features (extracapsular extension or at least 2 adverse factors) had locoregional control rates at 2 or more years of 66% and 94% for TLM alone and TLM plus adjuvant irradiation, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant irradiation after TLM resection of oropharyngeal SCC with intermediate- or high-risk features improves locoregional control compared with TLM alone.

Physician- and Patient-Reported Outcomes of the MC1635 Phase 3 Trial of Ultrahypofractionated Versus Moderately Hypofractionated Adjuvant Radiation Therapy After Breast-Conserving Surgery.

PURPOSE: Our aim was to report physician- and patient-reported outcomes of patients with localized breast cancer treated with moderate versus ultrahypofractionated whole breast irradiation (WBI) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between February 2018 and February 2020, patients with localized breast cancer (pT0-3 pN0-1 M0) were offered participation in a phase 3 randomized clinical trial assessing adjuvant moderate hypofractionation (MHF) to 40 Gy in 15 fractions versus ultrahypofractionation (UHF) to 25 Gy in 5 fractions after BCS, with an optional simultaneously integrated boost. Toxicities, cosmesis, and quality of life were assessed at baseline, end of treatment (EOT), and 3 months, 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years from irradiation using validated metric tools. RESULTS: One hundred seven patients were randomized to MHF (n = 54) or UHF (n = 53) adjuvant WBI. The median follow-up was 42.8 months. Grade 2 radiation dermatitis was experienced by 4 patients (7.4%) in the MHF arm and 2 patients (3.7%) in the UHF arm at EOT (P = .726). No grade 3 or higher toxicities were observed. Deterioration of cosmesis by physician assessment was observed in 2 (6.7%) patients treated in the UHF arm and 1 (1.9%) patient treated in the MHF arm at EOT (P = .534), whereas at 3 months, only 1 (1.8%) patient treated in the MHF arm demonstrated deterioration of cosmesis (P = .315). At EOT, 91% and 94% of patients reported excellent/good cosmesis among those treated with MHF and UHF regimens, respectively (P = .550). At 3 months, more patients within the MHF arm reported excellent/good cosmesis compared with those in the UHF arm (100% vs 91%; P = .030). However, the difference in patient-reported cosmesis disappeared at the 1-, 2-, and 3-year time points. CONCLUSIONS: UHF WBI showed similar treatment-related late toxicities and similar provider-scored cosmesis compared with MHF radiation in patients treated adjuvantly after BCS.

Dose Deintensified 3-Day Photon, Proton, or Brachytherapy: A Nonrandomized Controlled Partial Breast Irradiation Trial.

PURPOSE: The optimal approach for partial breast irradiation (PBI) is unknown. We investigated a novel de-intensified 3-fraction PBI regimen for photons, protons, and brachytherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A multicenter nonrandomized controlled trial with the primary outcome of adverse cosmesis at 3 years versus before PBI. Eligibility criteria were age ≥50 years treated with breast-conserving surgery for node-negative estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) invasive breast cancer or any ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) measuring ≤2.5 cm. Photon and proton PBI were prescribed 21.9 Gy (relative biological effectiveness) and brachytherapy 21 Gy in 3 fractions. Radiation therapy technique and adjuvant endocrine therapy were selected at physician and patient discretion. RESULTS: Between June 17, 2015, and July 13, 2017, 161 eligible patients were treated with photons (56), protons (49), or brachytherapy (56). Median patient age was 66.8 years. One hundred twenty-six (78.3%) had invasive breast cancer (all ER+) and 35 (21.7%) had DCIS (88.6% ER+). Fifty-four percent of patients with invasive breast cancer and 25.8% of patients with ER+ DCIS initiated and adhered to the prescribed endocrine therapy. The proportion of patients with adverse cosmesis (by trained nurse assessment) was 14.5% at baseline and 2.3% at 3 years (difference, -12.2%; 95% CI, -100% to -6.4%). Adverse cosmesis at the last follow-up, with a median follow-up of 5 years, was 5.7% by nurse assessment, 5.6% by panel assessment of digital photographs, and 5.2% by patient self-report. There were no observed clinically meaningful changes in other patient-reported outcomes, and just 2 grade 2 or higher adverse events, both grade 2, in the brachytherapy cohort. Five-year local recurrence-free survival and progression-free survival were 98.0% and 95.5%, respectively. There were no local recurrences among 60 patients with invasive breast cancer and Ki67 ≤13.25%. CONCLUSIONS: Deintensified 3-day PBI provided favorable disease control, tolerability, and cosmetic outcomes, meeting the prespecified criteria for acceptability. This approach is an attractive option for patients with small node-negative ER+ breast cancer and DCIS.

Prognostic factors in Merkel cell carcinoma: analysis of 240 cases.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge regarding behavior of and prognostic factors for Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is limited. OBJECTIVE: We sought to further understand the characteristics, behavior, prognostic factors, and optimal treatment of MCC. METHODS: A multicenter, retrospective, consecutive study of patients with known primary MCC was completed. Overall survival and survival free of locoregional recurrence were calculated and statistical analysis of characteristics and outcomes was performed. RESULTS: Among the 240 patients, the mean age at diagnosis was 70.1 years, 168 (70.0%) were male, and the majority was Caucasian. The most common location was head and neck (111, 46.3%). Immunosuppressed patients had significantly worse survival, with an overall 3-year survival of 43.4% compared with 68.1% in immunocompetent patients. In our study, patients with stage II disease had improved overall survival versus those with stage I disease, in a statistically significant manner. Patients with stage III disease had significantly worse survival compared with stage I and with stage II. Primary tumor size did not predict nodal involvement. CONCLUSION: The data presented represent one of the largest series of primary MCC in the literature and confirm that MCC of all sizes has metastatic potential, supporting sentinel lymph node biopsy for all primary MCC. Because of the unpredictable natural history of MCC, we recommend individualization of care based on the details of each patient's tumor and clinical presentation.

Unknown primary Merkel cell carcinoma: 23 new cases and a review.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge is limited regarding unknown primary Merkel cell carcinoma (UPMCC). OBJECTIVE: We sought to document the characteristics and behavior of UPMCC, and determine the most appropriate treatment. METHODS: A multicenter, retrospective, consecutive study reviewing patients given a diagnosis of UPMCC between 1981 and 2008 was completed. In addition, a literature review of cases of UPMCC was performed. RESULTS: In all, 23 patients with UPMCC are described and 34 cases from previous reports are compiled. Among the 23 new cases of UPMCC, the average age at diagnosis was 66.0 years; the majority of patients were male (87%) and Caucasian (100% of those reported). One patient was immunosuppressed, and 39% had a history of other cancer. After the initial biopsy, 16 patients had further evaluation of the involved lymph node basin. Half of these had additional positive nodes (8 of 16). The majority of patients had lymph node basin involvement only (78%), whereas 22% had lymph node basin and distant metastasis. The most common lymph node basin involved was inguinal. The median size of the involved lymph node at diagnosis was 5.0 cm. At 2 years, the overall survival of stage IIIB UPMCC was significantly improved versus stage IIIB known primary Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC): 76.9% to 36.4%. LIMITATIONS: Limited number of cases and retrospective review are limitations. CONCLUSION: Our data demonstrate improved overall survival in patients with stage IIIB UPMCC versus those with stage IIIB known primary MCC. Because of the unpredictable natural history of UPMCC, we recommend individualization of care based on the details of each patient's clinical presentation.

Assessment of patient-reported measures of bowel function before and after pelvic radiotherapy: an ancillary study of the North Central Cancer Treatment Group study N00CA.

PURPOSE: The Bowel Function Questionnaire (BFQ) has been used in clinical trials to assess symptoms during and after pelvic radiotherapy (RT). This study evaluated the importance of symptoms in the BFQ from a patient perspective. METHODS: Patients reported presence or absence of symptoms and rated importance of symptoms at baseline, 4 weeks after completion of pelvic RT, and 12 and 24 months after RT. The BFQ measured overall quality of life (QOL) and symptoms of nocturnal bowel movements, incontinence, clustering, need for protective clothing, inability to differentiate stool from gas, liquid bowel movements, urgency, cramping, and bleeding. Bowel movement frequency also was recorded. A content validity questionnaire (CVQ) was used to rate symptoms as "not very important," "moderately unimportant," "neutral," "moderately important," or "very important." RESULTS: Most of the 125 participating patients rated all symptoms as moderately or very important. Generally, patients gave similar ratings for symptom importance at all study points, and ratings were independent of whether the patient experienced the symptom. Measures of greatest importance (moderately or very important) at baseline were ability to control bowel movements (94 %), not having to wear protective clothing (90 %), and not having rectal bleeding (94 %). With the exception of need for protective clothing, the presence of a symptom at 4 weeks was associated with significantly worse QOL (P < .01 for all). CONCLUSIONS: The BFQ has excellent content validity. Patients rated most symptoms as moderately or very important, indicating the BFQ is an appropriate tool for symptom assessment during and after pelvic RT.

Gender differences in academic productivity, educational positions, and leadership appointments of physicians in the U.S.

BACKGROUND: Promotions in academic medicine are frequently based on number of publications and leadership positions held. While prior study has established women publish less than men, many evaluations are limited to individual specialties and do not evaluate involvement with educational activities. OBJECTIVE: To compare gender differences in academic output, intramural leadership positions, and educational leadership positions of academic physicians. METHODS: The curriculum vitae and de-identified demographic data of all permanent physicians employed at a multi-site academic medical center were reviewed from April to May 2020. Multivariable logistic and Poisson regressions evaluated leadership positions and number of publications. RESULTS: Of 3,359 physicians in the demographic database, 32.3% (n = 1,087) were women and 72.5% were white (n = 2,510). Of the 3,015 physicians in the curriculum vitae database, 32% (n = 962) were women. Women were more likely (p < 0.001) to be assistant professor (54% vs. 42.7%) and less likely to be associate (18.1% vs. 20.3%) or full professor (14.6% vs. 29.1%). Women assistant professors published 22% fewer articles (ratio estimate = 0.78, p < 0.001), associate professors 18% less (coefficient = 0.82, p < 0.001), and full professors 23% less (coefficient = 0.77, p < 0.001). Fewer women were program directors for residencies (1.6% vs. 2.9%, p = 0.02) or fellowships (5.4% vs. 7.4%, p = 0.04), and held fewer division or department leadership positions (OR 0.8, 95% CI as [0.6, 1.0], p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Women physicians do not outperform men across any education, leadership, or publication category. A cultural shift is needed to redefine traditional metrics for leadership appointments if academic medicine hopes to achieve equity.

Pilot/Phase II Trial of Hypofractionated Radiation Therapy to the Whole Breast Alone Before Breast Conserving Surgery.

Purpose: Our purpose was to report the results of a phase II trial of patients with breast cancer treated with hypofractionated whole breast radiation therapy (RT) before breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Methods and materials: Between 2019 and 2020, patients with cT0-T2, N0, M0 breast cancer were enrolled. Patients were treated with hypofractionated whole breast RT, 25 Gy in 5 fractions, 4 to 8 weeks before BCS. Pathologic assessment was performed using the residual cancer burden (RCB). Toxicities were assessed according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 4). Quality of life was assessed with Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, The Breast Cancer Treatment Outcome Scale, Linear Analogue Self-Assessment, and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System. Results: Twenty-two patients were enrolled. Median follow-up was 7.6 months (range, 0.2-16.8). Seven (32%) and 2 (9%) patients experienced grade 2+ or 3 toxicities, respectively. Overall quality of life Linear Analogue Self-Assessment and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System did not change significantly from baseline (P = .21 and P = .72, respectively). There was no clinically significant change (≥1 point) in any of The Breast Cancer Treatment Outcome Scale domains. Only 1 (5%) patient experienced a clinical deterioration that corresponded to a "fair" outcome on the Harvard Cosmesis Scale. At pathologic evaluation, 14 (64%) patients had RCB-0 or RCB-I, including 3 (14%) patients with a pathologic complete response (RCB-0). Eight patients (36%) had RCB-II. No local or distant recurrences have been observed. Conclusions: Extremely hypofractionated whole breast RT before BCS is a feasible approach. There were low rates of toxicities and good cosmesis. Further investigation into this approach with RT before BCS is warranted.

Dose delivery reproducibility for PBS proton treatment of breast cancer patients with and without mask immobilization.

BACKGROUND: Setup reproducibility of the tissue in the proton beam path is critical in maintaining the planned clinical target volume (CTV) dose coverage and sparing the organs at risk (OAR). In this study, we retrospectively evaluated radiation therapy dose reproducibility for proton pencil beam scanning (PBS) treatment of breast cancer patients with and without mask immobilization. METHODS: Ninety-four patients treated between January 2019 and September 2022 with at least one verification CT scan (V-CT) in treatment position were included for this study. All patients were set up with arms up using the Orfit AIO patient positioning system, with (69 patients) or without (25 patients) mask immobilization in chin, neck, shoulder, upper arm, and chest areas. Two to three enface or near enface single field uniform dose PBS beams were optimized using a commercial treatment planning system. Prescription doses were 25 to 60 GyRBE in 5 to 45 fractions. Treatment plan doses re-calculated on V-CTs were compared to the corresponding planned doses. Cumulative doses were also calculated for patients with at least 3 V-CTs by deform and weighted sum doses from V-CTs to corresponding P-CTs. CTV D95%, ipsilateral-lung V40%, esophagus D0.01cc, and heart mean dose were evaluated and reported as percentages of prescription doses. Differences were large dose deteriorations (LDD) if: (1) CTV (V-CT/cumulative D95%) - (Planned D95%) < - 5%; or (2) Ipsilateral-lung (V-CT/cumulative V40%) - (Planned V40%) > 5%; or (3) Esophagus (V-CT/cumulative D0.01cc) - (Planned D0.01cc) > 10%; or (4) Heart (V-CT/cumulative mean) - (Planned mean) > 1.5%. RESULTS: On average, V-CT/cumulative and planned CTV/OAR dose parameter differences were less than 2.2%/1.7% and 3.4%/3.7% for masked and maskless patients, respectively. The percentages of patients with at least one CTV or OAR V-CT/cumulative dose LDD were 20.3%/25.0% and 72.0%/54.0% for masked and maskless patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: On average, masked/maskless setups achieved delivered and planned CTV/OAR dose parameters agreed within 2.2%/3.7% for PBS treatment of breast cancer patients in this study. Maskless patients had higher rate of CTV/OAR LDDs compared to masked patients. Dosimetric differences large enough to raise clinical concerns in either group were able to be addressed with replannings.

A Prospective Study of Mucosal Sparing Radiation Therapy in Resected Oropharyngeal Cancer Patients.

PURPOSE: Our objective was to report the prospective results of mucosal sparing radiation therapy in human papillomavirus-related oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma. METHODS AND MATERIALS: From March 2016 through May 2019, patients were enrolled in this institutional review board-approved prospective cohort study at a multisite institution. Inclusion criteria included p16+ American Joint Committee on Cancer seventh edition pathologic T1 or T2, N1 to N3, and M0 oropharyngeal cancers. Proton therapy (PT) was delivered to at-risk nodal regions, excluding the primary mucosal site. Secondary to insurance denial for PT, intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) was allowed. European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Head and Neck Module and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System surveys (quality of life [QOL]) and modified barium swallowing impairment profiles (MBSImP) were obtained at baseline before radiation therapy, then 3 and 12 months after radiation therapy. Kaplan-Meier estimates were calculated for time-to-event clinical outcomes, and repeated measures mixed models were used to explore changes in QOL over time. A comparison of QOL and swallowing outcomes with standard-of-care treatment was analyzed. RESULTS: There were 61 evaluable patients with a median follow-up of 38 months (range, 10-64); 44 (72%) were treated with PT and 17 (28%) were treated with IMRT. The 2-year local control, locoregional control, distant metastasis-free survival, and overall survival were 98%, 97%, 98%, and 100%, respectively. There were 6 grade ≥3 events related to treatment. Two IMRT patients required percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement during treatment secondary to significant nausea due to dysgeusia. Patients noted significant QOL improvement over time in the pain, swallowing, speech, social eating, social contact, mouth opening, and use of pain medication domains (all P < .02). The MBSImP overall severity score as well as oral and pharyngeal impairment scores showed stability with no significant change over time. For the 44 patients treated with PT, the mean D95 to the primary target was 10.7 Gy (standard deviation = 12.5 Gy). CONCLUSIONS: Mucosal sparing radiation is well tolerated in select resected human papillomavirus-related oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma with a low risk of recurrence at the mucosal primary site, a low rate of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement, and few radiation-related grade ≥3 adverse events.

Implementing patient-reported outcomes assessment in clinical practice: a review of the options and considerations.

PURPOSE: While clinical care is frequently directed at making patients "feel better," patients' reports on their functioning and well-being (patient-reported outcomes [PROs]) are rarely collected in routine clinical practice. The International Society for Quality of Life Research (ISOQOL) has developed a User's Guide for Implementing Patient-Reported Outcomes Assessment in Clinical Practice. This paper summarizes the key issues from the User's Guide. METHODS: Using the literature, an ISOQOL team outlined considerations for using PROs in clinical practice; options for designing the intervention; and strengths, weaknesses, and resource requirements associated with each option. RESULTS: Implementing routine PRO assessment involves a number of methodological and practical decisions, including (1) identifying the goals for collecting PROs in clinical practice, (2) selecting the patients, setting, and timing of assessments, (3) determining which questionnaire(s) to use, (4) choosing a mode for administering and scoring the questionnaire, (5) designing processes for reporting results, (6) identifying aids to facilitate score interpretation, (7) developing strategies for responding to issues identified by the questionnaires, and (8) evaluating the impact of the PRO intervention on the practice. CONCLUSIONS: Integrating PROs in clinical practice has the potential to enhance patient-centered care. The online version of the User's Guide will be updated periodically.

ACR appropriateness criteria(®) ductal carcinoma in situ.

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) describes a wide spectrum of non-invasive tumors which carry a significant risk of invasive relapse, thus prevention of local recurrence is vital. For appropriate patients with limited disease, management with breast conserving surgery (BCS) followed by whole-breast radiation (RT) is supported by multiple Phase III studies, but mastectomy may be appropriate in selected patients. Omission of RT may also be reasonable in some patients, though which criteria are to be utilized remain unclear, and the existing data are contradictory with limited follow-up. Various RT techniques such as boost to the tumor bed, partial breast radiation or hypofractionated, whole-breast RT are increasingly utilized but the data to support their use specifically in DCIS is limited. Tamoxifen also increases local control for ER + DCIS, adding to the complexity of the local treatment management. This article reviews the existing scientific evidence, the controversies surrounding local management, and clinical guidelines for DCIS based on the group consensus by the ACR Breast Expert Panel. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.

Patient-reported outcomes for patients with breast cancer undergoing radiotherapy: A single-center registry experience.

Background: We present Patient-Reported Outcomes Version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) for patients undergoing adjuvant radiotherapy for breast cancer with curative intent. We describe the frequency and severity of PRO-CTCAE and analyze them with respect to dose fractionation. Methods: Patients were included in this study if they were treated with curative intent for breast cancer and enrolled on a prospective registry. Patients must have completed at least one baseline and one post-radiation survey that addressed PRO-CTCAE. For univariate and multivariate analysis, categorical variables were analyzed by Fisher's exact test and continuous variables by Wilcoxon rank sum test. PRO-CTCAE items graded ≥2 and ≥3 were analyzed between patients who received hypofractionation (HF) versus standard conventional fractionation (CF) therapy by the Chi-square test. Results: Three hundred thirty-one patients met inclusion criteria. Pathologic tumor stage was T1-T2 in 309 (94%) patients. Eighty-seven (29%) patients were node positive. Two hundred forty-seven patients (75%) experienced any PRO-CTCAE grade ≥2, and 92 (28%) patients experienced any PRO-CTCAE grade ≥3. CF was found to be associated with an increased risk of grade ≥3 skin toxicity, swallowing, and nausea (all p < 0.01). HF (OR 0.48, p < 0.01) was significant in the multivariate model for decreased risk of any occurrence of PRO-CTCAE ≥3. Conclusions: Our study reports one of the first clinical experiences utilizing multiple PRO-CTCAE items for patients with breast cancer undergoing radiation therapy with curative intent. Compared with CF, HF was associated with a significant decrease in any PRO-CTCAE ≥3 after multivariate analysis.