Mepitel Film and Mepilex Lite for the prophylaxis and treatment of skin toxicities from breast radiation.

Despite the prevalence of radiation dermatitis in breast cancer patients, current practice guidelines for its treatment are limited. We aimed to discuss the quality of evidence for the barrier-forming Mepitel Film for prophylaxis of radiation dermatitis, and argue for further investigation into evidence-based management of skin toxicities. Two studies assessing Mepitel Film were critically evaluated. Both reported that Mepitel Film decreased radiation dermatitis; moreover, patient-reported outcomes significantly favoured Mepitel Film. However, there has not been global adoption of barrier-forming films such as Mepitel, in part due to the absence of multi-centred randomised trials and the heterogeneity of study designs.

Effects of circadian rhythms and treatment times on the response of radiotherapy for painful bone metastases.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have observed how the time of radiotherapy delivery can impact toxicities and outcomes. The goal of this study was to determine whether treatment time influenced radiotherapy response for bone metastases. METHODS: Patients who received radiation treatment to painful bone metastases from January 2000 to December 2010 were included in our analysis. Demographic and treatment information including performance status, primary site, treatment dose and fraction, and response were collected prospectively. Treatment times were extracted from patient medical records. Patients were allocated to 8:00 AM-11:00 AM, 11:01 AM-2:00 PM, or 2:01 PM-5:00 PM cohorts based on their treatment times. To compare treatment response between the three cohorts, the Fisher exact test was used. A two-sided P value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Analysis was repeated with males and females separately. RESULTS: A total of 194 patients were included. The median age was 68 years and 55.5% of patients responded to treatment. The dose and fraction of radiation received differed significantly between treatment cohorts using all allocation methods. Females in the 11:01 AM-2:00 PM cohort exhibited a significantly higher response rate (P=0.02) and differing proportions of response types (P=0.03) compared to the 8:00 AM- 11:00 AM and 2:01 PM-5:00 PM cohorts when allocated using all treatment times. No significant differences in response were seen between cohorts when all patients were analysed together or analysed for males only. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment time may affect response in female patients receiving radiotherapy for painful bone metastases. Subsequent chronotherapy studies in radiation should investigate these gender differences.

Could time of whole brain radiotherapy delivery impact overall survival in patients with multiple brain metastases?

OBJECTIVE: Whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) is commonly used to treat brain metastases. Previous studies have explored how radiotherapy treatment time can affect response. The present study evaluated the influence of treatment time on overall survival (OS) for cancer patients receiving WBRT. METHODS: Patients who received WBRT from 2004 to 2016 were included. Demographic information including age, performance status, primary site, dose, fraction, treatment time, and date of death were collected. Based on different percentages of treatment times falling into one time frame (i.e., 100%, ≥80%, ≥70%, or ≥60%), patients were allocated to three cohorts (8:00-11:00 AM, 11:01 AM-2:00 PM, 2:01-5:00 PM). Demographics were compared among cohorts using the Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric test and Fisher exact test. To control the multiple comparisons on select demographic variables a Bonferroni adjusted P value was considered statistically significant. Kaplan-Meier curves were created for OS. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard (PH) model were used to find predictive factors of OS in all patients, females and males. RESULTS: A total of 755 patients were included with a median age of 66 years. The actuarial median OS was 2.37 months. Treatment time was not associated with OS for all patients or males only. In elderly female patients (>65 years), a significant difference in OS was found among treatment cohorts (P=0.02). Treatment time (when ≥80% or ≥70% of treatment times were in one time frame), age, and Karnofsky performance status (KPS) were significant predictive factors of OS in univariate analysis for females. Only age and KPS remained significant in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Time of WBRT delivery for brain metastases was significantly related to OS upon univariate analyses in females only. Future investigations should be conducted prospectively with homogenous patient groups to elucidate the effect of chronotherapy in palliative brain metastases patients as time of WBRT administration may affect OS in specific subsets of patients.