A qualitative evaluation of factors influencing Tumor Treating fields (TTFields) therapy decision making among brain tumor patients and physicians.

BACKGROUND: Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) Therapy is an FDA-approved therapy in the first line and recurrent setting for glioblastoma. Despite Phase 3 evidence showing improved survival with TTFields, it is not uniformly utilized. We aimed to examine patient and clinician views of TTFields and factors shaping utilization of TTFields through a unique research partnership with medical neuro oncology and medical social sciences. METHODS: Adult glioblastoma patients who were offered TTFields at a tertiary care academic hospital were invited to participate in a semi-structured interview about their decision to use or not use TTFields. Clinicians who prescribe TTFields were invited to participate in a semi-structured interview about TTFields. RESULTS: Interviews were completed with 40 patients with a mean age of 53 years; 92.5% were white and 60% were male. Participants who decided against TTFields stated that head shaving, appearing sick, and inconvenience of wearing/carrying the device most influenced their decision. The most influential factors for use of TTFields were the efficacy of the device and their clinician's opinion. Clinicians (N = 9) stated that TTFields was a good option for glioblastoma patients, but some noted that their patients should consider the burdens and benefits of TTFields as it may not be the desired choice for all patients. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to examine patient decision making for TTFields. Findings suggest that clinician support and efficacy data are among the key decision-making factors. Properly understanding the path to patients' decision making is crucial in optimizing the use of TTFields and other therapeutic decisions for glioblastoma patients.

Age most significant predictor of requiring enteral feeding in head-and-neck cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: A significant number of patients treated for head and neck squamous cell cancer (HNSCC) undergo enteral tube feeding. Data suggest that avoiding enteral feeding can prevent long-term tube dependence and disuse of the swallowing mechanism which has been linked to complications such as prolonged dysphagia and esophageal constriction. We examined detailed dosimetric and clinical parameters to better identify those at risk of requiring enteral feeding. METHODS: One hundred patients with advanced stage HNSCC were retrospectively analyzed after intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) to a median dose of 70 Gy (range: 60-75 Gy) with concurrent chemotherapy in nearly all cases (97%). Patients with significant weight loss (>10%) in the setting of severely reduced oral intake were referred for placement of a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube. Detailed DVH parameters were collected for several structures. Univariate and multivariate analyses using logistic regression were used to determine clinical and dosimetric factors associated with needing enteral feeding. Dichotomous outcomes were tested using Fisher's exact test and continuous variables between groups using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. RESULTS: Thirty-three percent of patients required placement of an enteral feeding tube. The median time to tube placement was 25 days from start of treatment, after a median dose of 38 Gy. On univariate analysis, age (p=0.0008), the DFH (Docetaxel/5-FU/Hydroxyurea) chemotherapy regimen (p= .042) and b.i.d treatment (P=0.040) (used in limited cases on protocol) predicted need for enteral feeding. On multivariate analysis, age remained the single statistically significant factor (p=0.003) regardless of other clinical features (e.g. BMI) and all radiation planning parameters. For patients 60 or older compared to younger adults, the odds ratio for needing enteral feeding was 4.188 (p=0.0019). CONCLUSIONS: Older age was found to be the most significant risk factor for needing enteral feeding in patients with locally advanced HNSCC treated with multimodal treatment. Pending further validation, this would support maximizing early nutritional guidance, targeted supplementation, and symptomatic support for older adults (>60) undergoing chemoradiation. Such interventions and others (e.g. swallowing therapy) could possibly delay or minimize the use of enteral feeding, thereby helping avoid tube dependence and tube-associated long-term physiologic consequences.

Hyperthermia and radiation therapy for locally advanced or recurrent breast cancer.

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to report the outcome and toxicity of combined hyperthermia (HT) and radiation therapy (RT) in treatment of locally advanced or loco-regionally recurrent breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients treated with HT and RT from January 1991 to December 2007 were reviewed. RT doses for previously irradiated patients were > 40 Gy and for RT naïve patients > 60 Gy, at 1.8-2 Gy/day. HT was planned for 2 sessions/week, immediately after RT, for a minimum of 20 min and for > 4 sessions. Superficial or interstitial applicators were used with temperature measured by superficial or interstitial thermistors based on target thickness. HT treatment was assessed by thermal equivalent dose (TED), > 42.5 °C and > 43 °C. Endpoints included treatment response, lack of local progression (local control), and survival. RESULTS: 127 patients received HT and RT to 167 sites. These included the intact breast (24.4%), chest wall/skin (67.7%), and breast/chest wall and nodes (7.9%). At a median follow-up of 13 months (mean 30 ± 38), improved overall survival was significantly associated with increasing RT dose (p < 0.0001), median TED 42.5 °C ≥ 200 min (p = 0.003), and local control (p = 0.0002). Local control at last follow-up was seen in 55.1% of patients. Complete response was significantly associated with median TED 42.5 °C ≥ 200 min (p = 0.002) and median TED 43 °C ≥ 100 min (p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: HT and RT are effective for locally advanced or recurrent breast cancer in patients that have been historically difficult to treat by RT alone. Over 50% of patients achieved control of locoregional disease. Overall survival was improved with local control.