Acute radiation-induced skin toxicity in hypofractionated vs. conventional whole-breast irradiation: An objective, randomized multicenter assessment using spectrophotometry.

PURPOSE: Radiation dermatitis represents one of the most frequent side effects in breast cancer patients undergoing adjuvant whole-breast irradiation (WBI). Whether hypofractionated WBI induces comparable or less acute radiation-induced skin reactions than conventional WBI is still not fully clarified, as randomized evidence and objective assessments are limited. The aim of this study was to objectively determine frequency and severity of acute radiation-induced skin reactions during hypofractionated vs. conventionally fractionated adjuvant WBI. METHODS: In this randomized multicenter study, a total of 140 breast cancer patients underwent either hypofractionated or conventional WBI following breast-preserving surgery. Maximum radiation dermatitis severity was assessed at completion and during follow-up by physician-assessed CTCAE v4.03 and the patient-reported RISRAS scale. Additionally, photospectrometric skin readings were performed to objectify skin color differences between both treatment arms. RESULTS: Radiation dermatitis severity was significantly lower in patients receiving hypofractionation compared with conventional fractionation (mean 1.05 vs. 1.43, p = .024). Grade 0 radiation dermatitis occurred in 21.43% vs. 4.28%, grade ≥2 in 27.14% vs. 42.91% and grade ≥3 in 0% vs. 4.34% of patients following hypofractionated and conventional WBI, respectively. Objective photospectrometric measurements (n = 4200) showed both decreased erythema severity (p = .008) and hyperpigmentation (p = .002) in the hypofractionation arm. Patients allocated to hypofractionated WBI also reported less pain (p = .006), less hyperpigmentation (p = <0.001) and less limitations of day-to-day activities (p = <0.001). CONCLUSION: Physician and patient-assessed toxicity scorings as well as objective photospectrometric skin measurements revealed that hypofractionated WBI yielded lower rates and severity of acute radiation-induced skin toxicity.

Tomotherapy in malignant mesothelioma: a planning study to establish dose constraints.

PURPOSE: A planning study was performed for helical tomotherapy treatment. We evaluated the maximum achievable protection of organs at risk (OARs) in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma after pleurectomy with simultaneous optimal target coverage. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The datasets of 13 patients were included. The applied dose to the planning target volume (PTV) was 50.4 Gy with single doses of 1.8 Gy per fraction. Presuming optimal target coverage, we evaluated the applied dose to the OARs with special regard to the contralateral lung. RESULTS: For left-(lsRT)/right(rsRT)-sided radiotherapy, target coverage for the PTV showed a D98 (mean) of 49.37/49.71 Gy (98.0%/98.6%) and a D2 (mean) of 54.19/54.61 Gy (107.5%/108.3%). The beam-on time was kept below 15 min. The achieved mean dose (D50) to the contralateral lung was kept below 4 Gy for lsRT and rsRT. With regard to the other organs at risk the applied doses were as follows: mean dose (lsRT): ipsilateral kidney (Dmean) 13.03 (5.32-22.18) Gy, contralateral kidney (Dmean) <2.0 Gy, heart (Dmean) 22.23 (13.57-27.72) Gy, spinal cord D1

Prophylactically applied Hydrofilm polyurethane film dressings reduce radiation dermatitis in adjuvant radiation therapy of breast cancer patients.

PURPOSE: Radiation-induced skin injury represents one of the most common side effects in breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant whole-breast radiotherapy. Numerous systemic and topical treatments have been studied in the prevention and management of radiation-induced skin injury without providing sustainable treatment strategies. While superficial barrier-forming skin products such as dressings are the standard of care in wound care management, their utilization as preventive treatment approach in radiotherapy has barely attracted attention. METHODS: In this prospective, intra-patient randomized study, Hydrofilm polyurethane film dressings were applied prophylactically to either the medial or lateral breast half of 62 patients with breast cancer undergoing adjuvant radiation therapy following breast conserving surgery. The breast half contralateral to the film dressing was concurrently treated with 5% urea lotion as control skin care. Maximum severity of radiation dermatitis was assessed using RTOG/EORTC toxicity scores, photospectrometric erythema measurements and patient-assessed modified RISRAS scale. RESULTS: In the Hydrofilm compartments, mean maximum RTOG/EORTC radiation dermatitis severity grades were significantly reduced from 1.33 to 0.35 and photospectrometric measurements showed significantly reduced erythema severity, as compared to the control compartments, with an overall response rate of 89.3%. Hydrofilm completely prevented moist desquamation and significantly reduced patients' subjective experience of itching and pain. CONCLUSION: The obtained results along with a favorable cost-benefit ratio and an easy and quick application suggest a prophylactic application of Hydrofilm in adjuvant radiotherapy of breast cancer patients to reduce or even prevent radiation dermatitis.

Patient positioning in head and neck cancer : Setup variations and safety margins in helical tomotherapy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the interfractional variations of patient positioning during intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with helical tomotherapy in head and neck cancer and to calculate the required safety margins (sm) for bony landmarks resulting from the necessary table adjustments. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In all, 15 patients with head and neck cancer were irradiated using the Hi-Art II tomotherapy system between April and September 2016. Before therapy sessions, patient position was frequently checked by megavolt computed tomography (MV-CT). Necessary table adjustments (ta) in the right-left (rl), superior-inferior (si) and anterior-posterior (ap) directions were recorded for four anatomical points: second, fourth and sixth cervical vertebral body (CVB), anterior nasal spine (ANS). Based upon these data sm were calculated for non-image-guided radiotherapy, image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) and image guidance limited to a shortened area (CVB 2). RESULTS: Based upon planning CT the actual treatment required ta from -0.05 ± 1.31 mm for CVB 2 (ap) up to 2.63 ± 2.39 mm for ANS (rl). Considering the performed ta resulting from image control (MV-CT) we detected remaining ta from -0.10 ± 1.09 mm for CVB 4 (rl) up to 1.97 ± 1.64 mm for ANS (si). After theoretical adjustment of patients position to CVB 2 the resulting ta ranged from -0.11 ± 2.44 mm for CVB6 (ap) to 2.37 ± 2.17 mm for ANS (si). These data imply safety margins: uncorrected patient position: 3.63-9.95 mm, corrected positioning based upon the whole target volume (IGRT): 1.85-6.63 mm, corrected positioning based upon CVB 2 (IGRT): 3.13-6.66 mm. CONCLUSIONS: The calculated safety margins differ between anatomic regions. Repetitive and frequent image control of patient positioning is necessary that, however, possibly may be focussed on a limited region.