Dosimetric comparison between proton beam therapy, intensity modulated radiation therapy, and 3D conformal therapy for soft tissue extremity sarcoma.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: Proton beam therapy (PBT) may provide a dosimetric advantage in sparing soft tissue and bone for selected patients with extremity soft sarcoma (eSTS). We compared PBT with photons plans generated using intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT). MATERIALS/METHODS: Seventeen patients previously treated with pencil beam scanning PBT were included in this study. Of these patients, 14 treated with pre-operative 50 Gy in 25 fractions were analyzed. IMRT and 3D-CRT plans were created to compare against the original PBT plans. Dose-volume histogram (DVH) indices were evaluated amongst PBT, IMRT, and 3D plans. Kruskal-Wallis rank sum tests were used to get the statistical significance. A p value smaller than .05 was considered to be statistically significant. RESULTS: For the clinical target volume (CTV), D2%, D95%, D98%, Dmin, Dmax, and V50Gy, were assessed. Dmin, D1%, Dmax, Dmean, V1Gy, V5Gy, and V50Gy were evaluated for the adjacent soft tissue. D1%, Dmax, Dmean, and V35-50% were evaluated for bone. All plans met CTV target coverage. The PBT plans delivered less dose to soft tissue and bone. The mean dose to the soft tissue was 2 Gy, 11 Gy, and 13 Gy for PBT, IMRT, and 3D, respectively (p < .001). The mean dose to adjacent bone was 15 Gy, 26 Gy, and 28 Gy for PBT, IMRT, and 3D, respectively (p = .022). CONCLUSION: PBT plans for selected patients with eSTS demonstrated improved sparing of circumferential soft tissue and adjacent bone compared to IMRT and 3D-CRT. Further evaluation will determine if this improved dosimetry correlates with reduced toxicity and improved quality of life.

Carbon-fiber-reinforced polyetheretherketone orthopedic implants in musculoskeletal and spinal tumors: imaging and clinical features.

Carbon-fiber-reinforced polyetheretherketone (CFR-PEEK) orthopedic implants are gaining popularity in oncologic applications as they offer many potential advantages over traditional metallic implants. From an imaging perspective, this instrumentation allows for improved evaluation of adjacent anatomic structures during radiography, computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). This results in improved postoperative surveillance imaging quality as well as easier visualization of anatomy for potential image-guided percutaneous interventions (e.g., pain palliation injections, or ablative procedures for local disease control). CFR-PEEK devices are also advantageous in radiation oncology treatment due to their decreased imaging artifact during treatment planning imaging and decreased dose perturbation during radiotherapy delivery. As manufacturing processes for CFR-PEEK materials continue to evolve and improve, potential orthopedic applications in the spine and appendicular skeleton increase. An understanding of the unique properties of CFR-PEEK devices and their impact on imaging is valuable to radiologists delivering care to orthopedic oncology patients in both the diagnostic and interventional settings. This multidisciplinary review aims to provide a comprehensive insight into the radiologic, surgical, and radiation oncology impact of these innovative devices.

Attitudes and Perception of the REFLECT Communication Curriculum for Clinical Oncology Graduate Medical Education.

Communication and interpersonal skills are essential components of oncology patient care. The REFLECT (Respect, Empathy, Facilitate Effective Communication, Listen, Elicit Information, Compassion, and Teach Others) curriculum is a novel framework to improve and refine physician/patient interactions for oncology graduate medical trainees. We seek to evaluate the attitudes and perceptions of the REFLECT communication curriculum among oncology trainees. Seven-question and 8-question Likert scale surveys (1 = not beneficial and 5 = beneficial) were distributed to resident/fellow participants and faculty mentors, respectively. Questions asked trainees and faculty about their perceptions of improvement in communication, handling of stressful situations, the value of the curriculum, and overall impression of the curriculum. Descriptive statistics determined the survey's baseline characteristics and response rates. Kruskal-Wallis rank sum tests were used to compare the distribution of continuous variables. Thirteen resident/fellow participants completed the participant survey. Six (43.6%) Radiation Oncology trainees and 7 (58.3%) Hematology/Oncology fellows completed the trainee survey. Eight (88.9%) Radiation Oncologists and 1 (11.1%) Medical Oncologist completed the observer survey. Faculty and trainees generally felt that the curriculum increased communication skills. Faculty responded more favorably to the program's impact on communication skills (median 5.0 vs. 4.0, p = 0.008). Faculty were more assertive about the curriculum's capabilities to improve a learner's ability to handle stressful situations (median 5.0 vs. 4.0, p = 0.003). Additionally, faculty had a more favorable overall impression of the REFLECT curriculum than the residents/fellows (median 5.0 vs. 4.0, p < 0.001). Radiation Oncology residents felt more strongly that the curriculum enhanced their ability to handle stressful topics, compared to Heme/Onc fellows (median 4.5 vs. 3.0, range 1-5, p = 0.379). Radiation Oncology trainees felt more consistently that the workshops improved their communication skills, compared to Heme/Onc fellows (median 4.5 vs. 3.5, range 1-5, p = 0.410). The overall impression between Rad Onc resident and Heme/Onc fellows was similar (median 4.0, p = 0.586). Conclusions: Overall, the REFLECT curriculum enhanced communication skills of trainees. Oncology trainees and faculty physicians feel that the curriculum was beneficial. As interactive skills and communication is critical to build positive interactions, further work is needed to improve the REFLECT curriculum.

Long-term experience with intraoperative electron radiation therapy boost in extremity sarcoma.

BACKGROUND: In patients with extremity soft tissue sarcoma (eSTS), we describe outcomes of preoperative external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), limb-sparing surgery (LSS), and intraoperative electron radiation therapy (IOERT). METHODS: One hundred and eighteen patients with eSTS treated between October 17, 2002 and July 28, 2021 were identified. EBRT was delivered preoperatively followed by LSS and IOERT. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 24.9 months. The presentation was primary in 102 (94%) patients and recurrent in 6 (6%) patients. Tumor location was lower extremity in 82 (76%) patients and upper extremity in 26 (24%) patients. Stage distribution was as follows: 3 (3%) IA, 24 (22%) IB, 31 (29%) II, 24 (22%) IIIA, and 25 (23%) IIIB. Final surgical margins were negative in 96 (89%) patients. The 5-year local control, failure-free survival, and overall survival were 94%, 75%, and 64%, respectively. Univariate analysis identified age >50, lower extremity, and higher grade as significant negative prognostic factors for overall survival. Grade 3 fracture or osteoradionecrosis requiring surgical fixation, neuropathy, and lymphedema occurred in 7 (6%), 1 (1%), and 0 patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study represents one of the largest series using preoperative EBRT, LSS, and IOERT for eSTS, with high local control and a low rate of late severe toxicity.

Carbon fiber-reinforced PEEK instrumentation in the spinal oncology population: a retrospective series demonstrating technique, feasibility, and clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: The authors aimed to demonstrate the feasibility and advantages of carbon fiber-reinforced PEEK (CFRP) composite implants in patients with both primary and secondary osseous spinal tumors. METHODS: Twenty-eight spinal tumor patients who underwent fixation with CFRP hardware were retrospectively identified in a Spine Tumor Quality Database at a single institution. Demographic, procedural, and follow-up data were retrospectively collected. RESULTS: The study population included 14 females and 14 males with a mean age of 60 years (range 30-86 years). Five patients had primary bone tumors, and the remaining patients had metastatic tumors. Breast cancer was the most common metastatic tumor. The most common presenting symptom was axial spine pain (25 patients, 89%), and the most common Spine Instability Neoplastic Score was 7 (range 6-14). Two patients in this series had anterior cervical procedures. The remaining patients underwent posterior thoracolumbar fixation. The average fusion length included 4.6 vertebral segments (range 3-8). The mean clinical follow-up time with surgical or oncology teams was 6.5 months (range 1-23 months), and the mean interval for last follow-up imaging (CT or MRI) was 6.5 months (range 1-22 months). Eighteen patients received postoperative radiation at the authors' institution (16 with photon therapy, 2 with proton therapy). Eleven of the patients (39%) in this series died. At the last clinical follow-up, 26 patients (93%) had stable or improved neurological function compared with their preoperative status. At the last imaging follow-up, local disease control was observed in 25 patients (89%). Two patients required reoperation in the immediate postoperative period, one for surgical site infection and the other for compressive epidural hematoma. One patient was noted to have lucencies around the most cephalad screws 3 months after surgery. No hardware fracture or malfunction occurred intraoperatively. No patients required delayed surgery for hardware loosening, fracture, or other failure. Early tumor recurrence was detected in 3 patients. Early detection was attributed to the imaging characteristics of the CFRP hardware. CONCLUSIONS: CFRP spinal implants appear to be safe and comparable to conventional titanium implants in terms of functionality. The imaging characteristics of CFRP hardware facilitate radiation planning and assessment of surveillance imaging. CFRP hardware may enhance safety and efficacy, particularly with particle therapy dosimetry. Larger patient populations with longer-term follow-up are needed to confirm the various valuable aspects of CFRP spinal implants.

Beam angle comparison for distal esophageal carcinoma patients treated with intensity-modulated proton therapy.

PURPOSE: To compare the dosimetric performances of intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) plans generated with two different beam angle configurations (the Right-Left oblique posterior beams and the Superior-Inferior oblique posterior beams) for the treatment of distal esophageal carcinoma in the presence of uncertainties and interplay effect. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty patients' IMPT plans were retrospectively selected, with 10 patients treated with the R-L oblique posterior beams (Group R-L) and the other 10 patients treated with the S-I oblique posterior beams (Group S-I). Patients in both groups were matched by their clinical target volumes (CTVs-high and low dose levels) and respiratory motion amplitudes. Dose-volume-histogram (DVH) indices were used to assess plan quality. DVH bandwidth was calculated to evaluate plan robustness. Interplay effect was quantified using four-dimensional (4D) dynamic dose calculation with random respiratory starting phase of each fraction. Normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) for heart, liver, and lung was calculated, respectively, to estimate the clinical outcomes. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used for statistical comparison between the two groups. RESULTS: Compared with plans in Group R-L, plans in Group S-I resulted in significantly lower liver Dmean and lung V30Gy[RBE] with slightly higher but clinically acceptable spinal cord Dmax . Similar plan robustness was observed between the two groups. When interplay effect was considered, plans in Group S-I performed statistically better for heart Dmean and V30Gy[RBE] , lung Dmean and V5Gy[RBE] , and liver Dmean , with slightly increased but clinically acceptable spinal cord Dmax . NTCP for liver was significantly better in Group S-I. CONCLUSIONS: IMPT plans in Group S-I have better sparing of liver, heart, and lungs at the slight cost of spinal cord maximum dose protection, and are more interplay-effect resilient compared to IMPT plans in Group R-L. Our study supports the routine use of the S-I oblique posterior beams for the treatments of distal esophageal carcinoma.

Dosimetric comparison of distal esophageal carcinoma plans for patients treated with small-spot intensity-modulated proton versus volumetric-modulated arc therapies.

BACKGROUND: Esophageal carcinoma is the eighth most common cancer in the world. Volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) is widely used to treat distal esophageal carcinoma due to high conformality to the target and good sparing of organs at risk (OAR). It is not clear if small-spot intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) demonstrates a dosimetric advantage over VMAT. In this study, we compared dosimetric performance of VMAT and small-spot IMPT for distal esophageal carcinoma in terms of plan quality, plan robustness, and interplay effects. METHODS: 35 distal esophageal carcinoma patients were retrospectively reviewed; 19 patients received small-spot IMPT and the remaining 16 of them received VMAT. Both plans were generated by delivering prescription doses to clinical target volumes (CTVs) on phase-averaged 4D-CT's. The dose-volume-histogram (DVH) band method was used to quantify plan robustness. Software was developed to evaluate interplay effects with randomized starting phases for each field per fraction. DVH indices were compared using Wilcoxon rank-sum test. For fair comparison, all the treatment plans were normalized to have the same CTVhigh D95% in the nominal scenario relative to the prescription dose. RESULTS: In the nominal scenario, small-spot IMPT delivered statistically significantly lower liver Dmean and V30Gy[RBE] , lung Dmean , heart Dmean compared with VMAT. CTVhigh dose homogeneity and protection of other OARs were comparable between the two treatments. In terms of plan robustness, the IMPT and VMAT plans were comparable for kidney V18Gy[RBE] , liver V30Gy[RBE] , stomach V45Gy[RBE] , lung Dmean , V5Gy[RBE] , and V20Gy[RBE] , cord Dmax and D 0.03 c m 3 , liver Dmean , heart V20Gy[RBE] , and V30Gy[RBE] , but IMPT was significantly worse for CTVhigh D95% , D 2 c m 3 , and D5% -D95% , CTVlow D95% , heart Dmean , and V40Gy[RBE] , requiring careful and experienced adjustments during the planning process and robustness considerations. The small-spot IMPT plans still met the standard clinical requirements after interplay effects were considered. CONCLUSIONS: Small-spot IMPT decreases doses to heart, liver, and total lung compared to VMAT as well as achieves clinically acceptable plan robustness. Our study supports the use of small-spot IMPT for the treatment of distal esophageal carcinoma.

Postoperative stereotactic radiosurgery compared with whole brain radiotherapy for resected metastatic brain disease (NCCTG N107C/CEC·3): a multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) is the standard of care to improve intracranial control following resection of brain metastasis. However, stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) to the surgical cavity is widely used in an attempt to reduce cognitive toxicity, despite the absence of high-level comparative data substantiating efficacy in the postoperative setting. We aimed to establish the effect of SRS on survival and cognitive outcomes compared with WBRT in patients with resected brain metastasis. METHODS: In this randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial, adult patients (aged 18 years or older) from 48 institutions in the USA and Canada with one resected brain metastasis and a resection cavity less than 5·0 cm in maximal extent were randomly assigned (1:1) to either postoperative SRS (12-20 Gy single fraction with dose determined by surgical cavity volume) or WBRT (30 Gy in ten daily fractions or 37·5 Gy in 15 daily fractions of 2·5 Gy; fractionation schedule predetermined for all patients at treating centre). We randomised patients using a dynamic allocation strategy with stratification factors of age, duration of extracranial disease control, number of brain metastases, histology, maximal resection cavity diameter, and treatment centre. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment allocation. The co-primary endpoints were cognitive-deterioration-free survival and overall survival, and analyses were done by intention to treat. We report the final analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01372774. FINDINGS: Between Nov 10, 2011, and Nov 16, 2015, 194 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to SRS (98 patients) or WBRT (96 patients). Median follow-up was 11·1 months (IQR 5·1-18·0). Cognitive-deterioration-free survival was longer in patients assigned to SRS (median 3·7 months [95% CI 3·45-5·06], 93 events) than in patients assigned to WBRT (median 3·0 months [2·86-3·25], 93 events; hazard ratio [HR] 0·47 [95% CI 0·35-0·63]; p<0·0001), and cognitive deterioration at 6 months was less frequent in patients who received SRS than those who received WBRT (28 [52%] of 54 evaluable patients assigned to SRS vs 41 [85%] of 48 evaluable patients assigned to WBRT; difference -33·6% [95% CI -45·3 to -21·8], p<0·00031). Median overall survival was 12·2 months (95% CI 9·7-16·0, 69 deaths) for SRS and 11·6 months (9·9-18·0, 67 deaths) for WBRT (HR 1·07 [95% CI 0·76-1·50]; p=0·70). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events reported with a relative frequency greater than 4% were hearing impairment (three [3%] of 93 patients in the SRS group vs eight [9%] of 92 patients in the WBRT group) and cognitive disturbance (three [3%] vs five [5%]). There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Decline in cognitive function was more frequent with WBRT than with SRS and there was no difference in overall survival between the treatment groups. After resection of a brain metastasis, SRS radiosurgery should be considered one of the standards of care as a less toxic alternative to WBRT for this patient population. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute.

Percutaneous revascularization in patients treated with thoracic radiation for cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To assess coronary revascularization outcomes in patients with previous thoracic radiation therapy (XRT). BACKGROUND: Previous chest radiation has been reported to adversely affect long term survival in patients with coronary disease treated with percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). METHODS: Retrospective, single center cohort study of patients previously treated with thoracic radiation and PCI. Patients were propensity matched against control patients without radiation undergoing revascularization during the same time period. RESULTS: We identified 116 patients with radiation followed by PCI (XRT-PCI group) and 408 controls. Acute procedural complications were similar between groups. There were no differences in all-cause and cardiac mortality between groups (all-cause mortality HR 1.31, P=.078; cardiac mortality 0.78, P=.49). CONCLUSION: Patients with prior thoracic radiation and coronary disease treated with PCI have similar procedural complications and long term mortality when compared to control subjects.

Compliance with National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines in the use of radiation therapy for extremity and superficial trunk soft tissue sarcoma in the United States.

BACKGROUND: We sought to examine adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for use of radiation therapy (RT) in patients with soft tissue sarcoma (STS) in the United States. METHODS: The surveillance, epidemiology, and end results cancer registry was queried to identify patients undergoing surgery for truncal and extremity STS from 2004 to 2009. RESULTS: Of 5,075 patients, 50% received RT. Although routine RT is not recommended for Stage I patients, 25% still underwent RT. Even though routine RT is recommended for Stage II and III tumors, only 60% underwent RT. On multivariate analysis predictors of RT included age <50 years (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.28-1.91), malignant fibrous histiocytoma histology (OR 1.47, 95% CI 1.3-1.92), T2 classification (OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.60-2.20), and G3 (OR 6.27, 95% CI 5.10-7.72). Patients with Stage III STS who received RT showed improved disease specific survival at 5 years compared to those who did not, 68% versus 46%, P <0.001. CONCLUSIONS: Underuse of RT is seen for a significant proportion of patients undergoing treatment for STS in the United States. More effort needs to be directed towards compliance with appropriate treatment recommendations, perhaps by regionalizing sarcoma care or remote multidisciplinary tumor boards.

Excellent local control with preoperative radiation therapy, surgical resection, and intra-operative electron radiation therapy for retroperitoneal sarcoma.

PURPOSE: To examine the value of surgical resection combined with preoperative external beam radiation therapy and intraoperative radiation therapy (Surg-RT) for retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS). METHODS: Review of 63 consecutive patients with RPS from 1996 to 2011. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients (59%) underwent Surg-RT and 26 (41%) had surgery alone. 51% of tumors were high grade and 36% of patients had locally recurrent disease. Final margin status was: R0 73%, R1 16%, R2 6%, and unknown 5%. Of those with R0 resections, 67% received Surg-RT. Median follow-up was 45 months. The 5-year local control rate was 89% for Surg-RT patients and 46% for surgery alone patients (P = 0.03). On multivariate analysis, Surg-RT was the only variable associated with a lower risk of LR (HR 0.19; CI 0.05-0.69, P = 0.003). The actuarial 5-year OS was 60% for patients receiving either Surg-RT or surgery alone. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of pre-operative radiation, surgical resection, and intraoperative radiation produces excellent local disease control for RPS. Combination therapy was associated with improved local control but not with overall survival.

Implementation of the REFLECT Communication Curriculum for Clinical Oncology Graduate Medical Education.

Background: Communication and interpersonal skills are essential medical components of oncology patient care. Patients and families rely on physicians for treatment, expertise, guidance, hope, meaning, and compassion throughout a life-threatening illness. A provider's inability to empathize with patients is linked to physician-related fatigue and burnout. Because oncology training programs focus on teaching evidence-based medicine and clinical acumen, little time may be dedicated to professional development and acquisition of interactive skills. Traditional communication courses typically include two components: formal, knowledge-based learning skills, which are gained from didactic lectures, and role-playing, which usually occurs in small groups. We report the implementation of a novel longitudinal communication curriculum for trainees in Oncology. Materials and Methods: At a single-center institution, an innovative communication curriculum titled "REFLECT" (Respect, Empathy, Facilitate Effective Communication, Listen, Elicit Information, Compassion, and Teach Others) was implemented for radiation oncology residents and medical oncology fellows to improve and refine physician/patient interactions. All oncology specialty residents and fellows were eligible to participate in this communication curriculum. The curriculum emphasized a reflective process to guide trainees through challenging scenarios. Results: Since October 2018, this comprehensive course consisted of quarterly (four hour) workshops comprising assigned reading, knowledge assessments, didactic lectures, expert guest lecturers, standardized patient simulations, role-playing, patient/expert panels, coaching, reflective writing, and debriefing/feedback sessions. The curriculum provided longitudinal communication training integrated with the learners' daily physician/patient encounters rather than occasional isolated experiences. Fifteen workshops have been completed. Each focused on navigating challenging situations with patients, loved ones, or colleagues. Conclusions: Future directions of the curriculum will entail improving the communication skills of oncology trainees and gathering communication improvement data to assess the program's success formally.

PTCOG Gastrointestinal Subcommittee Lower Gastrointestinal Tract Malignancies Consensus Statement.

Purpose: Radiotherapy delivery in the definitive management of lower gastrointestinal (LGI) tract malignancies is associated with substantial risk of acute and late gastrointestinal (GI), genitourinary, dermatologic, and hematologic toxicities. Advanced radiation therapy techniques such as proton beam therapy (PBT) offer optimal dosimetric sparing of critical organs at risk, achieving a more favorable therapeutic ratio compared with photon therapy. Materials and Methods: The international Particle Therapy Cooperative Group GI Subcommittee conducted a systematic literature review, from which consensus recommendations were developed on the application of PBT for LGI malignancies. Results: Eleven recommendations on clinical indications for which PBT should be considered are presented with supporting literature, and each recommendation was assessed for level of evidence and strength of recommendation. Detailed technical guidelines pertaining to simulation, treatment planning and delivery, and image guidance are also provided. Conclusion: PBT may be of significant value in select patients with LGI malignancies. Additional clinical data are needed to further elucidate the potential benefits of PBT for patients with anal cancer and rectal cancer.

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American Society for Radiation Oncology Updated Clinical Practice Guidelines on Multimodality Therapy for Locally Advanced Cancer of the Esophagus or Gastroesophageal Junction.

Outcomes for patients with esophageal cancer have improved over the last decade with the implementation of multimodality therapy. There are currently no comprehensive guidelines addressing multidisciplinary management of esophageal cancer that have incorporated the input of surgeons, radiation oncologists, and medical oncologists. To address the need for multidisciplinary input in the management of esophageal cancer and to meet current best practices for clinical practice guidelines, the current guidelines were created as a collaboration between The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS), American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). Physician representatives chose 8 key clinical questions pertinent to the care of patients with locally advanced, resectable thoracic esophageal cancer (excluding cervical location). A comprehensive literature review was performed identifying 227 articles that met the inclusion criteria covering the use of induction chemotherapy, chemotherapy vs chemoradiotherapy before surgery, optimal radiation dose, the value of esophagectomy, timing of esophagectomy, the approach and extent of lymphadenectomy, the use of minimally invasive esophagectomy, and the value of adjuvant therapy after resection. The relevant data were reviewed and voted on by the panel with 80% of the authors, with 75% agreement on class and level of evidence. These data were then complied into the guidelines document.

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American Society for Radiation Oncology Updated Clinical Practice Guidelines on Multimodality Therapy for Locally Advanced Cancer of the Esophagus or Gastroesophageal Junction.

Outcomes for patients with esophageal cancer have improved over the last decade with the implementation of multimodality therapy. There are currently no comprehensive guidelines addressing multidisciplinary management of esophageal cancer that have incorporated the input of surgeons, radiation oncologists, and medical oncologists. To address the need for multidisciplinary input in the management of esophageal cancer and to meet current best practices for clinical practice guidelines, the current guidelines were created as a collaboration between The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS), American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). Physician representatives chose 8 key clinical questions pertinent to the care of patients with locally advanced, resectable thoracic esophageal cancer (excluding cervical location). A comprehensive literature review was performed identifying 227 articles that met the inclusion criteria covering the use of induction chemotherapy, chemotherapy vs chemoradiotherapy before surgery, optimal radiation dose, the value of esophagectomy, timing of esophagectomy, the approach and extent of lymphadenectomy, the use of minimally invasive esophagectomy, and the value of adjuvant therapy after resection. The relevant data were reviewed and voted on by the panel with 80% of the authors, with 75% agreement on class and level of evidence. These data were then complied into the guidelines document.

Sublobar Resection, Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy, and Percutaneous Ablation Provide Comparable Outcomes for Lung Metastasis-Directed Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Prolonged survival of patients with metastatic disease has furthered interest in metastasis-directed therapy (MDT). RESEARCH QUESTION: There is a paucity of data comparing lung MDT modalities. Do outcomes among sublobar resection (SLR), stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), and percutaneous ablation (PA) for lung metastases vary in terms of local control and survival? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Medical records of patients undergoing lung MDT at a single cancer center between January 2015 and December 2020 were reviewed. Overall survival, local progression, and toxicity outcomes were collected. Patient and lesion characteristics were used to generate multivariable models with propensity weighted analysis. RESULTS: Lung MDT courses (644 total: 243 SLR, 274 SBRT, 127 PA) delivered to 511 patients were included with a median follow-up of 22 months. There were 47 local progression events in 45 patients, and 159 patients died. Two-year overall survival and local progression were 80.3% and 63.3%, 83.8% and 9.6%, and 4.1% and 11.7% for SLR, SBRT, and PA, respectively. Lesion size per 1 cm was associated with worse overall survival (hazard ratio, 1.24; P = .003) and LP (hazard ratio, 1.50; P < .001). There was no difference in overall survival by modality. Relative to SLR, there was no difference in risk of local progression with PA; however, SBRT was associated with a decreased risk (hazard ratio, 0.26; P = .023). Rates of severe toxicity were low (2.1%-2.6%) and not different among groups. INTERPRETATION: This study performs a propensity weighted analysis of SLR, SBRT, and PA and shows no impact of lung MDT modality on overall survival. Given excellent local control across MDT options, a multidisciplinary approach is beneficial for patient triage and longitudinal management.

Technical note: Comprehensive evaluations of gantry and couch rotation isocentricities for implementing proton stereotactic radiosurgery.

BACKGROUND: Mechanical accuracy should be verified before implementing a proton stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) program. Linear accelerator (Linac)-based SRS systems often use electronic portal imaging devices (EPIDs) to verify beam isocentricity. Because proton therapy systems do not have EPID, beam isocentricity tests of proton SRS may still rely on films, which are not efficient. PURPOSE: To validate that our proton SRS system meets mechanical precision requirements and to present an efficient method to evaluate the couch and gantry's rotational isocentricity for our proton SRS system. METHODS: A dedicated applicator to hold brass aperture for proton SRS system was designed. The mechanical precision of the system was tested using a metal ball and film for 11 combinations of gantry and couch angles. A more efficient quality assurance (QA) procedure was developed, which used a scintillator device to replace the film. The couch rotational isocentricity tests were performed using orthogonal kV x-rays with the couch rotated isocentrically to five positions (0°, 315°, 270°, 225°, and 180°). At each couch position, the distance between the metal ball in kV images and the imaging isocenter was measured. The gantry isocentricity tests were performed using a cone-shaped scintillator and proton beams at five gantry angles (0°, 45°, 90°, 135°, and 180°), and the isocenter position and the distance of each beam path to the isocenter were obtained. Daily QA procedure was performed for 1 month to test the robustness and reproducibility of the procedure. RESULTS: The gantry and couch rotational isocentricity exhibited sub-mm precision, with most measurements within ±0.5 mm. The 1-month QA results showed that the procedure was robust and highly reproducible to within ±0.2 mm. The gantry isocentricity test using the cone-shaped scintillator was accurate and sensitive to variations of ±0.2 mm. The QA procedure was efficient enough to be completed within 30 min. The 1-month isocentricity position variations were within 0.5 mm, which demonstrating that the overall proton SRS system was stable and precise. CONCLUSION: The proton SRS Winston-Lutz QA procedure using a cone-shaped scintillator was efficient and robust. We were able to verify radiation delivery could be performed with sub-mm mechanical precision.

Evaluating large language models on a highly-specialized topic, radiation oncology physics.

Purpose: We present the first study to investigate Large Language Models (LLMs) in answering radiation oncology physics questions. Because popular exams like AP Physics, LSAT, and GRE have large test-taker populations and ample test preparation resources in circulation, they may not allow for accurately assessing the true potential of LLMs. This paper proposes evaluating LLMs on a highly-specialized topic, radiation oncology physics, which may be more pertinent to scientific and medical communities in addition to being a valuable benchmark of LLMs. Methods: We developed an exam consisting of 100 radiation oncology physics questions based on our expertise. Four LLMs, ChatGPT (GPT-3.5), ChatGPT (GPT-4), Bard (LaMDA), and BLOOMZ, were evaluated against medical physicists and non-experts. The performance of ChatGPT (GPT-4) was further explored by being asked to explain first, then answer. The deductive reasoning capability of ChatGPT (GPT-4) was evaluated using a novel approach (substituting the correct answer with "None of the above choices is the correct answer."). A majority vote analysis was used to approximate how well each group could score when working together. Results: ChatGPT GPT-4 outperformed all other LLMs and medical physicists, on average, with improved accuracy when prompted to explain before answering. ChatGPT (GPT-3.5 and GPT-4) showed a high level of consistency in its answer choices across a number of trials, whether correct or incorrect, a characteristic that was not observed in the human test groups or Bard (LaMDA). In evaluating deductive reasoning ability, ChatGPT (GPT-4) demonstrated surprising accuracy, suggesting the potential presence of an emergent ability. Finally, although ChatGPT (GPT-4) performed well overall, its intrinsic properties did not allow for further improvement when scoring based on a majority vote across trials. In contrast, a team of medical physicists were able to greatly outperform ChatGPT (GPT-4) using a majority vote. Conclusion: This study suggests a great potential for LLMs to work alongside radiation oncology experts as highly knowledgeable assistants.

Clinical Outcomes of Stereotactic Radiosurgery-Related Radiation Necrosis in Patients with Intracranial Metastasis from Melanoma.

Background: Radiation necrosis (RN) is a clinically relevant complication of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for intracranial metastasis (ICM) treatments. Radiation necrosis development is variable following SRS. It remains unclear if risk factors for and clinical outcomes following RN may be different for melanoma patients. We reviewed patients with ICM from metastatic melanoma to understand the potential impact of RN in this patient population. Methods: Patients who received SRS for ICM from melanoma at Mayo Clinic Arizona between 2013 and 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Data collected included demographics, tumor characteristics, radiation parameters, prior surgical and systemic treatments, and patient outcomes. Radiation necrosis was diagnosed by clinical evaluation including brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and, in some cases, tissue evaluation. Results: Radiation necrosis was diagnosed in 7 (27%) of 26 patients at 1.6 to 38 months following initial SRS. Almost 92% of all patients received systemic therapy and 35% had surgical resection prior to SRS. Patients with RN trended toward having larger ICM and a prior history of surgical resection, although statistical significance was not reached. Among patients with resection, those who developed RN had a longer period between surgery and SRS start (mean 44 vs 33 days). Clinical improvement following treatment for RN was noted in 2 (29%) patients. Conclusions: Radiation necrosis is relatively common following SRS for treatment of ICM from metastatic melanoma and clinical outcomes are poor. Further studies aimed at mitigating RN development and identifying novel approaches for treatment are warranted.