Protocol for a systematic review with prospective individual patient data meta-analysis in EGFR-mutant NSCLC with brain metastases to assess the effect of SRS+osimertinib compared to osimertinib alone: the STARLET Collaboration.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with activating mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene are a heterogeneous population who often develop brain metastases (BM). The optimal management of patients with asymptomatic brain metastases is unclear given the activity of newer-generation targeted therapies in the central nervous system. We present a protocol for an individual patient data (IPD) prospective meta-analysis to evaluate whether the addition of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) before osimertinib treatment will lead to better control of intracranial metastatic disease. This is a clinically relevant question that will inform practice. METHODS: Randomised controlled trials will be eligible if they include participants with BM arising from EGFR-mutant NSCLC and suitable to receive osimertinib both in the first-line and second-line settings (P); comparisons of SRS followed by osimertinib versus osimertinib alone (I, C) and intracranial disease control included as an endpoint (O). Systematic searches of Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), CINAHL (EBSCO), PsychInfo, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform's Search Portal will be undertaken. An IPD meta-analysis will be performed using methodologies recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration. The primary outcome is intracranial progression-free survival, as determined by response assessment in neuro-oncology-BM criteria. Secondary outcomes include overall survival, time to whole brain radiotherapy, quality of life, and adverse events of special interest. Effect differences will be explored among prespecified subgroups. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approved by each trial's ethics committee. Results will be relevant to clinicians, researchers, policymakers and patients, and will be disseminated via publications, presentations and media releases. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42022330532.

Theragnostic Gadolinium-Based Nanoparticles Safely Augment X-ray Radiation Effects in Patients with Cervical Cancer.

Activated guided irradiation by X-ray (AGuIX) nanoparticles are gadolinium-based agents that have the dual benefit of mimicking the effects of a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) contrast agent used in a clinical routine and enhancing the radiotherapeutic activity of conventional X-rays (for cancer treatment). This "theragnostic" action is explained on the one hand by the paramagnetic properties of gadolinium and on the other hand by the generation of high densities of secondary radiation following the interaction of ionizing radiation and high-Z atoms, which leads to enhanced radiation dose deposits within the tumors where the nanoparticles accumulate. Here, we report the results of a phase I trial that aimed to assess the safety and determine the optimal dose of AGuIX nanoparticles in combination with chemoradiation and brachytherapy in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. AGuIX nanoparticles were administered intravenously and appropriately accumulated within tumors on a dose-dependent manner, as assessed by T1-weighted MRI, with a rapid urinary clearance of uncaught nanoparticles. We show that the observed tumor accumulation of the compounds can support precise delineation of functional target volumes at the time of brachytherapy based on gadolinium enhancement. AGuIX nanoparticles combined with chemoradiation appeared well tolerated among the 12 patients treated, with no dose-limiting toxicity observed. Treatment yielded excellent local control, with all patients achieving complete remission of the primary tumor. One patient had a distant tumor recurrence. These results demonstrate the clinical feasibility of using theranostic nanoparticles to augment the accuracy of MRI-based treatments while focally enhancing the radiation activity in tumors.

The Prediction of Stress in Radiation Therapy: Integrating Artificial Intelligence with Biological Signals.

This study aimed to predict stress in patients using artificial intelligence (AI) from biological signals and verify the effect of stress on respiratory irregularity. We measured 123 cases in 41 patients and calculated stress scores with seven stress-related features derived from heart-rate variability. The distribution and trends of stress scores across the treatment period were analyzed. Before-treatment information was used to predict the stress features during treatment. AI models included both non-pretrained (decision tree, random forest, support vector machine, long short-term memory (LSTM), and transformer) and pretrained (ChatGPT) models. Performance was evaluated using 10-fold cross-validation, exact match ratio, accuracy, recall, precision, and F1 score. Respiratory irregularities were calculated in phase and amplitude and analyzed for correlation with stress score. Over 90% of the patients experienced stress during radiation therapy. LSTM and prompt engineering GPT4.0 had the highest accuracy (feature classification, LSTM: 0.703, GPT4.0: 0.659; stress classification, LSTM: 0.846, GPT4.0: 0.769). A 10% increase in stress score was associated with a 0.286 higher phase irregularity (p < 0.025). Our research pioneers the use of AI and biological signals for stress prediction in patients undergoing radiation therapy, potentially identifying those needing psychological support and suggesting methods to improve radiotherapy effectiveness through stress management.

Frameless image-guided linear accelerator (LINAC) stereotactic radiosurgery for medically refractory trigeminal neuralgia: Clinical outcomes in 116 patients.

Background: Frameless image-guided radiosurgery (IGRS) is an effective and non-invasive method of treating patients who are unresponsive to medical management for trigeminal neuralgia (TN). This study evaluated the use of frameless IGRS to treat patients with medically refractory TN. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of records of 116 patients diagnosed with TN who underwent frameless IGRS using a linear accelerator (LINAC) over 10 years (March 2012-February 2023). All patients had failed medical management for TN. Facial pain was graded using the Barrow Neurological Institute (BNI) scoring system. Each patient received a BNI score before frameless IGRS and following treatment. Failure was defined as a BNI score IV-V at the last follow-up and/or undergoing a salvage procedure following IGRS. Results: All patients had a BNI score of either IV or V before the frameless IGRS. The mean follow-up duration for all 116 patients following IGRS was 44.1 months. Most patients (81 [69.8%]) had not undergone surgery (microvascular decompression [MVD] or rhizotomy) or stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for TN before frameless IGRS. A total of 41 (35.3%) patients underwent a salvage procedure (MVD, rhizotomy, or an additional IGRS) following frameless IGRS. The mean duration between the initial frameless IGRS and salvage procedure was 20.1 months. At the last follow-up, a total of 110 (94.8%) patients had a BNI score of I-III. No complications were reported after the frameless IGRS. The BNI score at the last follow-up was lower compared to the initial BNI for patients regardless of prior intervention (P < 0.001). Patients who failed IGRS had a higher BNI score at the last follow-up compared to those who did not fail IGRS (2.8 vs. 2.5, P = 0.05). Patients with pain relief had a shorter follow-up compared to those with pain refractory to SRS (38.0 vs. 55.1, P = 0.005). Conclusion: In this large cohort of patients with medically refractory TN, frameless IGRS resulted in durable pain control in the majority of patients without any toxicity.

Adjuvant external beam radiotherapy combined with brachytherapy for intermediate-risk cervical cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with intermediate-risk cervical cancer receive external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) as adjuvant treatment. It is commonly administered with brachytherapy without proven benefits. Therefore, we evaluated the frequency of brachytherapy use, the doses for EBRT administered alone or with brachytherapy, and the overall survival impact of brachytherapy in patients with intermediate-risk, early-stage cervical cancer. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was performed using data collected from the National Cancer Database. Patients diagnosed with cervical cancer from 2004 to 2019 who underwent a radical hysterectomy and lymph node staging and had disease limited to the cervix but with tumors larger than 4 cm or ranging from 2 to 4 cm with lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI) were included. Patients with distant metastasis or parametrial involvement were excluded. Patients who underwent EBRT alone were compared with those who also received brachytherapy after 2:1 propensity score matching. RESULTS: In total, 1174 patients met the inclusion criteria, and 26.7% of them received brachytherapy. After 2:1 propensity score matching, we included 620 patients in the EBRT group and 312 in the combination treatment group. Patients who received brachytherapy had higher equivalent doses than those only receiving EBRT. Overall survival did not differ between the two groups (hazard ratio (HR) 0.88 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.62 to 1.23]; p=0.45). After stratification according to tumor histology, LVSI, and surgical approach, brachytherapy was not associated with improved overall survival. However, in patients who did not receive concomitant chemotherapy, the overall survival rate for those receiving EBRT and brachytherapy was significantly higher than that for those receiving EBRT alone (HR, 0.48 (95% CI, 0.27 to 0.86]; p=0.011). CONCLUSION: About one-fourth of the study patients received brachytherapy and EBRT. The variability in the doses and radiotherapy techniques used highlights treatment heterogeneity. Overall survival did not differ for EBRT with and without brachytherapy. However, overall survival was longer for patients who received brachytherapy but did not receive concomitant chemotherapy.

Evaluating ChatGPT to test its robustness as an interactive information database of radiation oncology and to assess its responses to common queries from radiotherapy patients: A single institution investigation.

PURPOSE: Commercial vendors have created artificial intelligence (AI) tools for use in all aspects of life and medicine, including radiation oncology. AI innovations will likely disrupt workflows in the field of radiation oncology. However, limited data exist on using AI-based chatbots about the quality of radiation oncology information. This study aims to assess the accuracy of ChatGPT, an AI-based chatbot, in answering patients' questions during their first visit to the radiation oncology outpatient department and test knowledge of ChatGPT in radiation oncology. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Expert opinion was formulated using a set of ten standard questions of patients encountered in outpatient department practice. A blinded expert opinion was taken for the ten questions on common queries of patients in outpatient department visits, and the same questions were evaluated on ChatGPT version 3.5 (ChatGPT 3.5). The answers by expert and ChatGPT were independently evaluated for accuracy by three scientific reviewers. Additionally, a comparison was made for the extent of similarity of answers between ChatGPT and experts by a response scoring for each answer. Word count and Flesch-Kincaid readability score and grade were done for the responses obtained from expert and ChatGPT. A comparison of the answers of ChatGPT and expert was done with a Likert scale. As a second component of the study, we tested the technical knowledge of ChatGPT. Ten multiple choice questions were framed with increasing order of difficulty - basic, intermediate and advanced, and the responses were evaluated on ChatGPT. Statistical testing was done using SPSS version 27. RESULTS: After expert review, the accuracy of expert opinion was 100%, and ChatGPT's was 80% (8/10) for regular questions encountered in outpatient department visits. A noticeable difference was observed in word count and readability of answers from expert opinion or ChatGPT. Of the ten multiple-choice questions for assessment of radiation oncology database, ChatGPT had an accuracy rate of 90% (9 out of 10). One answer to a basic-level question was incorrect, whereas all answers to intermediate and difficult-level questions were correct. CONCLUSION: ChatGPT provides reasonably accurate information about routine questions encountered in the first outpatient department visit of the patient and also demonstrated a sound knowledge of the subject. The result of our study can inform the future development of educational tools in radiation oncology and may have implications in other medical fields. This is the first study that provides essential insight into the potentially positive capabilities of two components of ChatGPT: firstly, ChatGPT's response to common queries of patients at OPD visits, and secondly, the assessment of the radiation oncology knowledge base of ChatGPT.

Communication and collaboration skills training in radiation oncology: A quantitative validation survey.

INTRODUCTION: Communication and collaboration are integral in radiation oncology practice. A recently published qualitative study identified several deficiencies in skills development for Australian/New Zealand trainees. We aim to validate these findings to guide curriculum development. METHODS: A quantitative survey was developed through an iterative process, using themes identified in the previous qualitative investigation. This survey was distributed to radiation oncologists and trainees across Australia and New Zealand via email. Data collection and management utilised the REDCap system. Question types varied to maximise richness of data, including ranking, likert-scales and free-text questions. Results are primarily reported descriptively. RESULTS: Totally 35 participants submitted completed survey responses with broad representation across geography, gender and clinician seniority. To learn communication, participants reported strong preferences towards informal observation (60% agreement) and self-reflection (49% agreement), and against online learning (77% disagreement) methodologies. Nearly 35% acknowledge poor communication at least weekly, with time pressure being a major barrier (63% agreement). Clinical uncertainty and existing patient/family assumptions (both 74% agreement) contribute to difficulties in breaking bad news, with online learning being the only negatively perceived training modality (23% agreement). No participants reported any formal training/mentoring in multi-disciplinary team (MDT) engagement. Conflict was commonly witnessed/experienced (97%) and 26% of participants avoid MDTs due to difficulties experienced. CONCLUSIONS: This study validates the themes previously identified. We identified a strong preference for informal learning methodologies and against online modules, discordant to published literature. Effective collaboration within MDTs is identified as a particular area of need. We recommend future curriculum modification considers these results to maximise efficacy.

Cardio-oncology and radiation oncology: How collaboration between cardiologists and oncologists can be realised in radiation oncology.

Increased survivorship, improvements in cancer treatments, and the potential for cardiac side effects from cancer treatments have resulted in increased collaboration between oncologists and cardiologists and the development of cardio-oncology clinics. This collaboration is important given its role in ensuring greater patient satisfaction, aiding teams of clinicians in making complex treatment decision, and ensuring cardiac complications are diagnosed at an early stage. The particularities of implementing this collaboration in the field of radiation oncology and how this setting is different from other areas of cardio-oncology have not been well detailed in the literature. This paper will discuss what is currently understood about the need for and role of cardio-oncology and what a cardio-oncology services involves, with a particular emphasis on patient and clinician needs in the field of radiation oncology. The literature and recent guidelines do advocate for a detailed baseline assessment of cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy, especially patients with treatment or patient risk factors that increase their risk of cancer-therapy related cardiotoxicity. Advancements in cardiac imaging techniques will be discussed as these may help to diagnose cardiac side effects of certain cancer treatments, including radiotherapy, at an early stage. A multi-disciplinary and collaborative approach is well received by patients and such an approach, guided by the aim of maintaining a patient's cancer treatment wherever possible, should be the cornerstone of cardio-oncology clinics regardless of the patient's treatment regime.

Assessment of Real-Time US-CT/MR-guided Percutaneous Gold Fiducial Marker Implementation in Malignant Hepatic Tumors for Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy.

Background/Aims: This study explored the initial institutional experience of using gold fiducial markers for stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in treating malignant hepatic tumors using real-time ultrasound-computed tomography (CT)/magnetic resonance (MR) imaging fusion-guided percutaneous placement. Methods: From May 2021 to August 2023, 19 patients with 25 liver tumors that were invisible on pre-contrast CT received fiducial markers following these guidelines. Postprocedural scans were used to confirm their placement. We assessed technical and clinical success rates and monitored complications. The implantation of fiducial markers facilitating adequate treatment prior to SBRT, which was achieved in 96% of the cases (24 of 25 tumors), was considered technical success. Clinical success was the successful completion of SBRT without evidence of marker displacement and was achieved in 88% of cases (22 of 25 tumors). Complications included one major subcapsular hematoma and marker migration into the right atrium in two cases, which prevented SBRT. Results: Among the treated tumors, 83.3% (20 of 24) showed a complete response, 12.5% (3 of 24) remained stable, and 4.2% (1 of 24) progressed during an average 11.7-month follow-up (range, 2-32 months). Conclusions: This study confirms that percutaneous gold fiducial marker placement using real-time CT/MR guidance is effective and safe for SBRT in hepatic tumors, but warns of marker migration risks, especially near the hepatic veins and in subcapsular locations. Using fewer markers than traditionally recommended-typically two per patient), the outcomes were still satisfactory, particularly given the increased risk of migration when markers were placed near major hepatic veins.

A Pilot Clinical and Technical Validation of an Immersive Virtual Reality Platform for 3D Anatomical Modeling and Contouring in Support of Surgical and Radiation Oncology Treatment Planning.

The aim of this study was to validate a novel medical virtual reality (VR) platform used for medical image segmentation and contouring in radiation oncology and 3D anatomical modeling and simulation for planning medical interventions, including surgery. The first step of the validation was to verify quantitatively and qualitatively that the VR platform can produce substantially equivalent 3D anatomical models, image contours, and measurements to those generated with existing commercial platforms. To achieve this, a total of eight image sets and 18 structures were segmented using both VR and reference commercial platforms. The image sets were chosen to cover a broad range of scanner manufacturers, modalities, and voxel dimensions. The second step consisted of evaluating whether the VR platform could provide efficiency improvements for target delineation in radiation oncology planning. To assess this, the image sets for five pediatric patients with resected standard-risk medulloblastoma were used to contour target volumes in support of treatment planning of craniospinal irradiation, requiring complete inclusion of the entire cerebral-spinal volume. Structures generated in the VR and the commercial platforms were found to have a high degree of similarity, with dice similarity coefficient ranging from 0.963 to 0.985 for high-resolution images and 0.920 to 0.990 for lower resolution images. Volume, cross-sectional area, and length measurements were also found to be in agreement with reference values derived from a commercial system, with length measurements having a maximum difference of 0.22 mm, angle measurements having a maximum difference of 0.04°, and cross-sectional area measurements having a maximum difference of 0.16 mm2. The VR platform was also found to yield significant efficiency improvements, reducing the time required to delineate complex cranial and spinal target volumes by an average of 50% or 29 min.

Localized Merkel cell carcinoma treatment considerations: a response to the forty-year experience at the Peter MacCallum cancer centre.

Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is a rare but aggressive neuroendocrine tumour of the skin with poor prognosis and rising global incidence. A recently published article in BMC Cancer, titled "Merkel cell carcinoma: a forty-year experience at the Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre" (Wang et al.), provides a contemporary analysis of locoregional disease outcomes in Australia which highlights the comparative effectiveness of radiotherapy for excisions with involved margins versus wide local excision. There is a persistent lack of clear, well-defined guidelines to manage MCC in Australia despite experiencing the highest rates globally. The advanced age at onset also provides inherent challenges for optimal management and often, a case-by-case approach is necessary based on patient preferences, baseline function and fitness for surgery. This paper responds to the recently published article by Wang et al. and will expand the discourse regarding management of localized MCC. Specifically, we will discuss the surgical excision approaches; alternative treatment options for MCC including radiotherapy, Mohs micrographic surgery and novel immunotherapy agents being investigated through several clinical trials.

Key factors for establishing and sustaining a successful palliative radiation oncology program: a survey of the Society for Palliative Radiation Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Dedicated palliative radiation oncology programs (PROPs) within radiation oncology (RO) practices have been shown to improve quality and decrease costs of radiation therapy (RT) in advanced cancer patients. Despite this, relatively few PROPs currently exist, highlighting an unmet need to understand characteristics of the few existing PROPs and the potential barriers and facilitators that exist in starting and maintaining a successful PROP. We sought to assess the attributes of existing PROPs, the facilitators and barriers to establishing these programs, and the resources needed to create and maintain a successful program. METHODS: A 15-item online survey was sent to 157 members of the Society of Palliative Radiation Oncology (SPRO) in July 2019. RESULTS: Of the 157 members, 48 (31%) responded. Most practiced in an academic center (71% at main center and 15% at satellite) and 75% were from a larger group practice (≥6 physicians). Most (89%) believed the development and growth of a dedicated PROPs was either important (50%) or most important (39%) to the field of RO. Only 36% of respondents had a PROP, 38% wanted to establish one, and 13% were currently developing one. Of those with PROPs (N=16), 75% perceived an increase in the number of referrals for palliative RT since starting the program. A majority had an ability to refer to an outside palliative care specialist (64%), an outpatient RO service (53%), and specialized clinical processes for managing palliative radiotherapy patients (53%), with 41% having an inpatient RO consult service. Resources considered most essential were access to specialist-level palliative care, advanced practice provider support, a radiation oncologist with an interest in palliative care, having an outpatient palliative RO clinic, an emphasis on administering short radiation courses, and opportunities for educational development. Of those with a PROP or those who have tried to start one, the greatest perceived barriers to initiating a PROP were committed resources (83%), blocked out clinical time (61%), challenges coordinating management of patients (61%), and support from leaders/colleagues (61%). Perceived barriers to sustaining a PROP were similar. For those without a PROP, the perceived most important resources for starting one included access to palliative care specialist by referral (83%), published guidelines with best practices (80%), educational materials for referring physicians and patients (80%), educational sessions for clinical staff (83%), and standardized clinical pathways (80%). CONCLUSIONS: PROPs are not widespread, exist mainly within academic centers, are outpatient, have access to palliative care specialists by referral, and have specialized clinical processes for palliative radiation patients. Lack of committed resources was the single most important perceived barrier for initiating or maintaining a PROP. Best practice guidelines, educational resources, access to palliative care specialists and standardized pathways are most important for those who wish to develop a PROP. These insights can inform discussions and help align resources to develop, grow, and maintain a successful PROP.

Friedrich Dessauer (1881-1963): the forgotten medical physicist, politician, and philosopher.

Today, the name Friedrich Dessauer is almost forgotten; however, his scientific, social, and political works should not be. Dessauer's professional career began at a young age as a professor of physics in Frankfurt am Main. It is said that he published 400 papers and 65 book chapters and pamphlets. He was a technical inventor who established laws that dealt with theories to explain the limited understanding of the effects of radiation on cells. He advocated for methods to improve the therapeutic ratio. As a devout Catholic politician, Dessauer was an early opponent of National Socialism. This led to him being thrown into prison for political reasons in 1933. He did not leave until 1934, and then for Istanbul, largely thanks to Turkish efforts and his appointment as director of a large new institution. While he was already a well-known physicist in Germany, he had to start from scratch in order to build a modern institute. A recent article in the journal Radiotherapy and Oncology celebrated his important contributions to radiology from Turkey. After his contract in Istanbul expired in 1937, he left for the small University of Fribourg in Switzerland, where he was unfortunately unable to continue his scientific productivity. Dessauer wrote textbooks as well as political and philosophical books, and attempted to bridge the gap between Catholicism and science. Additionally, after the war, he began to teach again in Frankfurt. In photos of Dessauer, radiation-induced skin changes on his face and hands were clearly visible. Towards the end of his life, he received many medals and honors for his achievements in Germany, some of them posthumously.

Artificial intelligence in radiotherapy: Current applications and future trends.

Radiation therapy has dramatically changed with the advent of computed tomography and intensity modulation. This added complexity to the workflow but allowed for more precise and reproducible treatment. As a result, these advances required the accurate delineation of many more volumes, raising questions about how to delineate them, in a uniform manner across centers. Then, as computing power improved, reverse planning became possible and three-dimensional dose distributions could be generated. Artificial intelligence offers the opportunity to make such workflow more efficient while increasing practice homogeneity. Many artificial intelligence-based tools are being implemented in routine practice to increase efficiency, reduce workload and improve homogeneity of treatments. Data retrieved from this workflow could be combined with clinical data and omic data to develop predictive tools to support clinical decision-making process. Such predictive tools are at the stage of proof-of-concept and need to be explainatory, prospectively validated, and based on large and multicenter cohorts. Nevertheless, they could bridge the gap to personalized radiation oncology, by personalizing oncologic strategies, dose prescriptions to tumor volumes and dose constraints to organs at risk.

Markov models for clinical decision-making in radiation oncology: A systematic review.

The intrinsic stochasticity of patients' response to treatment is a major consideration for clinical decision-making in radiation therapy. Markov models are powerful tools to capture this stochasticity and render effective treatment decisions. This paper provides an overview of the Markov models for clinical decision analysis in radiation oncology. A comprehensive literature search was conducted within MEDLINE using PubMed, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Only studies published from 2000 to 2023 were considered. Selected publications were summarized in two categories: (i) studies that compare two (or more) fixed treatment policies using Monte Carlo simulation and (ii) studies that seek an optimal treatment policy through Markov Decision Processes (MDPs). Relevant to the scope of this study, 61 publications were selected for detailed review. The majority of these publications (n = 56) focused on comparative analysis of two or more fixed treatment policies using Monte Carlo simulation. Classifications based on cancer site, utility measures and the type of sensitivity analysis are presented. Five publications considered MDPs with the aim of computing an optimal treatment policy; a detailed statement of the analysis and results is provided for each work. As an extension of Markov model-based simulation analysis, MDP offers a flexible framework to identify an optimal treatment policy among a possibly large set of treatment policies. However, the applications of MDPs to oncological decision-making have been understudied, and the full capacity of this framework to render complex optimal treatment decisions warrants further consideration.

Variation in content discussed by specialty in consultations for clinically localized prostate cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Multidisciplinary consultations improve decisional conflict and guideline-concordant treatment for men with prostate cancer (PC), but differences in the content discussed by specialty during consultations are unknown. METHODS: We audiorecorded and transcribed 50 treatment consultations for localized PC across a multidisciplinary sample of urologists, radiation oncologists, and medical oncologists. Conversation was coded for narrative content using an open coding approach, grouping similar topics into major content areas. The number of words devoted to each content area per consult was used as a proxy for time spent. Multivariable Poisson regression calculated incidence rate ratios (IRR) for content-specific word count across specialties after adjustment for tumor risk and patient demographics. RESULTS: Coders identified 8 narrative content areas: overview of PC; medical history; baseline risk; cancer prognosis; competing risks; treatment options; physician recommendations; and shared decision making (SDM). In multivariable models, specialties significantly differed in proportion of time spent on treatment options, SDM, competing risks, and cancer prognosis. Urologists spent 1.8-fold more time discussing cancer prognosis than medical oncologists (IRR1.80, 95%CI:1.14-2.83) and radiation oncologists (IRR1.84, 95%CI:1.10-3.07). Urologists (IRR11.38, 95%CI:6.62-19.56) and medical oncologists (IRR10.60, 95%CI:6.01-18.72) spent over 10-fold more time discussing competing risks than radiation oncologists. Medical oncologists (IRR2.60, 95%CI:1.65-4.10) and radiation oncologists (IRR1.77, 95%CI:1.06-2.95) spent 2.6- and 1.8-fold more time on SDM than urologists, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Specialists focus on different content in PC consultations. Our results suggest that urologists should spend more time on SDM and radiation oncologists on competing risks. Our results also highlight the importance of medical oncologists in facilitating SDM.

The ASCENT Trial: a phase 2 study of induction and consolidation afatinib and chemoradiation with or without surgery in stage III EGFR-mutant NSCLC.

BACKGROUND: The role of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in early-stage and metastatic oncogene-driven non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is established, but it remains unknown how best to integrate TKIs with concurrent chemoradiotherapy (cCRT) in locally advanced disease. The phase 2 ASCENT trial assessed the efficacy and safety of afatinib and cCRT with or without surgery in locally advanced epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutant NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adults ≥18 years with histologically confirmed stage III (AJCC 7th edition) NSCLC with activating EGFR mutations were enrolled at Mass General and Dana-Farber/Brigham Cancer Centers, Boston, Massachusetts. Patients received induction afatinib 40 mg daily for 2 months, then cisplatin 75 mg/m2 and pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 IV every 3 weeks during RT (definitive or neoadjuvant dosing). Patients with resectable disease underwent surgery. All patients were offered consolidation afatinib for 2 years. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR) to induction TKI. Secondary endpoints were safety, conversion to operability, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Analyses were performed on the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: Nineteen patients (median age 56 years; 74% female) were enrolled. ORR to induction afatinib was 63%. Seventeen patients received cCRT; 2/9 previously unresectable became resectable. Ten underwent surgery; 6 had a major or complete pathological response. Thirteen received consolidation afatinib. With a median follow-up of 5.0 years, median PFS and OS were 2.6 (95% CI, 1.4-3.1) and 5.8 years (2.9-NR), respectively. Sixteen recurred or died; 6 recurrences were isolated to CNS. The median time to progression after stopping consolidation TKI was 2.9 months (95% CI, 1.1-7.2). Four developed grade 2 pneumonitis. There were no treatment-related deaths. CONCLUSION: We explored the efficacy of combining TKI with cCRT in oncogene-driven NSCLC. Induction TKI did not compromise subsequent receipt of multimodality therapy. PFS was promising, but the prevalence of CNS-only recurrences and rapid progression after TKI discontinuation speak to unmet needs in measuring and eradicating micrometastatic disease.

Radiation Oncology Resident Education: Is Change Needed?

Leading successful change efforts first requires assessment of the "before change" environment and culture. At our institution, the radiation oncology (RO) residents follow a longitudinal didactic learning program consisting of weekly 1-h lectures, case conferences, and journal clubs. The resident didactic education series format has not changed since its inception over 10 years ago. We evaluated the perceptions of current residents and faculty about the effectiveness of the curriculum in its present form. Two parallel surveys were designed, one each for residents and attendings, to assess current attitudes regarding the effectiveness and need for change in the RO residency curriculum, specifically the traditional didactic lectures, the journal club sessions, and the case conferences. We also investigated perceived levels of engagement among residents and faculty, whether self-assessments would be useful to increase material retention, and how often the content of didactic lectures is updated. Surveys were distributed individually to each resident (N = 10) and attending (N = 24) either in-person or via Zoom. Following completion of the survey, respondents were informally interviewed about their perspectives on the curriculum's strengths and weaknesses. Compared to 46% of attendings, 80% of RO residents believed that the curriculum should be changed. Twenty percent of residents felt that the traditional didactic lectures were effective in preparing them to manage patients in the clinic, compared to 74% of attendings. Similarly, 10% of residents felt that the journal club sessions were effective vs. 42% of attendings. Finally, 40% of residents felt that the case conferences were effective vs. 67% of attendings. Overall, most respondents (56%) favored change in the curriculum. Our results suggest that the perceptions of the residents did not align with those of the attending physicians with respect to the effectiveness of the curriculum and the need for change. The discrepancies between resident and faculty views highlight the importance of a dedicated change management effort to mitigate this gap. Based on this project, we plan to propose recommended changes in structure to the residency program directors. Main changes would be to increase the interactive nature of the course material, incorporate more ways to increase faculty engagement, and consider self-assessment questions to promote retention. Once we get approval from the residency program leadership, we will follow Kotter's "Eight steps to transforming your organization" to ensure the highest potential for faculty to accept the expectations of a new curriculum.