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.

Reirradiation With Proton Therapy for Recurrent Malignancies of the Esophagus and Gastroesophageal Junction: Results of the Proton Collaborative Group Multi-Institutional Prospective Registry Trial.

Purpose: Treatment options for recurrent esophageal cancer (EC) previously treated with radiation therapy (RT) are limited. Reirradiation (reRT) with proton beam therapy (PBT) can offer lower toxicities by limiting doses to surrounding tissues. In this study, we present the first multi-institutional series reporting on toxicities and outcomes after reRT for locoregionally recurrent EC with PBT. Methods and Materials: Analysis of the prospective, multicenter, Proton Collaborative Group registry of patients with recurrent EC who had previously received photon-based RT and underwent PBT reRT was performed. Patient/tumor characteristics, treatment details, outcomes, and toxicities were collected. Local control (LC), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Event time was determined from reRT start. Results: Between 2012 and 2020, 31 patients received reRT via uniform scanning/passive scattering (61.3%) or pencil beam scanning (38.7%) PBT at 7 institutions. Median prior RT, PBT reRT, and cumulative doses were 50.4 Gy (range, 37.5-110.4), 48.6 Gy (relative biological effectiveness) (25.2-72.1), and 99.9 Gy (79.1-182.5), respectively. Of these patients, 12.9% had 2 prior RT courses, and 67.7% received PBT with concurrent chemotherapy. Median follow-up was 7.2 months (0.9-64.7). Post-PBT, there were 16.7% locoregional only, 11.1% distant only, and 16.7% locoregional and distant recurrences. Six-month LC, DMFS, and OS were 80.5%, 83.4%, and 69.1%, respectively. One-year LC, DMFS, and OS were 67.1%, 83.4%, and 27%, respectively. Acute grade ≥3 toxicities occurred in 23% of patients, with 1 acute grade 5 toxicity secondary to esophageal hemorrhage, unclear if related to reRT or disease progression. No grade ≥3 late toxicities were reported. Conclusions: In the largest report to date of PBT for reRT in patients with recurrent EC, we observed acceptable acute toxicities and encouraging rates of disease control. However, these findings are limited by the poor prognoses of these patients, who are at high risk of mortality. Further research is needed to better assess the long-term benefits and toxicities of PBT in this specific patient population.

Defining Minimum Treatment Parameters of Ablative Radiation Therapy in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma: An Expert Consensus.

PURPOSE: External beam radiation therapy (EBRT) is a highly effective treatment in select patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer system does not recommend the use of EBRT in HCC due to a lack of sufficient evidence and intends to perform an individual patient level meta-analysis of ablative EBRT in this population. However, there are many types of EBRT described in the literature with no formal definition of what constitutes "ablative." Thus, we convened a group of international experts to provide consensus on the parameters that define ablative EBRT in HCC. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Fundamental parameters related to dose, fractionation, radiobiology, target identification, and delivery technique were identified by a steering committee to generate 7 Key Criteria (KC) that would define ablative EBRT for HCC. Using a modified Delphi (mDelphi) method, experts in the use of EBRT in the treatment of HCC were surveyed. Respondents were given 30 days to respond in round 1 of the mDelphi and 14 days to respond in round 2. A threshold of ≥70% was used to define consensus for answers to each KC. RESULTS: Of 40 invitations extended, 35 (88%) returned responses. In the first round, 3 of 7 KC reached consensus. In the second round, 100% returned responses and consensus was reached in 3 of the remaining 4 KC. The distribution of answers for one KC, which queried the a/b ratio of HCC, was such that consensus was not achieved. Based on this analysis, ablative EBRT for HCC was defined as a BED10 ≥80 Gy with daily imaging and multiphasic contrast used for target delineation. Treatment breaks (eg, for adaptive EBRT) are allowed, but the total treatment time should be ≤6 weeks. Equivalent dose when treating with protons should use a conversion factor of 1.1, but there is no single conversion factor for carbon ions. CONCLUSIONS: Using a mDelphi method assessing expert opinion, we provide the first consensus definition of ablative EBRT for HCC. Empirical data are required to define the a/b of HCC.

Postoperative Radiation Therapy Is Indicated for "Low-Risk" Pathologic Stage I Merkel Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck Region but Not for Other Locations.

Purpose: The role of postoperative radiation therapy (PORT) in early stage Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is controversial. We analyzed the role of PORT in preventing local recurrences (LR) among patients with low-risk, pathologic stage I MCC based on the location of the primary tumors: head/neck (HN) versus non-HN sites. Methods and Materials: One hundred forty-seven patients with MCC were identified that had "low risk" disease (pathologic T1 primary tumor, negative microscopic margins, negative pathologic node status, no immunosuppression or prior systemic therapy). LR was defined as tumor recurrence within 2 cm of the primary surgical bed, and its frequency was estimated with the cumulative incidence method. Results: Seventy-nine patients received PORT (30 HN, 49 non-HN) with a median dose of 50 Gy (range, 8-64 Gy) and 68 patients were treated with surgery alone (30 HN, 38 non-HN). Overall, PORT was associated with a decreased risk of LR (5-year rate: 0% vs 9.5%; P = .004) with 6 LRs observed in the surgery alone group. Although the addition of PORT significantly reduced LR rates among patients with HN MCC (0% vs. 21%; P = .034), no LRs were observed in patients with non-HN MCC managed with surgery alone. There was no significant difference in MCC-specific survival comparing HN versus non-HN groups, with or without PORT. Conclusions: For low-risk, pathologic stage I MCC of the extremities and trunk, excellent local control rates were achieved with surgery, and PORT is not indicated. However, PORT was associated with a significant reduction in LRs among low-risk MCC of the HN.

Increased risk of recurrence and disease-specific death following delayed postoperative radiation for Merkel cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is often treated with surgery and postoperative radiation therapy (PORT). The optimal time to initiate PORT (Time-to-PORT [ttPORT]) is unknown. PURPOSE: We assessed if delays in ttPORT were associated with inferior outcomes. METHODS: Competing risk regression was used to evaluate associations between ttPORT and locoregional recurrence (LRR) for patients with stage I/II MCC in a prospective registry and adjust for covariates. Distant metastasis and death were competing risks. RESULTS: The cohort included 124 patients with median ttPORT of 41 days (range: 8-125 days). Median follow-up was 55 months. 17 (14%) patients experienced a LRR, 14 (82%) of which arose outside the radiation field. LRR at 5 years was increased for ttPORT >8 weeks vs ≤ 8 weeks, 28.0% vs 9.2%, P = .006. There was an increase in the cumulative incidence of MCC-specific death with increasing ttPORT (HR = 1.14 per 1-week increase, P = .016). LIMITATIONS: The relatively low number of LRRs limited the extent of our multivariable analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Delay of PORT was associated with increased LRR, usually beyond the radiation field. This is consistent with the tendency of MCC to spread quickly via lymphatics. Initiation of PORT within 8 weeks was associated with improved locoregional control and MCC-specific survival.

Proton Beam Therapy and Photon-Based Magnetic Resonance Image-Guided Radiation Therapy: The Next Frontiers of Radiation Therapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

External beam radiation therapy (EBRT) has increasingly been utilized in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) due to technological advances with positive clinical outcomes. Innovations in EBRT include improved image guidance, motion management, treatment planning, and highly conformal techniques such as intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). Moreover, proton beam therapy (PBT) and magnetic resonance image-guided radiation therapy (MRgRT) have expanded the capabilities of EBRT. PBT offers the advantage of minimizing low- and moderate-dose radiation to the surrounding normal tissue, thereby preserving uninvolved liver and allowing for dose escalation. MRgRT provides the advantage of improved soft tissue delineation compared to computerized tomography (CT) guidance. Additionally, MRgRT with online adaptive therapy is particularly useful for addressing motion not otherwise managed and reducing high-dose radiation to the normal tissue such as the stomach and bowel. PBT and online adaptive MRgRT are emerging technological advancements in EBRT that may provide a significant clinical benefit for patients with HCC.

Proton Therapy for Unresectable and Medically Inoperable Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: Results From a Multi-Institutional Prospective Registry.

Purpose: Compared with photon-based techniques, proton beam radiation therapy (PBT) may improve the therapeutic ratio of radiation therapy (RT) for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC), but available data have been limited to single-institutional experiences. This study examined the toxicity, survival, and disease control rates among patients enrolled in a multi-institutional prospective registry study and treated with PBT for LAPC. Methods and Materials: Between March 2013 and November 2019, 19 patients with inoperable disease across 7 institutions underwent PBT with definitive intent for LAPC. Patients received a median radiation dose/fractionation of 54 Gy/30 fractions (range, 50.4-60.0 Gy/19-33 fractions). Most received prior (68.4%) or concurrent (78.9%) chemotherapy. Patients were assessed prospectively for toxicities using National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to analyze overall survival, locoregional recurrence-free survival, time to locoregional recurrence, distant metastasis-free survival, and time to new progression or metastasis for the adenocarcinoma cohort (17 patients). Results: No patients experienced grade ≥3 acute or chronic treatment-related adverse events. Grade 1 and 2 adverse events occurred in 78.7% and 21.3% of patients, respectively. Median overall survival, locoregional recurrence-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival, and time to new progression or metastasis were 14.6, 11.0, 11.0, and 13.9 months, respectively. Freedom from locoregional recurrence at 2 years was 81.7%. All patients completed treatment with one requiring a RT break for stent placement. Conclusions: Proton beam RT for LAPC offered excellent tolerability while still maintaining disease control and survival rates comparable with dose-escalated photon-based RT. These findings are consistent with the known physical and dosimetric advantages offered by proton therapy, but the conclusions are limited owing to the patient sample size. Further clinical studies incorporating dose-escalated PBT are warranted to evaluate whether these dosimetric advantages translate into clinically meaningful benefits.

Management and Prognosis of Cardiac Metastatic Merkel Cell Carcinoma: A Case-Control Study and Literature Review.

Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC), an aggressive neuroendocrine skin cancer, has a high rate (20%) of distant metastasis. Within a prospective registry of 582 patients with metastatic MCC (mMCC) diagnosed between 2003-2021, we identified 9 (1.5%) patients who developed cardiac metastatic MCC (mMCC). We compared overall survival (OS) between patients with cardiac and non-cardiac metastases in a matched case-control study. Cardiac metastasis was a late event (median 925 days from initial MCC diagnosis). The right heart was predominantly involved (8 of 9; 89%). Among 7 patients treated with immunotherapy, 6 achieved a complete or partial response of the cardiac lesion. Among these 6 responders, 5 received concurrent cardiac radiotherapy (median 20 Gray) with immunotherapy; 4 of 5 did not have local disease progression or recurrence in the treated cardiac lesion. One-year OS was 44%, which was not significantly different from non-cardiac mMCC patients (45%, p = 0.96). Though it occurs relatively late in the disease course, cardiac mMCC responded to immunotherapy and/or radiotherapy and was not associated with worse prognosis compared to mMCC at other anatomic sites. These results are timely as cardiac mMCC may be increasingly encountered in the era of immunotherapy as patients with metastatic MCC live longer.

The Impact of COVID-19 on US Radiation Oncology Residents.

The purpose of our study is to assess the impact of COVID-19 on the clinical responsibilities, training, and wellness of US radiation oncology residents. An anonymous cross-sectional survey was sent to all 91 radiation oncology residency programs in the USA. The survey included questions related to demographics, changes in clinical duties and training, job prospects, and wellness indicators. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate factors associated with residents endorsing high satisfaction with their departments' response to COVID-19. A total of 96 residents completed the survey from 67 US radiation oncology programs. In the multivariate logistic regression model, remote contouring (OR: 3.91 (95% CI: 1.11, 13.80), p = 0.03) and belief that one will be adequately trained to independently practice after completing residency (OR: 4.68 (1.12, 19.47), p = 0.03) were significantly associated with high resident satisfaction with their department's response to COVID-19. Most residents indicated that hypofractionation was encouraged to a greater extent (n = 79, 82.3%), patients were triaged by disease risk (n = 67, 69.8%), and most agreed/strongly agreed that they have been provided with adequate personal protective equipment (PPE) (n = 85, 88.5%). The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the training and wellness of radiation oncology residents. Our analysis suggests that radiation oncology programs might increase resident satisfaction with their department's response to COVID-19 by enabling remote contouring and working with residents to identity and remedy possible concerns regarding their ability to independently practice post residency.

External Beam Radiation Therapy for Primary Liver Cancers: An ASTRO Clinical Practice Guideline.

PURPOSE: This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for the indications and technique-dose of external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (IHC). METHODS: The American Society for Radiation Oncology convened a task force to address 5 key questions focused on the indications, techniques, and outcomes of EBRT in HCC and IHC. This guideline is intended to cover the definitive, consolidative, salvage, preoperative (including bridge to transplant), and adjuvant settings as well as palliative EBRT for symptomatic primary lesions. Recommendations were based on a systematic literature review and created using a predefined consensus-building methodology and system for grading evidence quality and recommendation strength. RESULTS: Strong recommendations are made for using EBRT as a potential first-line treatment in patients with liver-confined HCC who are not candidates for curative therapy, as consolidative therapy after incomplete response to liver-directed therapies, and as a salvage option for local recurrences. The guideline conditionally recommends EBRT for patients with liver-confined multifocal or unresectable HCC or those with macrovascular invasion, sequenced with systemic or catheter-based therapies. Palliative EBRT is conditionally recommended for symptomatic primary HCC and/or macrovascular tumor thrombi. EBRT is conditionally recommended as a bridge to transplant or before surgery in carefully selected patients. For patients with unresectable IHC, consolidative EBRT with or without chemotherapy should be considered, typically after systemic therapy. Adjuvant EBRT is conditionally recommended for resected IHC with high-risk features. Selection of dose-fractionation regimen and technique should be based on disease extent, disease location, underlying liver function, and available technologies. CONCLUSIONS: The task force has proposed recommendations to inform best clinical practices on the use of EBRT for HCC and IHC with strong emphasis on multidisciplinary care. Future studies should focus on further defining the role of EBRT in the context of liver-directed and systemic therapies and refining optimal regimens and techniques.

Executive Summary of Clinical and Technical Guidelines for Esophageal Cancer Proton Beam Therapy From the Particle Therapy Co-Operative Group Thoracic and Gastrointestinal Subcommittees.

Radiation therapy (RT) is an integral component of potentially curative management of esophageal cancer (EC). However, RT can cause significant acute and late morbidity due to excess radiation exposure to nearby critical organs, especially the heart and lungs. Sparing these organs from both low and high radiation dose has been demonstrated to achieve clinically meaningful reductions in toxicity and may improve long-term survival. Accruing dosimetry and clinical evidence support the consideration of proton beam therapy (PBT) for the management of EC. There are critical treatment planning and delivery uncertainties that should be considered when treating EC with PBT, especially as there may be substantial motion-related interplay effects. The Particle Therapy Co-operative Group Thoracic and Gastrointestinal Subcommittees jointly developed guidelines regarding patient selection, treatment planning, clinical trials, and future directions of PBT for EC.

Pancreas Cancer-Associated Pain Management.

Pain is highly prevalent in patients with pancreas cancer and contributes to the morbidity of the disease. Pain may be due to pancreatic enzyme insufficiency, obstruction, and/or a direct mass effect on nerves in the celiac plexus. Proper supportive care to decrease pain is an important aspect of the overall management of these patients. There are limited data specific to the management of pain caused by pancreatic cancer. Here we review the literature and offer recommendations regarding multiple modalities available to treat pain in these patients. The dissemination and adoption of these best supportive care practices can improve quantity and quality of life for patients with pancreatic cancer. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Pain management is important to improve the quality of life and survival of a patient with cancer. The pathophysiology of pain in pancreas cancer is complex and multifactorial. Despite tumor response to chemotherapy, a sizeable percentage of patients are at risk for ongoing cancer-related pain and its comorbid consequences. Accordingly, the management of pain in patients with pancreas cancer can be challenging and often requires a multifaceted approach.

Hypofractionated proton beam radiotherapy in patients with unresectable liver tumors: multi-institutional prospective results from the Proton Collaborative Group.

BACKGROUND: Recent advances in radiotherapy techniques have allowed ablative doses to be safely delivered to inoperable liver tumors. In this setting, proton beam radiotherapy (PBT) provides the means to escalate radiation dose to the target volume while sparing the uninvolved liver. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of hypofractionated PBT for liver tumors, predominantly hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC). METHODS: We evaluated the prospective registry of the Proton Collaborative Group for patients undergoing definitive PBT for liver tumors. Demographic, clinicopathologic, toxicity, and dosimetry information were compiled. RESULTS: To date, 63 patients have been treated at 9 institutions between 2013 and 2019. Thirty (48%) had HCC and 25 (40%) had ICC. The median dose and biological equivalent dose (BED) delivered was 58.05 GyE (range 32.5-75) and 80.5 GyE (range 53.6-100), respectively. The median mean liver BED was 13.9 GyE. Three (4.8%) patients experienced at least one grade ≥ 3 toxicity. With median follow-up of 5.1 months (range 0.1-40.8), the local control (LC) rate at 1 year was 91.2% for HCC and 90.9% for ICC. The 1-year LC was significantly higher (95.7%) for patients receiving BED greater than 75.2 GyE than for patients receiving BED of 75.2 GyE or lower (84.6%, p = 0.029). The overall survival rate at 1 year was 65.6% for HCC and 81.8% for ICC. CONCLUSIONS: Hypofractionated PBT results in excellent LC, sparing of the uninvolved liver, and low toxicity, even in the setting of dose-escalation. Higher dose correlates with improved LC, highlighting the importance of PBT especially in patients with recurrent or bulky disease.

Postoperative, Single-Fraction Radiation Therapy in Merkel Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck.

PURPOSE: Conventionally fractionated, postoperative radiation therapy (cPORT; 50 Gy in 25 fractions) is considered for patients with Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) to improve locoregional control. However, cPORT is associated with acute toxicity, especially in the head and neck (H&N) region, and requires daily treatments over several weeks. We previously reported high rates of durable local control with minimal toxicity using 8-Gy single-fraction radiation therapy (SFRT) in the metastatic setting. We report early results on a cohort of patients with localized H&N MCC who received postoperative SFRT if a cPORT regimen was not feasible. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twelve patients with localized MCC of the H&N (clinical/pathologic stages I-II) and no prior radiation therapy to the region were identified from an institutional review board-approved prospective registry who underwent surgical resection followed by postoperative SFRT. Time to event was calculated starting from the date of resection before SFRT. The cumulative incidence of in-field locoregional recurrences and out-of-field recurrences was estimated with death as a competing risk. RESULTS: Twelve patients with H&N MCC were identified with clinical/pathologic stages I-II H&N MCC. Median age at diagnosis was 81 years (range, 58-96 years); 25% had immunosuppression. At a median follow-up of 19 months (range, 8-34), there were no in-field locoregional recurrences. A single out-of-field regional recurrence was observed, which was successfully salvaged. There were no MCC-specific deaths. No radiation-associated toxicities greater than grade 1 (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5) were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary data suggest that SFRT could offer a potential alternative to cPORT to treat the primary site for localized H&N MCC, particularly in elderly or frail patients, with promising in-field local control and minimal toxicity. Further data with validation in larger cohorts are needed to confirm the sustained safety and efficacy of postoperative SFRT.

Management of primary hepatic malignancies during the COVID-19 pandemic: recommendations for risk mitigation from a multidisciplinary perspective.

Around the world, recommendations for cancer treatment are being adapted in real time in response to the pandemic of COVID-19. We, as a multidisciplinary team, reviewed the standard management options, according to the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer classification system, for hepatocellular carcinoma. We propose treatment recommendations related to COVID-19 for the different stages of hepatocellular carcinoma (ie, 0, A, B, and C), specifically in relation to surgery, locoregional therapies, and systemic therapy. We suggest potential strategies to modify risk during the pandemic and aid multidisciplinary treatment decision making. We also review the multidisciplinary management of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma as a potentially curable and incurable diagnosis in the setting of COVID-19.

Proton beam therapy for liver cancers.

Proton beam therapy (PBT) delivers less dose to nearby normal organs compared to X-ray therapy (XRT), which is particularly relevant for treating liver cancers given that both mean and low liver dose are among the most significant predictors of radiation induced liver disease (RILD). High-dose PBT has been shown to achieve excellent long-term tumor control with minimal toxicity in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients. Increasing data support ablative PBT for patients with unresectable cholangiocarcinoma or liver metastases, especially those with larger tumors not suitable for XRT.

Rectal Hydrogel Spacer Improves Late Gastrointestinal Toxicity Compared to Rectal Balloon Immobilization After Proton Beam Radiation Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: A Retrospective Observational Study.

PURPOSE: Our purpose was to compare dosimetric parameters and late gastrointestinal outcomes between patients treated with proton beam therapy (PBT) for localized prostate cancer with rectal balloon immobilization versus a hydrogel rectal spacer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with localized, clinical stage T1-4 prostate adenocarcinoma were treated at a single institution using conventionally fractionated, dose-escalated PBT from 2013 to 2018. Patient-reported gastrointestinal toxicity was prospectively collected, and the incidence of rectal bleeding was retrospectively reviewed from patient records. RESULTS: One hundred ninety-two patients were treated with rectal balloon immobilization, and 75 were treated with a rectal spacer. Rectal hydrogel spacer significantly improved rectal dosimetry while maintaining excellent target coverage. The 2-year actuarial rate of grade 2+ late rectal bleeding was 19% and 3% in the rectal balloon and hydrogel spacer groups, respectively (P = .003). In univariable analysis, the probability of grade 2+ rectal bleeding was significantly correlated with increasing rectal dose. In multivariable analysis, only receipt of spacer hydrogel (hazard ratio, 0.145; P = .010) and anticoagulation use (hazard ratio, 5.019; P < .001) were significantly associated with grade 2+ bleeding. At 2-year follow-up, patient-reported Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite bowel quality of life composite scores were less diminished in the hydrogel spacer group (absolute mean difference, 5.5; P = .030). CONCLUSIONS: Use of rectal hydrogel spacer for prostate PBT is associated with a significantly lower incidence of clinically relevant, late rectal bleeding and lower decrement in long-term, patient-reported bowel quality of life compared with rectal balloon immobilization. Our results suggest that hydrogel spacer may improve rectal sparing compared with rectal balloon immobilization during PBT for prostate cancer.