ABSTRACT
Purpose: To evaluate organ at risk (OAR) auto-segmentation in the head and neck region of computed tomography images using two different commercially available deep-learning-based auto-segmentation (DLAS) tools in a single institutional clinical applications. Methods: Twenty-two OARs were manually contoured by clinicians according to published guidelines on planning computed tomography (pCT) images for 40 clinical head and neck cancer (HNC) cases. Automatic contours were generated for each patient using two deep-learning-based auto-segmentation models-Manteia AccuContour and MIM ProtégéAI. The accuracy and integrity of autocontours (ACs) were then compared to expert contours (ECs) using the Sørensen-Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and Mean Distance (MD) metrics. Results: ACs were generated for 22 OARs using AccuContour and 17 OARs using ProtégéAI with average contour generation time of 1 min/patient and 5 min/patient respectively. EC and AC agreement was highest for the mandible (DSC 0.90 ± 0.16) and (DSC 0.91 ± 0.03), and lowest for the chiasm (DSC 0.28 ± 0.14) and (DSC 0.30 ± 0.14) for AccuContour and ProtégéAI respectively. Using AccuContour, the average MD was<1mm for 10 of the 22 OARs contoured, 1-2mm for 6 OARs, and 2-3mm for 6 OARs. For ProtégéAI, the average mean distance was<1mm for 8 out of 17 OARs, 1-2mm for 6 OARs, and 2-3mm for 3 OARs. Conclusions: Both DLAS programs were proven to be valuable tools to significantly reduce the time required to generate large amounts of OAR contours in the head and neck region, even though manual editing of ACs is likely needed prior to implementation into treatment planning. The DSCs and MDs achieved were similar to those reported in other studies that evaluated various other DLAS solutions. Still, small volume structures with nonideal contrast in CT images, such as nerves, are very challenging and will require additional solutions to achieve sufficient results.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: This study compares four management paradigms for large brain metastasis (LMB): fractionated SRS (FSRS), staged SRS (SSRS), resection and postoperative-FSRS (postop-FSRS) or preoperative-SRS (preop-SRS). METHODS: Patients with LBM (≥ 2 cm) between July 2017 and January 2022 at a single tertiary institution were evaluated. Primary endpoints were local failure (LF), radiation necrosis (RN), leptomeningeal disease (LMD), a composite of these variables, and distant intracranial failure (DIF). Gray's test compared cumulative incidence, treating death as a competing risk with a random survival forests (RSF) machine-learning model also used to evaluate the data. RESULTS: 183 patients were treated to 234 LBMs: 31.6% for postop-FSRS, 28.2% for SSRS, 20.1% for FSRS, and 20.1% for preop-SRS. The overall 1-year composite endpoint rates were comparable (21 vs 20%) between nonoperative and operative strategies, but 1-year RN rate was 8 vs 4% (p = 0.012), 1-year overall survival (OS) was 48 vs. 69% (p = 0.001), and 1-year LMD rate was 5 vs 10% (p = 0.052). There were differences in the 1-year RN rates (7% FSRS, 3% postop-FSRS, 5% preop-SRS, 10% SSRS, p = 0.037). With RSF analysis, the out-of-bag error rate for the composite endpoint was 47%, with identified top-risk factors including widespread extracranial disease, > 5 total lesions, and breast cancer histology. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to conduct a head-to-head retrospective comparison of four SRS methods, addressing the lack of randomized data in LBM literature amongst treatment paradigms. Despite patient characteristic trends, no significant differences were found in LF, composite endpoint, and DIF rates between non-operative and operative approaches.
Subject(s)
Brain Neoplasms , Radiosurgery , Humans , Radiosurgery/methods , Brain Neoplasms/secondary , Brain Neoplasms/surgery , Brain Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Brain Neoplasms/mortality , Female , Male , Middle Aged , Aged , Retrospective Studies , Adult , Treatment Outcome , Survival Rate , Follow-Up StudiesABSTRACT
Purpose: To report demographic and clinical characteristics of patients who were more likely to receive proton beam therapy (PBT) than photon therapy from facilities with access to proton centers. Materials and Methods: We utilized the national cancer database to identify the facilities with access to PBT between 2004 and 2015 and compared the relative usage of photons and PBT for demographic and clinical scenarios in breast, prostate, and nonsmall cell cancer. Results: In total, 231 facilities with access to proton centers accounted for 168 323 breast, 39 975 lung, and 77 297 prostate cancer patients treated definitively. Proton beam therapy was used in 0.5%, 1.5%, and 8.9% of breast, lung, and prostate cases. Proton beam therapy was correlated with a farther distance traveled and longer start time from diagnosis for each site (P < .05).For breast, demographic correlates of PBT were treatment in the west coast (odds ratio [OR] = 4.81), age <60 (OR = 1.25), white race (OR = 1.94), and metropolitan area (OR = 1.58). Left-sided cancers (OR = 1.28), N2 (OR = 1.71), non-ER+/PR+/Her2Neu- cancers (OR = 1.24), accelerated partial breast irradiation (OR = 1.98), and hypofractionation (OR = 2.35) were predictors of PBT.For nonsmall cell cancer, demographic correlates of PBT were treatment in the south (OR = 2.6), metropolitan area (OR = 1.72), and Medicare insurance (OR = 1.64). Higher comorbid score (OR = 1.36), later year treated (OR = 3.16), and hypofractionation (not SBRT) (OR = 3.7) were predictors of PBT.For prostate, correlates of PBT were treatment in the west coast (OR = 2.48), age <70 (OR = 1.19), white race (OR = 1.41), metropolitan area (OR = 1.25), higher income/education (OR = 1.25), and treatment at an academic center (OR = 33.94). Lower comorbidity score (OR = 1.42), later year treated (OR = 1.37), low-risk disease (OR = 1.45), definitive compared to postoperative (OR = 6.10), and conventional fractionation (OR = 1.64) were predictors of PBT. Conclusion: Even for facilities with established referrals to proton centers, PBT utilization was low; socioeconomic status was potentially a factor. Proton beam therapy was more often used with left-sided breast and low-risk prostate cancers, without a clear clinical pattern in lung cancer.
ABSTRACT
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.
ABSTRACT
Expert commentary on the evolving role of proton therapy, discussing the current status and controversies of proton therapy in the modern era.
Subject(s)
Proton Therapy , Proton Therapy/methods , Humans , Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Neoplasms/therapyABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: We explored characteristics and clinical outcomes of HER2-negative and HER2-low metastatic breast cancers using real-world data. METHODS: We queried the National Cancer Database to identify MBC patients that were HER2-low or HER2-negative per immunohistochemical staining. A binomial regression analysis identified demographic and clinical correlates of each subtype. A Cox multivariable regression analysis (MVA) and propensity-match analysis were performed to identify correlates of survival. RESULTS: Excluding missing data, 24,636 MBC patients diagnosed between 2008 and 2015 were identified; 27.9% were HER2-negative and 72.1% were HER2-low. There were no relevant demographic differences between the groups. HER2-low tumors were half as likely to have concomitant hormone receptor-positive status (p < 0.01). The 3-year survival rate among hormone receptor-negative patients was 33.8% for HER2-low and 32.2% for HER2-negative (p < 0.05), and 60.9% and 55.6% in HER2-low and HER2-negative cases among hormone receptor-positive patients (p < 0.05), respectively. HER2-low cases were associated with better survival on MVA (HR =0.95, 95% CI 0.91-0.99) and remained superior with propensity-matching (HR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.89-0.96). In a subset analysis isolated to hormone receptor-positive cases, HER2-low remained correlated with improved survival (HR = 0.93, 95% CI 0.89-0.98) with propensity-matched MVA. Correlates of worse survival include older age as a continuous variable (HR = 1.02, 95% CI 1.02-1.02) and Black race (HR = 1.26, 95% CI 1.20-1.32) [all p < 0.01]. CONCLUSIONS: In the largest such analysis performed to date, our study demonstrates a small but statistically significant association with improved survival for HER2-low tumors compared to HER2-negative tumors in MBC.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Humans , Female , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Prognosis , Receptor, ErbB-2/analysisABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Unilateral radiation therapy is appropriate for select patients with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC). The use of proton beam therapy (PBT) in the unilateral setting decreases the dose to the contralateral neck and organs at risk. This study aims to evaluate contralateral recurrences in patients who received ipsilateral PBT. METHODS: We evaluated the Proton Collaborative Group database for patients treated with PBT for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma between the years 2015-2020 at 12 institutions. Dosimetric analysis was performed in five cases. RESULTS: Our analysis included 41 patients that received ipsilateral PBT with a mean follow-up of 14.7 months. 37% patients (n = 15) were treated for recurrent disease, and 63% (n = 26) were treated for de novo disease. Oropharyngeal sites included tonsillar fossa (n = 30) and base of tongue (n = 11). The median dose and BED delivered were 69.96 CGE and 84 Gy, respectively. Eight (20%) patients experienced at least one grade 3 dysphagia (n = 4) or esophagitis (n = 4) toxicity. No grade ≥ 4 toxicities were reported. There was one (2.4%) failure in the contralateral neck. The 1-year locoregional control was 88.9% and the freedom from distant metastasis was 95.5% (n = 2). The dosimetric analysis demonstrated similar ipsilateral level II cervical nodal region doses, whereas contralateral doses were higher with photon plans, mean: 15.5 Gy and 0.7CGE, D5%: 25.1 Gy and 6.6CGE. CONCLUSIONS: Our series is the first to report outcomes for patients with OPSCC receiving unilateral PBT. The contralateral neck failure rate was excellent and comparable to failure rates with photon irradiation.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Squamous Cell , Head and Neck Neoplasms , Proton Therapy , Humans , Squamous Cell Carcinoma of Head and Neck/etiology , Protons , Prospective Studies , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/pathology , Proton Therapy/adverse effects , Head and Neck Neoplasms/etiology , Radiotherapy DosageABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Discharging clinically ready patients before noon on their discharge day may influence overall discharge process quality, emergency department (ED) boarding times, and length of stay (LOS). This study evaluated the effectiveness of a discharge before noon (DBN) initiative. METHODS: Many DBN components were refined or added during a pilot, including incorporating the DBN process into daily rounds, an electronic tracking system, and other elements for possible DBN patients such as a car service when appropriate and expedited lab results and physical therapy consults. DBN was evaluated through a retrospective pre-post study (12-month periods). Study patients were from Maimonides Medical Center's medicine units. Kaplan-Meier estimates and a log-rank test characterized and compared the discharge time probabilities in pre-DBN and post-DBN groups. Log-logistic accelerated failure time (AFT) analysis assessed the influence of DBN on discharge time. Secondary analyses examined the relationship between LOS and readmission within 30 days for any cause and DBN. RESULTS: The percentage of patients discharged before noon increased from 5.0% to 11.4% pre/post-DBN (p < 0.001). The AFT analysis estimated that post-DBN patients had discharge times 41.5% earlier (p < 0.001). DBN as an independent factor was not associated with LOS or subsequent readmissions within 30 days for any cause. Despite an increase in the percentage of patients admitted during the daytime (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.), the median ED boarding time increased by 41 minutes in post-DBN patients (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The DBN initiative was associated with an increased percentage of patients discharged before noon. Further research is needed to identify strategies that reliably improve discharge timeliness while reducing ED boarding.
Subject(s)
Emergency Service, Hospital , Patient Discharge , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Tertiary Healthcare , Time Factors , Length of Stay , Hospitals, UrbanABSTRACT
Proton pencil-beam scanning (PBS) Bragg peak FLASH combines ultra-high dose rate delivery and organ-at-risk (OAR) sparing. This proof-of-principle study compared dosimetry and dose rate coverage between PBS Bragg peak FLASH and PBS transmission FLASH in head and neck reirradiation. PBS Bragg peak FLASH plans were created via the highest beam single energy, range shifter, and range compensator, and were compared to PBS transmission FLASH plans for 6 GyE/fraction and 10 GyE/fraction in eight recurrent head and neck patients originally treated with quad shot reirradiation (14.8/3.7 CGE). The 6 GyE/fraction and 10 GyE/fraction plans were also created using conventional-rate intensity-modulated proton therapy techniques. PBS Bragg peak FLASH, PBS transmission FLASH, and conventional plans were compared for OAR sparing, FLASH dose rate coverage, and target coverage. All FLASH OAR V40 Gy/s dose rate coverage was 90-100% at 6 GyE and 10 GyE for both FLASH modalities. PBS Bragg peak FLASH generated dose volume histograms (DVHs) like those of conventional therapy and demonstrated improved OAR dose sparing over PBS transmission FLASH. All the modalities had similar CTV coverage. PBS Bragg peak FLASH can deliver conformal, ultra-high dose rate FLASH with a two-millisecond delivery of the minimum MU per spot. PBS Bragg peak FLASH demonstrated similar dose rate coverage to PBS transmission FLASH with improved OAR dose-sparing, which was more pronounced in the 10 GyE/fraction than in the 6 GyE/fraction. This feasibility study generates hypotheses for the benefits of FLASH in head and neck reirradiation and developing biological models.
ABSTRACT
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.
ABSTRACT
Purpose: After adequate surgical resection, early-stage oral tongue cancer patients can harbor a low risk of local recurrence but remain at risk of regional recurrence. Oral tongue avoidance during adjuvant radiation therapy is an attractive potential treatment strategy to mitigate treatment toxicity. We sought to quantify the dosimetric advantages of this approach and hypothesized that intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) may further reduce organs at risk doses compared with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Materials and Methods: Five patients with oral tongue cancer treated with postoperative radiation therapy from August 2020 to September 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Novel clinical target volume contours, excluding the oral tongue, were generated while maintaining coverage of bilateral at-risk lymph nodes. Comparison IMRT (X) and IMPT (PBT) plans were generated using standard treatment volumes (control) and avoidance volumes (study) (n = 4 plans/patient). Dosimetric variables for organs at risk were compared using the paired t test. Results: The prescribed dose was 60 Gy in 30 fractions. D95% clinical target volume coverage was similar between X and PBT plans for both control and study clinical target volumes. Comparing control with study plans, both X (58.9 Gy vs 38.3 Gy, P = .007) and PBT (60.2 Gy vs 26.1 Gy, P < .001) decreased the oral cavity dosemean. The pharyngeal constrictor dosemean was also reduced (P < .003). There was no difference between control and study plans for larynx (P = .19), parotid (P = .11), or mandible dose (P = .59). For study plans, PBT significantly reduced oral cavity dosemean (38.3 Gy vs 26.1 Gy, P = .007) and parotid dosemean (23.3 Gy vs 19.3 Gy, P = .03) compared with X. For control plans, there was no difference in oral cavity dosemean using PBT compared with X, but PBT did improve the parotid dosemean (26.6 Gy vs 19.7 Gy, P = .02). Conclusion: This study quantifies the feasibility and dosimetric advantages of oral tongue avoidance while still treating the at-risk lymph nodes for oral tongue cancer. The dosimetric difference between PBT and X was most prominent with an oral tongue-avoidance strategy.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: We present efficacy and toxicity outcomes among patients with chordoma treated on the Proton Collaborative Group prospective registry. METHODS: Consecutive chordoma patients treated between 2010-2018 were evaluated. One hundred fifty patients were identified, 100 had adequate follow-up information. Locations included base of skull (61%), spine (23%), and sacrum (16%). Patients had a performance status of ECOG 0-1 (82%) and median age of 58â¯years. Eighty-five percent of patients underwent surgical resection. The median proton RT dose was 74â¯Gy (RBE) (range 21-86â¯Gy (RBE)) using passive scatter proton RT (PS-PBT) (13%), uniform scanning proton RT (US-PBT) (54%) and pencil beam scanning proton RT (PBS-PBT) (33%). Rates of local control (LC), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and acute and late toxicities were assessed. RESULTS: 2/3-year LC, PFS, and OS rates are 97%/94%, 89%/74%, and 89%/83%, respectively. LC did not differ based on surgical resection (pâ¯=â¯0.61), though this is likely limited by most patients having undergone a prior resection. Eight patients experienced acute grade 3 toxicities, most commonly pain (nâ¯=â¯3), radiation dermatitis (nâ¯=â¯2), fatigue (nâ¯=â¯1), insomnia (nâ¯=â¯1) and dizziness (nâ¯=â¯1). No gradeâ¯≥â¯4 acute toxicities were reported. No gradeâ¯≥â¯3 late toxicities were reported, and most common grade 2 toxicities were fatigue (nâ¯=â¯5), headache (nâ¯=â¯2), CNS necrosis (nâ¯=â¯1), and pain (nâ¯=â¯1). CONCLUSIONS: In our series, PBT achieved excellent safety and efficacy outcomes with very low rates of treatment failure. CNS necrosis is exceedingly low (<1%) despite the high doses of PBT delivered. Further maturation of data and larger patient numbers are necessary to optimize therapy in chordoma.
Subject(s)
Chordoma , Proton Therapy , Humans , Middle Aged , Proton Therapy/adverse effects , Protons , Treatment Outcome , Chordoma/radiotherapy , Pain/etiology , RegistriesABSTRACT
Importance: Use of proton therapy reirradiation (PT-ReRT) for head and neck cancer is increasing; however, reports are heterogenous and outcomes can be difficult to interpret. Objective: To evaluate outcomes and toxic effects following PT-ReRT in a uniform and consecutive cohort of patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study included patients with recurrent primary head and neck squamous cell carcinoma who were treated with PT-ReRT from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2020, at a single institution. Patient, clinical, and treatment characteristics were obtained, and multidisciplinary review was performed to record and grade early and late toxic effects. Exposures: Proton therapy reirradiation. Main Outcomes and Measures: Follow-up was defined from the start of PT-ReRT. The Kaplan-Meier method was used for outcomes of interest, including local control (LC), locoregional control, distant metastatic control, progression-free survival, and overall survival (OS). Cox proportional hazards regression modeling was used to assess associations of covariates with OS. Results: A total of 242 patients (median [range] age, 63 [21-96] years; 183 [75.6%] male) were included. Of these patients, 231 (95.9%) had a Karnofsky performance status score of 70 or higher, and 145 (59.9%) had at least a 10-pack-year smoking history. Median (range) follow-up was 12.0 (5.8-26.0) months for all patients and 24.5 (13.8-37.8) months for living patients. A total of 206 patients (85.1%) had recurrent disease vs second primary or residual disease. The median (range) interval between radiation courses was 22 (1-669) months. Median PT-ReRT dose was 70 cobalt gray equivalents (CGE) for the fractionated cohort and 44.4 CGE for the quad shot cohort. For the fractionated cohort, the 1-year LC was 71.8% (95% CI, 62.8%-79.0%) and the 1-year OS was 66.6% (95% CI, 58.1%-73.8%). For the quad shot cohort, the 1-year LC was 61.6% (95% CI, 46.4%-73.6%) and the 1-year OS was 28.5% (95% CI, 19.4%-38.3%). Higher Karnofsky performance status scores (hazard ratio [HR], 0.50; 95% CI, 0.25-0.99; P = .046) and receipt of salvage surgery prior to PT-ReRT (HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.39-0.84; P = .005) were associated with improved OS, whereas receipt of quad shot (HR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.36-2.86; P < .001) was associated with worse OS. There were a total of 73 grade 3 and 6 grade 4 early toxic effects. There were 79 potential grade 3, 4 grade 4, and 5 grade 5 late toxic effects. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study suggest that, compared with previous reports with photon-based reirradiation, patients are living longer with aggressive PT-ReRT; however, surviving patients remain at risk of early and late complications.
Subject(s)
Head and Neck Neoplasms , Proton Therapy , Re-Irradiation , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Female , Squamous Cell Carcinoma of Head and Neck , Re-Irradiation/adverse effects , Re-Irradiation/methods , Cohort Studies , Proton Therapy/adverse effects , Retrospective Studies , Neoplasm Recurrence, LocalABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: We investigate the impact of gender, race, and socioeconomic status on the diagnosis and management of bladder cancer in the United States. METHODS: We utilized the National Cancer Database to stratify cases of urothelial cell carcinoma of the bladder as early (Tis, Ta, T1), muscle invasive (T2-T3, N0), locally advanced (T4, N1-3), and metastatic. Multivariate binomial and multinomial logistic regression analyses identified demographic characteristics associated with stage at diagnosis and receipt of cancer-directed therapies. Odds ratios (OR) are reported with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: After exclusions, we identified 331,714 early, 72,154 muscle invasive, 15,579 locally advanced, and 15,161 metastatic cases from 2004-2016. Relative to diagnosis at early stage, the strongest independent predictors of diagnosis at muscle invasive, locally advanced, and metastatic disease included Black race (OR = 1.19 [1.15-1.23], OR = 1.49 [1.40-1.59], OR = 1.66 [1.56-1.76], respectively), female gender (OR = 1.21 [1.18-1.21], OR = 1.16 [1.12-1.20], and OR = 1.34 [1.29-1.38], respectively), and uninsured status (OR = 1.22 [1.15-1.29], OR = 2.09 [1.94-2.25], OR = 2.57 [2.39-2.75], respectively). Additional demographic factors associated with delayed diagnosis included older age, treatment at an academic center, Medicaid insurance and patients from lower income/less educated/more rural areas (all p < 0.01). Treatment at a non-academic center, older age, women, Hispanic and Black patients, lower income and rural areas were all less likely to receive cancer-directed therapies in early stage disease (all p < 0.01). Women, older patients, and Black patients remained less likely to receive treatment in muscle invasive, locally advanced, and metastatic disease (all p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Black race was the strongest independent predictor of delayed diagnosis and substandard treatment of bladder cancer.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Transitional Cell , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms , Humans , Female , United States/epidemiology , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/diagnosis , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/therapy , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/pathology , Medicaid , Hispanic or Latino , Black People , Healthcare DisparitiesABSTRACT
Importance: Patients with oropharyngeal carcinoma (OPC) treated with radiotherapy often experience substantial toxic effects, even with modern techniques such as intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) has a potential advantage over IMRT due to reduced dose to the surrounding organs at risk; however, data are scarce given the limited availability and use of IMPT. Objective: To compare toxic effects and oncologic outcomes among patients with newly diagnosed nonmetastatic OPC treated with IMPT vs IMRT with or without chemotherapy. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study included patients aged 18 years or older with newly diagnosed nonmetastatic OPC who received curative-intent radiotherapy with IMPT or IMRT at a single-institution tertiary academic cancer center from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2021, with follow-up through December 31, 2021. Exposures: IMPT or IMRT with or without chemotherapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were the incidence of acute and chronic (present after ≥6 months) treatment-related adverse events (AEs) and oncologic outcomes, including locoregional recurrence (LRR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Fisher exact tests and χ2 tests were used to evaluate associations between toxic effects and treatment modality (IMPT vs IMRT), and the Kaplan-Meier method was used to compare LRR, PFS, and OS between the 2 groups. Results: The study included 292 patients with OPC (272 [93%] with human papillomavirus [HPV]-p16-positive tumors); 254 (87%) were men, 38 (13%) were women, and the median age was 64 years (IQR, 58-71 years). Fifty-eight patients (20%) were treated with IMPT, and 234 (80%) were treated with IMRT. Median follow-up was 26 months (IQR, 17-36 months). Most patients (283 [97%]) received a dose to the primary tumor of 70 Gy. Fifty-seven of the patients treated with IMPT (98%) and 215 of those treated with IMRT (92%) had HPV-p16-positive disease. There were no significant differences in 3-year OS (97% IMPT vs 91% IMRT; P = .18), PFS (82% IMPT vs 85% IMRT; P = .62), or LRR (5% IMPT vs 4% IMRT; P = .59). The incidence of acute toxic effects was significantly higher for IMRT compared with IMPT for oral pain of grade 2 or greater (42 [72%] IMPT vs 217 [93%] IMRT; P < .001), xerostomia of grade 2 or greater (12 [21%] IMPT vs 68 [29%] IMRT; P < .001), dysgeusia of grade 2 or greater (16 [28%] IMPT vs 134 [57%] IMRT; P < .001), grade 3 dysphagia (4 [7%] IMPT vs 29 [12%] IMRT; P < .001), mucositis of grade 3 or greater (10 [53%] IMPT vs 13 [70%] IMRT; P = .003), nausea of grade 2 or greater (0 [0%] IMPT vs 18 [8%] IMRT; P = .04), and weight loss of grade 2 or greater (22 [37%] IMPT vs 138 [59%] IMRT; P < .001). There were no significant differences in chronic toxic effects of grade 3 or greater, although there was a significant difference for chronic xerostomia of grade 2 or greater (6 IMPT [11%] vs 22 IMRT [10%]; P < .001). Four patients receiving IMRT (2%) vs 0 receiving IMPT had a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube for longer than 6 months. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, curative-intent radiotherapy with IMPT for nonmetastatic OPC was associated with a significantly reduced acute toxicity burden compared with IMRT, with few chronic toxic effects and favorable oncologic outcomes, including locoregional recurrence of only 5% at 2 years. Prospective randomized clinical trials comparing these 2 technologies and of patient-reported outcomes are warranted.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma , Oropharyngeal Neoplasms , Papillomavirus Infections , Proton Therapy , Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated , Xerostomia , Male , Humans , Female , Middle Aged , Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated/adverse effects , Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated/methods , Proton Therapy/adverse effects , Proton Therapy/methods , Radiotherapy Dosage , Retrospective Studies , Prospective Studies , Papillomavirus Infections/complications , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/etiology , Oropharyngeal Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Oropharyngeal Neoplasms/pathology , Xerostomia/etiologyABSTRACT
Purposes: To evaluate the plan quality and robustness of both dose and dose rate of proton pencil beam scanning (PBS) transmission FLASH delivery in lung cancer treatment. Methods and materials: An in-house FLASH planning platform was used to optimize 10 lung cancer patients previously consecutively treated with proton stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) to receive 3 and 5 transmission beams (Trx-3fds and Trx-5fds, respectively) to 34 Gy in a single fraction. Perturbation scenarios (n=12) for setup and range uncertainties (5 mm and 3.5%) were introduced, and dose-volume histogram and dose-rate-volume histogram bands were generated. Conventional proton SBRT clinical plans were used as a reference. RTOG 0915 dose metrics and 40 Gy/s dose rate coverage (V40Gy/s) were used to assess the dose and dose rate robustness. Results: Trx-5fds yields a comparable iCTV D2% of 105.3%, whereas Trx-3fds resulted in inferior D2% of 111.9% to the clinical SBRT plans with D2% of 105.6% (p<0.05). Both Trx-5fds and Trx-3fds plans had slightly worse dose metrics to organs at risk than SBRT plans. Trx-5fds achieved superior dosimetry robustness for iCTV, esophagus, and spinal cord doses than both Trx-3fds and conventional SBRT plans. There was no significant difference in dose rate robustness for V40Gy/s coverage between Trx-3fds and Trx-5fds. Dose rate distribution has similar distributions to the dose when perturbation exists. Conclusion: Transmission plans yield overall modestly inferior plan quality compared to the conventional proton SBRT plans but provide improved robustness and the potential for a toxicity-sparing FLASH effect. By using more beams (5- versus 3-field), both dose and dose rate robustness for transmission plans can be achieved.
ABSTRACT
Purpose: Proton therapy is an emerging therapy for several malignancies owing to its favorable therapeutic ratio. There are very limited data on the use of proton therapy in the management of thyroid carcinoma. Our objective was to review the safety, feasibility, and outcomes of proton therapy for patients with thyroid cancer treated to the head and neck. Methods: From our institution's proton database from 2012 to 2021, we identified 22 patients with thyroid cancer treated with proton beam therapy. We evaluated outcomes and toxicities. Results: Median follow-up was 26 months. Of the 22 patients, 50% were female. The mean age was 65 years. Three patients had anaplastic cancer; 13, papillary carcinoma; 2, follicular carcinoma; and 2, poorly differentiated carcinoma. Forty-six percent had T4 disease. Primary targets were the central neck compartment, level VI, and upper mediastinum. Radiation dose was 60 GyRBE adjuvantly, and 70 GyRBE for gross disease (range, 6000-7600 GyRBE). Eight patients underwent upfront adjuvant radiation, and 3 received definitive radiation for unresectable disease upfront. Eleven patients received either salvage or palliative radiation. Fifty-nine percent of patients had extrathyroidal extension, and 64% of patients had gross disease in the neck before treatment. Fifty percent of patients had metastatic disease before treatment. Sixteen patients received concurrent chemotherapy, 63% of these patients received doxorubicin. For all patients, 1-year local regional recurrence (LRR) was 0%, and overall survival (OS) was 90%. Acute grade 3+ toxicities occurred in 27% of patients, the most frequent being dermatitis (27%). Three patients required a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube after radiation therapy (RT), 2 owing to progression. There were no grade 4+ toxicities. Conclusions: Proton therapy for thyroid cancer appears feasible and effective with minimal toxicities. Prospective studies comparing proton therapy with intensity-modulated RT, to evaluate the clinical efficacy of using proton therapy to reduce toxicities in patients undergoing radiation for thyroid cancer, are warranted.
ABSTRACT
Purpose: Reports of proton beam therapy (PBT) utilization for cutaneous melanoma of the head and neck (HN) region is virtually non-existent. This study reports on the efficacy and acute toxicities of PBT for primary HN cutaneous melanoma. Materials and Methods: We queried the prospectively collected, multi-institutional Proton Collaborative Group registry for all consecutive patients with HN cutaneous melanoma receiving PBT from May 2010 to December 2019. Kaplan-Meier methods were used to estimate overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS), and local regional recurrence free survival (LRFS). Toxicity was reported per CTCAE version 4.0. Results: A total of 8 patients were identified with a median age of 69 (range, 37-88). All patients (100%) underwent surgery followed with postoperative PBT. There were 3 patients (37.5%) with T3 or T4 disease and 4 (50%) with N2 or N3 disease. The median radiation dose was 46 GyRBE (range, 27-70) and median dose per fraction was 2.4 GyRBE (range, 2.0-6.0) with the most common dose fractionation being 44 or 48 GyRBE in 20 fractions (n = 4). At a median follow-up of 40.1 months (range, 1.6-62.4) the 1 and 3 year OS rates were 85.7% and 35.7%, respectively. The median PFS was 25.40 months (95% CI, 2.53-58.70) while PFS at 1 year and 3 years was 85.7% and 35.7%, respectively. LRFS was 100% at 1 year and 85.7% at 3 years. Five of the 8 patients developed distant metastases, of which 3 received immunotherapy. Acute G2+ and G3+ toxicities occurred in 5 of 8 patients and 2 of 8 patients, respectively. G3 toxicities included radiation dermatitis (n = 1) and immunotherapy-related rash (n = 1). No G4+ toxicities were reported. Conclusion: Single modality PBT for HN melanomas in the definitive setting provides effective and durable local control rates with tolerable acute toxicity. Distant failure remains the primary pattern of failure.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The transmission proton FLASH technique delivers high doses to the normal tissue distal to the target, which is less conformal compared to the Bragg peak technique. To investigate FLASH radiotherapy (RT) planning using single-energy Bragg peak beams with a similar beam arrangement as clinical intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) in a liver stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and to characterize the plan quality, dose sparing of organs-at-risk (OARs), and FLASH dose rate percentage. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An in-house platform was developed to enable inverse IMPT-FLASH planning using single-energy Bragg peaks. A universal range shifter and range compensators were utilized to effectively align the Bragg peak to the distal edge of the target. Two different minimum MU settings of 400 and 800 MU/spot (Bragg-400 MU and Bragg-800 MU) plans were investigated on 10 consecutive hepatocellular carcinoma patients previously treated by IMPT-SBRT to evaluate the FLASH dose and dose rate coverage for OARs. The IMPT-FLASH using single-energy Bragg peaks delivered 50 Gy in five fractions with similar or identical beam arrangement to the clinical IMPT-SBRT plans. NRG GI003 dose constraint metrics were used. Three dose rate calculation methods, including average dose rate (ADR), dose threshold dose rate (DTDR), and dose-ADR (DADR), were all studied. RESULTS: The novel spot map optimization can fulfill the inverse planning using single-energy Bragg peaks. All the Bragg peak FLASH plans achieved similar results for the liver-gross tumor volume (GTV) Dmean and heart D 0.5 c m 3 ${D_{0.5\,{\rm{c}}{{\rm{m}}^3}}}$ , compared to SBRT-IMPT. The Bragg-800 MU plans resulted in 18.3% higher clinical target volume (CTV) D 2 c m 3 ${D_{2\,{\rm{c}}{{\rm{m}}^{\rm{3}}}}}$ compared with SBRT (p < 0.05), and no significant difference was found between Bragg-400 MU and SBRT plans. For the CTV Dmax , SBRT plans resulted in 10.3% (p < 0.01) less than Bragg-400 MU plans and 16.6% (p < 0.01) less than Bragg-800 MU plans. The Bragg-800 MU plans generally achieved higher ADR, DADR, and DTDR dose rates than Bragg-400 MU plans, and DADR mostly led to the highest V40 Gy/s compared to other dose rate calculation methods, whereas ADR led to the lowest. The lower dose rate portions in certain OARs are related to the lower dose deposited due to the farther distances from targets, especially in the penumbra of the beams. CONCLUSION: Single-energy Bragg peak IMPT-FLASH plans eliminate the exit dose in normal tissues, maintaining comparable dose metrics to the conventional IMPT-SBRT plans, while achieving a sufficient FLASH dose rate for liver cancers. This study demonstrates the feasibility of and sufficiently high dose rate when applying the Bragg peak FLASH treatment for a liver cancer hypofractionated FLASH therapy. The advancement of this novel method has the potential to optimize treatment for liver cancer patients.