The Clinical Utility of a 7-Gene Biosignature on Radiation Therapy Decision Making in Patients with Ductal Carcinoma In Situ Following Breast-Conserving Surgery: An Updated Analysis of the DCISionRT® PREDICT Study.

BACKGROUND: Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) followed by adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) is a standard treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). A low-risk patient subset that does not benefit from RT has not yet been clearly identified. The DCISionRT test provides a clinically validated decision score (DS), which is prognostic of 10-year in-breast recurrence rates (invasive and non-invasive) and is also predictive of RT benefit. This analysis presents final outcomes from the PREDICT prospective registry trial aiming to determine how often the DCISionRT test changes radiation treatment recommendations. METHODS: Overall, 2496 patients were enrolled from February 2018 to January 2022 at 63 academic and community practice sites and received DCISionRT as part of their care plan. Treating physicians reported their treatment recommendations pre- and post-test as well as the patient's preference. The primary endpoint was to identify the percentage of patients where testing led to a change in RT recommendation. The impact of the test on RT treatment recommendation was physician specialty, treatment settings, individual clinical/pathological features and RTOG 9804 like criteria. Multivariate logisitc regression analysis was used to estimate the odds ratio (ORs) for factors associated with the post-test RT recommendations. RESULTS: RT recommendation changed 38% of women, resulting in a 20% decrease in the overall recommendation of RT (p < 0.001). Of those women initially recommended no RT (n = 583), 31% were recommended RT post-test. The recommendation for RT post-test increased with increasing DS, from 29% to 66% to 91% for DS <2, DS 2-4, and DS >4, respectively. On multivariable analysis, DS had the strongest influence on final RT recommendation (odds ratio 22.2, 95% confidence interval 16.3-30.7), which was eightfold greater than clinicopathologic features. Furthermore, there was an overall change in the recommendation to receive RT in 42% of those patients meeting RTOG 9804-like low-risk criteria. CONCLUSIONS: The test results provided information that changes treatment recommendations both for and against RT use in large population of women with DCIS treated in a variety of clinical settings. Overall, clinicians changed their recommendations to include or omit RT for 38% of women based on the test results. Based on published clinical validations and the results from current study, DCISionRT may aid in preventing the over- and undertreatment of clinicopathological 'low-risk' and 'high-risk' DCIS patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03448926 ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03448926 ).

The Clinical Utility of DCISionRT® on Radiation Therapy Decision Making in Patients with Ductal Carcinoma In Situ Following Breast-Conserving Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The role of radiation therapy (RT) following breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) remains controversial. Trials have not identified a low-risk cohort, based on clinicopathologic features, who do not benefit from RT. A biosignature (DCISionRT®) that evaluates recurrence risk has been developed and validated. We evaluated the impact of DCISionRT on clinicians' recommendations for adjuvant RT. METHODS: The PREDICT study is a prospective, multi-institutional, observational registry in which patients underwent DCISionRT testing. The primary endpoint was to identify the percentage of patients where testing led to a change in RT recommendations. RESULTS: Overall, 539 women were included in this study. Pre DCISionRT testing, RT was recommended to 69% of patients; however, post-testing, a change in the RT recommendation was made for 42% of patients compared with the pre-testing recommendation; the percentage of women who were recommended RT decreased by 20%. For women initially recommended not to receive an RT pre-test, 35% had their recommendation changed to add RT following testing, while post-test, 46% of patients had their recommendation changed to omit RT after an initial recommendation for RT. When considered in conjunction with other clinicopathologic factors, the elevated DCISionRT score risk group (DS > 3) had the strongest association with an RT recommendation (odds ratio 43.4) compared with age, grade, size, margin status, and other factors. CONCLUSIONS: DCISionRT provided information that significantly changed the recommendations to add or omit RT. Compared with traditional clinicopathologic features used to determine recommendations for or against RT, the factor most strongly associated with RT recommendations was the DCISionRT result, with other factors of importance being patient preference, tumor size, and grade.

Effects of tillage practices on soil microbiome and agricultural parameters.

No-tillage (NT) is a common soil-conservation management practice with known agricultural advantages and drawbacks. However, its short- and long-term effects on the soil microbiome have not been well established. Here, we compared conventional (CT), minimal (MT) and NT practices in two agricultural fields in the north of Israel over a period of 3 years. Edaphic properties, plant-associated pests, weed species abundance and soil microbial community structure were assessed to examine the effects of tillage. Tillage significantly altered physical and chemical soil properties, and a significant increase in hydrolytic and redox microbial activities was observed in NT soils from both sites. Consistent with this, the microbial community structure of NT samples diverged significantly over time from those of CT samples. Repetitive tillage and even a single tillage event caused significant changes in the relative abundance of microorganisms at taxonomic levels ranging from phylum to OTU. However, no significant difference between treatments was found in microbial community alpha-diversity or crop yield. Conversely, higher levels of weed diversity and some pests number were found in NT samples. Overall, we demonstrate that tillage plays a major role in shaping microbial community structure, and in influencing additional environmental, ecological and agricultural soil parameters.

Lessons Learned From Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico: Practical Measures to Mitigate the Impact of a Catastrophic Natural Disaster on Radiation Oncology Patients.

PURPOSE: Although the wind, rain, and flooding of Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico abated shortly after its landfall on September 20, 2017, the disruption of the electrical, communications, transportation, and medical infrastructure of the island was unprecedented in scope and caused lasting harm for many months afterward. A compilation of recommendations from radiation oncologists who were in Puerto Rico during the disaster, and from a panel of American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) cancer experts was created. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Radiation oncologists throughout Puerto Rico collaborated and improvised to continue treating patients in the immediate aftermath of the storm and as routine clinical operations were restored gradually. Empirical lessons from the experience of radiation therapy administration in this profoundly altered context of limited resources, impaired communication, and inadequate transportation were organized into a recommended template, applicable to any radiation oncology practice. ASTRO disease-site experts provided evidence-guidelines for mitigating the impact of a 2- to 3-week interruption in radiation therapy. RESULTS: Practical measures to mitigate the medical impact of a disaster are summarized within the framework of "Prepare, Communicate, Operate, Compensate." Specific measures include the development of an emergency operations plan tailored to specific circumstances, prospective coordination with other radiation oncology clinics before a disaster, ongoing communications with emergency management organizations, and routine practice of alternate methods to disseminate information among providers and patients. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations serve as a starting point to assist any radiation oncology practice in becoming more resiliently prepared for a local or regional disruption from any cause. Disease-site experts provide evidence-based guidelines on how to mitigate the impact of a 2- to 3-week interruption in radiation therapy for lung, head and neck, uterine cervix, breast, and prostate cancers through altered fractionation or dose escalation.