RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Delay in time to treatment initiation (TTI) is associated with worsened survival outcomes in laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma (LSCC). It is unclear whether this is due to tumor growth or an increased risk of metastatic disease. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study at one academic center included patients with LSCC who underwent radiotherapy/chemoradiotherapy between 2005 and 2017. We examined the association between tumor growth rate (TGR) and survival outcomes. RESULTS: Among 105 patients (mean age, 63.8 ± 11.1 years; 72% male), the threshold between "slow-growing" and "fast-growing" tumors was >0.036 mL/day (survival) and >0.082 mL/day (recurrence). Faster growth was associated with worse overall survival (OS) (hazard ratio, 1.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94-4.13) and increased recurrence (odds ratio, 9.10; 95% CI, 2.40-34.4). CONCLUSIONS: TGR >0.036 mL/day during TTI was associated with decreased OS, and >0.082 mL/day was associated with increased recurrence. Tumor measurement in patients experiencing delay may identify those who could benefit from escalated therapy.
RESUMEN
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.
RESUMEN
Introduction: Invisible ink tattoos (IITs) avoid cosmetic permanence of visible ink tattoos (VITs) while serving as more reliable landmarks for radiation setup than tattooless setups. This trial evaluated patient-reported preference and feasibility of IIT implementation. Methods and materials: In an IRB-approved, single institution, prospective trial, patients receiving proton therapy underwent IIT-based treatment setup. A survey tool assessed patient preference on tattoos using a Likert scale. Matched patients treated using our institutional standard tattooless setup were identified; treatment times and image guidance requirements were evaluated between tattooless and IIT-based alignment approaches. Distribution differences were estimated using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests or Chi-square tests. Results: Of 94 eligible patients enrolled, median age was 58 years, and 58.5% were female. Most common treatment sites were breast (18.1%), lung (17.0%) and pelvic (14.9%). Patients preferred to receive IITs versus VITs (79.8% pre-treatment and 75.5% post-treatment, respectively). Patients were willing to travel farther from home to avoid VITs versus IITs (p<0.01). Females were willing to travel (45.5% vs. 23.1%; p=0.04) and pay additional money to avoid VITs (34.5% vs. 5.1%; p<0.01). Per-fraction average +treatment time and time from on table/in room to first beam were shorter with IIT-based vs. tattooless setup (12.3min vs. 14.1min; p=0.04 and 24.1min vs. 26.2min; p=0.02, respectively). Discussion: In the largest prospective trial on IIT-based radiotherapy setup to date, we found that patients prefer IITs to VITs. Additionally, IIT-based alignment is an effective and efficient strategy in comparison with tattooless setup. Standard incorporation of IITs for patient setup should be strongly considered.
RESUMEN
PurposeImmunotherapy is now a first-line treatment for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and melanomaQuery. It is important to understand the relationship between immunotherapy and radiation to the brain. The aim of this study was to assess the role of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) or WBRT in addition to immunotherapy in patients with melanoma or NSCLC metastatic to the brain.Methods/patientsUsing the National Cancer Database, 2951 patients with NSCLC and 936 patients with melanoma treated with immunotherapy were identified. Patients were classified as having received immunotherapy alone, immunotherapy with SRS, or immunotherapy with whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT). KaplanMeier, multivariate Cox regression analyses, and propensity matching were performed to evaluate the impact of adding SRS to immunotherapy on overall survival (OS). Immortal survival bias was accounted for by only including patients who received radiation before immunotherapy and time zero was defined as the start of immunotherapy.Results205(6.9%) and 75(8.0%) patients received immunotherapy with no radiation, 822(27.9%) and 326(34.8%) received SRS and immunotherapy, and 1924(65.2%) and 535(57.2%) received WBRT and immunotherapy for NSCLC and melanoma, respectively. Adding SRS to immunotherapy was associated with improved OS in multivariate analyses (NSCLC HR = 0.81, 95% CI 0.660.99, p = 0.044; melanoma HR = 0.63, 95% CI 0.450.90, p = 0.011). The addition of WBRT to immunotherapy did not improve OS in patients with melanoma nor NSCLC.ConclusionsThis analysis suggests that treatment with SRS and immunotherapy is associated with improved OS compared to immunotherapy alone for patients with melanoma or NSCLC metastatic to the brain.