Survey of current practices from an international task force for gynecological stereotactic ablative radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy (SABR) is an effective treatment that improves local control for many tumours. However, the role of SABR in gynecological cancers (GYN) has not been well-established. We hypothesize that there exists considerable variation in GYN-SABR practice and technique. The goal of this study is to describe clinical and technical factors in utilization of GYN-SABR among 11 experienced radiation oncologists. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 63 question survey on GYN-SABR was sent to 11 radiation oncologists (5 countries) who have published original research, conducted trials or have an established program at their institutions. Responses were combined and analyzed at a central institution. RESULTS: Most respondents indicated that salvage therapy (non-irradiated or re-irradiated field) for nodal (81%) and primary recurrent disease (91%) could be considered standard options for SABR in the setting of inability to administer brachytherapy. All other indications should be considered on clinical trials. Most would not offer SABR as a boost in primary treatment off-trial without absolute contraindications to brachytherapy. Multi-modality imaging is often (91%) used for planning including PET, CT contrast and MRI. There is a wide variation for OAR tolerances however small bowel is considered the dose-limiting structure for most experts (91%). Fractionation schedules range from 3 to 6 fractions for nodal/primary definitive and boost SABR. CONCLUSIONS: Although SABR has become increasingly standard in other oncology disease sites, there remains a wide variation in both clinical and technical factors when treating GYN cancers. Nodal and recurrent disease is considered a potential indication for SABR whereas other indications should be offered on clinical trials. This study summarizes SABR practices among GYN radiation oncologists while further studies are needed to establish consensus guidelines for GYN-SABR treatment.

Stereotactic radiotherapy for malignancies involving the trigeminal and facial nerves.

Involvement of a cranial nerve caries a poor prognosis for many malignancies. Recurrent or residual disease in the trigeminal or facial nerve after primary therapy poses a challenge due to the location of the nerve in the skull base, the proximity to the brain, brainstem, cavernous sinus, and optic apparatus and the resulting complex geometry. Surgical resection caries a high risk of morbidity and is often not an option for these patients. Stereotactic radiosurgery and radiotherapy are potential treatment options for patients with cancer involving the trigeminal or facial nerve. These techniques can deliver high doses of radiation to complex volumes while sparing adjacent critical structures. In the current study, seven cases of cancer involving the trigeminal or facial nerve are presented. These patients had unresectable recurrent or residual disease after definitive local therapy. Each patient was treated with stereotactic radiation therapy using a linear accelerator based system. A multidisciplinary approach including neuroradiology and surgical oncology was used to delineate target volumes. Treatment was well tolerated with no acute grade 3 or higher toxicity. One patient who was reirradiated experienced cerebral radionecrosis with mild symptoms. Four of the seven patients treated had no evidence of disease after a median follow up of 12 months (range 2-24 months). A dosimetric analysis was performed to compare intensity modulated fractionated stereotactic radiation therapy (IM-FSRT) to a 3D conformal technique. The dose to 90% (D90) of the brainstem was lower with the IM-FSRT plan by a mean of 13.5 Gy. The D95 to the ipsilateral optic nerve was also reduced with IM-FSRT by 12.2 Gy and the D95 for the optic chiasm was lower with FSRT by 16.3 Gy. Treatment of malignancies involving a cranial nerve requires a multidisciplinary approach. Use of an IM-FSRT technique with a micro-multileaf collimator resulted in a lower dose to the brainstem, optic nerves and chiasm for each case examined.