A Rare Case of Dual Metachronous Primary Malignancies, Chronic Myeloid Leukemia, and Tongue Carcinoma in a Patient With Long-Standing Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: A Case Report and Review of Literature.

Patients with long-standing autoimmune diseases like systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) are at a higher risk of developing hematological malignancies. However, chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) has rarely been reported in patients with SLE. Advancements in medical diagnostics and treatment have led to the life expectancy of SLE and CML patients moving closer to that of the general population, and it is not uncommon to encounter more than one malignancy in a cancer survivor. Although squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the skin has been reported in CML patients, mucosal SCC of the head and neck has rarely only been reported in CML survivors. The objective of this case report is to share our experience in treating a patient with dual metachronous primary malignancies, CML, and tongue carcinoma, along with long-standing SLE, managed by a multidisciplinary team.

Symptomatic Brain Radiation Necrosis in an Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase (ALK)-Positive Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Patient After Fractionated Stereotactic Radiotherapy While on Alectinib.

Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has a higher incidence of brain metastasis. Despite having a favorable prognosis and relatively long survival with second-generation ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI), patients can have substantial morbidity, negatively affecting functional progression-free and symptom-free survival. Studies have shown that ALK-rearranged NSCLC is a risk factor for developing radiation necrosis (RN). Recently, second-generation TKI, especially lorlatinib, alectinib, and brigatinib, have demonstrated good central nervous system (CNS) penetration and overall response rates in patients with brain metastasis. However, to improve overall outcomes in symptomatic or limited brain metastases, stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is increasingly preferred over whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) prior to systemic therapy to avoid significant cognitive deterioration. To improve the therapeutic ratio, fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (FSRT) has been explored for brain metastasis. Herein, we report on one ALK-rearranged NSCLC patient who developed RN despite FSRT, one year after the completion of radiotherapy while on alectinib.

Re-irradiation after stereotactic body radiotherapy for spine metastases from hepatocellular carcinoma: a case report.

Modern radiotherapy machines with refinements in planning software and image-guidance apparatuses have made stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) more widely available as an effective tool in the management of spine metastases. In conventional palliative radiotherapy, the aim has traditionally been pain relief and short-term local control. In contrast, SBRT aims to deliver an ablative dose to enhance local control, with a smaller number of fractions while sparing the organs at risk (OAR), especially the spinal cord. Recently, trials have asserted the role of spine SBRT as an effective modality for durable local control, in addition to achieving pain relief. The quality of evidence for spine SBRT data is maturing, while prospective published trials on re-irradiation SBRT in spine remain sparse. The purpose of the present case report is to share the challenges faced while salvaging a dorsal spine metastasis and ablating a new right adrenal metastatic lesion in proximity of the transplanted liver.

Hybrid volumetric modulated arc therapy for chest wall irradiation: For a good plan, get the right mixture.

PURPOSE: To find the optimal dose weighting for hybrid volumetric modulated arc therapy (H-VMAT), a combination of conventional 3DCRT and VMAT plans for left sided chest wall and supraclavicular radiation therapy. METHODS & MATERIALS: 20 left-sided breast cancer patients who received adjuvant radiotherapy were considered for this study. To find the optimal weighting, 5 H-VMAT plans were generated for each study case by combining different dose proportions of 3DCRT and VMAT plans including: 90% 3DCRT/10% VMAT, 80% 3DCRT/20% VMAT, 70% 3DCRT/30% VMAT, 60% 3DCRT/40% VMAT, 50% 3DCRT/50% VMAT. Further field-in-field, optimal H-VMAT and VMAT alone plans were compared. RESULTS: All H-VMAT plans achieved the expected target coverage. A higher conformity index was achieved for 50% 3DCRT/50% VMAT plan, while better homogeneity index was achieved for 80% 3DCRT/20% VMAT plan. Mean and low doses were less in 90% 3DCRT/10% VMAT plan. Compared with other proportions, 80% 3DCRT/20% VMAT and 70% 3DCRT/30% VMAT weighted H-VMAT plans achieved balanced results for PTVs and OARs. CONCLUSION: The optimal dose mixture for H-VMAT technique is 70% to 80% for 3DCRT and 20% to 30% for VMAT. The optimal H-VMAT achieved balanced results for the PTVs and OARs compared with field-in-field and VMAT alone plans.

Sparing dysphagia/aspiration related structures using novel hybrid volumetric modulated arc therapy.

PURPOSE: Studies using split field IMRT to spare dysphagia/aspiration related structures (DARS) have raised concern regarding dose uncertainty at matchline. This study explores the utility of hybrid VMAT in sparing the DARS and assesses matchline dose uncertainty in postoperative oral cavity cancer patients and compares it with VMAT. METHODS & MATERIALS: Ten postoperative oral cavity cancer patients were planned with h-VMAT and VMAT using the same planning CT dataset. PTV and DARS were contoured using standard delineation guidelines. In h-VMAT 80% of the neck dose was planned using AP/PA technique and then VMAT optimization was done for the total PTV by keeping the corresponding AP/PA plan as the base dose. Planning goal for PTV was V95%≥95% and for DARS, adequate sparing. Plans and dose volume histograms were analyzed using dosimetric indices. Absolute point and portal dose measurements were done for h-VMAT plans to verify dose at the matchline. RESULTS: Coverage in both the techniques was comparable. Significant differences were observed in mean doses to DARS (Larynx: 24.36±2.51 versus 16.88±2.41Gy; p<0.0006, Pharyngeal constrictors: 25.16±2.41 versus 21.2±2.1Gy; p<0.005, Esophageal inlet: 18.71±2 versus 12.06±0.79Gy; p<0.0002) favoring h-VMAT. Total MU in both the techniques was comparable. Average percentage variations in point dose measurements in h-VMAT done at +3.5 and -3.5 positions were (1.47±1.48 and 2.28±1.35%) respectively. Average gamma agreement for portal dose measured was 97.07%. CONCLUSION: h-VMAT achieves better sparing of DARS with no matchline dose uncertainty. Since these patients have swallowing dysfunction post-operatively, attempts should be made to spare these critical structures as much as possible.