Definitive Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy in Early-Stage Solitary Hepatocellular Carcinoma: An Australian Multi-Institutional Review of Outcomes.

AIMS: Standard curative options for early-stage, solitary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are often unsuitable due to liver dysfunction, comorbidities and/or tumour location. Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has shown high rates of local control in HCC; however, limited data exist in the treatment-naïve, curative-intent setting. We report the outcomes of patients with solitary early-stage HCC treated with SBRT as first-line curative-intent therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multi-institutional retrospective study of treatment-naïve patients with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage 0/A, solitary ≤5 cm HCC, Child-Pugh score (CPS) A liver function who underwent SBRT between 2010 and 2019 as definitive therapy. The primary end point was freedom from local progression. Secondary end points were progression-free survival, overall survival, rate of treatment-related clinical toxicities and change in CPS >1. RESULTS: In total, 68 patients were evaluated, with a median follow-up of 20 months (range 3-58). The median age was 68 years (range 50-86); 54 (79%) were men, 62 (91%) had cirrhosis and 50 (74%) were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 0. The median HCC diameter was 2.5 cm (range 1.3-5) and the median prescription biologically effective dose with a tumour a/b ratio of 10 Gy (BED10) was 93 Gy (interquartile range 72-100 Gy). Two-year freedom from local progression, progression-free survival and overall survival were 94.3% (95% confidence interval 86.6-100%), 59.5% (95% confidence interval 46.3-76.4%) and 88% (95% confidence interval 79.2-97.6%), respectively. Nine patients (13.2%) experienced grade ≥2 treatment-related clinical toxicities. A rise >1 in CPS was observed in six cirrhotic patients (9.6%). CONCLUSION: SBRT is an effective and well-tolerated option to consider in patients with solitary, early-stage HCC. Prospective, randomised comparative studies are warranted to further refine its role as a first-line curative-intent therapy.

Postgraduate Global Health Competency Profile for Radiation Oncology.

AIMS: To identify core competencies for postgraduate radiation oncology trainees in global health and cancer that may inform revisions across radiation oncology residency specialty training curricula. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A review of the literature was conducted to identify all potential global health competency items. An international two-phase Delphi process was conducted with experts in oncology. In phase 1, all experts scored, on a nine-point Likert scale, the degree to which they agreed an item should be included in the competency profile. Items with a mean score ≥7 were included, those scoring 4-6 were reviewed in phase 2, and items scored ≤3 were excluded. In phase 2, items were discussed and subsequently ranked for inclusion or exclusion in the competency profile. Items with >75% voting for inclusion were included in the final competency profile. RESULTS: In total, 142 potential global health competency items were identified. Sixty-one items were removed as redundant or irrelevant, leaving 81 items for the Delphi process. Eighteen specialists were invited to participate, with 10 (56%) agreeing to participate in phase 1 of the Delphi process. Participants represented 10 centres in seven countries. Of the 81 items ranked in phase 1, 72 items (89%) had a mean score ≥7 and were automatically included in the final competency profile. The remaining nine items received a score of 4-6 and were discussed in phase 2 of the Delphi process, of which three received <75% agreement for inclusion and were excluded. The result was a final list of 78 enabling competency items. CONCLUSIONS: The radiation oncology global health competency profile represents an international consensus on the items that can inform radiation oncology training requirements.