Radiation therapy for vulvar cancer: consensus guidelines of the GINECOR working group of the Spanish Society of Radiation Oncology. Part 1: clinical recommendations

Purpose The present consensus statement was developed by the GINECOR working group on behalf of the Spanish Society of Radiation Oncology (SEOR). Given the lack of prospective data on the management of vulvar carcinoma, this document provides an up-to-date review of radiotherapy treatment in vulvar cancer and a series of consensus-based recommendations from a group of experts. Methods A two-round, online modified Delphi study was conducted to reach consensus treatment recommendations in three clinical settings: 1) adjuvant treatment, 2) locally-advanced vulvar cancer (LAVC), and 3) recurrent disease. After the first round, we comprehensively reviewed the available medical literature from peer-reviewed journals to assess and define the evidence-based treatment options. In the second round, participants were asked to indicate their level of agreement with the preliminary recommendations according to the GRADE (Grade of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) criteria, as follows: strongly agree; agree; neither agree nor disagree; disagree; strongly disagree. Results The main recommendations were as follows: 1) following surgical resection, adjuvant radiotherapy is recommended with the presence of adverse risk factors (primarily positive margins and lymph node involvement); 2) radiotherapy (with or without chemotherapy) should be considered in LAVC; and 3) in recurrent disease, radiotherapy should be individualised on a case-by-case basis. A high level of agreement over 80% was reached. Conclusions In the absence of robust clinical data, these final recommendations may help to select the optimal radiotherapy approach for this relatively rare cancer (AU)

Radiation therapy for vulvar cancer: consensus technical guidelines of the GINECOR working group of the Spanish Society of Radiation Oncology. Part 2: radiotherapy recommendations

Purpose The present consensus statement was developed by the GINECOR working group on behalf of the Spanish Society of Radiation Oncology (SEOR). This document provides an up-to-date review of the technical aspects in radiation treatment of vulvar cancer. Methods A two-round modified Delphi study was conducted to reach consensus on the appropriateness of technical aspects of external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy. Three clinical scenarios were proposed: adjuvant treatment of vulvar cancer, radiation treatment of locally advanced vulvar carcinoma and locoregional recurrences. After the first round, an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journal was performed to define evidence-based treatment options. In the second round, participants were asked to indicate their level of agreement with the preliminary recommendations according to the GRADE (Grade of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) criteria, as follows: strongly agree; agree; neither agree nor disagree; disagree and strongly disagree. Results The main recommendations on external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy, both in adjuvant setting and local advanced disease are summarized. Recommendations include treatment technique, treatment volume, and doses in target and organs at-risk. Taking into consideration the different clinical scenarios of recurrent disease, the radiation treatment should be individualized. Conclusions In the absence of robust clinical data, these recommendations may help to select the optimal radiotherapy approach for this relatively rare cancer (AU)

Radiation therapy for vulvar cancer: consensus guidelines of the GINECOR working group of the Spanish Society of Radiation Oncology. Part 1: clinical recommendations.

PURPOSE: The present consensus statement was developed by the GINECOR working group on behalf of the Spanish Society of Radiation Oncology (SEOR). Given the lack of prospective data on the management of vulvar carcinoma, this document provides an up-to-date review of radiotherapy treatment in vulvar cancer and a series of consensus-based recommendations from a group of experts. METHODS: A two-round, online modified Delphi study was conducted to reach consensus treatment recommendations in three clinical settings: 1) adjuvant treatment, 2) locally-advanced vulvar cancer (LAVC), and 3) recurrent disease. After the first round, we comprehensively reviewed the available medical literature from peer-reviewed journals to assess and define the evidence-based treatment options. In the second round, participants were asked to indicate their level of agreement with the preliminary recommendations according to the GRADE (Grade of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) criteria, as follows: strongly agree; agree; neither agree nor disagree; disagree; strongly disagree. RESULTS: The main recommendations were as follows: 1) following surgical resection, adjuvant radiotherapy is recommended with the presence of adverse risk factors (primarily positive margins and lymph node involvement); 2) radiotherapy (with or without chemotherapy) should be considered in LAVC; and 3) in recurrent disease, radiotherapy should be individualised on a case-by-case basis. A high level of agreement over 80% was reached. CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of robust clinical data, these final recommendations may help to select the optimal radiotherapy approach for this relatively rare cancer.

Radiation therapy for vulvar cancer: consensus technical guidelines of the GINECOR working group of the Spanish Society of Radiation Oncology. Part 2: radiotherapy recommendations.

PURPOSE: The present consensus statement was developed by the GINECOR working group on behalf of the Spanish Society of Radiation Oncology (SEOR). This document provides an up-to-date review of the technical aspects in radiation treatment of vulvar cancer. METHODS: A two-round modified Delphi study was conducted to reach consensus on the appropriateness of technical aspects of external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy. Three clinical scenarios were proposed: adjuvant treatment of vulvar cancer, radiation treatment of locally advanced vulvar carcinoma and locoregional recurrences. After the first round, an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journal was performed to define evidence-based treatment options. In the second round, participants were asked to indicate their level of agreement with the preliminary recommendations according to the GRADE (Grade of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) criteria, as follows: strongly agree; agree; neither agree nor disagree; disagree and strongly disagree. RESULTS: The main recommendations on external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy, both in adjuvant setting and local advanced disease are summarized. Recommendations include treatment technique, treatment volume, and doses in target and organs at-risk. Taking into consideration the different clinical scenarios of recurrent disease, the radiation treatment should be individualized. CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of robust clinical data, these recommendations may help to select the optimal radiotherapy approach for this relatively rare cancer.

Feasibility and potential advantages using VMAT in SRS metastasis treatments.

BACKGROUND: Utilization of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for brain metastases (BM) has become the technique of choice as opposed to whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT). The aim of this work is to evaluate the feasibility and potential benefits in terms of normal tissue (NT) and dose escalation of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in SRS metastasis treatment. A VMAT optimization procedure has therefore been developed for internal dose scaling which minimizes planner dependence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five patient-plans incorporating treatment with frame-based SRS with dynamic conformal arc technique (DA) were re-planned for VMAT. The lesions selected were between 4-6 cm3. The same geometry used in the DA plans was maintained for the VMAT cases. A VMAT planning procedure was performed attempting to scale the dose in inner auxiliary volumes, and to explore the potential for dose scaling with this technique. Comparison of dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters were obtained. RESULTS: VMAT allows a superior NT sparing plus conformity and dose scaling using the auxiliary volumes. The VMAT results were significantly superior in NT sparing, improving both the V10 and V12 values in all cases, with a 2-3 cm3 saving. In addition, VMAT improves the dose coverage D95 by about 0.5 Gy. The objective of dose escalation was achieved with VMAT with an increment of the Dmean and the Dmedian of about 2 Gy. CONCLUSIONS: This work shows a benefit of VMAT in SRS treatment with significant NT sparing. A VMAT optimization procedure, based on auxiliary inner volumes, has been developed, enabling internal dose escalation.

Permanent seed implant brachytherapy in low-risk prostate cancer: Preoperative planning with 145 Gy versus real-time intraoperative planning with 160 Gy.

AIM: The present retrospective study was to compare toxicity and survival outcomes in a group of low-risk PCa patients treated with either the preoperative planning technique (145 Gy) or the real-time IoP technique (160 Gy). BACKGROUND: The two most common permanent seed implantation techniques are preoperative planning (PP) with 145 Gy and real-time intraoperative planning (IoP) with 160 Gy. Although IoP has largely replaced PP at many centres in recent years, few studies have directly compared these two techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective study of 408 patients with low-risk PCa treated with permanent seed implant brachytherapy at our institution between October 2003 and December 2014. Of these, 187 patients were treated with PP at a dose of 145 Gy while 221 received real-time IoP with 160 Gy. RESULTS: At a median follow up of 90 months, 5- and 8-year rates of biochemical relapse-free survival (BRFS) were 94.8% and 86% with the IoP technique versus 90.8% and 83.9%, respectively, with PP. The maximum dose to the urethra was <217 Gy with both techniques. Despite the higher dose, IoP did not cause any significant increase in toxicity (p = 0.11). CONCLUSIONS: The present study shows that real-time intraoperative brachytherapy at a dose of 160 Gy yield better biochemical control than preoperative planning at 145 Gy. In addition, urinary toxicity did not increase, despite the dose escalation, probably because the dose constraints to the urethra were met despite the increased dose escalation. These findings support the use of real-time IoP.

Interobserver variability in rectum contouring in high-dose-rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer: A multi-institutional prospective analysis.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the interobserver variability (IOV) of rectum contouring, and its dosimetric consequences, for high-dose-rate brachytherapy in patients with prostate cancer across multiple institutions. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Five radiation oncologists contoured rectums in 10 patients on transperineal ultrasound image sets after establishing a delineation consensus. The D0.1cc, D1cc, and D2cc rectum volume parameters were determined. The mean, standard deviation, and range of each dose-volume histogram parameter were evaluated for each patient. The IOV was determined using the coefficient of variation, and the dosimetric impacts on the total dose were analyzed by estimating the biologically equivalent dose (EQD2α/ß = 3). RESULTS: The interobserver coefficients of variation (±standard deviation) for the reported D0.1cc, D1cc, and D2cc were 5 ± 1.84%, 4 ± 1.26%, and 4 ± 1.33%, respectively. As for the impact on the total dose, the mean dose differences for D0.1cc, D1cc, and D2cc were 10 Gy, 7.3 Gy, and 6.6 Gy, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The D2cc is robust as evident by the low IOV (<5%). However, some variability ranges almost overlap with the clinical threshold level, which may present dosimetric and clinical complications. General rectal contouring guidelines for prostate high-dose-rate brachytherapy are desirable to reduce discrepancies in delineation.

Two years results of electronic brachytherapy for basal cell carcinoma.

PURPOSE: The use of radiation therapy (RT) for non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC) has been changing throughout the last century. Over the last decades, the use of radiotherapy has surged with the development of new techniques, applicators, and devices. In recent years, electronic brachytherapy (eBT) devices that use small x-ray sources have been introduced as alternative to radionuclide dependence. Nowadays, several devices have been incorporated, with a few series reported, and with a short follow-up, due to the recent introduction of these systems. The purpose of this work is to describe the clinical results of our series after two years follow-up with a specific eBT system. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a prospective single-center, non-randomized pilot study, to assess clinical results of electronic brachytherapy in basal cell carcinoma using the Esteya® system. In 2014, 40 patients with 60 lesions were treated. Patient follow-up on a regular basis was performed for a period of two years. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients with 44 lesions achieved two years follow-up. A complete response was documented in 95.5% of cases. Toxicity was mild (G1 or G2) in all cases, caused by erythema, erosion, or alopecia. Cosmesis was excellent in 88.6% of cases, and good in the rest. Change in pigmentation was the most frequent cosmetic alteration. CONCLUSIONS: This work is special, since the equipment's treatment voltage was 69.5 kV, and this is the first prospective study with long term follow-up with Esteya®. These preliminary report show excellent results with less toxicity and excellent cosmesis. While surgery has been the treatment of choice, certain patients might benefit from eBT treatment. These are elderly patients with comorbidities or undergoing anticoagulant treatment as well as those who simply refuse surgery or might have other contraindications.

An evaluation of the robustness of organ-at-risk recommendations made by GEC/ESTRO according to interobserver variability: a single-center experience.

PURPOSE: Groupe Européen de Curiethérapie (GEC) and European Society for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO) has proposed a rectal dose constraint of the most exposed 2-cc volume (D2cc of ≤ 75 Gy EQD2α/ß = 3) during external-beam plus high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) in localized prostate cancer patients. This study aimed to evaluate D2cc for rectal contouring via interobserver variability. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Four blinded observers contoured rectums of 5 patients. Rectal contouring anatomical limits were determined through previous consensus. Dose-volume histogram (DVH) dosimetric parameters (D0.1cc, D1cc, and D2cc) were analyzed according to GEC/ESTRO recommendations and subjected to intra- and interobserver comparisons. Latter comparisons involved coefficients of variation. For each parameter, the mean, standard deviation (SD), and range were evaluated. The effect of interobserver variation on total dose was analyzed by estimating the biologically equivalent rectal dose (EQD2α/ß = 3). RESULTS: Interobserver coefficients of variation for D0.1cc, D1cc, and D2cc were 5.7%, 4.5%, and 4%, respectively. The highest interobserver rectal delineation variation yielded a rectal dose difference up to 5.8 Gy EQD2. Estimated intraobserver variation for the reported D2cc was 5.5% in the worst-case scenario (non-significant). CONCLUSIONS: We observed acceptable interobserver variability in EQD2 for D2cc, with strong impacts on clinical threshold levels (D2cc ≤ 75 Gy EQD2) in some cases. This small, single-center analysis will be extended in a multicenter study.

Electronic brachytherapy for superficial and nodular basal cell carcinoma: a report of two prospective pilot trials using different doses.

PURPOSE: Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is a very common cancer in the Caucasian population. Treatment aims to eradicate the tumor with the lowest possible functional and aesthetic impact. Electronic brachytherapy (EBT) is a treatment technique currently emerging. This study aims to show the outcomes of two consecutive prospective pilot clinical trials using different radiation doses of EBT with Esteya(®) EB system for the treatment of superficial and nodular basal cell carcinoma. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two prospective, single-center, non-randomized, pilot studies were conducted. Twenty patients were treated in each study with different doses. The first group (1) was treated with 36.6 Gy in 6 fractions of 6.1 Gy, and the second group (2) with 42 Gy in 6 fractions of 7 Gy. Cure rate, acute toxicity, and late toxicity related to cosmesis were analyzed in the two treatment groups. RESULTS: In group 1, a complete response in 90% of cases was observed at the first year of follow-up, whereas in group 2, the complete response was 95%. The differences with reference to acute toxicity and the cosmetic results between the two treatment groups were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Our initial experience with Esteya(®) EB system to treat superficial and nodular BCC shows that a dose of 36.6 Gy and 42 Gy delivered in 6 fraction of 7 Gy achieves a 90% and 95% clinical cure rate at 1 year, respectively. Both groups had a tolerable toxicity and a very good cosmesis. The role of EBT in the treatment of BCC is still to be defined. It will probably become an established option for selected patients in the near future.

Efficacy and safety of electronic brachytherapy for superficial and nodular basal cell carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Surface electronic brachytherapy (EBT) is an alternative radiotherapy solution to external beam electron radiotherapy and high-dose-rate radionuclide-based brachytherapy. In fact, it is also an alternative solution to surgery for a subgroup of patients. The objective of this work is to confirm the clinical efficacy, toxicity and cosmesis of a new EBT system, namely Esteya(®) in the treatment of nodular and superficial basal cell carcinoma (BCC). MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a prospective single-center, non-randomized pilot study to assess the efficacy and safety of EBT in nodular and superficial BCC using the Esteya(®) system. The study was conducted from June 2014 to February 2015. The follow up time was 6 months for all cases. RESULTS: Twenty patients with 23 lesions were included. A complete response was documented in all lesions (100%). A low level of toxicity was observed after the 4(th) fraction in all cases. Erythema was the most frequent adverse event. Cosmesis was excellent, with more than 60% of cases without skin alteration and with subtle changes in the rest. CONCLUSIONS: Electronic brachytherapy with Esteya(®) appears to be an effective, simple, safe, and comfortable treatment for nodular and superficial BCC associated with excellent cosmesis. It could be a good choice for elderly patients, patients with contraindications for surgery (due to comorbidities or anticoagulant drugs) or patients where surgery would result in a more disfiguring outcome. A longer follow-up and more studies are needed to confirm these preliminary results.

Depth determination of skin cancers treated with superficial brachytherapy: ultrasound vs. histopathology.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to compare high frequency ultrasonography (HFUS) and histpathologic assessment done by punch biopsy in order to determine depth of basal cell carcinoma (BCC), in both superficial and nodular BCCs prior to brachytherapy treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study includes 20 patients with 10 superficial and 10 nodular BCCs. First, punch biopsy was done to confirm the diagnosis and to measure tumour depth (Breslow rate). Subsequently, HFUS was done to measure tumour depth to search for correlation of these two techniques. RESULTS: Neither clear tendency nor significance of the punch biopsy vs. HFUS depth determination is observed. Depth value differences with both modalities resulted patient dependent and then consequence of its uncertainty. Conceptually, HFUS should determine the macroscopic lesion (gross tumour volume - GTV), while punch biopsy is able to detect the microscopic extension (clinical target volume - CTV). Uncertainties of HFUS are difficult to address, while punch biopsy is done just on a small lesion section, not necessarily the deepest one. CONCLUSIONS: According to the results, HFUS is less accurate at very shallow depths. Nodular cases present higher depth determination differences than superficial ones. In our clinical practice, we decided to prescribe at 3 mm depth when HFUS measurements give depth lesion values smaller than this value.

Clinical implementation of a new electronic brachytherapy system for skin brachytherapy.

Although surgery is usually the first-line treatment for nonmelanoma skin cancers, radiotherapy (RT) may be indicated in selected cases. Radiation therapy as primary therapy can result in excellent control rates, cosmetics, and quality of life. Brachytherapy is a radiation treatment modality that offers the most conformal option to patients. A new modality for skin brachytherapy is electronic brachytherapy. This involves the placement of a high dose rate X-ray source directly in a skin applicator close to the skin surface, and therefore combines the benefits of brachytherapy with those of low energy X-ray radiotherapy. The Esteya electronic brachytherapy system is specifically designed for skin surface brachytherapy procedures. The purpose of this manuscript is to describe the clinical implementation of the new Esteya electronic brachytherapy system, which may provide guidance for users of this system. The information covered includes patient selection, treatment planning (depth evaluation and margin determination), patient marking, and setup. The justification for the hypofractionated regimen is described and compared with others protocols in the literature. Quality assurance (QA) aspects including daily testing are also included. We emphasize that these are guidelines, and clinical judgment and experience must always prevail in the care of patients, as with any medical treatment. We conclude that clinical implementation of the Esteya brachytherapy system is simple for patients and providers, and should allow for precise and safe treatment of nonmelanoma skin cancers.

Incontinencia urinaria, cáncer de próstata y radioterapia externa / Urinary incontinence, prostate cancer and eternal beam radiotherapy

La radioterapia externa está consolidada como tratamiento radical en el cáncer próstata localizado y localmente avanzado. Además, cada vez más estudios muestran su eficacia tanto en la adyuvancia como en el rescate. Antes de elegir una opción terapéutica es importante conocer la situación basal de los pacientes y los posibles efectos secundarios del tratamiento. Para ello disponemos de diferentes cuestionarios y escalas de toxicidad. Los efectos agudos, que se dejan notar durante el tratamiento y las semanas siguientes, se deben a síntomas irritativos e inflamatorios. La toxicidad crónica, meses o años tras la radioterapia, es consecuencia de la fibrosis e isquemia, así como de alteraciones a nivel miógeno y neuronal. La incontinencia urinaria es un síntoma relativamente poco frecuente dentro de la toxicidad asociada a la radioterapia. Pero, su importante impacto en la calidad de vida de nuestros pacientes nos obliga a determinar quienes tienen más riesgo de padecerla. El antecedente de resección transuretral de próstata, antes o tras la irradiación, y la severidad de la toxicidad genito-urinaria aguda son factores riesgo para el desarrollo de incontinencia(AU)

External beam radiotherapy is consolidated like radical treatment for localized and locally advanced prostate cancer. In addition, more and more studies show its effectiveness as much in postoperative as in salvage intention. Before choosing a therapeutic option, it is important to know the baseline state of the patients and the possible side effects of the treatment. In that way, different questionnaires and toxicity scales are at our disposal. Acute effects, during the treatment and the following weeks, are due to irritating and inflammatory symptoms. Chronic toxicity, months or years after radiotherapy, are consequence of the fibrosis and ischemia, as well as of alterations at the myogenic and neuronal level. Urinary incontinence is a relatively uncommon symptom among patients who have been treated with radiotherapy. But, due to the profound impact on the quality of life of our patients, it is necessary to identify patients at higher risk. Antecedent of transurethral resection of the prostate, before or after the irradiation, and severity of acute genitourinary toxicity increase the risk of developing incontinence(AU)