Treatment Options for Early Stage Inoperable Breast Cancer: Cryoablation or Radiotherapy?

Background: Surgical removal of the tumour is the gold standard treatment for early stage invasive breast cancer. However, with a global ageing population, a larger number of diagnoses are occurring in women with comorbidities that render them unsuitable for surgery. Hence, it is of interest to explore alternative treatment strategies for this group of women. Summary: Our narrative review aims to explore two such techniques, cryoablation and external beam radiotherapy, providing a brief summary of the evidence behind each technique. Following this, we discuss which groups of patients would gain the most benefit from each technique. Factors favouring the use of radiotherapy include patients with larger tumours, more superficial tumours, and those with less well-demarcated tumours where there is uncertainty regarding tumour extent. Meanwhile, patients who may benefit more from cryoablation include those who desire a smaller number of treatment sessions, have concerns regarding cosmesis and skin pigmentation, or who have relative contraindications to radiotherapy such as scleroderma, systemic lupus erythematosus, reduced lung function, or cardiac comorbidities. Key Messages: Continued advancements in both cryoablation and radiotherapy technologies are taking place, in tandem with imaging technologies enabling greater certainty in tumour detection and delineation. These factors will help increase local control rates in this group of non-operable early stage breast cancer patients. Through this review, we hope to aid in the clinical decision-making process regarding the selection and referral of patients for each treatment.

Overview of radiotherapy-induced chronic pain in childhood cancer survivors: A narrative review.

Radiotherapy is an important aspect of oncological treatment in several childhood cancers. However, radiotherapy is known to have numerous side effects, including detrimental effects on growth, neurocognitive impairment, and the development of secondary malignancies. One less studied long-term side effect of pediatric radiotherapy treatment is chronic pain. While the short-term toxicities of radiotherapy resolve over a few weeks to months, the chronic pain caused by radiotherapy-induced tissue damage can significantly affect children's quality of life. As long-term childhood cancer survivors age into adulthood, they are typically followed up by a wide variety of doctors, not all of whom may be familiar with radiotherapy-induced chronic pain and its management. The aim of this review is to discuss the various common manifestations of radiotherapy-related pain in children, as well as ways to identify and manage these. Common radiotherapy-related side effects leading to chronic pain symptoms include radiation fibrosis, enteritis, dermatitis, lymphedema, neuropathic pain, and effects on bone development. The pathophysiology, evaluation and management of these are briefly summarized in this review. This is followed by an overview of radiotherapy techniques that allow greater sparing of normal tissue, minimizing future painful side effects. Finally, the assessment of pain in children is described, as well as strategies for management, and red flag symptoms that should prompt urgent specialist referral. In conclusion, a good understanding of the long-term side effects of radiotherapy treatment in children is essential for the various medical professionals that follow-up the child in the years after treatment. For young children, the evaluation of pain is in itself a challenge, and effects on growth, development, and learning are crucial. For older children, social and psychological factors become increasingly important. As radiation therapy techniques continue to advance, the spectrum and incidence of chronic pain syndromes may change over time.

Impact of cancer diagnoses on the outcomes of patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 has caused significant mortality and morbidity across the globe. Patients with cancer are especially vulnerable given their immunocompromised state. We aimed to determine the proportion of COVID-19 patients with cancer, their severity and mortality outcomes through a systematic review and meta-analysis (MA). METHODS: Systematic review was performed through online databases, PubMed, Medline and Google Scholar, with keywords listed in the Methods section (1 November 2019-31 December 2020). Studies with clinical outcomes of at least 10 COVID-19 patients and at least one with a diagnosis of cancer were included. The studies for MA were assessed with PRISMA guidelines and appraised with Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The data were pooled using a random-effects model using STATA software. The main outcomes were planned before data collection, including proportion of patients with cancer among COVID-19 populations, relative risk (RR) of severe outcomes and death of patients with cancer compared with general COVID-19 patients. RESULTS: We identified 57 case series (63 413 patients), with 230 patients with cancer with individual patient data (IPD). We found that the pooled proportion of cancer among COVID-19 patients was 0.04 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.05, I2=97.69%, p<0.001). The pooled RR of death was 1.44 (95% CI 1.19 to 1.76) between patients with cancer and the general population with COVID-19 infection. The pooled RR of severe outcome was 1.49 (95% CI 1.18 to 1.87) between cancer and general COVID-19 patients. The presence of lung cancer and stage IV cancer did not result in significantly increased RR of severe outcome. Among the available IPD, only age and gender were associated with severe outcomes. CONCLUSION: Patients with cancer were at a higher risk of severe and death outcomes from COVID-19 infection as compared with general COVID-19 populations. Limitations of this study include publication bias. A collaborative effort is required for a more complete database.

Minimizing transmission of COVID-19 while delivering optimal cancer care in a National Cancer Centre.

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted current models of healthcare and adaptations will likely continue. With the gradual easing of lockdown measures worldwide, cancer centres must be prepared to implement novel means to prevent repeated waves of infection. There are two limitations unique to oncology - a higher susceptibility of patients to COVID-19 and the multidisciplinary approach required of cancer management. We describe the measures implemented in the largest cancer centre in Singapore to continue optimal cancer care in spite of the ongoing pandemic, with no nosocomial infections reported in our centre to date. We adopted a multipronged approach, with an overall committee supervising the entire COVID-19 management effort. A screening clinic was setup to triage patients prior to entry to the centre. Each Oncology Division within the cancer centre designed solutions tailored to the specific needs of their discipline. We explore in detail the screening criteria and workflow of the screening clinic, as well as modifications by individual divisions to reduce infection risk to patients and healthcare professionals. This approach can be modelled by other cancer centres during this prolonged COVID-19 pandemic.

Which patients benefit most from stereotactic body radiotherapy or surgery in medically operable non-small cell lung cancer? An in-depth look at patient characteristics on both sides of the debate.

The role of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in early stage medically operable non-small cell lung cancer is currently under debate. SBRT's advantage is its ability to provide high radiotherapy doses to a tumor in a short timeframe, without the risk of postoperative complications and mortality. Currently, in part due to limited prospective data comparing both treatments, international guidelines continue to recommend surgical resection as the gold standard for medically operable patients. However, not all patients possess uniform characteristics, and there is some evidence that certain subgroups of patients would benefit more from one form of treatment - SBRT or surgery - than the other. The aim of this review is to provide a brief summary of the evidence comparing SBRT to surgery, followed by a deeper discussion of the subgroups of patients who would benefit most from surgery: those with large tumors, centrally located tumors, increased risk of occult nodal metastases, increased risk of toxicity from radiotherapy and radioresistant histological tumor subtypes. Meanwhile, patients who could benefit most from SBRT might include elderly patients, those with reduced lung function or cardiac comorbidities, those with synchronous lung nodules, and those with specific tumor mutational status. We hope that this review will aid in the clinical decision-making process regarding patient selection for either treatment.

Are heart doses associated with survival in patients with non-small cell lung cancer who received post-operative thoracic radiotherapy?: A national population-based study.

The aim of this retrospective national cohort study is to assess the association between various radiation heart dosimetric parameters (RHDPs), acute myocardial infarct (AMI) and overall survival (OS) outcomes in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with post-operative thoracic radiotherapy (PORT) using contemporary radiation techniques.We identified patients with stage I to III NSCLC treated with PORT at the 2 national cancer institutions from 2007 to 2014. We linked their electronic medical records to the national AMI and death registries. Univariable Cox regression was performed to assess the association between various RHDPs, AMI, and OS.We included 43 eligible patients with median follow-up of 36.6 months. Median age was 64 years. Majority of the patients had pathological stage III disease (72%). Median prescription dose was 60Gy. Median mean heart dose (MHD) was 9.4Gy. There were no AMI events. The 5-year OS was 34%. Univariable Cox regression showed that age was significantly associated with OS (hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% confidence interval, 1.01 to 1.10; P = .008). Radiation heart doses, including MHD, volume of heart receiving at least 5, 25, 30, 40, 50Gy and dose to 30% of heart volume, were not significantly associated with OS.There is insufficient evidence to conclude that RHDPs are associated with OS for patients with NSCLC treated with PORT in this study. Studies with larger sample size and longer term follow-up are needed to assess AMI outcome.

Long-Term Disease-Free Survival of a Patient with Oligometastatic Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Treated with Radiotherapy Alone.

Distant metastases in nasopharyngeal carcinoma are fairly common. While the mainstay of treatment for metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma remains chemotherapy, it is now increasingly recognised that metastatic cases are a heterogenous group and can be stratified into oligometastatic cases versus those with widespread metastases, the former potentially benefiting more from local therapy. In this report, we describe a case of nasopharyngeal carcinoma with a solitary vertebral metastasis successfully treated with high-dose palliative radiotherapy alone, resulting in a long-term disease-free interval of more than 8 years at the time of writing. To our knowledge, this is the first report of a long-term survivor of metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma with oligometastatic bone disease who had received no chemotherapy. In view of this case, there may be potential for other patients with oligometastases from nasopharyngeal carcinoma to be treated solely with local therapy, thereby sparing them the toxicities of chemotherapy.

Assessing dose contribution to pelvic lymph nodes in intracavitary brachytherapy for cervical cancer.

PURPOSE: In radical radiotherapy for cervical cancer, high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy is commonly used after external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) to deliver a cumulative EQD2 of 80 to 90 Gy to the primary tumor. However, there is less certainty regarding brachytherapy dose contribution to the pelvic lymph nodes. This poses a challenge as to how high a preceding EBRT dose should be prescribed to gross nodal disease, in order to achieve a cumulative tumoricidal effect. Hence, this study aims to quantify brachytherapy dose contribution to individual pelvic nodal groups, using computed tomography (CT) planning with the Manchester system. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a single institution retrospective dosimetric study. CT planning datasets from 40 patients who received EBRT followed by intracavitary HDR brachytherapy (5 or 6 Gy fractions) were retrieved. The external iliac (EI), internal iliac (II), and obturator (OB) lymph node groups were contoured on each CT dataset. Applying the initial brachytherapy plan, mean doses to each nodal group were calculated for every patient, and averaged across the respective (5 or 6 Gy) study populations. RESULTS: With a brachytherapy dose of 5 Gy to Manchester point A, the mean absolute doses received by the EI, II, and OB groups were 0.79, 1.12, and 1.34 Gy respectively, corresponding to EQD2s (α/ß = 10) of 0.71, 1.04, and 1.27 Gy respectively. With a brachytherapy dose of 6 Gy, the mean absolute doses received by the EI, II, and OB groups were 1.16, 1.56, and 1.80 Gy respectively, corresponding to EQD2s of 1.08, 1.49, and 1.77 Gy, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates that pelvic lymph nodes receive substantial dose contributions from HDR brachytherapy in cervical cancer. This should be taken into account by the radiation oncologist during EBRT planning, and adequate external beam boost doses calculated to achieve cumulative tumoricidal doses to pelvic nodal disease.