Outcomes of Multimodal Treatment in Elderly Patients with Localized Non-Small Lung Cancer from a Radiation Oncology Point of View: Special Focus on Low-Dose Cisplatin.

Identification of the optimal treatment strategy is challenging in elderly with localized non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Concurrent chemotherapy with low-dose cisplatin represents an option for elderly. Outcomes (1) in elderly (≥70 years, n = 158) vs. younger patients (n = 188) and (2), independently of age, in definitive radiochemotherapy, with low-dose cisplatin (n = 125) vs. cisplatin/vinorelbine (n = 76) were studied. Elderly included more males, had a lower Karnofsky index, more comorbidities, and lower stages. Low-dose cisplatin patients (vs. cisplatin/vinorelbine) had higher age, more comorbidities, and lower stages. We observed reduced dermatitis and dysphagia and increased anemia and thrombocytopenia in elderly vs. younger patients, without increased ≥grade 3 toxicities. Low-dose cisplatin was less toxic than cisplatin/vinorelbine. Survival outcomes were lower in elderly vs. younger and comparable between low-dose cisplatin and cisplatin/vinorelbine. In elderly, gender, Karnofsky index, stage, and multimodal treatment (including additional surgery/systemic therapy) were identified as prognostic factors. In conclusion, we found evidence for an acceptable toxicity profile and the need for improvement of outcomes in elderly with localized NSCLC. Multimodal strategies (including additional surgery/systemic treatment) showed favorable outcomes and should be reasonably considered in elderly who are deemed fit enough. Low-dose cisplatin should be discussed on an individual basis due to favorable toxicity and outcomes.

Hemostatic radiotherapy in clinically significant tumor-related bleeding: excellent palliative results in a retrospective analysis of 77 patients.

BACKGROUND: Significant bleeding of tumor sites is a dreaded complication in oncological diseases and often results in clinical emergencies. Besides basic local and interventional procedures, an urgent radiotherapeutic approach can either achieve a bleeding reduction or a bleeding stop in a vast majority of patients. In spite of being used regularly in clinical practice, data reporting results to this therapy approach is still scarce. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 77 patients treated for significant tumor-related bleeding at our clinic between 2000 and 2021, evaluating treatment response rate, hemoglobin levels, hemoglobin transfusion necessity, administered radiotherapy dose and overall survival. RESULTS: Response rate in terms of bleeding stop was 88.3% (68/77) in all patients and 95.2% (60/63) in the subgroup, wherein radiotherapy (RT) was completed as intended. Hemoglobin transfusions decreased during treatment in a further subgroup analysis. Median overall survival (OS) was 3.3 months. Patients with primary tumors (PT) of the cervix (carcinoma of the cervix, CC) or endometrium (endometrioid carcinoma, EDC) and patients receiving the full intended RT dose showed statistically significant better OS in a multivariable cox regression model. Median administered dose was 39 Gy, treatment related acute toxicity was considerably low. CONCLUSIONS: Our data show an excellent response rate with a low toxicity profile when administering urgent radiotherapy for tumor related clinically significant bleeding complications. Nonetheless, treatment decisions should be highly individual due to the low median overall survival of this patient group.

Symptom relief, prognostic factors, and outcome in patients receiving urgent radiation therapy for superior vena cava syndrome : A single-center retrospective analysis of 21 years' practice.

PURPOSE: Superior vena cava syndrome (SVCS) often results from external vessel compression due to tumor growth. Urgent symptom-guided radiotherapy (RT) remains a major treatment approach in histologically proven, rapidly progressive disease. Despite several publications, recent data concerning symptom relief and oncological outcome as well as potential confounders in treatment response are still scarce. METHODS: We performed a retrospective single-center analysis of patients receiving urgent RT between 2000 and 2021 at the University Medical Center Göttingen. Symptom relief was evaluated by CTCAE score during the RT course. Effects of variables on symptom relief were assessed by logistic regression. The impact of parameters on overall survival (OS) was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier plot along with the log-rank test and by Cox regression analyses. Statistically significant (p-value < 0.05) confounders were tested in multivariable analyses. RESULTS: A total of 79 patients were included. Symptom relief was achieved in 68.4%. Mean OS was 59 days, 7.6% (n = 6) of patients showed long-term survival (> 2 years). Applied RT dose > 39 Gy, clinical target volume (CTV) size < 387 ml, concomitant chemotherapy, and completion of the prescribed RT course were found to be statistically significant for OS; applied RT dose and completion of the prescribed RT course were found to be statistically significant for symptom relief. CONCLUSION: Symptom relief by urgent RT for SVCS was achieved in the majority of patients. RT dose and completion of the RT course were documented as predictors for OS and symptom relief, CTV < 387 ml and concomitant chemotherapy were predictive for OS.

Patterns of Pretreatment Diagnostic Assessment in Patients Treated with Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC): Special Characteristics in the COVID Pandemic and Influence on Outcomes.

The pandemic raised a discussion about the postponement of medical interventions for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We analyzed the characteristics of pretreatment diagnostic assessment in the pandemic and the influence of diagnostic assessment on outcomes. A total of 96 patients with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for NSCLC were included. The number of patients increased from mean 0.9 (2012-2019) to 1.45 per month in the COVID era (p < 0.05). Pandemic-related factors (contact reduction, limited intensive care unit resources) might have influenced clinical decision making towards SBRT. The time from pretreatment assessment (multidisciplinary tumor board decision, bronchoscopy, planning CT) to SBRT was longer during the COVID period (p < 0.05). Reduced services, staff shortage, or appointment management to mitigate infection risks might explain this finding. Overall survival, progression-free survival, locoregional progression-free survival, and distant progression-free survival were superior in patients who received a PET/CT scan prior to SBRT (p < 0.05). This supports that SBRT guidelines advocate the acquisition of a PET/CT scan. A longer time from PET/CT scan/conventional staging to SBRT (<10 vs. ≥10 weeks) was associated with worse locoregional control (p < 0.05). The postponement of diagnostic or therapeutic measures in the pandemic should be discussed cautiously. Patient- and tumor-related features should be evaluated in detail.