Effects on Lung Tissue After Breast Cancer Radiation: Comparing Photon and Proton Therapies.

Purpose: In breast cancer, improved treatment approaches that reduce injury to lung tissue and early diagnosis and intervention for lung toxicity are increasingly important in survivorship. The aims of this study are to (1) compare lung tissue radiographic changes in women treated with conventional photon radiation therapy and those treated with proton therapy (PT), (2) assess the volume of lung irradiated to 5 Gy (V5) and 20 Gy (V20) by treatment modality, and (3) quantify the effects of V5, V20, time, and smoking history on the severity of tissue radiographic changes. Patients and Methods: A prospective observational study of female breast cancer patients was conducted to monitor postradiation subclinical lung tissue radiographic changes. Repeated follow-up x-ray computed tomography scans were acquired through 2 years after treatment. In-house software was used to quantify an internally normalized measure of pulmonary tissue density change over time from the computed tomography scans, emphasizing the 6- and 12-month time points. Results: Compared with photon therapy, PT was associated with significantly lower lung V5 and V20. Lung V20 (but not V5) correlated significantly with increased subclinical lung tissue radiographic changes 6 months after treatment, and neither correlated with lung effects at 12 months. Significant lung tissue density changes were present in photon therapy patients at 6 and 12 months but not in PT patients. Significant lung tissue density change persisted at 12 months in ever-smokers but not in never-smokers. Conclusion: Patients treated with PT had significantly lower radiation exposure to the lungs and less statistically significant tissue density change, suggesting decreased injury and/or improved recovery compared to photon therapy. These findings motivate additional studies in larger, randomized, and more diverse cohorts to further investigate the contributions of treatment modality and smoking regarding the short- and long-term radiographic effects of radiation on lung tissue.

Potential Therapeutic Improvements in Prostate Cancer Treatment Using Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Therapy with LETd Optimization and Disease-Specific RBE Models.

PURPOSE: To demonstrate the feasibility of improving prostate cancer patient outcomes with PBS proton LETd optimization. METHODS: SFO, IPT-SIB, and LET-optimized plans were created for 12 patients, and generalized-tissue and disease-specific LET-dependent RBE models were applied. The mean LETd in several structures was determined and used to calculate mean RBEs. LETd- and dose-volume histograms (LVHs/DVHs) are shown. TODRs were defined based on clinical dose goals and compared between plans. The impact of robust perturbations on LETd, TODRs, and DVH spread was evaluated. RESULTS: LETd optimization achieved statistically significant increased target volume LETd of ~4 keV/µm compared to SFO and IPT-SIB LETd of ~2 keV/µm while mitigating OAR LETd increases. A disease-specific RBE model predicted target volume RBEs > 1.5 for LET-optimized plans, up to 18% higher than for SFO plans. LET-optimized target LVHs/DVHs showed a large increase not present in OARs. All RBE models showed a statistically significant increase in TODRs from SFO to IPT-SIB to LET-optimized plans. RBE = 1.1 does not accurately represent TODRs when using LETd optimization. Robust evaluations demonstrated a trade-off between increased mean target LETd and decreased DVH spread. CONCLUSION: The demonstration of improved TODRs provided via LETd optimization shows potential for improved patient outcomes.

A pooled patient-reported outcomes analysis of moderately hypofractionated proton beam therapy and photon-based intensity modulated radiation therapy for low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: We sought to characterize and compare late patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after moderately hypofractionated intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and proton beam therapy (PBT) for localized prostate cancer (PC). METHODS: This multi-institutional analysis included low- or intermediate-risk group PC patients treated with moderately hypofractionated radiation to an intact prostate stratified by treatment modality: IMRT or PBT. The primary outcomes were prospectively collected patient-reported late gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity assessed by International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and Expanded PC Index Composite (EPIC). Multivariable regression analysis (MVA) controlling for age, race, and risk group tested the effect of time, treatment, and their interaction. RESULTS: 287 IMRT and 485 PBT patients were included. Intermediate risk group (81.2 vs. 68.2%; p < 0.001) and median age at diagnosis (70 vs. 67 years; p < 0.001) were higher in the IMRT group. On MVA, there was no significant difference between modalities. PBT IPSS did not differ from IMRT IPSS at 12 months (odds ratio [OR], 1.19; p = 0.08) or 24 months (OR, 0.99; p = 0.94). PBT EPIC overall GI function at 12 months (OR, 3.68; p = 0.085) and 24 months (OR 2.78; p = 0.26) did not differ from IMRT EPIC overall GI function. At 24 months, urinary frequency was no different between PBT and IMRT groups (OR 0.35; p = 0.096). CONCLUSIONS: This multi-institutional analysis of low- or intermediate-risk PC treated with moderately hypofractionated PBT and IMRT demonstrated low rates of late patient-reported GI and GU toxicities. After covariate adjustment, late GI and GU PROs were not significantly different between PBT or IMRT cohorts.

Strategic Operational Redesign Improves Prior Authorization Access: A Validation Study.

Purpose: Obtaining prior authorization (PA) before treatment is becoming increasingly burdensome in oncology, especially in radiation oncology. Here, we describe the impact of a strategic novel operational PA redesign to shorten authorization time and to improve patient access to cancer care at a large United States academic proton therapy center. We ask whether such a redesign may be replicable and adoptable across oncology centers. Materials and Methods: Our PA redesign strategy was based on a 3-tiered approach. Specifically, we (1) held payors accountable to legally backed timelines, (2) leveraged expertise on insurance policies and practices, and (3) updated the submission, appeal writing, and planning procedures for PA. Metrics were compared at the following 3 time points: 6 months before, at phase-in, and at 6 months after intervention. Results: In analyzing the impact of improving PA access to care, the percentage of approvals for commercial proton beam therapy improved by an absolute 30.6% postintervention (P < .001). The proportion of commercially insured patients treated with proton beam therapy also increased by 6.2%, and the number of new starts rose by 11.7 patients/mo. Overall patient census increased by 13 patients/d. Median authorization time was 1 week, and 90% of surveyed providers reported reduced PA burden and improved patient care. Conclusion: This is the first validated, comprehensive operational strategy to improve access to cancer therapy while reducing the burden of PA. This novel approach may be helpful for addressing barriers to PA in medical and surgical oncology because the redesign is predicated on laws that regulate PA across disciplines.

Proton Therapy in the Treatment of Men with Breast Cancer.

Purpose: Male breast cancer treatment involves multimodality therapy, including radiation therapy; nevertheless, few men have received proton therapy (PT) for it. Further, heart disease is an established leading cause of death in men, and radiation therapy heart dose correlates with cardiac toxicity, highlighting the need for cardiac-sparing radiation techniques. Thus, we provide a descriptive analysis of PT in a male breast cancer cohort. Patients and Methods: Men who received PT for localized breast cancer between 2012 and 2022 were identified from a prospective database. Toxicities were prospectively recorded by using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4.0. Results: Five male patients were identified. All had estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, Her2neu-negative disease and received adjuvant endocrine therapy. One had genetic testing positive for BRCA2, one had a variant of unknown significance (VUS) in the APC gene, and one had a VUS in MSH2. Median age was 73 years (range, 41-80). Baseline comorbidities included obesity (n = 1), diabetes (n = 1), hypertension (n = 4), history of deep vein thrombosis (n = 1), personal history of myocardial infarction (n = 3; 1 with a pacemaker), and a history of lung cancer (n = 1). All received PT to the left chest wall and comprehensive regional lymphatics. One received passive-scattering PT, and 4 received pencil beam scanning. One patient received a boost to the mastectomy incision via electrons. Median heart dose was 1 GyRBE (range, 0-1.0), median 0.1-cm3 dose to the left anterior descending artery was 7.5 GyRBE (range, 0-14.2), and median follow-up was 2 years (range, 0.75-6.5); no patient experienced a new cardiac event, and all remain free from breast cancer recurrence and progression. Conclusion: In a small case series for a rare diagnosis, PT to the chest wall and regional lymphatics, including internal mammary nodes, resulted in low cardiac exposure, high local regional disease control rates, and minimal toxicity. Proton therapy should be considered for treating men with breast cancer to achieve cardiac sparing.

Palliative care utilization and racial and ethnic disparities among women with de novo metastatic breast cancer in the United States.

PURPOSE: The potential disparities in palliative care delivery for underrepresented minorities with breast cancer are not well known. We sought to determine whether race and ethnicity impact the receipt of palliative care for patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the National Cancer Database for female patients diagnosed with stage IV breast cancer between 2010 and 2017 who received palliative care following diagnosis of MBC to assess the proportion of patients who received palliative care, including non-curative-intent local-regional or systemic therapy. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify variables associated with receiving palliative care. RESULTS: 60,685 patients were diagnosed with de novo MBC. Of these, only 21.4% (n = 12,963) received a palliative care service. Overall, there was a positive trend in palliative care receipt from 18.2% in 2010 to 23.0% in 2017 (P < 0.001), which persisted when stratified by race and ethnicity. Relative to non-Hispanic White women, Asian/Pacific Islander women (aOR 0.80, 95% CI 0.71-0.90, P < 0.001), Hispanic women (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.69, 95% CI 0.63-0.76, P < 0.001), and non-Hispanic Black women (aOR 0.94, 95% CI 0.88-0.99, P = 0.03) were less likely to receive palliative care. CONCLUSIONS: Fewer than 25% of women with MBC received palliative care between 2010 and 2017. While palliative care has significantly increased for all racial/ethnic groups, Hispanic White, Black, and Asian/Pacific Islander women with MBC still receive significantly less palliative care than non-Hispanic White women. Further research is needed to identify the socioeconomic and cultural barriers to palliative care utilization.

Local salvage of radiorecurrent prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Locally recurrent prostate cancer following primary external beam radiotherapy without distant metastasis is a challenging problem, with no current consensus on the optimal management of these patients. Traditional whole-gland salvage treatments offered up to a 50% 5-year disease-free survival rate but with troubling levels of risk for significant complications. Recent progress in advanced imaging techniques has allowed a more accurate selection of patients with local-only recurrence and a selection of patients that may be suitable for newer partial-gland salvage treatments that may reduce late complications. METHODS: This article reviews advances in patient selection and provides an overview of whole- and partial-gland salvage results from selected recent meta-analyses, multi-institutional series, and studies from centers of excellence for these treatment approaches. RESULTS: Salvage radical prostatectomy produces 5-year relapse-free survival (RFS) rates in the 50%-60% range with severe gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity in < 2% but severe genitourinary (GU) toxicity in 15%-23% of patients. The whole-gland options of high and low dose rate brachytherapy and stereotactic body radiation therapy appear to offer similar 5-year control rates, with low severe GU and GI toxicity rates of 4%-8% and <2%, respectively. Cryotherapy and high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) offer similar 5-year RFS rates but carry significant risks for severe GU and GI toxicity in the range of 10%-27% and <2%, respectively. Early results of partial-gland salvage techniques in selected patients appear promising, with 3-year RFS rates of 48%-72% and rare grade 3 toxicity. CONCLUSION: It is important to understand the relative effectiveness and risks of the various treatment options to effectively counsel patients who face this distressing clinical situation. Whole-gland salvage options offer the possibility of long-term control but with significant risks of severe toxicity. Emerging data for the partial-gland salvage options in appropriately selected patients may offer hope of reasonable control rates with reduced severe toxicity.

Incidence of Rib Fracture following Treatment with Proton Therapy for Breast Cancer.

Purpose: To determine the rib fracture rate in a cohort of patients with breast cancer treated with proton therapy. Patient and Methods: From a prospective database, we identified 225 patients treated with proton therapy between 2012 and 2020 (223 women; 2 men). Clinical and dosimetric data were extracted, the cumulative incidence method assessed rib fracture rate, and Fine-Gray tests assessed prognostic significance of select variables. In-field rib fracture was defined as a fracture that occurred in a rib located within the 10% isodose line. Out-of-field rib fracture was defined as a fracture occurring in a rib location outside of the 10% isodose line. Results: Of the patients, 74% had left-sided breast cancer; 5%, bilateral; and 21%, right-sided. Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry scans showed normality in 20%, osteopenia in 34%, and osteoporosis in 6% (test not performed in 40%). Additionally, 57% received an aromatase inhibitor. Target volumes were breast ± internal mammary nodes (IMNs) (16%), breast and comprehensive regional lymphatics (32%), chest wall ± IMNs (1%), and chest wall/comprehensive regional lymphatics (51%). Passive-scattered proton therapy was used for 41% of patients, 58% underwent pencil-beam scanning (PBS), and 1% underwent a combination (passive scattering/PBS), with 85% of patients receiving a boost. Median follow-up was 3.1 years, with 97% having >12-month follow-up. The 3-year cumulative in-field rib fracture incidence was 3.7%. Eight patients developed in-field rib fractures (1 symptomatic, 7 imaging identified) for a 0.4% symptomatic rib fracture rate. Median time from radiation completion to rib fracture identification was 1.8 years (fractures were identified within 2.2 years for 7 of 8 patients). No variables were associated with rib fracture on univariate analysis. Three fractures developed outside the radiation field (0.9% cumulative incidence of out-of-field rib fracture). Conclusion: In this series of patients with breast cancer treated with proton therapy, the 3-year rib fracture rates remain low (in-field 3.7%; symptomatic 0.4%). As in photon therapy, the asymptomatic rate may be underestimated owing to a lack of routine surveillance imaging. However, patients experiencing symptomatic rib fractures after proton therapy for breast cancer are rare.

Proton Therapy for Bilateral Breast Cancer Maximizes Normal-Tissue Sparing.

Purpose: Treatment for bilateral breast cancer with radiation therapy is technically challenging. We evaluated the clinical and dosimetric outcomes of a small series of patients with synchronous bilateral breast cancer, including a photon dosimetric comparison, to identify optimal treatment planning approaches. Materials and Methods: We reviewed a registry of patients (simultaneously) diagnosed with synchronous bilateral breast cancers who underwent postoperative definitive adjuvant proton therapy at our institution between 2012 and 2021. All patients were treated with double-scattered proton or pencil-beam scanning therapies. For comparison, intensity-modulated radiation therapy photon plans optimized for organ sparing and coverage were generated after treatment. Results: Six patients were included. The median patient age was 66 years; all were female with no history of breast cancer or radiation therapy. Two (33%) patients received breast/chest wall-only treatments, 1 (17%) required breast plus level I axillary treatment to one side and breast plus regional nodal irradiation (RNI) to the other, and 3 (50%) received bilateral breast/chest plus RNI; dosimetric results are reported for each group's median. Analysis showed clinical target coverage was comparable between proton and photon techniques (V95% of 96.4% with proton, 97.8% with photon). However, protons could deliver superior organ sparing at clinically relevant dose metrics for virtually all structures: a 6.7 Gy absolute reduction in the mean heart dose (7.5 Gy with photons to 0.7 Gy with protons), a 47% to 57% relative reduction in D0.1cm3 to coronary arteries, a 54% relative reduction in lung V20 Gy, and an absolute 7.6 Gy reduction to the brachial plexus. There was also greater esophagus and spinal cord sparing. The overall survival rate was 100% at 1.5 years of median follow-up (0.5-4.9), and all patients were free of disease. For toxicity, all patients had some form of acute side effects: 66% experienced grade 2 breast/chest pain or soreness; 100% had grade 2 radiation dermatitis or skin induration; 33% had grade 2 fatigue; and 17% had grade 2 esophagitis (per the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [CTCAE] version 5.0; US National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland). Subacute toxicity (within 6 months) was observed for 17% of patients with delayed onset of grade 3 dermatitis in the setting of preexisting lupus, 17% with a delayed surgical wound complication, and 17% with grade 2 soft tissue fibrosis. No grade 4 or 5 events were observed. Conclusions: Substantial dose reductions to multiple organs at risk while maintaining target coverage make proton the preferred modality for bilateral breast cancer treatment when available.

Intraoperative radiation therapy for early-stage breast cancer: a single-institution experience.

Background: To assess outcomes and toxicity after low-energy intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) for early-stage breast cancer (ESBC). Materials and methods: We reviewed patients with unilateral ESBC treated with breast-conserving surgery and 50-kV IORT at our institution. Patients were prescribed 20 Gy to the surface of the spherical applicator, fitted to the surgical cavity during surgery. Patients who did not meet institutional guidelines for IORT alone on final pathology were recommended adjuvant treatment, including additional surgery and/or external-beam radiation therapy (EBRT). We analyzed ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence, overall survival, recurrence-free survival and toxicity. Results: Among 201 patients (median follow-up, 5.1 years; median age, 67 years), 88% were Her2 negative and ER positive and/or PR positive, 98% had invasive ductal carcinoma, 87% had grade 1 or 2, and 95% had clinical T1 disease. Most had pathological stage T1 (93%) N0 (95%) disease. Mean IORT applicator dose at 1-cm depth was 6.3 Gy. Post-IORT treatment included additional surgery, 10%; EBRT, 11%; adjuvant chemotherapy, 9%; and adjuvant hormonal therapy, 74%. Median total EBRT dose was 42.4 (range, 40.05-63) Gy and median dose per fraction was 2.65 Gy. At 5 years, the cumulative incidence of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence was 2.7%, the overall survival rate was 95% with no breast cancer-related deaths, and the recurrence-free survival rate was 96%. For patients who were deemed unsuitable for postoperative IORT alone and did not receive recommended risk-adapted EBRT, the IBTR rate was 4.7% versus 1.7% (p = 0.23) for patients who were either suitable for IORT alone or unsuitable and received adjuvant EBRT. Cosmetic toxicity data was available for 83%, with 7% experiencing grade 3 breast toxicity and no grade 4-5 toxicity. Conclusions: IORT for select patients with ESBC results in acceptable outcomes in regard to ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence and toxicity.

Pericardial Effusion during Proton Therapy in a Patient with Chemorefractory Hodgkin Lymphoma.

We present a case of recurrent pericardial effusion presenting during proton therapy in a 24-year-old female receiving mediastinal treatment for classical Hodgkin lymphoma. Pericardial effusion is typically considered an event accompanying lymphoma diagnosis or as a subacute or late effect of radiotherapy. Rarely has it been described as occurring during radiation treatment with photon-based radiotherapy, let alone proton therapy. It is unclear what underlying cause triggered recurrent effusion in this patient. Identifying and managing pericardial effusion during treatment delivery is important to consider as it may affect radiation dosimetry, particularly with proton therapy. Doing so will help ensure patients receive optimal treatment and minimize the risks of morbidity and mortality.

Hyperfractionated-Accelerated Reirradiation with Proton Therapy for Radiation-Associated Breast Angiosarcoma.

Purpose: Radiation-associated angiosarcoma (RAAS) is a rare complication among patients treated with radiation therapy for breast cancer. Hyperfractionated-accelerated reirradiation (HART) improves local control after surgery. Proton therapy may further improve the therapeutic ratio by mitigating potential toxicity. Materials and Methods: Six patients enrolled in a prospective registry with localized RAAS received HART with proton therapy between 2015 and 2021. HART was delivered twice or thrice daily in fraction sizes of 1.5 or 1.0 Gy, respectively. All patients received 45 Gy to a large elective volume followed by boosts to a median dose of 65 (range, 60-75) Gy. Toxicity was recorded prospectively by using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0. Results: The median follow-up duration was 1.5 (range, 0.25-2.9) years. The median age at RAAS diagnosis was 73 (range, 60-83) years with a median latency of 8.9 (range, 5-14) years between radiation therapy completion and RAAS diagnosis. The median mean heart dose was 2.2 (range, 0.1-4.96) Gy. HART was delivered postoperatively (n = 1), preoperatively (n = 3), preoperatively for local recurrence after initial management with mastectomy (n = 1), and as definitive treatment (n = 1). All patients had local control of disease throughout follow-up. Three of 4 patients treated preoperatively had a pathologic complete response. The patient treated definitively had a complete metabolic response on her posttreatment PET/CT (positron emission tomography-computed tomography) scan. Two patients developed distant metastatic disease despite local control and died of their disease. Acute grade 3 toxicity occurred in 3 patients: 2 patients undergoing preoperative HART experienced wound dehiscence and 1 postoperatively developed grade 3 wound infection, which resolved. Conclusion: HART with proton therapy appears effective for local control of RAAS with a high rate of pathologic complete response and no local recurrences to date. However, vigilant surveillance for distant metastasis should occur. Toxicity is comparable to that in photon/electron series. Proton therapy for RAAS may maximize normal tissue sparing in this large-volume reirradiation setting.

Evaluating Regional Nodal Irradiation Allocation and Association with Oncologic Outcomes in NSABP B-18, B-27, B-40, and B-41.

PURPOSE: There is a lack of level I evidence to guide radiation therapy recommendations for patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. We used 4 neoadjuvant chemotherapy trials to determine which patients benefit from regional nodal irradiation (RNI). METHODS AND MATERIALS: We obtained data from the NSABP (National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project) B-18, B-27, B-40, and B-41 clinical trials. B-40 and B-41 allowed RNI at physician's discretion. We evaluated locoregional recurrence (LRR), distant recurrence, disease-free survival, and overall survival (OS). Kaplan-Meier, Peto-Peto, χ2, Fisher exact, and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used for survival estimates and comparison. RESULTS: Median follow-up for B-18, B-27, B-40, and B-41 was 13.7, 9.7, 4.5, and 5.1 years, respectively, including 742, 2254, 1154, and 504 patients for analysis. On multivariable analysis, factors significantly associated with RNI included tumor size, ypN status, and tumor subtype; Hispanic patients were less likely to receive RNI. Patients with ypN+HER2+ disease who received RNI had improved OS. B-40 patients with ypN+HR+ disease had improved LRR. On multivariable analysis for the B-40 and B-41 study population, RNI was not associated with significantly improved OS, disease-free survival, distant recurrence, or LRR. CONCLUSIONS: RNI was associated with a clinical benefit for patients with ypN+HER2+ and ypN+HR+ disease. RNI was not significantly associated with a clinically beneficial outcome for the entire cohort. Prospective phase 3 clinical trials are needed to establish guidelines for patients who should receive RNI after neoadjuvant treatment, and action is necessary to eliminate the disparity in care delivery shown for Hispanic women.

Insurance Approval for Definitive Proton Therapy for Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: To determine factors that influence insurance approval for definitive proton therapy (PT) for prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 2014 and 2018, 1592 insured patients with localized prostate cancer were evaluated and recommended to undergo definitive PT; 547 patients (34.4%) had commercial insurance, whereas 1045 patients (65.6%) had Medicare/Medicaid. Of those with Medicare, 164 patients (15.7%) had Medicare alone; 677 (64.8%) had supplemental plans; and 204 (19.5%) had secondary commercial insurance. Insurance that "covered" PT for prostate cancer implied that it was an indication designated in the coverage policy. "Not covered" means that the insurance policy did not list prostate cancer as an indication for PT. Of all 1592 patients, 1263 (79.3%) belonged to plans that covered PT per policy. However, approval for PT was still required via medical review for 619 patients (38.9%), comparative dosimetry for 56 patients (3.5%), peer-to-peer discussion for 234 patients (14.7%), and administrative law judge hearings for 3 patients (<0.1%). Multivariate analyses of factors affecting approval were conducted, including risk group (low/intermediate versus high), insurance type (commercial versus Medicare/Medicaid), whether PT was included as a covered benefit under the plan (covered versus not covered), and time period (2014-16 versus 2017 versus 2018). RESULTS: On multivariate analysis, factors affecting PT approval for prostate treatment included coverage of PT per policy (97.1% had approval with insurance that covered PT versus 48.6% whose insurance did not cover PT; P < .001); insurance type (32.5% had approval with commercial insurance versus 97.4% with Medicare; P < .001); and time, with 877/987 patients (88.9%) approved between 2014 and 2016, 255/312 patients (81.7%) approved during 2017, and 255/293 patients (87.0%) approved thereafter (P = .02). Clinical factors, including risk group, had no bearing on insurance approval (P = .44). CONCLUSION: Proton insurance approval for prostate cancer has decreased, is most influenced by the type of insurance a patient belongs to, and is unrelated to clinical factors (risk group) in this study. More work is needed to help navigate appropriate access to care and to assist patients seeking definitive PT for prostate cancer treatment.

Comparative Effectiveness of Proton Therapy versus Photon Radiotherapy in Adolescents and Young Adults for Classical Hodgkin Lymphoma.

PURPOSE: Early stage (stages I-II) classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) is a highly curable disease typically diagnosed in adolescents and young adults (AYAs). Proton therapy can also reduce the late toxicity burden in this population, but data on its comparative efficacy with photon radiotherapy in this population are sparse. We assessed outcomes in AYAs with cHL in a multi-institution retrospective review. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified 94 patients aged 15 to 40 years with stages I and II cHL treated with radiotherapy as part of their initial treatment between 2008 and 2017. We used Kaplan-Meier analyses and log-rank testing to evaluate survival differences between groups of patients. RESULTS: A total of 91 patients were included in the analysis. The 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate was 89%. Of the 12 patients who experienced progression after radiotherapy, 4 occurred out-of-field, 2 occurred in-field, and 6 experienced both in- and out-of-field progression. There was no significant difference in 2-year PFS among AYA patients by radiotherapy dose received (≥ 30 Gy, 91%; < 30 Gy, 86%; P = .82). Likewise, there was no difference in 2-year PFS among patients who received either proton or photon radiotherapy (proton, 94%; photon, 83%; P = .07). CONCLUSION: Our cohort of AYA patients had comparable outcomes regardless of radiotherapy dose or modality used. For patients with significant risk of radiation-induced late effects, proton therapy is a reasonable treatment modality.

Heterogeneity in Radiotherapeutic Parameter Assumptions in Cost-Effectiveness Analyses in Prostate Cancer: A Call for Uniformity.

OBJECTIVES: Cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) may provide useful data to inform management decisions depending on the robustness of a model's input parameters. We sought to determine the level of heterogeneity in health state utility values, transition probabilities, and cost estimates across published CEAs assessing primarily radiotherapeutic management strategies in prostate cancer. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of prostate cancer CEAs indexed in MEDLINE between 2000 and 2018 comparing accepted treatment modalities across all cancer stages. Search terms included "cost effectiveness prostate," "prostate cancer cost model," "cost utility prostate," and "Markov AND prostate AND (cancer OR adenocarcinoma)." Included studies were agreed upon. A Markov model was designed using the parameter estimates from the systematic review to evaluate the effect of estimate heterogeneity on strategy cost acceptability. RESULTS: Of 199 abstracts identified, 47 publications were reviewed and 37 were included; 508 model estimates were compared. Estimates varied widely across variables, including gastrointestinal toxicity risk (0%-49.5%), utility of metastatic disease (0.25-0.855), intensity-modulated radiotherapy cost ($21 193-$61 996), and recurrence after external-beam radiotherapy (1.5%-59%). Multiple studies assumed that different radiotherapy modalities delivering the same dose yielded varying cancer control rates. When using base estimates for similar parameters from included studies, the designed model resulted in 3 separate acceptability determinations. CONCLUSIONS: Significant heterogeneity exists across parameter estimates used to perform CEAs evaluating treatment for prostate cancer. Heterogeneity across model inputs yields variable conclusions with respect to the favorability and cost-effectiveness of treatment options. Decision makers are cautioned to review estimates in CEAs to ensure they are up to date and relevant to setting and population.

RBE-weighted dose and its impact on the risk of acute coronary event for breast cancer patients treated with intensity modulated proton therapy.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the relative biological effectiveness (RBE)-weighted dose to the heart and to estimate RBE uncertainties when assuming a constant RBE of 1.1, for breast cancer patients receiving intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT). Further, to study the impact of RBE uncertainties on the risk of an acute coronary event (ACE). MATERIAL AND METHODS: We analyzed 20 patients who received IMPT to either the left breast (n = 10) or left chest wall (n = 10) and regional lymph nodes. The Monte Carlo simulation engine, MCsquare, was used to simulate the dose-averaged linear energy transfer (LETd) map. The RBE-weighted dose to the heart and its substructures was calculated using three different RBE models. The risk of ACE was estimated per its linear relationship with mean heart dose (MHD) as established by Darby et al. RESULTS: The median MHD increased from 1.33 GyRBE assuming an RBE of 1.1 to 1.64, 1.87, and 1.99 GyRBE when using the RBE-weighted dose models. The median values (and ranges) of the excess absolute risk of ACE were 0.4% (0.1%-0.8%) when assuming an RBE of 1.1, and 0.6% (0.2%-1.0%), 0.6% (0.2%-1.1%), and 0.7% (0.2%-1.1%) with the RBE-weighted models. For our patient cohort, the maximum excess absolute risk of ACE increased by 0.3% with the RBE-weighted doses compared to the constant RBE of 1.1, reaching an excess absolute ACE risk of 1.1%. The interpatient LETd variation was small for the relevant high-dose regions of the heart. CONCLUSION: All three RBE models predicted a higher biological dose compared to the clinical standard dose assuming a constant RBE of 1.1. An underestimation of the biological dose results in underestimation of the ACE risk. Analyzing the voxel-by-voxel biological dose and the LET map alongside clinical outcomes is warranted in the development of a more accurate normal-tissue complication probability model.

Five- and seven-year outcomes for image-guided moderately accelerated hypofractionated proton therapy for prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: To report 5- and 7-year outcomes after image-guided moderately accelerated hypofractionated proton therapy (AHPT) for prostate cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We reviewed the first 582 prostate cancer patients enrolled on prospective outcomes tracking trial and treated with double-scattered moderately AHPT between 2008 and 2015. 269 patients had low-risk (LR) and 313 had intermediate-risk (IR) disease, including 149 with favorable intermediate-risk (FIR) and 164 with unfavorable intermediate-risk (UIR) disease. LR patients received a median 70.0GyRBE (2.5GyRBE/fraction) and IR patients received a median of 72.5 GyRBE. Seventeen patients (UIR, n = 12) received androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for a median of 6 months. Toxicities were graded per the CTCAE, v4.0, and patient-reported quality-of-life data were reviewed. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 8.0 years (0.9-12.2). The 5- and 7-year rates of freedom from biochemical progression (FFBP) overall and in the LR and IR subsets, respectively, were 96.8/95.2%, 98.8/98.8%, and 95.0/91.9%. For the FIR and UIR subsets, they were 97.2/95.2% and 93.1/88.8%. Actuarial 5- and 7-year rates of late CTCAE, v4.0, grade 2 gastrointestinal (GI), grade 3 GI, and grade 3 genitourinary (GU) toxicities were 9.9%/11.2%, 1.4/1.4% and 1.3/2.1%, respectively. No grade ≥4 GI or GU toxicities occurred. The mean (standard deviation, SD) IPSS and EPIC Composite bowel function and bother scores were 7 (SD = 5), 97 (SD = 7), and 94 (SD = 6), respectively at baseline, 7 (SD = 5), 92 (SD = 13), and 92 (SD = 9) at the 5-year follow-up, and 7 (SD = 5), 93 (SD = 12), and 92 (SD = 10) at the 7-year follow-up. CONCLUSION: Image-guided AHPT 5- and 7-year outcomes show high efficacy, minimal physician-assessed toxicity, and excellent patient-reported outcomes in this cohort.