Defining Minimum Treatment Parameters of Ablative Radiation Therapy in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma: An Expert Consensus.

PURPOSE: External beam radiation therapy (EBRT) is a highly effective treatment in select patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer system does not recommend the use of EBRT in HCC due to a lack of sufficient evidence and intends to perform an individual patient level meta-analysis of ablative EBRT in this population. However, there are many types of EBRT described in the literature with no formal definition of what constitutes "ablative." Thus, we convened a group of international experts to provide consensus on the parameters that define ablative EBRT in HCC. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Fundamental parameters related to dose, fractionation, radiobiology, target identification, and delivery technique were identified by a steering committee to generate 7 Key Criteria (KC) that would define ablative EBRT for HCC. Using a modified Delphi (mDelphi) method, experts in the use of EBRT in the treatment of HCC were surveyed. Respondents were given 30 days to respond in round 1 of the mDelphi and 14 days to respond in round 2. A threshold of ≥70% was used to define consensus for answers to each KC. RESULTS: Of 40 invitations extended, 35 (88%) returned responses. In the first round, 3 of 7 KC reached consensus. In the second round, 100% returned responses and consensus was reached in 3 of the remaining 4 KC. The distribution of answers for one KC, which queried the a/b ratio of HCC, was such that consensus was not achieved. Based on this analysis, ablative EBRT for HCC was defined as a BED10 ≥80 Gy with daily imaging and multiphasic contrast used for target delineation. Treatment breaks (eg, for adaptive EBRT) are allowed, but the total treatment time should be ≤6 weeks. Equivalent dose when treating with protons should use a conversion factor of 1.1, but there is no single conversion factor for carbon ions. CONCLUSIONS: Using a mDelphi method assessing expert opinion, we provide the first consensus definition of ablative EBRT for HCC. Empirical data are required to define the a/b of HCC.

Re-irradiation in clinical practice: Results of an international patterns of care survey within the framework of the ESTRO-EORTC E2-RADIatE platform.

BACKGROUND: Re-irradiation is an increasingly utilized treatment for recurrent, metastatic or new malignancies after previous radiotherapy. It is unclear how re-irradiation is applied in clinical practice. We aimed to investigate the patterns of care of re-irradiation internationally. MATERIAL/METHODS: A cross-sectional survey conducted between March and September 2022. The survey was structured into six sections, each corresponding to a specific anatomical region. Participants were instructed to complete the sections of their clinical expertise. A total of 15 multiple-choice questions were included in each section, addressing various aspects of the re-irradiation process. The online survey targeted radiation and clinical oncologists and was endorsed by the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC). RESULTS: 371 physicians from 55 countries across six continents participated. Participants had a median professional experience of 16 years, and the majority (60%) were affiliated with an academic hospital. The brain region was the most common site for re-irradiation (77%), followed by the pelvis (65%) and head and neck (63%). Prolonging local control was the most common goal (90-96% across anatomical regions). The most common minimum interval between previous radiotherapy and re-irradiation was 6-12 months (45-55%). Persistent grade 3 or greater radiation-induced toxicity (77-80%) was the leading contraindication. Variability in organs at risk dose constraints for re-irradiation was observed. Advanced imaging modalities and conformal radiotherapy techniques were predominantly used. A scarcity of institutional guidelines for re-irradiation was reported (16-19%). Participants from European centers more frequently applied thoracic and abdominal re-irradiation. Indications did not differ between academic and non-academic hospitals. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the heterogeneity in re-irradiation practices across anatomical regions and emphasizes the need for high-quality evidence from prospective studies to guide treatment decisions and derive safe cumulative dose constraints.

Dose comparison of robustly optimized intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) vs IMRT and VMAT photon plans for testicular seminoma.

BACKGROUND: Patients with stage II seminoma have traditionally been treated with photons to the retroperitoneal and iliac space, which leads to a substantial dose bath to abdominal and pelvic organs at risk (OAR). As these patients are young and with excellent prognosis, reducing dose to OAR and thereby the risk of secondary cancer is of utmost importance. We compared IMPT to opposing IMRT fields and VMAT, assessing dose to OAR and both overall and organ-specific secondary cancer risk. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A comparative treatment planning study was conducted on planning CT-scans from ten patients with stage II seminoma, treated with photons to a 'dog-leg' field with doses ranging from 20 to 25 Gy and a 10 Gy sequential boost to the metastatic lymph node(s). Photon plans were either 3-4 field IMRT (Eclipse) or 1-2 arc VMAT (Pinnacle). Proton plans used robust (5 mm; 3.5%) IMPT (Eclipse), multi field optimization with 3 posterior fields supplemented by 2 anterior fields at the level of the iliac vessels. Thirty plans were generated. Mean doses to OARs were compared for IMRT vs IMPT and VMAT vs IMPT. The risk of secondary cancer was calculated according to the model described by Schneider, using excess absolute risk (EAR, per 10,000 persons per year) for body outline, stomach, duodenum, pancreas, bowel, bladder and spinal cord. RESULTS: Mean doses to all OARs were significantly lower with IMPT except similar kidney (IMRT) and spinal cord (VMAT) doses. The relative EAR for body outline was 0.59 for IMPT/IMRT (p < .05) and 0.33 for IMPT/VMAT (p < .05). Organ specific secondary cancer risk was also lower for IMPT except for pancreas and duodenum. CONCLUSION: Proton therapy reduced radiation dose to OAR compared to both IMRT and VMAT plans, and potentially reduce the risk of secondary cancer both overall and for most OAR.

Plan robustness evaluation strategies in whole-pelvic proton therapy for high-risk prostate cancer patients within a randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Inter-fractional anatomical changes challenge robust delivery of whole-pelvic proton therapy for high-risk prostate cancer. Pre-treatment robust evaluation (PRE) takes uncertainties in isocenter shifts and distal beam edge in treatment plans into account. Using weekly control computed tomography scans (cCTs), the aim of this study was to evaluate the PRE strategy by comparing to an off-line during-treatment robust evaluation (DRE) while also assessing plan robustness with respect to protocol planning constraints. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Treatment plans and cCTs from ten patients included in the pilot phase of the PROstate PROTON Trial 1 were analysed. Treatment planning followed protocol guidelines with 78 Gy to the primary clinical target volume (CTVp) and 56 Gy to the elective target (CTVe) in 39 fractions. Recalculations of the treatment plans were performed for a total of 64 cCTs and dose/volume measures corresponding to clinical constraints were evaluated for this DRE against the simulated scenario interval from the PRE. RESULTS: Of the 64 cCTs, 59 showed DRE CTVp measures within the robustness range from the PRE; this was also the case for 39 of the cCTs for the CTVe measures. However, DRE CTVe coverage was still within constraints for 57 of the 64 cCTs. DRE dose/volume measures for CTVp fulfilled target coverage constraints in 59 of 64 cCTs. All DRE measures for the rectum, bladder, and bowel were inside the PRE range in 63, 39, and 31 cCTs, respectively. CONCLUSION: The PRE strategy predicted the DRE scenarios for CTVp and rectum. CTVe, bladder, and bowel showed more complex anatomical variations than simulated by the PRE isocenter shift. Both original and recalculated nominal treatment plans showed robust treatment delivery in terms of target coverage.

Proton therapy planning and image-guidance strategies within a randomized controlled trial for high-risk prostate cancer.

The Danish Prostate Cancer Group is launching the randomized trial, PROstate PROTON Trial 1 (NCT05350475), that compares photons and protons to the prostate and pelvic lymph nodes in treatment of high-risk prostate cancer. The aim of the work described in this paper was, in preparation of this trial, to establish a strategy for conventionally fractionated proton therapy of prostate and elective pelvic lymph nodes that is feasible and robust. Proton treatments are image-guided based on gold fiducial markers and on-board imaging systems in line with current practice. Our established proton beam configuration consists of four coplanar fields; two posterior oblique fields and two lateral oblique fields, chosen to minimize range uncertainties associated with penetrating a varying amount of material from both treatment couch and patient body. Proton plans are robustly optimized to ensure target coverage while keeping normal tissue doses as low as is reasonably achievable throughout the course of treatment. Specific focus is on dose to the bowel as a reduction in gastrointestinal toxicity is the primary endpoint of the trial. Strategies have been established using previously treated patients and will be further investigated and evaluated through the ongoing pilot phase of the trial.

Using immunotherapy to enhance the response of a C3H mammary carcinoma to proton radiation.

BACKGROUND: The benefit of combining immunotherapy with photon irradiation has been shown pre-clinically and clinically. This current pre-clinical study was designed to investigate the anti-tumour action of combining immunotherapy with protons. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Male CDF1 mice, with a C3H mammary carcinoma inoculated on the right rear foot, were locally irradiated with single radiation doses when tumours reached 200mm3. Radiation was delivered with an 83-107MeV pencil scanning proton beam in the centre of a 3 cm spread out Bragg peak. Following irradiation (day 0), mice were injected intraperitoneal with anti-CTLA-4, anti-PD-1, or anti-PD-L1 (10 mg/kg) twice weekly for two weeks. Endpoints were tumour growth time (TGT3; time to reach 3 times treatment volume) or local tumour control (percent of mice showing tumour control at 90 days). A Student's T-test (tumour growth) or Chi-squared test (tumour control) were used for statistical analysis; significance levels of p < 0.05. RESULTS: Untreated tumours had a mean (± 1 S.E.) TGT3 of 4.6 days (± 0.4). None of the checkpoint inhibitors changed this TGT3. A linear increase in TGT3 was seen with increasing radiation doses (5-20 Gy), reaching 17.2 days (± 0.7) with 20 Gy. Anti-CTLA-4 had no effect on radiation doses up to 15 Gy, but significantly enhanced 20 Gy; the TGT3 being 23.0 days (± 1.3). Higher radiation doses (35-60 Gy) were investigated using a tumour control assay. Logit analysis of the dose response curve, resulted in a TCD50 value (radiation dose causing 50% tumour control; with 95% confidence intervals) of 48 Gy (44-53) for radiation only. This significantly decreased to 43 Gy (38-49) when mice were treated with anti-CTLA-4. Neither anti-PD-1 nor anti-PD-L1 significantly affected tumour control. CONCLUSION: Checkpoint inhibitors enhanced the response of this C3H mammary carcinoma to proton irradiation. However, this enhancement depended on the checkpoint inhibitor and radiation dose.

Intrafraction tumor motion monitoring and dose reconstruction for liver pencil beam scanning proton therapy.

Background: Pencil beam scanning (PBS) proton therapy can provide highly conformal target dose distributions and healthy tissue sparing. However, proton therapy of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is prone to dosimetrical uncertainties induced by respiratory motion. This study aims to develop intra-treatment tumor motion monitoring during respiratory gated proton therapy and combine it with motion-including dose reconstruction to estimate the delivered tumor doses for individual HCC treatment fractions. Methods: Three HCC-patients were planned to receive 58 GyRBE (n=2) or 67.5 GyRBE (n=1) of exhale respiratory gated PBS proton therapy in 15 fractions. The treatment planning was based on the exhale phase of a 4-dimensional CT scan. Daily setup was based on cone-beam CT (CBCT) imaging of three implanted fiducial markers. An external marker block (RPM) on the patient's abdomen was used for exhale gating in free breathing. This study was based on 5 fractions (patient 1), 1 fraction (patient 2) and 6 fractions (patient 3) where a post-treatment control CBCT was available. After treatment, segmented 2D marker positions in the post-treatment CBCT projections provided the estimated 3D motion trajectory during the CBCT by a probability-based method. An external-internal correlation model (ECM) that estimated the tumor motion from the RPM motion was built from the synchronized RPM signal and marker motion in the CBCT. The ECM was then used to estimate intra-treatment tumor motion. Finally, the motion-including CTV dose was estimated using a dose reconstruction method that emulates tumor motion in beam's eye view as lateral spot shifts and in-depth motion as changes in the proton beam energy. The CTV homogeneity index (HI) The CTV homogeneity index (HI) was calculated as D 2 %  -  D 98 % D 50 %   × 100 % . Results: The tumor position during spot delivery had a root-mean-square error of 1.3 mm in left-right, 2.8 mm in cranio-caudal and 1.7 mm in anterior-posterior directions compared to the planned position. On average, the CTV HI was larger than planned by 3.7%-points (range: 1.0-6.6%-points) for individual fractions and by 0.7%-points (range: 0.3-1.1%-points) for the average dose of 5 or 6 fractions. Conclusions: A method to estimate internal tumor motion and reconstruct the motion-including fraction dose for PBS proton therapy of HCC was developed and demonstrated successfully clinically.

European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer consensus on re-irradiation: definition, reporting, and clinical decision making.

Re-irradiation can be considered for local recurrence or new tumours adjacent to a previously irradiated site to achieve durable local control for patients with cancer who have otherwise few therapeutic options. With the use of new radiotherapy techniques, which allow for conformal treatment plans, image guidance, and short fractionation schemes, the use of re-irradiation for different sites is increasing in clinical settings. Yet, prospective evidence on re-irradiation is scarce and our understanding of the underlying radiobiology is poor. Our consensus on re-irradiation aims to assist in re-irradiation decision making, and to standardise the classification of different forms of re-irradiation and reporting. The consensus has been endorsed by the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer. The use of this classification in daily clinical practice and research will facilitate accurate understanding of the clinical implications of re-irradiation and allow for cross-study comparisons. Data gathered in a uniform manner could be used in the future to make recommendations for re-irradiation on the basis of clinical evidence. The consensus document is based on an adapted Delphi process and a systematic review of the literature was done according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA).

A year of pandemic for European particle radiotherapy: A survey on behalf of EPTN working group.

OBJECTIVES: To provide an overview of the impact of the pandemic on the clinical activity and take a snapshot of the contingent challenges that European particle therapy centers are called to face, we surveyed the members of the European Particle Therapy Network (EPTN). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A 52-question survey was conducted from 4th April 2021 to 30th July 2021 using the Google Forms platform. Three dedicated sections analysed the clinical context of each participating institution, the staff management, and the clinical changes in the oncological workflow. RESULTS: Out of the 23 contacted European hubs of particle radiotherapy, a total of 9 (39%) responded to the survey. The number of in-person first evaluations and follow-up visits decreased, but telemedicine was implemented. Multidisciplinary tumour board discussions continued during the outbreak using web-based solutions. A delay in cancer diagnosis and oncological staging leading to an increment in more advanced diseases at first presentation was generally observed. Even if the total number of treatments (photons and particles) in the responding institutions showed a trend of decrease, there was or a stable situation or slight increase in particle treatments. The clinical treatment choices followed the national and international scientific recommendations and were patient/disease-oriented. Hypofractionation and short-schedule of chemotherapy, when applicable, were preferred. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show a rapid and effective reaction of European particle RT hubs to manage the healthcare crisis. Considering the new waves and virus variants, the vaccination campaign will hopefully reduce the oncological impacts and consequences of the prolonged outbreak.

Spot-scanning proton therapy for targets with adjacent cardiac implantable electronic devices - Strategies for breast and head & neck cancer.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) malfunctions can be induced by secondary neutron dose from spot-scanning proton therapy. A recent in-vitro study investigating secondary neutron dose to CIEDs up to 7 mSv per fraction found that exposure of secondary neutrons in this range was clinically manageable. This study presents decision algorithms proposed by a national expert group for selection of patients with breast and head & neck (H&N) cancer with CIEDs adjacent to target for proton therapy based on the 7 mSv threshold. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Ten patients with breast cancer and five with H&N cancer were included in the study. Five patients with breast cancer received photon therapy with CIED and proton plans were retrospectively created. The remaining patients received proton therapy without CIED and a worst-case position of a virtual CIED was retrospectively delineated. Secondary neutron dose was estimated as ambient dose equivalent H*(10) using Monte Carlo simulations. RESULTS: For patients with breast cancer and with contralateral CIED, the secondary neutron dose to the CIED was below 7 mSv per fraction for CTV < 1500 cm3 in 2 Gy fractions and CTV < 1000 cm3 in 2.67 Gy fractions. The secondary neutron dose to the CIED was below 7 mSv per fraction for all patients with H&N cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Simulations of neutron exposure suggest that proton therapy is feasible for most patients with CIED adjacent to target. This forms the basis for decision algorithms for selection of patients with CIED for proton therapy.

Current practice in proton therapy delivery in adult cancer patients across Europe.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Major differences exist among proton therapy (PT) centres regarding PT delivery in adult cancer patient. To obtain insight into current practice in Europe, we performed a survey among European PT centres. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We designed electronic questionnaires for eight tumour sites, focusing on four main topics: 1) indications and patient selection methods; 2) reimbursement; 3) on-going or planned studies, 4) annual number of patients treated with PT. RESULTS: Of 22 centres, 19 (86%) responded. In total, 4233 adult patients are currently treated across Europe annually, of which 46% consists of patients with central nervous system tumours (CNS), 15% head and neck cancer (HNC), 15% prostate, 9% breast, 5% lung, 5% gastrointestinal, 4% lymphoma, 0.3% gynaecological cancers. CNS are treated in all participating centres (n = 19) using PT, HNC in 16 centres, lymphoma in 10 centres, gastrointestinal in 10 centres, breast in 7 centres, prostate in 6 centres, lung in 6 centres, and gynaecological cancers in 3 centres. Reimbursement is provided by national health care systems for the majority of commonly treated tumour sites. Approximately 74% of centres enrol patients for prospective data registration programs. Phase II-III trials are less frequent, due to reimbursement and funding problems. Reasons for not treating certain tumour types with PT are lack of evidence (30%), reimbursement issues (29%) and/or technical limitations (20%). CONCLUSION: Across European PT centres, CNS tumours and HNC are the most frequently treated tumour types. Most centres use indication protocols. Lack of evidence for PT and reimbursement issues are the most reported reasons for not treating specific tumour types with PT.

Proton therapy for early breast cancer patients in the DBCG proton trial: planning, adaptation, and clinical experience from the first 43 patients.

BACKGROUND: The Danish Breast Cancer Group (DBCG) Proton Trial randomizes breast cancer patients selected on high mean heart dose (MHD) or high lung dose (V20Gy/V17Gy) in the photon plan between photon and proton therapy. This study presents the proton plans and adaptation strategy for the first 43 breast cancer patients treated with protons in Denmark. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty-four proton plans (one patient with bilateral cancer) were included; 2 local and 42 loco-regional including internal mammary nodes (IMN). Nineteen patients had a mastectomy and 25 a lumpectomy. The prescribed dose was either 50 Gy in 25 fractions (n = 30) or 40 Gy in 15 fractions (n = 14) wherefrom five received simultaneous integrated boost to the tumor bed. Using 2-3 en face proton fields, single-field optimization, robust optimization and a 5 cm range shifter ensured robustness towards breathing motion, setup- and range uncertainties. An anatomical evaluation was performed by evaluating the dose after adding/removing 3 mm and 5 mm tissue to/from the body-outline and used to define treatment tolerances for anatomical changes. RESULTS: The nominal and robust criteria were met for all patients except two. The median MHD was 1.5 Gy (0.5-3.4 Gy, 50 Gy) and 1.1 Gy (0.0-1.5 Gy, 40 Gy). The anatomical evaluations showed how 5 mm shrinkage approximately doubled the MHD while 5 mm swelling reduced target coverage of the IMN below constraints. Ensuring 3-5 mm robustness toward swelling was prioritized but not always achieved by robust optimization alone emphasizing the need for a distal margin. Twenty-eight patients received plan adaptation, eight patients received two, and one received five. CONCLUSION: This proton planning strategy ensured robust treatment plans within a pre-defined level of acceptable anatomical changes that fulfilled the planning criteria for most of the patients and ensured low MHD.

A phase I/II study of acute and late physician assessed and patient-reported morbidity following whole pelvic radiation in high-risk prostate cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess acute and late morbidity measured by the physician and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in high-risk prostate cancer (PC) patients receiving whole pelvic intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in the setting of a national clinical trial. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 88 patients with adenocarcinoma of the prostate and high-risk parameters were enrolled from 2011 to 2013. All patients received 78 Gy in 39 fractions of IMRT delivering simultaneous 78 Gy to the prostate and 56 Gy to the seminal vesicles and lymph nodes. Physician-reported morbidity was assessed by CTCAE v.4.0. PROs were registered for gastro-intestinal (GI) by the RT-ARD score, genito-urinary (GU) by DAN-PSS, sexual and hormonal by EPIC-26, and quality of life (QoL) by EORTC QLQ-C30. RESULTS: Median follow-up (FU) time was 4.6 years. No persistent late CTCAE grade 3+ morbidity was observed. Prevalence of CTCAE grade 2+ GI morbidities varied from 0 to 6% at baseline throughout FU time, except for diarrhea, which was reported in 19% of the patients post-RT. PROs revealed increased GI morbidity (≥1 monthly episode) for "rectal urgency", "use of pads", "incomplete evacuation", "mucus in stool" and "bowel function impact on QoL" all remained significantly different (p < .05) at 60 months compared to baseline. CTCAE grade 2+ GU and sexual morbidity were unchanged. GU PROs on obstructive and irritative GU items (≥daily episode) increased during RT and normalized at 24 months. No clinically significant differences were found in sexual, hormonal, and QoL scores compared to baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Whole pelvic RT resulted in a mild to the moderate burden of late GI morbidities demonstrated by a relatively high prevalence of PROs. Whereas, physician-assessed morbidity revealed a low prevalence of late GI morbidity scores. This emphasizes the importance of using both PROs and physician-reported scoring scales when reporting late morbidity in clinical trials.

Real-time dose-guidance in radiotherapy: Proof of principle.

PURPOSE: The outcome of radiotherapy is a direct consequence of the dose delivered to the patient. Yet image-guidance and motion management to date focus on geometrical considerations as a practical surrogate for dose. Here, we propose real-time dose-guidance realized through continuous motion-including dose reconstructions and demonstrate this new concept in simulated liver stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) delivery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: During simulated liver SBRT delivery, in-house developed software performed real-time motion-including reconstruction of the tumor dose delivered so far and continuously predicted the remaining fraction tumor dose. The total fraction dose was estimated as the sum of the delivered and predicted doses, both with and without the emulated couch correction that maximized the predicted final CTV D95% (minimum dose to 95% of the clinical target volume). Dose-guided treatments were simulated for 15 liver SBRT patients previously treated with tumor motion monitoring, using both sinusoidal tumor motion and the actual patient-measured motion. A dose-guided couch correction was triggered if it improved the predicted final CTV D95% with 3, 4 or 5 %-points. The final CTV D95% of the dose-guidance strategy was compared with simulated treatments using geometry guided couch corrections (Wilcoxon signed-rank test). RESULTS: Compared to geometry guidance, dose-guided couch corrections improved the median CTV D95% with 0.5-1.5 %-points (p < 0.01) for sinusoidal motions and with 0.9 %-points (p < 0.01, 3 %-points trigger threshold), 0.5 %-points (p = 0.03, 4 %-points threshold) and 1.2 %-points (p = 0.09, 5 %-points threshold) for patient-measured tumor motion. CONCLUSION: Real-time dose-guidance was proposed and demonstrated to be superior to geometrical adaptation in liver SBRT simulations.