Prise en charge des métastases osseuses (expérience rouennaise d'une réunion de concertation pluridisciplinaire dédiée)

Les métastases osseuses représentent une activité importante en oncologie sans que des référentiels établissent spécifiquement les différentes modalités thérapeutiques. Cependant, les possibilités de traitement sont multiples, en évolution permanente et font intervenir plusieurs spécialités. Il nous a donc semblé important de mettre en place une réunion de concertation pluridisciplinaire (RCP) dédiée aux métastases osseuses afin de proposer le traitement le plus adapté. Ce travail a pour objectif d'analyser les dossiers présentés à cette RCP durant ses deux premières années d'activité. Méthode : Pour ce faire, nous avons recueilli l'ensemble des données cliniques des patients présentés à la RCP, les décisions thérapeutiques prises et les traitements réalisés entre janvier 2009 et décembre 2010. Résultats :Au total, 332 dossiers ont été analysés en 47 RCP représentant 264 patients. Les patients provenaient très majoritairement du Centre Henri Becquerel et du Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire Charles Nicolle. Les cancers primitifs les plus fréquemment rencontrés étaient le cancer du sein et le cancer pulmonaire. Dans 87% des cas, la proposition thérapeutique de la RCP a été respectée. 25% des patients présentés ont été opérés par neurochirurgie ou par traitement orthopédique et 65% traités par radiothérapie. Les facteurs prédictifs de survie en analyse multivariée étaient l'absence de métastase viscérale, un état OMS inférieur à 2 et l'absence de traitement morphinique. La médiane de survie des patients était de 17 mois. Les patients opérés avaient une espérance de vie supérieure à celle des autres patients (p=0.03). Concernant les patients traités par radiothérapie antalgique, le fractionnement n'avait pas d'impact sur le taux de réponse. Conclusion : Actuellement, les patients avec des métastases osseuses peuvent avoir une longue survie comme cela est confirmé dans notre travail. Il apparaît donc indispensable de définir le projet thérapeutique au cours de discussions pluridisciplinaires auxquelles sont présents des chirurgiens, des radiothérapeutes, des radiologues, des oncologues médicaux, des rhumatologues et des médecins nucléaires.ROUEN-BU Médecine-Pharmacie (765402102) / SudocSudocFranceF

Evaluation of inter- and intra-fraction 6D motion for stereotactic body radiation therapy of spinal metastases : influence of treatment time

International audienceAbstract Background The objective of this study was to analyze the amplitude of translational and rotational movements occurring during stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) of spinal metastases in two different positioning devices. The relevance of intra-fractional imaging and the influence of treatment time were evaluated. Methods Twenty patients were treated in the supine position either (1) on a body vacuum cushion with arms raised and resting on a clegecel or (2) on an integrated SBRT solution consisting of a SBRT table top, an Orfit™ AIO system, and a vacuum cushion. Alignments between the cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and the planning computed tomography allowed corrections of inter- and intra-fraction positional shifts using a 6D table. The absolute values of the translational and rotational setup errors obtained for 329 CBCT were recorded. The translational 3D vector, the maximum angle, and the characteristic times of the treatment fractions were calculated. Results An improvement in the mean (SD) inter-fraction 3D vector (mm) from 7.8 (5.9) to 5.9 (3.8) was obtained by changing the fixation devices from (1) to (2) ( p < 0.038). The maximum angles were less than 2° for a total of 87% for (1) and 96% for (2). The mean (SD) of the intra-fraction 3D vectors (mm) was lower for the new 1.1 (0.8) positioning fixation (2) compared to the old one (1) 1.7 (1.7) ( p = 0.004). The angular corrections applied in the intra-fraction were on average very low (0.4°) and similar between the two systems. A strong correlation was found between the 3D displacement vector and the fraction time for (1) and (2) with regression coefficients of 0.408 (0.262–0.555, 95% CI) and 0.069 (0.010–0.128, 95% CI), respectively. An accuracy of 1 mm would require intra-fraction imaging every 5 min for both systems. If the expected accuracy was 2 mm, then only system (2) could avoid intra-fractional imaging. Conclusions This study allowed us to evaluate setup errors of two immobilization devices for spine SBRT. The association of inter- and intra-fraction imaging with 6D repositioning of a patient is inevitable. The correlation between treatment time and corrections to be applied encourages us to move toward imaging modalities which allow a reduction in fraction time

Decision making factors of the management of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast with microinvasion

International audienceIntroductionMicroinvasive in situ ductal carcinomas of the breast are rare and of good prognosis. They are grouped with early stage invasive carcinomas in the TNM 2017 classification. This study assessed practitioners’ treatment decisions and their justifications in comparison to the literature.Materials and methodsThree clinical cases were evaluated by anonymous forms regarding sentinel node decisions, tumour bed boost irradiation and hormone therapy.ResultsSentinel lymph node was performed by 93.1%, 100% and 44.4% of the practitioners respectively. Radiation boost was a treatment option chosen by 62.1% and 61.1% of practitioners in both clinical cases. Hormone therapy was advocated for 65.5%, 94.7% and 50.0% patients depending on the clinical case.ConclusionThe therapeutic attitude proposed in microinvasive breast carcinomas was heterogeneous in this study, reflecting the absence of specific recommendations. In view of the existing literature, it is not currently possible to propose recommendations for these three therapeutic options. Prospective cohorts and meta-analyses of the microinvasive subgroup could provide answers

Evaluation of a Dedicated Software “Elements™ Spine SRS, Brainlab®” for Target Volume Definition in the Treatment of Spinal Bone Metastases With Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy

Introduction Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is a treatment option for spine metastases. The International Spine Radiosurgery Consortium (ISRC) has published consensus guidelines for target delineation in spine SBRT. A new software called Elements™ Spine SRS by Brainlab ® that includes the module Elements SmartBrush Spine (v3.0, Munich, Germany) has been developed specifically for SBRT treatment of spine metastases, and the latter provides the ability to perform semiautomatic clinical target volume (CTV) generation based on gross tumor volume (GTV) localization and guidelines. The aims of our study were to evaluate this software by studying differences in volumes between semiautomatic CTV contours compared to manual contouring performed by an expert radiation oncologist and to determine the dosimetric impact of these differences on treatment plans. Methods A total of 35 volumes (“Expert GTV” and “Expert CTV”) from 30 patients were defined by a single expert. A semiautomatic definition of these 35 CTVs based on the location of “Expert GTV” and following ISRC guidelines was also performed in Elements SmartBrush Spine (“Brainlab CTV”). The spatial overlap between “Brainlab” and “Expert” CTVs was calculated using the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC). We considered a threshold of 0.80 or above to indicate that Elements SmartBrush Spine performed very well with adequate contours for clinical use. Two dosimetric treatment plans, each corresponding to a specific planning target volume (PTV; Expert PTV, Brainlab PTV), were created for 11 patients. Results We showed that “Brainlab CTV” and “Expert CTV” mean volumes were 29.8 ± 16.1 and 28.7 ± 15.7 cm 3 , respectively (p = 0.23). We also showed that the mean DSC for semiautomatic contouring relative to expert manual contouring was 0.85 ± 0.08 and less than 0.80 in five cases. For metastases involving the vertebral body only (n = 13,37%), the mean DSC was 0.90 ± 0.03, and for ones involving other or several vertebral regions (n = 22.63%), the mean DSC was 0.81 ± 0.08 (p &lt; 0.001). The comparison of dosimetric treatment plans was performed for equivalent PTV coverage. There were no differences between doses received by organs at risk (spinal cord and esophagus) for Expert and Brainlab PTVs, respectively. Conclusion The results showed that the semiautomatic method had quite good accuracy and can be used in clinical routine even for complex lesions

ExacTrac X-Ray 6D Imaging During Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy of Spinal and Nonspinal Metastases

The objective was to investigate the possibility of using ExacTrac X-ray (ETX) for 6D image guidance in stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) of bone metastasis and to propose a patient management protocol. The analyses were first obtained from measurements on a pelvic phantom and on 19 patients treated for bone metastasis. The phantom study consisted of applying known offsets and evaluating the ETX level of accuracy, where results were compared with kV-cone beam computed tomography (kV-CBCT). Two groups of patients, 10 spinal and 9 nonspinal SBRT cases, were analyzed to evaluate ETX imaging for different bone localisations. A comparison was made between kV-CBCT and ETX prior to the treatment fractions. During treatments, two other kV-CBCT/ETX image pairs were also acquired and a total of 224 shifts were compared. A second study, using the ETX monitoring module, analyzed the intrafraction motion of 8 other patients. In the phantom study, the root mean square (RMS) of the translational and rotational discrepancies between ETX and kV-CBCT were < 0.6 mm and < 0.4°, respectively. For both groups of patients, the RMS of the discrepancies observed between the two imaging systems were greater than the phantom experiment while still remaining < 1 mm and < 0.7°. In the nonspinal group, three patients (2 scapulas and 1 humerus) did not have consistent shift values with ETX due to a lack of anatomical information. When ETX monitoring was used during irradiation, the setup errors measured were on average less than 1 mm/1°. The results obtained validated the use of ETX for 6D image guidance during bone SBRT. Real-time tracking of the target position improves the accuracy of the irradiation. This strategy allowed for faster correction of out-of-tolerance positioning errors. The registration of bone lesions with poor anatomical information is a limitation of this 2D-kV imaging system

Impact of creative art therapy on fatigue and quality of life in patients treated for localized breast cancer: A randomized study

International audienc

Target volume delineation for radiotherapy of meningiomas: an ANOCEF consensus guideline

International audiencePurpose Radiotherapy is, with surgery, one of the main therapeutic treatment strategies for meningiomas. No prospective study has defined a consensus for the delineation of target volumes for meningioma radiotherapy. Therefore, target volume definition is mainly based on information from retrospective studies that include heterogeneous patient populations. The aim is to describe delineation guidelines for meningioma radiotherapy as an adjuvant or definitive treatment with intensity-modulated radiation therapy and stereotactic radiation therapy techniques. This guideline is based on a consensus endorsed by a multidisciplinary group of brain tumor experts, members of the Association of French-speaking Neuro-oncologists (ANOCEF). Materials and methods A 3-step procedure was used. First, the steering group carried out a comprehensive review to identify divergent issues on meningiomas target volume delineation. Second, an 84-item web-questionnaire has been developed to precisely define meningioma target volume delineation in the most common clinical situations. Third, experts members of the ANOCEF were requested to answer. The first two rounds were completed online. A third round was carried out by videoconference to allow experts to debate and discuss the remaining uncertain questions. All questions remained in a consensus. Results Limits of the target volume were defined using visible landmarks on computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging, considering the pathways of tumor extension. The purpose was to develop clear and precise recommendations on meningiomas target volumes. Conclusion New recommendations for meningiomas delineation based on simple anatomic boundaries are proposed by the ANOCEF. Improvement in uniformity in target volume definition is expected

Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus radiotherapy alone in women with high-risk endometrial cancer (PORTEC-3): patterns of recurrence and post-hoc survival analysis of a randomised phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND: The PORTEC-3 trial investigated the benefit of combined adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy versus pelvic radiotherapy alone for women with high-risk endometrial cancer. We updated the analysis to investigate patterns of recurrence and did a post-hoc survival analysis. METHODS: In the multicentre randomised phase 3 PORTEC-3 trial, women with high-risk endometrial cancer were eligible if they had International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2009 stage I, endometrioid grade 3 cancer with deep myometrial invasion or lymphovascular space invasion, or both; stage II or III disease; or stage I-III disease with serous or clear cell histology; were aged 18 years and older; and had a WHO performance status of 0-2. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive radiotherapy alone (48·6 Gy in 1·8 Gy fractions given on 5 days per week) or chemoradiotherapy (two cycles of cisplatin 50 mg/m2 given intravenously during radiotherapy, followed by four cycles of carboplatin AUC5 and paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 given intravenously), by use of a biased coin minimisation procedure with stratification for participating centre, lymphadenectomy, stage, and histological type. The co-primary endpoints were overall survival and failure-free survival. Secondary endpoints of vaginal, pelvic, and distant recurrence were analysed according to the first site of recurrence. Survival endpoints were analysed by intention-to-treat, and adjusted for stratification factors. Competing risk methods were used for failure-free survival and recurrence. We did a post-hoc analysis to analyse patterns of recurrence with 1 additional year of follow-up. The study was closed on Dec 20, 2013; follow-up is ongoing. This study is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN14387080, and ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00411138. FINDINGS: Between Nov 23, 2006, and Dec 20, 2013, 686 women were enrolled, of whom 660 were eligible and evaluable (330 in the chemoradiotherapy group, and 330 in the radiotherapy-alone group). At a median follow-up of 72·6 months (IQR 59·9-85·6), 5-year overall survival was 81·4% (95% CI 77·2-85·8) with chemoradiotherapy versus 76·1% (71·6-80·9) with radiotherapy alone (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·70 [95% CI 0·51-0·97], p=0·034), and 5-year failure-free survival was 76·5% (95% CI 71·5-80·7) versus 69·1% (63·8-73·8; HR 0·70 [0·52-0·94], p=0·016). Distant metastases were the first site of recurrence in most patients with a relapse, occurring in 78 of 330 women (5-year probability 21·4%; 95% CI 17·3-26·3) in the chemoradiotherapy group versus 98 of 330 (5-year probability 29·1%; 24·4-34·3) in the radiotherapy-alone group (HR 0·74 [95% CI 0·55-0·99]; p=0·047). Isolated vaginal recurrence was the first site of recurrence in one patient (0·3%; 95% CI 0·0-2·1) in both groups (HR 0·99 [95% CI 0·06-15·90]; p=0·99), and isolated pelvic recurrence was the first site of recurrence in three women (0·9% [95% CI 0·3-2·8]) in the chemoradiotherapy group versus four (0·9% [95% CI 0·3-2·8]) in the radiotherapy-alone group (HR 0·75 [95% CI 0·17-3·33]; p=0·71). At 5 years, only one grade 4 adverse event (ileus or obstruction) was reported (in the chemoradiotherapy group). At 5 years, reported grade 3 adverse events did not differ significantly between the two groups, occurring in 16 (8%) of 201 women in the chemoradiotherapy group versus ten (5%) of 187 in the radiotherapy-alone group (p=0·24). The most common grade 3 adverse event was hypertension (in four [2%] women in both groups). At 5 years, grade 2 or worse adverse events were reported in 76 (38%) of 201 women in the chemoradiotherapy group versus 43 (23%) of 187 in the radiotherapy-alone group (p=0·002). Sensory neuropathy persisted more often after chemoradiotherapy than after radiotherapy alone, with 5-year rates of grade 2 or worse neuropathy of 6% (13 of 201 women) versus 0% (0 of 187). No treatment-related deaths were reported. INTERPRETATION: This updated analysis shows significantly improved overall survival and failure-free survival with chemoradiotherapy versus radiotherapy alone. This treatment schedule should be discussed and recommended, especially for women with stage III or serous cancers, or both, as part of shared decision making between doctors and patients. Follow-up is ongoing to evaluate long-term survival. FUNDING: Dutch Cancer Society, Cancer Research UK, National Health and Medical Research Council, Project Grant, Cancer Australia Grant, Italian Medicines Agency, and the Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute

Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus radiotherapy alone for women with high-risk endometrial cancer (PORTEC-3) : final results of an international, open-label, multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND: Although women with endometrial cancer generally have a favourable prognosis, those with high-risk disease features are at increased risk of recurrence. The PORTEC-3 trial was initiated to investigate the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy during and after radiotherapy (chemoradiotherapy) versus pelvic radiotherapy alone for women with high-risk endometrial cancer. METHODS: PORTEC-3 was an open-label, international, randomised, phase 3 trial involving 103 centres in six clinical trials collaborating in the Gynaecological Cancer Intergroup. Eligible women had high-risk endometrial cancer with FIGO 2009 stage I, endometrioid-type grade 3 with deep myometrial invasion or lymph-vascular space invasion (or both), endometrioid-type stage II or III, or stage I to III with serous or clear cell histology. Women were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive radiotherapy alone (48·6 Gy in 1·8 Gy fractions given on 5 days per week) or radiotherapy and chemotherapy (consisting of two cycles of cisplatin 50 mg/m 2 given during radiotherapy, followed by four cycles of carboplatin AUC5 and paclitaxel 175 mg/m 2) using a biased-coin minimisation procedure with stratification for participating centre, lymphadenectomy, stage of cancer, and histological type. The co-primary endpoints were overall survival and failure-free survival. We used the Kaplan-Meier method, log-rank test, and Cox regression analysis for final analysis by intention to treat and adjusted for stratification factors. The study was closed on Dec 20, 2013, after achieving complete accrual; follow-up is ongoing. PORTEC-3 is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN14387080, and ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00411138. RESULTS: 686 women were enrolled between Nov 23, 2006, and Dec 20, 2013. 660 eligible patients were included in the final analysis, of whom 330 were assigned to chemoradiotherapy and 330 were assigned to radiotherapy. Median follow-up was 60·2 months (IQR 48·1-73·1). 5-year overall survival was 81·8% (95% CI 77·5-86·2) with chemoradiotherapy versus 76·7% (72·1-81·6) with radiotherapy (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·76, 95% CI 0·54-1·06; p=0·11); 5-year failure-free survival was 75·5% (95% CI 70·3-79·9) versus 68·6% (63·1-73·4; HR 0·71, 95% CI 0·53-0·95; p=0·022). Grade 3 or worse adverse events during treatment occurred in 198 (60%) of 330 who received chemoradiotherapy versus 41 (12%) of 330 patients who received radiotherapy (p<0·0001). Neuropathy (grade 2 or worse) persisted significantly more often after chemoradiotherapy than after radiotherapy (20 [8%] women vs one [1%] at 3 years; p<0·0001). Most deaths were due to endometrial cancer; in four patients (two in each group), the cause of death was uncertain. One death in the radiotherapy group was due to either disease progression or late treatment complications; three deaths (two in the chemoradiotherapy group and one in the radiotherapy group) were due to either intercurrent disease or late treatment-related toxicity. INTERPRETATION: Adjuvant chemotherapy given during and after radiotherapy for high-risk endometrial cancer did not improve 5-year overall survival, although it did increase failure-free survival. Women with high-risk endometrial cancer should be individually counselled about this combined treatment. Continued follow-up is needed to evaluate long-term survival. FUNDING: Dutch Cancer Society, Cancer Research UK, National Health and Medical Research Council Project Grant and Cancer Australia, L'Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco, and Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute