Asteroseismology and Interferometry

Asteroseismology provides us with a unique opportunity to improve our understanding of stellar structure and evolution. Recent developments, including the first systematic studies of solar-like pulsators, have boosted the impact of this field of research within Astrophysics and have led to a significant increase in the size of the research community. In the present paper we start by reviewing the basic observational and theoretical properties of classical and solar-like pulsators and present results from some of the most recent and outstanding studies of these stars. We centre our review on those classes of pulsators for which interferometric studies are expected to provide a significant input. We discuss current limitations to asteroseismic studies, including difficulties in mode identification and in the accurate determination of global parameters of pulsating stars, and, after a brief review of those aspects of interferometry that are most relevant in this context, anticipate how interferometric observations may contribute to overcome these limitations. Moreover, we present results of recent pilot studies of pulsating stars involving both asteroseismic and interferometric constraints and look into the future, summarizing ongoing efforts concerning the development of future instruments and satellite missions which are expected to have an impact in this field of research.Comment: Version as published in The Astronomy and Astrophysics Review, Volume 14, Issue 3-4, pp. 217-36

IMRT in oral cavity cancer

BACKGROUND: Except for early T1,2 N0 stages, the prognosis for patients with oral cavity cancer (OCC) is reported to be worse than for carcinoma in other sites of the head and neck (HNC). The aim of this work was to assess disease outcome in OCC following IMRT. Between January 2002 and January 2007, 346 HNC patients have been treated with curative intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) at the Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich. Fifty eight of these (16%) were referred for postoperative (28) or definitive (30) radiation therapy of OCC. 40 of the 58 OCC patients (69%) presented with locally advanced T3/4 or recurred lesions. Doses between 60 and 70 Gy were applied, combined with simultaneous cisplatin based chemotherapy in 78%. Outcome analyses were performed using Kaplan Meier curves. In addition, comparisons were performed between this IMRT OCC cohort and historic in-house cohorts of 33 conventionally irradiated (3DCRT) and 30 surgery only patients treated over the last 10 years. RESULTS: OCC patients treated with postoperative IMRT showed the highest local control (LC) rate of all assessed treatment sequence subgroups (92% LC at 2 years). Historic postoperative 3DCRT patients and patients treated with surgery alone reached LC rates of ~70–80%. Definitively irradiated patients revealed poorest LC rates with ~30 and 40% following 3DCRT and IMRT, respectively. T1 stage resulted in an expectedly significantly higher LC rate (95%, n = 19, p < 0.05) than T2-4 and recurred stages (LC ~50–60%, n = 102). Analyses according to the diagnosis revealed significantly lower LC in OCC following definitive IMRT than that in pharyngeal tumors treated with definitive IMRT in the same time period (43% vs 82% at 2 years, p < 0.0001), while the LC rate of OCC following postoperative IMRT was as high as in pharyngeal tumors treated with postoperative IMRT (>90% at 2 years). CONCLUSION: Postoperative IMRT of OCC resulted in the highest local control rate of the assessed treatment subgroups. In conclusion, generous indication for IMRT following surgical treatment is recommended in OCC cases with unfavourable features like tight surgical margin, nodal involvement, primary tumor stage >T1N0, or already recurred disease, respectively. Loco-regional outcome of OCC following definitive IMRT remained unsatisfactory, comparable to that following definitive 3DCRT

Permanent 125I-seed prostate brachytherapy: early prostate specific antigen value as a predictor of PSA bounce occurrence

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Purpose</p> <p>To evaluate predictive factors for PSA bounce after ¹²⁵I permanent seed prostate brachytherapy and identify criteria that distinguish between benign bounces and biochemical relapses.</p> <p>Materials and methods</p> <p>Men treated with exclusive permanent ¹²⁵I seed brachytherapy from November 1999, with at least a 36 months follow-up were included. Bounce was defined as an increase ≥ 0.2 ng/ml above the nadir, followed by a spontaneous return to the nadir. Biochemical failure (BF) was defined using the criteria of the Phoenix conference: nadir +2 ng/ml.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>198 men were included. After a median follow-up of 63.9 months, 21 patients experienced a BF, and 35.9% had at least one bounce which occurred after a median period of 17 months after implantation (4-50). Bounce amplitude was 0.6 ng/ml (0.2-5.1), and duration was 13.6 months (4.0-44.9). In 12.5%, bounce magnitude exceeded the threshold defining BF. Age at the time of treatment and high PSA level assessed at 6 weeks were significantly correlated with bounce but not with BF. Bounce patients had a higher BF free survival than the others (100% versus 92%, p = 0,007). In case of PSA increase, PSA doubling time and velocity were not significantly different between bounce and BF patients. Bounces occurred significantly earlier than relapses and than nadir + 0.2 ng/ml in BF patients (17 vs 27.8 months, p < 0.0001).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>High PSA value assessed 6 weeks after brachytherapy and young age were significantly associated to a higher risk of bounces but not to BF. Long delays between brachytherapy and PSA increase are more indicative of BF.</p

Primary breast lymphoma: Patient profile, outcome and prognostic factors. A multicentre Rare Cancer Network study

BACKGROUND: To asses the clinical profile, treatment outcome and prognostic factors in primary breast lymphoma (PBL). METHODS: Between 1970 and 2000, 84 consecutive patients with PBL were treated in 20 institutions of the Rare Cancer Network. Forty-six patients had Ann Arbor stage IE, 33 stage IIE, 1 stage IIIE, 2 stage IVE and 2 an unknown stage. Twenty-one underwent a mastectomy, 39 conservative surgery and 23 biopsy; 51 received radiotherapy (RT) with (n = 37) or without (n = 14) chemotherapy. Median RT dose was 40 Gy (range 12-55 Gy). RESULTS: Ten (12%) patients progressed locally and 43 (55%) had a systemic relapse. Central nervous system (CNS) was the site of relapse in 12 (14%) cases. The 5-yr overall survival, lymphoma-specific survival, disease-free survival and local control rates were 53%, 59%, 41% and 87% respectively. In the univariate analyses, favorable prognostic factors were early stage, conservative surgery, RT administration and combined modality treatment. Multivariate analysis showed that early stage and the use of RT were favorable prognostic factors. CONCLUSION: The outcome of PBL is fair. Local control is excellent with RT or combined modality treatment but systemic relapses, including that in the CNS, occurs frequently

Pure seminoma: A review and update

Pure seminoma is a rare pathology of the young adult, often discovered in the early stages. Its prognosis is generally excellent and many therapeutic options are available, especially in stage I tumors. High cure rates can be achieved in several ways: standard treatment with radiotherapy is challenged by surveillance and chemotherapy. Toxicity issues and the patients' preferences should be considered when management decisions are made. This paper describes firstly the management of primary seminoma and its nodal involvement and, secondly, the various therapeutic options according to stage

Oncoplastic breast consortium recommendations for mastectomy and whole breast reconstruction in the setting of post-mastectomy radiation therapy

Aim Demand for nipple- and skin- sparing mastectomy (NSM/SSM) with immediate breast reconstruction (BR) has increased at the same time as indications for post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) have broadened. The aim of the Oncoplastic Breast Consortium initiative was to address relevant questions arising with this clinically challenging scenario. Methods A large global panel of oncologic, oncoplastic and reconstructive breast surgeons, patient advocates and radiation oncologists developed recommendations for clinical practice in an iterative process based on the principles of Delphi methodology. Results The panel agreed that surgical technique for NSM/SSM should not be formally modified when PMRT is planned with preference for autologous over implant-based BR due to lower risk of long-term complications and support for immediate and delayed-immediate reconstructive approaches. Nevertheless, it was strongly believed that PMRT is not an absolute contraindication for implant-based or other types of BR, but no specific recommendations regarding implant positioning, use of mesh or timing were made due to absence of high-quality evidence. The panel endorsed use of patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice. It was acknowledged that the shape and size of reconstructed breasts can hinder radiotherapy planning and attention to details of PMRT techniques is important in determining aesthetic outcomes after immediate BR. Conclusions The panel endorsed the need for prospective, ideally randomised phase III studies and for surgical and radiation oncology teams to work together for determination of optimal sequencing and techniques for PMRT for each patient in the context of BR