Hitting the Target: Developing High-quality Evidence for Proton Beam Therapy Through Randomised Controlled Trials

The National Health Service strategy for the delivery of proton beam therapy (PBT) in the UK provides a unique opportunity to deliver high-quality evidence for PBT through randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We present a summary of three UK PBT RCTs in progress, including consideration of their key design characteristics and outcome assessments, to inform and support future PBT trial development. The first three UK multicentre phase III PBT RCTs (TORPEdO, PARABLE and APPROACH), will compare PBT with photon radiotherapy for oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma, breast cancer and oligodendroglioma, respectively. All three studies were designed by multidisciplinary teams, which combined expertise from clinicians, clinical trialists and scientists with strong patient advocacy and guidance from national radiotherapy research networks and international collaborators. Consistent across all three studies is a focus on the reduction of long-term radiotherapy-related toxicities and an evaluation of patient-reported outcomes and health-related quality of life, which will address key uncertainties regarding the clinical benefits of PBT. Innovative translational components will provide insights into mechanisms of toxicity and help to frame the key future research questions regarding PBT. The UK radiotherapy research community is developing and delivering an internationally impactful PBT research portfolio. The combination of data from RCTs with prospectively collected data from a national PBT outcomes registry will provide an innovative, high-quality repository for PBT research and the platform to design and deliver future trials of PBT

Superiority of deformable image co-registration in the integration of diagnostic positron emission tomography-computed tomography to the radiotherapy treatment planning pathway for oesophageal carcinoma

Aims To investigate the use of image co-registration in incorporating diagnostic positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) directly into the radiotherapy treatment planning pathway, and to describe the pattern of local recurrence relative to the PET-avid volume. Materials and methods Fourteen patients were retrospectively identified, six of whom had local recurrence. The accuracy of deformable image registration (DIR) and rigid registration of the diagnostic PET-CT and recurrence CT, to the planning CT, were quantitatively assessed by comparing co-registration of oesophagus, trachea and aorta contours. DIR was used to examine the correlation between PET-avid volumes, dosimetry and site of recurrence. Results Positional metrics including the dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and conformity index (CI), showed DIR to be superior to rigid registration in the co-registration of diagnostic and recurrence imaging to the planning CT. For diagnostic PET-CT, DIR was superior to rigid registration in the transfer of oesophagus (DSC = 0.75 versus 0.65, P < 0.009 and CI = 0.59 versus 0.48, P < 0.003), trachea (DSC = 0.88 versus 0.65, P < 0.004 and CI = 0.78 versus 0.51, P < 0.0001) and aorta structures (DSC = 0.93 versus 0.86, P < 0.006 and CI = 0.86 versus 0.76, P < 0.006). For recurrence imaging, DIR was superior to rigid registration in the transfer of trachea (DSC = 0.91 versus 0.66, P < 0.03 and CI = 0.83 versus 0.51, P < 0.02) and oesophagus structures (DSC = 0.74 versus 0.51, P < 0.004 and CI = 0.61 versus 0.37, P < 0.006) with a non-significant trend for the aorta (DSC = 0.91 versus 0.75, P < 0.08 and CI = 0.83 versus 0.63, P < 0.06) structure. A mean inclusivity index of 0.93 (range 0.79–1) showed that the relapse volume was within the planning target volume (PTVPET-CT); all relapses occurred within the high dose region. Conclusion DIR is superior to rigid registration in the co-registration of PET-CT and recurrence CT to the planning CT, and can be considered in the direct integration of PET-CT to the treatment planning process. Local recurrences occur within the PTVPET-CT, suggesting that this is a suitable target for dose-escalation strategies

Effective treatment of anal cancer in the elderly with low-dose chemoradiotherapy

Chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is accepted as the standard initial treatment for squamous cell anal cancer. However, frail elderly patients cannot always tolerate full-dose CRT. This paper reports the results of a modified regimen for this group of patients. In all, 16 patients with biopsy-proven squamous cell carcinoma of the anal canal or margin and performance status or co-morbidity precluding the use of full-dose CRT were included in this protocol. The median age was 81 (range 77–91). Patients received a dose of 30 Gy to the gross tumour volume plus 3 cm margin in all directions. Concurrent chemotherapy comprised 5-fluorouracil 600 mg m−2 given over 24 h on days 1–4 of radiotherapy. The treatment was well tolerated. All 16 patients completed treatment as planned. Only one patient experienced any grade 3 toxicity (skin). The local control at a median follow-up of 16 months was 73% (13 out of 16). The overall survival was 69% and disease-specific survival 86%. This is a well-tolerated regimen for elderly/poor performance patients with anal cancer, which can achieve high rates of local control and survival. Longer follow-up will determine whether these encouraging results are maintained

Biomarkers in anal cancer: from biological understanding to stratified treatment

Squamous cell carcinomas of the anus and anal canal represent a model of a cancer and perhaps the first where level 1 evidence supported primary chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in treating locoregional disease with curative intent. The majority of tumours are associated with infection with oncogenic subtypes of human papilloma virus and this plays a significant role in their sensitivity to treatment. However, not all tumours are cured with CRT and there remain opportunities to improve outcomes in terms of oncological control and also reducing late toxicities. Understanding the biology of ASCC promises to allow a more personalised approach to treatment, with the development and validation of a range of biomarkers and associated techniques that are the focus of this review

2010 SSO John Wayne Clinical Research Lecture: Rectal Cancer Outcome Improvements in Europe: Population-Based Outcome Registrations will Conquer the World

During the past two decades, rectal cancer treatment has improved considerably in Europe. Clinical trials played a crucial role in improving surgical techniques, (neo)adjuvant treatment schedules, imaging, and pathology. However, there is still a wide variation in outcome after rectal cancer. In most western health care systems, efforts are made to reduce hospital variation by focusing on selective referral and encouraging patients to seek care in high-volume hospitals. On the other hand, the expertise for diagnosis and treatment of common types of cancer should be preferably widespread and easily accessible for all patients. As an alternative to volume-based referral, hospitals and surgeons can improve their results by learning from their own outcome statistics and those from colleagues treating a similar patient group. Several European surgical (colo)rectal audits have led to improvements with a greater impact than any of the adjuvant therapies currently under study. However, differences remain between European countries, which cannot be easily explained. To generate the best care for colorectal cancer in the whole of Europe and to meet political and public demands for transparency, the European CanCer Organisation (ECCO) initiated an international, multidisciplinary, outcome-based quality improvement program: European Registration of Cancer Care (EURECCA). The goal is to create a multidisciplinary European registration structure for patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics linked to outcome registration. Clinical trials will always play a major role in improving rectal cancer treatment. To further improve outcomes and diminish variation, EURECCA will establish the basis for a strong, multidisciplinary, international audit structure that can be used as a template for similar projects worldwide

Can we <i>S</i>ave the rectum by watchful waiting or <i>T</i>rans<i>A</i>nal microsurgery following (chemo) <i>R</i>adiotherapy versus total mesorectal excision for early <i>RE</i>ctal <i>C</i>ancer (STAR-TREC study)?::protocol for a multicentre, randomised feasibility study

Introduction Total mesorectal excision (TME) is the highly effective standard treatment for rectal cancer but is associated with significant morbidity and may be overtreatment for low-risk cancers. This study is designed to determine the feasibility of international recruitment in a study comparing organ-saving approaches versus standard TME surgery. Methods and analysis STAR-TREC trial is a multicentre international randomised, three-arm parallel, phase II feasibility study in patients with biopsy-proven adenocarcinoma of the rectum. The trial is coordinated from Birmingham, UK with national hubs in Radboudumc (the Netherlands) and Odense University Hospital Svendborg UMC (Denmark). Patients with rectal cancer, staged by CT and MRI as ≤cT3b (up to 5 mm of extramural spread) N0 M0 can be included. Patients will be randomised to either standard TME surgery (control), organ-saving treatment using long-course concurrent chemoradiation or organ-saving treatment using short-course radiotherapy. For patients treated with an organ-saving strategy, clinical response to (chemo)radiotherapy determines the next treatment step. An active surveillance regime will be performed in the case of a complete clinical regression. In the case of incomplete clinical regression, patients will proceed to local excision using an optimised platform such as transanal endoscopic microsurgery or other transanal techniques (eg, transanal endoscopic operation or transanal minimally invasive surgery). The primary endpoint of this phase II study is to demonstrate sufficient international recruitment in order to sustain a phase III study incorporating pelvic failure as the primary endpoint. Success in phase II is defined as randomisation of at least four cases per month internationally in year 1, rising to at least six cases per month internationally during year 2