Skin markings methods and guidelines: A reality in image guidance radiotherapy era

Preparation of site of radiation delivery is an important process in radiation treatment planning and plays a crucial role during a course of radiotherapy to achieve reproducibility of set-up and accuracy of treatment delivery. The preparation of treatment area is done by markings of field center, field edge or other reference point of planned field. Both non-invasive (marker pen, henna) and invasive methods (tattoo) are available for marking with limitations of each. Tattoo with a needle pricked at angle of 30° to 1-2 mm depth to create tattoo 2-3 mm diameter in size is an ideal procedure. Visibility, permanent nature, social-religious belief, and mobility of skin are one of the main concerns about tattoo. Tattoo removal can be done performed if desirable by patients by various modern ways, which will be esthetically available. Dermabrasion, cryotherapy, surgery, QSRL (Q-switched ruby laser) are common methods of tattoo removal. Esthetic dissatisfaction, allergy, dermatoses, keloids, infection, fanning/fading of tattoo are associated problems. In IMRT and IGRT treatment, delivery dependence on tattoo in reduced and use of surrogate markers including particularly for bony set-up and implanted markers (e.g. gold seeds) for tumor localization and treatment verification is increasing. However, these are complex procedures and require an expertise. Ease of set-up and less time required for tattooing are one of the main advantages of tattoo as compared to external or internal marker set-up. Tattoo still remains a crucial method of positioning, especially in developing countries and in palliative treatment settings

Impact of Pre-Treatment NLR and Other Hematologic Biomarkers on the Outcomes of Early-Stage Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Treated with Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy

Introduction: We evaluated the association of pre-treatment immunologic biomarkers on the outcomes of early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). Materials and methods: In this retrospective study, all newly diagnosed early-stage NSCLC treated with SBRT between January 2010 and December 2017 were screened and included for further analysis. The pre-treatment neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), monocyte lymphocyte ratio (MLR), and platelet-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) were calculated. Overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were estimated by Kaplan–Meier. Multivariable models were constructed to determine the impact of different biomarkers and the Akaike information criterion (AIC), index of adequacy, and scaled Brier scores were calculated. Results: A total of 72 patients were identified and 61 were included in final analysis. The median neutrophil count at baseline was 5.4 × 109/L (IQR: 4.17–7.05 × 109/L). Median lymphocyte count was 1.63 × 109/L (IQR: 1.29–2.10 × 109/L), median monocyte count was 0.65 × 109/L (IQR: 0.54–0.83 × 109/L), median platelet count was 260.0 × 109/L (IQR: 211.0–302.0 × 109/L). The median NLR was 3.42 (IQR: 2.38–5.04), median MLR was 0.39 (IQR: 0.31–0.53), and median PLR was 156.4 (IQR: 117.2–197.5). On multivariable regression a higher NLR was associated with worse OS (p = 0.01; HR-1.26; 95% CI 1.04–1.53). The delta AIC between the two multivariable models was 3.4, suggesting a moderate impact of NLR on OS. On multivariable analysis, higher NLR was associated with poor RFS (p = 0.001; NLR^1 HR 0.36; 0.17–0.78; NLR^2 HR-1.16; 95% CI 1.06–1.26) with a nonlinear relationship. The delta AIC between the two multivariable models was 16.2, suggesting a strong impact of NLR on RFS. In our cohort, MLR and PLR were not associated with RFS or OS in multivariable models. Conclusions: Our study suggests NLR, as a biomarker of systemic inflammation, is an independent prognostic factor for OS and RFS. The nonlinear relationship with RFS may indicate a suitable immunological environment is needed for optimal SBRT action and tumoricidal mechanisms. These findings require further validation in independent cohorts

Do Sustainable Palliative Single Fraction Radiotherapy Practices Proliferate or Perish 2 Years after a Knowledge Translation Campaign?

In early 2017, the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer and CancerCare Manitoba undertook a comprehensive knowledge translation (KT) campaign to improve the utilization of single fraction radiotherapy (SFRT) over multiple fraction radiotherapy (MFRT) for palliative management of bone metastases. The campaign significantly increased short-term SFRT utilization. We assess the time-dependent effects of KT-derived SFRT utilization 12–24 months removed from the KT campaign in a Provincial Cancer Program. This study identified patients receiving palliative radiotherapy for bone metastases in Manitoba in the 2018 calendar year using the provincial radiotherapy database. The proportion of patients treated with SFRT in 2018 was compared to 2017. Logistic regression analyses identified risk factors associated with MFRT receipt. In 2018, 1008 patients received palliative radiotherapy for bone metastasis, of which 63.3% received SFRT, a small overall increase in SFRT use over 2017 (59.1%). However, 41.1% of ROs demonstrated year-over-year decreases in SFRT utilization, indicative of a time-dependent loss of SFRT prescription habits derived from KT. Although SFRT use increased slightly overall in 2018, evidence of compliance fatigue was observed, suggestive of a time-perishing property of RO prescription behaviours derived from KT methodologies. Verification of the study’s findings in larger cohorts would be beneficial. These findings highlight the need for additional longitudinal KT reinforcement practices in the years following KT campaigns.Medicine, Faculty ofNon UBCEmergency Medicine, Department ofReviewedFacultyResearche