The pervasive crisis of diminishing radiation therapy access for vulnerable populations in the United States—Part 4: Appalachian patients

Purpose: Compared with the rest of the United States, the population of Appalachia has lower education levels, higher rates of poverty, and limited access to health care. The presence of disparities in radiation therapy (RT) access for Appalachian patients with cancer has rarely been examined. Methods and materials: The National Cancer Institute initiatives toward addressing disparities in treatment access for rural populations were examined. An extensive literature search was undertaken for studies investigating RT access disparities in Appalachian patients, beginning with the most common cancers in these patients (lung, colorectal, and cervical). Results: Although the literature investigating RT access disparities in Appalachia is relatively sparse, studies examining lung, colorectal, cervical, prostate, head and neck, breast, and esophageal cancer, as well as lymphoma, indicate an unfortunate commonality in barriers to optimal RT access for Appalachian patients with cancer. These barriers are predominantly socioeconomic in nature (low income and lack of private insurance) but are exacerbated by paucities in both the number and quality of radiation centers that are accessible to this patient population. Conclusions: Regardless of organ system, there are significant barriers for Appalachian patients with cancer to receive RT. Such diminished access is alarming and warrants resources devoted to addressing these disparities, which often go overlooked because of the assumption that the overall wealth of the United States is tangibly applicable to all of its citizens. Without intelligently targeted investments of time and finances in this arena, there is great risk of exacerbating rather than alleviating the already heavy burden facing Appalachian patients with cancer

Long-term Clinical Outcomes and Safety Profile of SBRT for Centrally Located NSCLC

Purpose: Previous studies suggest that stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is associated with higher toxicity rates for central lung tumors relative to peripheral tumors when using 3 fraction SBRT. The initial results from Radiation Therapy Oncology Group study 0813 suggest a safe toxicity profile of SBRT administered in 5 fractions for central non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We reviewed our institutional data to evaluate the safety and efficacy of SBRT for central NSCLC. Methods and materials: We reviewed our prospectively collected SBRT database for patients with central NSCLC who received SBRT between 2008 and 2014. The most frequent dose and fractionations were 50 Gy in 5 fractions (59%) and 48 Gy in 4 fraction (30%). Local control (LC), regional control, metastasis-free survival, and overall survival were calculated using Kaplan-Meier estimates. The National Cancer Institute Common Terminal Criteria for Adverse Events were used for toxicity grading. Results: A total of 110 central lung tumors in 103 patients were included. The median age was 74 years (range, 40-95 years), and the median follow-up time of living patients was 50 months. The mean tumor size was 20 mm (range, 5-70 mm). The 5 year rate of LC, regional control, and distant control was 89%, 77%, and 82%, respectively. The median and 5-year overall survival were 3.5 years and 35%, respectively. No treatment variables were associated with tumor control or other clinical outcomes. A single patient experienced grade 3 radiation pneumonitis (0.97%). The rate of late toxicity grade ≥3 was 9.7% (grade 3, 7.7%; grade 4, 0.97%; grade 5, 0.97%) and included pneumonitis (3.9%), bronchial necrosis (2.9%), myocardial dysfunction (1.9%), and worsening heart failure (0.97%). Conclusions: SBRT for central NSCLC provides high rates of LC. Despite excellent LC, patients remain at risk for regional and distant failure. The rate of grade 3 pneumonitis was consistent with that of prior reports. We observed low rates of grade 4-5 toxicity potentially attributable to SBRT. Our results contribute to the growing body of data in support of the safety of SBRT for central NSCLC

Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Initial Clinical Experience

Purpose: Our purpose was to assess the safety and efficacy of intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Methods and Materials: A retrospective review was conducted on all patients who were treated with IMPT for HCC with curative intent from June 2015 to December 2018. All patients had fiducials placed before treatment. Inverse treatment planning used robust optimization with 2 to 3 beams. The majority of patients were treated in 15 fractions (n = 30, 81%, 52.5-67.5 Gy, relative biological effectiveness), whereas the remainder were treated in 5 fractions (n = 7, 19%, 37.5-50 Gy, relative biological effectiveness). Daily image guidance consisted of orthogonal kilovoltage x-rays and use of a 6° of freedom robotic couch. Outcomes (local control, progression free survival, and overall survival) were determined using Kaplan-Meier methods. Results: Thirty-seven patients were included. The median follow-up for living patients was 21 months (Q1-Q3, 17-30 months). Pretreatment Child-Pugh score was A5-6 in 70% of patients and B7-9 in 30% of patients. Nineteen patients had prior liver directed therapy for HCC before IMPT. Eight patients (22%) required a replan during treatment, most commonly due to inadequate clinical target volume coverage. One patient (3%) experienced a grade 3 acute toxicity (pain) with no recorded grade 4 or 5 toxicities. An increase in Child-Pugh score by ≥ 2 within 3 months of treatment was observed in 6 patients (16%). At 1 year, local control was 94%, intrahepatic control was 54%, progression free survival was 35%, and overall survival was 78%. Conclusions: IMPT is safe and feasible for treatment of HCC