African American men with low-grade prostate cancer have increased disease recurrence after prostatectomy compared with Caucasian men.

PURPOSE: To explore whether disparities in outcomes exist between African American (AA) and Caucasian (CS) men with low-grade prostate cancer and similar cancer of the prostate risk assessment-postsurgery (CAPRA-S) features following prostatectomy (RP). METHODS: The overall cohort consisted of 1,265 men (234 AA and 1,031 CS) who met the National comprehensive cancer network criteria for low- to intermediate-risk prostate cancer and underwent RP between 1990 and 2012. We first evaluated whether clinical factors were associated with adverse pathologic outcomes and freedom from biochemical failure (FFbF) using the entire cohort. Next, we studied a subset of 705 men (112 AA and 593 CS) who had pathologic Gleason score≤6 (low-grade disease). Using this cohort, we determined whether race affected FFbF in men with RP-proven low-grade disease and similar CAPRA-S scores. RESULTS: With a median follow-up time of 27 months, the overall 7-year FFbF rate was 86% vs. 79% in CS and AA men, respectively (P = 0.035). There was no significant difference in one or more adverse pathologic features between CS vs. AA men (27% vs. 31%; P = 0.35) or CAPRA-S score (P = 0.28). In the subset analysis of patients with low-grade disease, AA race was associated with worse FFbF outcomes (P = 0.002). Furthermore, AA race was a significant predictor of FFbF in men with low-grade disease (hazard ratio = 2.01, 95% CI: 1.08-3.72; P = 0.029). CONCLUSIONS: AA race is a predictor of worse FFbF outcomes in men with low-grade disease after RP. These results suggest that a subset of AA men with low-grade disease may benefit from more aggressive treatment

Long-term Clinical Outcomes in Favorable Risk Prostate Cancer Patients Receiving Proton Beam Therapy

PURPOSE: Long-term data regarding the disease control outcomes of proton beam therapy (PBT) for patients with favorable risk intact prostate cancer (PC) are limited. Herein, we report our institution's long-term disease control outcomes in PC patients with clinically localized disease who received PBT as primary treatment. METHODS: One hundred sixty-six favorable risk PC patients who received definitive PBT to the prostate gland at our institution from 2010 to 2012 were retrospectively assessed. The outcomes studied were biochemical failure-free survival (BFFS), biochemical failure, local failure, regional failure, distant failure, PC-specific survival, and overall survival. Patterns of failure were also analyzed. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to estimate independent predictors of BFFS. RESULTS: The median length of follow-up was 8.3 years (range, 1.2–10.5 years). The majority of patients had low-risk disease (58%, n = 96), with a median age of 64 years at the onset of treatment. Of 166 treated men, 13 (7.8%), 8 (4.8%), 2 (1.2%) patient(s) experienced biochemical failure, local failure, regional failure, respectively. Regional failure was seen in an obturator lymph node in 1 patient and the external iliac lymph nodes in the other. None of the patients experienced distant failure. There were 5 (3.0%) deaths, none of which were due to PC. The 5- and 8-year BFFS rate were 97% and 92%, respectively. None of the clinical disease characteristics or treatment-related factors assessed were associated with BFFS on multivariate Cox proportional hazards modeling (all P > .05). CONCLUSION: Disease control rates reported in our assessment of PBT were similar to those reported in previous clinically localized intact PC analyses, which used intensity-modulated radiotherapy, three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, or radical prostatectomy as definitive therapy. In addition, BFFS rates were similar, if not improved, to previous PBT studies

Comparative Analysis of 5-Year Clinical Outcomes and Patterns of Failure of Proton Beam Therapy Versus Intensity Modulated Radiation therapy for Prostate Cancer in the Postoperative Setting

Purpose: Although proton beam therapy (PBT) is a rapidly expanding modality to treat prostate cancer compared with intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), data comparing disease control outcomes and patterns of failure in the postprostatectomy setting remain substantially limited. Methods and Materials: All patients who underwent postoperative IMRT or PBT to the prostate bed only at a single institution were included (2009-2017). Endpoints included biochemical failure (BF; using institutional and recent cooperative group trial definitions), local failure (LF), regional failure (RF), distant failure (DF), and all-cause mortality. A case-matched cohort analysis was performed using 3-to-1 nearest-neighbor matching; multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling (MVA) estimated hazard ratios for disease-related outcomes by treatment modality. Results: Of 295 men, 260 were matched (n = 65 PBT, 195 IMRT); after matching, only age at diagnosis (P .05). RT modality was not significantly associated with BF on MVA using institutional or cooperative group definitions (all P > .05), nor with LF (P = .82), RF (P = .11), DF (P = .36), or all-cause mortality (P = .69). Patterns of failure were qualitatively similar between cohorts (DF: bone, retroperitoneal nodes, lung). Conclusions: In this single institution, case-matched analysis, PBT yielded similar long-term disease-related outcomes and patterns of failure to IMRT in the postprostatectomy setting. (C) 2020 American Society for Radiation Oncology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved

Comparative toxicity outcomes of proton-beam therapy versus intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer in the postoperative setting

Background Despite increasing utilization of proton-beam therapy (PBT) in the postprostatectomy setting, no data exist regarding toxicity outcomes relative to intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). The authors compared acute and late genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity outcomes in patients with prostate cancer (PC) who received treatment with postprostatectomy IMRT versus PBT. Methods With institutional review board approval, patients with PC who received adjuvant or salvage IMRT or PBT (70.2 gray with an endorectal balloon) after prostatectomy from 2009 through 2017 were reviewed. Factors including combined IMRT and PBT and/or concurrent malignancies prompted exclusion. A case-matched cohort analysis was performed using nearest-neighbor 3-to-1 matching by age and GU/GI disorder history. Logistic and Cox regressions were used to identify univariate and multivariate associations between toxicities and cohort/dosimetric characteristics. Toxicity-free survival (TFS) was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results Three hundred seven men (mean +/- SD age, 59.7 +/- 6.3 years; IMRT, n = 237; PBT, n = 70) were identified, generating 70 matched pairs. The median follow-up was 48.6 and 46.1 months for the IMRT and PBT groups, respectively. Although PBT was superior at reducing low-range (volumes receiving 10% to 40% of the dose, respectively) bladder and rectal doses (all P = .05). Five-year grade >= 2 GU and grade >= 1 GI TFS was 61.1% and 73.7% for IMRT, respectively, and 70.7% and 75.3% for PBT, respectively; and 5-year grade >= 3 GU and GI TFS was >95% for both groups (all P >= .05). Conclusions Postprostatectomy PBT minimized low-range bladder and rectal doses relative to IMRT; however, treatment modality was not associated with clinician-reported GU/GI toxicities. Future prospective investigation and ongoing follow-up will determine whether dosimetric differences between IMRT and PBT confer clinically meaningful differences in long-term outcomes

Topological Interference Management With Transmitter Cooperation

Interference networks with no channel state information at the transmitter except for the knowledge of the connectivity graph have been recently studied under the topological interference management framework. In this paper, we consider a similar problem with topological knowledge but in a distributed broadcast channel setting, i.e., a network where transmitter cooperation is enabled. We show that the topological information can also be exploited in this case to strictly improve the degrees of freedom (DoF) as long as the network is not fully connected, which is a reasonable assumption in practice. Achievability schemes from graph theoretic and interference alignment perspectives are proposed. Together with outer bounds built upon generator sequence, the concept of compound channel settings, and the relation to index coding, we characterize the symmetric DoF for the so-called regular networks with constant number of interfering links, and identify the sufficient and/or necessary conditions for the arbitrary network topologies to achieve a certain amount of symmetric DoF

African American men with low-grade prostate cancer have increased disease recurrence after prostatectomy compared with Caucasian men.

PURPOSE: To explore whether disparities in outcomes exist between African American (AA) and Caucasian (CS) men with low-grade prostate cancer and similar cancer of the prostate risk assessment-postsurgery (CAPRA-S) features following prostatectomy (RP). METHODS: The overall cohort consisted of 1,265 men (234 AA and 1,031 CS) who met the National comprehensive cancer network criteria for low- to intermediate-risk prostate cancer and underwent RP between 1990 and 2012. We first evaluated whether clinical factors were associated with adverse pathologic outcomes and freedom from biochemical failure (FFbF) using the entire cohort. Next, we studied a subset of 705 men (112 AA and 593 CS) who had pathologic Gleason score≤6 (low-grade disease). Using this cohort, we determined whether race affected FFbF in men with RP-proven low-grade disease and similar CAPRA-S scores. RESULTS: With a median follow-up time of 27 months, the overall 7-year FFbF rate was 86% vs. 79% in CS and AA men, respectively (P = 0.035). There was no significant difference in one or more adverse pathologic features between CS vs. AA men (27% vs. 31%; P = 0.35) or CAPRA-S score (P = 0.28). In the subset analysis of patients with low-grade disease, AA race was associated with worse FFbF outcomes (P = 0.002). Furthermore, AA race was a significant predictor of FFbF in men with low-grade disease (hazard ratio = 2.01, 95% CI: 1.08-3.72; P = 0.029). CONCLUSIONS: AA race is a predictor of worse FFbF outcomes in men with low-grade disease after RP. These results suggest that a subset of AA men with low-grade disease may benefit from more aggressive treatment

Applications of various range shifters for proton pencil beam scanning radiotherapy

Background A range pull-back device, such as a machine-related range shifter (MRS) or a universal patient-related range shifter (UPRS), is needed in pencil beam scanning technique to treat shallow tumors. Methods Three UPRS made by QFix (Avondale, PA, USA) allow treating targets across the body: U-shaped bolus (UB), anterior lateral bolus (ALB), and couch top bolus. Head-and-neck (HN) patients who used the UPRS were tested. The in-air spot sizes were measured and compared in this study at air gaps: 6 cm, 16 cm, and 26 cm. Measurements were performed in a solid water phantom using a single-field optimization pencil beam scanning field with the ALB placed at 0, 10, and 20 cm air gaps. The two-dimensional dose maps at the middle of the spread-out Bragg peak were measured using ion chamber array MatriXX PT (IBA-Dosimetry, Schwarzenbruck, Germany) located at isocenter and compared with the treatment planning system. Results A UPRS can be consistently placed close to the patient and maintains a relatively small spot size resulting in improved dose distributions. However, when a UPRS is non-removable (e.g. thick couch top), the quality of volumetric imaging is degraded due to their high Z material construction, hindering the value of Image-Guided Radiation Therapy (IGRT). Limitations of using UPRS with small air gaps include reduced couch weight limit, potential collision with patient or immobilization devices, and challenges using non-coplanar fields with certain UPRS. Our experience showed the combination of a U-shaped bolus exclusively for an HN target and an MRS as the complimentary device for head-and-neck targets as well as for all other treatment sites may be ideal to preserve the dosimetric advantages of pencil beam scanning proton treatments across the body. Conclusion We have described how to implement UPRS and MRS for various clinical indications using the PBS technique, and comprehensively reviewed the advantage and disadvantages of UPRS and MRS. We recommend the removable UB only to be employed for the brain and HN treatments while an automated MRS is used for all proton beams that require RS but not convenient or feasible to use UB

Improving the Clinical Treatment of Vulnerable Populations in Radiation Oncology

The increasing role of radiation oncology in optimal cancer care treatment brings to mind the adage that power is never a gift, but a responsibility. A significant part of the responsibility we in radiation oncology bear is how to ensure optimal access to our services. This article summarizes the discussion initiated at the 2019 American Society for Radiation Oncology Annual Meeting educational panel entitled "Improving the Clinical Treatment of Vulnerable Populations in Radiation Oncology: Latin, African American, Native American, and Gender/Sexual Minority Communities." By bringing the discussion to the printed page, we hope to continue the conversation with a broader audience to better define the level of responsibility our field bears in optimizing cancer care to the most vulnerable patient populations within the United States

Improving Diversity, Inclusion, and Representation in Radiology and Radiation Oncology Part 1: Why These Matter

The ACR Commission for Women and General Diversity is committed to identifying barriers to a diverse physician workforce in radiology and radiation oncology (RRO), and to offering policy recommendations to overcome these barriers. In Part 1 of a 2-part position article from the commission, diversity as a concept and its dimensions of personality, character, ethnicity, biology, biography, and organization are introduced. Terms commonly used to describe diverse individuals and groups are reviewed. The history of diversity and inclusion in US society and health care are addressed. The post–Civil Rights Era evolution of diversity in medicine is delineated: Diversity 1.0, with basic awareness, nondiscrimination, and recruitment; Diversity 2.0, with appreciation of the value of diversity but inclusion as peripheral or in opposition to other goals; and Diversity 3.0, which integrates diversity and inclusion into core missions of organizations and their leadership, and leverages its potential for innovation and contribution. The current states of diversity and inclusion in RRO are reviewed in regard to gender, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and gender identity. The lack of representation and unchanged demographics in these fields relative to other medical specialties are explored. The business case for diversity is discussed, with examples of successful models and potential application to the health care industry in general and to RRO. The moral, ethical, and public health imperative for diversity is also highlighted