Patterns of CT lung injury and toxicity after stereotactic radiotherapy delivered with helical tomotherapy in early stage medically inoperable NSCLC

To evaluate toxicity and patterns of radiologic lung injury on CT images after hypofractionated image-guided stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) delivered with helical tomotherapy (HT) in medically early stage inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

Hypofractionated SBRT versus conventionally fractionated EBRT for prostate cancer: comparison of PSA slope and nadir.

BackgroundPatients with early stage prostate cancer have a variety of curative radiotherapy options, including conventionally-fractionated external beam radiotherapy (CF-EBRT) and hypofractionated stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). Although results of CF-EBRT are well known, the use of SBRT for prostate cancer is a more recent development, and long-term follow-up is not yet available. However, rapid post-treatment PSA decline and low PSA nadir have been linked to improved clinical outcomes. The purpose of this study was to compare the PSA kinetics between CF-EBRT and SBRT in newly diagnosed localized prostate cancer.Materials/methods75 patients with low to low-intermediate risk prostate cancer (T1-T2; GS 3 + 3, PSA < 20 or 3 + 4, PSA < 15) treated without hormones with CF-EBRT (>70.2 Gy, <76 Gy) to the prostate only, were identified from a prospectively collected cohort of patients treated at the University of California, San Francisco (1997-2012). Patients were excluded if they failed therapy by the Phoenix definition or had less than 1 year of follow-up or <3 PSAs. 43 patients who were treated with SBRT to the prostate to 38 Gy in 4 daily fractions also met the same criteria. PSA nadir and rate of change in PSA over time (slope) were calculated from the completion of RT to 1, 2 and 3 years post-RT.ResultsThe median PSA nadir and slope for CF-EBRT was 1.00, 0.72 and 0.60 ng/ml and -0.09, -0.04, -0.02 ng/ml/month, respectively, for durations of 1, 2 and 3 years post RT. Similarly, for SBRT, the median PSA nadirs and slopes were 0.70, 0.40, 0.24 ng and -0.09, -0.06, -0.05 ng/ml/month, respectively. The PSA slope for SBRT was greater than CF-EBRT (p < 0.05) at 2 and 3 years following RT, although similar during the first year. Similarly, PSA nadir was significantly lower for SBRT when compared to EBRT for years 2 and 3 (p < 0.005).ConclusionPatients treated with SBRT experienced a lower PSA nadir and greater rate of decline in PSA 2 and 3 years following completion of RT than with CF-EBRT, consistent with delivery of a higher bioequivalent dose. Although follow-up for SBRT is limited, the improved PSA kinetics over CF-EBRT are promising for improved biochemical control

The role of stereotactic body radiation therapy in oligometastatic colorectal cancer

Rationale: Regorafenib is the new standard third-line therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, the reported 1-year overall survival rate does not exceed 25%. Patient concerns: A 55-year-old man affected by mCRC, treated with regorafenib combined with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), showing a durable response. Interventions: After 6 months of regorafenib, a PET/CT scan revealed a focal uptake in a solid lung nodule which was treated with SBRT, whereas continuing regorafenib administration. Fourteen months later, the patient had further progression in a parasternal lymph node, but treatment with regorafenib was continued. The regorafenib-associated side effects, such us the hand-foot syndrome, were favorable managed by reducing the dose from 160 to 120 mg/day. Outcomes: Patient-reported outcome was characterized by a progression-free survival of approximately 3 years. Lessons: in presence of oligometastatic progression, a local SBRT while retaining the same systemic therapy may be a better multidisciplinary approach. Moreover, disease progression is no longer an absolute contraindication for continuing the regorafenib treatment

Simple Factors Associated With Radiation-Induced Lung Toxicity After Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy of the Thorax: A Pooled Analysis of 88 Studies

To study the risk factors for radiation-induced lung toxicity (RILT) after stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) of the thorax

Exploratory analysis using machine learning to predict for chest wall pain in patients with stage I non-small-cell lung cancer treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy.

Background and purposeChest wall toxicity is observed after stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for peripherally located lung tumors. We utilize machine learning algorithms to identify toxicity predictors to develop dose-volume constraints.Materials and methodsTwenty-five patient, tumor, and dosimetric features were recorded for 197 consecutive patients with Stage I NSCLC treated with SBRT, 11 of whom (5.6%) developed CTCAEv4 grade ≥2 chest wall pain. Decision tree modeling was used to determine chest wall syndrome (CWS) thresholds for individual features. Significant features were determined using independent multivariate methods. These methods incorporate out-of-bag estimation using Random forests (RF) and bootstrapping (100 iterations) using decision trees.ResultsUnivariate analysis identified rib dose to 1 cc < 4000 cGy (P = 0.01), chest wall dose to 30 cc < 1900 cGy (P = 0.035), rib Dmax < 5100 cGy (P = 0.05) and lung dose to 1000 cc < 70 cGy (P = 0.039) to be statistically significant thresholds for avoiding CWS. Subsequent multivariate analysis confirmed the importance of rib dose to 1 cc, chest wall dose to 30 cc, and rib Dmax. Using learning-curve experiments, the dataset proved to be self-consistent and provides a realistic model for CWS analysis.ConclusionsUsing machine learning algorithms in this first of its kind study, we identify robust features and cutoffs predictive for the rare clinical event of CWS. Additional data in planned subsequent multicenter studies will help increase the accuracy of multivariate analysis

Characterisation and classification of oligometastatic disease : a European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer consensus recommendation

Oligometastatic disease has been proposed as an intermediate state between localised and systemically metastasised disease. In the absence of randomised phase 3 trials, early clinical studies show improved survival when radical local therapy is added to standard systemic therapy for oligometastatic disease. However, since no biomarker for the identification of patients with true oligometastatic disease is clinically available, the diagnosis of oligometastatic disease is based solely on imaging findings. A small number of metastases on imaging could represent different clinical scenarios, which are associated with different prognoses and might require different treatment strategies. 20 international experts including 19 members of the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer OligoCare project developed a comprehensive system for characterisation and classification of oligometastatic disease. We first did a systematic review of the literature to identify inclusion and exclusion criteria of prospective interventional oligometastatic disease clinical trials. Next, we used a Delphi consensus process to select a total of 17 oligometastatic disease characterisation factors that should be assessed in all patients treated with radical local therapy for oligometastatic disease, both within and outside of clinical trials. Using a second round of the Delphi method, we established a decision tree for oligometastatic disease classification together with a nomenclature. We agreed oligometastatic disease as the overall umbrella term. A history of polymetastatic disease before diagnosis of oligometastatic disease was used as the criterion to differentiate between induced oligometastatic disease (previous history of polymetastatic disease) and genuine oligometastatic disease (no history of polymetastatic disease). We further subclassified genuine oligometastatic disease into repeat oligometastatic disease (previous history of oligometastatic disease) and de-novo oligometastatic disease (first time diagnosis of oligometastatic disease). In de-novo oligometastatic disease, we differentiated between synchronous and metachronous oligometastatic disease. We did a final subclassification into oligorecurrence, oligoprogression, and oligopersistence, considering whether oligometastatic disease is diagnosed during a treatment-free interval or during active systemic therapy and whether or not an oligometastatic lesion is progressing on current imaging. This oligometastatic disease classification and nomenclature needs to be prospectively evaluated by the OligoCare study

A call for the aggressive treatment of oligometastatic and oligo-recurrent non-small cell lung cancer.

Metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) carries a dismal prognosis. Clinical evidence suggests the existence of an intermediate, or oligometastatic, state when metastases are limited in number and/or location. In addition, following initial curative therapy, many patients present with limited metastatic disease, or oligo-recurrence. Metastasis-directed, anti-cancer therapies may benefit these patients. A growing evidence-base supports the use of hypofractionated, image-guided radiotherapy (HIGRT) for a variety of malignant conditions including inoperable stage I NSCLC and many metastatic sites. When surgical resection is not possible, HIGRT offers an effective alternative for local treatment of limited metastatic disease. Early studies have produced promising results when HIGRT was delivered to all known sites of disease in patients with oligometastatic/oligo-recurrent NSCLC. In a population of patients formerly considered rapidly terminal, these studies report five year overall survival rates of 13-22%. HIGRT for metastatic NSCLC warrants further study. We call for large, intergroup, and even international randomized trials incorporating HIGRT and other metastasis-directed therapies into the treatment of patients with oligometastatic/oligo-recurrent NSCLC

Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy: Prostate Cancer

Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy: Prostate Cancer Monica Mahon Dr. Elaine Halesey, Ed.D., R.T.(R)(QM) Abstract Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is a special type of radiation therapy that uses very high precise radiation to treat cancerous cells and the treatments are only a total of about five fractions. Prostate cancer is very common in men around the age of 66 and is treated with radiation therapy. Prostate cancer’s high sensitivity to radiation, the use of continuous motion monitoring, and the time efficiency of SBRT are reasons why it should be used to treat prostate cancer. By using continuous motion monitoring along with the SBRT treatment, it allows for very precise treatment. This research discusses the treatment planning, average dose, and procedural set up for SBRT when treating prostate cancer. Along with the benefits of SBRT, previous studies were analyzed and concluded SBRT is a safe and efficient way to treat low-risk, intermediate risk, and lymph node positive prostate cancer.https://digitalcommons.misericordia.edu/research_posters2021/1080/thumbnail.jp

A current perspective on stereotactic body radiation therapy for pancreatic cancer.

Pancreatic cancer is a formidable malignancy with poor outcomes. The majority of patients are unable to undergo resection, which remains the only potentially curative treatment option. The management of locally advanced (unresectable) pancreatic cancer is controversial; however, treatment with either chemotherapy or chemoradiation is associated with high rates of local tumor progression and metastases development, resulting in low survival rates. An emerging local modality is stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), which uses image-guided, conformal, high-dose radiation. SBRT has demonstrated promising local control rates and resultant quality of life with acceptable rates of toxicity. Over the past decade, increasing clinical experience and data have supported SBRT as a local treatment modality. Nevertheless, additional research is required to further evaluate the role of SBRT and improve upon the persistently poor outcomes associated with pancreatic cancer. This review discusses the existing clinical experience and technical implementation of SBRT for pancreatic cancer and highlights the directions for ongoing and future studies