Radiation recall after COVID-19 infection Ross, Richard Blake; Rabinovitch, Rachel A
Lancet oncology/Lancet. Oncology,
04/2022, Letnik:
23, Številka:
4
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
Laboratory investigations were notable for a positive SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein IgG, and elevated D-dimer, C-reactive protein, and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (all non-specific inflammatory ...markers). ...there has been only one other report of radiation recall in the context of COVID-19 infection with pneumonitis 3 years after radiotherapy for lung cancer. Since most women with locoregional breast cancer maintain long-term disease control, follow-up presents many non-malignant and treatment-related issues.
Whole-breast irradiation after breast-conserving surgery for patients with early-stage breast cancer decreases ipsilateral breast-tumour recurrence (IBTR), yielding comparable results to mastectomy. ...It is unknown whether accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) to only the tumour-bearing quadrant, which shortens treatment duration, is equally effective. In our trial, we investigated whether APBI provides equivalent local tumour control after lumpectomy compared with whole-breast irradiation.
We did this randomised, phase 3, equivalence trial (NSABP B-39/RTOG 0413) in 154 clinical centres in the USA, Canada, Ireland, and Israel. Adult women (>18 years) with early-stage (0, I, or II; no evidence of distant metastases, but up to three axillary nodes could be positive) breast cancer (tumour size ≤3 cm; including all histologies and multifocal breast cancers), who had had lumpectomy with negative (ie, no detectable cancer cells) surgical margins, were randomly assigned (1:1) using a biased-coin-based minimisation algorithm to receive either whole-breast irradiation (whole-breast irradiation group) or APBI (APBI group). Whole-breast irradiation was delivered in 25 daily fractions of 50 Gy over 5 weeks, with or without a supplemental boost to the tumour bed, and APBI was delivered as 34 Gy of brachytherapy or 38·5 Gy of external bream radiation therapy in 10 fractions, over 5 treatment days within an 8-day period. Randomisation was stratified by disease stage, menopausal status, hormone-receptor status, and intention to receive chemotherapy. Patients, investigators, and statisticians could not be masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome of invasive and non-invasive IBTR as a first recurrence was analysed in the intention-to-treat population, excluding those patients who were lost to follow-up, with an equivalency test on the basis of a 50% margin increase in the hazard ratio (90% CI for the observed HR between 0·667 and 1·5 for equivalence) and a Cox proportional hazard model. Survival was assessed by intention to treat, and sensitivity analyses were done in the per-protocol population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00103181.
Between March 21, 2005, and April 16, 2013, 4216 women were enrolled. 2109 were assigned to the whole-breast irradiation group and 2107 were assigned to the APBI group. 70 patients from the whole-breast irradiation group and 14 from the APBI group withdrew consent or were lost to follow-up at this stage, so 2039 and 2093 patients respectively were available for survival analysis. Further, three and four patients respectively were lost to clinical follow-up (ie, survival status was assessed by phone but no physical examination was done), leaving 2036 patients in the whole-breast irradiation group and 2089 in the APBI group evaluable for the primary outcome. At a median follow-up of 10·2 years (IQR 7·5–11·5), 90 (4%) of 2089 women eligible for the primary outcome in the APBI group and 71 (3%) of 2036 women in the whole-breast irradiation group had an IBTR (HR 1·22, 90% CI 0·94–1·58). The 10-year cumulative incidence of IBTR was 4·6% (95% CI 3·7–5·7) in the APBI group versus 3·9% (3·1–5·0) in the whole-breast irradiation group. 44 (2%) of 2039 patients in the whole-breast irradiation group and 49 (2%) of 2093 patients in the APBI group died from recurring breast cancer. There were no treatment-related deaths. Second cancers and treatment-related toxicities were similar between the two groups. 2020 patients in the whole-breast irradiation group and 2089 in APBI group had available data on adverse events. The highest toxicity grade reported was: grade 1 in 845 (40%), grade 2 in 921 (44%), and grade 3 in 201 (10%) patients in the APBI group, compared with grade 1 in 626 (31%), grade 2 in 1193 (59%), and grade 3 in 143 (7%) in the whole-breast irradiation group.
APBI did not meet the criteria for equivalence to whole-breast irradiation in controlling IBTR for breast-conserving therapy. Our trial had broad eligibility criteria, leading to a large, heterogeneous pool of patients and sufficient power to detect treatment equivalence, but was not designed to test equivalence in patient subgroups or outcomes from different APBI techniques. For patients with early-stage breast cancer, our findings support whole-breast irradiation following lumpectomy; however, with an absolute difference of less than 1% in the 10-year cumulative incidence of IBTR, APBI might be an acceptable alternative for some women.
National Cancer Institute, US Department of Health and Human Services.
To examine 10-year rates of local, regional, and distant recurrences, patterns of recurrence, and survival rates for breast cancer patients enrolled on Study NRG Oncology/Radiation Therapy Oncology ...Group 9517, a multi-institutional prospective trial that studied one of the earliest methods of accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI), multicatheter brachytherapy (MCT).
Eligibility included stage I/II unifocal breast cancer <3 cm in size after lumpectomy with negative surgical margins and 0 to 3 positive axillary nodes without extracapsular extension. The APBI dose delivered was 34 Gy in 10 twice-daily fractions over 5 days for high-dose-rate (HDR); and 45 Gy in 3.5 to 5 days for low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy. The primary endpoint was HDR and LDR MCT reproducibility. This analysis focuses on long-term ipsilateral breast recurrence (IBR), contralateral breast cancer events (CBE), regional recurrence (RR), and distant metastases (DM), disease-free, and overall survival.
The median follow-up was 12.1 years. One hundred patients were accrued from 1997 to 2000; 98 were evaluable; 65 underwent HDR and 33 LDR MCT. Median age was 62 years; 88% had T1 tumors; 81% were pN0. Seventy-seven percent were estrogen receptor and/or progesterone receptor positive; 33% received adjuvant chemotherapy and 64% antiendocrine therapy. There have been 4 isolated IBRs and 1 IBR with RR, for 5.2% 10-year IBR without DM. There was 1 isolated RR, 1 with IBR, and 1 with a CBE, for 3.1% 10-year RR without DM. The 10-year CBE rate was 4.2%, with 5 total events. Eleven patients have developed DM, 8 have died of breast cancer, and 22 have died from other causes. The 10-year DFS and OS rates are 69.8% and 78.0%, respectively.
This multi-institutional, phase 2 trial studying MCT-APBI continues to report durable in-breast cancer control rates with long-term follow-up.
With 5-year survival rates after breast cancer therapy exceeding 90%, comprehensive follow-up care is a vital component of the treatment plan for patients who have completed active therapy. Although ...radiation oncologists are generally comfortable with management of the locoregional toxicities of breast cancer radiation therapy, many may be less familiar with the toxicities and available interventions associated with surgery, chemotherapy, and antihormone therapy. For radiation oncologists to provide the greatest value to their patients and play a meaningful role in patients with breast cancer follow-up care, multisystem assessment and management, beyond the breast/chest and axilla, is key. This guide is intended as an educational and practical tool to assist any oncology caregiver with a thorough multisystem assessment and management of the most common survivorship issues for the treated breast cancer patient. Hyperlinks to published data supporting or summarizing the intervention are provided for further reading in the online version, along with sample "Follow-Up Note and After Visit Summary" templates.
Decipher is a genomic classifier (GC) prospectively validated postprostatectomy. We validated the performance of the GC in pretreatment biopsy samples within the context of 3 randomized phase 3 ...high-risk definitive radiation therapy trials.
A prespecified analysis plan (NRG-GU-TS006) was approved to obtain formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue from biopsy specimens from the NRG biobank from patients enrolled in the NRG/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 9202, 9413, and 9902 phase 3 randomized trials. After central review, the highest-grade tumors were profiled on clinical-grade whole-transcriptome arrays and GC scores were obtained. The primary objective was to validate the independent prognostic ability for the GC for distant metastases (DM), and secondary for prostate cancer–specific mortality (PCSM) and overall survival (OS) with Cox univariable and multivariable analyses.
GC scores were obtained on 385 samples, of which 265 passed microarray quality control (69%) and had a median follow-up of 11 years (interquartile range, 9-13). In the pooled cohort, on univariable analysis, the GC was shown to be a prognostic factor for DM (per 0.1 unit; subdistribution hazard ratio sHR, 1.29; 95% confidence interval CI, 1.18-1.41; P < .001), PCSM (sHR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.16-1.41; P < .001), and OS (hazard ratio HR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.08-1.22; P < .001). On multivariable analyses, the GC (per 0.1 unit) was independently associated with DM (sHR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.09-1.36), PCSM (sHR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.09-1.39), and OS (HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.05-1.20) after adjusting for age, Prostate Specific Antigen, Gleason score, cT stage, trial, and randomized treatment arm. GC had similar prognostic ability in patients receiving short-term or long-term androgen-deprivation therapy, but the absolute improvement in outcome varied by GC risk.
This is the first validation of a gene expression biomarker on pretreatment prostate cancer biopsy samples from prospective randomized trials and demonstrates an independent association of GC score with DM, PCSM, and OS. High-risk prostate cancer is a heterogeneous disease state, and GC can improve risk stratification to help personalize shared decision making.
High-Dose-Rate (HDR) brachytherapy is a safe and efficacious treatment option for patients with a variety of different malignancies. Careful adherence to established standards has been shown to ...improve the likelihood of procedural success and reduce the incidence of treatment-related morbidity. A collaborative effort of the American College of Radiology (ACR) and American Society for Therapeutic Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) has produced a practice guideline for HDR brachytherapy. The guideline defines the qualifications and responsibilities of all the involved personnel, including the radiation oncologist, physicist and dosimetrists. Review of the leading indications for HDR brachytherapy in the management of gynecologic, thoracic, gastrointestinal, breast, urologic, head and neck, and soft tissue tumors is presented. Logistics with respect to the brachytherapy implant procedures and attention to radiation safety procedures and documentation are presented. Adherence to these practice guidelines can be part of ensuring quality and safety in a successful HDR brachytherapy program.
Background
Skeletal-related events (SREs), common sequelae of metastatic cancer, are reduced by bisphosphonates. In this study, it was postulated that radiopharmaceuticals, added to bisphosphonates, ...could further decrease the incidence of SREs.
Methods
NRG Oncology RTOG 0517 randomized patients with breast, lung, and prostate cancer and blastic bone metastases to either zoledronic acid (ZA) alone or ZA plus radiopharmaceuticals (Sr-89 or Sm-153). The primary endpoint was time to development of SREs. Secondary objectives included quality of life (QOL), pain control, overall survival (OS), and toxicity.
Results
261 patients (median age 68; 62% male; 55% prostate, 35% breast, 10% lung) were accrued between July 2006 and February 2011. The study closed early due to a lower than expected rate of SREs. 52 (42%) patients in the ZA arm and 49 (40%) in the radiopharmaceutical arm experienced an SRE. Median time free of SREs was 29.9 and 27.4 months, respectively (
p
= 0.84). Median OS in the ZA arm and radiopharmaceutical arms was 32.1 and 26.9 months, respectively (
p
= 0.37). Cox proportional hazards regression model showed that primary disease site (lung) and number of bone metastases (> 2) had a negative impact on OS (
p
< 0.0001,
p
= 0.01, respectively). The addition of radiopharmaceuticals to ZA led to a significant reduction in pain at 1 month based on BPI worst score (
p
= 0.02). No other group differences were noted for QOL or toxicity.
Conclusion
The addition of radiopharmaceuticals to bisphosphonates did not alter time to SREs or OS for patients with breast, lung, prostate cancers and blastic bone metastases, although it was associated with significant pain reduction at 1 month.
Clinical Trial Registry
This protocol (RTOG 0517) is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00365105), and may be viewed online at
http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00365105?term=RTOG+0517&rank=1
.
Prostate cancer is the most frequent cancer in men and a leading cause of cancer death. Determining a patient's optimal therapy is a challenge, where oncologists must select a therapy with the ...highest likelihood of success and the lowest likelihood of toxicity. International standards for prognostication rely on non-specific and semi-quantitative tools, commonly leading to over- and under-treatment. Tissue-based molecular biomarkers have attempted to address this, but most have limited validation in prospective randomized trials and expensive processing costs, posing substantial barriers to widespread adoption. There remains a significant need for accurate and scalable tools to support therapy personalization. Here we demonstrate prostate cancer therapy personalization by predicting long-term, clinically relevant outcomes using a multimodal deep learning architecture and train models using clinical data and digital histopathology from prostate biopsies. We train and validate models using five phase III randomized trials conducted across hundreds of clinical centers. Histopathological data was available for 5654 of 7764 randomized patients (71%) with a median follow-up of 11.4 years. Compared to the most common risk-stratification tool-risk groups developed by the National Cancer Center Network (NCCN)-our models have superior discriminatory performance across all endpoints, ranging from 9.2% to 14.6% relative improvement in a held-out validation set. This artificial intelligence-based tool improves prognostication over standard tools and allows oncologists to computationally predict the likeliest outcomes of specific patients to determine optimal treatment. Outfitted with digital scanners and internet access, any clinic could offer such capabilities, enabling global access to therapy personalization.
Total body irradiation (TBI) is a specialized radiotherapy technique. It is frequently used as a component of treatment plans involving hematopoietic stem cell transplant for a variety of disorders, ...most commonly hematologic malignancies. A variety of treatment delivery techniques, doses, and fractionation schemes can be utilized. A collaborative effort of the American College of Radiology and American Society for Radiation Oncology has produced a practice guideline for delivery of TBI. The guideline defines the qualifications and responsibilities of the involved personnel, including the radiation oncologist, physicist, dosimetrist, and radiation therapist. Review of the typical indications for TBI is presented, and the importance of integrating TBI into the multimodality treatment plan is discussed. Procedures and special considerations related to the simulation, treatment planning, treatment delivery, and quality assurance for patients treated with TBI are reviewed. This practice guideline can be part of ensuring quality and safety in a successful TBI program.
PDF
