Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background. We sought to study the association between RPS case volume and outcomes. Although a relationship has been demonstrated between case volume and patient outcomes in some cancers, such a relationship has not been established for retroperitoneal sarcomas (RPSs). Study Design. The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried for patients undergoing treatment for primary RPS diagnosed between 2004 and 2013. Mean annual patient volume for RPS resection was calculated for all hospitals and divided into low volume (<5 cases/year), medium volume (5–10 cases/year), and high volume (>10 cases/year). Risk-adjusted regression analyses were performed to identify predictors of 30-day surgical mortality, R0 margin status, and overall survival (OS). Results. Our study population consisted of 5,407 patients with a median age of 61 years, of whom 47% were male and 3,803 (70%) underwent surgical resection. Absolute 30-day surgical mortality and R0 margin rate following surgery for low-, medium-, and high-volume institutions were 2.4%, 1.3%, and 0.5% (p=0.027) and 68%, 65%, and 82%, (p<0.001), respectively. Five-year overall survival rates for low, medium, and high-volume institutions were 56%, 57%, and 66%, respectively (p<0.001). Patients treated at low-volume institutions had a significantly higher risk of 30-day mortality (adjusted OR = 4.66, 95% CI 2.26–9.63) and long-term mortality (adjusted HR = 1.56, 95% CI 1.16–2.11) compared to high-volume institutions. Conclusion. We demonstrate the existence of a hospital sarcoma service line volume-oncologic outcome relationship for RPS at the national level and provide benchmark data for cancer care delivery systems and policy makers.

To assess coronary revascularization outcomes in patients with previous thoracic radiation therapy (XRT). Previous chest radiation has been reported to adversely affect long term survival in patients with coronary disease treated with percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). Retrospective, single center cohort study of patients previously treated with thoracic radiation and PCI. Patients were propensity matched against control patients without radiation undergoing revascularization during the same time period. We identified 116 patients with radiation followed by PCI (XRT-PCI group) and 408 controls. Acute procedural complications were similar between groups. There were no differences in all-cause and cardiac mortality between groups (all-cause mortality HR 1.31, P=.078; cardiac mortality 0.78, P=.49). Patients with prior thoracic radiation and coronary disease treated with PCI have similar procedural complications and long term mortality when compared to control subjects.

Whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) is the standard of care to improve intracranial control following resection of brain metastasis. However, stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) to the surgical cavity is widely used in an attempt to reduce cognitive toxicity, despite the absence of high-level comparative data substantiating efficacy in the postoperative setting. We aimed to establish the effect of SRS on survival and cognitive outcomes compared with WBRT in patients with resected brain metastasis. In this randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial, adult patients (aged 18 years or older) from 48 institutions in the USA and Canada with one resected brain metastasis and a resection cavity less than 5·0 cm in maximal extent were randomly assigned (1:1) to either postoperative SRS (12–20 Gy single fraction with dose determined by surgical cavity volume) or WBRT (30 Gy in ten daily fractions or 37·5 Gy in 15 daily fractions of 2·5 Gy; fractionation schedule predetermined for all patients at treating centre). We randomised patients using a dynamic allocation strategy with stratification factors of age, duration of extracranial disease control, number of brain metastases, histology, maximal resection cavity diameter, and treatment centre. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment allocation. The co-primary endpoints were cognitive-deterioration-free survival and overall survival, and analyses were done by intention to treat. We report the final analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01372774. Between Nov 10, 2011, and Nov 16, 2015, 194 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to SRS (98 patients) or WBRT (96 patients). Median follow-up was 11·1 months (IQR 5·1–18·0). Cognitive-deterioration-free survival was longer in patients assigned to SRS (median 3·7 months [95% CI 3·45–5·06], 93 events) than in patients assigned to WBRT (median 3·0 months [2·86–3·25], 93 events; hazard ratio [HR] 0·47 [95% CI 0·35–0·63]; p<0·0001), and cognitive deterioration at 6 months was less frequent in patients who received SRS than those who received WBRT (28 [52%] of 54 evaluable patients assigned to SRS vs 41 [85%] of 48 evaluable patients assigned to WBRT; difference −33·6% [95% CI −45·3 to −21·8], p<0·00031). Median overall survival was 12·2 months (95% CI 9·7–16·0, 69 deaths) for SRS and 11·6 months (9·9–18·0, 67 deaths) for WBRT (HR 1·07 [95% CI 0·76–1·50]; p=0·70). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events reported with a relative frequency greater than 4% were hearing impairment (three [3%] of 93 patients in the SRS group vs eight [9%] of 92 patients in the WBRT group) and cognitive disturbance (three [3%] vs five [5%]). There were no treatment-related deaths. Decline in cognitive function was more frequent with WBRT than with SRS and there was no difference in overall survival between the treatment groups. After resection of a brain metastasis, SRS radiosurgery should be considered one of the standards of care as a less toxic alternative to WBRT for this patient population. National Cancer Institute.

Background: Radiation necrosis (RN) is a clinically relevant complication of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for intracranial metastasis (ICM) treatments. Radiation necrosis development is variable following SRS. It remains unclear if risk factors for and clinical outcomes following RN may be different for melanoma patients. We reviewed patients with ICM from metastatic melanoma to understand the potential impact of RN in this patient population. Methods: Patients who received SRS for ICM from melanoma at Mayo Clinic Arizona between 2013 and 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Data collected included demographics, tumor characteristics, radiation parameters, prior surgical and systemic treatments, and patient outcomes. Radiation necrosis was diagnosed by clinical evaluation including brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and, in some cases, tissue evaluation. Results: Radiation necrosis was diagnosed in 7 (27%) of 26 patients at 1.6 to 38 months following initial SRS. Almost 92% of all patients received systemic therapy and 35% had surgical resection prior to SRS. Patients with RN trended toward having larger ICM and a prior history of surgical resection, although statistical significance was not reached. Among patients with resection, those who developed RN had a longer period between surgery and SRS start (mean 44 vs 33 days). Clinical improvement following treatment for RN was noted in 2 (29%) patients. Conclusions: Radiation necrosis is relatively common following SRS for treatment of ICM from metastatic melanoma and clinical outcomes are poor. Further studies aimed at mitigating RN development and identifying novel approaches for treatment are warranted.

Localized hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) that is unresectable and non-transplantable can be treated by several liver-directed therapies. External beam radiation therapy (EBRT) is an increasingly accepted and widely utilized treatment modality in this setting. Accelerated charged particles such as proton beam therapy (PBT) and carbon ion radiation therapy (CIRT) offer technological advancements over conventional photon radiotherapy. In this review, we summarize the distinct advantages of CIRT use for HCC treatment, focusing on physical and biological attributes, and outline dosimetric and treatment planning caveats. Based on these considerations, we posit that HCC may be among the best indications for use of CIRT, as it allows for maximizing tumoricidal doses to the target volume while minimizing the dose to the organs at risk.

Carbon-fiber-reinforced polyetheretherketone (CFR-PEEK) orthopedic implants are gaining popularity in oncologic applications as they offer many potential advantages over traditional metallic implants. From an imaging perspective, this instrumentation allows for improved evaluation of adjacent anatomic structures during radiography, computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). This results in improved postoperative surveillance imaging quality as well as easier visualization of anatomy for potential image-guided percutaneous interventions (e.g., pain palliation injections, or ablative procedures for local disease control). CFR-PEEK devices are also advantageous in radiation oncology treatment due to their decreased imaging artifact during treatment planning imaging and decreased dose perturbation during radiotherapy delivery. As manufacturing processes for CFR-PEEK materials continue to evolve and improve, potential orthopedic applications in the spine and appendicular skeleton increase. An understanding of the unique properties of CFR-PEEK devices and their impact on imaging is valuable to radiologists delivering care to orthopedic oncology patients in both the diagnostic and interventional settings. This multidisciplinary review aims to provide a comprehensive insight into the radiologic, surgical, and radiation oncology impact of these innovative devices.

Purpose Lattice radiation therapy (LRT) is a form of spatially fractionated radiation therapy that allows increased total dose delivery aiming for improved treatment response without an increase in toxicities, commonly utilized for palliation of bulky tumors. The LRT treatment planning process is complex, while eligible patients often have an urgent need for expedited treatment start. In this study, we aimed to develop a simulation‐free workflow for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT)‐based LRT planning via deep learning‐predicted synthetic CT (sCT) to expedite treatment initiation. Methods Two deep learning models were initially trained using 3D U‐Net architecture to generate sCT from diagnostic CTs (dCT) of the thoracic and abdomen regions using a training dataset of 50 patients. The models were then tested on an independent dataset of 15 patients using image similarity analysis assessing mean absolute error (MAE) and structural similarity index measure (SSIM) as metrics. VMAT‐based LRT plans were generated based on sCT and recalculated on the planning CT (pCT) for dosimetric accuracy comparison. Differences in dose volume histogram (DVH) metrics between pCT and sCT plans were assessed using the Wilcoxon signed‐rank test. Results The final sCT prediction model demonstrated high image similarity to pCT, with a MAE and SSIM of 38.93 ± 14.79 Hounsfield Units (HU) and 0.92 ± 0.05 for the thoracic region, and 73.60 ± 22.90 HU and 0.90 ± 0.03 for the abdominal region, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences between sCT and pCT plans in terms of organ‐at‐risk and target volume DVH parameters, including maximum dose (Dmax), mean dose (Dmean), dose delivered to 90% (D90%) and 50% (D50%) of target volume, except for minimum dose (Dmin) and (D10%). Conclusion With demonstrated high image similarity and adequate dose agreement between sCT and pCT, our study is a proof‐of‐concept for using deep learning predicted sCT for a simulation‐free treatment planning workflow for VMAT‐based LRT.

Objectives: Identifying patients’ advantageous radiotherapy modalities prior to CT simulation is challenging. This study aimed to develop a workflow using deep learning (DL)-predicted synthetic CT (sCT) for treatment modality comparison based solely on a diagnostic CT (dCT). Methods: A DL network, U-Net, was trained utilizing 46 thoracic cases from a public database to generate sCT images predicting planning CT (pCT) scans based on the latest dCT, and tested on 15 institutional patients. The sCT accuracy was evaluated against the corresponding pCT and a commercial algorithm deformed CT (MdCT) based on Mean Absolute Error (MAE) and Universal Quality Index (UQI). To determine advantageous treatment modality, clinical dose-volume histogram (DVH) metrics and Normal Tissue Complication Probability (NTCP) differences between proton and photon treatment plans were analyzed on the sCTs via concordance correlation coefficient (CCC). Results: The AI-generated sCTs closely resembled those of the commercial deformation algorithm in the tested cases. The differences in MAE and UQI values between the sCT-vs-pCT and MdCT-vs-pCT were 19.38 HU and 0.06, respectively. The mean absolute NTCP deviation between sCT and pCT was 1.54%, 0.21%, and 2.36% for esophagus perforation, lung pneumonitis, and heart pericarditis, respectively. The CCC between sCT and pCT was 0.90 for DVH metrics and 0.97 for NTCP, indicating moderate agreement for DVH metrics and substantial agreement. Conclusions: Radiation oncologists can potentially utilize this personalized sCT based approach as a clinical support tool to rapidly compare the treatment modality benefit during patient consultation and facilitate in-depth discussion on potential toxicities at a patient-specific level.

Background Esophageal carcinoma is the eighth most common cancer in the world. Volumetric‐modulated arc therapy (VMAT) is widely used to treat distal esophageal carcinoma due to high conformality to the target and good sparing of organs at risk (OAR). It is not clear if small‐spot intensity‐modulated proton therapy (IMPT) demonstrates a dosimetric advantage over VMAT. In this study, we compared dosimetric performance of VMAT and small‐spot IMPT for distal esophageal carcinoma in terms of plan quality, plan robustness, and interplay effects. Methods 35 distal esophageal carcinoma patients were retrospectively reviewed; 19 patients received small‐spot IMPT and the remaining 16 of them received VMAT. Both plans were generated by delivering prescription doses to clinical target volumes (CTVs) on phase‐averaged 4D‐CT's. The dose‐volume‐histogram (DVH) band method was used to quantify plan robustness. Software was developed to evaluate interplay effects with randomized starting phases for each field per fraction. DVH indices were compared using Wilcoxon rank‐sum test. For fair comparison, all the treatment plans were normalized to have the same CTVhigh D95% in the nominal scenario relative to the prescription dose. Results In the nominal scenario, small‐spot IMPT delivered statistically significantly lower liver Dmean and V30Gy[RBE], lung Dmean, heart Dmean compared with VMAT. CTVhigh dose homogeneity and protection of other OARs were comparable between the two treatments. In terms of plan robustness, the IMPT and VMAT plans were comparable for kidney V18Gy[RBE], liver V30Gy[RBE], stomach V45Gy[RBE], lung Dmean, V5Gy[RBE], and V20Gy[RBE], cord Dmax and D0.03cm3, liver Dmean, heart V20Gy[RBE], and V30Gy[RBE], but IMPT was significantly worse for CTVhigh D95%, D2cm3, and D5%‐D95%, CTVlow D95%, heart Dmean, and V40Gy[RBE], requiring careful and experienced adjustments during the planning process and robustness considerations. The small‐spot IMPT plans still met the standard clinical requirements after interplay effects were considered. Conclusions Small‐spot IMPT decreases doses to heart, liver, and total lung compared to VMAT as well as achieves clinically acceptable plan robustness. Our study supports the use of small‐spot IMPT for the treatment of distal esophageal carcinoma.

Purpose To compare the dosimetric performances of intensity‐modulated proton therapy (IMPT) plans generated with two different beam angle configurations (the Right–Left oblique posterior beams and the Superior–Inferior oblique posterior beams) for the treatment of distal esophageal carcinoma in the presence of uncertainties and interplay effect. Methods and Materials Twenty patients’ IMPT plans were retrospectively selected, with 10 patients treated with the R‐L oblique posterior beams (Group R‐L) and the other 10 patients treated with the S‐I oblique posterior beams (Group S‐I). Patients in both groups were matched by their clinical target volumes (CTVs—high and low dose levels) and respiratory motion amplitudes. Dose‐volume‐histogram (DVH) indices were used to assess plan quality. DVH bandwidth was calculated to evaluate plan robustness. Interplay effect was quantified using four‐dimensional (4D) dynamic dose calculation with random respiratory starting phase of each fraction. Normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) for heart, liver, and lung was calculated, respectively, to estimate the clinical outcomes. Wilcoxon signed‐rank test was used for statistical comparison between the two groups. Results Compared with plans in Group R‐L, plans in Group S‐I resulted in significantly lower liver Dmean and lung V30Gy[RBE] with slightly higher but clinically acceptable spinal cord Dmax. Similar plan robustness was observed between the two groups. When interplay effect was considered, plans in Group S‐I performed statistically better for heart Dmean and V30Gy[RBE], lung Dmean and V5Gy[RBE], and liver Dmean, with slightly increased but clinically acceptable spinal cord Dmax. NTCP for liver was significantly better in Group S‐I. Conclusions IMPT plans in Group S‐I have better sparing of liver, heart, and lungs at the slight cost of spinal cord maximum dose protection, and are more interplay‐effect resilient compared to IMPT plans in Group R‐L. Our study supports the routine use of the S‐I oblique posterior beams for the treatments of distal esophageal carcinoma.