Explore the vast range of titles available.

High-quality randomised clinical trials testing moderately fractionated breast radiotherapy have clearly shown that local control and survival is at least as effective as with 2 Gy daily fractions with similar or reduced normal tissue toxicity. Fewer treatment visits are welcomed by patients and their families, and reduced fractions produce substantial savings for health-care systems. Implementation of hypofractionation, however, has moved at a slow pace. The oncology community have now reached an inflection point created by new evidence from the FAST-Forward five-fraction randomised trial and catalysed by the need for the global radiation oncology community to unite during the COVID-19 pandemic and rapidly rethink hypofractionation implementation. The aim of this paper is to support equity of access for all patients to receive evidence-based breast external beam radiotherapy and to facilitate the translation of new evidence into routine daily practice. The results from this European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology Advisory Committee in Radiation Oncology Practice consensus state that moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy can be offered to any patient for whole breast, chest wall (with or without reconstruction), and nodal volumes. Ultrafractionation (five fractions) can also be offered for non-nodal breast or chest wall (without reconstruction) radiotherapy either as standard of care or within a randomised trial or prospective cohort. The consensus is timely; not only is it a pragmatic framework for radiation oncologists, but it provides a measured proposal for the path forward to influence policy makers and empower patients to ensure equity of access to evidence-based radiotherapy.

SummaryStereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for patients with metastatic cancer, especially when characterised by a low tumour burden (ie, oligometastatic disease), receiving targeted therapy or immunotherapy has become a frequently practised and guideline-supported treatment strategy. Despite the increasing use in routine clinical practice, there is little information on the safety of combining SBRT with modern targeted therapy or immunotherapy and a paucity of high-level evidence to guide clinical management. A systematic literature review was performed to identify the toxicity profiles of combined metastases-directed SBRT and targeted therapy or immunotherapy. These results served as the basis for an international Delphi consensus process among 28 interdisciplinary experts who are members of the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) OligoCare consortium. Consensus was sought about risk mitigation strategies of metastases-directed SBRT combined with targeted therapy or immunotherapy; a potential need for and length of interruption to targeted therapy or immunotherapy around SBRT delivery; and potential adaptations of radiation dose and fractionation. Results of this systematic review and consensus process compile the best available evidence for safe combination of metastases-directed SBRT and targeted therapy or immunotherapy for patients with metastatic or oligometastatic cancer and aim to guide today's clinical practice and the design of future clinical trials.

Novel systemic therapies for breast cancer are being rapidly implemented into clinical practice. These drugs often have different mechanisms of action and side-effect profiles compared with traditional chemotherapy. Underpinning practice-changing clinical trials focused on the systemic therapies under investigation, thus there are sparse data available on radiotherapy. Integration of these new systemic therapies with radiotherapy is therefore challenging. Given this rapid, transformative change in breast cancer multimodal management, the multidisciplinary community must unite to ensure optimal, safe, and equitable treatment for all patients. The aim of this collaborative group of radiation, clinical, and medical oncologists, basic and translational scientists, and patient advocates was to: scope, synthesise, and summarise the literature on integrating novel drugs with radiotherapy for breast cancer; produce consensus statements on drug–radiotherapy integration, where specific evidence is lacking; and make best-practice recommendations for recording of radiotherapy data and quality assurance for subsequent studies testing novel drugs.

Head and neck cancer (HNC) management requires highly coordinated multidisciplinary care. Radiation Therapy Technologists (RTTs) have increasingly expanded their role beyond technical execution, contributing to patient positioning, treatment delivery, monitoring, and supportive care. This narrative review integrates evidence from published literature with structured experiential insights collected through focus group discussions with RTTs and other multidisciplinary team (MDT) members. The resulting conceptual and operational framework highlights RTT contributions across the radiotherapy pathway, including adaptive planning, workflow coordination, and patient-centered interventions, supported by imaging and artificial intelligence (AI) tools for predictive modeling and treatment optimization. By facilitating communication, monitoring anatomical and functional changes, and integrating AI-informed insights, RTTs support timely interventions, reduce treatment interruptions, and enhance treatment safety and precision. Structured training, formal recognition of advanced practice roles, and interprofessional collaboration are key to maximizing the impact of RTTs in HNC care. This review provides a practical roadmap for institutions, professional societies, and research initiatives to support the evolution of RTT roles in complex radiotherapy settings.

•Pineal tumors correspond.•to less than 1 % and 3–8 % of brain tumors in adults and children, respectively•According to 2016 WHO Classification of CNS tumors, papillary tumors of the pineal region are considered as grade II or III.•The main treatment options for pineal region tumors are surgery and radiotherapy.•Adjuvant radiotherapy is offered because of the high risk of local recurrence.•Very few data are available for chemotherapy. Papillary tumor of the pineal region (PTPR) is a rare neuroepithelial brain tumor, characterized by a high risk of local recurrence (greater than 70 % at 6 years). The aim of our study was to review the available literature on radiotherapy for PTPR in order to evaluate timings, schedules, outcomes and toxicities of this treatment modality. In our review, 72.4 % (84) of the patients diagnosed with PTPR received radiation therapy. There is heterogeneity in the dose prescription, ranging from 45 Gy (25 × 1.8 Gy) to 60 Gy (30 × 2 Gy) for 3D Conformal Radiation Therapy and from 12 Gy to 36 Gy for Stereotactic Radiosurgery. Being considered as a grade II or III tumor, PTPR should receive higher total radiation dose in the adjuvant setting. Our analysis showed a very limited treatment-related toxicity with an expected 10-y OS of 72.5 %. At 5-years from the diagnosis, about 60 % of the patients experienced a local recurrence, whereas at 10 years the rate is higher than 80 %. In the literature, conflicting data about radiotherapy for PTPR are reported, in particular regarding disease progression. Although radiotherapy represents a fundamental treatment in the management of PTPR, prospective studies are required to better define its impact on overall survival and progression-free survival.

Background: Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma (OPSCC) is rapidly increasing due to the spread of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) infection. HPV-positive disease has unique characteristics, with better response to treatment and consequent better prognosis. HPV status is routinely assessed via p16 immunohistochemistry or HPV DNA Polymerase Chain Reaction. Radiomics is a quantitative approach to medical imaging which can overcome limitations due to its subjective interpretation and correlation with clinical data. The aim of this narrative review is to evaluate the impact of radiomic features on assessing HPV status in OPSCC patients. Methods: A narrative review was performed by synthesizing literature results from PUBMED. In the search strategy, Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms were used. Retrospective mono- or multicentric works assessing the correlation between radiomic features and HPV status prediction in OPSCC were included. Selected papers were in English and included studies on humans. The range of publication date was July 2015–April 2023. Results: Our research returned 23 published papers; the accuracy of radiomic models was evaluated by ROC curves and AUC values. MRI- and CT-based radiomic models proved of comparable efficacy. Also, metabolic imaging showed crucial importance in the determination of HPV status, albeit with lower AUC values. Conclusions: Radiomic features from conventional imaging can play a complementary role in the assessment of HPV status in OPSCC. Both primary tumor- and nodal-related features and multisequencing-based models demonstrated higher accuracy.

Objectives: In breast cancer (BC) patients receiving mastectomy, postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) improves long-term outcomes by decreasing local failure and cancer mortality. However, the optimal PMRT schedule is still under investigation. The present review aims to discuss the evidence regarding hypofractionated (HF) PMRT in BC patients in order to identify the optimal treatment approach. Additional purpose is to highlight what we have learned from COVID-19 era regarding HF schedules for PMRT in BC patients. Mechanism: Between February and November 2021, literature and database research were conducted. Key references were detected from a PubMed query. Range of publication date was between 2000 and 2021. Selection criteria included English language publications in humans. Hand searching included meeting proceedings of the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO), European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO), American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO). The website clinicaltrials.gov was also searched. Randomized controlled trials evaluating HF-PMRT were included. Findings in brief: Our research returned 87 published papers. Fourteen trials were included in our final analysis. The comparisons of several different schedules of HF-PMRT with conventional fractionated PMRT provided similar results in terms of locoregional disease control without increasing toxicity. Particularly, an acute skin toxicity incidence grade 2 or higher ranged between 10 and 25% among the studies we analyzed. Conclusions: The present paper suggests that safety and efficacy of HF-PMRT is comparable with conventional schedules and standard practice guidelines are already available. COVID-19 pandemic has emphasised the need for increasingly tailored treatment protocols. Modern HF regimens should continue to be the standard of treatment in BC patients who receive PMRT also in the post-COVID-19 era.

Optimal therapy following breast-conserving surgery in older adults with low-risk, early-stage breast cancer remains uncertain. The EUROPA trial aims to compare the effects of radiotherapy and endocrine therapy as single-modality treatments on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence (IBTR) outcomes in this population. This non-inferiority, phase 3, randomised study was conducted at 18 academic hospitals across Italy (17 centres) and Slovenia (one centre). Eligible patients were women aged 70 years or older with histologically confirmed, stage I, luminal A-like breast cancer, who had undergone breast-conserving surgery and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive single-modality endocrine therapy or radiotherapy. Endocrine therapy consisted of daily oral aromatase inhibitors or tamoxifen, for a total planned duration of 5–10 years as per clinical discretion, while radiotherapy was administered as either whole breast or partial breast irradiation, delivered in 5–15 fractions. Randomisation was stratified by health status according to the Geriatric 8 (G8) screening tool and by age, with allocation concealed and no blinding. The co-primary endpoints were the change in HRQOL, assessed by the global health status (GHS) scale of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire 30-item core module at 24 months, and 5-year IBTR rates (not reported here). This preplanned interim analysis was performed once at least 152 patients completed the 24-month GHS HRQOL assessment. The safety population comprised patients who received the study intervention at least once after randomisation. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04134598, and is ongoing and actively recruiting. Between March 4, 2021, and June 14, 2024, 731 women were randomly assigned to receive radiotherapy (n=365) or endocrine therapy (n=366). This analysis included 104 patients in the radiotherapy group and 103 in the endocrine therapy group, with a median follow-up of 23·9 months (IQR 22·9–24·2). Patients were predominantly White (204 [99%] of 207) and the median age was 75·0 years (IQR 73·0–80·0) in the radiotherapy group and 74·0 years (72·0–80·0) in the endocrine therapy group. 86 patients in the radiotherapy group and 75 in the endocrine therapy group completed the 24-month HRQOL assessment. The mean baseline GHS score was 71·9 (SD 19·1) in the radiotherapy group and 75·5 (19·3) in the endocrine therapy group. At 24 months, the age-adjusted, G8 score-adjusted mean change from baseline in GHS was –3·40 (95% CI –7·82 to 1·03; p=0·13) in the radiotherapy group and –9·79 (–14·45 to –5·13; p<0·0001) in the endocrine therapy group, with an adjusted mean difference of 6·39 (0·14 to 12·65; p=0·045) favouring radiotherapy. Treatment-related adverse events were less frequent in the radiotherapy group (65 [67%] of 97 patients) compared with the endocrine therapy group (76 [85%] of 89). The most common grade 3–4 adverse events were arthralgia (six [7%] of 89 in the endocrine therapy group vs 0 of 97 in the radiotherapy group), pelvic organ prolapse (three [3%] vs 0), fatigue, hot flashes, myalgia, bone pain, and fractures (two [2%] vs 0 for each). Serious adverse events were reported in 15 (15%) patients in the radiotherapy group and 13 (15%) in the endocrine therapy group. There were no treatment-related deaths in either group. Endocrine therapy was associated with a greater reduction in HRQOL, as measured by GHS, compared with radiotherapy at 24 months. While these interim results suggest radiotherapy might better preserve HRQOL in older women with low-risk early breast cancer, further data on disease control outcomes and final patient accrual are needed to draw definitive conclusions. Fondazione Radioterapia Oncologica.

Acute radiation dermatitis is a frequent adverse effect of radiotherapy, but standardisation of care for acute radiation dermatitis is lacking. Due to the conflicting evidence and variability in current guidelines, a four-round Delphi consensus process was used to compile opinions of 42 international experts on care for people with acute radiation dermatitis on the basis of the evidence in existing medical literature. Interventions for acute radiation dermatitis prevention or management that reached at least 75% consensus were recommended for clinical use. Six interventions could be recommended for the prevention of acute radiation dermatitis: photobiomodulation therapy and Mepitel film in people with breast cancer, Hydrofilm, mometasone, betamethasone, and olive oil. Mepilex Lite dressings were recommended for the management of acute radiation dermatitis. Most interventions were not recommended due to insufficient evidence, conflicting evidence, or lack of consensus to support use, suggesting a need for further research. Clinicians can consider implementing recommended interventions in their practice to prevent and manage acute radiation dermatitis until additional evidence becomes available.

ObjectiveTumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) are the most represented cells of the immune system in the tumor microenvironment (TME). Besides its effects on cancer cells, radiation therapy (RT) can alter TME composition. With this systematic review, we provide a better understanding on how RT can regulate macrophage characterization, namely the M1 antitumor and the M2 protumor polarization, with the aim of describing new effective RT models and exploration of the possibility of integrating radiation with other available therapies.MethodsA systematic search in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was carried out in PubMed, Google Scholar, and Scopus. Articles from January 2000 to April 2020 which focus on the role of M1 and M2 macrophages in the response to RT were identified.ResultsOf the 304 selected articles, 29 qualitative summary papers were included in our analysis (16 focusing on administration of RT and concomitant systemic molecules, and 13 reporting on RT alone). Based on dose intensity, irradiation was classified into low (low-dose irradiation, LDI; corresponding to less than 1 Gy), moderate (moderate-dose irradiation, MDI; between 1 and 10 Gy), and high (high-dose irradiation, HDI; greater than 10 Gy). While HDI seems to be responsible for induced angiogenesis and accelerated tumor growth through early M2-polarized TAM infiltration, MDI stimulates phagocytosis and local LDI may represent a valid treatment option for possible combination with cancer immunotherapeutic agents.ConclusionTAMs seem to have an ambivalent role on the efficacy of cancer treatment. Radiation therapy, which exerts its main antitumor activity via cell killing, can in turn interfere with TAM characterization through different modalities. The plasticity of TAMs makes them an attractive target for anticancer therapies and more research should be conducted to explore this potential therapeutic strategy.