Explore the vast range of titles available.

Prostate cancer is a major public health problem with considerable uncertainties about the effectiveness of population screening and treatment options. We report the study design, participant sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, and the initial results of the testing and diagnostic phase of the Prostate testing for cancer and Treatment (ProtecT) trial, which aims to investigate the effectiveness of treatments for localised prostate cancer. In this randomised phase 3 trial, men aged 50–69 years registered at 337 primary care centres in nine UK cities were invited to attend a specialist nurse appointment for a serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test. Prostate biopsies were offered to men with a PSA concentration of 3·0 μg/L or higher. Consenting participants with clinically localised prostate cancer were randomly assigned to active monitoring (surveillance strategy), radical prostatectomy, or three-dimensional conformal external-beam radiotherapy by a computer-generated allocation system. Randomisation was stratified by site (minimised for differences in participant age, PSA results, and Gleason score). The primary endpoint is prostate cancer mortality at a median 10-year follow-up, ascertained by an independent committee, which will be analysed by intention to treat in 2016. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02044172, and as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN20141297. Between Oct 1, 2001, and Jan 20, 2009, 228 966 men were invited to attend an appointment with a specialist nurse. Of the invited men, 100 444 (44%) attended their initial appointment and 82 429 (82%) of attenders had a PSA test. PSA concentration was below the biopsy threshold in 73 538 (89%) men. Of the 8566 men with a PSA concentration of 3·0–19·9 μg/L, 7414 (87%) underwent biopsies. 2896 men were diagnosed with prostate cancer (4% of tested men and 39% of those who had a biopsy), of whom 2417 (83%) had clinically localised disease (mostly T1c, Gleason score 6). With the addition of 247 pilot study participants recruited between 1999 and 2001, 2664 men were eligible for the treatment trial and 1643 (62%) agreed to be randomly assigned (545 to active monitoring, 545 to radiotherapy, and 553 to radical prostatectomy). Clinical and sociodemographic characteristics of randomly assigned participants were balanced across treatment groups. The ProtecT trial randomly assigned 1643 men with localised prostate cancer to active monitoring, radiotherapy, or surgery. Participant clinicopathological features are more consistent with contemporary patient characteristics than in previous prostate cancer treatment trials. UK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.

In Thailand, individuals with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who develop portal vein tumor thrombosis (PVTT) have a restricted treatment option because to the extent of the disease, poor underlying liver function, and non-coverage of immuno/targeted therapy. Radiotherapy (RT) plays an increasingly important function in these patients. To investigate the feasibility, efficacy, and adverse event rates, we performed a retrospective analysis of patients with HCC with PVTT who underwent 3-dimensional conformal radiation (3DCRT), intensity-modulated radiation (IMRT), volumetric-modulated radiotherapy (VMAT), and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in a single-institution. To examine clinical results in terms of overall survival (OS), local control (LC), response of primary tumor and PVTT, hepatic and gastrointestinal adverse reaction, and prognosis variables for OS and LC. Between July 2007 and August 2019, non-metastatic HCC with PVTT patients treated with RT were retrospectively reviewed and evaluated. The analysis included data from 160 patients. The mean age of the patients was 60.8 years ((95% CI 58.2-62.0). The median diameter of the tumor was 7.7 cm (range: 1-24.5). 85 (54.5%) individuals had PVTT in the main or first branch. At 1.8-10 Gy per fraction, the mean biologically effective dose (BED) as α/β ratio of 10 was 49.6 (95% CI 46.7-52.5) Gy10. The median survival time was 8.3 (95% CI 6.1-10.3) months. Survival rates at one and two years were 39.6% and 17.1%, respectively. Estimated incidence of local failure using competing risk analysis were 24% and 60% at 1 and 2 years, respectively. The overall response rate was 74%, with an 18.5 percent complete response rate. In multivariate analysis, tumor size, overall response, and radiation dose were all significant prognostic variables for OS. Hepatic unfavorable events of grade 3 and 4 were for 14.1% of the total. There was no occurrences of grade 3-4 gastrointestinal toxicity, either acute or late. Additionally, there were no treatment-related mortality. Advanced RT is regarded as a safe and effective therapeutic option for HCC with PVTT. Overall survival was clearly related to tumor size, radiation dose, and tumor/PVTT response. Individuals with BED 56 Gy10 had significantly better overall survival than patients with BED 56 Gy10. A prospective randomized trial is required to validate these outcomes in order to corroborate these findings.

Background Excellent dosimetric characteristics were demonstrated for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). In a single-center retrospective analysis, we tested whether these advantages may translate into significant clinical benefits. We compared VMAT to conventional 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) in patients, homogeneously treated according to the control arm of the CAO/ARO/AIO-04 trial. Methods CRT consisted of pelvic irradiation with 50.4/1.8Gy by VMAT ( n  = 81) or 3DCRT ( n  = 107) and two cycles of 5-fluorouracil. Standardized total mesorectal excision surgery was performed within 4–6 weeks. The tumor regression grading (TRG) was assessed by the Dworak score. Acute and late toxicity were evaluated via the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events and the Late effects of normal tissues scale, respectively. Side effects greater than or equal to grade 3 were considered high-grade. Results Median follow-up was 18.3 months in the VMAT group and 61.5 months in the 3DCRT group with no differences in TRG between them ( p  = 0.1727). VMAT treatment substantially reduced high-grade acute and late toxicity, with 5 % versus 20 % ( p  = 0.0081) and 6 % vs. 22 % ( p  = 0.0039), respectively. With regard to specific organs, differences were found in skin reaction ( p  = 0.019) and proctitis ( p  = 0.0153). Conclusions VMAT treatment in preoperative CRT for LARC showed the potential to substantially reduce high-grade acute and late toxicity. Importantly, we could demonstrate that VMAT irradiation did not impair short-term oncological results. We conclude, that the reduced toxicity after VMAT irradiation may pave the way for more efficient systemic therapies, and hopefully improved patient survival in the multimodal treatment of LARC.

Background Various randomized trials have demonstrated that postmastectomy radiotherapy (RT) to the chest wall and comprehensive regional nodal areas improves survival in patients with axillary node-positive breast cancer. Controversy exists as to whether the internal mammary node (IMN) region is an essential component of regional nodal irradiation. Available data on the survival benefit of IMN irradiation (IMNI) are conflicting. The patient populations enrolled in previous studies were heterogeneous and most studies were conducted before modern systemic treatment and three-dimensional (3D) radiotherapy (RT) techniques were introduced. This study aims to assess the efficacy and safety of IMNI in the context of modern systemic treatment and computed tomography (CT)-based RT planning techniques. Methods POTENTIAL is a prospective, multicenter, open-label, parallel, phase III, randomized controlled trial investigating whether IMNI improves disease-free survival (DFS) in high-risk breast cancer with positive axillary nodes (pN+) after mastectomy. A total of 1800 patients will be randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive IMNI or not. All patients are required to receive ≥ six cycles of anthracycline and/or taxane-based chemotherapy. Randomization will be stratified by institution, tumor location (medial/central vs. other quadrants), the number of positive axillary nodes (1–3 vs. 4–9 vs. ≥10), and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (yes vs. no). Treatment will be delivered with CT-based 3D RT techniques, including 3D conformal RT, intensity-modulated RT, or volumetric modulated arc therapy. The prescribed dose is 50 Gy in 25 fractions or 43.5 Gy in 15 fractions. Tiered RT quality assurance is required. After RT, patients will be followed up at regular intervals. Oncological and toxilogical outcomes, especially cardiac toxicities, will be assessed. Discussion This trial design is intended to overcome the limitations of previous prospective studies by recruiting patients with pN+ breast cancer, using DFS as the primary endpoint, and prospectively assessing cardiac toxicities and requiring RT quality assurance. The results of this study will provide high-level evidence for elective IMNI in patients with breast cancer after mastectomy. Trial registration ClinicalTrails.gov , NCT04320979 . Registered 25 Match 2020, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04320979

Background and Objectives: Reducing time of treatment during COVID-19 outbreaks has been recommended by the leading Radiation Oncology societies. Still minimizing radiation induced tissue toxicity is one of the most important issues in breast cancer patients. The study aimed to investigate compliance, clinical and dosimetry normal tissue toxicity, and cosmetic results between moderated and ultra-fractionated regimes for breast cancer patients during COVID-19 pandemic. Materials and Methods: This pilot prospective randomized study included 60 patients with early breast cancer after preserving surgery, 27 patients advocated to ultra-hypofractionated whole-breast three dimensional (3D) conformal radiotherapy of 26 Gy in 5 fractions over 1 week and 33 patients with moderate fractionated breast 3D conformal radiotherapy patients between March 2020 and July 2020, during the COVID pandemic outbreak. The compliance to treatment, dosimetric parameters, acute and late skin toxicity, subcutaneous tissue toxicity, cosmetic results and clinical follow up for 18 months for the two regimes were analyzed and compared. Results: When two regimes were compared 5 fraction group had significantly lower prevalence of newly infected cases of SARS-CoV-2 and thus delayed/interrupted treatment (p = 0.05), comparable grade 1 CTCAE v5, acute skin toxicity (p = 0.18), Grade 1 Radiation Morbidity Scoring Scheme (RESS) subcutaneous tissue toxicity (p = 0.18), Grade 1 RESS late skin toxicity (p = 0.88) and cosmetic results (p = 0.46). Dosimetric results reveled that patients in 5 fraction group received significantly lower median ipsilateral lung doses (p < 0.01) in addition to left breast cancer patients that received significantly lower median heart dose (p < 0.01) and median left anterior descending artery (LAD) dose (p < 0.01). Conclusion: Ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy for breast cancer is comparable to moderate hypofractionation regimen regarding grade 1 acute skin toxicity, grade 1 subcutaneous tissue toxicity, late skin toxicity and cosmetic results. Application of ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy with significantly lower radiation doses for lung and heart could be crucial in reducing the risk of acute/late pulmonary and heart radiation-induced toxicity.

Purpose Volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) achieves high conformity to the planned target volume (PTV) and good sparing of organs at risk (OAR). This study compares dosimetric parameters and toxicity in esophageal cancer (EC) patients treated with VMAT and 3D conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT). Materials and methods Between 2007 and 2014, 17 SC patients received neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) with VMAT. Dose–volume histograms and toxicity were compared between these patients and 20 treated with 3D-CRT. All patients were irradiated with a total dose of 45 Gy. All VMAT patients received simultaneous chemotherapy with cisplatin and 5‑fluorouracil (5-FU) in treatment weeks 1 and 5. Of 20 patients treated with 3D-CRT, 13 (65 %) also received CRT with cisplatin and 5‑FU, whereas 6 patients (30 %) received CRT with weekly oxaliplatin and cetuximab, and a continuous infusion of 5‑FU (OE-7). Results There were no differences in baseline characteristics between the treatment groups. For the lungs, VMAT was associated with a higher V 5 (median 90.1 % vs. 79.7 %; p  = 0.013) and V 10 (68.2 % vs. 56.6 %; p  = 0.014), but with a lower V 30 (median 6.6 % vs. 11.0 %; p  = 0.030). Regarding heart parameters, VMAT was associated with a higher V 5 (median 100.0 % vs. 91.0 %; p  = 0.043), V 10 (92.0 % vs. 79.2 %; p  = 0.047), and D max (47.5 Gy vs. 46.3 Gy; p  = 0.003), but with a lower median dose (18.7 Gy vs. 30.0 Gy; p  = 0.026) and V 30 (17.7 % vs. 50.4 %; p  = 0.015). Complete resection was achieved in 16 VMAT and 19 3D-CRT patients. Due to systemic progression, 2 patients did not undergo surgery. The most frequent postoperative complication was anastomosis insufficiency, occurring in 1 VMAT (6.7 %) and 5 3D-CRT patients (27.8 %; p  = 0.180). Postoperative pneumonia was seen in 2 patients of each group ( p  = 1.000). There was no significant difference in 3‑year overall (65 % VMAT vs. 45 % 3D-CRT; p  = 0.493) or 3‑year progression-free survival (53 % VMAT vs. 35 % 3D-CRT; p  = 0.453). Conclusion Although dosimetric differences in lung and heart exposure were observed, no clinically relevant impact was detected in either patient group. In a real-life patient cohort, VMAT enables reduction of lung and heart V 30 compared to 3D-CRT, which may contribute to reduced toxicity.

The purpose of this study was to report the efficacy and the safety profile on the subset of selected early breast cancer (BC) patients aged 70 years or older from a single-center phase 3 trial comparing whole breast irradiation (WBI) to accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) using intensity-modulated radiation therapy technique. Between 2005 and 2013, 520 patients aged more than 40 years old were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive either WBI or APBI in a 1:1 ratio. Eligible patients were women with early BC (maximum diameter 2.5 cm) suitable for breast conserving surgery. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02104895. A total of 117 patients aged 70 years or more were analyzed (58 in the WBI arm, 59 in the APBI arm). At a median follow-up of 5-years (range 3.4–7.0), the ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) rate was 1.9 % in both groups. No significant difference between the two groups was identified (log-rank test p  = 0.96). The 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates in the WBI group and APBI group were 6.1 and 1.9 %, respectively ( p  = 0.33). The APBI group presented significantly better results in terms of acute skin toxicity, considering both any grade ( p  = 0.0001) and grade 2 or higher ( p  = 0.0001). Our subgroup analyses showed a very low rate and no significant difference in terms of IBTR, using both WBI and APBI. A significant impact on patients compliance in terms of acute and early late toxicity was shown, which could translate in a consistent improvement of overall quality of life.

Radical radiotherapy is a standard form of management of localised prostate cancer. Conformal treatment planning spares adjacent normal tissues reducing treatment-related side effects and may permit safe dose escalation. We have tested the effects on tumour control and side effects of escalating radiotherapy dose and investigated the appropriate target volume margin. After an initial 3–6 month period of androgen suppression, 126 men were randomised and treated with radiotherapy using a 2 by 2 factorial trial design. The initial radiotherapy tumour target volume included the prostate and base of seminal vesicles (SV) or complete SV depending on SV involvement risk. Treatments were randomised to deliver a dose of 64 Gy with either a 1.0 or 1.5 cm margin around the tumour volume (1.0 and 1.5 cm margin groups) and also to treat either with or without a 10 Gy boost to the prostate alone with no additional margin (64 and 74 Gy groups). Tumour control was monitored by prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing and clinical examination with additional tests as appropriate. Acute and late side effects of treatment were measured using the Radiation Treatment and Oncology Groups (RTOG) and LENT SOM systems. The results showed that freedom from PSA failure was higher in the 74 Gy group compared to the 64 Gy group, but this did not reach conventional levels of statistical significance with 5-year actuarial control rates of 71% (95% CI 58–81%) in the 74 Gy group vs 59% (95% CI 45–70%) in the 64 Gy group. There were 23 failures in the 74Gy group and 33 in the 64 Gy group (Hazard ratio 0.64, 95% CI 0.38–1.10, P =0.10). No difference in disease control was seen between the 1.0 and 1.5 cm margin groups (5-year actuarial control rates 67%, 95% CI 53–77% vs 63%, 95% CI 50–74%) with 28 events in each group (Hazard ratio 0.97, 95% CI 0.50–1.86, P =0.94). Acute side effects were generally mild and 18 weeks after treatment, only four and five of the 126 men had persistent ⩾Grade 1 bowel or bladder side effects, respectively. Statistically significant increases in acute bladder side effects were seen after treatment in the men receiving 74 Gy ( P =0.006), and increases in both acute bowel side effects during treatment ( P =0.05) and acute bladder sequelae ( P =0.002) were recorded for men in the 1.5 cm margin group. While statistically significant, these differences were of short duration and of doubtful clinical importance. Late bowel side effects (RTOG⩾2) were seen more commonly in the 74 Gy and 1.5 cm margin groups ( P =0.02 and P =0.05, respectively) in the first 2 years after randomisation. Similar results were found using the LENT SOM assessments. No significant differences in late bladder side effects were seen between the randomised groups using the RTOG scoring system. Using the LENT SOM instrument, a higher proportion of men treated in the 74 Gy group had Grade ⩾3 urinary frequency at 6 and 12 months. Compared to baseline scores, bladder symptoms improved after 6 months or more follow-up in all groups. Sexual function deteriorated after treatment with the number of men reporting some sexual dysfunction (Grade⩾1) increasing from 38% at baseline to 66% at 6 months and 1 year and 81% by year 5. However, no consistent differences were seen between the randomised groups. In conclusion, dose escalation from 64 to 74 Gy using conformal radiotherapy may improve long-term PSA control, but a treatment margin of 1.5 cm is unnecessary and is associated with increased acute bowel and bladder reactions and more late rectal side effects. Data from this randomised pilot study informed the Data Monitoring Committee of the Medical Research Council RT 01 Trial and the two studies will be combined in subsequent meta-analysis.

Background This was a prespecified secondary analysis of a randomized trial that analyzed bone density and pain response following fractionated intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) versus three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) for palliative management of spinal metastases. Methods/materials Sixty patients were enrolled in the single-institutional randomized exploratory trial, randomly assigned to receive IMRT or 3DCRT (30 Gy in 10 fractions). Along with pain response (measured by the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Chow criteria), quantitative bone density was evaluated at baseline, 3, and 6 months in both irradiated and unirradiated spinal bodies, along with rates of pathologic fractures and vertebral compression fractures. Results Relative to baseline, bone density increased at 3 and 6 months following IMRT by a median of 24.8% and 33.8%, respectively ( p  < 0.01 and p  = 0.048). These figures in the 3DCRT cohort were 18.5% and 48.4%, respectively (p < 0.01 for both). There were no statistical differences in bone density between IMRT and 3DCRT at 3 ( p  = 0.723) or 6 months ( p  = 0.341). Subgroup analysis of osteolytic and osteoblastic metastases showed no differences between groups; however, mixed metastases showed an increase in bone density over baseline in the IMRT (but not 3DCRT) arm. The 3-month rate of the pathological fractures was 15.0% in the IMRT arm vs. 10.5% in the 3DCRT arm. There were no differences in pathological fractures at 3 ( p  = 0.676) and 6 ( p  = 1.000) months. The IMRT arm showed improved VAS scores at 3 ( p  = 0.037) but not 6 months ( p  = 0.430). Using Chow criteria, pain response was similar at both 3 ( p  = 0.395) and 6 ( p  = 0.732) months. Conclusions This the first prospective investigation evaluating the impact of IMRT vs. 3DCRT on bone density. Along with pain response and pathologic fracture rates, significant rises in bone density after 3 and 6 months were similar in both cohorts. Future randomized investigations with larger sample sizes are recommended. Trial registration NCT, NCT02832830 . Registered 14 July 2016

Purpose/Objective The primary objective is to examine patient self‐assessment of breast pain and cosmesis between three‐dimensional (3D‐CRT) versus intensity‐modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). The secondary objective is to evaluate any relationship of treatment planning conformality of both cohorts to patient‐assessed pain. Assessments were performed at interim 12, 24, 36, and 48 months with a final 5‐year assessment. Materials/Methods In total, 656 patients (3D‐CRT n = 328; IMRT n = 328) were randomly assigned to either IMRT or 3D‐CRT accelerated partial breast radiotherapy to 38.5 Gy in 10 BID 3.85 Gy fractions. Results Median follow‐up was 3 years. Multivariate analysis showed that pain severity significantly decreased from baseline to the 12‐month follow‐up visit (<0.001 for both 3D‐CRT and IMRT) in each cohort. There was significantly less pain at 2 (p = 0.002) and 3 years (0.045) in the IMRT arm versus the 3D‐CRT arm when compared to the baseline pain level. There was no difference in patient‐assessed cosmesis at any follow‐up point; however, although MD‐assessed cosmesis showed no difference from years 1 to 4, there was significantly better cosmesis for 3D‐CRT versus IMRT (p = 0.047) at 5 years. There was a significant correlation between a maximum pain score and an increase in the CI100 (indicating less conformity) in the IMRT cohort (p < 0.01) and in the IMRT subgroup when the CI100 was ≤0.37 cohort arm (p = 0.01). Conclusion In the analysis of our primary objective we found that at 2 years, IMRT resulted in more interval improvement in breast pain after baseline when compared to patients treated with 3D‐CRT planning. As seen in our secondary analysis, this may be due to the ability of IMRT to achieve higher conformality (as evidenced by lower CI values) resulting in less fibrosis. There were no differences in patient‐assessed cosmesis or MD‐assessed cosmesis for years 1–4; however, physician‐assessed 5‐year cosmesis was better with 3D‐CRT. After a median follow‐up of 3 years, results showed that the IMRT cohort experienced significantly less pain at 2 and 3 years. Patients did not describe any differences in breast cosmesis; however, physicians did score 3D‐CRT with significantly better cosmesis at 5 years (only 147 patients) but no differences in years 1–4.