Explore the vast range of titles available.

Localised prostate cancer is commonly treated with external beam radiotherapy and moderate hypofractionation is non-inferior to longer schedules. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) allows shorter treatment courses without impacting acute toxicity. We report 2-year toxicity findings from PACE-B, a randomised trial of conventionally fractionated or moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy versus SBRT. PACE is an open-label, multicohort, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial conducted at 35 hospitals in the UK, Ireland, and Canada. In PACE-B, men aged 18 years and older with a WHO performance status 0–2 and low-risk or intermediate-risk histologically-confirmed prostate adenocarcinoma (Gleason 4 + 3 excluded) were randomly allocated (1:1) by computerised central randomisation with permuted blocks (size four and six), stratified by centre and risk group to control radiotherapy (CRT; 78 Gy in 39 fractions over 7·8 weeks or, following protocol amendment on March 24, 2016, 62 Gy in 20 fractions over 4 weeks) or SBRT (36·25 Gy in five fractions over 1–2 weeks). Androgen deprivation was not permitted. Co-primary outcomes for this toxicity analysis were Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) grade 2 or worse gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity at 24 months after radiotherapy. Analysis was by treatment received and included all patients with at least one fraction of study treatment assessed for late toxicity. Recruitment is complete. Follow-up for oncological outcomes continues. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01584258. We enrolled and randomly assigned 874 men between Aug 7, 2012, and Jan 4, 2018 (441 to CRT and 433 to SBRT). In this analysis, 430 patients were analysed in the CRT group and 414 in the SBRT group; a total of 844 (97%) of 874 randomly assigned patients. At 24 months, RTOG grade 2 or worse genitourinary toxicity was seen in eight (2%) of 381 participants assigned to CRT and 13 (3%) of 384 participants assigned to SBRT (absolute difference 1·3% [95% CI –1·3 to 4·0]; p=0·39); RTOG grade 2 or worse gastrointestinal toxicity was seen in 11 (3%) of 382 participants in the CRT group versus six (2%) of 384 participants in the SBRT group (absolute difference –1·3% [95% CI –3·9 to 1·1]; p=0·32). No serious adverse events (defined as RTOG grade 4 or worse) or treatment-related deaths were reported within the analysis timeframe. In the PACE-B trial, 2-year RTOG toxicity rates were similar for five fraction SBRT and conventional schedules of radiotherapy. Prostate SBRT was found to be safe and associated with low rates of side-effects. Biochemical outcomes are awaited. Accuray.

Patients with human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma have high survival when treated with radiotherapy plus cisplatin. Whether replacement of cisplatin with cetuximab—an antibody against the epidermal growth factor receptor—can preserve high survival and reduce treatment toxicity is unknown. We investigated whether cetuximab would maintain a high proportion of patient survival and reduce acute and late toxicity. RTOG 1016 was a randomised, multicentre, non-inferiority trial at 182 health-care centres in the USA and Canada. Eligibility criteria included histologically confirmed HPV-positive oropharyngeal carcinoma; American Joint Committee on Cancer 7th edition clinical categories T1–T2, N2a–N3 M0 or T3–T4, N0–N3 M0; Zubrod performance status 0 or 1; age at least 18 years; and adequate bone marrow, hepatic, and renal function. We randomly assigned patients (1:1) to receive either radiotherapy plus cetuximab or radiotherapy plus cisplatin. Randomisation was balanced by using randomly permuted blocks, and patients were stratified by T category (T1–T2 vs T3–T4), N category (N0–N2a vs N2b–N3), Zubrod performance status (0 vs 1), and tobacco smoking history (≤10 pack-years vs >10 pack-years). Patients were assigned to receive either intravenous cetuximab at a loading dose of 400 mg/m2 5–7 days before radiotherapy initiation, followed by cetuximab 250 mg/m2 weekly for seven doses (total 2150 mg/m2), or cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on days 1 and 22 of radiotherapy (total 200 mg/m2). All patients received accelerated intensity-modulated radiotherapy delivered at 70 Gy in 35 fractions over 6 weeks at six fractions per week (with two fractions given on one day, at least 6 h apart). The primary endpoint was overall survival, defined as time from randomisation to death from any cause, with non-inferiority margin 1·45. Primary analysis was based on the modified intention-to-treat approach, whereby all patients meeting eligibility criteria are included. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01302834. Between June 9, 2011, and July 31, 2014, 987 patients were enrolled, of whom 849 were randomly assigned to receive radiotherapy plus cetuximab (n=425) or radiotherapy plus cisplatin (n=424). 399 patients assigned to receive cetuximab and 406 patients assigned to receive cisplatin were subsequently eligible. After median follow-up duration of 4·5 years, radiotherapy plus cetuximab did not meet the non-inferiority criteria for overall survival (hazard ratio [HR] 1·45, one-sided 95% upper CI 1·94; p=0·5056 for non-inferiority; one-sided log-rank p=0·0163). Estimated 5-year overall survival was 77·9% (95% CI 73·4–82·5) in the cetuximab group versus 84·6% (80·6–88·6) in the cisplatin group. Progression-free survival was significantly lower in the cetuximab group compared with the cisplatin group (HR 1·72, 95% CI 1·29–2·29; p=0·0002; 5-year progression-free survival 67·3%, 95% CI 62·4–72·2 vs 78·4%, 73·8–83·0), and locoregional failure was significantly higher in the cetuximab group compared with the cisplatin group (HR 2·05, 95% CI 1·35–3·10; 5-year proportions 17·3%, 95% CI 13·7–21·4 vs 9·9%, 6·9–13·6). Proportions of acute moderate to severe toxicity (77·4%, 95% CI 73·0–81·5 vs 81·7%, 77·5–85·3; p=0·1586) and late moderate to severe toxicity (16·5%, 95% CI 12·9–20·7 vs 20·4%, 16·4–24·8; p=0·1904) were similar between the cetuximab and cisplatin groups. For patients with HPV-positive oropharyngeal carcinoma, radiotherapy plus cetuximab showed inferior overall survival and progression-free survival compared with radiotherapy plus cisplatin. Radiotherapy plus cisplatin is the standard of care for eligible patients with HPV-positive oropharyngeal carcinoma. National Cancer Institute USA, Eli Lilly, and The Oral Cancer Foundation.

The incidence of human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive oropharyngeal cancer, a disease affecting younger patients, is rapidly increasing. Cetuximab, an epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor, has been proposed for treatment de-escalation in this setting to reduce the toxicity of standard cisplatin treatment, but no randomised evidence exists for the efficacy of this strategy. We did an open-label randomised controlled phase 3 trial at 32 head and neck treatment centres in Ireland, the Netherlands, and the UK, in patients aged 18 years or older with HPV-positive low-risk oropharyngeal cancer (non-smokers or lifetime smokers with a smoking history of <10 pack-years). Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive, in addition to radiotherapy (70 Gy in 35 fractions), either intravenous cisplatin (100 mg/m2 on days 1, 22, and 43 of radiotherapy) or intravenous cetuximab (400 mg/m2 loading dose followed by seven weekly infusions of 250 mg/m2). The primary outcome was overall severe (grade 3–5) toxicity events at 24 months from the end of treatment. The primary outcome was assessed by intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN33522080. Between Nov 12, 2012, and Oct 1, 2016, 334 patients were recruited (166 in the cisplatin group and 168 in the cetuximab group). Overall (acute and late) severe (grade 3–5) toxicity did not differ significantly between treatment groups at 24 months (mean number of events per patient 4·8 [95% CI 4·2–5·4] with cisplatin vs 4·8 [4·2–5·4] with cetuximab; p=0·98). At 24 months, overall all-grade toxicity did not differ significantly either (mean number of events per patient 29·2 [95% CI 27·3–31·0] with cisplatin vs 30·1 [28·3–31·9] with cetuximab; p=0·49). However, there was a significant difference between cisplatin and cetuximab in 2-year overall survival (97·5% vs 89·4%, hazard ratio 5·0 [95% CI 1·7–14·7]; p=0·001) and 2-year recurrence (6·0% vs 16·1%, 3·4 [1·6–7·2]; p=0·0007). Compared with the standard cisplatin regimen, cetuximab showed no benefit in terms of reduced toxicity, but instead showed significant detriment in terms of tumour control. Cisplatin and radiotherapy should be used as the standard of care for HPV-positive low-risk patients who are able to tolerate cisplatin. Cancer Research UK.

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) might detect more toxic effects of radiotherapy than do clinician-reported outcomes. We did a quality of life (QoL) substudy to assess PROs up to 24 months after conventionally fractionated or hypofractionated radiotherapy in the Conventional or Hypofractionated High Dose Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy in Prostate Cancer (CHHiP) trial. The CHHiP trial is a randomised, non-inferiority phase 3 trial done in 71 centres, of which 57 UK hospitals took part in the QoL substudy. Men with localised prostate cancer who were undergoing radiotherapy were eligible for trial entry if they had histologically confirmed T1b–T3aN0M0 prostate cancer, an estimated risk of seminal vesicle involvement less than 30%, prostate-specific antigen concentration less than 30 ng/mL, and a WHO performance status of 0 or 1. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive a standard fractionation schedule of 74 Gy in 37 fractions or one of two hypofractionated schedules: 60 Gy in 20 fractions or 57 Gy in 19 fractions. Randomisation was done with computer-generated permuted block sizes of six and nine, stratified by centre and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk group. Treatment allocation was not masked. UCLA Prostate Cancer Index (UCLA-PCI), including Short Form (SF)-36 and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P), or Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) and SF-12 quality-of-life questionnaires were completed at baseline, pre-radiotherapy, 10 weeks post-radiotherapy, and 6, 12, 18, and 24 months post-radiotherapy. The CHHiP trial completed accrual on June 16, 2011, and the QoL substudy was closed to further recruitment on Nov 1, 2009. Analysis was on an intention-to-treat basis. The primary endpoint of the QoL substudy was overall bowel bother and comparisons between fractionation groups were done at 24 months post-radiotherapy. The CHHiP trial is registered with ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN97182923. 2100 participants in the CHHiP trial consented to be included in the QoL substudy: 696 assigned to the 74 Gy schedule, 698 assigned to the 60 Gy schedule, and 706 assigned to the 57 Gy schedule. Of these individuals, 1659 (79%) provided data pre-radiotherapy and 1444 (69%) provided data at 24 months after radiotherapy. Median follow-up was 50·0 months (IQR 38·4–64·2) on April 9, 2014, which was the most recent follow-up measurement of all data collected before the QoL data were analysed in September, 2014. Comparison of 74 Gy in 37 fractions, 60 Gy in 20 fractions, and 57 Gy in 19 fractions groups at 2 years showed no overall bowel bother in 269 (66%), 266 (65%), and 282 (65%) men; very small bother in 92 (22%), 91 (22%), and 93 (21%) men; small bother in 26 (6%), 28 (7%), and 38 (9%) men; moderate bother in 19 (5%), 23 (6%), and 21 (5%) men, and severe bother in four (<1%), three (<1%) and three (<1%) men respectively (74 Gy vs 60 Gy, ptrend=0.64, 74 Gy vs 57 Gy, ptrend=0·59). We saw no differences between treatment groups in change of bowel bother score from baseline or pre-radiotherapy to 24 months. The incidence of patient-reported bowel symptoms was low and similar between patients in the 74 Gy control group and the hypofractionated groups up to 24 months after radiotherapy. If efficacy outcomes from CHHiP show non-inferiority for hypofractionated treatments, these findings will add to the growing evidence for moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy schedules becoming the standard treatment for localised prostate cancer. Cancer Research UK, Department of Health, and the National Institute for Health Research Cancer Research Network.

Moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy (MHRT) is a standard treatment for prostate cancer. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is also effective, and has been shown to be non-inferior to MHRT in a lower-risk group of patients who did not require hormone therapy (PACE-B), but randomised data on toxicity for higher-risk patients are lacking. We aimed to compare the early toxicity of MHRT and SBRT. The randomised, open-label, phase 3, non-inferiority PACE-C trial, conducted at 53 hospitals across the UK, Republic of Ireland, and New Zealand, recruited men aged at least 18 years with intermediate-risk or high-risk histologically confirmed prostate adenocarcinoma (T1–T3a, Gleason 7–8, and prostate specific antigen 10–30 ng/mL) and with WHO performance status of 0–2. Participants were centrally randomly assigned (1:1; non-masked; permuted block size of four and six; stratified by centre and risk group) to MHRT (60 Gy; 20 daily fractions over 4 weeks) or SBRT (36·25 Gy; five daily or alternate day fractions; over 1–2 weeks) with an additional mandatory clinical target volume dose target of 40 Gy (no margin) to the prostate, and proximal 1 cm of seminal vesicles. 6 months of androgen deprivation therapy was planned and was started before commencement of radiotherapy. The primary outcome of PACE-C is freedom from biochemical or clinical failure, the data for which are not yet mature. The co-primary endpoints for this preplanned safety analysis were the percentages of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) grade 2 or worse gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicities at any point during or within 12 weeks of completion of radiotherapy (the early or acute period). Analyses are by treatment received, with participants included if they had one or more fractions of MHRT or SBRT, regardless of their allocated treatment. Late toxicity and efficacy data are awaited as the trial remains in follow-up. The study was prospectively registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01584258. Between Nov 13, 2019, and June 24, 2022, 1208 participants were randomly assigned (601 to MHRT and 607 to SBRT). 608 patients received MHRT and 584 received SBRT, and thus were included in the study analysis. 1136 (95%) of 1192 patients were White, 20 (2%) were Black or Black British, 17 (1%) were Asian or Asian British, and seven (1%) were Chinese or other. During the early period (within 12 weeks of treatment), the co-primary endpoint of RTOG grade 2 or worse genitourinary toxicity was observed in 166 (27%) of 608 patients (95% CI 23·8 to 31·1) receiving MHRT and 162 (28%) of 582 patients (24·3 to 31·7) after SBRT (absolute difference 0·5%, 95% CI –4·7 to 5·7; p=0·89). For grade 2 or worse genitourinary Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), 170 (28%) of 604 patients had events after MHRT and 195 (34%) of 581 patients had events after SBRT (p=0·050). Grade 3 CTCAE genitourinary toxicity was observed in three (<1%) patients receiving MHRT and three (1%) patients receiving SBRT. For grade 2 or worse gastrointestinal CTCAE, 60 (10%) of 604 patients had an event after MHRT and 96 (17%) of 581 patients had an event after SBRT (p=0·0011). Grade 3 CTCAE gastrointestinal toxicity was observed in three (<1%) patients receiving MHRT and four (1%) patients receiving SBRT. During the early period, the co-primary endpoint of RTOG grade 2 or worse gastrointestinal toxicity was observed in 69 (11%) of 608 patients (95% CI 9·0 to 14·2) receiving MHRT and 74 (13%) of 584 patients (10·2 to 15·8) receiving SBRT (absolute difference 1·4%, 95% CI –2·5 to 5·2; p=0·53). There were no treatment-related deaths. Despite an accelerated treatment schedule and a larger treated volume than PACE-B, SBRT and MHRT had similar rates of early RTOG toxicity. The Royal Marsden Cancer Charity.

The IMPORT LOW trial evaluated partial-breast radiotherapy with intensity-modulated radiotherapy in women with early-stage breast cancer at below average risk of ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence (IBTR). 5-year results concluded non-inferiority of IBTR for reduced-dose and partial-breast radiotherapy, with similar or lower frequency of adverse effects compared with whole-breast radiotherapy. We report outcomes after 10 years. IMPORT LOW was a randomised, open-label, multicentre, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial. Women were eligible if they were aged 50 years or older and had had breast conservation surgery for unifocal invasive ductal adenocarcinoma, pT1–2 (tumour size of ≤3 cm), N0–1 (none to three positive axillary nodes), grades 1–3, with microscopic margins of non-cancerous tissue of 2 mm or more. Patients were ineligible if they had a previous malignancy of any kind (except non-melanomatous skin cancer), had undergone mastectomy, or had received neoadjuvant or concurrent adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) by randomly permuted blocks to radiotherapy regimens of 40 Gy in 15 fractions to the whole breast (whole-breast group), 36 Gy in 15 fractions to the whole breast plus 40 Gy in 15 fractions to the partial breast (reduced-dose group), or 40 Gy in 15 fractions to the partial breast (partial-breast group). Participants were stratified by treatment centre, without masking. The primary endpoint was IBTR. 10-year outcomes were analysed in the intention-to-treat population. Clinician-reported late adverse effects were evaluated in all participants with available data analysed according to allocated treatment. The study is registered in the ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN12852634) and is now complete. 2018 patients were recruited between May 3, 2007, and Oct 5, 2010, from 30 radiotherapy centres in the UK and randomly assigned to the whole-breast group (n=675), reduced-dose group (n=674), or partial-breast group (n=669). Two participants subsequently withdrew consent. Median age was 63 years (IQR 58–68). 854 (42%) of 2016 patients had grade 1 tumours, 959 (48%) had grade 2 tumours, and 200 (10%) had grade 3 tumours (three tumours were ungradable); 59 (3%) had node-positive disease. Median follow-up was 120 months (IQR 119–122) for the whole-breast group, 121 months (IQR 120–122) for the reduced-dose group, and 120 months (IQR 119–122) for the partial-breast group. By 10 years, IBTR events were reported for 45 of 2016 participants: 17 of 674 in the whole-breast group, 11 of 673 in the reduced-dose group, and 17 of 669 in the partial-breast group, with cumulative incidence of 2·8% (95% CI 1·8–4·5), 1·9% (1·1–3·5), and 3·0% (1·9–4·8), respectively. The estimated absolute difference in 10-year IBTR incidence was –1·02% (95% CI –1·98 to 0·99) for the reduced-dose group and 0·16% (–1·28 to 2·89) for the partial-breast group compared with the whole-breast group. Similar low levels of moderate or marked adverse effects were recorded for participants in all three groups in 10-year clinical assessments. Breast shrinkage had the highest incidence (30 [9%] of 321 in the whole-breast group, 28 [9%] of 322 in the reduced-dose group, and 22 [7%] of 333 in the partial-breast group). Long-term follow-up provides further evidence that partial-breast and reduced-dose radiotherapy are as safe and effective as whole-breast radiotherapy in patients with low-risk early breast cancer. These results reaffirm the use of partial-breast radiotherapy delivered with intensity-modulated radiotherapy in this population as standard of care. Cancer Research UK.

Localised squamous cell carcinoma of the anus is treated with radical chemoradiotherapy. Cure rates are high, but treatment can result in substantial acute and long-term morbidity. We aimed to assess whether lower dose chemoradiotherapy maintains high local control rates in patients with early-stage disease, with the secondary aim of reducing toxicity. ACT4 is a phase 2, prospective, multicentre, open-label, two-arm non-comparative, randomised, controlled trial, investigating reduced-dose intensity-modulated radiotherapy (rd-IMRT: 41·4 Gy in 23 fractions) in patients with early-stage anal cancer; T1–2 (≤4 cm) N0–NxM0. Eligible patients were at least 16 years of age, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–1. The primary outcome is 3-year loco-regional failure rates. Patients were randomly assigned 1:2 (with stratification by T stage, N stage, gender, HIV status, and randomising site) to standard-dose IMRT (sd-IMRT: 50·4 Gy in 28 fractions) or rd-IMRT with concurrent mitomycin and capecitabine chemotherapy. Here, we report the pre-planned, modified intention-to-treat analysis of secondary endpoints 6 months after treatment end—complete clinical response, compliance, patient-reported outcomes (EORTC QLQ-C30 and ANL27), and safety data. The trial is registered at the ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN88455282) and is ongoing but no longer recruiting. 163 patients were recruited from 28 UK tertiary centres between April 24, 2017, and Dec 1, 2020. 160 patients were included in the primary analysis (sd-IMRT n=55; dr-IMRT n=105). Data on ethnicity were not collected. The median patient age was 66 years (IQR 58–72 years); 117 (73%) were female and 43 (27%) male; and 129 (94%) of 138 evaluable samples were p16 positive. Complete clinical responses at 6 months were 87% (46 of 53) for sd-IMRT and 92% (89 of 97) for rd-IMRT. Radiotherapy interruptions of 3 days or more occurred in 14 (26%) of 55 patients in sd-IMRT and 16 (15%) of 105 patients in rd-IMRT. Chemotherapy modifications occurred in 27 (49%) of 55 patients in sd-IMRT and 39 (37%) of 105 patients in rd-IMRT. Grade 3 or worse acute toxicity was reported in 25 (46%) of 55 patients in sd-IMRT and 37 (35%) of 105 patients in rd-IMRT. The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were radiation dermatitis (seven [13%] of 55 in sd-IMRT and ten [10%] of 105 in rd-IMRT), and diarrhoea (four [7%] of 55 in sd-IMRT and nine [9%] of 105 in rd-IMRT). Serious adverse events occurred in eight (15%) of 55 patients in sd-IMRT and ten (10%) of 105 patients in rd-IMRT. Patient-reported outcomes for most issues deteriorated at the end of treatment and resolved to baseline by 6 weeks in both groups. Poorer sexual function for men and women was observed at 6 months following sd-IMRT. Good 6-month complete clinical responses rates were seen in both groups. Early results suggest rd-IMRT is well tolerated with oncological outcomes maintained. 3-year locoregional failure rates are awaited. Cancer Research UK and Stand Up to Cancer.

Introduction The effect of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DWI)-guided dose-painting intensity-modulated radiation therapy (DP-IMRT) on locally advanced recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) remains unclear. This study aimed to compare the outcomes and toxicities of DWI-guided DP-IMRT in patients with locally recurrent NPC. Methods In this prospective trial, 150 patients with locally advanced recurrent NPC were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive reirradiation with DWI-guided DP-IMRT (DWI group, n  = 75) or conventional MRI-based IMRT (MRI group, n  = 75). In the DWI group, DWI-guided gross tumor volume received escalation to 65.4 Gy/30 fx in 2.18 Gy per fraction, while in the MRI group, the planning target volume was irradiated at 60 Gy/30fx in 2.0 Gy per fraction. The trial was registered at Chictr.org.cn (ChiCTR2100052340) on October 24, 2021. Survival rates were compared, and multivariate analyses were conducted. Results The median follow-up duration was 16 months. Compared with the MRI group, patients in the DWI group had better 18-month progression-free survival (PFS) 75.1% vs. 53.6%; P  = 0.006), local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) (83.4% vs. 61.8%; P  = 0.010), and locoregional recurrence-free survival (73.1% vs. 64.9%; P  = 0.025). Grade 3–4 toxicities between the two groups showed no significant difference. Multivariate analysis revealed that DWI-guided DP-IMRT was an independent prognostic factor for PFS and LRFS. Conclusion Compared with conventional MRI-based IMRT, DWI-guided DP-IMRT improved PFS in patients with recurrent NPC without increasing acute and late toxic effects.

The aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness of carbon ion radiation therapy (CIRT), proton radiation therapy (PRT), and photon‐based intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in the treatment of sinonasal malignancies. We identified studies through systematic review and divided them into three cohorts (CIRT group/PRT group/IMRT group). Primary outcomes of interest were overall survival (OS) and local control (LC). We pooled the outcomes with meta‐analysis and compared the survival difference among groups using Chi2 (χ2) test. A representative sample of 2282 patients with sinonasal malignancies (911 in the CIRT group, 599 in the PRT group, and 772 in the IMRT group) from 44 observation studies (7 CIRT, 16 PRT, and 21 IMRT) was included. The pooled 3‐year OS, LC, distant metastasis–free survival, and progression‐free survival rates were 67.0%, 72.8%, 69.4%, and 52.8%, respectively. Through cross‐group analysis, the OS was significantly higher after CIRT (75.1%, 95% CI: 67.1%‐83.2%) than PRT (66.2%, 95% CI: 57.7%‐74.6%; χ2 = 13.374, P < .0001) or IMRT (63.8%, 95% CI: 55.3%‐72.3%; χ2 = 23.814, P < .0001). LC was significantly higher after CIRT (80.2%, 95% CI: 73.9%‐86.5%) than PRT (72.9%, 95% CI: 63.7%‐82.0%; χ2 = 8.955, P = .003) or IMRT (67.8%, 95% CI: 59.4%‐76.2%; χ2 = 30.955, P < .0001). However, no significant difference between PRT and IMRT for OS and LC was observed. CIRT appeared to provide better OS and LC for patients with malignancies of nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses. A prospective randomized clinical trial is needed to confirm the superiority of CIRT in the treatment of sinonasal tumors. Carbon‐ion radiation therapy achieved higher overall survival and local control rates as compared to both proton radiation therapy and photon based intensity‐modulated radiation therapy through meta‐analysis of 2, 282 patients with sinonasal malignancies from the real world. CIRT appeared to provide better OS and LC for patients with malignancies of nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses.

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.