ABSTRACT
Background: COVID-19 pandemic led to a drastical rearrangement within healthcare staff and facilities. Due to its high incidence, management of breast cancer (BC) was particularly critical during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the reduction of healthcare staff and facilities influenced the timing in BC care. The aim of the present report was to analyze the timing from diagnosis to surgery, from diagnosis to radiotherapy (RT) start and from surgery to RT start during the COVID-19 pandemic. Method(s): We retrospectively collected data of women with BC treated with Radiotherapy (RT) after surgery at our Institution (Department of Oncology, Radiation Oncology, S. Anna Hospital, Turin, Italy), during the COVID-19 pandemic. To evaluate patients' data according to the different stages of the pandemic, we identified 4 periods: first wave (FW), first reopening (FR), second wave (SW) and second reopening (SR). Among the 4 periods, we divided patients in 2 groups: patients who underwent adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) before RT (CT-group), and those who received exclusive adjuvant RT (non-CT group). Result(s): from early March 2020 to 31 March 2022, 464 patients were treated. After patients' selection, data from 390 patients were analyzed. Overall, the average interval between biopsy and RT in the non-CT group was 202 days during the FW (101-386), 172 days (85-242) during the FR, 136 days (69-366) during the SW, 159 days (77-455) during the SR. In the CT group, the average interval from biopsy to RT start was 337 days (224-495) during the FW, 277 days (209-496) during FR, 297 days (220-419) during the SW, and 261 days (169-447) during the SR. Conclusion(s): we reported our experience during these two years of the pandemic and how COVID-19 impacted the timing of the management of patients with BC. Overall, during the viral waves there was a remarkable increase in the interval between biopsy/surgery and RT. Nonetheless, we managed to keep optimal BC care and favorable interval trends were observed with reopening phases. Copyright: © 2022 The Author(s).
ABSTRACT
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic had a catastrophic impact on healthcare. Keeping an optimal cancer care routine has been challenging. For cervical cancer (CC) patients external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and brachytherapy (BT) are key elements for radical treatment. Oncological treatment delays have represented a major issue during the pandemic. Overall treatment time (OTT) is a well-known prognostic factor for CC. Thus, we decided to evaluate radiotherapy timing and modalities, and OTT trends for locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC) patients treated at our center during the Pandemic. Method(s): We retrospectively collected and analyzed data of patients treated for LACC at our Center, (Department of Oncology, Radiation Oncology, S.Anna Hospital, Turin, Italy), during the COVID-19 pandemic. Result(s): Between March 2020 and March 2022, 36 patients were treated. All patients underwent EBRT (median pelvic dose 48 Gray (Gy)). Concurrent chemotherapy (ChT) was administered in 31/36 patients. High Dose Rate (HDR) BT boost was delivered to 32/36 patients. BT schedules adopted were: 28 Gy in 4 fractions (18 cases, 56.2%), 26 Gy in 4 fractions (5 cases, 15.6%), 21 Gy in 3 fractions (4 cases, 12.5%), 18 Gy in 3 fractions (3 cases, 9.3%), 24 Gy in 4 fractions (one case, 3.2%), 12 Gy in 2 fractions plus 11 Gy in 2 fractions (one case, 3.2%). Most of the patients (25/32, 78.1%) received one fraction per week;6 patients (18.1%) 2 fractions per week and one patient 3 fractions per week. Median OTT was 74 days (57-99). The median interval from EBRT to HDR-BT was 14 days (6-54). Four patients tested positive for COVID-19 between EBRT and BT. At a median follow-up of 10.7 months (range 1.8-20.3), a complete response was obtained in 25 patients (69.5%), a partial response in 8 cases (22.2%), and a disease progression in two patients (5.5%). Conclusion(s): in terms of radiotherapy management of LACC, brachytherapy resulted as the most affected by the restrictions due to the pandemic. We adopted different schedules and fractionations to optimize the resources available and to keep providing an optimal care. A be-weekly fractionation emerged as a promising option for LACC during the pandemic, with a good toxicity profile. Copyright: © 2022 The Author(s).
ABSTRACT
Purpose/Objective(s): The COVID19 pandemic required radiation oncologists (ROs) to consider shorter treatment courses to minimize patient and staff exposure and conserve healthcare resources. Hematologic ROs adopted hypofractionated radiation therapy (hRT) regimens according to guidelines published by the International Lymphoma Radiation Oncology Group (ILROG). We report for the first time the preliminary efficacy and toxicity of these novel hypofractionated regimens in the treatment of hematologic malignancies. Materials/Methods: We conducted a multicenter, multinational retrospective study under the direction of the ILROG. All patients receiving hRT according to ILROG guidelines from 1/1/2020 to 8/31/2020 were included. Patient and treatment details were abstracted from separate institutional databases. Toxicity was graded using CTCAE v5.0. Results: Ninety-three patients from 4 institutions treated with 114 RT courses were included. Patient and treatment details are displayed in Table 1. Median follow up for the cohort was 179 days, and 77 patients (82%) were alive at last follow up. Maximal toxicity experienced by patients included Grade 1 (n = 16), Grade 2 (n = 1) and Grade 3 (n = 1) toxicities. Of 80 sites with response assessment within the RT field, 69% of patients achieved a complete response (n = 55), 20% partial response (n = 16), 9% stable disease (n = 7), and 2% progressive disease (n = 2). No COVID19 infections during or after RT have been documented in this patient cohort. Conclusion: HRT according to ILROG guidelines resulted in low rates of acute toxicity and reasonable short-term treatment efficacy. Longer follow up and comparison with control groups is needed to draw more definitive conclusions and will be presented at the Annual Meeting.
ABSTRACT
Background: Early-stage follicular lymphoma (FL) is usually managed with involved field radiotherapy (IFRT), allowing a complete and long lasting eradication of the disease only in 40-50% of patients (pts). The aim of this multicenter phase II prospective study was to evaluate the role of MRD in identifying pts unlikely to be cured by IFRT, for whom an immunotherapy consolidation could improve outcome. Methods: 110 pts with stage I/II FL were enrolled and treated with 24 Gy IFRT. Peripheral blood (PB) and bone marrow (BM) samples were centralized to the FIL (Fondazione Italiani Linfomi) MRD Network of EuroMRD-certified laboratories. In BCL2/IGH+ pts at baseline by both nested PCR (NEST) and RQ-PCR (RQ) in BM a/o PB, MRD was analyzed after IFRT and every 6 months over a 3-year period. Pts with MRD+ by both NEST and RQ in BM a/o PB after IFRT or who became MRD+ during the follow-up were treated with 8 weekly doses of the anti-CD20 MoAb ofatumumab (OFA). The primary objective of the study was to define the efficacy of immunotherapy in obtaining a negative MRD. Results: Of the 106 evaluable pts, 50 were males. Median age was 55 y (29-83). The FLIPI score was 0 in 59% of pts, 1 in 35%, 2 in 6%. 68% of pts had inguinal site involvement. At baseline, 30% of pts had a BCL2/IGH rearrangement (30 MBR, 1 MBR and mcr, 1 mcr) in BM a/ o PB;the concordance between compartments was 90%. All but one pt achieved a clinical response after IFRT;one additional pt died soon after IFRT of unrelated causes. MRD evaluation after IFRT revealed the persistence of BCL2/IGH+ cells in PB a/o BM in 60% of pts. MRD + pts, either after IFRT (n = 18) or in case of conversion to MRD+ during the follow-up (n = 6), received OFA, obtaining a conversion to MRD-in 22/24 pts (91.7%-CI 73.0-99.0), significantly superior to the expected 50% (Fig). After a median F-U of 38 m, 17 pts who achieved a MRD-with OFA are still negative;5 converted to MRD+ (2 received OFA retreatment, achieving a second MRD-;2 pts were not re-treated due to Sars-Cov2 pandemic;1 relapsed). A clinical relapse or progression was observed in 23 pts: 18 (24.6%) among the 73 “no marker” pts and 5 (15.6%) among the 32 BCL2/IGH+ at baseline (p = 0.3), with no significant difference in PFS (p = 0.25). Two early relapses were observed among the 12 pts who became MRD-after IFRT and 3 among the 24 treated at least once with OFA (1 MRD+, 1 MRD-, 1 converted from MRD-to MRD+). Only 1 Pt relapsed while MRD-after OFA. Conclusions: MRD data indicate that RT alone is often insufficient to eradicate the disease, inducing a MRD-only in 40% of pts, notably long-lasting only in half of them. The primary objective of this study-MRD conversion after immunotherapy-was largely achieved. The strategy of an immunotherapy consolidation after IFRT in MRD+ pts allowed increasing molecular responses. However, this strategy is applicable only to 30% of enrolled pts. A clinical advantage of the MRD driven treatment strategy is suggested although not significan.