Cellular bases of hypofractionated radiotherapy protocols for lung cancer.

The extreme demand on health systems due to the COVID-19 pandemic has led to reconsider hypofractionation. Although the best clinical efficacy of these schemes is being demonstrated, the biological bases have not been established. Thus, after validating basic clinical parameters, through complementary in vitro models, we characterized the cellular and molecular mechanisms of hypofractionation protocols. Cell cultures of human lung cancer cell line A549 were irradiated with 0, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16 and 20 Gy. The clastogenic, cytotoxic, proliferative and clonogenic capacities and bystander effect were evaluated. In addition, we assessed survival and toxicity in a retrospective study of 49 patients with lung cancer. Our findings showed that the greater efficacy of ablative regimens should not only be attributed to events of direct cell death induced by genotoxic damage, but also to a lower cell repopulation and the indirect action of clastogenic factors secreted. These treatments were optimal in terms of 1- and 2-year overall survival (74 and 65%, respectively), and progression-free survival at 1 and 2 years (71 and 61%, respectively). The greater efficacy of high doses per fraction could be attributed to a multifactorial mechanism that goes beyond the 4Rs of conventional radiotherapy.

Stereotactic MRI-guided radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer (SMILE): a prospective, multicentric phase-II-trial.

BACKGROUND: Normofractionated radiation regimes for definitive prostate cancer treatment usually extend over 7-8 weeks. Recently, moderate hypofractionation with doses per fraction between 2.2 and 4 Gy has been shown to be safe and feasible with oncologic non-inferiority compared to normofractionation. Radiobiologic considerations lead to the assumption that prostate cancer might benefit in particular from hypofractionation in terms of tumor control and toxicity. First data related to ultrahypofractionation demonstrate that the overall treatment time can be reduced to 5-7 fractions with single doses > 6 Gy safely, even with simultaneous focal boosting of macroscopic tumor(s). With MR-guided linear accelerators (MR-linacs) entering clinical routine, invasive fiducial implantations become unnecessary. The aim of the multicentric SMILE study is to evaluate the use of MRI-guided stereotactic radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer in 5 fractions regarding safety and feasibility. METHODS: The study is designed as a prospective, one-armed, two-stage, multi-center phase-II-trial with 68 patients planned. Low- and intermediate-risk localized prostate cancer patients will be eligible for the study as well as early high-risk patients (cT3a and/or Gleason Score ≤ 8 and/or PSA ≤ 20 ng/ml) according to d'Amico. All patients will receive definitive MRI-guided stereotactic radiation therapy with a total dose of 37.5 Gy in 5 fractions (single dose 7.5 Gy) on alternating days. A focal simultaneous integrated boost to MRI-defined tumor(s) up to 40 Gy can optionally be applied. The primary composite endpoint includes the assessment of urogenital or gastrointestinal toxicity ≥ grade 2 or treatment-related discontinuation of therapy. The use of MRI-guided radiotherapy enables online plan adaptation and intrafractional gating to ensure optimal target volume coverage and protection of organs at risk. DISCUSSION: With moderate hypofractionation being the standard in definitive radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer at many institutions, ultrahypofractionation could be the next step towards reducing treatment time without compromising oncologic outcomes and toxicities. MRI-guided radiotherapy could qualify as an advantageous tool as no invasive procedures have to precede in therapeutic workflows. Furthermore, MRI guidance combined with gating and plan adaptation might be essential in order to increase treatment effectivity and reduce toxicity at the same time.

The Evolving Role of Whole Breast Hypofractionation in Older Patients With Early Breast Cancer.

Breast cancer in older patients presents an increasing health care challenge. Hypofractionated dose schedules of 15/16 daily fractions of postoperative radiotherapy over 3/3.5 weeks have been established in clinical trials with long term follow up as safe and effective and become the standard of care after breast conserving therapy for most older patients. Emerging clinical trial data are pushing the limits of hypofractionation to even shorter schedules over a week. In this mini-review the applicability of this new data to older patients is discussed and the development of guidelines for hypofractionated dose fractionation schedules adapted to the COVID19 pandemic for this age group.

European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology Advisory Committee in Radiation Oncology Practice consensus recommendations on patient selection and dose and fractionation for external beam radiotherapy in early breast cancer.

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.

Hypofractionated radiotherapy for nonmelanoma skin cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic: experience in 31 cases.

As a result of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, radiation therapies have been modulated to reduce the risk of infection during outpatient activities and hypofractionated regimens or radiotherapy delay for nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC) were suggested. Hypofractionated radiotherapy not only may confer no disadvantage in regard to outcome when compared to a more protracted schedule but might also reduce the risk of infection. We report the experience of a dermatologic radiation therapy department concerning a group of patients with a diagnosis of NMSC selected for a radiation treatment plan aimed to minimize the number of their accesses to our department.

Assessment of Simulated SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Mortality Risk Associated With Radiation Therapy Among Patients in 8 Randomized Clinical Trials.

Importance: During the COVID-19 pandemic, cancer therapy may put patients at risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality. The impacts of proposed alternatives on reducing infection risk are unknown. Objective: To investigate how the COVID-19 pandemic is associated with the risks and benefits of standard radiation therapy (RT). Design, Setting, and Participants: This comparative effectiveness study used estimated individual patient-level data extracted from published Kaplan-Meier survival figures from 8 randomized clinical trials across oncology from 1993 to 2014 that evaluated the inclusion of RT or compared different RT fractionation regimens. Included trials were Dutch TME and TROG 01.04 examining rectal cancer; CALGB 9343, OCOG hypofractionation trial, FAST-Forward, and NSABP B-39 examining early stage breast cancer, and CHHiP and HYPO-RT-PC examining prostate cancer. Risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality associated with receipt of RT in the treatment arms were simulated and trials were reanalyzed. Data were analyzed between April 1, 2020, and June 30, 2020. Exposures: COVID-19 risk associated with treatment was simulated across different pandemic scenarios, varying infection risk per fractions (IRFs) and case fatality rates (CFRs). Main Outcomes and Measures: Overall survival was evaluated using Cox proportional hazards modeling under different pandemic scenarios. Results: Estimated IPLD from a total of 14 170 patients were included in the simulations. In scenarios with low COVID-19-associated risks (IRF, 0.5%; CFR, 5%), fractionation was not significantly associated with outcomes. In locally advanced rectal cancer, short-course RT was associated with better outcomes than long-course chemoradiation (TROG 01.04) and was associated with similar outcomes as RT omission (Dutch TME) in most settings (eg, TROG 01.04 median HR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.46-0.96]; Dutch TME median HR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.80-1.03] in a scenario with IRF 5% and CFR 20%). Moderate hypofractionation in early stage breast cancer (OCOG hypofractionation trial) and prostate cancer (CHHiP) was not associated with survival benefits in the setting of COVID-19 (eg, OCOG hypofractionation trial median HR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.74-1.06]; CHHiP median HR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.75-1.01] under high-risk scenario with IRF 10% and CFR 30%). More aggressive hypofractionation (FAST-Forward, HYPO-RT-PC) and accelerated partial breast irradiation (NSABP B-39) were associated with improved survival in higher risk scenarios (eg, FAST-Forward median HR, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.49-0.68]; HYPO-RT-PC median HR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.48-0.75] under scenario with IRF 10% and CFR 30%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this comparative effectiveness study of data from 8 clinical trials of patients receiving radiation therapy to simulate COVID-19 risk and mortality rates, treatment modification was not associated with altered risk from COVID-19 in lower-risk scenarios and was only associated with decreased mortality in very high COVID-19-risk scenarios. This model, which can be adapted to dynamic changes in COVID-19 risk, provides a flexible, quantitative approach to assess the potential impact of treatment modifications and supports the continued delivery of standard evidence-based care with appropriate precautions against COVID-19.

Management of prostate cancer radiotherapy during the COVID-19 pandemic: A necessary paradigm change.

PURPOSE: To adapt the management of prostate malignancy in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: In according to the recommendations of the European Association of Urology, we have developed practical additional document on the treatment of prostate cancer. RESULTS: Low-Risk Group Watchful Waiting should be offered to patients >75 years old, with a limited life expectancy and unfit for local treatment. In Active Surveillance (AS) patients re-biopsy, PSA evaluation and visits should be deferred for up to 6 months, preferring non-invasive multiparametric-MRI. The active treatment should be delayed for 6-12 months. Intermediate-Risk Group AS should be offered in favorable-risk patients. Short-course neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) combined with ultra-hypo-fractionation radiotherapy should be used in unfavorable-risk patients. High-Risk Group Neoadjuvant ADT combined with moderate hypofractionation should be preferred. Whole-pelvis irradiation should be offered to patients with positive lymph nodes in locally advanced setting. ADT should be initiated if PSA doubling time is < 12 months in radio-recurrent patients, as well as in low priority/low volume of metastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer. If radiotherapy cannot be delayed, hypo-fractionated regimens should be preferred. In high priority class metastatic disease, treatment with androgen receptor-targeted agents should be offered. When palliative radiotherapy for painful bone metastasis is required, single fraction of 8 Gy should be offered. CONCLUSIONS: In Covid-19 Era, the challenge should concern a correct management of the oncologic patient, reducing the risk of spreading the virus without worsening tumor prognosis.

COVID-19 and radiotherapy: potential new strategies for patients management with hypofractionation and telemedicine.

COVID-19 disease is one of the biggest public health challenges in Italy and global healthcare facilities, including radiotherapy departments, faced an unprecedented emergency. Cancer patients are at higher risk of COVID-19 infection because of their immunosuppressive state caused by both tumor itself and anticancer therapy adopted. In this setting, the radiation therapy clinical decision-making process has been partly reconsidered; thus, to reduce treatment duration and minimize infection risk during a pandemic, hypofractionated regimens have been revised. Moreover, telemedicine shows its helpfulness in the radiotherapy field, and patients get the supportive care they need minimizing their access to hospitals. This review aims to point out the importance of hypofractionated RT and telemedicine in cancer patient management in the COVID-19 era.

Hypofractionated chemoradiation for head and cancer: Data from the PET NECK trial.

There has been increased interest in hypofractionated accelerated chemoradiation for head and neck cancer during the recent first peak of the COVID-19 pandemic. Prospective data regarding this approach from randomised trials is lacking. In the PET NECK study, 564 patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck receiving definitive chemoradiation were randomised to either planned neck dissection or PET CT scan guided surveillance. In this surgical trial, three radiotherapy fractionation schedules delivered over 7, 6 or 4 weeks were permitted with synchronous chemotherapy. The purpose of this study was to determine efficacy and quality of life outcomes associated with the use of these schedules. Primary local control and overall survival in addition to quality of life measures at immediately post treatment and 6, 12 and 24 months post-treatment were compared between the three fractionation cohorts. In the 525 patients where fractionation data was available, 181 (34%), 288 (55%) and 56 (11%) patients received 68-70 Gy in 34-35 fractions (#), 60-66 Gy in 30# and 55 Gy in 20# respectively. At a minimum follow up of two years following treatment there was no significant difference between the three fractionation schemes in local control, overall survival or any quality of life measure. Despite the obvious limitations of this study, some data is provided to support the use of hypofractionated accelerated chemoradiation to avoid delays in cancer treatment and reduce hospital visits during the peak of a pandemic. Data from on-going randomised trials examining hypofractionated chemoradiation may be useful for selecting fractionation schedules during future pandemics.

Resource-sparing curative-intent hypofractionated-accelerated radiotherapy in head and neck cancer: More relevant than ever before in the COVID era.

The incidence of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is increasing worldwide, with over three quarters of cases now diagnosed in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) with resource-constraints. Loco-regional recurrence remains the predominant pattern of failure mandating adequate local therapy for acceptable loco-regional control and survival. There is high-quality evidence that intensification of treatment by either by adding concurrent chemotherapy or by altering radiotherapy (RT) fractionation improves outcomes in the curative-intent management of loco-regionally advanced HNSCC. Even conservative estimates indicate that >50% of patients in LMIC are unlikely to get access to timely RT, which will only get compounded with the coronavirus disease (COVID)-19 pandemic. The radiation oncology community has been systematically testing altered fractionation schedules in several solid cancers (breast, lung, and head-neck), given the cost-effectiveness, convenience, and compliance to short-course RT regimens. Radiobiological modelling suggests that standard fractionation of 6-7 weeks in HNSCC can be compressed safely into a 4-week schedule to counter accelerated repopulation by increasing the dose per fraction and delivering 5 fractions per week which is currently being tested in the ongoing multicentric trial of hypo- vs normo-fractionated accelerated RT (HYPNO study). Herein, we discuss the radiobiological basis of curative-intent hypofractionated-accelerated RT schedule delivering 55 Gy in 20 fractions over 4 weeks in HNSCC followed by critical appraisal of the published literature on such regimens with concurrent systemic therapy and its inherent resource-sparing potential applicable across large parts of the world particularly in the context of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

Hypofractionated radiotherapy alone with 2.4 Gy per fraction for head and neck cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic: The Princess Margaret experience and proposal.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to identify a subgroup of patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) who might be suitable for hypofractionated radiotherapy (RT-hypo) during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: HNSCC cases (oropharynx/larynx/hypopharynx) treated with definitive RT-hypo (60 Gy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks), moderately accelerated radiotherapy (RT-acc) alone (70 Gy in 35 fractions over 6 weeks), or concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) during 2005-2017 were included. Locoregional control (LRC) and distant control (DC) after RT-hypo, RT-acc, and CCRT were compared for various subgroups. RESULTS: The study identified 994 human papillomavirus-positive (HPV+) oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma cases (with 61, 254, and 679 receiving RT-hypo, RT-acc, and CCRT, respectively) and 1045 HPV- HNSCC cases (with 263, 451, and 331 receiving RT-hypo, RT-acc, and CCRT, respectively). The CCRT cohort had higher T/N categories, whereas the radiotherapy-alone patients were older. The median follow-up was 4.6 years. RT-hypo, RT-acc, and CCRT produced comparable 3-year LRC and DC for HPV+ T1-2N0-N2a disease (seventh edition of the TNM system [TNM-7]; LRC, 94%, 100%, and 94%; P = .769; DC, 94%, 100%, and 94%; P = .272), T1-T2N2b disease (LRC, 90%, 94%, and 97%; P = .445; DC, 100%, 96%, and 95%; P = .697), and T1-2N2c/T3N0-N2c disease (LRC, 89%, 93%, and 95%; P = .494; DC, 89%, 90%, and 87%; P = .838). Although LRC was also similar for T4/N3 disease (78%, 84%, and 88%; P = .677), DC was significantly lower with RT-hypo or RT-acc versus CCRT (67%, 65%, and 87%; P = .005). For HPV- HNSCC, 3-year LRC and DC were similar with RT-hypo, RT-acc, and CCRT in stages I and II (LRC, 85%, 89%, and 100%; P = .320; DC, 99%, 98%, and 100%; P = .446); however, RT-hypo and RT-acc had significantly lower LRC in stage III (76%, 69%, and 91%; P = .006), whereas DC rates were similar (92%, 85%, and 90%; P = .410). Lower LRC in stage III predominated in patients with laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma receiving RT-acc (62%) but not RT-hypo (80%) or CCRT (92%; RT-hypo vs CCRT: P = .270; RT-acc vs CCRT: P = .004). CCRT had numerically higher LRC in comparison with RT-hypo or RT-acc in stage IV (73%, 65%, and 66%; P = .336). CONCLUSIONS: It is proposed that RT-hypo be considered in place of CCRT for HPV+ T1-T3N0-N2c (TNM-7) HNSCCs, HPV- T1-T2N0 HNSCCs, and select stage III HNSCCs during the COVID-19 outbreak.