Patterns of Temporal Lobe Reaction and Radiation Necrosis after Particle Radiotherapy in Patients with Skull Base Chordoma and Chondrosarcoma-A Single-Center Experience.

BACKGROUND: The current study aims to evaluate the occurrence of temporal lobe reactions and identify possible risk factors for patients who underwent particle therapy of the skull base. METHODS: 244 patients treated for skull base chordoma (n = 144) or chondrosarcoma (n = 100) at the Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT) using a raster scan technique, were analyzed. Follow-up MRI-scans were matched with the initial planning images. Radiogenic reactions were contoured and analyzed based on volume and dose of treatment. RESULTS: 51 patients with chordoma (35.4%) and 30 patients (30%) with chondrosarcoma experienced at least one temporal lobe reaction within the follow-up period (median 49 months for chondrosarcoma, 62 months for chordoma). Age, irradiated volume, and dose values were significant risk factors for the development of temporal lobe reactions with the highest significance for the value of DMax-7 being defined as the dose maximum in the temporal lobe minus the 7cc with the highest dose (p = 0.000000000019; OR 1.087). CONCLUSION: Temporal lobe reactions are a common side effect after particle therapy of the skull base. We were able to develop a multivariate model, which predicted radiation reactions with a specificity of 99% and a sensitivity of 52.2%.

First clinical application of image-guided intraoperative electron radiation therapy with real time intraoperative dose calculation in recurrent rectal cancer: technical procedure.

Intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) is a radiation technique applying a single fraction with a high dose during surgery. We report the first abdomino-pelvic application of an image-guided intraoperative electron radiation therapy with intraoperative real time dose calculation based on the individual intraoperative patient anatomy. A patient suffering from locoregionally recurrent rectal cancer after treatment with neoadjuvant re-chemoradiation was chosen for this approach. After surgical removal of the recurrence, an adequate IORT applicator was placed as usual. A novel mobile imaging device (ImagingRing, MedPhoton) was positioned around the patient covering the region to be treated with the IORT-applicator in place. It allowed the acquisition of three-dimensional intraoperative cone-beam computed tomography images suitable for dose calculation using an automated scaling (heuristic object and head scatter as well as hardening corrections) of Hounsfield units. After image acquisition confirmed the correct applicator position, the images were transferred to our treatment planning system for intraoperative dose calculation. Treatment could be accomplished using the calculated dose distribution. We herein describe the details of the procedure including necessary adjustments in the typically used IORT equipment and work flow. We further discuss the pros and cons of this new approach generally overcoming a decade long limitation of IORT procedures as well as future perspectives regarding IORT treatments.

Proton or Carbon Ion Therapy for Skull Base Chordoma: Rationale and First Analysis of a Mono-Institutional Experience.

BACKGROUND: Skull base chordomas are radio-resistant tumors that require high-dose, high-precision radiotherapy, as can be delivered by particle therapy (protons and carbon ions). We performed a first clinical outcome analysis of particle therapy based on the initial 4-years of operation. METHODS: Between August 2017 and October 2021, 44 patients were treated with proton (89%) or carbon ion therapy (11%). Prior gross total resection had been performed in 21% of lesions, subtotal resection in 57%, biopsy in 12% and decompression in 10%. The average prescription dose was 75.2 Gy RBE in 37 fractions for protons and 66 Gy RBE in 22 fractions for carbon ions. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 34.3 months (range: 1-55), 2-, and 3-year actuarial local control rates were 95.5% and 90.9%, respectively. The 2-, and 3-year overall and progression-free survival rates were 97.7%, 93.2%, 95.5% and 90.9%, respectively. The tumor volume at the time of particle therapy was highly predictive of local failure (p < 0.01), and currently, there is 100% local control in patients with tumors < 49 cc. No grade ≥3 toxicities were observed. There was no significant difference in outcome or side effect profile seen for proton versus carbon ion therapy. Five patients (11.4%) experienced transient grade ≤2 radiation-induced brain changes. CONCLUSIONS: The first analysis suggests the safety and efficacy of proton and carbon ion therapy at our center. The excellent control of small to mid-size chordomas underlines the effectiveness of particle therapy and importance of upfront maximum debulking of large lesions.

Normofractionated and moderately hypofractionated proton therapy: comparison of acute toxicity and early quality of life outcomes.

Aim: Data on the safety of moderately hypofractionated proton beam therapy (PBT) are limited. The aim of this study is to compare the acute toxicity and early quality of life (QoL) outcomes of normofractionated (nPBT) and hypofractionated PBT (hPBT). Material and methods: We prospectively compared acute toxicity and QoL between patients treated with nPBT (dose per fraction 1.8-2.3 Gy, n = 90) and hPBT (dose per fraction 2.5-3.1 Gy, n = 49) in following locations: head and neck (H&N, n = 85), abdomen and pelvis (A&P, n = 43), and other soft tissue (ST, n = 11). The toxicities were grouped into categories-mucosal, skin, and other sites-and evaluated according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.03 at baseline, treatment completion, and 3 months after PBT completion. QoL was evaluated with the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 scale for all locations and additionally with EORTC QLQ-HN35 for H&N patients. Results: Overall, the highest toxicity grades of G0, G1, G2, and G3 were observed in 7 (5%), 40 (28.8%), 78 (56.1%), and 15 (10.8%) patients, respectively. According to organ and site, no statistically significant differences were detected in the majority of toxicity comparisons (66.7%). For A&P, hPBT showed a more favorable toxicity profile as compared to nPBT with a higher frequency of G0 and G1 and a lower frequency of G2 and G3 events (p = 0.04), more patients with improvement (95.7% vs 70%, p = 0.023), and full resolution of toxicities (87% vs 50%, p = 0.008). Skin toxicity was unanimously milder for hPBT compared to nPBT in A&P and ST locations (p = 0.018 and p = 0.025, respectively). No significant differences in QoL were observed in 97% of comparisons for QLQ-C30 scale except for loss of appetite in H&N patients (+33.3 for nPBT and 0 for hPBT, p = 0.02) and role functioning for A&P patients (0 for nPBT vs +16.7 hPBT, p = 0.003). For QLQ-HN35, 97.9% of comparisons did not reveal significant differences, with pain as the only scale varying between the groups (-8.33 vs -25, p = 0.016). Conclusion: Hypofractionated proton therapy offers non-inferior early safety and QoL as compared to normofractionated irradiation and warrants further clinical investigation.

Toxicity and cosmetic outcome after hypofractionated whole breast irradiation and boost-IOERT in early stage breast cancer (HIOB): First results of a prospective multicenter trial (NCT01343459).

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To assess the role of intraoperative radiation with electrons (IOERT) as tumor bed boost followed by hypofractionated whole breast irradiation (HWBI) after breast conserving surgery (BCS) of patients with low to intermediate risk breast cancer focusing on acute/late toxicity and cosmetic outcome. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In 2011, a prospective multicenter trial (NCT01343459) was started. Treatment consisted of BCS, IOERT (11.1 Gy) and HWBI (40.5 Gy in 15 fractions). In a single-arm design, 5-year IBR-rates are benchmarked by a sequential ratio test (SQRT) against best published evidences in 3 age groups (35-40 y, 41-50 y, >50 y). Acute/late toxicity and cosmesis were evaluated by validated scorings systems. RESULTS: Of 627 eligible patients, 44 were excluded, leaving 583 to analyze. After a median follow-up (FUP) of 45 months (range 0-74), for acute effects CTCAE-score 0/1 was noted in 91% (end of HWBI) and 92% (4 weeks later), respectively. Late toxicity Grading 0/1 (mean values, ranges) by LENT-SOMA criteria were observed in 92.7% (89-97.3) at 4/5 months, rising to 96.5% (91-100) at 6 years post HWBI. Baseline cosmesis after wound healing prior to HWBI was scored as excellent/good in 86% of cases by subjective (patient) and in 74% by objective (doctor) assessment with no impairment thereafter. CONCLUSIONS: Acute and late treatment tolerance of a combined Boost-IOERT/HWBI regimen is excellent in short/mid-term assessment. Postoperative cosmetic appearance is not impaired after 3 years FUP.

Intraoperative Tumor Bed Boost With Electrons in Breast Cancer of Clinical Stages I Through III: Updated 10-Year Results.

PURPOSE: To assess retrospectively the role of an anticipated intraoperative tumor electron radiation therapy (IOERT) as a bed boost during breast-conserving surgery followed by conventional whole breast irradiation (WBI). METHODS AND MATERIALS: An unselected cohort of 770 breast cancer patients of all risk types was analyzed in terms of local control (LC) and survival outcome. Patients were treated by breast-conserving surgery, IOERT of 10 Gy, and WBI to total median doses of 54 Gy (range, 1.6-2). Patients were retrospectively analyzed for LC, locoregional control, metastasis-free survival (MFS), overall survival (OS), and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS). RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 121 months (range, 4-200), 21 (2.7%) in-breast recurrences (IBRs) were observed, 107 patients (14%) died and 106 (14%) developed metastases. Ten-year rates of LC, locoregional control, MFS, OS, and BCSS amounted to 97.2%, 96.5%, 86%, 85.7%, and 93.2 %, respectively. In multivariate analysis, HER2+ and triple-negative breast cancer subtype (TN) turned out to be significant negative predictors for IBRs (hazard ratios, 15.02 and 12.87, respectively; P < .05). Sorted by subtypes, 10-year LC rates were observed in 98.7% (range, 96.7%-99.5%) (luminal A), 98% (range, 94%-99.3%) (luminal B), 87.9% (range, 66.2%-96%) (HER2+), and 89% (range, 76.9%-94.9%) (TN), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: After 10 years, boost IOERT maintains high LC rates in any risk setting.

Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) as boost in breast cancer.

The term IORT (intraoperative radiotherapy) is currently used for various techniques that show huge differences in dose delivery and coverage of the tissue at risk. The largest evidence for boost IORT preceding whole breast irradiation (WBI) originates from intraoperative electron treatments (IOERT) with single doses around 10 Gy. At median follow-up periods at 6 years, outstandingly low local recurrence rates of less than 1% are observed. Higher local relapse rates were described for G3 tumors and triple negative breast cancers as well as for IORT following primary systemic treatment for locally advanced tumors. Even there, long term (>5y) local tumor control rates mostly beyond 95% were maintained. Compared to other boost methods, an intraoperative treatment has evident advantages in terms of precision (by avoiding a "spatial and/or temporal miss"), cosmetic outcome and patient comfort. Direct visualisation of a tumor bed during surgery guarantees for an accurate dose delivery, which has additionally gained importance in times of primary reconstruction techniques after lumpectomy, since IORT is performed before breast tissue including parts of the tumor bed is mobilized for plastic purposes. As a consequence of direct tissue exposure without distension by hematoma/seroma, IORT allows for small treatment volumes and complete skin sparing, both having a positive effect on late tissue tolerance and, hence, cosmetic appearance. Boost IORT marginally prolongs the surgical procedure, while significantly shortening postoperative radiotherapy. Its combination with external beam radiotherapy to the whole breast (WBI) is currently tested in two multicentric prospective trials: as kV-IORT in the multicentric TARGIT-B (oost) study, and as IOERT in the HIOB trial (3 weeks hypofractionated WBI preceded by IORT electron boost).

Survival and local control rates of triple-negative breast cancer patients treated with boost-IOERT during breast-conserving surgery.

AIM: The purpose of this work was to retrospectively evaluate survival and local control rates of triple-negative breast cancer subtypes classified as five marker negative (5NP) and core basal (CB), respectively, after breast-conserving surgery and intraoperative boost radiotherapy with electrons (IOERT) followed by whole breast irradiation. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 71 patients with triple-negative breast cancer were enrolled, who were treated with lumpectomy, axillary lymph node dissection, and IOERT with 9.6 Gy (median Dmax) followed by normofractionated whole breast irradiation to median total doses of 54 Gy. Chemotherapy was applied in a neoadjuvant (12 %), adjuvant (75 %), or combinational setting (7 %). RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 97 months (range 4-170 months), 5 in-breast recurrences were detected (7.0 %). For all patients, 8-year actuarial rates for local control, metastases-free survival, disease-specific survival, and overall survival amounted to 89, 75, 80, and 69 %, respectively. All local recurrences occurred in grade 3 (G3) tumors irrespective of their specific immunohistochemical phenotype; thus, the local control rate for grades 1/2 (G1/2) was 100 % for both 5NP and CB, while for G3 it was 88 % for 5NP and 90 % for CB (p = 0.65 and 0.82, respectively, n.s.). For disease-specific survival, only the difference of the best-prognosis group 5-NP/G3 vs. the worst-prognosis cohort CB/G1/2 was statistically significant: 90 % vs. 54 % (p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Boost-IOERT provides acceptable long-term in-breast control in triple negative breast cancer. The best subgroup in terms of disease-specific survival was represented by 5NP in combination with tumor grading G3.

Normal tissue complication models for clinically relevant acute esophagitis (≥ grade 2) in patients treated with dose differentiated accelerated radiotherapy (DART-bid).

BACKGROUND: One of the primary dose-limiting toxicities during thoracic irradiation is acute esophagitis (AE). The aim of this study is to investigate dosimetric and clinical predictors for AE grade ≥ 2 in patients treated with accelerated radiotherapy for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: 66 NSCLC patients were included in the present analysis: 4 stage II, 44 stage IIIA and 18 stage IIIB. All patients received induction chemotherapy followed by dose differentiated accelerated radiotherapy (DART-bid). Depending on size (mean of three perpendicular diameters) tumors were binned in four dose groups: <2.5 cm 73.8 Gy, 2.5-4.5 cm 79.2 Gy, 4.5-6 cm 84.6 Gy, >6 cm 90 Gy. Patients were treated in 3D target splitting technique. In order to estimate the normal tissue complication probability (NTCP), two Lyman models and the cutoff-logistic regression model were fitted to the data with AE ≥ grade 2 as statistical endpoint. Inter-model comparison was performed with the corrected Akaike information criterion (AICc), which calculates the model's quality of fit (likelihood value) in relation to its complexity (i.e. number of variables in the model) corrected by the number of patients in the dataset. Toxicity was documented prospectively according to RTOG. RESULTS: The median follow up was 686 days (range 84-2921 days), 23/66 patients (35 %) experienced AE ≥ grade 2. The actuarial local control rates were 72.6 % and 59.4 % at 2 and 3 years, regional control was 91 % at both time points. The Lyman-MED model (D50 = 32.8 Gy, m = 0.48) and the cutoff dose model (Dc = 38 Gy) provide the most efficient fit to the current dataset. On multivariate analysis V38 (volume of the esophagus that receives 38 Gy or above, 95 %-CI 28.2-57.3) was the most significant predictor of AE ≥ grade 2 (HR = 1.05, CI 1.01-1.09, p = 0.007). CONCLUSION: Following high-dose accelerated radiotherapy the rate of AE ≥ grade 2 is slightly lower than reported for concomitant radio-chemotherapy with the additional benefit of markedly increased loco-regional tumor control. In the current patient cohort the most significant predictor of AE was found to be V38. A second clinically useful parameter in treatment planning may be MED (mean esophageal dose).

IOERT as anticipated tumor bed boost during breast-conserving surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer--results of a case series after 5-year follow-up.

To evaluate retrospectively rates of local (LCR) and locoregional tumor control (LRCR) in patients with locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) who were treated with preoperative chemotherapy (primary systemic treatment, PST) followed by breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and either intraoperative radiotherapy with electrons (IOERT) preceding whole-breast irradiation (WBI) (Group 1) or with WBI followed by an external tumor bed boost (electrons or photons) instead of IOERT (Group 2). From 2002 to 2007, 83 patients with clinical Stage II or III breast cancer were enrolled in Group 1 and 26 in Group 2. All patients received PST followed by BCS and axillary lymph node dissection. IOERT boosts were applied by single doses of 9 Gy (90% reference isodose) versus external boosts of 12 Gy (median dose range, 6-16) in 2 Gy/fraction (ICRU). WBI in both groups was performed up to total doses of 51-57 Gy (1.7-1.8 Gy/fraction). The respective median follow-up times for Groups 1 and 2 amount 59 months (range, 3-115) and 67.5 months (range, 13-120). Corresponding 6-year rates for LCR, LRCR, metastasis-free survival, disease-specific survival and overall survival were 98.5, 97.2, 84.7, 89.2 and 86.4% for Group 1 and 88.1, 88.1, 74, 92 and 92% for Group 2, respectively, without any statistical significances. IOERT as boost modality during BCS in LABC after PST shows a trend to be superior in terms of LCR and LRCR in comparison with conventional boosts.

DART-bid: dose-differentiated accelerated radiation therapy, 1.8 Gy twice daily: high local control in early stage (I/II) non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: While surgery is considered standard of care for early stage (I/II), non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), radiotherapy is a widely accepted alternative for medically unfit patients or those who refuse surgery. International guidelines recommend several treatment options, comprising stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for small tumors, conventional radiotherapy ≥ 60 Gy for larger sized especially centrally located lesions or continuous hyperfractionated accelerated RT (CHART). This study presents clinical outcome and toxicity for patients treated with a dose-differentiated accelerated schedule using 1.8 Gy bid (DART-bid). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between April 2002 and December 2010, 54 patients (median age 71 years, median Karnofsky performance score 70%) were treated for early stage NSCLC. Total doses were applied according to tumor diameter: 73.8 Gy for < 2.5 cm, 79.2 Gy for 2.5-4.5 cm, 84.6 Gy for 4.5-6 cm, 90 Gy for > 6 cm. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 28.5 months (range 2-108 months); actuarial local control (LC) at 2 and 3 years was 88%, while regional control was 100%. There were 10 patients (19%) who died of the tumor, and 18 patients (33%) died due to cardiovascular or pulmonary causes. A total of 11 patients (20%) died intercurrently without evidence of progression or treatment-related toxicity at the last follow-up, while 15 patients (28%) are alive. Acute esophagitis ≤ grade 2 occurred in 7 cases, 2 patients developed grade 2 chronic pulmonary fibrosis. CONCLUSION: DART-bid yields high LC without significant toxicity. For centrally located and/or large (> 5 cm) early stage tumors, where SBRT is not feasible, this method might serve as radiotherapeutic alternative to present treatment recommendations, with the need of confirmation in larger cohorts.

Boost IORT in Breast Cancer: Body of Evidence.

The term IORT (intraoperative radiotherapy) is currently used for various techniques that show decisive differences in dose delivery. The largest evidence for boost IORT preceding whole breast irradiation (WBI) originates from intraoperative electron treatments with single doses around 10 Gy, providing outstandingly low local recurrence rates in any risk constellation also at long term analyses. Compared to other boost methods, an intraoperative treatment has evident advantages as follows. Precision. Direct visualisation of the tumour bed during surgery guarantees an accurate dose delivery. This fact has additionally gained importance in times of primary reconstruction techniques after lumpectomy to optimise cosmetic outcome. IORT is performed before breast tissue is mobilised for plastic purposes. Cosmesis. As a consequence of direct tissue exposure without distension by hematoma/seroma, IORT allows for small treatment volumes and complete skin sparing, both having a positive effect on late tissue tolerance and, hence, cosmetic appearance. Patient Comfort. Boost IORT marginally prolongs the surgical procedure, while significantly shortening postoperative radiotherapy. Its combination with a 3-week hypofractionated external beam radiotherapy to the whole breast (WBI) is presently tested in the HIOB trial (hypofractionated WBI preceded by IORT electron boost), a prospective multicenter trial of the International Society of Intraoperative Radiotherapy (ISIORT).

DEGRO practical guidelines for radiotherapy of breast cancer IV: radiotherapy following mastectomy for invasive breast cancer.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Since the last recommendations from the Breast Cancer Expert Panel of the German Society for Radiation Oncology (DEGRO) in 2008, evidence for the effectiveness of postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) has grown. This growth is based on updates of the national S3 and international guidelines, as well as on new data and meta-analyses. New aspects were considered when updating the DEGRO recommendations. METHODS: The authors performed a comprehensive survey of the literature. Data from recently published (meta-)analyses, randomized clinical trials and international cancer societies' guidelines yielding new aspects compared to 2008 were reviewed and discussed. New aspects were included in the current guidelines. Specific issues relating to particular PMRT constellations, such as the presence of risk factors (lymphovascular invasion, blood vessel invasion, positive lymph node ratio >20 %, resection margins <3 mm, G3 grading, young age/premenopausal status, extracapsular invasion, negative hormone receptor status, invasive lobular cancer, size >2 cm or a combination of ≥ 2 risk factors) and 1-3 positive lymph nodes are emphasized. RESULTS: The evidence for improved overall survival and local control following PMRT for T4 tumors, positive resection margins, >3 positive lymph nodes and in T3 N0 patients with risk factors such as lymphovascular invasion, G3 grading, close margins, and young age has increased. Recently identified risk factors such as invasive lobular subtype and negative hormone receptor status were included. For patients with 1-3 positive lymph nodes, the recommendation for PMRT has reached the 1a level of evidence. CONCLUSION: PMRT is mandatory in patients with T4 tumors and/or positive lymph nodes and/or positive resection margins. PMRT should be strongly considered in patients with T3 N0 tumors and risk factors, particularly when two or more risk factors are present.