Recommendations for stereotactic body radiation therapy for spine and non-spine bone metastases. A GETUG (French society of urological radiation oncolgists) consensus using a national two-round modified Delphi survey.

Background and purpose: The relevance of metastasis-directed stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) remains to be demonstrated through phase III trials. Multiple SBRT procedures have been published potentially resulting in a disparity of practices. Therefore, the french society of urological radiation oncolgists (GETUG) recognized the need for joint expert consensus guidelines for metastasis-directed SBRT in order to standardize practice in trials carried out by the group. Materials and methods: After a comprehensive literature review, 97 recommendation statements were created regarding planning and delivery of spine bone (SBM) and non-spine bone metastases (NSBM) SBRT. These statements were then submitted to a national online two-round modified Delphi survey among main GETUG investigators. Consensus was achieved if a statement received ≥ 75 % agreements, a trend to consensus being defined as 65-74 % agreements. Any statement without consensus at round one was re-submitted in round two. Results: Twenty-one out of 29 (72.4%) surveyed experts responded to both rounds. Seventy-five statements achieved consensus at round one leaving 22 statements needing a revote of which 16 achieved consensus and 5 a trend to consensus. The final rate of consensus was 91/97 (93.8%). Statements with no consensus concerned patient selection (3/19), dose and fractionation (1/11), prescription and dose objectives (1/9) and organs at risk delineation (1/15). The voting resulted in the writing of step-by-step consensus guidelines. Conclusion: Consensus guidelines for SBM and NSBM SBRT were agreed upon using a validated modified Delphi approach. These guidelines will be used as per-protocole recommendations in ongoing and further GETUG clinical trials.

Salvage reirradiation for local prostate cancer recurrence after radiation therapy. For who? When? How?

PURPOSE: Literature review reporting results of salvage brachytherapy and stereotactic body radiotherapy for prostate recurrence only after radiotherapy for prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 38 studies (including at least 15 patients per study) were analysed: 19 using low-dose-rate brachytherapy, nine high-dose-rate brachytherapy and ten stereotactic body radiotherapy. Only five studies were prospective. The median numbers of patients were 30 for low-dose-rate brachytherapy, 34 for high-dose-rate brachytherapy, and 30 for stereotactic body radiotherapy. The median follow-up were 47months for low-dose-rate brachytherapy, 36months for high-dose-rate brachytherapy and 21months for stereotactic body radiotherapy. RESULTS: Late genitourinary toxicity rates ranged, for grade 2: from 4 to 42% for low-dose-rate brachytherapy, from 7 to 54% for high-dose-rate brachytherapy and from 3 to 20% for stereotactic body radiotherapy, and for grade 3 or above: from 0 to 24% for low-dose-rate brachytherapy, from 0 to 13% for high-dose-rate brachytherapy and from 0 to 3% for grade 3 or above (except 12% in one study) for stereotactic body radiotherapy. Late gastrointestinal toxicity rates ranged, for grade 2: from 0 to 6% for low-dose-rate brachytherapy, from 0 to 14% for high-dose-rate brachytherapy and from 0 to 11% for stereotactic body radiotherapy, and for grade 3 or above: from 0 to 6% for low-dose-rate brachytherapy, and from 0 to 1% for high-dose-rate brachytherapy and stereotactic body radiotherapy. The 5-year biochemical disease-free survival rates ranged from 20 to 77% for low-dose-rate brachytherapy and from 51 to 68% for high-dose-rate brachytherapy. The 2- and 3-year disease-free survival rates ranged from 40 to 82% for stereotactic body radiotherapy. Prognostic factors of biochemical recurrence have been identified. CONCLUSION: Despite a lack of prospective data, salvage reirradiation for prostate cancer recurrence can be proposed to highly selected patients and tumours. Prospective comparative studies are needed.

[Adaptive radiotherapy: Strategies and benefits depending on tumor localization]. / Radiothérapie adaptative : stratégies et bénéfices selon les localisations tumorales.

Adaptive radiotherapy (ART) is a complexe image-guided radiotherapy modality that comprises multiple planning to account for anatomical variations occurring during irradiation. Schematically, two strategies of RTA can be distinguished and combined according to tumor locations. One or more replanning can be proposed to correct systematic variations such as tumor shrinkage. A library of treatment plans with day-to-day plan selection from cone-beam CT imaging can also be proposed to correct random variations such as uterine motion or bladder/rectum volume changes. Because of strong anatomical variations occurring during irradiation, RTA appears therefore particularly justified in head and neck, lung, bladder, cervical and rectum and pancreas tumors, and to a lesser extent for prostate tumors and other digestive tumors. For these tumor locations, ART provides a fairly clear dosimetric benefit but a clinical benefit not yet formally demonstrated. ART cannot be proposed in a routine practice but must be evaluated medico-economically in the context of prospective trials. A rigorous quality control must be associated.

[Toxicity and quality of life comparison of iodine 125 brachytherapy and stereotactic radiotherapy for prostate cancers]. / Toxicité et qualité de vie comparées après curiethérapie par iode 125 et radiothérapie stéréotaxique des cancers prostatiques.

Quality of life is a major issue for good prognostic prostate cancer, for which brachytherapy is one of the reference treatments. Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) is a recent alternative however not yet validated as a standard treatment. This review of the literature reports and compares the toxicities and the quality of life, either after exclusive brachytherapy with iodine 125 or after SBRT. The comparison is made with the limitations of the absence of randomized trial comparing the two treatment techniques. Acute toxicity appears to be lower after SBRT compared to brachytherapy (from 10 to 40 % versus 30 to 40 %, respectively). Conversely, acute and late gastrointestinal toxicity (from 0 to 21 % and from 0 to 10 % of grade 2, respectively) appears more frequent with SBRT. Late urinary toxicity seems identical between both techniques (from 20 to 30 % of grade 2), with a possible urinary flare syndrome. Both treatments have an impact on erectile dysfunction, although it is not possible to conclude that a technique is superior because of the limited data on SBRT. SBRT has better bowel and urinary (irritation or obstruction) quality of life scores than brachytherapy; while sexual and urinary incontinence remain the same. The absence of randomized trial comparing SBRT with brachytherapy for prostate cancers does not allow to conclude on the superiority of one technique over another, thus justifying a phase III medicoeconomic evaluation.

[Radiotherapy for cervix carcinomas: clinical target volume delineation]. / Délinéation des volumes cibles anatomocliniques pour la radiothérapie des cancers du col utérin.

Concurrent chemoradiation followed by brachytherapy is currently the standard treatment for locally advanced cervix carcinomas. Modern radiation techniques require planning based on 3D images, and therefore an accurate delineation of target volumes. The clinical target volume (CTV) used for the different phases of treatment are now well defined, but are not always easy to delineate on a CT scan which is currently the standard examination for simulation in radiotherapy. MRI and PET-CT are routinely performed at diagnosis, and can be used to improve the accuracy of the delineation. The objective of this review is to describe the definitions and recommendations of CTV in the treatment of cervical cancer.