Response-Adapted Ultralow-Dose Radiation Therapy for Orbital Indolent B-Cell Lymphoma: A Phase 2 Nonrandomized Controlled Trial.

Importance: Radiation therapy to doses of 24 to 36 Gy is currently used to treat indolent B-cell lymphoma of the ocular adnexa; however, ocular adverse effects are common. Objective: To determine if a response-adapted radiation therapy strategy will result in excellent disease outcomes while reducing orbital morbidity. Design, Setting, and Participants: This single-institution, phase 2 prospective nonrandomized controlled trial of a response-adapted strategy involved 50 evaluable patients with stage I to IV indolent B-cell lymphoma of the ocular adnexa enrolled between July 2015 and January 2021. This treatment approach was also retrospectively evaluated with a separate 55-patient cohort treated between March 2013 and October 2021. All data were analyzed between November 2021 and December 2023. Interventions: Patients were treated with ultralow-dose radiation therapy to 4 Gy in 2 fractions and assessed for response at 3-month intervals. Patients with persistent orbital lymphoma were offered an additional 20 Gy in 10 fractions to complete the response-adapted treatment. Main Outcome and Measures: The primary end point was 2-year local orbital control within the irradiated field after response-adapted therapy. Secondary end points included overall survival and complete response rate. Results: The 50 prospective patients were a median (range) of 63 (29-88) years old, and 31 (62%) were female. Among the 50 patients, 32 (64%) had mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue lymphoma, 12 (24%) had follicular lymphoma, and 6 (12%) had unclassifiable low-grade B-cell lymphoma. Thirty-one patients (62%) had stage I disease, and 36 (72%) were newly diagnosed. At a median follow-up of 37.4 (95% CI, 33.7-52.5) months, the 2-year local control rate was 89.4% (95% CI, 81.0%-98.7%), and the 2-year overall survival rate was 98.0% (95% CI, 94.1%-100%); 45 patients (90.0%; 95% CI, 78.2%-96.7%) experienced a complete response to response-adapted radiation, including 44 patients with a complete response to ultralow-dose radiation and 1 patient with a complete response after an additional 20 Gy. No local recurrences were observed among patients with a complete response to response-adapted therapy. No grade 3 or higher toxic effects were observed. In a planned subset analysis of 22 patients with newly diagnosed, untreated stage I mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue lymphoma, the 2-year local control rate was 90.7% (95% CI, 79.2%-100%), and the 2-year freedom from distant relapse rate was 95.2% (95% CI, 86.6%-100%). Conclusion and Relevance: In this nonrandomized controlled trial, response-adapted ultralow-dose therapy for indolent orbital B-cell lymphoma resulted in reduced radiation exposure, negligible toxic effects, and excellent disease outcomes. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02494700.

Radiotherapy in the treatment of primary cutaneous CD4+ small/medium T-cell lymphoproliferative disorder.

BACKGROUND: Primary cutaneous CD4+ small/medium T-cell lymphoproliferative disorder (PCSM-LPD) is an increasingly recognized entity with heterogeneous management strategies that may include radiotherapy. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to characterize treatment options for PCSM-LPD, with a focus on the role of radiotherapy. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of 46 patients seen in the Cutaneous Lymphoma Program at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, with a clinicopathologic review consistent with PCSM-LPD. All patients were biopsied and underwent observation, topical/intralesional steroids, and/or radiotherapy. Patients were confirmed to have residual disease prior to radiotherapy. RESULTS: All patients achieved a complete response (CR). Sixteen patients (35%) received focal radiotherapy, with a CR in 15 (94%). The CR rate following ultra-low-dose radiotherapy (4 Gy in 1-2 fractions) was 92%. There was no grade 3 toxicity after radiotherapy. Thirty patients were managed without radiotherapy, with excision and observation or steroids. CONCLUSION: Primary cutaneous CD4+ small/medium T-cell lymphoproliferative disorder has excellent outcomes, and management strategies may include observation following biopsy, steroids, or radiation. Ultra-low-dose radiotherapy results in excellent outcomes with limited toxicity and is effective for persistent lesions after steroidal therapy.

Response-adapted ultra-low-dose 4 Gy radiation as definitive therapy of gastric MALT lymphoma: a single-centre, pilot trial.

BACKGROUND: Given the favourable prognosis of patients with gastric mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue (MALT) lymphoma, treatment-related toxicity should be minimised. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of 4 Gy radiotherapy given in a response-adapted approach. METHODS: We conducted a single-centre, single-arm, prospective trial at MD Anderson Cancer Center (Houston, TX, USA) of response-adapted ultra-low-dose radiotherapy. Eligible patients were 18 years or older and had newly diagnosed or relapsed Helicobacter pylori-negative gastric MALT lymphoma, with stage I-IV disease. Given the expected low toxicity profile of treatment, performance status was not an exclusion criterion. Patients received external beam photon-based radiotherapy for a total dose of 4 Gy in two fractions. Patients with a complete response to 4 Gy via endoscopy and imaging at 3-4 months were observed; patients with a partial response were re-evaluated in 6-9 months. Residual disease at 9-13 months or stable or progressive disease at any time required additional treatment with 20 Gy. The primary endpoint was gastric complete response at 1 year (second evaluation timepoint) after 4 Gy treatment. All analyses were performed as intention to treat. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03680586) and is complete and closed to enrolment. FINDINGS: Between March 27, 2019, and Oct 12, 2021, we enrolled 24 eligible patients. The median age of participants was 67 years (IQR 58-74; range 40-85); 15 (63%) were female and nine (37%) male; 18 (75%) were White, four (17%) Asian, and two (8%) Hispanic; 20 (83%) had stage I disease, one (4%) stage II, and three (13%) stage IV. Median follow-up time was 36 months (IQR 26-42). 20 patients (83%) had a complete response to 4 Gy (16 at 3-4 months, four at 9-13 months); two patients received 20 Gy for symptomatic stable disease at 3-4 months and two for residual disease at 9-13 months; all had a complete response. The 3-year local control rate was 96% (95% CI 88-100), with one local relapse at 14 months after 4 Gy radiotherapy salvaged successfully with 20 Gy. One patient with stage IV disease had a distant relapse. The most common adverse events were grade 1 nausea (nine [38%] of 24 patients who received 4 Gy and two [50%] of four patients who received 20 Gy) and grade 1 abdominal pain (five [21%] of 24 and zero of four, respectively). No grade 3 or worse adverse events were noted, including no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Most patients had a complete response after 4 Gy radiotherapy; all who required an additional 20 Gy had a complete response within 12 months. This response-adapted strategy could be used to select patients who would benefit from additional radiotherapy and spare others potential associated toxicity. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute.

Applicant and Program Director Perceptions of Second Look Events During the 2023 Radiation Oncology Residency Match.

Purpose: Virtual radiation oncology (RO) residency interviews may impair applicant and program evaluation. Second look events (SLEs) exist; however, the frequency, nature, and implications are unknown. We surveyed applicants and program directors (PDs) to characterize the 2023 RO Match SLEs and assess perspectives. Method and Materials: An online, anonymous survey was distributed to 2023 RO Match applicants and American College of Graduate Medical Education-accredited RO PDs post-Match. Number and percentage are reported as response per question. Likert-type scores (1, strongly agree; 5, strongly disagree) are reported as median, IQR. Results: Responses were received from 51 of 246 applicants (21%) and 52 of 88 PDs (59%). Forty applicants (87%) were offered in-person and virtual SLEs; 20 (51%) and 17 (44%) applicants were invited to 1 to 3 and 4 to 6 events, respectively. Most invited applicants attended none (21, 54%). Applicants reported that all (21, 54%) or some (16, 41%) programs communicated intentions to finalize rank order lists (ROLs) before SLEs. Most applicants (29, 74%) agreed that SLEs were optional without ROL consequences (median, 2, IQR 1-3). Applicants declined in-person SLEs due to city/facility indifference (10, 43%), finances (10, 43%), and logistics (9, 39%). Most (12, 86%) in-person SLE attendees agreed that SLEs influenced their ROL (median, 2, IQR 1-2). Nineteen PDs (40%) reported offering SLEs, with 18 of 19 being in-person. PDs who did not offer SLEs cited ethical concerns (13, 45%) and institutional policies (11, 38%). All PDs reported that SLEs were optional, and 18 of 19 explained that the SLE would be without ROL consequences. SLEs mostly occurred in February before (11, 58%) and after (15, 79%) ROL submission. Conclusions: In-person SLEs occurred during Match 2023. All PDs considered SLEs optional which was trusted by most applicants. Attendance at in-person SLEs influenced applicants' ROLs; however, finances and logistics impaired applicant attendance. Further work is needed to appreciate SLE implications and ensure equitable residency recruitment.

Knowledge and competences in hematological malignancies amongst radiation oncology residents in Germany-results from a national survey.

INTRODUCTION: Radiation oncology is a pivotal modality in the treatment of hematologic malignancies. To enable state-of-the-art patient care, structured education during residency is essential. However, given the lack of detailed data, the scope of educational opportunities available to trainees remains elusive. This prompted our group to perform a national survey amongst radiation oncology residents in Germany assessing the status quo of competences in the treatment of lymphoma and leukemia patients. Furthermore, areas of potential improvement were identified to further the goal of competence-based education for residents. METHODS: A survey-based analysis was conducted to assess the knowledge and competence of radiation oncology residents in Germany regarding hematological malignancies. A decisive questionnaire covering demographics, self-assessment of competences, and areas for improvement was developed in adaption of a survey by the Association of Residents in Radiation Oncology and distributed amongst 1439 members of the German Society of Radiation Oncology. Responses were collected anonymously via an online survey tool and analyzed using descriptive statistics and chi-square tests. RESULTS: A total of 59 complete and 22 partial responses were collected, yielding a 5.6% response rate. Participants' competence varied, with notable experience gaps in pediatric cases, proton therapy, and large-field techniques like total-skin irradiation or pediatric total body irradiation. While participants felt confident in treatment planning and patient counseling, they showed deficiencies in the definition of the planning target volume for modern involved site radiotherapy. Resources for education included national and international guidelines, scientific reviews, and textbooks. Board-certified radiation oncologists and physicians from specialized lymphoma centers demonstrated higher overall competence levels. CONCLUSION: This survey highlights the diversity of resident education regarding hematological malignancies in German radiation oncology programs. Knowledge gaps exist in key areas, including pediatric cases and specialized techniques. Competence-based education, interactive teaching formats, and rotations to specialized centers are potential strategies to address these gaps. The study contributes to the understanding of the federal educational landscape, underscoring the need for standardized and comprehensive training to ensure optimal patient care in hematological malignancies within the context of radiation oncology. Further research and collaborations are warranted to enhance training and expertise in this critical domain.

Characterization of Research Mentorship During Medical School for Future Radiation Oncology Trainees.

Purpose: Medical student access to radiation oncology (RO) research opportunities is important for stimulating interest in the specialty. The purpose of this study was to assess the publication record during medical school of students who ultimately matched in RO, to characterize the source(s) of their RO mentorship relative to other specialties. Methods and Materials: We performed web-based searches to identify manuscripts published during medical school (defined as being published from January 2016 to December 2019) for all RO residents with postgraduate year 2 status in 2020 to 2021. Students with a PhD degree and international graduates were excluded. Characteristics of these publications, the student, and the primary mentor, were assessed. Results: A total of 435 publications were authored by the 148 included residents. In total, 115 (78%) attended a medical school with an affiliated RO residency program. The median number of publications per student was 2 (interquartile range, 1-4), and students' median byline author position was 2 (interquartile range, 1-4). In total, 351 publications (80.7%) were on a cancer-related topic, with 234 (53.8%) published in oncology-oriented journal, and 96 (22.0%) published in RO-oriented journals. There were 294 unique mentors, with 70 mentors (24%) on 2 or more student publications. Most mentors (n = 187, 64%) shared the same institution as the student. Mentors were most commonly radiation oncologists/radiation biologists/medical physicists (n = 153, 52.6%), surgical subspecialists (n = 53, 21%), and medical oncologists (n = 18, 6.2%). Students working with primary RO mentors were more likely to publish in an oncology-oriented journal (79.1% vs 18.2%, P < .01) or RO-oriented journal (36.2% vs 2.2%, P < .01), compared with students working with non-RO mentors, respectively. A higher percentage of publications with RO mentors occurred in the last 2 years of medical school compared with the first 2 years (64.0% vs 40.9%, respectively, P < .01). Conclusions: Approximately one-half of student publications among future RO residents are published in nononcology journals, and result from mentoring relationships with non-RO physicians.

Assessment of Medical Student Research Mentorship in Radiation Oncology.

Purpose: Mentored medical student (MS) research opportunities in radiation oncology (RO) provide in-depth exposure to the specialty and may promote greater interest in a career in RO. Many radiation oncologists conduct research; however, the extent to which they directly engage MSs in their research is unknown. The purpose of this study was to characterize MS authorship in American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) journals. Methods and Materials: The byline and abstract of all scientific articles (ie, clinical, basic science, training/education) and case reports published from 2019 to 2021 in the International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, and Physics; Practical Radiation Oncology; and Advances in Radiation Oncology were reviewed. Characteristics of MSs and senior authors are reported. Results: A total of 105 of 1785 articles (5.8%) included an MS author, among which 72 (68.6%) were clinical, 13 training/education (12.4%), 12 case reports (11.4%), and 8 basic science (7.6%). MS authors were more common for publications in Advances in Radiation Oncology (9.0%) than Practical Radiation Oncology (6.4%) or the International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, and Physics (4.2%; P = .002). There were 125 unique MS authors from 72 institutions, among which 40 were first author (32.0%), 28 second author (22.4%), and 57 third (or higher) author (45.6%). There were 88 unique senior authors from 55 institutions, among which 10 (11.3%) were on 2 or more MS publications, and 57 (64.7%) shared the same institution as the MS. The median number of articles per mentor institution was 1 (interquartile range, 1-2), and the mentor institutions in the upper quartile in terms of number of MS publications accounted for 53 (50.5%) of all MS publications. Conclusions: Few publications in American Society for Radiation Oncology journals include MS authors with mentorship disproportionately from a small number of academic faculty at select institutions. These findings suggest that there is great potential for radiation oncologists to proactively engage more students in their work.

Management and Outcomes of Patients with Refractory Solitary Plasmacytoma after Treatment with Definitive Radiation Therapy.

PURPOSE: Radiation therapy (RT) is the standard treatment for solitary plasmacytoma (SP); however, the optimal management of RT-refractory SPs is unknown. We examined outcomes after early systemic therapy, surgical resection, or observation for patients with RT-refractory disease and assessed the potential impact of treatment selection on disease outcomes. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We retrospectively reviewed patients with SP treated with definitive radiation and evaluated at a single institution with persistent disease on imaging or biopsy. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize patient and disease characteristics and treatment outcomes. RESULTS: Of 102 total SP patients, 17 (17%) were RT-refractory. The median RT dose was 45 Gy, and median follow-up was 71 months from end of RT. Fifteen patients had additional treatment for refractory disease at a median time of 9.5 months after RT, with the following subsequent interventions: surgical resection (n = 4), additional RT (n = 2), systemic therapy without evidence of multiple myeloma (MM; n = 4), systemic therapy for progression to MM (n = 5), and observation (n = 2). Of 4 patients treated with surgical resection, 3 progressed to MM 22 to 43 months after diagnosis. Of 2 patients treated with additional RT, neither responded, and both had pathologic confirmation of residual disease after the second course. Four patients treated with systemic therapy without MM all had complete responses on positron emission tomography and no subsequent MM progression. Eight patients were initially observed after RT for ≥12 months (n = 8) or ≥24 months (n = 6). Of the 2 patients in continued observation, both had stable/unchanged avidity after radiation treatment for 12 and 22 months and ultimately had a slow decrease of disease avidity over multiple years. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with RT-refractory SPs can achieve good local control with alternative therapies, such as surgery or systemic therapy, if needed. Additional RT does not seem to be effective. Given the known high rates of progression from SP to MM, close observation of asymptomatic persistent disease until disease progression is likely sufficient in most cases.

Radiation Therapy Can Be Safely Incorporated into Pretransplantation Treatment Regimens for Patients with Multiple Myeloma.

Primary treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) often involves systemic induction therapy (SIT) followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). Radiation therapy (RT) is sometimes used for palliation; however, many practitioners avoid RT out of concern that future peripheral blood progenitor cell (PBPC) collection required for ASCT may be compromised. In this study, we retrospectively examined the possible effect of RT on PBPC collection. We reviewed the charts of 732 patients with MM treated with RT at our institution from 1999 to 2017, including patients who received RT prior to PBPC collection for planned ASCT. RT plans (both MM and non-MM RT) were reviewed to estimate the percentage of bone marrow (BM) treated using published estimates of skeletal BM distribution. Statistics were performed using Pearson correlation and the t-test. The 732 MM patients included 485 planned for ASCT; of these, 223 received RT prior to PBPC collection and were included in the final cohort. The median age at PBPC collection was 59 years (range, 33 to 80 years). For SIT, patients received combination regimens including the following agents: bortezomib (142 patients; 64%), lenalidomide (111 patients; 50%), and alkylators (46 patients; 21%). Nine patients (4%) received dexamethasone alone. The median cumulative %BM treated per patient was 6.7 (range .0 to 47.4). The median RT dose was 24 Gy (range, 10.0 to 75.6 Gy). Mobilization was performed using granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) alone (189 patients; 85%), G-CSF with plerixafor (15 patients; 7%), or chemotherapy (19 patients; 9%). A median of 7.8 × 106 CD34+/kg PBPCs (range, .5 to 54.8× 106 CD34+/kg) were collected in a median of 3 (range, 1 to 9) apheresis procedures. One hundred ninety-six patients (99%) collected ≥2.0 × 106 CD34+/kg PBPCs, and 166 (83%) collected >5.0 × 106 CD34+/kg PBPCs. The number of PBPCs collected was not associated with %BM treated (P = .15) or RT dose (P = .56). The number of apheresis procedures performed was not associated with %BM treated (P = .54) or RT dose (P = .85). The amount of PBPCs collected did not differ significantly between patients receiving RT to the pelvis/sacrum (P = .20) and those receiving RT to the spine (P = .13). The time to platelet engraftment was longer for patients with higher %BM treated (P = .02). Eleven patients did not undergo a confirmed ASCT, owing to patient preference (3 patients), trial therapy (1 patient), comorbidities (1 patient), election for hospice (1 patient), inadequate collection (4 patients), or inadequate follow-up (1 patient). In our study cohort, RT prior to ASCT did not impair successful ASCT. RT must be carefully planned and delivered to ensure safe incorporation into pre-ASCT treatment regimens.

Impact of cumulative dose of brentuximab vedotin on outcomes of frontline therapy for advanced-stage Hodgkin lymphoma.

In the pivotal study ECHELON-1, brentuximab vedotin (BV), doxorubicin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (A + AVD) demonstrated superior efficacy compared with bleomycin + AVD for the treatment of advanced-stage classic Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL). However, there are minimal available data regarding the frequency of dose reductions or omission of BV during curative therapy and the potential impact on patient outcomes. In a real-world analysis, we retrospectively reviewed the characteristics and outcomes of 179 patients with stage III or IV cHL treated with frontline A + AVD from January 2010 to April 2022. Treatment consisted of up to 1.2 mg/kg of BV and standard dose AVD IV on days 1 and 15 of each 28-day cycle for up to 6 cycles. At the time of treatment, the median patient age was 37 years, and a high-risk International Prognostic Score was observed in 46% of patients. Overall, 91% of patients received 6 cycles of AVD; 55% of patients did not receive the intended cumulative dose of BV (CDB); 28% of patients received two-thirds or less than the planned CDB. At a median follow-up time of 27.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 24.8-29), the median progression-free survival (PFS) was not reached, and the 12-month PFS was 90.3% (95% CI, 85.9-95.0). The impact of CDB on PFS was not significant (P = .15), nor was high CDB significantly associated with increased adverse events. In real-world experience, A + AVD is a highly effective treatment for patients with advanced-stage cHL, including for patients with prominent dose reductions of BV.

Evaluation of a Radiation Oncology Microclerkship as a Component of Medical Student Education.

Compared to most oncologic subspecialties, radiation oncology (RO) lacks a natural pathway for incorporation into the clinical clerkships, and few students ever complete a formal rotation in RO. The feasibility, and perceived value, of a 1-day "microclerkship" exposure in RO during other related clerkships was evaluated in this study. At a single institution, the RO clerkship director partnered with clerkship directors in medical oncology, palliative care, and radiology so that every 3rd or 4th year student would spend 1 day in RO during those clerkships. Afterwards, students completed an electronic survey containing multiple choice and 5-point Likert-type questions describing their experience. Descriptive statistics are reported. Ninety-seven students completed the RO microclerkship over 2 years, and 81 completed the survey (response rate 84%). Only 8 students (10%) had ever been in a RO department previously. During the microclerkship, 73 students (90%) saw at least one new patient consultation; 77 (95%) were involved in contouring or treatment planning; 76 (94%) saw treatment delivery; and 38 (47%) saw a brachytherapy procedure. Seventy-nine students (98%) felt that the microclerkship was at least moderately valuable (mean Likert-type rating 4.01, SD 0.73). Forty students (49%) were either somewhat or much more interested in participating in a longer (2-4 week) rotation in radiation oncology (mean Likert-type rating 3.59, SD 0.83). This study demonstrated the feasibility of incorporating a 1-day RO microclerkship into other related elective clerkships. Students viewed the experience favorably and found it valuable in their education.

Safety of Concurrent Radiation Therapy With Brentuximab Vedotin in the Treatment of Lymphoma.

Purpose: Purpose: Radiation therapy (RT) and the antibody-drug conjugate brentuximab vedotin (BV) are standard-of-care treatment options for patients with certain B and T-cell lymphomas; however, there are limited data exploring the safety of concurrent BV and RT (BVRT). Methods and Materials: We performed a single institutional retrospective review of 44 patients who received BVRT. Results: Twenty percent of patients (9/44) developed new grade 2 or higher (G2+) hematologic toxicity (HT) after BVRT, which was associated with radiation dose (median dose of 35 Gy in those with new G2+ HT compared with 15 Gy in those without; P < .001). Acute G2+ elevation in aspartate transaminase or alanine transaminase level was associated with administration of concurrent chemotherapy with BVRT (57% vs 21%; P = .047) but was not associated with any RT factors. Local control (LC) was achieved in 24 of 42 patients (57%) with available follow-up. Ten patients (23%) proceeded to stem cell transplant or cellular therapy after BVRT at a median of 48 days (interquartile range, 27-188 days). At last follow-up, 10 patients (23%) remained without evidence of disease. Conclusions: Our analysis demonstrates that the combination of BV and RT is well tolerated, though care should be taken during RT planning to reduce the risk of HT. This combination can be considered for patients in need of both local and systemic disease control.

Association of Patient-Reported Health-Related Quality of Life With Physician-Reported Toxicities in Adolescents and Young Adults Receiving Radiation Therapy for Cancer.

PURPOSE: Radiation therapy (RT) may cause toxicities in adolescents and young adults (AYAs, age 15-39 years) with cancer. However, the range of RT-related toxicities in AYAs and the affect on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) has not been well studied. We performed a cross-sectional study in AYAs with cancer who received RT to identify RT-related toxicities and examine their impact on HRQOL. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 178 AYAs received RT and completed PROMIS HRQOL instruments from 2018 to 2022. Acute and late physician-graded Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events RT-related toxicities were extracted and described. Multivariable linear regression was used to evaluate the association of RT-related toxicity with HRQOL scores during and post-RT. Minimally important differences were used to evaluate the clinical relevance of relationships. RESULTS: Eighty-four AYAs completed HRQOL surveys during RT and 94 post-RT. In the during-RT cohort, 75 AYAs (89%) had acute RT-related toxicities, a majority of which were grade 1 (n = 49, 65%). AYAs who experienced acute grade 2 or greater toxicities reported worse global mental health (B = -7.35, P < .01) and worse pain (B = 5.25, P = .01) than those with acute grade 1 or no toxicities. In the post-RT cohort, the median (IQR) time from RT to survey completion was 24 (14-27) months. Forty-eight AYAs (51%) had late RT-related toxicities, a majority of which were grade 1 (n = 37, 77%). AYAs who experienced late grade 2 or greater toxicities reported worse global mental health (B = -8.07, P = .01), worse social roles (B = -9.96, P < .01), and greater sleep disturbance (B = 10.75, P < .01) than those with late grade 1 or no RT toxicities. CONCLUSION: The presence of acute and late grade 2 or greater RT-related toxicities may contribute to worse HRQOL, especially global mental health, in AYAs. Screening and early interventions to mitigate RT-related toxicities are needed to improve AYA HRQOL.

Patient-reported quality of life in adolescents and young adults with cancer who received radiation therapy.

BACKGROUND: Radiation therapy (RT) is a common treatment for adolescents and young adults (AYAs, 15-39 years old) with cancer; however, it may cause toxicities that affect health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL). Thus, we assessed HRQOL in AYAs before, during, and after RT. METHODS: We identified 265 AYAs who completed HRQOL PROMIS® surveys before (n = 87), during (n = 84), or after (n = 94) RT. Higher PROMIS® score represents more of the concept. Mean scores were compared to the general US population and minimally important differences (MIDs) were used to evaluate the impact of cancer on HRQOL. Linear regression modeling was used to evaluate the effect of clinical and demographic factors on PROMIS scores. RESULTS: Median [IQR] age was 26 [20-31] years. Cancer types varied; most had sarcoma (26%) or CNS malignancy (23%). Compared to the general US population, the before RT cohort had worse anxiety (mean score 55.2 vs. 50, MID 3, p < 0.001) and the during RT cohort had worse global physical health (mean score 44.9 vs. 50, MID 5, p < 0.001). In the during RT cohort, patients with regional/distant disease had significantly worse pain (B = 15.94, p < 0.01) and fatigue (B = 14.20, p = 0.01) than patients with localized disease. In the after RT cohort, adolescents (15-18 years) and young adults (26-39 years) had worse global physical health (B = -6.87, p < 0.01, and B = -7.87, p < 0.01, respectively) and global mental health (B = -6.74, p < 0.01, and B = -5.67, p = 0.01, respectively) than emerging adults (19-25 years). CONCLUSIONS: AYAs with cancer receiving RT experience impairments in various domains of HRQOL. Advanced cancer stage may contribute to poorer short-term HRQOL and developmental stage may contribute to differing long-term HRQOL.

Health-related quality of life in adolescents and young adults with cancer who received radiation therapy: a scoping review.

PURPOSE: Radiation therapy (RT) is a critical component of treatment for adolescents and young adults (AYAs, age 15-39 years old) diagnosed with cancer. Limited prior studies have focused on AYAs receiving RT despite the potentially burdensome effects of RT. We reviewed the literature to assess health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in AYAs with cancer who received RT. METHODS: The MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases were searched in January 2022 to identify studies that analyzed HRQOL measured by patient-reported outcomes in AYAs who received RT. After title (n = 286) and abstract (n = 58) screening and full-text review (n = 19), articles that met eligibility criteria were analyzed. RESULTS: Six studies were analyzed. Two studies included AYAs actively receiving treatment and all included patients in survivorship; time between diagnosis and HRQOL data collection ranged from 3 to > 20 years. Physical and mental health were commonly assessed (6/6 studies) with social health assessed in three studies. AYA-relevant HRQOL needs were rarely assessed: fertility (1/6 studies), financial hardship (1/6), body image (0/6), spirituality (0/6), and sexual health (0/6). No study compared HRQOL between patients actively receiving RT and those post-treatment. None of the studies collected HRQOL data longitudinally. CONCLUSION: HRQOL data in AYAs receiving RT is limited. Future studies examining longitudinal, clinician- vs. patient-reported, and AYA-relevant HRQOL are needed to better understand the unique needs in this population.

Implementation and Assessment of an Informal Virtual Elective for Medical Student Radiation Oncology Exploration During the COVID19 Pandemic: a Brief Report.

Subspecialty exposure during medical school can be limited. Moreover, the COVID19 pandemic prevented most onsite elective medical student (MS) rotations during 2020. Therefore, we sought to create and assess the efficacy of an informal virtual elective (IVE) for MSs to explore radiation oncology (RO) at our institution. We created IVE activities including invitations to resident didactics, a faculty lecture series, and interactive virtual events with residents and faculty. MSs were offered RO resident and faculty mentors and the opportunity to deliver a lecture. Pre- and post-IVE evaluation surveys were sent to 27 4th year MSs. Surveys utilized importance ordering (1=most important; reported as median (interquartile range), free response, and Likert-type questions (5 = extremely, 1=not at all). Our IVE, held from July to October 2020, had a median of 11 students (range 7-18) attend each activity. Pre- and post-IVE surveys were completed by 22/27 (81%) and 20/27 (74%) MSs, respectively. In pre-IVE, MSs reported participating in the IVE for faculty/resident interaction (1.5 [1, 2]), networking (3 [2, 3]), and learning (4 [3-5]). In post-IVE, MSs reported benefit from faculty mentors (5 [4, 5]), delivering a presentation (5 [3-5]), and faculty lectures (4.5 [4, 5]). In post-IVE, MSs preferred a full onsite away elective (16, 80%) over an official virtual elective (1, 5%) or IVE (3, 15%). Overall, MSs reported that the IVE provided an adequate introduction to RO at our institution (4 [4, 5]). Alternative virtual elective experiences allow MSs to informally evaluate medical subspecialties and could be offered even if formal elective opportunities are available.

Assessment of Lymphoma and Other Hematologic Malignancies Training Needs Among Radiation Oncology Residents: a Brief Report.

The role of radiation therapy (RT) varies across hematologic malignancies (HM). Radiation oncology (RO) resident comfort with specific aspects of HM patient management is unknown. The International Lymphoma RO Group (ILROG) assessed resident HM training opportunities and interest in an HM away elective. RO residents (PGY2-5) in the Association of Residents in RO (ARRO) database (n = 572) were emailed an anonymous, web-based survey in January 2019 including binary, Likert-type scale (1 = not at all, 5 = extremely, reported as median [interquartile range]), and multiple-choice questions. Of 134 resident respondents (23%), 86 (64%) were PGY4/5 residents and 36 (27%) were in larger programs (≥ 13 residents). Residents reported having specialized HM faculty (112, 84%) and a dedicated HM rotation (95, 71%). Residents reported "moderate" preparedness to advocate for RT in multidisciplinary conferences (3 [2-3]); make HM-related clinical decisions (3 [2-4]); and critique treatment planning (3 [2-4]). They reported feeling "moderately" to "quite" prepared to contour HM cases (3.5 [3-4]) and "quite" prepared to utilize the PET-CT five-point scale (4 [3-5]). Overall, residents reported feeling "moderately" prepared to treat HM patients (3 [2-3]); 24 residents (23%) felt "quite" or "extremely" prepared. Sixty-six residents (49%) were potentially interested in an HM away elective, commonly to increase comfort with treating HM patients (65%). Therefore, HM training is an important component of RO residency, yet a minority of surveyed trainees felt quite or extremely well prepared to treat HM patients. Programs should explore alternative and additional educational opportunities to increase resident comfort with treating HM patients.