Moderately hypofractionated post-operative radiation therapy for breast cancer: preferences amongst radiation oncologists from countries in Latin America and the Caribbean.

Background: The safety and effectiveness of moderately hypofractionated post-operative radiation therapy for breast cancer were demonstrated by several trials. This study aimed to evaluate the current patterns of practice and prescription preference about moderately hypofractionated post-operative radiation therapy to assess possible aspects that affect the decision-making process regarding the use of fractionation in breast cancer patients in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). We also aimed to identify factors that can restrain the utilization of moderately hypofractionated post-operative radiation therapy for breast cancer. Materials an methods: Radiation oncologists from LAC were invited to contribute to this study. A 38-question survey was used to evaluate their opinions. Results: A total of 173 radiation oncologists from 13 countries answered the questionnaire. The majority of respondents (84.9%) preferred moderately hypofractionated post-operative radiation therapy as their first choice in cases of whole breast irradiation. Whole breast plus regional nodal irradiation, post-mastectomy (chest wall and regional nodal irradiation) without reconstruction, and post-mastectomy (chest wall and regional node irradiation) with reconstruction hypofractionated post-operative radiation therapy was preferred by 72.2% 71.1%, and 53.7% of respondents, respectively. Breast cancer stage, and flap-based breast reconstruction were the factors associated with absolute contraindications for the use of hypofractionated schedules. Conclusion: Even though moderately hypofractionated post-operative radiation therapy for breast cancer is considered a new standard to the vast majority of the patients, its unrestricted application in clinical practice across LAC still faces reluctance.

Leveling Up the Access to Radiation Therapy in Latin America: Economic Analysis of Investment, Equity, and Inclusion Opportunities Up to 2030.

PURPOSE: Latin America faces a shortage in radiation therapy (RT) units and qualified personnel for timely and high-quality treatment of patients with cancer. Investing in equitable and inclusive access to RT over the next decade would prevent thousands of deaths. Measuring the investment gap and payoff is necessary for stakeholder discussions and capacity planning efforts. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Data were collected from the International Atomic Energy Agency's Directory of Radiotherapy Centers, industry stakeholders, and individual surveys sent to national scientific societies. Nationwide data on available devices and personnel were compiled. The 10 most common cancers in 2020 with RT indication and their respective incidence rates were considered for gap calculations. The gross 2-year financial return on investment was calculated based on an average monthly salary across Latin America. A 10-year cost projection was calculated according to the estimated population dynamics for the period until 2030. RESULTS: Eleven countries were included in the study, accounting for 557,213,447 people in 2020 and 561 RT facilities. Approximately 1,065,684 new cancer cases were diagnosed, and a mean density of 768,469 (standard deviation ±392,778) people per available unit was found. By projecting the currently available treatment fractions to determine those required in 2030, it was found that 62.3% and 130.8% increases in external beam RT and brachytherapy units are needed from the baseline, respectively. An overall regional investment of approximately United States (US) $349,650,480 in 2020 would have covered the existing demand. An investment of US $872,889,949 will be necessary by 2030, with the expectation of a 2-year posttreatment gross return on investment of more than US $2.1 billion from patients treated in 2030 only. CONCLUSIONS: Investment in RT services is lagging in Latin America in terms of the population's needs. An accelerated outlay could save additional lives during the next decade, create a self-sustaining system, and reduce region-wide inequities in cancer care access. Cash flow analyses are warranted to tailor precise national-level intervention strategies.

Ethnic difference in risk of toxicity in prostate cancer patients treated with dynamic arc radiation therapy.

AIMS AND BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to assess the influence of ethnicity on toxicity in patients treated with dynamic arc radiation therapy (ART) for prostate cancer (PC). METHODS: From June 2006 to May 2012, 162 cT1-T3 cN0 cM0 PC patients were treated with ART (primary diagnosis, n = 125; post-prostatectomy/brachytherapy biochemical recurrence, n = 26; adjuvant post-prostatectomy, n = 11) at 2 institutions. Forty-five patients were Latin Americans and 117 were Europeans. The dose prescribed to the prostate ranged between 68 Gy and 81 Gy. RESULTS: The median age was 69 years (range 43-87 years). The median follow-up was 18 months (range 2-74 months). Overall, only 3 patients died, none due to a cancer-related cause. Biochemical recurrence was seen in 7 patients. The rates of acute grade 2 gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicities were 19.7% and 17%, respectively. Only 1 patient experienced acute grade 3 GI toxicity, whereas 11 patients (6.7%) experienced acute grade 3 GU toxicity. Multivariate analysis showed that undergoing whole pelvic lymph node irradiation was associated with a higher grade of acute GI toxicity (OR: 3.46; p = 0.003). In addition, older age was marginally associated with a higher grade of acute GI toxicity (OR: 2.10; p = 0.074). Finally, ethnicity was associated with acute GU toxicity: Europeans had lower-grade toxicity (OR: 0.27; p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest an ethnic difference in GU toxicity for PC patients treated with ART. In addition, we found that ART is associated with a very low risk of severe toxicity and a low recurrence rate.

Evidence based radiation oncology with existing technology.

AIM: To assess the real contribution of modern radiation therapy (RT) technology in the more common tumoral types in Central America, Caribbean and South America. BACKGROUND: RT is an essential tool in the management of cancer. RT can be either palliative or of curative intent. In general, for palliative radiotherapy, major technologies are not needed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed the contribution of RT technology based on published evidence for breast, lung, gastric, gallbladder, colorectal, prostate and cervix cancer in terms of disease control, survival or toxicity with especial focus on Latin America. RESULTS: Findings indicate that three dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D RT) is the gold standard in most common type of cancer in the studied regions. Prostate cancer is probably the pathology that has more benefits when using new RT technology such as intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) versus 3DRT in terms of toxicity and biochemical progression-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: In light of the changes in technology, the ever-increasing access of developing countries to such technology, and its current coverage in Latin America, any efforts in this area should be aimed at improving the quality of the radiotherapy departments and centers that are already in place.

Hypofractionated helical tomotherapy using 2.5-2.6 Gy daily fractions for localized prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the tolerability of hypofractionated helical tomotherapy (HT) in the treatment of localized prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated 48 patients with primary adenocarcinoma of the prostate (cT1-T3N0M0) who were treated with hypofractionated HT from August 2008 through July 2011. Hypofractionated regimens included: 68.04 Gy at 2.52 Gy/fraction, 70 Gy at 2.5 Gy/fraction, and 70.2 Gy at 2.6 Gy/fraction. Genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity was scored using the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group scoring system. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients were treated with 68.04 Gy, 5 patients with 70 Gy, and 11 with 70.2 Gy. The median age at diagnosis was 69 years (range 49-87) and the median follow-up 11 months (range 7-40). Grade 2 acute GI toxicity occurred in 9 patients (19 %). No grade 3 or higher acute GI toxicity was observed. Grade 2 and 3 acute GU toxicities occurred in 19 and 6 % of patients, respectively. The incidence of late grade 2 GI and GU toxicity was 4 and 2 %, respectively. No grade 3 or higher late toxicities were observed. Multivariate analysis showed that patients treated at 2.6 Gy/fraction or those who received a total radiation dose ≥70 Gy had higher rates of grade ≥2 acute GU toxicity (P = 0.004 and P = 0.048, respectively). CONCLUSION: Hypofractionated HT in the treatment of localized prostate cancer is well tolerated with no grade 3 or higher early or late GI and GU toxicities. Further research is needed to assess definitive late toxicity and tumor control.

New perspectives in radiation oncology: Young radiation oncologist point of view and challenges.

AIM: To assess the role of the young radiation oncologist in the context of important recent advancements in the field of radiation oncology, and to explore new perspectives and competencies of the young radiation oncologist. BACKGROUND: Radiation oncology is a field that has rapidly advanced over the last century. It holds a rich tradition of clinical care and evidence-based practice, and more recently has advanced with revolutionary innovations in technology and computer science, as well as pharmacology and molecular biology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Several young radiation oncologists from different countries evaluated the current status and future directions of radiation oncology. RESULTS: For young radiation oncologists, it is important to reflect on the current practice and future directions of the specialty as it relates to the role of the radiation oncologist in the comprehensive management of cancer patients. Radiation oncologists are responsible for the radiation treatment provided to patients and its subsequent impact on patients' quality of life. Young radiation oncologists must proactively master new clinical, biological and technical information, as well as lead radiation oncology teams consisting of physicists, dosimetrists, nurses and technicians. CONCLUSIONS: The role of the young radiation oncologist in the field of oncology should be proactive in developing new competencies. Above all, it is important to remember that we are dealing with the family members and loved ones of many individuals during the most difficult part of their lives.