ABSTRACT
Introduction: Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has been found to be an effective and safe modality with excellent oncological outcome in medically inoperable primary renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and oligometastases. There is scarcity of data on the synchronous delivery of SBRT to primary and oligometastatic RCC in patients unfit for nephrectomy. Here, we report the findings of a retrospective study of prospectively collected data on "total ablative SBRT." Methods: Oligometastatic RCC patients with intact primary tumors were enrolled between May 2021 and June 2022. SBRT was synchronously delivered to the primary tumor and metastases. Demographics, treatment, oncologic outcomes, and toxicity were assessed. Kaplan-Meier estimates were generated for oncologic outcomes. The primary endpoint of this study was feasibility and tolerability. Results: Eleven patients were enrolled between May 2021 and June 2022. One patient died at 2 months after SBRT due to viral pneumonitis (possibly COVID pneumonia). Nine patients (82%) had metastatic disease, while 2 (18%) were stage II. The average maximal diameter of primary was 68.7 mm (range, 23-128 mm). The SBRT doses for primary and metastasis ranged from 40 to 55 Gray (Gy) in 5 to 7 fractions and 22 to 40Gy in 2 to 5 fractions, respectively. The median follow-up period was 10.5 months (Range: 4-15 months). Response assessment was available for ten patients. Local control, marginal control, regional control and initial oligometastatic control (OMC) rates were 100%. OMC declined to 87.5% as one patient had recurrence in irradiated subcarinal lymphnode at 7 months. The metastatic control rate was 80% and loco-regional progression-free survival was 8 months (range, 4-15 months). Toxicities were minimal and manageable. At the last follow-up, 7 of 11 patients were alive with an overall survival of 63.5%. Six patients received systemic therapy after SBRT. Conclusions: Synchronous delivery of SBRT to primary and oligometastatic sites in patients unfit for nephrectomy was feasible and tolerable with good locoregional control. The total ablative SBRT strategy needs to be explored in similar cohorts.
ABSTRACT
Purpose: This survey aimed to understand the practice pattern and attitude of Indian doctors towards prostate brachytherapy. Material and methods: A 21-point questionnaire was designed in Google form and sent to radiation oncologists practicing in India, using texts, mails, and social media. Responses were collated, and descriptive statistical analysis was performed. Results: A total of 212 radiation oncologists from 136 centers responded to the survey questionnaire, with majority (66%) being post-specialty training > 6 years. We found that about 44.3% (n = 94) of respondents do not practice interstitial brachytherapy for any site, and majority (83.3%, n = 175) do not practice high-dose-rate (HDR) prostate brachytherapy. Only 2.8% (n = 6) of doctors preferred boost by brachytherapy compared with 38.1% (n = 80) of respondents, who favored stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) boost. When asked about the indication of HDR prostate brachytherapy in Indian setting, 32.5% (n = 67) of respondents favored monotherapy, 46.1% (n = 95) of oncologists thought boost as a good indication, and 21.4% (n = 44) preferred re-irradiation/salvage setting. The most cited reason for prostate brachytherapy not being popularly practiced in India was lack of training (84.8%, n = 179). It was also noted that out of 80 respondents who practiced SBRT for prostate boost, 37 would prefer HDR brachytherapy boost if given adequate training and facilities. Conclusions: The present survey provided insight on practice of prostate brachytherapy in India. It is evident that majority of radiation oncologists do not practice HDR prostate brachytherapy due to lack of training and infrastructure. Indian physicians are willing to learn and start prostate brachytherapy procedures if dedicated training and workshops are organized.
ABSTRACT
Treatment of head and neck cancers (HNCs) involves radiotherapy. Patients undergoing radiotherapy for HNCs are prone to dental complications. Radiotherapy to the head and neck region causes xerostomia and salivary gland dysfunction which dramatically increases the risk of dental caries and its sequelae. Radiation therapy (RT) also affects the dental hard tissues increasing their susceptibility to demineralization following RT. Postradiation caries is a rapidly progressing and highly destructive type of dental caries. Radiation-related caries and other dental hard tissue changes can appear within the first 3 months following RT. Hence, every effort should be focused on prevention to manage patients with severe caries. This can be accomplished through good preoperative dental treatment, frequent dental evaluation and treatment after RT (with the exception of extractions), and consistent home care that includes self-applied fluoride. Restorative management of radiation caries can be challenging. The restorative dentist must consider the altered dental substrate and a hostile oral environment when selecting restorative materials. Radiation-induced changes in enamel and dentine may compromise bonding of adhesive materials. Consequently, glass ionomer cements have proved to be a better alternative to composite resins in irradiated patients. Counseling of patients before and after radiotherapy can be done to make them aware of the complications of radiotherapy and thus can help in preventing them.