Ablative radiotherapy for ultracentral lung cancers: Dosimetric, geometric, and volumetric predictors of outcomes and toxicity.

BACKGROUND: Ultracentral lung cancers arise near the proximal bronchial tree (PBT), trachea, or esophagus, and have been associated with worse outcomes and increased toxicity after radiotherapy. We sought to associate dosimetric and anatomic factors with oncologic outcomes and toxicities. METHODS: One-hundred ten patients treated with ablative, curative-intent radiotherapy for ultracentral, node-negative, non-small cell lung cancer were included. Dosimetric and geometric data obtained using custom software that calculated volumes of target structures and organs-at-risk and measured the shortest vector length between these volumes were associated with outcomes and toxicity. RESULTS: Common dose/fractionation schemes included 50 Gy in 5 fractions (57%), 60 Gy in 8 fractions (15%), and 48 Gy in 4 fractions (13%). Overall survival at 1, 2, and 5 years was 78%, 57%, and 32%, respectively. Factors significantly associated with death included endobronchial tumor, gross tumor volume (GTV) or planning target volume (PTV) contacting PBT, shorter distance from GTV to PBT or esophagus, volume of PBT receiving prescription dose, higher pericardium max dose, lung V20Gy, and mean lung dose. Local progression at 1, 2, and 5 years was 4%, 16%, and 21%. Factors associated with local progression were lower GTV minimum dose and higher GTV/PTV volume ratio. Acute and late grade 2 + toxicity was seen in 18% and 27%, respectively. Four patients (4%) had fatal toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Lower GTV minimum dose and smaller volumetric PTV expansions may increase risk of local progression, and should be balanced against normal tissue doses including pericardium maximum dose, lung V20Gy, and mean lung dose.

Surgery for Mesothelioma After Radiation Therapy (SMART); A Single Institution Experience.

Background: The optimal treatment sequence for localized malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is controversial. We aimed to assess outcomes and toxicities of treating localized MPM with neoadjuvant radiation therapy (RT) followed by extrapleural pneumonectomy (EPP). Methods: Patients were enrolled on an institutional protocol of surgery for mesothelioma after radiation therapy (SMART) between June 2016 and May 2017. Eligible patients were adults with MPM localized to the ipsilateral pleura. Patients underwent staging with PET/CT, pleuroscopy, bronchoscopy/EBUS, mediastinoscopy, and laparoscopy. Five fractions of RT were delivered using intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), with 30 Gy delivered to gross disease and 25 Gy to the entire pleura. EPP was performed 4-10 days following completion of RT. Results: Five patients were treated on protocol. Median age was 62 years (range 36-66). Histology was epithelioid on initial biopsy in all patients, but one was found to have biphasic histology after surgery. Three patients had surgeon-assessed gross total resection, and two had gross residual disease. While all patients were clinically node negative by pretreatment staging, three had positive nodal disease at surgery. Patients were hospitalized for a median 24 days (range 5-69) following surgery. Two patients developed empyema, one of whom developed respiratory failure and subsequently renal failure requiring dialysis, while the other required multiple surgical debridements. Two patients developed atrial fibrillation with rapid ventricular response after surgery, one of whom developed acute respiratory distress requiring intubation and tracheostomy. At last follow-up, one patient died at 1.4 years after local and distant progression, two were alive with local and distant progression, and the remaining two were alive without evidence of disease at 0.1 and 2.7 years. Median time to progression was 9 months. Three patients received salvage chemotherapy. Conclusions: SMART provided promising oncologic outcomes at the cost of significant treatment related morbidity. Due to the significant treatment associated morbidity and favorable treatment alternatives, we have not broadly adopted SMART at our institution.