Influence of Dexamethasone Premedication on Acute Lung Toxicity in Lung SBRT.

Introduction: The cooperative group experience of thoracic sterotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in medically inoperable patients with early stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) historically utilized corticosteroid premedication. Patterns of care have been mixed as to whether premedication adds benefit in terms of improved lung toxicity and treatment tolerance. Methods: Patients treated for NSCLC from 2014 to 2017 with definitive thoracic SBRT (BED10≥100) at a single institution, in a prospectively collected database were evaluated. Pretreatment clinicopathologic characteristics, including Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, PFT parameters of FEV1, and diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO) were collected. Treatment and dosimetric characteristics were collected, and patients were scored as to whether dexamethasone was prescribed and utilized with each fraction. Toxicity was graded on multiple domains including lung as during and 30 days after completion of treatment using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Version 4. Univariate analysis was performed with Fisher's exact test for categorical variables and two-tailed Student's t-test for continuous variables. Multivariate analysis was performed with Cox proportional hazards model to adjust for age, pretreatment DLCO, ECOG, tumor size, central versus peripheral location, and biological effective dose. Results: A total of 86 patients treated with thoracic SBRT with 54-60 Gy in 3-8 fractions met inclusion criteria, with the majority (70%) receiving 5 fractions. Of these patients, 45 (52%) received 4 mg dexamethasone premedication prior to each fraction of SBRT and 41 (48%) were treated without dexamethasone premedication. Overall acute lung toxicity was low in both groups. Between the two groups of patients, 5/45 (11%) developed grade 2 or higher lung toxicity including hospital admission in the dexamethasone premedication arm vs. 2/41 (5%) without premedication (p = 0.4370, Fisher's exact test). Freedom from acute SBRT lung toxicity was no different between dexamethasone premedication arm and no premedication (Log rank, p = 0.45). On multivariate Cox proportional hazard modeling adjusting for age, ECOG, tumor size, central vs. peripheral location, pretreatment DLCO, and BED, there was no difference in freedom from acute lung toxicity without dexamethasone premedication (HR: 0.305; 95% CI: 0.033, 2.792; p = 0.293). Conclusions: In this retrospective analysis, pretreatment steroid prophylaxis with dexamethasone confers a similar acute toxicity profile and no added clinical benefit to treatment without pretreatment steroid prophylaxis.

Is Radiation Therapy Cost-Effective in the Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography Era for Early-Stage Favorable Hodgkin Lymphoma With Alternative Payment Models?

PURPOSE: Despite multiple randomized trials, variation in practice remains regarding the most effective treatment for early-stage, favorable-risk Hodgkin lymphoma. With increasing emphasis on alternative payment models, we investigate the cost-effectiveness of chemotherapy alone versus combined modality therapy (CMT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: A Markov model was formed to compared 2 cycles of adriamycin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD) to 2 cycles of ABVD followed by 20 Gy in 10 fractions involved-site radiation therapy. Modalities were compared using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, with effectiveness measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and evaluated with a willingness to pay a threshold of $100,000 per QALY gained. RESULTS: The base case analysis showed that CMT is cost-effective compared with ABVD alone, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $8028 per QALY gained and an incremental cost of $236 gaining 0.029 QALYs. On sensitivity analyses, the results were the most sensitive to changes in recurrence rates. If the recurrence rate differences were ≥6%, CMT was cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: CMT is a cost-effective strategy for early-stage, favorable-risk Hodgkin lymphoma based on currently available evidence. However, small variations in recurrence-rate estimates dramatically affect strategy cost-effectiveness.

Radiation Toxicity in Patients With Collagen Vascular Disease: A Meta-Analysis of Case-Control Studies.

PURPOSE: Several retrospective series have reported that patients with collagen vascular disease (CVD) are at increased risk of radiation (RT) toxicity. However, the evidence is mixed, and many series lack control groups. We performed a meta-analysis including only case-cohort or randomized studies that examined the risk of RT toxicity for patients with CVD compared with controls. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines were used to perform a comprehensive search identifying case-control or randomized studies reporting RT toxicity outcomes for patients with CVD versus controls. Data were synthesized from studies reporting grade 2 to 3 or more (G2/3 +) acute and late RT toxicities. Results were analyzed with fixed effects meta-analysis on the random-effects model for between-study heterogeneity; otherwise, the fixed-effects model was used. Hazard ratio or odds ratio (OR) were the effect-size estimators, as appropriate. RESULTS: Ten studies were included, with 4028 patients (CVD: 406, control: 3622). Patients with CVD had higher rates of acute G2/3 + toxicity (26.2% vs 16.5%, OR [odds ratio] 2.01; P < .001) and late G2/3 + toxicity (18.4% vs 10.1%, OR 2.37; P < .001). Higher rates of late G2/3 + toxicity were observed for CVD patients with systemic lupus erythematous (21% vs 9.7%; OR 2.55, P = .03), systemic scleroderma (31.8% vs 9.7%, OR 3.85; P = .03), rheumatoid arthritis (11.7% vs 8.4%, OR = 2.56; P = .008), and those irradiated to the pelvis/abdomen (32.2% vs 11.9%, OR 3.29; P = .001), breast (14.7% vs 4.4%, OR 3.51; P = .003), thorax (12.5% vs 8.7%, OR 3.46; P < .001), and skin (14.6% vs 5.2%, OR 2.59; P = .02). Late grade 5 toxicities were significantly higher for patients with CVD, although absolute rates were low (3.9% vs 0.6%, OR = 7.81; P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Moderate and severe toxicities are more likely in patients with CVD, with variable risk depending on toxicity grade, CVD subtype, treatment site, and dose. Severe toxicities are uncommon. These factors should be considered when informing patients of treatment-related risks and monitoring for morbid treatment sequelae.

Intraoperative Radiation Therapy Versus Whole Breast Radiation for Early-Stage Breast Cancer Treatment in Rural Appalachia.

BACKGROUND: Intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) is an alternate accelerated form of radiation following breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Lack of data regarding long-term outcomes has limited adoption. We report our experience with IORT in patients undergoing BCS versus whole breast radiation therapy (WBRT). METHODS: Retrospective review of patients undergoing BCS with IORT versus WBRT (2012-2017). Inclusion: low grade, T1-2N0M0, estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor positive, and Her2-negative infiltrating ductal carcinomas. IORT was delivered as a single fraction of radiation (20 Gy) intraoperatively. Outcomes were compared using Fisher's test for discrete variables or Wilcoxon signed-rank test for continuous variables. Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: Fifty-one patients (44%) received IORT, and 66 (56%) received WBRT. There was no difference in age, tumor size, receptor status, or in-breast recurrence (1.9% vs 0%, all P > .05). Length of follow-up was longer in the WBRT group due to time to inception of IORT (mean ± SD: 44 ± 8.1 vs 73 ± 13 months, P < .001). There was no difference in DFS between the 2 groups (HR 2.5; P = .44). IORT patients experienced delay to BCS (mean ± SD: 38 ± 12.7 vs 27 ± 12.2 days, P < .001) likely due to coordination of care. Analysis demonstrated IORT patients would have traveled a mean distance of 20 miles to the closest WBRT center (range 1-70, miles) for a mean travel time of 31 minutes (range 4-90, minutes) per WBRT treatment. DISCUSSION: IORT produces noninferior oncologic outcomes and decreased skin toxicity compared with WBRT. It can be convenient for patients in rural regions with limited health care access.