OBJECTIVE: The main objective of this study was to assess inter- and intrafraction errors for two patient immobilisation devices in the context of lung stereotactic body radiation therapy: a vacuum cushion and a simple arm support.
METHODS: Twenty patients who were treated with lung stereotactic body radiation therapy in supine position with arms above their head were included in the study. Ten patients were setup in a vacuum cushion (Bluebag™, Elekta) and ten other patients with a simple arm support (Posirest™, Civco). A pretreatment four-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography and a post-treatment three-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography were acquired to compare positioning and immobilisation accuracy. Based on a rigid registration with the planning computed tomography on the spine at the target level, translational and rotational errors were reported.
RESULTS: The median number of fractions per treatment was 5 (range: 3-10). Mean interfraction errors based on 112 four-dimensional cone-beam computed tomographies were similar for both setups with deviations less than or equal to 1.3mm in lateral and vertical direction and 1.2° in roll and yaw. For longitudinal translational errors, mean interfraction errors were 0.7mm with vacuum cushion and -3.9mm with arm support. Based on 111 three-dimensional cone-beam computed tomographies, mean lateral, longitudinal and vertical intrafraction errors were -0.1mm, -0.2mm and 0.0mm respectively (SD: 1.0, 1.2 and 1.0mm respectively) for the patients setup with vacuum cushion, and mean vertical, longitudinal and lateral intrafraction errors were -0.3mm, -0.7mm and 0.1mm respectively (SD: 2.3, 1.8 and 1.4mm respectively) for the patients setup with arm support. Intrafraction errors means were not statistically different between both positions but standard deviations were statistically larger with arm support.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study showed similar inter and intrafraction mean deviations between both positioning but a large variability in intrafraction observed with arm support suggested a more accurate immobilization with vacuum cushion.

BACKGROUND: Chemoradiotherapy with high-dose cisplatin (HD-Cis: 100 mg/m2 q3w for three cycles) is the standard of care (SOC) in locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (LA-HNSCC). Cumulative delivered dose of cisplatin is prognostic of survival, even beyond 200 mg/m2 but high toxicity compromises its delivery.
OBJECTIVE: Cisplatin fractionation may allow, by decreasing the peak serum concentration, to decrease toxicity. To date, no direct comparison was done of HD-Cis versus fractionated high dose cisplatin (FHD-Cis).
METHODS: This is a multi-institutional randomized phase II trial, stratified on postoperative or definitive chemoradiotherapy, comparing HD-Cis to FHD-Cis (25 mg/m2/d d1-4 q3w for 3 cycles) in patients with LA-HNSCC. The primary endpoint was the cumulative delivered cisplatin dose.
RESULTS: Between December 2015 and April 2018, 124 patients were randomized. Median cisplatin cumulative delivered dose was 291 mg/m2 (IQR: 251;298) in the FHD-Cis arm and 274 mg/m2 (IQR: 198;295) in the HD-Cis arm (P = 0.054). The proportion of patients receiving a third cycle of cisplatin was higher, with a lower proportion of grade 3-4 acute AEs in the FHD-Cis arm compared to the HD-Cis arm: 81 % vs. 64 % (P = 0.04) and 10 % vs. 17 % (P = 0.002), respectively. With a median follow-up of 48 months (IQR: 41;55), locoregional failure rate, PFS and OS were similar between the two arms.
CONCLUSIONS: Although the primary endpoint was not met, FHD-Cis allowed more cycles of cisplatin to be delivered with lower toxicity, when compared to SOC. FHD-Cis concurrently with RT is a treatment option which deserves further consideration.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.NRG Oncology RTOG 0415 is a randomized phase III noninferiority (NI) clinical trial comparing conventional fractionation (73.8 Gy in 41 fractions) radiotherapy (C-RT) with hypofractionation (H-RT; 70 Gy in 28) in patients with low-risk prostate cancer. The study included 1,092 protocol-eligible patients initially reported in 2016 with a median follow-up of 5.8 years. Updated results with median follow-up of 12.8 years are now presented. The estimated 12-year disease-free survival (DFS) is 56.1% (95% CI, 51.5 to 60.5) for C-RT and 61.8% (95% CI, 57.2 to 66.0) for H-RT. The DFS hazard ratio (H-RT/C-RT) is 0.85 (95% CI, 0.71 to 1.03), confirming NI (P < .001). Twelve-year cumulative incidence of biochemical failure (BF) was 17.0% (95% CI, 13.8 to 20.5) for C-RT and 9.9% (95% CI, 7.5 to 12.6) for H-RT. The HR (H-RT/C-RT) comparing biochemical recurrence between the two arms was 0.55 (95% CI, 0.39 to 0.78). Late grade ≥3 GI adverse event (AE) incidence is 3.2% (C-RT) versus 4.4% (H-RT), with relative risk (RR) for H-RT versus C-RT 1.39 (95% CI, 0.75 to 2.55). Late grade ≥3 genitourinary (GU) AE incidence is 3.4% (C-RT) versus 4.2% (H-RT), RR 1.26 (95% CI, 0.69 to 2.30). Long-term DFS is noninferior with H-RT compared with C-RT. BF is less with H-RT. No significant differences in late grade ≥3 GI/GU AEs were observed between assignments (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00331773).

The usefulness of moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer has been extensively reported, but there are limited studies on proton beam therapy (PBT) using similar hypofractionation schedules. The aim of this prospective phase II study is to confirm the safety of a shortened PBT course using 70 Gy relative biological effectiveness (RBE) in 28 fractions. From May 2013 to June 2015, 102 men with localized prostate cancer were enrolled. Androgen deprivation therapy was administered according to risk classification. Toxicity was assessed using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0. Of the 100 patients ultimately evaluated, 15 were classified as low risk, 43 as intermediate risk, and 42 as high risk. The median follow-up time of the surviving patients was 96 months (range: 60-119 months). The 5-year cumulative incidences of grade 2 gastrointestinal/genitourinary adverse events were 1% (95% CI: 0.1-6.9) and 4% (95% CI: 1.5-10.3), respectively; no grade ≥ 3 gastrointestinal/genitourinary adverse events were observed. The current study revealed a low incidence of late adverse events in prostate cancer patients treated with moderately hypofractionated PBT of 70 Gy (RBE) in 28 fractions, indicating the safety of this schedule.

The effectiveness of single-fraction 8-Gy radiotherapy for painful bone metastases has been verified in numerous randomized controlled trials. However, few reports have described the effectiveness of single-fraction 8-Gy radiotherapy in painful tumors other than bone metastases. We conducted a retrospective analysis to evaluate the pain response to single-fraction 8-Gy radiotherapy in painful non-bone-metastasis tumors. We included patients who had received single-fraction 8-Gy radiotherapy for such tumors between January 2017 and December 2022, excluding those with brain metastases, hematological tumors and those who received re-irradiation. Pain response assessment was based on the best responses documented in the medical records and conducted by two radiation oncologists. A total of 36 eligible patients were included in this study. The irradiation sites included primary lesions in eight patients, lymph node metastases in eight, muscle metastases in seven, pleural dissemination in four, skin/subcutaneous metastases in four and other sites in five. Pain response was assessed in 24 patients after radiotherapy. Pain response rate was 88% in evaluable patients; 21 of the 24 patients experienced response. The median assessment date for pain response was 37 days (range: 8-156 days) after radiotherapy. Re-irradiation was performed in four patients (11%). Single-fraction 8-Gy radiotherapy seemed to be a promising treatment option for painful non-bone-metastasis tumors and warrants further investigation.

OBJECTIVE: Concerns over chest wall toxicity has led to debates on treating tumors adjacent to the chest wall with single-fraction stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR). We performed a secondary analysis of patients treated on the prospective iSABR trial to determine the incidence and grade of chest wall pain and modeled dose-response to guide radiation planning and estimate risk.
METHODS: This analysis included 99 tumors in 92 patients that were treated with 25 Gy in one fraction on the iSABR trial which individualized dose by tumor size and location. Toxicity events were prospectively collected and graded based on the CTCAE version 4. Dose-response modeling was performed using a logistic model with maximum likelihood method utilized for parameter fitting.
RESULTS: There were 22 grade 1 or higher chest wall pain events, including five grade 2 events and zero grade 3 or higher events. The volume receiving at least 11 Gy (V11Gy) and the minimum dose to the hottest 2 cc (D2cc) were most highly correlated with toxicity. When dichotomized by an estimated incidence of ≥ 20 % toxicity, the D2cc > 17 Gy (36.6 % vs. 3.7 %, p < 0.01) and V11Gy > 28 cc (40.0 % vs. 8.1 %, p < 0.01) constraints were predictive of chest wall pain, including among a subset of patients with tumors abutting or adjacent to the chest wall.
CONCLUSIONS: For small, peripheral tumors, single-fraction SABR is associated with modest rates of low-grade chest wall pain. Proximity to the chest wall may not contraindicate single fractionation when using highly conformal, image-guided techniques with sharp dose gradients.

OBJECTIVE: To compare patient discomfort and immobilisation performance of open-face and closed immobilization masks in cranial radiotherapy.
METHODS: This was a single-center randomized self-controlled clinical trial. At CT simulation, an open-face and closed mask was made for each patient and treatment plans with identical dose prescription were generated for each mask. Patients were randomised to start treatment with an open-face or closed mask. Masks were switched halfway through the treatment course; every patient was their own control. Patients self-reported discomfort, anxiety and pain using the visual analogue scale (VAS). Inter- and intrafraction set-up variability was measured with planar kV imaging and a surface guided radiotherapy (SGRT) system for the open-face masks.
RESULTS: 30 patients with primary or metastatic brain tumors were randomized - 29 completed radiotherapy to a median total dose of 54 Gy (range 30-60 Gy). Mean discomfort VAS score was significantly lower with open-face masks (0.5, standard deviation 1.0) vs. closed masks (3.3, standard deviation 2.9), P < 0.0001. Anxiety and pain VAS scores were significantly lower with open-face masks (P < 0.0001). Closed masks caused more discomfort in infraorbital (P < 0.001) and maxillary (P = 0.02) areas. Two patients and 27 patients preferred closed or open-face masks, respectively. Interfraction longitudinal shifts and roll and yaw rotations were significantly smaller and lateral shifts were significantly larger with closed masks in combination with the laser system (P < 0.05) compared to open masks in combination with a SGRT system. Intrafraction variability did not differ between the masks.
CONCLUSIONS: Open-face masks are associated with decreased patient discomfort without compromising patient positioning and immobilisation accuracy.

OBJECTIVE: This multicenter randomized phase III trial evaluated whether locoregional control of patients with LAHNSCC could be improved by fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography (FDG-PET)-guided dose-escalation while minimizing the risk of increasing toxicity using a dose-redistribution and scheduled adaptation strategy.
METHODS: Patients with T3-4-N0-3-M0 LAHNSCC were randomly assigned (1:1) to either receive a dose distribution ranging from 64-84 Gy/35 fractions with adaptation at the 10thfraction (rRT) or conventional 70 Gy/35 fractions (cRT). Both arms received concurrent three-cycle 100 mg/m2cisplatin. Primary endpoints were 2-year locoregional control (LRC) and toxicity. Primary analysis was based on the intention-to-treat principle.
RESULTS: Due to slow accrual, the study was prematurely closed (at 84 %) after randomizing 221 eligible patients between 2012 and 2019 to receive rRT (N = 109) or cRT (N = 112). The 2-year LRC estimate difference of 81 % (95 %CI 74-89 %) vs. 74 % (66-83 %) in the rRT and cRT arm, respectively, was not found statistically significant (HR 0.75, 95 %CI 0.43-1.31,P=.31). Toxicity prevalence and incidence rates were similar between trial arms, with exception for a significant increased grade ≥ 3 pharyngolaryngeal stenoses incidence rate in the rRT arm (0 versus 4 %,P=.05). In post-hoc subgroup analyses, rRT improved LRC for patients with N0-1 disease (HR 0.21, 95 %CI 0.05-0.93) and oropharyngeal cancer (0.31, 0.10-0.95), regardless of HPV.
CONCLUSIONS: Adaptive and dose redistributed radiotherapy enabled dose-escalation with similar toxicity rates compared to conventional radiotherapy. While FDG-PET-guided dose-escalation did overall not lead to significant tumor control or survival improvements, post-hoc results showed improved locoregional control for patients with N0-1 disease or oropharyngeal cancer treated with rRT.

OBJECTIVE: To present the outcome and toxicity results of a prospective trial of 21 Gy single fraction high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy for men with low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer.
METHODS: Patients were treated according to an IRB-approved prospective study of single fraction HDR brachytherapy. Eligible patients had low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer with tumor stage ≤ T2b, PSA ≤ 15, and Gleason score ≤ 7. Patients underwent trans-rectal ultrasound-guided trans-perineal implant of the prostate followed by single fraction HDR brachytherapy to a dose of 21 Gy. The primary endpoint was grade ≥ 2 urinary/GI toxicity rates.
RESULTS: Twenty-six patients were enrolled with a median follow up of 5.1 years and median age of 64 years. 88.5% of patients had T1 disease, 15.4% had Gleason score 6 (84.6% Gleason 7), and median pre-treatment PSA was 5.0 ng/mL. Acute and chronic grade ≥ 2 urinary toxicity rates were 38.5% and 38.5%, respectively. There were no grade ≥ 2 acute or chronic GI toxicities. Six (23.1%) patients experienced biochemical failure, six (23.1%) patients experienced radiographic local failure, and five (19.2%) patients had biopsy-proven local failure. No patients developed regional lymph node recurrence or distant metastasis. 5-year overall survival and cause-specific survival were 96.2% and 100%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: 21 Gy single fraction HDR brachytherapy was associated with modestly higher-than-anticipated chronic urinary toxicity, as well as high biochemical and local failure rates. The results from this prospective pilot study do not support the use of this regimen in standard clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Optimal dose and fractionation in stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for oligometastatic cancer patients remain unknown. In this interim analysis of OligoCare, we analyzed factors associated with SBRT dose and fractionation.
METHODS: Analysis was based on the first 1,099 registered patients. SBRT doses were converted to biological effective doses (BED) using α/β of 10 Gy for all primaries, and cancer-specific α/β of 10 Gy for non-small cell lung and colorectal cancer (NSCLC, CRC), 2.5 Gy for breast cancer (BC), or 1.5 Gy for prostate cancer (PC).
RESULTS: Of the interim analysis population of 1,099 patients, 999 (99.5 %) fulfilled inclusion criteria and received metastasis-directed SBRT for NSCLC (n = 195; 19.5 %), BC (n = 163; 16.3 %), CRC (n = 184; 18.4 %), or PC (n = 457; 47.5 %). Two thirds of patients were treated for single metastasis. Median number of fractions was 5 (IQR, 3-5) and median dose per fraction was 9.7 (IQR, 7.7-12.4) Gy. The most frequently treated sites were non-vertebral bone (22.8 %), lung (21.0 %), and distant lymph node metastases (19.0 %). On multivariate analysis, the dose varied significantly for primary cancer type (BC: 237.3 Gy BED, PC 300.6 Gy BED, and CRC 84.3 Gy BED), and metastatic sites, with higher doses for lung and liver lesions.
CONCLUSIONS: This real-world analysis suggests that SBRT doses are adjusted to the primary cancers and oligometastasis location. Future analysis will address safety and efficacy of this site- and disease-adapted SBRT fractionation approach (NCT03818503).