UNASSIGNED: The European Society for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO) Advisory Committee for Radiation Oncology Practice (ACROP) panel on prostate bed delineation reflected on macroscopic local recurrences in patients referred for postoperative radiotherapy (PORT), a challenging situation without standardized approach, and decided to propose a consensus recommendation on target volume selection and definition.
UNASSIGNED: An ESTRO ACROP contouring consensus panel consisting of 12 radiation oncologists and one radiologist, all with subspecialty expertise in prostate cancer, was established. Participants were asked to delineate the prostate bed clinical target volumes (CTVs) in two separate clinically relevant scenarios: a local recurrence at the seminal vesicle bed and one apically at the level of the anastomosis. Both recurrences were prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-avid and had an anatomical correlate on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Participants also answered case-specific questionnaires addressing detailed recommendations on target delineation. Discussions via electronic mails and videoconferences for final editing and consensus were performed.
UNASSIGNED: Contouring of the two cases confirmed considerable variation among the panelists. Finally, however, a consensus recommendation could be agreed upon. Firstly, it was proposed to always delineate the entire prostate bed as clinical target volume and not the local recurrence alone. The panel judged the risk of further microscopic disease outside of the visible recurrence too high to safely exclude the rest of the prostate bed from the CTV. A focused, \"stereotactic\" approach should be reserved for re-irradiation after previous PORT. Secondly, the option of a focal boost on the recurrence was discussed.
UNASSIGNED: Radiation oncologists are increasingly confronted with macroscopic local recurrences visible on imaging in patients referred for postoperative radiotherapy. It was recommended to always delineate and irradiate the entire prostate bed, and not the local recurrence alone, whatever the exact location of that recurrence. Secondly, specific dose-escalation on the macroscopic recurrence should only be considered if an anatomic correlate is visible. Such a focal boost is probably feasible, provided that OAR constraints are prioritized. Possible dose is also dependent on the location of the recurrence. Its potential benefit should urgently be investigated in prospective clinical trials.

UNASSIGNED: Radiotherapy to the prostate bed is a potentially curative salvage option after radical prostatectomy. Although prostate bed contouring guidelines are available in the literature, important variabilities exist. The objective of this work is to provide a contemporary consensus guideline for prostate bed delineation for postoperative radiotherapy.
UNASSIGNED: An ESTRO-ACROP contouring consensus panel consisting of 11 radiation oncologists and one radiologist, all with known subspecialty expertise in prostate cancer, was established. Participants were asked to delineate the prostate bed clinical target volumes (CTVs) in 3 separate clinically relevant scenarios: adjuvant radiation, salvage radiation with PSA progression, and salvage radiation with persistently elevated PSA. These cases focused on the presence of positive surgical margin, extracapsular extension, and seminal vesicles involvement. None of the cases had radiographic evidence of local recurrence on imaging. A single computed tomography (CT) dataset was shared via FALCON platform and contours were performed using EduCaseTM software. Contours were analyzed qualitatively using heatmaps which provided a visual assessment of controversial regions and quantitatively analyzed using Sorensen-Dice similarity coefficients. Participants also answered case-specific questionnaires addressing detailed recommendations on target delineation. Discussions via electronic mails and videoconferences for final editing and consensus were performed.
UNASSIGNED: The mean CTV for the adjuvant case was 76 cc (SD = 26.6), salvage radiation with PSA progression was 51.80 cc (SD = 22.7), and salvage radiation with persistently elevated PSA 57.63 cc (SD = 25.2). Compared to the median, the mean Sorensen-Dice similarity coefficient for the adjuvant case was 0.60 (SD 0.10), salvage radiation with PSA progression was 0.58 (SD = 0.12), and salvage radiation with persistently elevated PSA 0.60 (SD = 0.11). A heatmap for each clinical scenario was generated. The group agreed to proceed with a uniform recommendation for all cases, independent of the radiotherapy timing. Several controversial areas of the prostate bed CTV were identified based on both heatmaps and questionnaires. This formed the basis for discussions via videoconferences where the panel achieved consensus on the prostate bed CTV to be used as a novel guideline for postoperative prostate cancer radiotherapy.
UNASSIGNED: Variability was observed in a group formed by experienced genitourinary radiation oncologists and a radiologist. A single contemporary ESTRO-ACROP consensus guideline was developed to address areas of dissonance and improve consistency in prostate bed delineation, independent of the indication.There is important variability in existing contouring guidelines for postoperative prostate bed (PB) radiotherapy (RT) after radical prostatectomy. This work aimed at providing a contemporary consensus guideline for PB delineation. An ESTRO ACROP consensus panel including radiation oncologists and a radiologist, all with known subspecialty expertise in prostate cancer, delineated the PB CTV in 3 scenarios: adjuvant RT, salvage RT with PSA progression, and salvage RT with persistently elevated PSA. None of the cases had evidence of local recurrence. Contours were analysed qualitatively using heatmaps for visual assessment of controversial regions and quantitatively using Sorensen-Dice coefficient. Case-specific questionnaires were also discussed via e-mails and videoconferences for consensus. Several controversial areas of the PB CTV were identified based on both heatmaps and questionnaires. This formed the basis for discussions via videoconferences. Finally, a contemporary ESTRO-ACROP consensus guideline was developed to address areas of dissonance and improve consistency in PB delineation, independent of the indication.

Evidence on the efficacy of postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) in low-intermediate risk squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity (OSCC) remains inconclusive. Members of a task force from two national radio-oncology Associations (AIRO and GORTEC) defined 14 clinically relevant questions to identify \"gray areas\" pertinent to the indication for PORT in this clinical setting. Consequently, a literature review was performed on the topic. The resulting statements were then rated by an Expert Panel (EP) using a modified Delphi method. Only radiation oncologists were part of the discussion and voting on the scenarios. There was agreement on the 14 statements at the first round of voting. The task force then decided to propose clinical cases for the two more controversial statements that had received a lower agreement to better capture the Experts\' attitudes. The clinical cases highlighted a more significant decisional heterogeneity. However, the good level of consensus reached among the two Associations gives relevant support in informing clinical choices while acknowledging general indications cannot fit all clinical situations and do not replace multidisciplinary discussion.

Head and neck reconstructive surgery using a flap is increasingly common. Best practices and outcomes for postoperative radiotherapy (poRT) with flaps have not been specified. We aimed to provide consensus recommendations to assist clinical decision-making highlighting areas of uncertainty in the presence of flaps.
Radiation, medical, and surgical oncologists were assembled from GORTEC and internationally with the Head and Neck Cancer International Group (HNCIG). The consensus-building approach covered 59 topics across four domains: (1) identification of postoperative tissue changes on imaging for flap delineation, (2) understanding of tumor relapse risks and target volume definitions, (3) functional radiation-induced deterioration, (4) feasibility of flap avoidance.
Across the 4 domains, international consensus (median score ≥ 7/9) was achieved only for functional deterioration (73.3%); other consensus rates were 55.6% for poRT avoidance of flap structures, 41.2% for flap definition and 11.1% for tumor spread patterns. Radiation-induced flap fibrosis or atrophy and their functional impact was well recognized while flap necrosis was not, suggesting dose-volume adaptation for the former. Flap avoidance was recommended to minimize bone flap osteoradionecrosis but not soft-tissue toxicity. The need for identification (CT planning, fiducials, accurate operative report) and targeting of the junction area at risk between native tissues and flap was well recognized. Experts variably considered flaps as prone to tumor dissemination or not. Discrepancies in rating of 11 items among international reviewing participants are shown.
International GORTEC and HNCIG-endorsed recommendations were generated for the management of flaps in head and neck radiotherapy. Considerable knowledge gaps hinder further consensus, in particular with respect to tumor spread patterns.

BACKGROUND: The types of patients with gastric adenocarcinoma (GA) for whom postoperative radiotherapy can improve the disease-specific survival rate (DSS) remain controversial. This study aims to explore the ideal indications.
METHODS: Patients in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database with T3-4Nx or TxN+ GA from January 1988 to December 2012 were included and divided into a postoperative chemoradiotherapy group (Group R) and a postoperative chemotherapy group (Group C). We established a nomogram to predict DSS and then divided entire patient cohort into low-risk and high-risk groups based on the DSS predicted by the nomogram.
RESULTS: The Cox multiple regression analysis demonstrated that various risk factors affected DSS for Group R. Based on these risk factors, a nomogram for predicting DSS was established. The decision curve indicated that the best clinical effect could be obtained when the threshold probability was 0-58%. The patients were then divided into low-risk (< 69 points) and high-risk (≥ 69 points) groups according to the five-year DSS predicted. DSS was significantly better for Group R than for Group C for high-risk patients (P < 0.001) but was similar for low-risk patients (P = 0.732).
CONCLUSIONS: At present, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines may include an overly broad range of indications for postoperative radiotherapy for patients with GA. For intestinal GA patients with a postoperative pathologic stage of T1 N1 who are younger than 65 years, have had more than 15 lymph nodes dissected, and have received postoperative chemotherapy, postoperative radiotherapy should not be recommended.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the referral rate to radiation oncologist (RO), use of postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) and the impact of a clinical practice guideline (CPG) on patients with atypical meningioma (AM).
METHODS: A retrospective review of meningioma patients (n=526) treated between 2003 and 2013 was undertaken. Patients\' characteristics, extent of surgical resection (EOR), RO referral, PORT, date and treatment of first recurrence were collected for all patients >18 years with a new diagnosis of AM after surgical resection (n=83). Progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) according to EOR were assessed by the Log-Rank test of Kaplan-Meier survival.
RESULTS: Median age was 57 years. EOR was gross total (GTR) in 44 patients, subtotal (STR) in 36 patients and 3 patients had unknown EOR. RO referral rate was 26.5% (n=22); 5 patients initially had GTR and 17 had STR. Only 7 patients received PORT. At a median follow up time of 29 months, recurrences occurred in 28 patients, 4 had GTR, 21 had STR and 3 had an unknown EOR. With PORT, 2 patients developed recurrence. 5-year PFS was 62% after GTR and 33% after STR (P=0.002). 5-year OS was 92% after GTR and 83% after STR (P=0.45).
CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort with AM, RO referral rate was low and was not influenced by the CPG. Use of PORT was also low. Given the lack of conclusive evidence supporting PORT in such patients, a multidisciplinary approach, including RO consultation, is needed to provide patients with optimal and individualised care.

Debate continues surrounding the indications for adjuvant and salvage radiotherapy as the published randomized trials have only addressed adjuvant treatment. Salvage radiotherapy has been advocated to limit significant toxicity to patients that would not have benefited from immediate adjuvant radiotherapy. The American Urological Association and American Society for Radiation Oncology guideline released in 2013 has since recommended offering adjuvant therapy to all patients with any adverse features and salvage to those with prostate-specific antigen or local recurrence. The suggested criteria is limited in its application as it potentially subjects patients with few adverse features to adjuvant therapy despite not qualifying as high risk according to established postoperative predictive tools such as the Kattan nomogram. This article reviews the indications for postoperative radiotherapy, limitations of the guideline and alternative prognostication tools for clinicians faced with biochemical or locally recurrent post-prostatectomy prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Surgery followed by radiotherapy (RT) is indicated for patients with high-risk oral cavity cancer (OCC). Based on multi-institutional reports, we developed a guideline for postoperative RT for patients with OCC.
METHODS: A multidisciplinary OCC team was recruited to develop a questionnaire concerning details of risk-factor categorization, target delineation, and dose specification. Thirty-one radiation oncologists from 18 institutions completed the questionnaire, and data were subjected to extensive review to establish the guideline by expert meeting. In this study, we also report the results for patients treated in accordance with the guideline at our institution between 2007 and 2011.
RESULTS: Forty-one patients received RT compatible with this guideline with a median 26.8-month follow-up. Thirty-two patients (78%) remained disease-free, 6 (15%) developed locoregional recurrence (4 in-field, 1 marginal, and 1 out-field) and 4 (10%) developed distant metastasis. The overall 2-year survival rate was 86.7%.
CONCLUSIONS: This guideline is promising and should be validated and refined in further clinical practice.