European Society For Radiotherapy And Oncology Research Articles

Analyzing the performance of ChatGPT in answering inquiries about cervical cancer.

To analyze the knowledge of ChatGPT about cervical cancer (CC). Official websites of professional health institutes, and websites created by patients and charities underwent strict screening. Using CC-related keywords, common inquiries by the public and comments about CC were searched in social media applications with these data, a list of frequently asked questions (FAQs) was prepared. When preparing question about CC, the European Society of Gynecological Oncology (ESGO), European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO), and European Society of Pathology (ESP) guidelines were used. The answers given by ChatGPT were scored according to the Global Quality Score (GQS). When all ChatGPT answers to FAQs about CC were evaluated with regard to GQS, 68 ChatGPT answers were classified as score 5, and none of ChatGPT answers for FAQs were scored as 2 or 1. Moreover, ChatGPT answered 33 of 53 (62.3%) CC-related questions based on ESGO, ESTRO, and ESP guidelines with completely accurate and satisfactory responses (GQS 5). In addition, eight answers (15.1%), seven answers (13.2%), four answers (7.5%), and one answer (1.9%) were categorized as GQS 4, GQS 3, GQS 2, and GQS 1, respectively. The reproducibility rate of ChatGPT answers about CC-related FAQs and responses about those guideline-based questions was 93.2% and 88.7%, respectively. ChatGPT had an accurate and satisfactory response rate for FAQs about CC with regards to GQS. However, the accuracy and quality of ChatGPT answers significantly decreased for questions based on guidelines.

Staging for endometrial carcinoma FIGO 2023 and its relevance for clinical practice.

International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (Fédération Internationale de Gynécologie et d'Obstétrique - FIGO) introduced a new staging system for endometrial carcinoma - FIGO 2023 - in June 2023. The new staging system differs significantly from previous versions. The new system represents a significant departure from the traditional staging systems for other gynaecological cancers, as the definition of individual stages includes not only the traditional anatomical extent of the tumour, but also the molecular profile of the tumour and other histopathological parameters - histological type of tumour, tumour grade and the presence of substantial lymphovascular invasion. The new system defines stages I and II in a completely different way and expands the definition of stages III and IV, allowing for different types of tumour spread outside the uterus. The introduction of molecular testing is the main change in the new staging system. When certain molecular markers are detected, stage I or II is completely changed. By including these non-anatomical parameters, the FIGO 2023 staging system improves the accuracy of a patient's prognosis at a specific stage with better options for individualized treatment, including the use of immunotherapy. Another goal was to synchronise staging as much as possible with the recommendations of three professional societies: the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) and the European Society of Pathology (ESP). The staging system for carcinosarcoma remains identical to the staging system for endometrial cancer. This article presents an overview of the new FIGO 2023 endometrial cancer staging system and discusses its advantages and disadvantages for clinical practice.

Re-irradiation practice and ESTRO/EORTC consensus recommendations: 2023 ASTRO education panel.

Indications for re-irradiation are increasing both for palliation and potentially curative attempts to achieve durable local control. This has been in part driven by the technological advances in the last decade including image-guided brachytherapy, volumetric-modulated arc therapy and stereotactic body radiotherapy. These enable high dose focal irradiation to be delivered to a limited target volume with minimal normal tissue re-irradiation. The European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) have collaboratively developed a comprehensive consensus on re-irradiation practices, aiming to standardise definitions, reporting, and clinical decision-making processes. The document introduces a universally applicable definition for re-irradiation, categorised into two primary types based on the presence of geometric overlap of irradiated volumes and concerns for cumulative dose toxicity. It also identifies "repeat organ irradiation" and "repeat irradiation" for cases without such overlap, emphasising the need to consider toxicity risks associated with cumulative doses. Additionally, the document presents detailed reporting guidelines for re-irradiation studies, specifying essential patient and tumour characteristics, treatment planning and delivery details, and follow-up protocols. These guidelines are designed to improve the quality and reproducibility of clinical research, thus fostering a more robust evidence base for future re-irradiation practices. The consensus underscores the necessity of interdisciplinary collaboration and shared decision-making, highlighting performance status, patient survival estimates, and response to initial radiotherapy as critical factors in determining eligibility for re-irradiation. It advocates for a patient-centric approach, with transparent communication about treatment intent and potential risks. Radiobiological considerations, including the application of the linear-quadratic model, are recommended for assessing cumulative doses and guiding re-irradiation strategies. By providing these comprehensive recommendations, the ESTRO-EORTC consensus aims to enhance the safety, efficacy, and quality of life for patients undergoing re-irradiation, while paving the way for future research and refinement of treatment protocols in the field of oncology.

Stage IV nonsmall cell lung cancer treatment: oligometastatic disease and disease progression, untangling the knot.

Stage IV nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a heterogeneous group of patients for whom systemic therapy is decided based on tumour-biological cancer features (histology, PD-L1 expression, genomic alteration, metastatic sites) and patient characteristics (performance status, comorbidities). In most instances, some kind of systemic treatment is proposed, for which immunotherapy-based or targeted therapies are considered the standards of care in 2024. Oligometastatic NSCLC represents a specific concept during the biological spectrum from localised to metastatic disease in which only a limited number of metastatic sites can be documented. Based on this assumption, prospective and a few randomised phase II studies have been performed, which suggested that adding a local ablative treatment to the systemic one can be a new option for selected stage IV NSCLC. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) and the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) supported efforts to define oligometastatic NSCLC to unify the semantics within the thoracic oncology community. This article summarises the currently available data and emphasises the questions and perspectives in oligometastatic disease NSCLC in European patient cohorts.

Role of the gel spacer in safely delivering whole pelvic radiation therapy without central shielding in computed tomography-based image-guided adaptive brachytherapy for uterine cervical cancer patients

BackgroundTo protect the rectum and bladder from high dose exposure, the Japanese guidelines for managing uterine cervical carcinoma recommend pelvic irradiation with central shielding (CS). Conversely, the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) and the American Brachytherapy Society (ABS) guidelines recommend delivering ≥ 85 Gy to high-risk clinical target volume D90 (CTVHR D90%). In this study, we investigated whether a gel spacer can enable the safe delivery of the ESTRO/ABS-recommended doses to the target while observing dose constraints for the OARs without using CS in external beam radiation therapy (EBRT). Materials and MethodsTwenty patients who received definitive radiation therapy without CS and were treated by brachytherapy with a gel spacer between April 2017 and May 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. The cumulative doses of EBRT and brachytherapy expressed in the form of the equivalent dose in 2 Gy fractions (EQD2) were calculated. Treatment outcomes and incidence of adverse events were also examined. ResultsThe median cumulative CTVHR D90%, rectum D2cm3, and bladder D2cm3 were 86.6 Gy (range, 69.8–103.7), 62.9 Gy (range, 55.3–72.5), and 72.0 Gy (range, 62.9–84.1), respectively. The median follow-up was 35.9 months (range, 10.9–70.3). The 2-year local control rate was 95% (95% CI: [69–99%]). There were no CTCAE ≥Grade 3 late gastrointestinal or genitourinary adverse events. ConclusionsThe use of gel spacer can enable ESTRO/ABS-recommended dose constraints even without using CS in EBRT, with favorable outcomes and low adverse event rates.

Prognostic Factors of Oligometastasis After Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy: The Real-World Utility of the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology/European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Classification.

The efficacy of local therapy for oligometastatic disease (OMD) remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the prognostic utility of the classification system for OMD and explore which groups may benefit from stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). This single-center retrospective study included 45 patients (52 sites) with solid tumors and 1-3 extracranial oligometastases who underwent SBRT for all metastases at our institution between January 2018 and December 2021. OMD states were classified based on the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) classification system. Local control (LC), overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS) for each group were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Acute and late adverse events (AEs) were evaluated according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 5.0. The median follow-up period was 14 months (range: 0-48 months). The numbers of patients in the de novo (first diagnosis of OMD), repeat (previous history of OMD), and induced (previous history of polymetastatic disease) OMD groups were 15, 17, and 13, respectively. The LC rates at one year for the entire, de novo, repeat, and induced cohorts were 87.2%, 87.5%, 90.2%, and 83.9%, respectively (p=0.80). The one-year PFS rates for each group were 35.0%, 56.7%, and 29.9%, respectively (p=0.58). The one-year OS rates for each group were 80.0%, 86.2%, and 80.8%, respectively (p=0.50). Grade 2 or 3 AEs occurred in five patients (10.4%). No grade 4 or 5 AEs were observed. SBRT is safe and highly effective for local control. Patients with repeat OMD demonstrated a trend of longer PFS, suggesting that this subgroup may benefit from local therapy at metastatic sites.

RTT advanced practice and how it can change the future of radiotherapy

The radiation therapy (RT) landscape is continuously evolving, necessitating adaptation in roles and responsibilities of radiation therapists (RTTs). Advanced Practice Radiation Therapists (APRTs) have taken on a proactive role in expanding services and assuming responsibilities within multi-professional teams.A European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) brought geographically diverse and experienced RTTs together, to discuss how advanced practice (AP) in the RTT profession should be future-proofed and create a global platform for collaboration. Challenges in achieving consensus and standardisation of APRT was identified across jurisdictions, emphasising the importance of international collaboration.Whilst highlighting the pivotal role of APRTs in driving innovation, improving patient care, and navigating the complexities of modern RT practice, this position paper presents outcomes and recommendations from the workshop. Discussions highlighted the need for standardised role definitions, education frameworks, regulatory support, and career development pathways to enable the advancement of APRT effectively. Increasing networks and collaboration is recommended to ensure APRTs can shape the future of RT.

Professional development through mentoring: Final evaluation of the pilot mentoring programme of the European society of radiotherapy and oncology

The European SocieTy for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) organized a one-year pilot mentoring programme. At evaluation after one year, both mentors and mentees scored the programme with a median score of 9 on a scale of 10. All of the mentors indicated that they wanted to participate again as mentors.

ESTRO-SIOPE guideline: Clinical management of radiotherapy in atypical teratoid/rhabdoid tumors (AT/RTs)

Background and purposeTreatment of patients with atypical teratoid/rhabdoid (AT/RT) is challenging, especially when very young (below the age of three years). Radiotherapy (RT) is part of a complex trimodality therapy. The purpose of this guideline is to provide appropriate recommendations for RT in the clinical management of patients not enrolled in clinical trials. Materials and methodsNine European experts were nominated to form a European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) guideline committee. A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE and Web of Science. They discussed and analyzed the evidence concerning the role of RT in the clinical management of AT/RT. ResultsRecommendations on diagnostic imaging, therapeutic principles, RT considerations regarding timing, dose, techniques, target volume definitions, dose constraints of radiation-sensitive organs at risk, concomitant chemotherapy, and follow-up were considered. Treating children with AT/RT within the framework of prospective trials or prospective registries is of utmost importance. ConclusionThe present guideline summarizes the evidence and clinical-based recommendations for RT in patients with AT/RT. Prospective clinical trials and international, large registries evaluating modern treatment approaches will contribute to a better understanding of the best treatment for these children in future.

The Role of Imaging in Cervical Cancer Staging: ESGO/ESTRO/ESP Guidelines (Update 2023).

Following the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO), and the European Society of Pathology (ESP) joint guidelines (2018) for the management of patients with cervical cancer, treatment decisions should be guided by modern imaging techniques. After five years (2023), an update of the ESGO-ESTRO-ESP recommendations was performed, further confirming this statement. Transvaginal/transrectal ultrasound (TRS/TVS) or pelvic magnetic resonance (MRI) enables tumor delineation and precise assessment of its local extent, including the evaluation of the depth of infiltration in the bladder- or rectal wall. Additionally, both techniques have very high specificity to confirm the presence of metastatic pelvic lymph nodes but fail to exclude them due to insufficient sensitivity to detect small-volume metastases, as in any other currently available imaging modality. In early-stage disease (T1a to T2a1, except T1b3) with negative lymph nodes on TVS/TRS or MRI, surgicopathological staging should be performed. In all other situations, contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) or 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography combined with CT (PET-CT) is recommended to assess extrapelvic spread. This paper aims to review the evidence supporting the implementation of diagnostic imaging with a focus on ultrasound at primary diagnostic workup of cervical cancer.

Utility of Clinical-Pathological Parameters for Exclusion of BRCA1/2 Mutation Carriers as Candidates for Partial Breast Irradiation

Several international groups have published guidelines to identify low-risk breast cancer (BC) patients who are eligible for partial breast irradiation (PBI). These include the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO), and ESTRO subgroups such as the Intraoperative radiation (IORT) Task Force and Groupe Européen de Curiethérapie (GEC) -ESTRO. Only ASTRO guidelines recommend against the use of PBI in known carriers of germline pathogenic variants (PVs) in BRCA1/2. The aim of this study was to evaluate the proportion of BC patients, subsequently found to be BRCA1/2 PV carriers who would be eligible for PBI based on clinical-pathologic criteria of the above-mentioned international guidelines. Data were extracted from the medical records of consecutive BC BRCA1/2 PV carriers treated at a single institution between 2006 and 2023. Data included patient demographics, tumor characteristics, treatment, and disease outcomes. Overall, 498 patients with 518 primary tumors were analyzed. Of these, 282 (12 of them with synchronous bilateral disease) presented with unknown genetic status at diagnosis and formed the study cohort. The median age at diagnosis was 42.7 years (range, 23.8-77.9). Based on the recent ASTRO guidelines (not including conditionally recommended criteria), 17 of 294 (5.8%) of the carriers had tumors that would be eligible for PBI, including 3 Her2-positive tumors and 5 patients diagnosed between ages 40 and 49 years. Using the ESTRO IORT and the ACROP-ESTRO PBI criteria, 9 of 294 (3%) would be eligible, whereas with the GEC-ESTRO low-risk criteria, 31 of 294 (10.5%) of the carriers would be eligible, and their intermediate risk criteria would increase eligibility for PBI by an additional 8.2% (overall 18.7%). Using clinical-pathologic criteria published in international guidelines, 3% to 18% of BRCA1/2 PV carriers will have tumors eligible for PBI. Therefore, especially in populations who are at high risk for being BRCA1/2 PV carriers, we recommend adhering to stricter guidelines. In our cohort, ASTRO, ESTRO-IORT, and ESTRO PBI had the lowest probability of identifying BRCA1/2 PV carriers as eligible for PBI.

Adjuvant medial versus entire supraclavicular lymph node irradiation in high-risk early breast cancer (SUCLANODE): a protocol for a multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial

BackgroundSupraclavicular nodal (SCL) irradiation is commonly used for patients with high-risk breast cancer after breast surgery. The Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) and European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) breast contouring atlases delineate the medial part of the SCL region, while excluding the posterolateral part. However, recent studies have found that a substantial proportion of SCL failures are located in the posterolateral SCL region, outside of the RTOG/ESTRO-defined SCL target volumes. Consequently, many radiation oncologists advocate for enlarging the SCL irradiation target volume to include both the medial and posterolateral SCL regions. Nevertheless, it remains uncertain whether adding the posterolateral SCL irradiation improves survival outcomes for high-risk breast cancer patients.MethodsThe SUCLANODE trial is an open-label, multicenter, randomized, phase 3 trial comparing the efficacy and adverse events of medial SCL irradiation (M-SCLI group) and medial plus posterolateral SCL irradiation (entire SCL irradiation, E-SCLI group) in high-risk breast cancer patients who underwent breast conserving-surgery or mastectomy. Patients with pathological N2-3b disease following initial surgery, or clinical stage III or pathological N1-3b if receiving neoadjuvant systemic therapy, are eligible and randomly assigned (1:1) to M-SCLI group and E-SCLI group. Stratification is by chemotherapy sequence (neoadjuvant vs. adjuvant), T stage (T3-4 vs. T1-2), N stage (N1-2 vs. N3), and ER status (positive vs. negative). Other radiation volumes are identical in the two arms, including breast/chest wall, undissected axillary lymph node, and internal mammary node. Advanced intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), or tomotherapy techniques are recommended. Both hypofractionated and conventional fractionation schedules are permitted. The primary end point is invasive disease-free survival, and secondary end points included overall survival, SCL recurrence, local-regional recurrence, distance recurrence, safety outcome, and patient-reported outcomes. The target sample size is 1650 participants.DiscussionThe results of the SUCLANODE trial will provide high-level evidence regarding whether adding posterolateral SCL irradiation to medial SCL target volume provides survival benefit in patients with high-risk breast cancer.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05059379. Registered 28 September 2021, https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05059379.

Oligometastatic Disease (OMD): The Classification and Practical Review of Prospective Trials.

Oligometastatic disease (OMD) is currently known as an intermediate state of cancer, characterized by a limited number of systemic metastatic lesions for which local ablative therapy could be curative. Indeed, data from multiple clinical trials have illustrated an increase in overall survival (OS) for cancer patients when local ablative therapy was included in the systemic adjuvant therapy. Given that no driver and somatic mutations specific to OMD are currently established, the diagnosis of OMD is mainly based on the results of X-ray studies. In 2020, 20 international experts from the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) developed a comprehensive system for the characterization and classification of OMD. They identified 17 OMD characteristics that needed to be assessed in all patients who underwent radical local treatment. These characteristics reflect the tumor biology and clinical features of the disease underlying the development of OMD independently of the primary tumor type and the number of metastatic lesions. In particular, the system involves the characteristics of the primary tumor (e.g., localization, histology, TNM stage, mutational status, specific tumor markers), clinical parameters (e.g., disease-free interval, treatment-free interval), therapies (e.g., local, radical or palliative treatment, the numbers of the therapeutic regimens), and type of OMD (e.g., invasive). Based on the aforementioned criteria, an algorithm was introduced into the clinic to classify OMDs collectively according to their nomenclature. A history of polymetastatic disease (PMD) prior to OMD is used as a criterion to delineate between induced OMD (previous history of PMD after successful therapy) and genuine OMD (no history of PMD). Genuine OMD is divided into two states: recurrent OMD (i.e., after a previous history of OMD) and de novo OMD (i.e., a first newly diagnosed oligometastatic disease). de novo OMD is differentiated into synchronous and metachronous forms depending on the length of time from the primary diagnosis to the first evidence of OMD. In the case of synchronous OMD, this period is less than 6 months. Lastly, metachronous and induced OMD are divided into oligorecurrence, oligoprogression, and oligopersistence, depending on whether OMD is firstly diagnosed during an absence (oligo recurrence) or presence (oligoprogression or oligopersistence) of active systemic therapy. This classification and nomenclature of OMD are evaluated prospectively in the OligoCare study. In this article, we present a practical review of the current concept of OMD and discuss the available prospective clinical trials and potential future directions.

Re-irradiation in clinical practice: Results of an international patterns of care survey within the framework of the ESTRO-EORTC E2-RADIatE platform

BackgroundRe-irradiation is an increasingly utilized treatment for recurrent, metastatic or new malignancies after previous radiotherapy. It is unclear how re-irradiation is applied in clinical practice. We aimed to investigate the patterns of care of re-irradiation internationally. Material/MethodsA cross-sectional survey conducted between March and September 2022. The survey was structured into six sections, each corresponding to a specific anatomical region. Participants were instructed to complete the sections of their clinical expertise. A total of 15 multiple-choice questions were included in each section, addressing various aspects of the re-irradiation process. The online survey targeted radiation and clinical oncologists and was endorsed by the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC). Results371 physicians from 55 countries across six continents participated. Participants had a median professional experience of 16 years, and the majority (60%) were affiliated with an academic hospital. The brain region was the most common site for re-irradiation (77%), followed by the pelvis (65%) and head and neck (63%). Prolonging local control was the most common goal (90–96% across anatomical regions). The most common minimum interval between previous radiotherapy and re-irradiation was 6–12 months (45–55%). Persistent grade 3 or greater radiation-induced toxicity (77–80%) was the leading contraindication. Variability in organs at risk dose constraints for re-irradiation was observed. Advanced imaging modalities and conformal radiotherapy techniques were predominantly used. A scarcity of institutional guidelines for re-irradiation was reported (16–19%). Participants from European centers more frequently applied thoracic and abdominal re-irradiation. Indications did not differ between academic and non-academic hospitals. ConclusionThis study highlights the heterogeneity in re-irradiation practices across anatomical regions and emphasizes the need for high-quality evidence from prospective studies to guide treatment decisions and derive safe cumulative dose constraints.

Dosimetric Comparison of Nodal Clinical Target Volume for Locally Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Options for Geometric Expansion vs. Lymph Node Stations

We investigated whether dosimetric differences existed in nodal clinical target volume (CTV) using options for geometric expansion and lymph node stations based on the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) guideline for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). With treatment planning computed tomographic images in 17 patients who underwent radiotherapy for cT4N2M0 NSCLC from 2017 to 2022 at our institution, we retrospectively contoured nodal CTVs based on the guideline's options of: (1) geometric expansion, CTV including the nodal gross tumor volume plus 5 mm margin: (2) lymph node stations, CTV including the affected lymph node stations. The 5 mm margins for planning target volume (PTV) were added to the nodal and primary tumors' CTVs. Treatment planning of 60 Gy in 30 fractions to the PTV D50% was performed using volumetric modulated arc therapy; Dn% was irradiated dose to n% of volume of the structure; VnGy was percentage of volume of the structure at least irradiated n Gy. We compared dose-volume parameters between the two options using Wilcoxon rank sum test. Primary tumors were located in the right and left lobes in 12 and five patients, and in the upper and lower lobes in 13 and four patients, respectively. Median PTV size/D95% of the options for geometric expansion and lymph node stations were 569 cc (range, 149-2005 cc)/58.2 Gy (range, 57.5-58.7 Gy) and 635 cc (range, 184-2109 cc)/58.1 Gy (range, 57.5-58.7 Gy), respectively. Median mean dose of the esophagus/heart in the two options were 12.2 Gy (range, 6.6-24.9 Gy)/3.3 Gy (range, 0.6-19.1 Gy) and 16.1 Gy (range, 13.6-30.5 Gy)/4.6 Gy (range, 0.7-18.9 Gy), respectively. Median V20 Gy/mean dose of the lungs in the options for geometric expansion and lymph node stations were 20.5% (range, 14.8-33.9%)/12.2 Gy (range, 8.7-18.4 Gy) and 24.0% (range, 15.1-36.7%)/13.5 Gy (range, 9.5-19.4 Gy), respectively. In the eight patients (47%) with lymph node metastases in stations 2 or 3, a significant dosimetric difference between the two options existed on V20 Gy of the lungs; median values of the difference were 2.8% and 0.5% with and without lymph node metastases in stations 2 or 3, respectively (p = 0.027). Of the ESTRO guideline for the nodal CTV, using the option for geometric expansion might be able to reduce V20 Gy of the lungs in patients with lymph node metastases in stations 2 or 3.

Generation and comparison of 3D dosimetric reference datasets for COMS eye plaque brachytherapy using model-based dose calculations.

A joint Working Group of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM), the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO), and the Australasian Brachytherapy Group (ABG) was created to aid in the transition from the AAPM TG-43 dose calculation formalism, the current standard, to model-based dose calculations. This work establishes the first test cases for low-energy photon-emitting brachytherapy using model-based dose calculation algorithms (MBDCAs). Five test cases are developed: (1) a single model 6711 125 I brachytherapy seed in water, 13 seeds (2) individually and (3) in combination in water, (4) the full Collaborative Ocular Melanoma Study (COMS) 16 mm eye plaque in water, and (5) the full plaque in a realistic eye phantom. Calculations are done with four Monte Carlo (MC) codes and a research version of a commercial treatment planning system (TPS). For all test cases, local agreement of MC codes was within ∼2.5% and global agreement was ∼2% (4% for test case 5). MC agreement was within expected uncertainties. Local agreement of TPS with MC was within 5% for test case 1 and ∼20% for test cases 4 and 5, and global agreement was within 0.4% for test case 1 and 10% for test cases 4 and 5. Dose distributions for each set of MC and TPS calculations are available online (https://doi.org/10.52519/00005) along with input files and all other information necessary to repeat the calculations. These data can be used to support commissioning of MBDCAs for low-energy brachytherapy as recommended by TGs 186 and 221 and AAPM Report 372. This work additionally lays out a sample framework for the development of test cases that can be extended to other applications beyond eye plaque brachytherapy.

European consensus-based interdisciplinary guideline for invasive cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma: Part 2. Treatment–Update 2023

In order to update recommendations on treatment, supportive care, education, and follow-up of patients with invasive cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC), a multidisciplinary panel of experts from the European Association of Dermato-Oncology (EADO), the European Dermatology Forum (EDF), the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO), the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS), the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV), and the European Organisation of Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) was formed. Recommendations were based on an evidence-based literature review, guidelines, and expert consensus. Treatment recommendations are presented for common primary cSCC (low risk, high risk), locally advanced cSCC, regional metastatic cSCC (operable or inoperable), and distant metastatic cSCC. For common primary cSCC, the first-line treatment is surgical excision with postoperative margin assessment or micrographically controlled surgery. Achieving clear surgical margins is the most important treatment consideration for patients with cSCCs amenable to surgery. Regarding adjuvant radiotherapy for patients with high-risk localised cSCC with clear surgical margins, current evidence has not shown significant benefit for those with at least one high-risk factor. Radiotherapy should be considered as the primary treatment for non-surgical candidates/tumours. For cSCC with cytologically or histologically confirmed regional nodal metastasis, lymph node dissection is recommended. For patients with metastatic or locally advanced cSCC who are not candidates for curative surgery or radiotherapy, anti-PD-1 agents are the first-line systemic treatment, with cemiplimab being the first approved systemic agent for advanced cSCC by the Food and Drugs Administration/European Medicines Agency. Second-line systemic treatments for advanced cSCC, include epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors (cetuximab) combined with chemotherapy or radiotherapy. Multidisciplinary board decisions are mandatory for all patients with advanced cSCC, considering the risks of toxicity, the age and frailty of patients, and co-morbidities, including immunosuppression. Patients should be engaged in informed, shared decision-making on management and be provided with the best supportive care to improve symptom management and quality of life. The frequency of follow-up visits and investigations for subsequent new cSCC depends on underlying risk characteristics.

European consensus-based interdisciplinary guideline for invasive cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma. Part 1: Diagnostics and prevention–Update 2023

Invasive cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) is one of the most common cancers in white populations, accounting for 20% of all cutaneous malignancies. Overall, cSCC mostly has very good prognosis after treatment, with 5-year cure rates greater than 90%. Despite the overall favourable prognosis and the proportionally rare deaths, cSCC is associated with a high total number of deaths due to its high incidence. A collaboration of multidisciplinary experts from the European Association of Dermato-Oncology (EADO), the European Dermatology Forum (EDF), the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO), the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS), the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) and the European Organization of Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC), was formed to update recommendations on cSCC, based on current literature and expert consensus. Part 1 of the guidelines addresses the updates on classification, epidemiology, diagnosis, risk stratification, staging and prevention in immunocompetent as well as immunosuppressed patients.

A dosimetric comparative study following RTOG and ESTRO contouring guidelines for breast radiation therapy

PurposeTo compare the dosimetric parameters considering the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) and European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) guidelines for breast cancer radiotherapy. Two radiotherapy techniques, intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT), were considered. Patients and methodsTwenty-eight patients with left-sided medially-located TanyN2M0 tumors were contoured based on RTOG and ESTRO guidelines. 9-field IMRT, 10-field IMRT, 11-field IMRT, and VMAT treatment plans were applied as radiotherapy (RT) techniques for both contouring sets. The dosimetric parameters of the RT plans were extracted and compared. ResultsComparing dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters, equivalent uniform dose (EUD), and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) of OARs across the contouring guidelines and considering each RT technique showed that the only significant differences were higher Dmax, Dmean, V30, and V45, EUD, and NTCP of the thyroid in all treatment modalities when the RTOG guideline had been adopted. Using the VMAT technique, PTV's EUD and the tumor control probability (TCP) were considerably higher when the ESTRO guideline was adopted. Moreover, the conformity index (CI) of VMAT plans was significantly higher when the ESTRO guideline was used. ConclusionUnless having higher doses to thyroid when the RTOG guideline was adopted, the doses to other organs-at-risk (OAR) were similar between the two considering guidelines. Moreover, except for higher EUD, TCP, and CI for VMAT when the ESTRO guideline was used, no other significant differences were obtained between dosimetric parameters of target volumes considering the RT techniques and contouring guidelines.

Seminal Vesicle Treatment for Localized Prostate Cancer Treated with External Beam Radiotherapy.

This study retrospectively reviewed data from men with localized prostate cancer treated with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). We identified 359 men with localized prostate cancer treated with curative EBRT at the Cross Cancer Institute between 2010-2011. The volume of seminal vesicles (SVs) treated as well as dose values were extracted. These volumes were compared to gold standard contours drawn by a trained expert based on consensus European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) contouring guidelines. Patient and tumor characteristics were extracted for these patients. Memorial Sloan Kettering prostate cancer nomogram was used to assign a predicted risk of SV involvement for each patient based on baseline tumor characteristics. In patients with a predicted risk of SV involvement greater than 15% (n = 184), 86.5% (SD = 18.6) of the base of the SVs were treated with EBRT, compared to 66.7% (SD = 32.6) for patients with a predicted risk of SV involvement less than 15% (n = 175, p < 0.0001). Similarly, the mean percentage of proximal and total SV volumes treated with EBRT was 75.6% (SD = 24.4) and 68.7% (SD = 26.0) for patients with a predicted risk of SV involvement of greater than 15%, compared to 50.3% (SD = 31.0, p < 0.0001) and 41.0% (SD = 27.8, p < 0.0001) for patients with a risk of less than 15%. The results indicate that all parts of the SVs are more likely to be contoured in men with >15% risk of SV involvement than those with <15% risk. However, radiation oncologists still contour a high percentage of SVs in men with <15% risk of SV involvement, suggesting that there may be over-treatment of SVs that increases the risk of rectal or bladder toxicity.