Radiation Delivery Techniques Research Articles

SU‐F‐BRB‐04: Comparison of Coplanar VMAT, Non‐Coplanar VMAT, and 4π Treatment Plans

Purpose:The 4π non‐coplanar radiotherapy delivery technique has demonstrated significantly better normal tissue sparing and dose conformality than the clinically used volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). It is unclear whether this is a fundamental limitation of VMAT delivery or the coplanar nature of its typical clinical plans. The non‐coplanar basis of 4π is incorporated into VMAT treatment planning to compare its effect on plan quality.Methods:Clinical stereotactic body radiation therapy plans for 9 liver patients treated with 30–60 Gy using coplanar VMAT (cVMAT) were re‐planned using non‐coplanar VMAT (nVMAT) with 3 arcs and 4 π with 20 intensity‐modulated non‐coplanar fields. All plans were optimized to deliver 100% of the prescribed dose to 95% of the planning target volume (PTV), and nVMAT and 4π plans were tailored to match the maximum and mean PTV dose from the clinical plan. The conformality index (CI), 50% dose spillage volume (R50), normal liver volume receiving >15 Gy (VL>15), and doses to organs at risk (OARs) were compared for all three treatment plans.Results:Compared to cVMAT, the nVMAT and 4π plans reduced VL>15 by an average of 30.6 cm3 and 96.3 cm3, respectively. The average CI was also reduced from 1.22 (cVMAT) to 1.17 (nVMAT) and 1.14 (4π), indicating higher conformality in the same order. Similarly, R50 was reduced from 3.87 (cVMAT) to 3.58 (nVMAT) and 2.74 (4π). With the exception of the mean right kidney dose, which increased by an average of only 0.6 Gy for nVMAT, the dose differences to OARs were not statistically significant between the two VMAT plans. 4π plans either significantly decreased or maintained OAR doses.Conclusion:While the manual selection of intuitive non‐coplanar arcs does show some improvement over coplanar VMAT, the automated beam selection for 4π still results in superior plan quality.This project is supported in part by Varian Medical Systems and NIH R43 CA183390.

Consensus and differences in primary radiotherapy for localized and locally advanced prostate cancer in Switzerland: A survey on patterns of practice.

External beam radiotherapy (EBRT), with or without androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), is an established treatment option for nonmetastatic prostate cancer. Despite high-level evidence from several randomized trials, risk group stratification and treatment recommendations vary due to contradictory or inconclusive data, particularly with regard to EBRT dose prescription and ADT duration. Our aim was to investigate current patterns of practice in primary EBRT for prostate cancer in Switzerland. Treatment recommendations on EBRT and ADT for localized and locally advanced prostate cancer were collected from 23 Swiss radiation oncology centers. Written recommendations were converted into center-specific decision trees, and analyzed for consensus and differences using a dedicated software tool. Additionally, specific radiotherapy planning and delivery techniques from the participating centers were assessed. The most commonly prescribed radiation dose was 78 Gy (range 70-80 Gy) across all risk groups. ADT was recommended for intermediate-risk patients for 6 months in over 80 % of the centers, and for high-risk patients for 2 or 3 years in over 90 % of centers. For recommendations on combined EBRT and ADT treatment, consensus levels did not exceed 39 % in any clinical scenario. Arc-based intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) is implemented for routine prostate cancer radiotherapy by 96 % of the centers. Among Swiss radiation oncology centers, considerable ranges of radiotherapy dose and ADT duration are routinely offered for localized and locally advanced prostate cancer. In the vast majority of cases, doses and durations are within the range of those described in current evidence-based guidelines.

Radiation therapy for oligometastatic non-small cell lung cancer.

Interest has been increasing in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with limited or oligometastatic disease. Surgery has historically been used to remove non-small cell lung cancer metastases, but recent developments including advanced radiotherapy planning and delivery techniques, often called stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) or stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR), has been associated with high rates of treated metastasis control. Therefore, given common comorbid disease, often precluding surgery, an increasing number of oligometastatic NSCLC patients are receiving radiation for ablation of all disease. Early results have reported favorable survival for some, with improved median survival, and approximately 25% alive long term. Patients with fewer metastases, those treated to all known cancerous sites, and longer disease-free intervals tend to have better outcomes. While promising, better clinical criteria are needed to optimize patient selection. The biologic underpinnings of the oligometastatic state are beginning to be demonstrated with specific microRNAs being associated with limited or no progression both in human samples and murine models. Clinical trials are ongoing to improve the techniques used to deliver radiotherapy for NSCLC oligometastases. Ideally, randomized studies will need to be conducted to demonstrate the utility of these treatments suggested by the uncontrolled studies to date. In lieu of these, data presented here may help guide clinicians as to appropriate patient selection.

Role of Radiotherapy and Newer Techniques in the Treatment of GI Cancers.

The role of radiotherapy in multidisciplinary treatment of GI malignancies is well established. Recent advances in imaging as well as radiotherapy planning and delivery techniques have made it possible to target tumors more accurately while sparing normal tissues. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy is an advanced method of delivering radiation using cutting-edge technology to manipulate beams of radiation. The role of intensity-modulated radiotherapy is growing for many GI malignancies, such as cancers of the stomach, pancreas, esophagus, liver, and anus. Stereotactic body radiotherapy is an emerging treatment option for some GI tumors such as locally advanced pancreatic cancer and primary or metastatic tumors of the liver. Stereotactic body radiotherapy requires a high degree of confidence in tumor location and subcentimeter accuracy of the delivered dose. New image-guided techniques have been developed to overcome setup uncertainties at the time of treatment, including real-time imaging on the linear accelerator. Modern imaging techniques have also allowed for more accurate pretreatment staging and delineation of the primary tumor and involved sites. In particular, magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography scans can be particularly useful in radiotherapy planning and assessing treatment response. Molecular biomarkers are being investigated as predictors of response to radiotherapy with the intent of ultimately moving toward using genomic and proteomic determinants of therapeutic strategies. The role of all of these new approaches in the radiotherapeutic management of GI cancers and the evolving role of radiotherapy in these tumor sites will be highlighted in this review.

Radiation-induced heart disease: pathologic abnormalities and putative mechanisms.

Breast cancer is a common diagnosis in women. Breast radiation has become critical in managing patients who receive breast conserving surgery, or have certain high-risk features after mastectomy. Most patients have an excellent prognosis, therefore understanding the late effects of radiation to the chest is important. Radiation-induced heart disease (RIHD) comprises a spectrum of cardiac pathology including myocardial fibrosis and cardiomyopathy, coronary artery disease, valvular disease, pericardial disease, and arrhythmias. Tissue fibrosis is a common mediator in RIHD. Multiple pathways converge with both acute and chronic cellular, molecular, and genetic changes to result in fibrosis. In this article, we review the pathophysiology of cardiac disease related to radiation therapy to the chest. Our understanding of these mechanisms has improved substantially, but much work remains to further refine radiation delivery techniques and develop therapeutics to battle late effects of radiation.

Feasibility of a unified approach to intensity-modulated radiation therapy and volume-modulated arc therapy optimization and delivery.

To study the feasibility of unified intensity-modulated arc therapy (UIMAT) which combines intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) optimization and delivery to produce superior radiation treatment plans, both in terms of dose distribution and efficiency of beam delivery when compared with either VMAT or IMRT alone. An inverse planning algorithm for UIMAT was prototyped within the pinnacle treatment planning system (Philips Healthcare). The IMRT and VMAT deliveries are unified within the same arc, with IMRT being delivered at specific gantry angles within the arc. Optimized gantry angles for the IMRT and VMAT phases are assigned automatically by the inverse optimization algorithm. Optimization of the IMRT and VMAT phases is done simultaneously using a direct aperture optimization algorithm. Five treatment plans each for prostate, head and neck, and lung were generated using a unified optimization technique and compared with clinical IMRT or VMAT plans. Delivery verification was performed with an ArcCheck phantom (Sun Nuclear) on a Varian TrueBeam linear accelerator (Varian Medical Systems). In this prototype implementation, the UIMAT plans offered the same target dose coverage while reducing mean doses to organs at risk by 8.4% for head-and-neck cases, 5.7% for lung cases, and 3.5% for prostate cases, compared with the VMAT or IMRT plans. In addition, UIMAT can be delivered with similar efficiency as VMAT. In this proof-of-concept work, a novel radiation therapy optimization and delivery technique that interlaces VMAT or IMRT delivery within the same arc has been demonstrated. Initial results show that unified VMAT/IMRT has the potential to be superior to either standard IMRT or VMAT.

Severe Gastrointestinal Complications in the Era of Image-guided High-dose-rate Intracavitary Brachytherapy for Cervical Cancer

PurposeThe purposes of this analysis are to report a modern series of severe gastrointestinal toxic effects after definitive chemoradiotherapy in the treatment of locally advanced cervical cancer at our institution and to review the existing literature on factors that contribute to toxic effects and preventive strategies and management. MethodsOur institution’s cervical cancer cohort was evaluated for patients with late grade 3 to 4 gastrointestinal toxic effects who were retrospectively reviewed for clinical or dosimetric parameters that could have contributed to late toxic effects. A review of the published literature was performed to identify factors associated with late toxic effects, prophylactic agents, and corrective therapy. FindingsFive of 85 patients were identified as having late grade 3 to 4 gastrointestinal toxic effects with a median follow-up of 13.3 months. Two of 5 patients developed late grade 3 toxic effects, and 3 of 5 developed late grade 4 toxic effects. Three of the 5 patients reviewed ultimately required permanent colostomies. Cumulative median dose (in equivalent dose in 2-Gy fractions) of clinical target volume to the hottest 90% was 107.2 Gy, rectal dose to the hottest 2 cc (D2cc) was 81.7 Gy, sigmoid D2cc was 61.7 Gy, and bladder D2cc was 79.5 Gy. No patient had evidence of disease recurrence in the pelvis. One patient developed oligometastatic disease in the suprarenal gland and was successfully salvaged with adrenalectomy. ImplicationsDespite its risk of toxic effects, intracavitary brachytherapy remains a critical component of the treatment of locally advanced cervical cancer. Even with modern radiotherapy planning and delivery techniques, extra attention is warranted to continue to strive for optimal outcomes.

ABCDE steps to prevent heart disease in breast cancer survivors.

Breast cancer is the most common invasive cancer diagnosed in women. Of every 8 women, 1 woman is diagnosed with breast cancer in her lifetime. In 2013, more than 230 000 women were diagnosed with breast cancer in the United States alone, resulting in nearly 40 000 deaths. Breast cancer can also occur in men, although the incidence is much lower, with a total of 2240 men diagnosed in 2013 (accounting for less than 1% of all breast cancers). Over the past 2 decades, death resulting from breast cancer has been declining each year. This decrease in mortality is due in part to improvements in cancer treatment. These treatments have come about as a result of collaborations among physicians in various specialties. These physicians include medical oncologists (who give systemic treatments like chemotherapy and hormonal therapy), surgeons (who perform surgery such as mastectomy and lumpectomy), and radiation oncologists (who treat patients with radiation therapy). Radiation therapy, in particular, has increasingly become an important part of management of most patients with breast cancer. Radiation therapy has been demonstrated not only to prevent recurrence of cancer in the breast or chest wall area but also to improve long-term survival in women. In addition, radiation therapy allows women to undergo a less radical form of surgery in which the breast tissue is conserved, thus improving body image for breast cancer survivors without compromising survival. As a result of this progress in treatment and improved detection of early breast cancer, in 2012, there were nearly 3 million breast cancer survivors in the United States alone, a number that will increase in the coming years. Women who survive breast cancer may face many health challenges, but the number 1 cause of death in breast cancer survivors (and, in fact, all women) remains heart disease. Unfortunately, although systemic …

Assessment of the American Joint Committee on Cancer 7th Edition Staging for Localised Prostate Cancer in Asia Treated with External Beam Radiotherapy

Most international clinical practice guidelines for prostate cancer (PCa) are driven by data derived in a Western setting. However, tumour biology and clinical disease progression are likely to differ in the Asian population. We compare the performance of the revised American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) prognostic groups with the commonly used D'Amico Risk Classification and conventional predictors for PCa, in a large cohort of Asian patients. We retrospectively reviewed data for 404 consecutive Singaporean patients receiving definitive radiotherapy at our centre between December 1996 and October 2006. The primary outcome was biochemical relapse-free survival (BRFS), defined using the Phoenix definition. The secondary outcome was overall survival (OS). Prognostic risk groups were defined using AJCC 7th edition (AJCC7) and 6th edition (AJCC6). Univariate analysis (UVA) and multivariate analysis (MVA) were performed for the following putative risk factors: age, Gleason score, prognostic grouping, tumour classification, radiation delivery technique, radiotherapy dose, hormonal therapy and initial PSA value. For the cohort, median age was 69 years. Median follow-up was 66.3 months. Five-year BRFS rate was 84.3% with 71 biochemical relapses and 5-year OS rate was 89.1% with 54 deaths. The concordance-indices for BRFS prediction were 0.588, 0.550 and 0.567 for AJCC7, AJCC6 and D'Amico respectively. Initial PSA, T-stage and AJCC7 were prognostic for BRFS on UVA. Comparison of AJCC7 vs. D'Amico showed no statistical additional value of either classification system although D'Amico was superior when compared to AJCC6 in predicting BRFS. T-stage ≥3 and D'Amico were significant prognostic factors for BRFS on MVA. In our local, predominantly Chinese population, neither AJCC6 nor AJCC7 demonstrated a high predictive accuracy for BRFS although AJCC7 has a slightly better predictive ability than AJCC6.

Assessment of radiation-induced xerostomia: validation of the Italian version of the xerostomia questionnaire in head and neck cancer patients.

Xerostomia is the most common acute and late side effect of radiation treatment for head and neck cancer. Affecting taste perception, chewing, swallowing and speech, xerostomia is also the major cause of decreased quality of life. The aims of this study were to validate the Italian translation of the self-reported eight-item xerostomia questionnaire (XQ) and determine its psychometric properties in patients treated with radiotherapy for head and neck cancer. An observational cross-sectional study was conducted in the Radiotherapy Unit of the Veneto Institute of Oncology - IOV in Padua. The XQ was translated according to international guidelines and filled out by 102 patients. Construct validity was assessed using principal component analysis, internal consistency using Cronbach's α coefficient and test-retest reliability at 1-month interval using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Criterion-related validity was evaluated to compare the Italian version of XQ with the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) and its Head and Neck Cancer Module (QLQ-H&N35). Cronbach's α for the Italian version of XQ was strong at α = 0.93, test-retest reliability was also strong (0.79) and factor analysis confirmed that the questionnaire was one-dimensional. Criterion-related validity was excellent with high association with the EORTC QLQ-H&N35 xerostomia and sticky saliva scales. The Italian version of XQ has excellent psychometric properties and can be used to evaluate the impact of emerging radiation delivery techniques aiming at preventing xerostomia.

Sci-Fri AM: Mountain - 05: Unified Optimization and Delivery of Intensity-modulated Radiation Therapy and Volume-modulated Arc Therapy

Purpose: To study the feasibility of a unified intensity-modulated arc therapy (UIMAT) that combines IMRT and VMAT optimization and delivery in order to produce efficient and superior radiation treatment plans. Methods: Inverse planning for UIMAT was prototyped on the Pinnacle treatment planning system (Philips Medical Systems). UIMAT integrates IMRT and VMAT delivery in the same arc where IMRT was delivered with gantry speed close to zero. Optimal gantry angles for the IMRT phases were selected automatically by the inverse optimization algorithm. Optimization of the VMAT phases and IMRT phases were done simultaneously using Pinnacle's direct machine parameter optimization algorithm. Five treatment plans each for prostate, head and neck, and lung were generated using our unified technique and compared with clinical VMAT or IMRT plans. Delivery verification was performed on an ArcCheck phantom (Sun Nuclear) and delivered in clinical mode on a Varian TrueBeam linear accelerator. Results: In this prototype implementation, compared to the VMAT or IMRT plans, with the plans normalized to the same dose coverage to the planning target volumes, the UIMAT plans produced improved OAR sparing for head and neck cases, while for lung and prostate cases, the dosimetric improvements for OARs were not as significant. In this proof-of-concept work, we demonstrated that a novel radiation therapy delivery technique combining VMAT and IMRT delivery in the same arc is feasible. Initial results showed UIMAT has the potential to be superior to either standard IMRT or VMAT.

Development and application of a dose verification tool using a small field model for TomoTherapy

Helical TomoTherapy® is a radiation delivery technique that uses the superposition of many small fields to precisely deliver the prescribed dose to the patient. This work presents a dose verification tool that can be used as part of a quality assurance program for a tomotherapy system. This tool is based on a small field model that takes into account the two main effects that influence the dose distribution in small fields: the extended shape of the radiation source and the loss of lateral charged particle equilibrium (CPE) within the field. The dose verification tool was implemented for simple beam configurations and used to study the influence of temporal beam parameter variations on the delivered dose. After comparing measured and calculated output factors (OFs) and dose profiles for different field configurations, it was found that they agree well to within the globally-defined gamma acceptance criteria of 2%/2mm. The study demonstrated that none of the studied systematic and random variations applied resulted in failed gamma scores using gamma acceptance criteria of 3%/3mm. The developed model implemented in the verification tool allows to evaluate the performance of devices applying narrow photon beams in the treatment delivery and, in particular, to evaluate the delivery performance of a tomotherapy unit.

Role of Chemoradiotherapy in the Adjuvant and Neoadjuvant Settings for Resectable Pancreatic Cancer

Pancreatic cancer is the 10th most commonly diagnosed malignancy in the USA and the fourth most common cause of cancer-related death. Worldwide, the mortality incidence ratio approaches 98%. Although only 15–20% of patients present with resectable disease, there is international consensus that complete surgical resection (R0, i.e. grossly and microscopically negative margins) is a vital part of any curative treatment paradigm. Despite advances in surgical technique, peri-operative care, chemotherapy and radiation delivery techniques over the past two decades, 5 year overall survival rates for resected pancreatic cancer with modern therapies remain around 20–25%. There is level I evidence for adjuvant chemotherapy in fully resected pancreatic cancer, but randomised trials examining the role of adjuvant chemoradiotherapy to date do not provide clear support for radiation therapy in this setting. In addition, efforts to increase the proportion of long-term survivors have recently centred on increasing the resectability of locoregional disease by incorporating neoadjuvant treatment before definitive surgery. Post-hoc analysis of randomised data as well as retrospective reviews have shown that there are several independent prognostic factors that may have considerable impact on survival outcomes, complicating interpretation and comparison of historical data. There is considerable interest in adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapy, but there is significant controversy as to whether radiation is of value, especially in the adjuvant context. Herein, we explore the sources of those controversies.

Stereotactic body radiation therapy for liver tumours

Recent improvements in radiation therapy delivery techniques provide new tools to treat patients with liver-confined disease, either with hepatocellular carcinoma or liver metastases. An appropriate selection of the patients made during a multidisciplinary specialized tumour board is mandatory. It should be based on the disease extension, an accurate evaluation of the comorbidities and the liver functions. The added value of this approach has to be evaluated in well-designed trials, alone or in combination with other treatments such as surgery, local treatments, chemoembolization and/or chemotherapy with or without targeted agents. Stereotactic body radiation therapy should be applied under strict conditions of expertise of the radiation oncology departments, including equipment and educational training programmes. However under these conditions, preliminary results seems highly encouraging in terms of local control and tolerance but should be confirmed in large controlled prospective trials.

Adjuvant chemoradiation for pancreatic cancer: what does the evidence tell us?

The role of adjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) for pancreas cancer remains unclear. A handful of randomized trials conducted decades of ago ignited a debate that continues today about whether CRT improves survival after surgery. The many flaws in these trials are well described in the literature, which include the use of antiquated radiation delivery techniques and suboptimal doses. Recent prospective randomized data is lacking, and we eagerly await the results the ongoing Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0848 trial that is evaluating the utility of high quality adjuvant CRT in resected pancreas cancer patients. Until the results of RTOG 0848 are available we should look to other studies from the modern era to guide adjuvant treatment recommendations. Here we review the current state of the art for adjuvant pancreas CRT with respect to patient selection, radiation techniques, radiation dose, and integration with novel systemic agents.

TH‐A‐BRE‐01: The Status of Intensity Modulated Proton and Ion Therapy

IMRT with photons has become a radiation therapy standard of care for many cancer treatment sites. The situation is quite different with intensity modulated particle (protons and ion) radiation therapy (IMPT). With the rapid development of beam scanning techniques and many of the newer proton facilities exclusively offering active beam scanning as their radiation delivery technique, it is timely to give an update on the status and challenges of IMPT. The leading principle in IMPT is to aim at the target from several, not necessarily coplanar, directions with multiple pencil beams that are modulated in their intensity and adjusted in their energy such that a desired dose distribution or, more generally, a desired bio‐effective dose distribution is achieved. Different from low‐LET photons, the varying relative biological effectiveness (RBE) along the beam path adds an additional dimension to the treatment planning process and will require biophysical modeling at least for carbon ion therapy. IMPT involves computationally challenging tasks, yet it needs to be very fast in order to be clinically relevant. To make IMPT computationally tractable, robust and efficient optimization methods are required. Lastly, IMPT planning is very sensitive to accurate knowledge of relative stopping and scattering powers of the intervening tissues as well as intra‐ and inter‐fraction motion. Robust planning methods are being developed in order to obtain IMPT plans that are less sensitive against such uncertainties. This therapy symposium will present an update on the current status and emerging developments of IMPT from the medical physics perspective.Learning Objectives: Become familiar with current delivery techniques for IMPT and their limitations. Understand the basics of dose calculational algorithms and commissioning of IMPT. Learn how to assess the accuracy of planning and delivery of IMPT treatments. Get an overview of currently used and emerging optimization techniques. Learn about the pro or contra arguments for using IMPT for moving targets.

Epstein-Barr virus as a paradigm in nasopharyngeal cancer: from lab to clinic.

Nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) of the undifferentiated subtype remains endemic in southern China, with a peak incidence in this region approaching 30 cases per 100,000 population per year. Despite advances in chemotherapy and radiation delivery techniques in localized disease, distant metastasis is still common and NPC remains the seventh leading cause of cancer death in the region. There is great need for early diagnosis, developing novel therapies, and identifying patients with localized disease at higher risk of future recurrence or metastasis to appropriately tailor their treatment and improve outcomes. Knowledge of the integral involvement of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) in the pathogenesis of undifferentiated NPC has been of seminal importance in developing strategies to optimize disease management. The close association with EBV is being evaluated in multiple settings including screening of at-risk populations, disease prognostication, development of targeted therapies, optimizing adjuvant treatment, and early recurrence detection. These translational studies are likely to have an enormous effect on management of undifferentiated NPC and significantly improve the landscape of the disease in years to come.

Measurements of the neutron dose equivalent for various radiation qualities, treatment machines and delivery techniques in radiation therapy

In radiation therapy, high energy photon and proton beams cause the production of secondary neutrons. This leads to an unwanted dose contribution, which can be considerable for tissues outside of the target volume regarding the long term health of cancer patients. Due to the high biological effectiveness of neutrons in regards to cancer induction, small neutron doses can be important. This study quantified the neutron doses for different radiation therapy modalities. Most of the reports in the literature used neutron dose measurements free in air or on the surface of phantoms to estimate the amount of neutron dose to the patient. In this study, dose measurements were performed in terms of neutron dose equivalent inside an anthropomorphic phantom. The neutron dose equivalent was determined using track etch detectors as a function of the distance to the isocenter, as well as for radiation sensitive organs. The dose distributions were compared with respect to treatment techniques (3D-conformal, volumetric modulated arc therapy and intensity-modulated radiation therapy for photons; spot scanning and passive scattering for protons), therapy machines (Varian, Elekta and Siemens linear accelerators) and radiation quality (photons and protons). The neutron dose equivalent varied between 0.002 and 3 mSv per treatment gray over all measurements. Only small differences were found when comparing treatment techniques, but substantial differences were observed between the linear accelerator models. The neutron dose equivalent for proton therapy was higher than for photons in general and in particular for double-scattered protons. The overall neutron dose equivalent measured in this study was an order of magnitude lower than the stray dose of a treatment using 6 MV photons, suggesting that the contribution of the secondary neutron dose equivalent to the integral dose of a radiotherapy patient is small.

Evidence supporting contemporary post-operative radiation therapy (PORT) using linear accelerators in N2 lung cancer

PurposePost-operative radiotherapy (PORT) treatment for lung cancer declined since a meta-analysis failed to show benefit in patients with N2 disease. Because several included studies employed outmoded radiation planning and delivery techniques, we sought to determine whether PORT with modern technology benefits patients with N2 disease. MethodsWe conducted searches of the published literature. For inclusion, studies must have included patients with stage III-N2 lung cancer treated with PORT using only linear accelerators, used a control group that did not receive PORT, and reported outcome data for overall survival (OS). Prospective and retrospective analyses were included. Exclusion criteria were the use of cobalt devices or orthovoltage radiation. ResultsData were evaluated with random-effects models. Three prospective and eight retrospective studies were included. The PORT and no-PORT groups included 1368 and 1360 patients, respectively. The PORT group had significantly improved OS over the no-PORT group (hazard ratio [HR]=0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62–0.96, P=0.020). Locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS) in 10 studies for which data was available was also improved in the PORT group (HR=0.51, CI 0.41–0.65, P<0.001). ConclusionsPORT was associated with significantly lower risk of death and locoregional recurrence in patients with N2 lung cancer. Our study was limited by lack of access to individual patient data, which would have enabled more detailed analyses. Regardless, data thus far suggest PORT may be associated with a survival benefit. Given a lack of large-scale prospective data, clinical trials evaluating PORT with modern technology are warranted.

SP-0201: Advanced radiotherapy delivery techniques: What is the clinical rationale?

SP-0201: Advanced radiotherapy delivery techniques: What is the clinical rationale?