1
|
Gaito S, Cella L, France A, Monti S, Whitfield G, Sitch P, Burnet N, Smith E, Palma G, Aznar M. Incidence of alopecia in brain tumour patients treated with pencil scanning proton therapy and validation of existing NTCP models. Radiother Oncol 2024; 199:110462. [PMID: 39069083 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110462] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/05/2024] [Revised: 07/19/2024] [Accepted: 07/22/2024] [Indexed: 07/30/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Radiation-induced alopecia (RIA) is one of the most frequent and upsetting cosmetic side effects after radiotherapy (RT) for brain cancer. We report the incidence of RIA in a cohort of brain tumours patients treated with Proton Therapy (PT) and externally validate published NTCP models of grade 2 (G2) RIA for their implementation in clinical practice. METHODS Data for patients treated for brain tumours with scanning beam PT between 2018 and 2022 were extracted. Acute, late and permanent RIA events were evaluated according to CTCAE 5.0. Lyman-Kutcher-Burman (LKB) and multivariable logistic regression (MLR) published models were computed from the relative dose-surface histogram of the scalp. External validity of models was assessed in terms of discrimination and calibration. RESULTS In the 264 patients analysed, rates of any grade acute (≤90 days after PT completion), late (>90 days) and permanent RIA (persisting for> 12 months) were 61.8 %, 24.7 % and 14.4 %, respectively. In our independent cohort, LKB- and MLR-NTCP showed a good discrimination for G2 RIA (0.71≤ROC-AUC≤0.83) while model calibration was unsatisfactory possibly due to a different outcome evaluation between training and validation cohorts, as well as differences in clinical and treatment related variables between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS Despite the reasonable sensitivity and specificity of the NTCP models for RIA in the validation cohort, our study emphasizes the significance of differences between the cohorts utilized for model development and validation. Specifically, variations in the reporting of clinical outcomes inevitably jeopardize the validation of NTCP models. A standardize and objective RIA scoring system is essential.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Simona Gaito
- Proton Clinical Outcomes Unit, The Christie Proton Beam Therapy Center, Manchester, United Kingdom; Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Science, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Laura Cella
- Institute of Biostructures and Bioimaging, National Research Council, Naples, Italy.
| | - Anna France
- Proton Clinical Outcomes Unit, The Christie Proton Beam Therapy Center, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Serena Monti
- Institute of Biostructures and Bioimaging, National Research Council, Naples, Italy
| | - Gillian Whitfield
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Science, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom; Proton Beam Therapy Centre. The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Peter Sitch
- Proton Clinical Outcomes Unit, The Christie Proton Beam Therapy Center, Manchester, United Kingdom; Proton Beam Therapy Centre. The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Neil Burnet
- Proton Beam Therapy Centre. The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Ed Smith
- Proton Clinical Outcomes Unit, The Christie Proton Beam Therapy Center, Manchester, United Kingdom; Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Science, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom; Proton Beam Therapy Centre. The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Giuseppe Palma
- Institute of Nanotechnology, National Research Council, Lecce, Italy
| | - Marianne Aznar
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Science, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Kacar M, Nagel MB, Liang J, Li Y, Neel MD, Lucas JT, McCarville MB, Santiago T, Pappo AS, Krasin MJ. Radiation therapy dose escalation achieves high rates of local control with tolerable toxicity profile in pediatric and young adult patients with Ewing sarcoma. Cancer 2024; 130:1836-1843. [PMID: 38271232 PMCID: PMC11058012 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.35196] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/13/2023] [Revised: 11/28/2023] [Accepted: 12/07/2023] [Indexed: 01/27/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Local control for patients with Ewing sarcoma (EWS) who present with large tumors are suboptimal when treated with standard radiation therapy (RT) doses of 54-55.8 Gy. The purpose of this study is to determine local control and toxicity of dose-escalated RT for tumors ≥8 cm (greatest diameter at diagnosis) in pediatric and young adult patients with EWS. METHODS Eligible patients ≤30 years old with newly diagnosed EWS ≥8 cm treated with definitive conformal or intensity modulated photon, or proton radiation therapy techniques were included. All patients in the study received dose-escalated RT doses. Outcomes included overall survival (OS), event-free survival (EFS), local failure rates, and toxicity. RESULTS Thirty-two patients were included, 20 patients presented with metastatic disease and 12 patients with localized disease. The median RT dose was 64.8 Gy (range, 59.4-69.4 Gy) with variability of doses to protect normal surrounding tissues. All patients received systemic chemotherapy. The 5-year OS and EFS for the cohort was 64.2% and 42%, respectively. The 5-year cumulative incidence of local failure was 6.6%. There were two combined local and distant failures with no isolated local failures. Twenty-nine patients experienced short term toxicity, 90% of those being radiation dermatitis. Twenty-seven patients experienced long-term toxicity, with only one experiencing grade 4 toxicity, a secondary malignancy after therapy. CONCLUSION This study demonstrates that definitive RT for pediatric and young adult patients with EWS ≥8 cm provides high rates of local control, while maintaining a tolerable toxicity profile.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marija Kacar
- Department of Oncology, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee, USA
| | - Margaret B. Nagel
- Department of Pediatrics, UT Southwestern Medical Center Dallas, Dallas, Texas, USA
| | - Jia Liang
- Department of Biostatistics, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee, USA
| | - Yimei Li
- Department of Biostatistics, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee, USA
| | - Michael D. Neel
- Department of Surgery, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee, USA
| | - John T. Lucas
- Department of Radiation Oncology, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee, USA
| | - M. Beth McCarville
- Department of Diagnostic Imaging, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee, USA
| | - Teresa Santiago
- Department of Pathology, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee, USA
| | - Alberto S. Pappo
- Department of Oncology, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee, USA
| | - Matthew J. Krasin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Gogineni E, Chen H, Hu C, Boudadi K, Engle J, Levine A, Deville C. Prospective phase II trial of preoperative hypofractionated proton therapy for extremity and truncal soft tissue sarcoma: the PRONTO study rationale and design. Radiat Oncol 2024; 19:56. [PMID: 38745333 PMCID: PMC11095023 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-024-02447-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/09/2024] [Accepted: 04/30/2024] [Indexed: 05/16/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Oncologic surgical resection is the standard of care for extremity and truncal soft tissue sarcoma (STS), often accompanied by the addition of pre- or postoperative radiation therapy (RT). Preoperative RT may decrease the risk of joint stiffness and fibrosis at the cost of higher rates of wound complications. Hypofractionated, preoperative RT has been shown to provide acceptable outcomes in prospective trials. Proton beam therapy (PBT) provides the means to decrease dose to surrounding organs at risk, such as the skin, bone, soft tissues, and adjacent joint(s), and has not yet been studied in patients with extremity and truncal sarcoma. METHODS Our study titled "PROspective phase II trial of preoperative hypofractionated protoN therapy for extremity and Truncal soft tissue sarcOma (PRONTO)" is a non-randomized, prospective phase II trial evaluating the safety and efficacy of preoperative, hypofractionated PBT for patients with STS of the extremity and trunk planned for surgical resection. Adult patients with Eastern Cooperative Group Performance Status ≤ 2 with resectable extremity and truncal STS will be included, with the aim to accrue 40 patients. Treatment will consist of 30 Gy radiobiological equivalent of PBT in 5 fractions delivered every other day, followed by surgical resection 2-12 weeks later. The primary outcome is rate of major wound complications as defined according to the National Cancer Institute of Canada Sarcoma2 (NCIC-SR2) Multicenter Trial. Secondary objectives include rate of late grade ≥ 2 toxicity, local recurrence-free survival and distant metastasis-free survival at 1- and 2-years, functional outcomes, quality of life, and pathologic response. DISCUSSION PRONTO represents the first trial evaluating the use of hypofractionated PBT for STS. We aim to prove the safety and efficacy of this approach and to compare our results to historical outcomes established by previous trials. Given the low number of proton centers and limited availability, the short course of PBT may provide the opportunity to treat patients who would otherwise be limited when treating with daily RT over several weeks. We hope that this trial will lead to increased referral patterns, offer benefits towards patient convenience and clinic workflow efficiency, and provide evidence supporting the use of PBT in this setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION NCT05917301 (registered 23/6/2023).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emile Gogineni
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, 460 W 10 Ave, Columbus, OH, 43210, USA.
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
| | - Hao Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Chen Hu
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Karim Boudadi
- Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Jessica Engle
- Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Adam Levine
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Curtiland Deville
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Saito T, Nakayama M, Ohnishi K, Tanaka S, Nakamura M, Murakami M, Matsumoto S, Baba K, Fujii K, Mizumoto M, Tabuchi K, Sakurai H. Proton beam therapy in multimodal treatment for locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the nasal cavity and paranasal sinus. Radiat Oncol 2023; 18:106. [PMID: 37386495 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-023-02296-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/16/2023] [Accepted: 06/12/2023] [Indexed: 07/01/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND To evaluate proton beam therapy (PBT) in multimodal treatment for locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the nasal cavity and paranasal sinus (NPSCC). METHODS The cases in this study included T3 and T4 NPSCC without distant metastases that were treated at our center using PBT between July 2003 and December 2020. These cases were classified into 3 groups based on resectability and treatment strategy: surgery followed by postoperative PBT (group A); those indicated to be resectable, but the patient refused surgery and received radical PBT (group B); and those declared unresectable based on the extent of the tumor and treated with radical PBT (group C). RESULTS The study included 37 cases, with 10, 9 and 18 in groups A, B and C, respectively. The median follow-up period in surviving patients was 4.4 years (range 1.0-12.3 years). The 4-year overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and local control (LC) rates were 58%, 43% and 58% for all patients; 90%, 70% and 80% in group A, 89%, 78% and 89% in group B; and 24%, 11% and 24% in group C. There were significant differences in OS (p = 0.0028) and PFS (p = 0.009) between groups A and C; and in OS (p = 0.0027), PFS (p = 0.0045) and LC (p = 0.0075) between groups B and C. CONCLUSIONS PBT gave favorable outcomes in multimodal treatment for resectable locally advanced NPSCC, including surgery followed by postoperative PBT and radical PBT with concurrent chemotherapy. The prognosis for unresectable NPSCC was extremely poor, and reconsideration of treatment strategies, such as more active use of induction chemotherapy, may improve outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Takashi Saito
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan.
| | - Masahiro Nakayama
- Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan
| | - Kayoko Ohnishi
- Department of Radiology, School of Medicine, International University of Health and Welfare, Narita, Japan
| | - Shuho Tanaka
- Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan
| | | | - Motohiro Murakami
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan
| | - Shin Matsumoto
- Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan
| | - Keiichiro Baba
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan
| | - Keitaro Fujii
- Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan
| | - Masashi Mizumoto
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan
| | - Keiji Tabuchi
- Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan
| | - Hideyuki Sakurai
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Chen Y, Luo H, Liu R, Tan M, Wang Q, Wu X, Du T, Liu Z, Sun S, Zhang Q, Wang X. Efficacy and safety of particle therapy for inoperable stage II-III non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiat Oncol 2023; 18:86. [PMID: 37217970 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-023-02264-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/21/2023] [Accepted: 04/12/2023] [Indexed: 05/24/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Particle therapy, mainly including carbon-ion radiotherapy (CIRT) and proton beam therapy (PBT), has dose distribution advantages compared to photon radiotherapy. It has been widely reported as a promising treatment method for early non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, its application in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC) is relatively rare, and its efficacy and safety are inconclusive. This study aimed to provide systematic evidence for evaluating the efficacy and safety of particle therapy for inoperable LA-NSCLC. METHODS To retrieve published literature, a systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library until September 4, 2022. The primary endpoints were local control (LC) rate, overall survival (OS) rate, and progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 2 and 5 years. The secondary endpoint was treatment-related toxicity. The pooled clinical outcomes and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by using STATA 15.1. RESULTS Nineteen eligible studies with a total sample size of 851 patients were included. The pooled data demonstrated that the OS, PFS, and LC rates at 2 years of LA-NSCLC treated by particle therapy were 61.3% (95% CI = 54.7-68.7%), 37.9% (95% CI = 33.8-42.6%) and 82.2% (95% CI = 78.7-85.9%), respectively. The pooled 5-year OS, PFS, and LC rates were 41.3% (95% CI = 27.1-63.1%), 25.3% (95% CI = 16.3-39.4%), and 61.5% (95% CI = 50.7-74.6%), respectively. Subgroup analysis stratified by treatment type showed that the concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT, PBT combined with concurrent chemotherapy) group had better survival benefits than the PBT and CIRT groups. The incidence rates of grade 3/4 esophagitis, dermatitis, and pneumonia in LA-NSCLC patients after particle therapy were 2.6% (95% CI = 0.4-6.0%), 2.6% (95% CI = 0.5-5.7%) and 3.4% (95% CI = 1.4-6.0%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS Particle therapy demonstrated promising efficacy and acceptable toxicity in LA-NSCLC patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yanliang Chen
- Institute of Modern Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou, 730000, Gansu Province, China
- The First School of Clinical Medicine, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
| | - Hongtao Luo
- Institute of Modern Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou, 730000, Gansu Province, China
- Department of Postgraduate, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
- Heavy Ion Therapy Center, Lanzhou Heavy Ions Hospital, Lanzhou, China
| | - Ruifeng Liu
- Institute of Modern Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou, 730000, Gansu Province, China
- Department of Postgraduate, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
- Heavy Ion Therapy Center, Lanzhou Heavy Ions Hospital, Lanzhou, China
| | - Mingyu Tan
- Institute of Modern Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou, 730000, Gansu Province, China
- The First School of Clinical Medicine, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
| | - Qian Wang
- Institute of Modern Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou, 730000, Gansu Province, China
- The First School of Clinical Medicine, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
| | - Xun Wu
- Institute of Modern Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou, 730000, Gansu Province, China
- The First School of Clinical Medicine, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
| | - Tianqi Du
- Institute of Modern Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou, 730000, Gansu Province, China
- The First School of Clinical Medicine, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
| | - Zhiqiang Liu
- Institute of Modern Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou, 730000, Gansu Province, China
- Department of Postgraduate, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
- Heavy Ion Therapy Center, Lanzhou Heavy Ions Hospital, Lanzhou, China
| | - Shilong Sun
- Institute of Modern Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou, 730000, Gansu Province, China
- Department of Postgraduate, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
- Heavy Ion Therapy Center, Lanzhou Heavy Ions Hospital, Lanzhou, China
| | - Qiuning Zhang
- Institute of Modern Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou, 730000, Gansu Province, China.
- Department of Postgraduate, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China.
- Heavy Ion Therapy Center, Lanzhou Heavy Ions Hospital, Lanzhou, China.
| | - Xiaohu Wang
- Institute of Modern Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou, 730000, Gansu Province, China.
- The First School of Clinical Medicine, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
- Department of Postgraduate, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China.
- Heavy Ion Therapy Center, Lanzhou Heavy Ions Hospital, Lanzhou, China.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Gaito S, Marvaso G, Ortiz R, Crellin A, Aznar MC, Indelicato DJ, Pan S, Whitfield G, Alongi F, Jereczek-Fossa BA, Burnet N, Li MP, Rothwell B, Smith E, Colaco RJ. Proton Beam Therapy in the Oligometastatic/Oligorecurrent Setting: Is There a Role? A Literature Review. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:cancers15092489. [PMID: 37173955 PMCID: PMC10177340 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15092489] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/13/2023] [Revised: 04/21/2023] [Accepted: 04/25/2023] [Indexed: 05/15/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) with conventional photon radiotherapy (XRT) are well-established treatment options for selected patients with oligometastatic/oligorecurrent disease. The use of PBT for SABR-SRS is attractive given the property of a lack of exit dose. The aim of this review is to evaluate the role and current utilisation of PBT in the oligometastatic/oligorecurrent setting. METHODS Using Medline and Embase, a comprehensive literature review was conducted following the PICO (Patients, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes) criteria, which returned 83 records. After screening, 16 records were deemed to be relevant and included in the review. RESULTS Six of the sixteen records analysed originated in Japan, six in the USA, and four in Europe. The focus was oligometastatic disease in 12, oligorecurrence in 3, and both in 1. Most of the studies analysed (12/16) were retrospective cohorts or case reports, two were phase II clinical trials, one was a literature review, and one study discussed the pros and cons of PBT in these settings. The studies presented in this review included a total of 925 patients. The metastatic sites analysed in these articles were the liver (4/16), lungs (3/16), thoracic lymph nodes (2/16), bone (2/16), brain (1/16), pelvis (1/16), and various sites in 2/16. CONCLUSIONS PBT could represent an option for the treatment of oligometastatic/oligorecurrent disease in patients with a low metastatic burden. Nevertheless, due to its limited availability, PBT has traditionally been funded for selected tumour indications that are defined as curable. The availability of new systemic therapies has widened this definition. This, together with the exponential growth of PBT capacity worldwide, will potentially redefine its commissioning to include selected patients with oligometastatic/oligorecurrent disease. To date, PBT has been used with encouraging results for the treatment of liver metastases. However, PBT could be an option in those cases in which the reduced radiation exposure to normal tissues leads to a clinically significant reduction in treatment-related toxicities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Simona Gaito
- Proton Clinical Outcomes Unit, The Christie NHS Proton Beam Therapy Centre, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
- Division of Clinical Cancer Science, School of Medical Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
| | - Giulia Marvaso
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, 20122 Milan, Italy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, 20126 Milan, Italy
| | - Ramon Ortiz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco, CA 94720, USA
| | - Adrian Crellin
- National Lead Proton Beam Therapy NHSe, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
| | - Marianne C Aznar
- Division of Clinical Cancer Science, School of Medical Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
| | - Daniel J Indelicato
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida, Jacksonville, FL 32206, USA
| | - Shermaine Pan
- Department of Proton Beam Therapy, The Christie Proton Beam Therapy Centre, Manchester M20 3DA, UK
| | - Gillian Whitfield
- Division of Clinical Cancer Science, School of Medical Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
- Department of Proton Beam Therapy, The Christie Proton Beam Therapy Centre, Manchester M20 3DA, UK
| | - Filippo Alongi
- Advanced Radiation Oncology Department, IRCCS Ospedale Sacro Cuore don Calabria, 37024 Verona, Italy
- Division of Radiology and Radiotherapy, University of Brescia, 25121 Brescia, Italy
| | - Barbara Alicja Jereczek-Fossa
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, 20122 Milan, Italy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, 20126 Milan, Italy
| | - Neil Burnet
- Department of Proton Beam Therapy, The Christie Proton Beam Therapy Centre, Manchester M20 3DA, UK
| | - Michelle P Li
- Department of Proton Beam Therapy, The Christie Proton Beam Therapy Centre, Manchester M20 3DA, UK
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC 3000, Australia
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia
| | - Bethany Rothwell
- Division of Physics, Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, USA
| | - Ed Smith
- Proton Clinical Outcomes Unit, The Christie NHS Proton Beam Therapy Centre, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
- Division of Clinical Cancer Science, School of Medical Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
- Department of Proton Beam Therapy, The Christie Proton Beam Therapy Centre, Manchester M20 3DA, UK
| | - Rovel J Colaco
- Department of Proton Beam Therapy, The Christie Proton Beam Therapy Centre, Manchester M20 3DA, UK
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Efficacy and safety of proton beam therapy for rhabdomyosarcoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiat Oncol 2023; 18:31. [PMID: 36805784 PMCID: PMC9942395 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-023-02223-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/15/2022] [Accepted: 02/07/2023] [Indexed: 02/22/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This study aimed to evaluate and conduct a meta-analysis on the efficacy and safety of proton beam therapy (PBT) for rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS). METHODS We searched for articles using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases from their inception to December 22, 2022. Two researchers independently screened literature and extracted data. Statistical analyses were performed using STATA version 14.0. RESULTS We got 675 candidate articles, of which 11 studies were included in our study according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Of the 544 RMS patients who received PBT. The local control (LC) rate at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 years were 96% (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.91-1.01), 93% (95% CI 0.86-1.00), 78% (95% CI 0.71-0.85), 85% (95% CI 0.78-0.92), and 84% (95% CI 0.74-0.95), respectively. The progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 years were 82% (95% CI 0.72-0.92), 73% (95% CI 0.61-0.84), 63% (95% CI 0.47-0.79), 64% (95% CI 0.54-0.74), and 76% (95% CI 0.59-0.94), respectively. The overall survival (OS) rate at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 years were 93% (95% CI 0.86-1.00), 85% (95% CI 0.76-0.95), 80% (95% CI 0.63-0.96), 71% (95% CI 0.62-0.80), and 82% (95% CI 0.71-0.94), respectively. Acute and late toxicities were mainly grades 1 to 2 in all studies. CONCLUSION As an advantageous RT technique, PBT is an emerging option for patients with RMS, particularly children and adolescents patients. The data showed that PBT is a feasible, safe, and effective modality for RMS, showing promising LC, OS, PFS, and lower acute and late toxicities. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022329154.
Collapse
|
8
|
Thomas R, Chen H, Gogineni E, Halthore A, Floreza B, Esho-Voltaire T, Weaver A, Alcorn S, Ladra M, Li H, Deville C. Comparing Ultra-hypofractionated Proton versus Photon Therapy in Extremity Soft Tissue Sarcoma. Int J Part Ther 2023; 9:30-39. [PMID: 36721484 PMCID: PMC9875823 DOI: 10.14338/ijpt-22-00022.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/19/2022] [Accepted: 10/18/2022] [Indexed: 01/19/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose Recent single institution, phase II evidence has demonstrated the feasibility and efficacy of ultra-hypofractionated, preoperative photon therapy in 5 fractions for the treatment of soft tissue sarcoma (STS). Our purpose was to evaluate the dosimetric benefits of modern scanning beam proton therapy compared with conventional photon radiation therapy (RT) for the neoadjuvant treatment of adult extremity STS. Materials and Methods Existing proton and photon plans for 11 adult patients with STS of the lower extremities previously treated preoperatively with neoadjuvant RT at our center were used to create proton therapy plans using Raystation Treatment Planning System v10.A. Volumes were delineated, and doses reported consistent with International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements reports 50, 62, and 78. Target volumes were optimized such that 100% clinical target volume (CTV) was covered by 99% of the prescription dose. The prescribed dose was 30 Gy for PT and RT delivered in 5 fractions. For proton therapy, doses are reported in GyRBE = 1.1 Gy. The constraints for adjacent organs at risk (OARs) within 1 cm of the CTV were the following: femur V30Gy ≤ 50%, joint V30Gy < 50%, femoral head V30Gy ≤ 5 cm3, strip V12 ≤ 10%, and skin V12 < 50%. Target coverage goals, OAR constraints, and integral dose were compared by Student t test with P < .05 significance. Results A minimum 99% CTV coverage was achieved for all plans. OAR dose constraints were achieved for all proton and photon plans; however, mean doses to the femur (10.7 ± 8.5 vs 16.1 ± 7.7 GyRBE), femoral head (2.0 ± 4.4 vs 3.6 ± 6.4 GyRBE), and proximal joint (1.8 ± 2.4 vs 3.5 ± 4.4 GyRBE) were all significantly lower with PT vs intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) (all P < .05). Integral dose was significantly reduced for proton vs photon plans. Conformity and heterogeneity indices were significantly better for proton therapy. Conclusion Proton therapy maintained target coverage while significantly reducing integral and mean doses to the proximal organs at risk compared with RT. Further prospective investigation is warranted to validate these findings and potential benefit in the management of adult STS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rehema Thomas
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Hao Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Emile Gogineni
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Aditya Halthore
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | | | | | | | - Sara Alcorn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - Matthew Ladra
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Heng Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Curtiland Deville
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Dosimetric Parameters Related to Acute Radiation Dermatitis of Patients with Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Treated by Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy. J Pers Med 2022; 12:jpm12071095. [PMID: 35887590 PMCID: PMC9318665 DOI: 10.3390/jpm12071095] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/23/2022] [Revised: 06/25/2022] [Accepted: 06/29/2022] [Indexed: 12/08/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Growing patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) were treated with intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT). However, a high probability of severe acute radiation dermatitis (ARD) was observed. The objective of the study is to investigate the dosimetric parameters related to ARD for NPC patients treated with IMPT. Methods: Sixty-two patients with newly diagnosed NPC were analyzed. The ARD was recorded based on the criteria of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0. Logistic regression model was performed to identify the clinical and dosimetric parameters related to ARD. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis and the area under the curve (AUC) were used to evaluate the performance of the models. Results: The maximum ARD grade was 1, 2, and 3 in 27 (43.5%), 26 (42.0%), and 9 (14.5%) of the patients, respectively. Statistically significant differences (p < 0.01) in average volume to skin 5 mm with the respective doses were observed in the range 54−62 Cobalt Gray Equivalent (CGE) for grade 2 and 3 versus grade 1 ARD. Smoking habit and N2-N3 status were identified as significant predictors to develop grade 2 and 3 ARD in clinical model, and V58CGE to skin 5 mm as an independent predictor in dosimetric model. After adding the variable of V58CGE to the metric incorporating two parameters of smoking habit and N status, the AUC value of the metric increases from 0.78 (0.66−0.90) to 0.82 (0.72−0.93). The most appropriate cut-off value of V58CGE to skin 5 mm as determined by ROC curve was 5.0 cm3, with a predicted probability of 54% to develop grade 2 and 3 ARD. Conclusion: The dosimetric parameter of V58CGE to skin 5 mm < 5.0 cm3 could be used as a constraint in treatment planning for NPC patients treated by IMPT.
Collapse
|
10
|
Burnet NG, Mee T, Gaito S, Kirkby NF, Aitkenhead AH, Anandadas CN, Aznar MC, Barraclough LH, Borst G, Charlwood FC, Clarke M, Colaco RJ, Crellin AM, Defourney NN, Hague CJ, Harris M, Henthorn NT, Hopkins KI, Hwang E, Ingram SP, Kirkby KJ, Lee LW, Lines D, Lingard Z, Lowe M, Mackay RI, McBain CA, Merchant MJ, Noble DJ, Pan S, Price JM, Radhakrishna G, Reboredo-Gil D, Salem A, Sashidharan S, Sitch P, Smith E, Smith EAK, Taylor MJ, Thomson DJ, Thorp NJ, Underwood TSA, Warmenhoven JW, Wylie JP, Whitfield G. Estimating the percentage of patients who might benefit from proton beam therapy instead of X-ray radiotherapy. Br J Radiol 2022; 95:20211175. [PMID: 35220723 PMCID: PMC10993980 DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20211175] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/20/2021] [Revised: 01/11/2022] [Accepted: 01/12/2022] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES High-energy Proton Beam Therapy (PBT) commenced in England in 2018 and NHS England commissions PBT for 1.5% of patients receiving radical radiotherapy. We sought expert opinion on the level of provision. METHODS Invitations were sent to 41 colleagues working in PBT, most at one UK centre, to contribute by completing a spreadsheet. 39 responded: 23 (59%) completed the spreadsheet; 16 (41%) declined, arguing that clinical outcome data are lacking, but joined six additional site-specialist oncologists for two consensus meetings. The spreadsheet was pre-populated with incidence data from Cancer Research UK and radiotherapy use data from the National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service. 'Mechanisms of Benefit' of reduced growth impairment, reduced toxicity, dose escalation and reduced second cancer risk were examined. RESULTS The most reliable figure for percentage of radical radiotherapy patients likely to benefit from PBT was that agreed by 95% of the 23 respondents at 4.3%, slightly larger than current provision. The median was 15% (range 4-92%) and consensus median 13%. The biggest estimated potential benefit was from reducing toxicity, median benefit to 15% (range 4-92%), followed by dose escalation median 3% (range 0 to 47%); consensus values were 12 and 3%. Reduced growth impairment and reduced second cancer risk were calculated to benefit 0.5% and 0.1%. CONCLUSIONS The most secure estimate of percentage benefit was 4.3% but insufficient clinical outcome data exist for confident estimates. The study supports the NHS approach of using the evidence base and developing it through randomised trials, non-randomised studies and outcomes tracking. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE Less is known about the percentage of patients who may benefit from PBT than is generally acknowledged. Expert opinion varies widely. Insufficient clinical outcome data exist to provide robust estimates. Considerable further work is needed to address this, including international collaboration; much is already underway but will take time to provide mature data.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Neil G Burnet
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Rd,
Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Thomas Mee
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester,
Manchester Cancer Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science
Centre, Manchester, United
Kingdom
| | - Simona Gaito
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Rd,
Manchester, United Kingdom
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester,
Manchester Cancer Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science
Centre, Manchester, United
Kingdom
| | - Norman F Kirkby
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester,
Manchester Cancer Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science
Centre, Manchester, United
Kingdom
| | - Adam H Aitkenhead
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester,
Manchester Cancer Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science
Centre, Manchester, United
Kingdom
- Christie Medical Physics and Engineering, The Christie NHS
Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Road,
Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Carmel N Anandadas
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Rd,
Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Marianne C Aznar
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Rd,
Manchester, United Kingdom
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester,
Manchester Cancer Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science
Centre, Manchester, United
Kingdom
| | - Lisa H Barraclough
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Rd,
Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Gerben Borst
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Rd,
Manchester, United Kingdom
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester,
Manchester Cancer Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science
Centre, Manchester, United
Kingdom
| | - Frances C Charlwood
- Christie Medical Physics and Engineering, The Christie NHS
Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Road,
Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Matthew Clarke
- Christie Medical Physics and Engineering, The Christie NHS
Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Road,
Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Rovel J Colaco
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Rd,
Manchester, United Kingdom
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester,
Manchester Cancer Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science
Centre, Manchester, United
Kingdom
| | - Adrian M Crellin
- NHS England National Clinical Lead Proton Beam Therapy, Leeds
Cancer Centre, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds and St James's
Institute of Oncology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Beckett
Street, Leeds, LS9 7TF, UK, Leeds,
United Kingdom
| | - Noemie N Defourney
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester,
Manchester Cancer Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science
Centre, Manchester, United
Kingdom
| | - Christina J Hague
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Rd,
Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Margaret Harris
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Rd,
Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Nicholas T Henthorn
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester,
Manchester Cancer Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science
Centre, Manchester, United
Kingdom
| | - Kirsten I Hopkins
- International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna International
Centre, Vienna,
Austria
| | - E Hwang
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Rd,
Manchester, United Kingdom
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sydney West Radiation
Oncology Network, Crown Princess Mary Cancer Centre,
Sydney, New South Wales, Australia and
Institute of Medical Physics, School of Physics, University of Sydney,
Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Sam P Ingram
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester,
Manchester Cancer Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science
Centre, Manchester, United
Kingdom
- Christie Medical Physics and Engineering, The Christie NHS
Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Road,
Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Karen J Kirkby
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester,
Manchester Cancer Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science
Centre, Manchester, United
Kingdom
| | - Lip W Lee
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Rd,
Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - David Lines
- Christie Medical Physics and Engineering, The Christie NHS
Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Road,
Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Zoe Lingard
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester,
Manchester Cancer Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science
Centre, Manchester, United
Kingdom
| | - Matthew Lowe
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester,
Manchester Cancer Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science
Centre, Manchester, United
Kingdom
- Christie Medical Physics and Engineering, The Christie NHS
Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Road,
Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Ranald I Mackay
- Christie Medical Physics and Engineering, The Christie NHS
Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Road,
Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Catherine A McBain
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Rd,
Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Michael J Merchant
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester,
Manchester Cancer Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science
Centre, Manchester, United
Kingdom
| | - David J Noble
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Edinburgh Cancer Centre,
Western General Hospital,
Edinburgh, United Kingdom
| | - Shermaine Pan
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester,
Manchester Cancer Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science
Centre, Manchester, United
Kingdom
| | - James M Price
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Rd,
Manchester, United Kingdom
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester,
Manchester Cancer Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science
Centre, Manchester, United
Kingdom
| | | | - David Reboredo-Gil
- Christie Medical Physics and Engineering, The Christie NHS
Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Road,
Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Ahmed Salem
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Rd,
Manchester, United Kingdom
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester,
Manchester Cancer Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science
Centre, Manchester, United
Kingdom
| | | | - Peter Sitch
- Christie Medical Physics and Engineering, The Christie NHS
Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Road,
Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Ed Smith
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Rd,
Manchester, United Kingdom
- Proton Clinical Outcomes Unit, The Christie NHS Foundation
Trust, Manchester, United
Kingdom
| | - Edward AK Smith
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester,
Manchester Cancer Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science
Centre, Manchester, United
Kingdom
- Christie Medical Physics and Engineering, The Christie NHS
Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Road,
Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Michael J Taylor
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester,
Manchester Cancer Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science
Centre, Manchester, United
Kingdom
| | - David J Thomson
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Rd,
Manchester, United Kingdom
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester,
Manchester Cancer Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science
Centre, Manchester, United
Kingdom
| | - Nicola J Thorp
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Rd,
Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Tracy SA Underwood
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester,
Manchester Cancer Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science
Centre, Manchester, United
Kingdom
| | - John W Warmenhoven
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester,
Manchester Cancer Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science
Centre, Manchester, United
Kingdom
| | - James P Wylie
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Rd,
Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Gillian Whitfield
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Rd,
Manchester, United Kingdom
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester,
Manchester Cancer Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science
Centre, Manchester, United
Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Normal Tissue Complication Probability Modelling for Toxicity Prediction and Patient Selection in Proton Beam Therapy to the Central Nervous System: A Literature Review. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2022; 34:e225-e237. [DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2021.12.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/04/2021] [Revised: 11/22/2021] [Accepted: 12/21/2021] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
|
12
|
Hwang E, Burnet NG, Crellin AM, Ahern V, Thwaites DI, Gaito S, Chang YC, Smith E. A Novel Model and Infrastructure for Clinical Outcomes Data Collection and Their Systematic Evaluation for UK Patients Receiving Proton Beam Therapy. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2021; 34:11-18. [PMID: 34602320 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2021.09.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/30/2020] [Revised: 07/23/2021] [Accepted: 09/09/2021] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
AIMS To establish an infrastructure for sustainable, comprehensive data collection and systematic outcomes evaluation for UK patients receiving proton beam therapy (PBT). MATERIALS AND METHODS A Proton Outcomes Working Group was formed in 2014 to develop a national minimum dataset for PBT patients and to define a clinically integrated informatics solution for data collection. The Christie Proton Beam Therapy Centre formed its Proton Clinical Outcomes Unit in 2018 to collect, curate and analyse outcomes data prospectively for UK-treated patients and retrospectively for UK patients referred abroad for PBT since 2008 via the Proton Overseas Programme (POP). RESULTS A single electronic form (eForm) was developed to capture the agreed data, using a data tree approach including conditional logic: data items are requested once, further questions depend on previous answers and are sensitive to tumour site and patient pathway time point. Relevant data automatically populate other forms, saving time, prompting completeness of clinical assessments and ensuring data consistency. Completed eForm data populate the electronic patient record and generate individualised outputs, including consultation letters, treatment summary and surveillance plans, based on organs at risk irradiated, age and sex. All data regarding POP-treated patients are verified and migrated into the system, ensuring that patient data, whether overseas or UK treated, are consistently recorded. The eForm utilises a 'user friendly' web portal interface, the Clinical Web Portal, including clickable tables and infographics. Data items are coded to a universally recognised standard comparable with other data systems. Patient-reported outcomes are also integrated, highlighting significant toxicities and prompting a response. Outcomes data can be correlated with dosimetric DICOM data to support radiation dose modelling. CONCLUSION Outcomes data from both POP-treated and The Christie-treated patients support long-term care, allow evaluation of PBT efficacy and safety, assist future selection of PBT patients and support hypothesis generation for future clinical trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E Hwang
- The Christie Proton Beam Therapy Centre, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Institute of Medical Physics, School of Physics, University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
| | - N G Burnet
- The Christie Proton Beam Therapy Centre, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - A M Crellin
- NHS England National Clinical Lead Proton Beam Therapy, UK
| | - V Ahern
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sydney West Radiation Oncology Network, Crown Princess Mary Cancer Centre, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Medical Physics, Leeds Institute of Cancer and Pathology, School of Medicine, Leeds University, Leeds, UK
| | - D I Thwaites
- Institute of Medical Physics, School of Physics, University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Westmead Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - S Gaito
- Proton Clinical Outcomes Unit, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - Y-C Chang
- University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (UCLH), London, UK
| | - E Smith
- The Christie Proton Beam Therapy Centre, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Proton Clinical Outcomes Unit, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; University of Manchester, Manchester Cancer Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| |
Collapse
|