1
|
Agnoux E, Renan A, Faivre JC. Clinical trials that will change practices: News in palliative radiotherapy. Cancer Radiother 2023; 27:746-753. [PMID: 37891036 DOI: 10.1016/j.canrad.2023.08.004] [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: 08/16/2023] [Revised: 08/24/2023] [Accepted: 08/24/2023] [Indexed: 10/29/2023]
Abstract
Palliative radiotherapy is used to alleviate cancer-related symptoms. Symptomatic responses to palliative radiotherapy may however take several weeks, meaning that patients need to survive long enough to derive a real benefit. Oncologists can be optimistic when estimating survival for patients with advanced cancer and as a consequence some patients receiving palliative radiotherapy die before experiencing any gain. Models of patient survival have limited accuracy, particularly for predicting whether patients will die within the next 30 days. Dedicated rapid access palliative radiotherapy clinics, in which patients are assessed, simulated and treated on the same day, reduce the number of patient visits to the radiation oncology department and hence the burden on the patient as well as costs. Teleconsultation and advanced practice nurses can play a crucial role in providing rapid access to palliative radiotherapy in a dedicated palliative radiotherapy service. Single-fraction palliative radiotherapy should be offered to eligible patients if they are able to attend treatment and could potentially benefit from symptom palliation, irrespective of predicted life expectancy. Technical and organizational innovations have been proposed in order to dispense with the computed tomography scanner by carrying out the dosimetry on a recent diagnostic scanner or a magnetic resonance imaging scanner with integrated linear acceleration system. Stereotactic body radiation therapy makes it possible to envisage greater and more lasting analgesic benefits in patients with painful bone metastasis and good prognosis. Flash radiotherapy remains at the preclinical stage.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E Agnoux
- Academic Department of Radiation Therapy & Brachytherapy, institut de cancérologie de Lorraine, centre Alexis-Vautrin, Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy, France
| | - A Renan
- Academic Department of Radiation Therapy & Brachytherapy, institut de cancérologie de Lorraine, centre Alexis-Vautrin, Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy, France
| | - J-C Faivre
- Academic Department of Radiation Therapy & Brachytherapy, institut de cancérologie de Lorraine, centre Alexis-Vautrin, Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy, France.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Alger E, Minchom A, Lee Aiyegbusi O, Schipper M, Yap C. Statistical methods and data visualisation of patient-reported outcomes in early phase dose-finding oncology trials: a methodological review. EClinicalMedicine 2023; 64:102228. [PMID: 37781154 PMCID: PMC10541462 DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2023.102228] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/16/2023] [Revised: 08/25/2023] [Accepted: 09/05/2023] [Indexed: 10/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Traditionally, within dose-finding clinical trials, treatment toxicity and tolerability are assessed by clinicians. Research has shown that clinician reporting may have inadequate inter-rater reliability, poor correlation with patient reported outcomes, and under capture the true toxicity burden. The introduction of patient-reported outcomes (PROs), where the patient can assess their own symptomatic adverse events or quality of life, has potential to complement current practice to aid dose optimisation. There are no international recommendations offering guidance for the inclusion of PROs in dose-finding trial design and analysis. Our review aimed to identify and describe current statistical methods and data visualisation techniques employed to analyse and visualise PRO data in published early phase dose-finding oncology trials (DFOTs). Methods DFOTs published from June 2016-December 2022, which presented PRO analysis methods, were included in this methodological review. We extracted 35 eligible papers indexed in PubMed. Study characteristics extracted included: PRO objectives, PRO measures, statistical analysis and visualisation techniques, and whether the PRO was involved in interim and final dose selection decisions. Findings Most papers (30, 85.7%) did not include clear PRO objectives. 20 (57.1%) papers used inferential statistical techniques to analyse PROs, including survival analysis and mixed-effect models. One trial used PROs to classify a clinicians' assessed dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs). Three (8.6%) trials used PROs to confirm the tolerability of the recommended dose. 25 trial reports visually presented PRO data within a figure or table within their publication, of which 12 papers presented PRO score longitudinally. Interpretation This review highlighted that the statistical methods and reporting of PRO analysis in DFOTs are often poorly described and inconsistent. Many trials had PRO objectives which were not clearly described, making it challenging to evaluate the appropriateness of the statistical techniques used. Drawing conclusions based on DFOTs which are not powered for PROs may be misleading. With no guidance and standardisation of analysis methods for PROs in early phase DFOTs, it is challenging to compare study findings across trials. Therefore, there is a crucial need to establish international guidance to enhance statistical methods and graphical presentation for PRO analysis in the dose-finding setting. Funding EA has been supported to undertake this work as part of a PhD studentship from the Institute of Cancer Research within the MRC/NIHR Trials Methodology Research Partnership. AM is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre at the Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, the Institute of Cancer Research and Imperial College.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emily Alger
- Clinical Trial and Statistics Unit, Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Anna Minchom
- Drug Development Unit, Royal Marsden/Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Olalekan Lee Aiyegbusi
- Centre for Patient Reported Outcomes Research, Institute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, UK
- National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Matthew Schipper
- Departments of Radiation Oncology and Biostatistics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Christina Yap
- Clinical Trial and Statistics Unit, Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Van Oirschot M, Bergman A, Verbakel WFAR, Ward L, Gagne I, Huang V, Chng N, Houston P, Symes K, Thomas CG, Basran P, Bowes D, Harrow S, Olson R, Senan S, Warner A, Palma DA, Gaede S. Determining Planning Priorities for SABR for Oligometastatic Disease: A Secondary Analysis of the SABR-COMET Phase II Randomized Trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2022; 114:1016-1021. [PMID: 35031340 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.01.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/01/2021] [Revised: 11/29/2021] [Accepted: 01/03/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE SABR may improve survival in patients with oligometastases, but for some lesions, safe delivery of SABR may require a reduction in delivered dose or target coverage. This study assessed the association between target coverage compromise and oncologic and survival outcomes. METHODS AND MATERIALS Patients with a controlled primary malignancy and 1 to 5 oligometastases were randomized (1:2) between standard of care (SOC) treatment and SOC plus SABR. In patients receiving SABR, the target dose coverage was reduced to meet organ at risk (OAR) constraints, if necessary. The D99 value (minimum dose received by the hottest 99% of the planning target volume [PTV]) was used as a measure of PTV coverage for each treatment plan, and the relationship between the coverage compromise index (CCI, defined as D99/prescription dose) and patient outcomes was assessed. RESULTS Sixty-two patients in the SABR arm had dosimetric information available and a total of 109 lesions were evaluated. The mean CCI per lesion was 0.96 (95% CI, 0.56-1.61). Of the 109 lesions evaluated, 29.4% (n = 32) required coverage compromise (CCI <0.9). Adrenal metastases required coverage compromise in 100% of analyzed lesions (n = 7). CCI was not significantly associated with lesional control, adverse events, overall survival (OS), or progression-free survival (PFS). CONCLUSIONS Target compromise was required in a substantial minority of cases, but PTV coverage was not associated with OS, progression-free survival, or lesional control. This suggests that OAR constraints used for SABR treatments in the oligometastatic setting should continue to be prioritized during planning.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Alanah Bergman
- British Columbia Cancer, Vancouver Centre, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Wilko F A R Verbakel
- Amsterdam University Medical Center, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Lucy Ward
- Nova Scotia Health, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
| | - Isabelle Gagne
- British Columbia Cancer, Victoria Centre, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Vicky Huang
- British Columbia Cancer, Surrey Centre, Surrey, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Nick Chng
- British Columbia Cancer, Centre for the North, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Peter Houston
- Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre, Glasgow, Scotland
| | - Kerry Symes
- British Columbia Cancer, Vancouver Centre, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | | | | | - David Bowes
- Nova Scotia Health, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
| | - Stephen Harrow
- Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre, Glasgow, Scotland
| | - Robert Olson
- British Columbia Cancer, Centre for the North, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Suresh Senan
- Amsterdam University Medical Center, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Andrew Warner
- London Health Sciences Centre, London, Ontario, Canada
| | - David A Palma
- London Health Sciences Centre, London, Ontario, Canada
| | - Stewart Gaede
- London Health Sciences Centre, London, Ontario, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Dove APH, Wells A, Gong W, Liu D, Kirschner AN. Evaluation of 5 Fraction Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) for Osseous Renal Cell Carcinoma Metastases. Am J Clin Oncol 2022; 45:501-505. [PMID: 36413679 PMCID: PMC9699181 DOI: 10.1097/coc.0000000000000952] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The best fractionation for stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) metastases has not been well defined. In addition, the literature on outcomes using 5-fraction SBRT in the setting of osseous metastases has not been well reported. MATERIALS AND METHODS Thirty-nine patients with 69 RCC osseous metastases were treated using 5-fraction SBRT at a single institution using 2 dose-fractionation schemes. Overall survival and local-control (LC) outcomes of the 2 fractionation schemes were studied using Kaplan-Meier curves. RESULTS Of the 69 lesions included in the study, 20 were treated with 30 grays (Gy) in 5 fractions and 49 were treated with 40 Gy in 5 fractions. The median age of patients at diagnosis was 58.4 years. The 1-year LC rate for all treated lesions was 85.5% (59/69) with an LC of 90% (18/20) for lesions receiving 30 Gy and 83.7% (41/49) in lesions receiving 40 Gy. There was no statistically significant difference in 1-year LC rate between the 2 fractionation schemes (P-value, 0.553). CONCLUSIONS Patients with osseous RCC metastases undergoing 5 fractions of SBRT had favorable LC outcomes. There was no difference in survival or LC between the 40 Gy and 30 Gy treatment arms.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Austin P H Dove
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Department of Cancer Biology
| | - Alex Wells
- School of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Sherry AD, Bathala TK, Liu S, Fellman BM, Chun SG, Jasani N, Guadagnolo BA, Jhingran A, Reddy JP, Corn PG, Shah AY, Kaiser KW, Ghia AJ, Gomez DR, Tang C. Definitive Local Consolidative Therapy for Oligometastatic Solid Tumors: Results From the Lead-in Phase of the Randomized Basket Trial EXTEND. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2022; 114:910-918. [PMID: 35691448 PMCID: PMC11041161 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.05.023] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/15/2022] [Revised: 05/01/2022] [Accepted: 05/07/2022] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE The benefit of local consolidative therapy (LCT) for oligometastasis across histologies remains uncertain. EXTernal beam radiation to Eliminate Nominal metastatic Disease (EXTEND; NCT03599765) is a randomized phase 2 basket trial evaluating the effectiveness of LCT for oligometastatic solid tumors. We report here the prospective results of the single-arm "lead-in" phase intended to identify histologies most likely to accrue to histology-specific endpoints in the randomized phase. METHODS AND MATERIALS Eligible histologies included colorectal, sarcoma, lung, head and neck, ovarian, renal, melanoma, pancreatic, prostate, cervix/uterine, breast, and hepatobiliary. Patients received LCT to all sites of active metastatic disease and primary/regional disease (as applicable) plus standard-of-care systemic therapy or observation. The primary endpoint in EXTEND was progression-free survival (PFS), and the primary endpoint of the lead-phase was histology-specific accrual feasibility. Adverse events were graded by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0. RESULTS From August 2018 through January 2019, 50 patients were enrolled and 49 received definitive LCT. Prostate, breast, and kidney were the highest enrolling histologies and identified for independent accrual in the randomization phase. Most patients (73%) had 1 or 2 metastases, most often in lung or bone (79%), and received ablative radiation (62%). Median follow-up for censored patients was 38 months (range, 16-42 months). Median PFS was 13 months (95% confidence interval, 9-24), 3-year overall survival rate was 73% (95% confidence interval, 57%-83%), and local control rate was 98% (93 of 95 tumors). Two patients (4%) had Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade 3 toxic effects related to LCT; no patient had grade 4 or 5 toxic effects. CONCLUSIONS The prospective lead-in phase of the EXTEND basket trial demonstrated feasible accrual, encouraging PFS, and low rates of severe toxic effects at mature follow-up. The randomized phase is ongoing with histology-based baskets that will provide histology-specific evidence for LCT in oligometastatic disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexander D Sherry
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Tharakeswara K Bathala
- Department of Abdominal Imaging, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Suyu Liu
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Bryan M Fellman
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Stephen G Chun
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Nikesh Jasani
- Department of General Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - B Ashleigh Guadagnolo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Anuja Jhingran
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Jay P Reddy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Paul G Corn
- Department of Genitourinary Medical Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Amishi Y Shah
- Department of Genitourinary Medical Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Kelsey W Kaiser
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Amol J Ghia
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Daniel R Gomez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas; Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Chad Tang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas; Department of Investigational Cancer Therapeutics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas; Department of Translational Molecular Pathology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Local Control after Locally Ablative, Image-Guided Radiotherapy of Oligometastases Identified by Gallium-68-PSMA-Positron Emission Tomography in Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer Patients (OLI-P). Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14092073. [PMID: 35565207 PMCID: PMC9100669 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14092073] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/20/2022] [Revised: 04/13/2022] [Accepted: 04/18/2022] [Indexed: 02/01/2023] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary In this clinical trial, 63 patients with a total of 89 prostate cancer metastases identified on PSMA-PET were included, none of them undergoing androgen deprivation therapy. We showed that local ablative radiotherapy controls >90% of the metastases, but progression at other sites is common after two years. Local ablative radiotherapy may be an option to at least temporarily avoid systemic therapy in selected patients. Abstract Progression of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) values after curative treatment of prostate cancer patients is common. Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA-) PET imaging can identify patients with metachronous oligometastatic disease even at low PSA levels. Metastases-directed local ablative radiotherapy (aRT) has been shown to be a safe treatment option. In this prospective clinical trial, we evaluated local control and the pattern of tumor progression. Between 2014 and 2018, 63 patients received aRT of 89 metastases (MET) (68 lymph node (LN-)MET and 21 bony (OSS-)MET) with one of two radiation treatment schedules: 50 Gy in 2 Gy fractions in 34 MET or 30 Gy in 10 Gy fractions in 55 MET. The mean gross tumor volume and planning target volume were 2.2 and 14.9 mL, respectively. The median follow-up time was 40.7 months. Local progression occurred in seven MET, resulting in a local control rate of 93.5% after three years. Neither treatment schedule, target volume, nor type of lesion was associated with local progression. Regional progression in the proximity to the LN-MET was observed in 19 of 47 patients with at least one LN-MET (actuarial 59.3% free of regional progression after 3 years). In 33 patients (52%), a distant progression was reported. The median time to first tumor-related clinical event was 16.6 months, and 22.2% of patients had no tumor-related clinical event after three years. A total of 14 patients (22%) had another aRT. In conclusion, local ablative radiotherapy in patients with PSMA-PET staged oligometastatic prostate cancer may achieve local control, but regional or distant progression is common. Further studies are warranted, e.g., to define the optimal target volume coverage in LN-MET and OSS-MET.
Collapse
|
7
|
Toxicity and Efficacy of Local Ablative, Image-guided Radiotherapy in Gallium-68 Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Targeted Positron Emission Tomography-staged, Castration-sensitive Oligometastatic Prostate Cancer: The OLI-P Phase 2 Clinical Trial. Eur Urol Oncol 2021; 5:44-51. [PMID: 34785189 DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2021.10.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/06/2021] [Revised: 09/17/2021] [Accepted: 10/05/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Local ablative radiotherapy (aRT) of oligometastatic prostate cancer (PCa) is very promising and has become a focus of current clinical research. OBJECTIVE We hypothesize that aRT is safe and effective in gallium-68 prostate-specific membrane antigen targeted positron emission tomography (PSMA-PET)-staged oligometastatic PCa patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A nonrandomized, prospective, investigator-initiated phase 2 trial recruited patients with oligometastatic PCa (five or fewer lymph node or osseous metastases) after local curative therapy, without significant comorbidity and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), at two German centers from 2014 to 2018. INTERVENTION All PSMA-PET-positive metastases were treated with aRT. No systemic therapy was initiated. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS The primary endpoint was treatment-related toxicity (grade ≥2) 24 mo after aRT. A one-sided single-sample test of proportions was planned to test whether the endpoint occurs in <15% of the patients. Key secondary endpoints were time to progression of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and time to ADT, which were associated with potential prognostic factors by Cox regression. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Of 72 patients, 63 received aRT (13% dropout rate). The median follow-up was 37.2 mo. No treatment-related grade ≥2 toxicity was observed 2 yr after treatment. The median time to PSA progression and time to ADT were 13.2 and 20.6 mo, respectively. Of the patients, 21.4% were free of PSA progression after 3 yr. CONCLUSIONS It was observed that aRT is safe, and midterm PSA progression and ADT-free time were achieved in one of five patients. Randomized clinical trials are indicated to further evaluate the option of delaying ADT in selected patients. PATIENT SUMMARY In this clinical trial, 63 patients with up to five metastases of prostate cancer without androgen deprivation therapy were included. We showed that local ablative radiotherapy is safe and that one in five patients had no recurrent prostate-specific antigen value after 3 yr. Local ablative radiotherapy might be an option to avoid systemic therapy in selected patients.
Collapse
|
8
|
Lopez-Campos F, Cacicedo J, Couñago F, García R, Leaman-Alcibar O, Navarro-Martin A, Pérez-Montero H, Conde-Moreno A. SEOR SBRT-SG stereotactic body radiation therapy consensus guidelines for non-spine bone metastasis. Clin Transl Oncol 2021; 24:215-226. [PMID: 34633602 DOI: 10.1007/s12094-021-02695-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/05/2021] [Accepted: 08/11/2021] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
The use of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) to treat non-spine bone metastases (NSBM) is becoming increasingly common in clinical practice. The clinical advantages of SBRT include good pain control and high local control rates, although only limited data are available. The Spanish Society of Radiation Oncology (SEOR) SBRT group recently convened a task force of experts in the field to address key questions related to SBRT for NSBM, including treatment indications, planning, techniques, and dose fractionation. The task force reviewed the available literature to develop evidence-based recommendations for the safe application of NSBM SBRT and to standardize and optimize SBRT processes. The present document provides a comprehensive analysis of the available data, including ongoing clinical trials and controversies, providing clinically applicable recommendations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- F Lopez-Campos
- Radiation Oncology Department, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, Madrid, Spain.
| | - J Cacicedo
- Radiation Oncology Department, Osakidetza/Biocruces Bizkaia Health Research Institute, Hospital Universitario Cruces, Barakaldo, Spain.,Department of Surgery, Radiology and Physical Medicine of the University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), Vizcaya, Spain
| | - F Couñago
- Radiation Oncology Department, Hospital Universitario Quirón Salud, Hospital La Luz, Madrid, Universidad Europea de Madrid (UEM), Madrid, Spain
| | - R García
- Radiation Oncology Department, Hospital Ruber Internacional Madrid, Madrid, Spain
| | - O Leaman-Alcibar
- Radiation Oncology Department, Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañon, Madrid, Spain
| | - A Navarro-Martin
- Radiation Oncology Department, Institut Català d'Oncologia, Hospital Duran i Reynals, Barcelona, Spain
| | - H Pérez-Montero
- Radiation Oncology Department, Institut Català d'Oncologia, Hospital Duran i Reynals, Barcelona, Spain
| | - A Conde-Moreno
- Radiation Oncology Department, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe, Valencia, CEU Cardenal Herrera University, Castellón, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Rans K, De Meerleer G, Joniau S, Baten A, Berkovic P, Lambrecht M, Berghen C. In Regard to Zelefsky et al. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2021; 110:910-911. [PMID: 34089682 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2021.02.038] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/27/2021] [Accepted: 02/16/2021] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Kato Rans
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Gert De Meerleer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Steven Joniau
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Adinda Baten
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Patrick Berkovic
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Maarten Lambrecht
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Charlien Berghen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Zelefsky MJ, Greco C, Yamada Y, Powell SN, Fuks Z. In Reply to Rans et al. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2021; 110:911-912. [PMID: 34089683 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2021.02.040] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2021] [Accepted: 02/16/2021] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Michael J Zelefsky
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Carlo Greco
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Champalimaud Center for the Unknown, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Yoshiya Yamada
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Simon N Powell
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Zvi Fuks
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| |
Collapse
|