To Örebro University

PURPOSE: Intraoperative breast cancer radiotherapy (IORT) offers an alternative to external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS). The Intraoperative brachytherapy (IOBT) trial applies high dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy with a new applicator prototype as IORT after BCS. In this interim analysis of the IOBT trial, we present the oncological safety and toxicity of the method.

METHODS: Eligible patients were women, ≥ 50 years old with an unifocal nonlobular, estrogen-receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer, cN0, ≤ 3 cm, treated with BCS and sentinel node biopsy (SNB). Toxicity was registered according to the LENT-SOMA scale. Cumulative incidence of local (LR) and regional recurrence (RR) were calculated through cumulative incidence function whereas overall survival (OS) was illustrated through Kaplan-Meier curve.

RESULTS: Until February 2023, 155 women (median age 68 years) were included in the trial. Twenty-nine women (18.7%) received supplemental EBRT, mostly due to positive SNB. Three-year cumulative incidence of LR and RR were 1.0% (CI 95 % 0.1%-2.3%) and 2.1% (CI 95% 0.8%-4.2%) respectively. Five- year cumulative incidence of LR and RR were 3.9% (CI 95% 1.8%-6.4%) and 2.1% (CI 95% 0.8%-4.2%) respectively. Five-year OS was 96.3% (CI 95% 93.6%-98.4%). Side effects were limited, low grade, and transient.

CONCLUSION: Acknowledging the short median follow-up time at interim analysis, our initial results indicate that delivering IORT through HDR brachytherapy in carefully selected breast cancer patients is feasible and oncological safe so far. A long-term follow-up is essential to confirm the initial results.

BACKGROUND: The benefit of prophylactic whole pelvis radiation therapy (WPRT) in prostate cancer has been debated for decades, with evidence based mainly on conventional fractionation targeting pelvic nodes.

AIM: This retrospective cohort study aimed to explore the impact of adding moderately hypofractionated pelvic radiotherapy to prostate-only irradiation (PORT) on prognosis, toxicity, and quality of life in real-world settings.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with high-risk and conventionally staged prostate cancer (cT1-3N0M0) treated with moderately hypofractionated WPRT or PORT, using external beam radiotherapy alone or combined with high-dose-rate brachytherapy, at Örebro University Hospital between 2008 and 2021 were identified. Biochemical failure-free survival (BFFS), metastasis-free survival (MFS), prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS), and overall survival (OS) were compared using Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards. Toxicity and quality of life measures were also analysed.

RESULTS: Among 516 patients (227 PORT, 289 WPRT), 5-year BFFS rates were 77 % (PORT) and 74 % (WPRT), adjusted HR=1.50 (95 % CI=0.88-2.55). No significant differences were found in MFS, PCSS, or OS in main analyses. WPRT was associated with a higher risk of acute grade ≥ 2 and 3 genitourinary toxicities whereas no differences in late toxicities or quality of life between PORT and WPRT were observed.

CONCLUSION: We found no significant differences in oncological outcomes or quality of life when comparing moderately hypofractionated PORT to WPRT. Some differences in toxicity patterns were observed. Despite caveats related to study design, our findings support the need for further research on WPRT's impact on treatment-related and patient-reported outcomes.

Purpose: Treating localized prostate cancer (PC) with combination radiotherapy consisting of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) has been proven to result in better disease outcome than EBRT only. We aimed to evaluate the incidence of toxicities due to combination therapy and identify parameters correlated to acute or late urinary, rectal, and erectile toxicities.

Material and methods: Data on symptoms and tumor/treatment parameters were collected from 359 patients treated between 2008 and 2018 with EBRT (42 Gy in 14 fractions) and HDR-BT (14.5 Gy in one fraction) for localized PC, at the Örebro University Hospital. Urinary, rectal, and erectile symptoms were presented descriptively, and bivariate analyses for correlation between grade ≥ 2 toxicity and potential predictors were performed. To evaluate prognostic models, multivariable analyses were applied.

Results: Urinary toxicity grade ≥ 2 was observed in 154 patients (47% of patients without pre-existing symptoms grade ≥ 2), of which 15 were grade 3. Rectal toxicity grade 2 was observed in 22 (6%) patients. Any grade erectile dysfunction was evident in all patients without pre-existing dysfunction (n = 103), whereas only 7 recovered completely. In bivariate analyses age was correlated with higher risk of acute urinary toxicity, and irradiated volume was associated with both urinary and rectal toxicities. However, we found no multivariable model of clinical and statistical significance to predict the risk of urinary or rectal toxicities.

Conclusions: In our study cohort, the severity of toxicities was in general mild or moderate and temporary, whereas the incidence of severe toxicity was considerably low. Although we found no predictive models for toxicities, our findings are reassuring that this treatment approach as curative therapy for localized PC is well-tolerated.

There is an increasing incidence of Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) and Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) on the external nose. Surgery is the main treatment but often face problems with respect to cosmetic defects and non-radical resection. Brachytherapy (BT) can be used in the primary treatment to preserve cosmetic appearance and to treat with appropriate margins. Brachytherapy are also indicated in tumor recurrence after surgery and in case of non-radical resection. Long-term local control rate (LCR) in literature is 90-95 %. Treatment time is short 1-2 weeks.

There are different BT techniques available such as -Surface BT (Valencia applicator or Mould BT), -interstitial BT (trans-nasal or along nasal) or a combination of both.

The choice of BT technique is depending on; -thickness of the tumor, -location on the nose (cartilage part vs bony part), -tumor growth (flat part, curvature part, exophytic part), -extension to peri-nasal areas (upper lip, cheek, medial eye corner).

Usually a full dose of BT is prescribed  ike 60 Gy PDR (0.83 Gy/ 2nd hour) or 45, 5 Gy HDR (3.5 Gy 2fx/d) (GEC-ESTRO recommendations for head/neck BT RTO 20016:10 and skin RTO 2018:126). Own experience 1998-2019 in 121 patients confirms published results of 93.4 % long-term LCR.

Side effects are uncommon and include: septum perforation, telangiectasia, atrophy and sclerosis. Multidisciplinary conferences and teaching of plastic surgeons about potential benefits of BT are fundamental to avoid unnecessary mutilation.

Purpose: Until now, most long-term results for brachytherapy only has been published for low-dose-rate (LDR) seeds. Due to radiobiology reasons, high-dose-rate (HDR) mono-brachytherapy is of growing interest. The aim of the study was to report long-term biochemical control rate and toxicities with HDR monotherapy.

Material and methods: This was a retrospective single-institution experience, including 229 men, clinically staged T1c-T2b, Gleason 3 + 3 (prostate specific antigen (PSA) <= 15), or Gleason 3 + 4 (PSA <= 10), consecutively treated between 2004 and 2012 with HDR brachytherapy alone, using three different fractionation schedules of 92-95 Gy (EQD(2), alpha/beta = 3). Group 4F (n = 19) had a single implant of 9.5 Gy in four fractions over 2 days. Group 3F (n = 107) had three separate implants of 11 Gy over 4 weeks. Group 2F (n = 103) had two implants of 14 Gy over 2 weeks. No adjuvant hormonal therapy was allowed.

Results: For 4F, 3F, and 2F study groups, median follow-up was 10.2, 7.1, and 6.1 years, respectively, and biochemical failure rate was 10.5%, 4.7%, and 14.6%, respectively. Early and late side effects were followed with common terminology criteria version 2.0 and patient-reported questionnaires. There were a temporary acute urethral toxicity increase, 1-2 grades over baseline lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), which usually recovered. About 1/3 of the patients had a remaining one grade over baseline LUTS. Severe grade 3-4 toxicity were only found in 3.5% of patients. No rectal toxicity was observed. Erectile dysfunction (ED) was depending on age and erectile function before treatment. In patients without ED before the treatment, we found a complete ED in 21% of men at the last follow-up.

Conclusions: In the present study, HDR mono-brachytherapy was found to be an effective treatment, with mild long-term side effects difficult to differentiate from aging effects. There were no significant differences in PSA regression, PSA failure rate, and toxicity between the different fraction schedules.

Purpose: To evaluate feasibility, quality of life, toxicity, and cosmetic outcome for intraoperative breast cancer brachytherapy after breast-conserving surgery using high dose rate brachytherapy.

Methods and materials: Fifty-two consecutive women, > 50 years old, diagnosed with a unifocal non-lobular breast cancer <= 3 cm, N0, underwent breast-conserving surgery and sentinel node biopsy. Twenty-five women received intraoperative brachytherapy pre-pathology at primary surgery and the others post-pathology, during a second procedure. An applicator, connected to a high dose rate afterloader, was used. Two of the women were excluded due to metastases found per-operatively at a frozen section from the sentinel node. Quality of life was evaluated using two validated health questionnaires. Treatment toxicity was documented according to the LENT-SOMA scale by two oncologists. The cosmetic result was evaluated using the validated freely available software BCCT.core 2.0.

Results: The clinical procedure worked out well logistically. Seven women received supplementary external radiotherapy due to insufficient margins and, in one case, poor adaptation of the breast parenchyma to the applicator. No serious adverse effects from irradiation were registered. The results from the health questionnaires showed no major differences compared with reference groups from the Swedish population. Only two women were registered as having a "poor" cosmetic result while a majority of the women had a "good" outcome.

Conclusion: This pilot study shows that intraoperative brachytherapy is a feasible procedure and encourages further trials evaluating its role in treatment of early breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The HYPO-RT-PC trial compared conventionally fractionated radiotherapy with ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy in patients with localised prostate cancer. Ultra-hypofractionation was non-inferior to conventional fractionation regarding 5-year failure-free survival and toxicity. We aimed to assess whether patient-reported quality of life (QOL) differs between conventional fractionation and ultra-hypofractionation up to 6 years after treatment in the HYPO-RT-PC trial.

METHODS: HYPO-RT-PC is a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial done in 12 centres (seven university hospitals and five county hospitals) in Sweden and Denmark. Inclusion criteria were histologically verified intermediate-to-high-risk prostate cancer (defined as T1c-T3a with one or two of the following risk factors: stage T3a; Gleason score ≥7; and prostate-specific antigen 10-20 ng/mL with no evidence of lymph node involvement or distant metastases), age up to 75 years, and WHO performance status 0-2. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to conventional fractionation (78·0 Gy in 39 fractions, 5 days per week for 8 weeks) or ultra-hypofractionation (42·7 Gy in seven fractions, 3 days per week for 2·5 weeks) via a minimisation algorithm with stratification by trial centre, T-stage, Gleason score, and prostate-specific antigen. QOL was measured using the validated Prostate Cancer Symptom Scale (PCSS) and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) at baseline, the end of radiotherapy, months 3, 6, 12, and 24 after radiotherapy, every other year thereafter up to 10 years, and at 15 years. The primary endpoint (failure-free survival) has been reported elsewhere. Here we report QOL, a secondary endpoint analysed in the per-protocol population, up to 6 years after radiotherapy. The HYPO-RT-PC trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN45905321.

FINDINGS: Between July 1, 2005, and Nov 4, 2015, 1200 patients were enrolled and 1180 were randomly assigned (conventional fractionation n=591, ultra-hypofractionation n=589); 1165 patients (conventional fractionation n=582, ultra-hypofractionation n=583) were included in this QOL analysis. 158 (71%) of 223 patients in the conventional fractionation group and 146 (66%) of 220 in the ultra-hypofractionation group completed questionnaires at 6 years. The median follow-up was 48 months (IQR 25-72). In seven of ten bowel symptoms or problems the proportion of patients with clinically relevant deteriorations at the end of radiotherapy was significantly higher in the ultra-hypofractionation group than in the conventional fractionation group (stool frequency [p<0·0001], rush to toilet [p=0·0013], flatulence [p=0·0013], bowel cramp [p<0·0001], mucus [p=0·0014], blood in stool [p<0·0001], and limitation in daily activity [p=0·0014]). There were no statistically significant differences in the proportions of patients with clinically relevant acute urinary symptoms or problems (total 14 items) and sexual functioning between the two treatment groups at end of radiotherapy. Thereafter, there were no clinically relevant differences in urinary, bowel, or sexual functioning between the groups. At the 6-year follow-up there was no difference in the incidence of clinically relevant deterioration between the groups for overall urinary bother (43 [33%] of 132 for conventional fractionation vs 33 [28%] of 120 for ultra-hypofractionation; mean difference 5·1% [95% CI -4·4 to 14·6]; p=0·38), overall bowel bother (43 [33%] of 129 vs 34 [28%] of 123; 5·7% [-3·8 to 15·2]; p=0·33), overall sexual bother (75 [60%] of 126 vs 59 [50%] of 117; 9·1% [-1·4 to 19·6]; p=0·15), or global health/QOL (56 [42%] of 134 vs 46 [37%] of 125; 5·0% [-5·0 to 15·0]; p=0·41).

INTERPRETATION: Although acute toxicity was higher for ultra-hypofractionation than conventional fractionation, this long-term patient-reported QOL analysis shows that ultra-hypofractionation was as well tolerated as conventional fractionation up to 6 years after completion of treatment. These findings support the use of ultra-hypofractionation radiotherapy for intermediate-to-high-risk prostate cancer.

Background: Hypofractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer has gained increased attention due to its proposed high radiation-fraction sensitivity. Recent reports from studies comparing moderately hypofractionated and conventionally fractionated radiotherapy support the clinical use of moderate hypofractionation. To date, there are no published randomised studies on ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy. Here, we report the outcomes of the Scandinavian HYPO-RTPC phase 3 trial with the aim to show non-inferiority of ultra-hypofractionation compared with conventional fractionation.

Methods: In this open-label, randomised, phase 3 non-inferiority trial done in 12 centres in Sweden and Denmark, we recruited men up to 75 years of age with intermediate-to-high-risk prostate cancer and a WHO performance status between 0 and 2. Patients were randomly assigned to ultra-hypofractionation (42.7 Gy in seven fractions, 3 days per week for 2.5 weeks) or conventional fractionated radiotherapy (78.0 Gy in 39 fractions, 5 days per week for 8 weeks). No androgen deprivation therapy was allowed. The primary endpoint was time to biochemical or clinical failure, analysed in the per-protocol population. The prespecified non-inferiority margin was 4% at 5 years, corresponding to a critical hazard ratio (HR) limit of 1.338. Physician-recorded toxicity was measured according to the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) morbidity scale and patient-reported outcome measurements with the Prostate Cancer Symptom Scale (PCSS) questionnaire. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN45905321.

Findings: Between July 1, 2005, and Nov 4, 2015, 1200 patients were randomly assigned to conventional fractionation (n=602) or ultra-hypofractionation (n=598), of whom 1180 (591 conventional fractionation and 589 ultra-hypofractionation) constituted the per-protocol population. 1054 (89%) participants were intermediate risk and 126 (11%) were high risk. Median follow-up time was 5.0 years (IQR 3.1-7.0). The estimated failure-free survival at 5 years was 84% (95% CI 80-87) in both treatment groups, with an adjusted HR of 1.002 (95% CI 0.758-1.325; log-rank p=0.99). There was weak evidence of an increased frequency of acute physician-reported RTOG grade 2 or worse urinary toxicity in the ultra-hypofractionation group at end of radiotherapy (158 [28%] of 569 patients vs 132 [23%] of 578 patients; p=0.057). There were no significant differences in grade 2 or worse urinary or bowel late toxicity between the two treatment groups at any point after radiotherapy, except for an increase in urinary toxicity in the ultra-hypofractionation group compared to the conventional fractionation group at 1-year follow-up (32 [6%] of 528 patients vs 13 [2%] of 529 patients; (p=0.0037). We observed no differences between groups in frequencies at 5 years of RTOG grade 2 or worse urinary toxicity (11 [5%] of 243 patients for the ultra-hypofractionation group vs 12 [5%] of 249 for the conventional fractionation group; p=1.00) and bowel toxicity (three [1%] of 244 patients vs nine [4%] of 249 patients; p=0.14). Patient-reported outcomes revealed significantly higher levels of acute urinary and bowel symptoms in the ultra-hypofractionation group compared with the conventional fractionation group but no significant increases in late symptoms were found, except for increased urinary symptoms at 1-year follow-up, consistent with the physician-evaluated toxicity.

Interpretation: Ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy is non-inferior to conventionally fractionated radiotherapy for intermediate-to-high risk prostate cancer regarding failure-free survival. Early side-effects are more pronounced with ultra-hypofractionation compared with conventional fractionation whereas late toxicity is similar in both treatment groups. The results support the use of ultra-hypofractionation for radiotherapy of prostate cancer. Copyright (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Purpose: Clinical data collecting is expensive in terms of time and human resources. Data can be collected in different ways; therefore, performing multicentric research based on previously stored data is often difficult. The primary objective of the ENT COBRA (COnsortium for BRachytherapy data Analysis) ontology is to define a specific terminological system to standardized data collection for head and neck (H&N) cancer patients treated with interventional radiotherapy.

Material and methods: ENT-COBRA is a consortium for standardized data collection for H&N patients treated with interventional radiotherapy. It is linked to H&N and Skin GEC-ESTRO Working Group and includes 11 centers from 6 countries. Its ontology was firstly defined by a multicentric working group, then evaluated by the consortium followed by a multi-professional technical commission involving a mathematician, an engineer, a physician with experience in data storage, a programmer, and a software expert.

Results: Two hundred and forty variables were defined on 13 input forms. There are 3 levels, each offering a specific type of analysis: 1. Registry level (epidemiology analysis); 2. Procedures level (standard oncology analysis); 3. Research level (radiomics analysis). The ontology was approved by the consortium and technical commission; an ad-hoc software architecture ("broker") remaps the data present in already existing storage systems of the various centers according to the shared terminology system. The first data sharing was successfully performed using COBRA software and the ENT COBRA Ontology, automatically collecting data directly from 3 different hospital databases (Lubeck, Navarra, and Rome) in November 2017.

Conclusions: The COBRA Ontology is a good response to the multi-dimensional criticalities of data collection, retrieval, and usability. It allows to create a software for large multicentric databases with implementation of specific remapping functions wherever necessary. This approach is well-received by all involved parties, primarily because it does not change a single center's storing technologies, procedures, and habits.