Predicted Breast Cancer Risk after Mediastinal Radiotherapy for Pediatric Hodgkin Lymphoma: Analysis of a Multi-Institutional Children’s Oncology Group Trial
10019 Background: The reported incidence of second malignant neoplasms (SMN) in long-term survivors of Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) is derived from patients treated with outdated radiation therapy (RT) techniques. We modeled the risk of SMN in pediatric patients with high-risk classic HL treated with modern mediastinal RT. Methods: In patients who received mediastinal RT on the Children’s Oncology Group study AHOD1331, we modeled the lifetime attributable risk (LAR) at 70 years of age of thyroid, lung, and breast carcinoma. This value indicates the absolute increased risk of SMN at 70 years of age due to RT, above the baseline population risk (mean baseline rates at 70 years of age are 0.7%, 3.3%, and 8.9% for thyroid, lung, and breast carcinoma, respectively, https://seer.cancer.gov/data/ ). Results: In 296 patients who received protocol-directed mediastinal RT, median age at diagnosis was 15.1 years, 55% were female, and 98% had large mediastinal adenopathy. Following 5 cycles of chemotherapy, patients received RT targeting the mediastinum based on criteria of this study; in addition, some patients received RT to other supradiaphragmatic sites that contained slowly responding lesions, including the axilla (n = 3, 1%), lung (n = 7, 2.4%), upper neck (n = 4, 1.3%), and lower neck (n = 8, 2.7%). The RT modality was proton therapy in 25.3%, photon intensity modulated RT (IMRT) in 45.6%, and photon 3-dimensional conformal RT (3D-CRT) in 27.7%. The RT prescription dose was 21 Gy in 83% and 30 Gy in 16% who had a partial metabolic response at the completion of chemotherapy. The mean (range) doses to the thyroid, lungs, and breasts were 12.8 Gy (0-30.3), 8.0 Gy (0.1-15.2), and 4.2 Gy (0.2-14.5), respectively. For the complete cohort, the mean LAR at 70 years of age of thyroid carcinoma was 0.063% and of lung carcinoma was 5.34%. For females, the mean LAR at 70 years of age of breast carcinoma was 2.92%. The Table summarizes the LAR for each SMN, stratified by RT modality. Conclusions: In patients treated with mediastinal RT on a recent multi-institutional study of pediatric HL, the predicted long-term risk of SMN is substantially lower than in historical cohorts. Clinicians should consider the toxicity associated with a current RT approach when selecting therapies and counseling patients. Clinical trial information: NCT02166463 , this is a post hoc modeling study that includes patients enrolled on this study. Mean [range] lifetime attributable risk (%) at an attained age of 70 years for thyroid, lung, and breast carcinoma. Thyroid Lung Breast (females) 3D-CRT 0.046 [0.002-0.332]N=81 5.07 [0.12-10.82]N=82 1.82 [0.67-5.98]N=46 IMRT 0.064 [0.001-0.386]N=135 6.24 [2.22-11.79]N=135 4.36 [0.66-8.43]N=76 Proton 0.086 [0-1.160]N=74 4.15 [0.94-7.77]N=75 1.45 [0.17-7.23]N=40
Abstract The treatment of cancer with proton radiation therapy was first suggested in 1946 followed by the first treatments in the 1950s. As of 2020, almost 200 000 patients have been treated with proton beams worldwide and the number of operating proton therapy (PT) facilities will soon reach one hundred. PT has long moved from research institutions into hospital-based facilities that are increasingly being utilized with workflows similar to conventional radiation therapy. While PT has become mainstream and has established itself as a treatment option for many cancers, it is still an area of active research for various reasons: the advanced dose shaping capabilities of PT cause susceptibility to uncertainties, the high degrees of freedom in dose delivery offer room for further improvements, the limited experience and understanding of optimizing pencil beam scanning, and the biological effect difference compared to photon radiation. In addition to these challenges and opportunities currently being investigated, there is an economic aspect because PT treatments are, on average, still more expensive compared to conventional photon based treatment options. This roadmap highlights the current state and future direction in PT categorized into four different themes, ‘improving efficiency’, ‘improving planning and delivery’, ‘improving imaging’, and ‘improving patient selection’.
Characterization of proton pencil beam scanning and passive beam using a high spatial resolution solid‐state microdosimeter
PurposeThis work aims to characterize a proton pencil beam scanning (PBS) and passive double scattering (DS) systems as well as to measure parameters relevant to the relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of the beam using a silicon on insulator (SOI) microdosimeter with well‐defined 3D sensitive volumes (SV). The dose equivalent downstream and laterally outside of a clinical PBS treatment field was assessed and compared to that of a DS beam.MethodsA novel silicon microdosimeter with well‐defined 3D SVs was used in this study. It was connected to low noise electronics, allowing for detection of lineal energies as low as 0.15 keV/μm. The microdosimeter was placed at various depths in a water phantom along the central axis of the proton beam, and at the distal part of the spread‐out Bragg peak (SOBP) in 0.5 mm increments. The RBE values of the pristine Bragg peak (BP) and SOBP were derived using the measured microdosimetric lineal energy spectra as inputs to the modified microdosimetric kinetic model (MKM). Geant4 simulations were performed in order to verify the calculated depth‐dose distribution from the treatment planning system (TPS) and to compare the simulated dose‐mean lineal energy to the experimental results.ResultsFor a 131 MeV PBS spot (124.6 mm R90 range in water), the measured dose‐mean lineal energy increased from 2 keV/μm at the entrance to 8 keV/μm in the BP, with a maximum value of 10 keV/μm at the distal edge. The derived RBE distribution for the PBS beam slowly increased from 0.97 ± 0.14 at the entrance to 1.04 ± 0.09 proximal to the BP, then to 1.1 ± 0.08 in the BP, and steeply rose to 1.57 ± 0.19 at the distal part of the BP. The RBE distribution for the DS SOBP beam was approximately 0.96 ± 0.16 to 1.01 ± 0.16 at shallow depths, and 1.01 ± 0.16 to 1.28 ± 0.17 within the SOBP. The RBE significantly increased from 1.29 ± 0.17 to 1.43 ± 0.18 at the distal edge of the SOBP.ConclusionsThe SOI microdosimeter with its well‐defined 3D SV has applicability in characterizing proton radiation fields and can measure relevant physical parameters to model the RBE with submillimeter spatial resolution. It has been shown that for a physical dose of 1.82 Gy at the BP, the derived RBE based on the MKM model increased from 1.14 to 1.6 in the BP and its distal part. Good agreement was observed between the experimental and simulation results, confirming the potential application of SOI microdosimeter with 3D SV for quality assurance in proton therapy.