Citations

Abstract Cancer patient survivorship has become a significant topic within oncology care for both adult and pediatric patients. Starting in 2005, the Institute of Medicine recommended the use of survivorship care plans to assist patients transitioning from active treatment to the posttreatment phase of their cancer care, a critical time for many patients. Since 2014 there has been a mandate within the United States for adult cancer patients treated with curative intent to receive survivorship care plans comprised of a treatment summary and a follow-up plan to facilitate a better understanding among patients of what to expect after treatment. In addition to a general oncology survivorship care plan, specific care plans have been created for breast, lung, prostate, and colon cancers, as well as lymphoma. A survivorship care plan specific to adult neuro-oncology has been developed by a multidisciplinary and interprofessional committee, with approval from the Society for Neuro-Oncology Guidelines Committee. It has been published in compendium with this review of survivorship care planning and available as a fillable PDF on the Society of Neuro-Oncology Guidelines Endorsement web page (https://www.soc-neuro-onc.org/SNO/Resources/Survivorship_Care_Plan.aspx). Implementation of this survivorship care plan provides a unique opportunity to begin addressing the range of survivorship issues our neuro-oncology patients navigate from diagnosis to end of life.

With robust optimization for spot scanning proton therapy now commercially available, the ability exists to account for setup, range, and interfield uncertainties during optimization. Robust optimization is particularly beneficial for craniospinal irradiation (CSI) where the large target volume lends itself to larger setup uncertainties and the need for robust match lines can all be handled with the uncertainty parameters found inside the optimizer. Suggested robust optimization settings, parameters, and image guidance for CSI patients using proton therapy spot scanning are provided. Useful structures are defined and described. Suggestions are given for perturbations to be entered into the optimizer in order to achieve a plan that provides robust target volume coverage and critical structure sparing as well as a robust match line. Interfield offset effects, a concern when using multifield optimization, can also be addressed within the robust optimizer. A robust optimizer can successfully be employed to produce robust match lines, target volume coverage, and critical structure sparing under specified uncertainties. The robust optimizer can also be used to reduce effects arising from interfield uncertainties. Using robust optimization, a plan robust against setup, range, and interfield uncertainties for craniospinal treatments can be created. Utilizing robust optimization allows one to ensure critical structures are spared and target volumes are covered under the desired uncertainty parameters.

BackgroundCurative therapy for ES requires both chemotherapy and local control of primary tumor. There is no universally accepted standard approach to local control modalities. This survey was conducted to determine practice patterns and factors influencing the choice to offer various local control modalities to patients with ES of the spine and pelvis.MethodsThe survey consisted of four scenarios involving a 15‐year‐old girl who presented with Ewing sarcoma of thoracic vertebra, sacrum, iliac wing, and acetabulum with or without neurologic compromise. The questionnaire was sent to oncologists, orthopedic surgeons, and radiation oncologists, asking their recommendations for local control modality.ResultsAmong 94 respondents, radiotherapy was most frequently chosen for sacral tumors (68.1%) and T10 vertebral tumors (46.2%) whereas surgery was preferred for iliac wing pelvic tumors (45.7%) and acetabular tumors (43.6%). Orthopedic surgeons were significantly more likely to offer surgery than radiation oncologists (OR 3.07, 95%CI 1.37‐6.88, P = 0.007). Providers outside North America were more likely to offer combined surgery plus radiotherapy (OR 10.58, 95%CI 5.41‐20.70, P < 0.001).ConclusionConsiderable heterogeneity exists in local control modalities for Ewing sarcoma of the spine and pelvis. Specialty and location of practice may influence treatment recommendations.