Citations

Abstract Context Prognosis of metastatic pheochromocytoma/paraganglioma following 131-Iodine metaiodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) is incompletely characterized due to small samples and shorter follow-up in these rare, often indolent tumors. Objective To describe long-term survival, frequency, and prognostic impact of imaging, biochemical, and symptomatic response to 131-I MIBG. Design Retrospective chart and imaging review at a tertiary referral center. Patients Six hundred sixty-eight person-years of follow-up in 125 patients with metastatic pheochromocytoma/paraganglioma with progression through prior multimodal treatment. Intervention Median 18 800 MBq 131-I MIBG. Main Outcome Measures Overall survival, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1 (RECIST) imaging response, symptomatic response per chart review, and biochemical response (20% change over 2 consecutive assays of catecholamines, vanillylmandelic acid, metanephrines, or chromogranin A). Results Median survival standard deviation [SD] from diagnosis was 11.5 years [2.4]; following metastasis, 6.5 years [0.8]; post treatment, 4.3 years [0.7]. Among 88 participants with follow-up imaging, 1% experienced complete response, 33% partial response, 53% stability, and 13% progression. Fifty-one percent showed subsequent progression, median progression-free survival [SD] of 2.0 years [0.6]. Stability/response vs progression at first imaging follow-up (3–6 months) predicted improved survival, 6.3 vs 2.4 years (P = 0.021). Fifty-nine percent of 54 patients demonstrated biochemical response. Fifty percent of these relapsed, with median time to laboratory progression [SD] of 2.8 years [0.7]. Biochemical response did not predict extended survival. Seventy-five percent of 83 patients reported improvement in pretreatment symptoms, consisting primarily of pain (42%), fatigue (27%), and hypertension (14%). Sixty-one percent of these patients experienced subsequent symptomatic progression at median [SD] 1.8 years [0.4]. Symptomatic response did not predict extended survival. Conclusions Imaging, symptomatic, and laboratory response to multimodal treatment including high-dose 131-I MIBG were achieved on long-term follow-up in metastatic pheochromocytoma or paraganglioma. Imaging response at 3 to 6 months was prognostic.

PurposeApproximate dose calculation methods were used in the nominal dose distribution and the perturbed dose distributions due to uncertainties in a commercial treatment planning system (CTPS) for robust optimization in intensity‐modulated proton therapy (IMPT). We aimed to investigate whether the approximations influence plan quality, robustness, and interplay effect of the resulting IMPT plans for the treatment of locally advanced lung cancer patients.Materials and methodsTen consecutively treated locally advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients were selected. Two IMPT plans were created for each patient using our in‐house developed TPS, named “Solo,” and also the CTPS, EclipseTM (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA, USA), respectively. The plans were designed to deliver prescription doses to internal target volumes (ITV) drawn by a physician on averaged four‐dimensional computed tomography (4D‐CT). Solo plans were imported back to CTPS, and recalculated in CTPS for fair comparison. Both plans were further verified for each patient by recalculating doses in the inhalation and exhalation phases to ensure that all plans met clinical requirements. Plan robustness was quantified on all phases using dose‐volume‐histograms (DVH) indices in the worst‐case scenario. The interplay effect was evaluated for every plan using an in‐house developed software, which randomized starting phases of each field per fraction and accumulated dose in the exhalation phase based on the patient's breathing motion pattern and the proton spot delivery in a time‐dependent fashion. DVH indices were compared using Wilcoxon rank‐sum test.ResultsCompared to the plans generated using CTPS on the averaged CT, Solo plans had significantly better target dose coverage and homogeneity (normalized by the prescription dose) in the worst‐case scenario [ITV D95%: 98.04% vs 96.28%, Solo vs CTPS, P = 0.020; ITV D5%–D95%: 7.20% vs 9.03%, P = 0.049] while all DVH indices were comparable in the nominal scenario. On the inhalation phase, Solo plans had better target dose coverage and cord Dmax in the nominal scenario [ITV D95%: 99.36% vs 98.45%, Solo vs CTPS, P = 0.014; cord Dmax: 20.07 vs 23.71 Gy(RBE), P = 0.027] with better target coverage and cord Dmax in the worst‐case scenario [ITV D95%: 97.89% vs 96.47%, Solo vs CTPS, P = 0.037; cord Dmax: 24.57 vs 28.14 Gy(RBE), P = 0.037]. On the exhalation phase, similar phenomena were observed in the nominal scenario [ITV D95%: 99.63% vs 98.87%, Solo vs CTPS, P = 0.037; cord Dmax: 19.67 vs 23.66 Gy(RBE), P = 0.039] and in the worst‐case scenario [ITV D95%: 98.20% vs 96.74%, Solo vs CTPS, P = 0.027; cord Dmax: 23.47 vs 27.93 Gy(RBE), P = 0.027]. In terms of interplay effect, plans generated by Solo had significantly better target dose coverage and homogeneity, less hot spots, and lower esophageal Dmean, and cord Dmax [ITV D95%: 101.81% vs 98.68%, Solo vs CTPS, P = 0.002; ITV D5%–D95%: 2.94% vs 7.51%, P = 0.002; cord Dmax: 18.87 vs 22.29 Gy(RBE), P = 0.014].ConclusionsSolo‐generated IMPT plans provide improved cord sparing, better target robustness in all considered phases, and reduced interplay effect compared with CTPS. Consequently, the approximation methods currently used in commercial TPS programs may have space for improvement in generating optimal IMPT plans for patient cases with locally advanced lung cancer.

(1) Background: To assess the role of postoperative external beam radiotherapy (pEBRT) on locoregional failure (LRF) for patients with locally advanced high-risk non-anaplastic thyroid carcinoma (naTC) at primary event or relapse. (2) Methods: Between 1995 and 2015, postoperative naTC patients with a theoretical indication for EBRT were included based on criteria that were common to American-British-French current guidelines, i.e., pT3-4, pN+, gross or microscopic residual disease. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) after multiple imputation was used to reduce selection biases. (3) Results: Of 254 naTC patients, 216 patients underwent pEBRT (106 de novo, 110 at relapse, median dose 60 Gy) and 38 underwent surgery only. pEBRT patients had more gross residual disease, a major prognostic factor (p = 0.027) but less perineural invasion (p = 0.008) or lymphovascular emboli (p = 0.009). pEBRT patients more frequently underwent radioiodine therapy (p = 0.026). The 10-year cumulative incidence of LRF was 56% (95% CI, 32–74%) in operated patients, and 23% (95% CI, 17–30%) in pEBRT patients. After IPTW method, pEBRT reduced the risk of LRF (hazard ratio 0.30; 95% CI [0.18–0.49], p < 0.001), but had no impact on OS. In the pEBRT group, non-Intensity Modulated RadioTherapy (IMRT) plans and interruption of the radiotherapy were associated with poorer survival, while extended versus limited field strategy and dose were not. (4) Conclusions: In naTC patients who have pT3-4, pN+ disease or R1-2 resection, pEBRT improved LRF. Limited-field IMRT is preferred.

BackgroundEsophageal carcinoma is the eighth most common cancer in the world. Volumetric‐modulated arc therapy (VMAT) is widely used to treat distal esophageal carcinoma due to high conformality to the target and good sparing of organs at risk (OAR). It is not clear if small‐spot intensity‐modulated proton therapy (IMPT) demonstrates a dosimetric advantage over VMAT. In this study, we compared dosimetric performance of VMAT and small‐spot IMPT for distal esophageal carcinoma in terms of plan quality, plan robustness, and interplay effects.Methods35 distal esophageal carcinoma patients were retrospectively reviewed; 19 patients received small‐spot IMPT and the remaining 16 of them received VMAT. Both plans were generated by delivering prescription doses to clinical target volumes (CTVs) on phase‐averaged 4D‐CT's. The dose‐volume‐histogram (DVH) band method was used to quantify plan robustness. Software was developed to evaluate interplay effects with randomized starting phases for each field per fraction. DVH indices were compared using Wilcoxon rank‐sum test. For fair comparison, all the treatment plans were normalized to have the same CTVhigh D95% in the nominal scenario relative to the prescription dose.ResultsIn the nominal scenario, small‐spot IMPT delivered statistically significantly lower liver Dmean and V30Gy[RBE], lung Dmean, heart Dmean compared with VMAT. CTVhigh dose homogeneity and protection of other OARs were comparable between the two treatments. In terms of plan robustness, the IMPT and VMAT plans were comparable for kidney V18Gy[RBE], liver V30Gy[RBE], stomach V45Gy[RBE], lung Dmean, V5Gy[RBE], and V20Gy[RBE], cord Dmax and , liver Dmean, heart V20Gy[RBE], and V30Gy[RBE], but IMPT was significantly worse for CTVhigh D95%, , and D5%‐D95%, CTVlow D95%, heart Dmean, and V40Gy[RBE], requiring careful and experienced adjustments during the planning process and robustness considerations. The small‐spot IMPT plans still met the standard clinical requirements after interplay effects were considered.ConclusionsSmall‐spot IMPT decreases doses to heart, liver, and total lung compared to VMAT as well as achieves clinically acceptable plan robustness. Our study supports the use of small‐spot IMPT for the treatment of distal esophageal carcinoma.

Abstract Increasing evidence recognizes Alzheimer's disease (AD) as a multifactorial and heterogeneous disease with multiple contributors to its pathophysiology, including vascular dysfunction. The recently updated AD Research Framework put forth by the National Institute on Aging–Alzheimer's Association describes a biomarker‐based pathologic definition of AD focused on amyloid, tau, and neuronal injury. In response to this article, here we first discussed evidence that vascular dysfunction is an important early event in AD pathophysiology. Next, we examined various imaging sequences that could be easily implemented to evaluate different types of vascular dysfunction associated with, and/or contributing to, AD pathophysiology, including changes in blood‐brain barrier integrity and cerebral blood flow. Vascular imaging biomarkers of small vessel disease of the brain, which is responsible for >50% of dementia worldwide, including AD, are already established, well characterized, and easy to recognize. We suggest that these vascular biomarkers should be incorporated into the AD Research Framework to gain a better understanding of AD pathophysiology and aid in treatment efforts.