Objectives The objective of the paper was to assess real-life experience in the management of head and neck cancer (HNC) patients during the COVID-19 pandemic in radiotherapy departments and to evaluate the variability in terms of adherence to American Society of Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) and European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) recommendations. Materials and methods In May 2020, an anonymous 30-question online survey, comparing acute phase of outbreak and pre-COVID-19 period, was conducted. Two sections exploited changes in general management of HNC patients and different HNC primary tumors, addressing specific statements from ASTRO ESTRO consensus statement as well. Results Eighty-eight questionnaires were included in the demographic/clinical workflow analysis, and 64 were analyzed for treatment management. Forty-eight percent of radiotherapy departments became part of oncologic hubs. First consultations reduced, and patients were addressed to other centers in 33.8 and 18.3% of cases, respectively. Telematic consultations were used in 50% of follow-up visits and 73.9% of multidisciplinary tumor board discussions. There were no practical changes in the management of patients affected by different primitive HNCs. Hypofractionation was not favored over conventional schedules. Conclusions Compared to pre-COVID era, the clinical workflow was highly reorganized , whereas there were no consistent changes in RT indications and schedules.

Background Radiotherapy (RT) plays a fundamental role in the treatment of pediatric central nervous system (CNS) malignancies, but its late sequelae are still a challenging question. Despite developments in modern high-conformal photon techniques and proton beam therapy (PBT) are improving the normal tissues dose-sparing while maintaining satisfactory target coverage, clinical advantages supporting the optimal treatment strategy have to be better evaluated in long-term clinical studies and assessed in further radiobiological analyses. Our analysis aimed to systematically review current knowledge on the dosimetric advantages of PBT in the considered setting, which should be the basis for future specific studies. Materials and Methods A PubMed and Google Scholar search was conducted in June 2019 to select dosimetric studies comparing photon versus proton RT for pediatric patients affected by CNS tumors. Then, a systematic review and meta-analysis according to the PRISMA statement was performed. Average and standard deviation values of Conformity Index, Homogeneity Index, and mean and maximum doses to intracranial and extracranial organs at risk (OARs) were specifically evaluated for secondary dosimetric comparisons. The standardized mean differences (SMDs) for target parameters and the mean differences (MDs) for OARs were summarized in forest plots (P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant). Publication bias was also assessed by the funnel plot and Egger's regression test. Results Among the 88 identified papers, a total of twelve studies were included in the meta-analysis. PBT showed dosimetric advantages in target homogeneity (significant especially in the subgroup comparing PBT and 3D conformal RT), as well as in the dose sparing of almost all analyzed OARs (significantly superior results for brainstem, normal brain, and hippocampal dose constraints and for extracranial OARs parameters, excluding the kidneys). Publication bias was observed for Conformity Index. Conclusion Our analysis supports the evidence of dosimetric advantages of PBT over photon RT, especially in the dose sparing of normal growing tissues. Confirmations from wider well-designed studies are required.

It has been shown that growth hormone (GH) and insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF1) enhance steroidogenesis responsiveness to ACTH in cultured adrenal cells. To investigate the GH effect on adrenal steroidogenesis in non-GH-deficient subjects, we studied 9 girls with Turner syndrome (chronological age 5.5–7.2 years; bone age 5–7 years). In all subjects an ACTH test (Synacthen depot, 0.25 mg i.v. with blood samples at 0 and 60  min) was performed basally at 8–9 a.m. and 6 months after GH therapy (1 IU/kg/week). 17-Hydroxypregnenolone (17PGN), 17-hydroxyprogesterone (17OHP), dehydroepiandrosterone (DHA), its sulfate (DHA-S), androstenedione and cortisol were evaluated by radioimmunoassay. Two groups of normal girls were selected as controls: group A age-matched the patients at the start of the study, and group B age-matched the patients at the end of the study. The responsiveness of each hormone to ACTH was expressed as the difference between stimulated and basal values. A p value of < 0.01 was considered to indicate significance. There were no significant differences between pre- and posttreatment basal values of 17PGN, 17OHP, DHA, androstenedione and cortisol in the Turner syndrome patients, whereas a significant increase was observed for basal DHA-S (1.57 ± 0.31; 1.89 ± 0.43 µmol/l, p < 0.01). Comparison of increments before and after GH treatment showed a significant increase in responsiveness to ACTH after GH therapy DHA (p < 0.01). The increase in 17PGN was evident (p < 0.02), but the established significant p value was not reached. No differences for 17OHP, androstenedione and cortisol were found. The stimulated 17PGN/17OHP ratio was significantly higher (p < 0.01) after GH, whereas the 17OHP/androstenedione ratio was considerably lower, but the p value was < 0.02. No differences between pretreatment values with the control group androstenedione was found, whereas basal and stimulated posttreatment values of DHA and stimulated values of 17PGN were higher in patients after GH therapy than in control group B. No differences between the 2 control groups were found. In conclusion our study showed that adrenal steroid responsiveness to ACTH increases in Turner syndrome after long-term treatment with high GH doses. An increase in the number of ACTH adrenal receptors and/or a modulation of enzyme activities may be suggested. The positive or negative pharmacological implications of these data remain to be determined especially when taking into consideration the wide use of GH therapy in non-GH-deficient subjects.