Background and purpose: We investigated clinical outcomes of proton beam concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) for unresectable, locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) patients. Materials and methods: Records from 42 unresectable LAPC patients (21 male and 21 female, 39-83 years old) with IIB/III clinical staging of 1/41 treated by proton beam CCRT were retrospectively reviewed. Twelve patients received a conventional 50 Gray equivalents (GyE) in 25 fractions protocol and 30 others received a higher dose protocol of 54.0-67.5 GyE in 25-33 fractions. Gemcitabine or S-1 (Tegafur, Gimeracil and Oteracil) was used concurrently. Toxicity, overall survival (OS) and local control (LC) were examined. Results: Acute adverse events of grades 1, 2, 3 and 4 were found in 4, 15, 17 and 2 patients, respectively. All grade 3 and 4 events were hematologic. Late adverse events of grades 1 and 2 were found in 3 and 2 patients, respectively. No late adverse effects of grade 3 or higher were observed. The 1-year/2-year OS rates from the start of CCRT were 77.8/50.8% with median survival time (MST) of 25.6 months. The 1year/2-year LC rate from CCRT start was 83.3/78.9% with a median time to local recurrence of more than 36 months. Total irradiation dose was the only significant factor in univariate analyses of OS and LC (p = 0.015 and 0.023, respectively). Conclusion: Proton beam CCRT lengthened survival periods compared to previous photon CCRT data and higher dose irradiation prolonged LC and OS for unresectable LAPC patients. Proton beam therapy is therefore safe and effective in these cases.

Long‐term efficacy of proton beam therapy (PBT) remains unclear for patients with previously untreated hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We aimed to study the long‐term outcomes of PBT according to Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging classifications in patients with previously untreated HCC. The major eligibility criteria of this observational study were an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (PS) 0–2, Child–Pugh grade A or B, previously untreated HCC covered within an irradiation field, and no massive ascites. A total of 66.0–77.0 GyE was administered in 10–35 fractions. Local tumor control (LTC), defined as no progression in the irradiated field, progression‐free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were assessed according to BCLC staging. From 2002 to 2009 at our institution, 129 patients were eligible. The 5‐year LTC, PFS, and OS rates were 94%, 28%, and 69% for patients with 0/A stage disease (n = 9/21), 87%, 23%, and 66% for patients with B stage disease (n = 34), and 75%, 9%, and 25% for patients with C stage disease (n = 65), respectively. The 5‐year LTC and OS rates of 15 patients with tumor thrombi in major vessels were 90% and 34%, respectively. Multivariate analyses revealed that PS (0 versus 1–2) was a significant prognostic factor for OS. No grade 3 or higher adverse effects were observed. PBT showed favorable long‐term efficacies with mild adverse effects in BCLC stage 0 to C, and can be an alternative treatment for localized HCC especially when accompanied with tumor thrombi. This study was registered with UMIN Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000025342).

No abstract

Purpose To evaluate the outcomes of particle therapy in cancer patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). Materials and methods From April 2001 to March 2013, 19,585 patients were treated with proton beam therapy (PBT) or carbon ion therapy (CIT) at 8 institutions. Of these, 69 patients (0.4%, PBT 46, CIT 22, and PBT + CIT 1) with CIEDs (64 pacemakers, 4 implantable cardioverter defibrillators, and 1 with a cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator) were retrospectively reviewed. All the patients with CIEDs in this study were treated with the passive scattering type of particle beam therapy. Results Six (13%) of the 47 PBT patients, and none of the 23 CIT patients experienced CIED malfunctions (p = 0.105). Electrical resets (7) and over-sensing (3) occurred transiently in 6 patients. The distance between the edge of the irradiation field and the CIED was not associated with the incidence of malfunctions in 20 patients with lung cancer. A larger field size had a higher event rate but the test to evaluate trends as not statistically significant (p = 0.196). Conclusion Differences in the frequency of occurrence of device malfunctions for patients treated with PBT and patients treated with CIT did not reach statistical significance. The present study can be regarded as a benchmark study about the incidence of malfunctioning of CIED in passive scattering particle beam therapy and can be used as a reference for active scanning particle beam therapy.

Background and Purpose: Aeration in the nasal cavity and paranasal