Purpose/Objective To create and compare consensus clinical target volume (CTV) contours for computed tomography (CT) and 3 Tesla (3T) magnetic resonance (MR) image-based cervical-cancer brachytherapy Materials/Methods Twenty-three gynecologic radiation oncology experts contoured the same 3 cervical-cancer brachytherapy cases: one Stage IIB near-complete response (CR) case with a tandem and ovoid, one Stage IIB partial response (PR) case with ovoid with needles and one Stage IB2 CR case with a ring applicator. CT contours were completed before MRI contours. These were analyzed for consistency and clarity of target delineation using an expectation maximization algorithm for simultaneous truth and performance level estimation (STAPLE), with kappa statistics as a measure of agreement between participants. The conformity index (CI) was calculated for each of the six data sets. Dice coefficients were generated to compare CT and MR contours of the same case. Results For all 3 cases, the mean tumor volume was smaller on MR than on CT (p<0.001). Kappa and CI estimates were slightly higher for CT, indicating a higher level of agreement on CT. DICE coefficients were 89% for the Stage IB2 case with a CR, 74% for the Stage IIB case with a PR, and 57% for the Stage IIB case with a CR. Conclusion When comparing MR- to CT-contoured CTV volumes, the higher level of agreement on CT may be due to the more distinct contrast visible on the images at the time of brachytherapy. The largest difference at the time of brachytherapy was in the case with parametrial extension at diagnosis that had a near-complete response, due to the appearance of the parametria on CT but not on MR. Based on these results, a 95% consensus volume was generated for CT and for MR. Online contouring atlases are available for instruction at http://www.nrgoncology.org/Resources/ContouringAtlases.aspx.

IMPORTANCE Chemoradiotherapy (CRT), followed by surgery, is the recommended approach for stage II and III rectal cancer. While CRT decreases the risk of local recurrence, it does not improve survival and leads to poorer functional outcomes than surgery alone. Therefore, new approaches to better select patients for CRT are important. OBJECTIVE To conduct a phase 2 study to evaluate the safety and feasibility of using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) criteria to select patients with "good prognosis" rectal tumors for primary surgery. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Prospective nonrandomized phase 2 study at 12 high-volume colorectal surgery centers across Canada. From September 30, 2014, to October 21, 2016, a total of 82 patients were recruited for the study. Participants were patients newly diagnosed as having rectal cancer with MRI-predicted good prognosis rectal cancer. The MRI criteria for good prognosis tumors included distance to the mesorectal fascia greater than 1 mm; definite T2, T2/early T3, or definite T3 with less than 5 mm of extramural depth of invasion; and absent or equivocal extramural venous invasion. INTERVENTIONS Patients with rectal cancer with MRI-predicted good prognosis tumors underwent primary surgery. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a positive circumferential resection margin (CRM) rate. Assuming a 10% baseline probability of a positive CRM, a sample size of 75 was estimated to yield a 95% CI of ±6.7%. RESULTS Eighty-two patients (74% male) participated in the study. The median age at the time of surgery was 66 years (range, 37-89 years). Based on MRI, most tumors were midrectal (65% [n = 53]), T2/early T3 (60% [n = 49]), with no suspicious lymph nodes (63% [n = 52]). On final pathology, 91% (n = 75) of tumors were T2 or greater, 29% (n = 24) were node positive, and 59% (n = 48) were stage II or III. The positive CRM rate was 4 of 82 (4.9%; 95% CI, 0.2%-9.6%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The use of MRI criteria to select patients with good prognosis rectal cancer for primary surgery results in a low rate of positive CRM and suggests that CRT may not be necessary for all patients with stage II and III rectal cancer.

Histologic grade is the most important factor affecting outcome in parotid MEC. Adjuvant radiotherapy is recommended for high-grade tumors and should be tailored according to the expected risk of recurrence for low-grade and intermediate-grade tumors.

No abstract