Aim Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is recommended only for inoperable patients with early‐stage (e‐stage) non‐small‐cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We compared outcomes between surgery and SBRT in patients borderline for surgery due to impaired pulmonary function (PF). Methods We reviewed single‐institution retrospective data of 578 patients with clinically T1‐2N0M0 NSCLC treated by surgery or SBRT between 2004 and 2014, and extracted a cohort with borderline impaired PF for surgery, which was defined as predicted postoperative (PPO) forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) of <50% and ≥30%. Overall survival (OS), cancer‐specific survival (CSS), and disease‐free survival (DFS) were compared between surgery and SBRT using propensity score‐matching (PSM) to avoid bias. Results Among a total of 116 eligible patients with a median PPO FEV1 of 45%, PSM identified 25 patients from each group with similar characteristics. The median age, pretreatment FEV1, and follow‐up durations for the surgery and SBRT groups were 75 and 74 years, 58% and 56%, and 56 and 60 months, respectively. The 5‐year OS, CSS, and DFS rates of the surgery versus SBRT groups were 60% versus 63%, 76% versus 81%, and 52% versus 48%, respectively (p = 0.97, 0.81, and 0.99). The surgical mortality was 4.0%, but no treatment‐related death was observed after SBRT. The incidence of ≥ grade 2 adverse events after surgery was double that after SBRT (40% versus 20%, p = .22). Conclusion Our study suggests that SBRT is a reasonable option for patients with e‐stage NSCLC and impaired PF who are considered borderline candidates for surgery.

Background Radiobiological daily changes within tumors are considered to be quite different between stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) (e.g., 50 Gy in 4 fractions) and conventional radiotherapy (e.g., 60 Gy in 30 fractions). We aim to assess the optimal interval of irradiation in SRT and compare outcomes of daily irradiation with irradiation at two- to three-day intervals in SRT for patients with one to five brain metastases (BM). Methods This study is conducted as a multicenter open-label randomized phase II trial. Patients aged 20 or older with one to five BM, less than 3.0 cm diameter, and Karnofsky Performance Status ≥70 are eligible. A total of 70 eligible patients will be enrolled. After stratifying by the number of BMs (1, 2 vs. 3–5) and diameter of the largest tumor (< 2 cm vs. ≥ 2 cm), we randomly assigned patients (1:1) to receive daily irradiation (Arm 1), or irradiation at two- to three-day intervals (Arm 2). Both arms are performed with total dose of 27-30 Gy in 3 fractions. The primary endpoint is an intracranial local control rate, defined as intracranial local control at initially treated sites. We use a randomized phase II screening design with a two-sided α of 0∙20. The phase II trial is positive with p < 0.20. All analyses are intention to treat. This study is registered with the UMIN-clinical trials registry, number UMIN000048728. Discussion This study will provide an assessment of the impact of SRT interval on local control, survival, and toxicity for patients with 1–5 BM. The trial is ongoing and is recruiting now. Trial registration UMIN000048728. Date of registration: August 23, 2022. https://center6.umin.ac.jp/cgi-bin/ctr/ctr_view_reg.cgi?recptno=R000055515.

The outcomes of three methods of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for localized prostate cancer were evaluated. Between 2010 and 2018, 308 D’Amico intermediate- or high-risk patients were treated with 2.2 Gy daily fractions to a total dose of 74.8 Gy in combination with hormonal therapy. Overall, 165 patients were treated with 5-field IMRT using a sliding window technique, 66 were then treated with helical tomotherapy and 77 were treated with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). The median age of patients was 71 years. The median follow-up period was 75 months. Five-year overall survival (OS) and biochemical or clinical failure-free survival (FFS) rates were 95.5 and 91.6% in the 5-field IMRT group, 95.1 and 90.3% in the tomotherapy group and 93.0 and 88.6% in the VMAT group, respectively, with no significant differences among the three groups. The 5-year cumulative incidence of late grade ≥2 genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities were 7.3 and 6.2%, respectively, for all patients. Late grade ≥2 gastrointestinal toxicities were less frequent in patients undergoing VMAT (0%) than in patients undergoing 5-field IMRT (7.3%) and those undergoing tomotherapy (11%) (P = 0.025), and this finding appeared to be correlated with the better rectal DVH parameters in patients undergoing VMAT. Other toxicities did not differ significantly among the three groups, although bladder dose-volume parameters were slightly worse in the tomotherapy group than in the other groups. Despite differences in the IMRT delivery methods, X-ray energies and daily registration methods, all modalities may be used as IMRT for localized prostate cancer.

No abstract

No abstract