Background/aimsPrimary radiation therapy is used to treat malignant uveal melanoma (UM). We report our single-centre experience with fractionated radiosurgery (fSRS) with a linear accelerator (LINAC) after specific adaptation for small target volumes with HybridArc.MethodsFrom October 2014 to January 2020, 101 patients referred to Dessau City Hospital with unilateral UM underwent fSRS with 50 Gy given in five fractions on five consecutive days. Primary endpoints were local tumour control, globe preservation, metastasis and death. Potential prognostic features were analysed. Kaplan-Meier analysis, Cox proportional hazards model and linear models were used for calculations.ResultsThe median baseline tumour diameter was 10.0 mm (range, 3.0–20.0 mm), median tumour thickness 5.0 mm (range, 0.9–15.5 mm) and median gross tumour volume (GTV) 0.4 cm³ (range, 0.2–2.6 cm³). After a median follow-up of 32.0 months (range, 2.5–76.0 months), 7 patients (6.9%) underwent enucleation: 4 (4.0%) due to local recurrence and 3 (3.0%) due to radiation toxicities, and 6 patients (5.9%) revealed tumour persistence with a GTV exceeding 1.0 cm³. Of 20 patients (19.8%) who died, 8 (7.9%) were tumour-related deaths. Twelve patients (11.9%) suffered from distant metastasis. GTV showed an impact on all endpoints, and treatment delay was associated with reduced odds of eye preservation.ConclusionLINAC-based fSRS with static conformal beams combined with dynamic conformal arcs and discrete intensity-modulated radiotherapy results in a high tumour control rate. The tumour volume is the most robust physical prognostic marker for local control and disease progression. Avoiding treatment delay improves outcomes.

BackgroundSalvage radiation therapy (SRT) can be offered to patients with relapsing glioblastoma multiforme (GBM). Here we report our experience with a schedule extending the treatment time of SRT with the aim to prolong the cytotoxic effect of ionizing radiation while minimizing the cytotoxic hazards for the surrounding brain.Methods and PatientsFrom 2009 until 2017, 124 of 218 patients received radical resection, adjuvant chemo-radiation with photons and temozolomide (TMZ) followed by adjuvant TMZ. Re-irradiation was performed in 26 patients due to local relapse. Treatment schedules varied. Survival and molecular markers were assessed.ResultsThe median survival was respectively 12 months (9–14.5) of the 124 patients treated with tri-modal therapy and 19.2 months (14.9–24.6) for the 26 patients retreated with SRT (p=0.038). Patients who received daily fractions of 1,6 to 1,65 Gy to a total dose of >40 Gy had a median survival time of 24,6 months compared to patients treated with higher daily doses or a total dose of <40 Gy (p= 0.039), consistent with the observation that patients treated with 21–28 fractions had a median survival of 21,9 months compared to 15,8 months of patients who received 5–20 fractions (p=.0.05). Patients with Ki-67 expression of >30% seemed to perform better than patients with expression levels of ≤20% (p=0.03). MGMT methylation status, TERT promoter or ATRX mutations, overexpression of p53, p16, PD-L1, and EGFR were not prognostic.ConclusionsRe-irradiation of relapsing GBM is a highly valid treatment option. Our observation challenges hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy for retreatment and controlled trials on the fractionation dose for SRT are needed. Robust predictive molecular markers could be beneficial in the selection of patients for SRT.

Inflammatory periodontal and peri-implant diseases follow dysbiotic shifts in a susceptible host. A well-established tool for microbial sample collection is the use of paper points. The purpose of this pilot study was to evaluate the use of interdental brushes compared to paper points. Biofilm samples were collected with paper points and later interdental brushes from ten patients. Five patients were represented with a community periodontal index of treatment needs (CPITN) of 0–2 around the teeth and an implant with PPD ≤ 5 mm and no radiological bone loss. The remaining five patients had a CPITN ≥ 3 and one implant with peri-implantitis. Microbial samples were analyzed with quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) and next-generation sequencing (NGS). The results showed higher amounts of DNA in samples taken by interdental brushes but also higher Ct values. Both methods detected Filifactor alocis, Porphyromonas gingivalis, Prevotella intermedia, Tannerella forsythia, and Treponema denticola in the majority of samples, while Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans was rarely found. A microbial dysbiosis index showed comparable or higher values in sites with no periodontitis/peri-implantitis with interdental brushes. The results of this pilot study indicate that interdental brushes might be a valid technique for microbial sampling and particularly advantageous in the early detection of dysbiotic shifts around teeth and implants. Larger studies with more participants are needed to validate the proposed microbial sampling method with interdental brushes.