Springer Science and Business Media LLC

This study aimed to determine factors allowing the prediction of extracranial metastases in patients presenting with brain metastases at the first diagnosis of cancer. Data from 659 patients with brain metastases upon first diagnosis of cancer were retrospectively analyzed. The parameters age, gender, Karnofsky performance score (KPS), primary tumor type and number of brain metastases were compared between 359 patients with extracranial metastases and 300 patients without extracranial metastases. Additional analyses were performed for patients with the most unfavorable and those with the most favorable characteristics. The comparison of patients with versus without extracranial metastases revealed significant differences between the groups in terms of KPS (p < 0.001) and number of brain metastases (p < 0.001). Of the study patients, 113 had both most unfavorable characteristics, i.e. KPS ≤ 50 and ≥ 4 brain metastases. The sensitivity for identifying patients with extracranial metastases was 82 %; specificity was 51 %. A total of 50 patients had KPS ≥ 90 and only one brain metastasis. The sensitivity for identifying patients without extracranial metastases was 86 %; specificity was 58 %. The combination of KPS and the number of brain metastases can help to predict the presence or absence of extracranial metastases.

Three doses were compared for local control of irradiated metastases, freedom from new brain metastases, and survival in patients receiving stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) alone for one to three newly diagnosed brain metastases. In all, 134 patients were assigned to three groups according to the SRS dose given to the margins of the lesions: 13–16 Gy (n = 33), 18 Gy (n = 18), and 20 Gy (n = 83). Additional potential prognostic factors were evaluated: age (≤ 60 vs. > 60 years), gender, Karnofsky Performance Scale score (70–80 vs. 90–100), tumor type (non-small-cell lung cancer vs. melanoma vs. others), number of brain metastases (1 vs. 2–3), lesion size (< 15 vs. ≥ 15 mm), extracranial metastases (no vs. yes), RPA class (1 vs. 2), and interval of cancer diagnosis to SRS (≤ 24 vs. > 24 months). For 13–16 Gy, 18 Gy, and 20 Gy, the 1-year local control rates were 31, 65, and 79 %, respectively (p < 0.001). The SRS dose maintained significance on multivariate analysis (risk ratio: 2.25; 95 % confidence interval: 1.56–3.29; p < 0.001). On intergroup comparisons of local control, 20 Gy was superior to 13–16 Gy (p < 0.001) but not to 18 Gy (p = 0.12); 18 Gy showed a strong trend toward better local control when compared with 13–16 Gy (p = 0.059). Freedom from new brain metastases (p = 0.57) and survival (p = 0.15) were not associated with SRS dose in the univariate analysis. SRS doses of 18 Gy and 20 Gy resulted in better local control than 13–16 Gy. However, 20 Gy and 18 Gy must be compared again in a larger cohort of patients. Freedom from new brain metastases and survival were not associated with SRS dose.

Personalized cancer treatment considers the patient’s survival prognosis. Therefore, it is important to be able to estimate the patient’s survival time, particularly in a palliative situation such as brain metastasis. This study aimed to create and validate a survival score for patients with brain metastasis from breast cancer, which is the second most common primary tumor in these patients. Data of 230 patients treated with whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) alone for brain metastasis from breast cancer were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were assigned to a test (n = 115) or a validation group (n = 115). According to the results of the multivariate analysis of the test group, Karnofsky Performance Score and extracranial metastases were included in the scoring system. The score for each factor was obtained from the 6-month survival rate (in %) divided by 10. Total scores represented the sum of these scores and were 4, 7, 9, or 12 points. Three prognostic groups were formed. The 6-month survival rates in the test group were 10 % for 4–7 points, 55 % for 9 points, and 78 % for 15 points (p < 0.001). In the validation group the corresponding 6-month survival rates were 11, 54, and 75 %, respectively (p < 0.001). The comparisons between the prognostic groups of the test and the validation group did not show significant differences. This simple survival score appears valid and reproducible. It can be used to estimate the survival time of patients with brain metastasis from breast cancer receiving WBRT alone.

To investigate therapeutic outcome of dose escalation ≥ 80 Gy in nonresected non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). 124 consecutive patients with histologically/cytologically proven NSCLC were enrolled. Tumor stage I, II, IIIA, and IIIB was diagnosed in 30, eight, 39, and 47 patients, respectively. 38 patients (31%) had weight loss > 5% during the 3 months before diagnosis. A median dose of 88.2 Gy (range 80.0–96.0 Gy), 69.3 Gy (63.0–88.0 Gy) and 56.7 Gy was applied to primary lesions, involved lymph nodes, and elective nodes (within a region of about 6 cm cranial to macroscopically involved nodes), respectively. Daily fractional ICRU doses of 2.0–2.2 Gy were delivered by the conformal target-splitting technique. 58 patients (47%) received induction chemotherapy, in median two cycles prior to radiotherapy. Median follow-up time of all patients was 19 months, of patients alive 72.4 months (69–121 months). The cumulative actual overall survival rate at 2 and 5 years amounts to 39% and 11.3%, respectively, resulting in a median overall survival time of 19.6 months. According to stages I, II, IIIA, and IIIB, the median overall survival times are 31.8, 31.4, 19.0, and 14.5 months, respectively. The locoregional tumor control rate at 2 years is 49%. Apart from one treatment-related death (pneumonitis), acute toxicity according to EORTC/RTOG scores was moderate: lung grade 2 (n = 7), grade 3 (n = 3); esophagus grade 1 (n = 11); heart grade 3 (n = 1, pericarditis). No late toxicity grade > 1 has been observed. Sequential, conventionally fractionated high-dose radiotherapy by conformal target splitting is well tolerated. The results for survival and locoregional tumor control seem to at least equalize the outcome of simultaneous chemoradiation approaches, which, at present, are considered “state of the art” for patients with nonresected NSCLC. A higher potential of radiation therapy might be reached by accelerated fractionation regimens.

Little is known about efficacy and toxicity of radiation therapy in the elderly, as the vast majority of prospective trials excluded patients aged over 70 years. The aim of this study was to investigate the outcome of radiation therapy in a group of so-called oldest old cancer patients (≥85 years). We retrospectively reviewed data from patients aged ≥85 years, treated between 2010 and 2015 for any tumor histology at the University Hospital Zurich, Switzerland. Overall survival (OS), relapse-free survival (RFS), performance status (ECOG), Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) and treatment tolerance were assessed. We identified and included 100 patients with a mean age of 88 years (range: 85–102 years). Most patients received a curative-intent treatment (n = 64, 64%). About one third received palliative radiation therapy for symptomatic metastatic disease (n = 36, 36%). Curative treatment was well tolerated, with no high-grade acute toxicities (≥grade 4). Median OS was 52.6 and 13.1 months for the curative and palliative treated patient groups, respectively. 5‑year OS for all patients was 39.5% (95% CI: 23.6–54.5%). The Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) had a predictive value for overall survival (CCI > 10, p = 0.0001) in the curative group. The number of older cancer patients will increase considerably in the next decades because of demographic changes. Our analysis supports the notion that radiation therapy for this patient group of oldest old cancer patients is feasible in general. Treatment decisions should not be based on chronological age but rather on comorbidities and functional status.

Chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy is the standard in patients with initially nonmetastatic unresectable pancreatic cancer. Additional surgery is in discussion. The CONKO-007 multicenter randomized trial examines the value of radiotherapy. Our interim analysis showed a significant effect of surgery, which may be relevant to clinical practice. One hundred eighty patients received induction chemotherapy (gemcitabine or FOLFIRINOX). Patients without tumor progression were randomized to either chemotherapy alone or to concurrent chemoradiotherapy. At the end of therapy, a panel of five independent pancreatic surgeons judged the resectability of the tumor. Following induction chemotherapy, 126/180 patients (70.0%) were randomized to further treatment. Following study treatment, 36/126 patients (28.5%) underwent surgery; (R0: 25/126 [19.8%]; R1/R2/Rx [n = 11/126; 6.1%]). Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were significantly better for patients with R0 resected tumors (median DFS and OS: 16.6 months and 26.5 months, respectively) than for nonoperated patients (median DFS and OS: 11.9 months and 16.5 months, respectively; p = 0.003). In the 25 patients with R0 resected tumors before treatment, only 6/113 (5.3%) of the recommendations of the panel surgeons recommended R0 resectability, compared with 17/48 (35.4%) after treatment (p < 0.001). Tumor resectability of pancreatic cancer staged as unresectable at primary diagnosis should be reassessed after neoadjuvant treatment. The patient should undergo surgery if a resectability is reached, as this significantly improves their prognosis.

The present study investigates the impact of systemic application of heparins on the manifestation of radiation-induced oral mucositis in a well-established mouse model. Male C3H/Neu mice were irradiated with either single-dose or fractionated irradiation protocols with 5 × 3 Gy/week, given over one (days 0–4) or two (days 0–4, 7–11) weeks. All fractionation protocols were concluded by a local test irradiation (day 7/14) using graded doses to generate complete dose–effect curves. Daily doses of unfractionated or low molecular weight heparin (40 or 200 I.U./mouse, respectively) were applied subcutaneously over varying time intervals. The incidence and the time course of mucosal ulceration, corresponding to confluent mucositis in patients (RTOG/EORTC grade 3), were analysed as clinically relevant endpoints. Systemic application of heparins significantly increased the iso-effective doses for the induction of mucosal ulceration, particularly in combination with fractionated irradiation protocols. Moreover, a tentative prolongation of the latent time and a pronounced reduction of the ulcer duration were observed. These data provide the first evidence for a protective and/or mitigative effect of heparins for radiation-induced oral mucositis. Further studies are ongoing investigating the underlying mechanism.

Stereotactic radiosurgery of intracranial tumors and vascular malformations can be performed by either a linear accelerator (Linac) or gamma knife. The aim of this first study on patients was to determine the radiation exposure of organs at risk and assess the risk for late effects including secondary tumors and/or hereditary disorders after stereotactic Linac radiosurgery. Thermoluminescent dosimetry (TLD) measurements were done on 21 consecutively admitted patients with various intracranial lesions scheduled for Linac radiosurgery. The TLD chips were placed on the eyelid, thyroid, breast and the regions of the ovary or testes. The mean doses in organs at risk were 276 ± 200 mGy (eye lens), 155 ± 83 mGy (thyroid), 47 ± 22 mGy (breast), 20 ± 12 mGy (ovary), and 9 ± 3 mGy (testes). The doses decreased significantly with a larger distance from the isocenter. The absorbed doses to the extracranial organs at risk in patients undergoing Linac radiosurgery were very low, ranging from 0.025% (testes) to 0.76% (eye lens) of the mean maximum target dose (36 Gy). Nevertheless, while the majority of radiosurgery patients have benign tumors or arteriovenous malformations and their life expectancy is long, all doses should be kept as low as reasonably achievable. This could be accomplished by the use of modern irradiation techniques including conformal beams with micro–multileaf collimator and avoiding beams directed to the trunk.