Magnetic Resonance-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) marks the beginning of a new era. MR is a versatile and suitable imaging modality for radiotherapy, as it enables direct visualization of the tumor and the surrounding organs at risk. Moreover, MRgRT provides real-time imaging to characterize and eventually track anatomical motion. Nevertheless, the successful translation of new technologies into clinical practice remains challenging. To date, the initial availability of next-generation hybrid MR-linac (MRL) systems is still limited and therefore, the focus of the present preview was on the initial applicability in current clinical practice and on future perspectives of this new technology for different treatment sites. MRgRT can be considered a groundbreaking new technology that is capable of creating new perspectives towards an individualized, patient-oriented planning and treatment approach, especially due to the ability to use daily online adaptation strategies. Furthermore, MRL systems overcome the limitations of conventional image-guided radiotherapy, especially in soft tissue, where target and organs at risk need accurate definition. Nevertheless, some concerns remain regarding the additional time needed to re-optimize dose distributions online, the reliability of the gating and tracking procedures and the interpretation of functional MR imaging markers and their potential changes during the course of treatment. Due to its continuous technological improvement and rapid clinical large-scale application in several anatomical settings, further studies may confirm the potential disruptive role of MRgRT in the evolving oncological environment.
Neuroendocrine carcinoma of the breast is considered a rare entity, and for this reason there are no data from prospective clinical trials on its optimal management. Early stage tumors are usually treated with the same strategy used for the other types of invasive breast cancer. Anthracycline-and taxane-based regimens represent the most frequently administered chemotherapy in neoadjuvant and adjuvant setting, as well as for metastatic disease, although combinations of platinum compounds and etoposide have been widely used, in particular for small-cell histology and tumors with a high proliferation index. For metastatic disease, a multimodality therapeutic strategy can be considered on an individual basis, with chemotherapy, endocrine therapy, peptide receptor radionuclide therapy, radiation therapy, surgery, or a combination of the above. In the near future, a better knowledge of the biology of these tumors will hopefully provide new therapeutic targets for personalized treatment. In this review, we discuss the current evidence and the future perspectives on diagnosis and treatment of neuroendocrine carcinoma of the breast. The Oncologist 2016;21:28-32 Implications for Practice: Neuroendocrine carcinoma of the breast (NECB) is a distinct entity of breast cancer. Clinical features and morphology are not helpful to distinguish NECB from other subtypes of breast cancer; therefore, immunohistochemistry markers for neuroendocrine differentiation, mainly chromogranin and synaptophysin, should be routinely used to confirm the diagnosis, especially in cases of mucinous or solid papillary carcinoma in which the suspicion of NECB may be relevant. Adjuvant treatment should be offered according to the same recommendations given for the other types of invasive breast cancer. An accurate diagnosis of NECB is also important in the metastatic setting, in which a multimodality approach including specific therapies such as peptide receptor radionuclide therapy can be considered.
After completing this course, the reader will be able to:1. Assess stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) as an emerging modality in the treatment of oligometastatic patients.2. Discuss data on safety and efficacy of SBRT in the oligometastatic setting.3. Evaluate SBRT as a competitive option in patients with a low burden of disease in the metastatic setting.This article is available for continuing medical education credit at CME.TheOncologist.com. CME CME ABSTRACTIn patients with proven distant metastases from solid tumors, it has been a notion that the condition is incurable, warranting palliative care only. The term "oligometastases" was coined to refer to isolated sites of metastasis, whereby the entire burden of disease can be recognized as a finite number of discrete lesions that can be potentially cured with local therapies. Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is a novel treatment modality in radiation oncology that delivers a very high dose of radiation to the tumor target with high precision using single or a small number of fractions. SBRT is the result of technological advances in patient and tumor immobilization, image guidance, and treatment planning and delivery. A number of studies, both retrospective and prospective, showed promising results in terms of local tumor control and, in a limited subset of patients, of survival. This article reviews the radiobiologic, technical, and clinical aspects of SBRT for various anatomical sites.
BackgroundLinac-based stereotactic radiosurgery or fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (SRS/FSRT) of multiple brain lesions using volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) is typically performed by a multiple-isocenter approach, i.e. one isocenter per lesion, which is time-demanding for the need of independent setup verifications of each isocenter. Here, we present our initial experience with a new dedicated mono-isocenter technique with multiple non-coplanar arcs (HyperArc™, Varian Inc.) in terms of a plan comparison with a multiple-isocenter VMAT approach.MethodsFrom August 2017 to October 2017, 20 patients with multiple brain metastases (mean 5, range 2–10) have been treated by HyperArc in 1–3 fractions. The prescribed doses (Dp) were 18–25 Gy in single-fraction, and 21–27 Gy in three-fractions. Planning Target Volume (PTV), defined by a 2 mm isotropic margin from each lesion, had mean dimension of 9.6 cm3 (range 0.5–27.9 cm3). Mono-isocenter HyperArc VMAT plans (HA) with 5 non-coplanar 180°-arcs (couch at 0°, ±45°, ±90°) were generated and compared to multiple-isocenter VMAT plans (RA) with 2 coplanar 360°-arcs per isocenter. A dose normalization of 100%Dp at 98%PTV was adopted, while D2%(PTV) < 150%Dp was accepted. All plans had to respect the constraints on maximum dose to the brainstem (D0.5cm3 < 18 Gy) as well as to the optical nerves/chiasm, eyes and lenses (D0.5cm3 < 15 Gy). HA and RA plans were compared in terms of dose-volume metrics, by Paddick conformity (CI) and gradient (GI) index and by V12 and mean dose to the brain-minus-PTV, and in terms of MU and overall treatment time (OTT) per fraction. OTT was measured for HA treatments, whereas for RA plans OTT was estimated by assuming 3 min. For initial patient setup plus 5 min. For each CBCT-guided setup correction per isocenter.ResultsSignificant variations in favour of HA plans were computed for both target dose indexes, CI (p < .01) and GI (p < .01). The lower GI in HA plans was the likely cause of the significant reduction in V12 to the brain-minus-PTV (p = .023). Although at low doses, below 2–5 Gy, the sparing of the brain-minus-PTV was in favour of RA plans, no significant difference in terms of mean doses to the brain-minus-PTV was observed between the two groups (p = .31). Finally, both MU (p < .01) and OTT (p < .01) were significantly reduced by HyperArc plans.ConclusionsFor linac-based SRS/FSRT of multiple brain lesions, HyperArc plans assured a higher CI and a lower GI than standard multiple-isocenter VMAT plans. This is consistent with the computed reduction in V12 to the brain-minus-PTV. Finally, HyperArc treatments were completed within a typical 20 min. time slot, with a significant time reduction with respect to the expected duration of multiple-isocenters VMAT.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.