Background COVID-19 in Italy has led to the need to reorganize hospital protocols with a significant risk of interruption to cancer treatment programs. In this report, we will focus on a management model covering the two phases of the COVID-19 emergency, namely lockdown-phase I and post-lockdown-phase II. Methods The following steps were taken in the two phases: workload during visits and radiotherapy planning, use of dedicated routes, measures for triage areas, management of suspected and positive COVID-19 cases, personal protective equipment, hospital environments and intra-institutional meetings and tumor board management. Due to the guidelines set out by the Ministry of Health, oncological follow-up visits were interrupted during the lockdown-phase I; consequently, we set about contacting patients by telephone, with laboratory and instrumental exams being viewed via telematics. During the post-lockdown-phase II, the oncological follow-up clinic reopened, with two shifts operating daily. Results By comparing our radiotherapy activity from March 9 to May 4 2019 with the same period in 2020 during full phase I of the COVID-19 emergency, similar results were achieved. First radiotherapy visits, Simulation Computed Tomography and Linear Accelerator treatments amounted to 123, 137 and 151 in 2019 compared with 121, 135 and 170 in 2020 respectively. There were no cases of COVID-19 positivity recorded either in patients or in healthcare professionals, who were all negative to the swab tests performed. Conclusion During both phases of the COVID-19 emergency, the planned model used in our own experience guaranteed both continuity in radiotherapy treatments whilst neither reducing workload nor interrupting treatment and, as such, it ensured the safety of cancer patients, hospital environments and staff.

Background/Aim: Quality of life (QoL) in early breast cancer (BC) treatment may be affected by acute and late toxicities. This study evaluated the impact of radiotherapy (RT) schedules, treatment-related toxicities, hormone therapy (HT) and age on QoL. Patients and Methods: Ninety-five patients answered the FACT-B 4.0 questionnaire. Acute or late toxicities were recorded at each follow-up visit. Results: The median trend of the QoL subscales was stable during all questionnaires. HT negatively impacted on Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General-Total, functional and emotional wellbeing. No difference was recorded between RT schedules and toxicity. No significant differences for age were detected in QoL. Conclusion: RT seems not to influence QoL of BC patients, in terms of fractionation regimen or RT-related side-effects. Moreover, women having systemic HT experienced a QoL worse than patients treated with RT only. Further and longterm protocols are needed to improve the validity of the tool.Advances in diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer (BC) have led to an increase in cancer survival, resulting in quality of life (QoL) improvement. Breast conserving surgery followed by adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) is the current standard treatment for early BC. Local and systemic treatments could cause skin dyschromia, lymphedema, fatigue, hot flashes, sexual dysfunction, and arthralgia with consequent changes in physical appearance and routine activities. These toxicities may persist for a long time after treatment with a subsequent decline in QoL (1). Studies have shown that in clinical trials QoL represents an important endpoint, whose assessment could contribute to improved treatment and patient's satisfaction (2-5). Under this scenario, the main aim of the study was to evaluate the impact of RT and hormone therapy (HT) on the QoL during the first 2 years after RT. Fractionation schedules (conventional vs. hypofractionation), radiation toxicities and age were also investigated. QoL was evaluated with Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy General Questionnaire and its Breast Cancer Supplement (FACT-B) questionnaire (https://www.facit.org), version 4.0 in Italian language. This tool is deemed as a quick and well validated multi-dimensional self-report questionnaire with subscales measuring physical, social, emotional, and functional wellbeing and contains additional concerns in breast cancer (6). Patients and MethodsThe study was designed as a prospective observational research project and was approved by the Ethics Committee of the "SS Annunziata" Hospital, "G. D'Annunzio" University, Chieti, Italy on 9 th May 2018. All patients were treated in our Radiotherapy Department and provided written informed consent. Medical records of enrolled patients were marked by a pink circle to streamline the identification process during treatment and follow-up.Inclusion criteria were: female patients, age ≥18 years, histologically proven breast cancer, ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive carcinoma stage I-II, bre...

Purpose Axillary management remains unclear when sentinel lymph node (SLN) results are positive in cN0 patients with breast cancer (BC). The trial ACOSOG Z0011 represented a revolution with axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) omission in SLN+ patients, despite critiques regarding non-uniformity of radiation fields. We conducted an observational study (LISEN) where whole breast radiotherapy (WBRT) was planned with tangential fields without nodal irradiation in patients eligible for the Z0011 trial. Methods Inclusion criteria were female patients with histologically proven BC, cT1-2cN0, planned conservative surgery, no neoadjuvant therapy. Patients were stratified into two groups: micrometastatic (pN1mic, group 1) and macrometastatic (pN1a, group 2) lymph nodes. Tangential field WBRT was mandatory. Clinical outcomes were analysed, measured from surgery until the first event. Results In all, 199 patients underwent conservative surgery and SLN biopsy; 133 patients meeting criteria were analysed: 41 patients (30.8%) pN1mic and 92 (69.2%) pN1a. The 5‑year disease-free survival (DFS) was 95.0% (85.9–100%) in group 1 and 93.0% (86.3–100.0%) in group 2 (p = 0.78). Overall survival (OS) was 100% (100–100%) in group 1 and 97.4% (92.4–100%) in group 2 (p = 0.74). For the whole cohort DFS and OS were 93.6% (88.2–99.4%) and 96.9% (91.5–100.0%), respectively. For groups 1 and 2, the 5‑year outcomes were 5.0% (0.0–14.4%) and 2.3% (0.0–6.1%) for local recurrence (p = 0.51), and 6.2% (0.0–17.4%) and 7.0% (0.0–13.7%) for distant metastasis (p = 0.61), respectively. In group 1, regional recurrence (RR) and local regional recurrence (LRR) were 5.0% (0.0–14.1%; p = 0.13). In group 2, RR and LRR were 0.0% (0.0–0.0%). Conclusion Our results showed good regional control in patients who met the Z0011 trial criteria. WBRT, without nodal surgery or RT, avoiding axillary morbidity, seems to be a good choice.

No abstract

Background/Aim: We employed a multimodal evaluation of voice outcome (MEVO) model to assess long-term voice outcome in early glottic cancer (EGC) patients treated with primary radiotherapy (RT). The model consisted of objective and subjective vocal evaluation during follow-up, by a dedicated Speech Pathologist and Speech Therapist. Patients and Methods: MEVO methodology includes Self-perception Voice Handicap Index (VHI-30), evaluation of parameters Grade (G), Roughness (R), Breathiness (B), Asthenia (A) and Strain (S) according to GRBAS scale, objective analysis and aerodynamics using the PRAAT software and laryngeal evaluation with videostroboscope (VS). Results: The MEVO methodology was described and tested on a sample of 10 EGCs submitted to definitive RT (total dose 66-70 Gy). Mean follow-up was 48.9 months (range=9-115). VHI was mild-moderate in 90% of patients; overall voice function (GRBAS) was normal-mildly impaired in 70% of patients; VS evaluation showed normal vocal cord motion in 90% of patients, but complete glottic closure in 60%. PRAAT scores confirmed these findings. Conclusion: A multidimensional voice evaluation is time consuming, but useful to objectify vocal impact of radiotherapy. The MEVO model allowed to quantify vocal dysfunction, showing a good objective vocal outcome.

No abstract

No abstract

Background: We report a mono-institutional experience regarding patient-perceived quality regarding the Chieti Radiotherapy Department, through RAMSI (Radiotherapy Amica Mia—SmileINTM(SI)—My Friend RadiotherapySI) project, in critical scenarios of limited equipment and COVID-19. Material and methods: Patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) were assessed as follows: Patient-centric welcome perception (PCWP), Comfort, Professional skills and Punctuality. Patients could give anonymous feedback using HappyOrNot technology through four totems located in strategic areas within the center. An internal benchmark was obtained using the feedback received after a preliminary observation period. The SI Experience Index was collected, analyzed and compared. Weekly and monthly reports were generated. Results: From February 2019 to February 2022, 8924 patients accessed the department; 17,464 daily treatments were recorded and 5830points of feedback were collected: 896, 1267, 1125and 2542 for PCWP, Comfort, Professional skills and Punctuality, respectively. A LINAC decommissioning period was analyzed, with decreases in the SI-Index score and Smile-IN approved percentage and an improvement after this period. Additionally, the COVID-19 pandemic was analyzed with a mild evaluations decrease for PREM’s Welcome, Comfort and Punctuality (Δ-value: −9%, −3% and −4%, respectively), while Professional skills were always optimal. Conclusion: The RAMSI project was effective for assessing treatment quality perception, allowing for improving clinical procedures with corrective actions. The RAMSI project is ongoing.