Purpose: Telemedicine was rapidly and ubiquitously adopted during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, there are growing discussions as to its role postpandemic. Methods and Materials: We surveyed patients, radiation oncology (RO) attendings, and RO residents to assess their experience with telemedicine. Surveys addressed quality of patient care and utility of telemedicine for teaching and learning core competencies. Satisfaction was rated on a 6-point Likert-type scale. The quality of teaching and learning was graded on a 5point Likert-type scale, with overall scores calculated by the average rating of each core competency required by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (range, 1-5). Results: Responses were collected from 56 patients, 12 RO attendings, and 13 RO residents. Patient feedback was collected at 17 new-patient, 22 on-treatment, and 17 follow-up video visits. Overall, 88% of patients were satisfied with virtual visits. A lower proportion of on-treatment patients rated their virtual visit as "very satisfactory" (68.2% vs 76.5% for new patients and 82.4% for follow-ups). Only 5.9% of the new patients and none of the follow-up patients were dissatisfied, and 27% of on-treatment patients were dissatisfied. The large majority of patients (88%) indicated that they would continue to use virtual visits as long as a physical examination was not needed. Overall scores for medical training were 4.1 out of 5 (range, 2.8-5.0) by RO residents and 3.2 (range, 2.0-4.0) by RO attendings. All residents and 92% of attendings indicated they would use telemedicine again; however, most indicated that telemedicine is best for follow-up visits. Conclusions: Telemedicine is a convenient means of delivering care to patients, with some limitations demonstrated for on-treatment patients. The majority of both patients and providers are interested in using telemedicine again, and it will likely continue to supplement patient care.

Ectopic pregnancies are the leading cause of maternal mortality in the first trimester, with an incidence of 5%–10% of all pregnancy-related deaths. Diagnosis of ectopic pregnancies is difficult due to clinical mimics and non-specific symptoms of abdominal pain and vaginal bleeding. The current standard for ectopic pregnancy diagnosis includes ultrasound imaging and β-human chorionic gonadotropin (β-hCG) monitoring. In addition to β-hCG, serum markers are being explored as a potential for diagnosis, with activin-AB and pregnancy-associated plasma protein A specifically showing promise. Other diagnostic methods include endometrial sampling, with dilation and curettage showing the highest specificity; however, frozen section reduces the diagnostic timeline which may improve outcomes. Treatment options for confirmed ectopic pregnancies include medical, surgical, and expectant management. Chosen treatment methodology is based on β-hCG levels, hematologic stability, and risk of ectopic pregnancy rupture. Current innovations in ectopic pregnancy management aim to preserve fertility and include laparoscopic partial tubal resection with end-to-end anastomosis and uterine artery embolization with intrauterine infusion of methotrexate. Psychological interventions to improve patient mental health surrounding ectopic pregnancy diagnosis and treatment are also valuable innovations. This literature review aims to bring light to current ectopic pregnancy diagnostics, treatments, and future directions.

During the unprecedented workplace disruption from the corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, health care workers have been particularly vulnerable to increased work-related stress and anxiety. This may have a negative effect on job performance and personal well-being. Personal safety, job security, and childcare needs are essential concerns that must be addressed by health care organizations to ensure stability of its workforce. In addition, workplace morale is also damaged by the many daily changes brought about by social distancing. Thus, opportunities exist for departments to address the loss of social bonding and cohesiveness needed for successful team building. In this report, we describe the efforts of our departmental workplace culture committee during this pandemic.

CRT followed by total mesorectal excision (TME). 60 patients in the consolidation chemotherapy group received two cycles XELOX between CRT and TME, while 84 patients in the standard treatment group without consolidation chemotherapy. Two groups were matched according to age, gender, TNM staging, and ECOG grade. The pCR (ypT0N0), tumor downstaging (ypT0-2N0) after TME and adverse events (AEs) during and post treatment were compared between the treatment groups using multivariable logistic regression analysis. Results: The consolidation chemotherapy group improved pCR rate (19.3% versus 4.9%, p Z 0.01) and tumor downstaging rate (45.8% versus 24.6%, p Z 0.009) compared to the standard treatment group. After adjustment for clinical tumor stage, clinical nodal stage and time interval to surgery, patients with consolidation chemotherapy were more likely to reach pCR (adjusted odds ratio 4.91, 95%CI 1.01-23.79, p Z 0.048). adverse events (AEs) during and post treatment in the two groups were 54.1% versus 49.3% (p Z 0.57), respectively. In addition, the incidence of any grade 1-2 AEs in the two groups was 93.4% versus 95.1% (p Z 0.93), while the incidence of grade 3 adverse events was 1.6% versus 2.4% (p Z 0.74), respectively. No grade 4 AEs were occurred in two groups Conclusion: Adding neoadjuvant consolidation chemotherapy after CRT significantly improved the pCR rate without increasing during and post treatment in patients with LARC.

560 Background: Caution is usually employed in the treatment of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) due to the inherent liver radiosensitivity, especially in patients with Child Pugh (CP) B and C classes. This study aims to review the outcomes of patients treated with SBRT for CP class B with HCC. Methods: Medical records of all patients with HCC and compromised liver function (CP class B) treated with SBRT between 2003 and 2018 were retrieved after institutional review board approval. Clinical, laboratory, and treatment-related data were collected and analyzed for their correlation to toxicity and survival. Liver function was assessed prior to SBRT and at 1, 3 and 6 months after treatment using the CP score classification. Patients were censored for toxicity after extensive tumor progression in the liver, new liver-directed therapies, or liver transplant. Time-to-events were calculated from date of SBRT. Results: A total of 22 patients were identified, but 3 were excluded for incomplete follow-up. Median follow-up time was 33 months (range: 11-95 months). At baseline, 13 (68%) patients had a CP score of 7, and 6 (32%) had a CP score of 8. The median PTV volume was 94 cc (range: 14-710 cc). The median prescribed dose was in 5 fractions (range: 35-45 Gy in 3-5 fractions). After SBRT, 8 (42%) patients presented with worsening in CP score, with a mean increase of 1.5 points (95% CI, 0.6-2.5; p = 0.005) at the first month of follow-up, but followed by recovery in liver function with change in CP score not statistically different from baseline at 3- or 6-month follow-up times (p = 0.35 and p = 0.13, respectively). Eight patients (42%) presented with acute hepatobiliary toxicity, with six of those presenting with ≥grade 2 toxicity. Patients with CP score change ≥2 points (n = 6) showed a significantly higher incidence of acute grade 2 or higher hepatobiliary toxicity (p = 0.001) with a trend toward worse overall survival (33 vs. 51 months, p = 0.45). Conclusions: In our cohort, SBRT demonstrated to be safe for patients with Child Pugh Class B liver function.

The aim of our prospective study is to evaluate the safety and the longÀterm clinical efficacy of Intracoronary Brachytherapy (ICBT) for In-stent Restenosis utilizing a prespecified interventional and radiation protocol. Materials/Methods: Single center prospective analysis of patients undergoing ICBT with at least 2 prior layers of coronary stents compared to patients undergoing balloon angioplasty alone. Per our protocol, the first step is to perform an intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) study to evaluate the lesion for degree of calcification, etiology of ISR, length of the lesion and diameter of the vessel. Then, laser atherectomy is performed using 0.9, 1.4-or 1.7-mm catheters for 3 runs. Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) of the culprit lesion with a 1:1 sized cutting balloon is performed. Then, ICBT is performed and IVUS is repeated to confirm appropriate MLA. Target Vessel Revascularization rates within one year of ICBT will be assessed. Periprocedural complications will be assessed for up to 72 hours. Side branch occlusion: > 50% stenosis of the side-branch of the target vessel during/ immediately after completion of ICBT. Absence of TIMI III flow distally in the target vessel after ICBT will also be assessed. Results: Results for our project are forthcoming however we have completed 32 brachytherapy treatments in our laboratory since 2016 and their results are presented herein. Significant side branch occlusion occurred in only 4 cases (13%). Distal slow flow or no flow occurred in 3 cases (9%). TIMI 3 flow was restored in all 3 cases. TVR occurred in only 3 cases (9%). Bleeding complications occurred in 3 cases, 2 patients had a hematoma and one had bleeding at the access site. Only one case required one unit of blood transfusion. Acute renal failure occurred in one case. There were no 30-day readmissions to our hospital for any of the patients who received ICBT. 30-day survival was observed in all 32 patients. The 8 patients who qualified for ICBT during the same time period of January 2016 to December 2020 but had PTCA alone or atherectomy and PTCA had TVR observed in 5/8 cases (63%); This was significantly higher than in those patients who underwent ICBT (P < .001). Side branch occlusion did not occur in any of the 8 cases. None of the cases had a distal slow flow or no flow phenomenon. None of the patients had acute renal failure. There were no 30-day readmissions and all of the patients survived to 30 days. Conclusion:In-stent restenosis of DES is an important clinical issue. Intracoronary brachytherapy is a safe and well tolerated treatment option that may serve as a form of therapy for high-risk patients with recurrent ISR of DES. At our high-volume institution we have created a systematic protocol for ICBT. We look forward to updating the clinical results from our prospective study.

The mortality of the SARS-CoV-2 virus (COVID-19) has been associated with a pulmonary inflammatory response resulting in hypoxemia and rapid clinical decline. Recent work has indicated a potential therapeutic window for treatment to prevent ventilator-dependence thereby reducing mortality. PREVENT is an ongoing prospective multicenter Phase II randomized controlled trial where patients hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia are randomized to ultra-low dose radiation therapy (RT) versus control. This study is registered at clinicaltrials. gov, NCT04466683. The following is a description of the inpatient onboarding process of the center contributing the largest number of patients to this trial. Materials/Methods: COVID-19 hospital admissions from the previous day were attained by the clinical research manager each morning, screened for eligibility, and then sent to the designated radiation oncologist who further delineated from this list. Common exclusion criteria were: 1. Oxygen saturation > 96% on room air, 2. Age < 50, 3. > 9 days from initial COVID-19 symptomatology. From this list, HIPAA-compliant text message contact was made with infectious disease, critical care, and nursing staff with reciprocal discussion of the trial protocol and approval for consulting the patient. Subsequently, a virtual consult was made with the patient, with witnessed informed consent obtained via telephone and in person by our research associate. Patients randomized to RT were treated within 24 hours of consent. Simulation and treatment were performed on a linear accelerator with one personal protective equipment-protected therapist moving in and out of the treatment room, and a second therapist manning the console. On-site dose calculation was performed by physics, after which the radiation oncologist approved the fields prior to treatment delivery. Simulation and treatment were performed without a computer plan; therapists underwent several practice sessions prior to treating patients on trial. Results: Between August 28, 2020 and October 6, 2020, the first 10 enrolled patients on this multicenter trial were randomized and treated at our institution; no research staff member nor radiation oncology clinical team member contracted COVID-19 while employing this protocol. Conclusion: This represents the first published protocol to address efficient and safe recruitment of COVID-19 patients for a radiation oncology trial. Despite the procedural hurdles of conducting a trial in the midst of a pandemic, the combination of recruitment efficiency (> 2 patients/week) and safety to the research and clinical teams (no COVID-19 infections) of this protocol has allowed for the PREVENT trial to make substantial progress in meeting recruitment goals (n = 100). This onboarding process serves as a model in conducting recruitment of COVID-19 patients for clinical trials, and is worthy of emulation at additional centers.

414 Background: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for pancreatic cancers has been shown to improve local control, and is an important option for treatment, especially for unresectable disease. Verifying the tumor location prior to delivery of SBRT is challenging, so fiducial markers are used to track tumor location. There is currently no standard of which fiducials to use in treatment. This study would like to compare outcomes of patients treated with SBRT using different fiducial markers. Methods: Records of patients diagnosed with primary pancreas cancer who were treated with chemotherapy and SBRT were reviewed from 2006-2019. Patients were excluded if they were treated with Cyberknife, were metastatic at presentation, recurrence /persistent disease after Whipple/radiation therapy, were secondary metastatic disease (from another primary), and if they were resected after SBRT. Patients were categorized according to the fiducial used for tumor tracking during SBRT treatment: gold seeds, intrabiliary stent, or both. Cumulative incidence of local recurrence (CIR) was analyzed with death as competing event, and time to over-all survival was estimated using Kaplan-Meier curves. Results: A total of 129 patients with available fiducial information were included in this study, of which 64 (49.6%) were treated with SBRT using gold seeds, 23 (17.8%) using intrabiliary stent, and 42 (32.6%) using both the seeds and stent. There were no difference between groups in terms of baseline characteristics such as age (p = 0.169), sex (p = 0.293), and stage grouping (p = 0.293). Median follow-up time was 15 months (range: 0.3-37.3 months). The 6- and 12-month CIR were 1.5% (95%CI, 0.1%-7.4%) and 11% (95%CI, 4.8%-20.2%) for patients treated with seeds, 4.3% (95%CI, 0.2%-18.6%) and 30.4% (95%CI, 13.1%-49.8%) for patients treated with stent, and 4.8% (95%CI, 0.8%-14.6%) and 19.5% (95%CI, 9.0%-32.9%) for patients treated with both (p = 0.007). Median time to overall survival was 15.3 months (95%CI, 13-17.8 months) for patients treated with seeds, 21.3 months (95%CI, 14.7-29.6 months) for patients treated with stent, and 15.7 months (95%CI, 11.5-19.7 months) for patients treated with both (p = 0.307). Univariate analysis for predictors of local failure did not show significance for age (p = 0.812), or advanced stage (p = 0.483), but was significant for the presence of seeds (p = 0.006). Conclusions: The type of fiducial marker used for tracking during pancreas SBRT treatment was associated with local failure but no difference in overall survival. Further analysis is warranted to see which clinical factors contribute to this difference.