No abstract

ObjectiveRadiation therapy (RT) for esophageal cancer often results in unintended radiation doses delivered to the heart owing to anatomic proximity. Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database, we examined late cardiac death in survivors of esophageal cancer that had or had not received RT.Methods5,630 patients were identified that were diagnosed with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) or adenocarcinoma (AC) from 1973–2012, who were followed for at least 5 years after therapy. Examined risk factors for cardiac death included age (≤55/56-65/66-75/>75), gender, race (white/non-white), stage (local/regional/distant), histology (SCC/AC), esophageal location (<18cm/18-24cm/25-32cm/33-40cm from incisors), diagnosis year (1973-1992/1993-2002/2003-2012), and receipt of surgery and/or RT. Time to cardiac death was evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method. A Cox model was used to evaluate risk factors for cardiac death in propensity score matched data.ResultsPatients who received RT were younger, diagnosed more recently, had more advanced disease, SCC histology, and no surgery. The RT group had higher risk of cardiac death than the no-RT group (log-rank p<0.0001). The median time to cardiac death in the RT group was 289 months (95% CI, 255–367) and was not reached in the no-RT group. The probability of cardiac death increased with age and decreased with diagnosis year, and this trend was more pronounced in the RT group. Multivariate analysis found RT to be associated with higher probability of cardiac death (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.03–1.47, HR 1.961, 95% CI 1.466–2.624). Lower esophageal subsite (33–40 cm) was also associated with a higher risk of cardiac death. Other variables were not associated with cardiac death.ConclusionsRecognizing the limitations of a SEER analysis including lack of comorbidity accountability, these data should prompt more definitive study as to whether a possible associative effect of RT on cardiac death could potentially be a causative effect.

BackgroundType-C dose algorithms provide more accurate dosimetry for lung SBRT treatment planning. However, because current dosimetric protocols were developed based on conventional algorithms, its applicability for the new generation algorithms needs to be determined. Previous studies on this issue used small sample sizes and reached discordant conclusions. Our study assessed dose calculation of a Type-C algorithm with current dosimetric protocols in a large patient cohort, in order to demonstrate the dosimetric impacts and necessary treatment planning steps of switching from a Type-B to a Type-C dose algorithm for lung SBRT planning.MethodsFifty-two lung SBRT patients were included, each planned using coplanar VMAT arcs, normalized to D95% = prescription dose using a Type-B algorithm. These were compared against three Type-C plans: re-calculated plans (identical plan parameters), re-normalized plans (D95% = prescription dose), and re-optimized plans. Dosimetric endpoints were extracted and compared among the four plans, including RTOG dosimetric criteria: (R100%, R50%, D2cm, V105%, and lung V20), PTV Dmin, Dmax, Dmean, V% and D90%, PTV coverage (V100%), homogeneity index (HI), and Paddick conformity index (PCI).ResultsRe-calculated Type-C plans resulted in decreased PTV Dmin with a mean difference of 5.2% and increased Dmax with a mean difference of 3.1%, similar or improved RTOG dose compliance, but compromised PTV coverage (mean D95% and V100% reduction of 2.5 and 8.1%, respectively). Seven plans had >5% D95% reduction (maximum reduction = 16.7%), and 18 plans had >5% V100% reduction (maximum reduction = 60.0%). Re-normalized Type-C plans restored target coverage, but yielded degraded plan conformity (average PCI reduction 4.0%), and RTOG dosimetric criteria deviation worsened in 11 plans, in R50%, D2cm, and R100%. Except for one case, re-optimized Type-C plans restored RTOG compliance achieved by the original Type-B plans, resulting in similar dosimetric values but slightly higher target dose heterogeneity (mean HI increase = 13.2%).ConclusionsType-B SBRT lung plans considerably overestimate target coverage for some patients, necessitating Type-C re-normalization or re-optimization. Current RTOG dosimetric criteria appear to remain appropriate.

Large, population‐based analyses of rectal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) have not been previously conducted. We assessed patterns of care, prognostic factors, and outcomes of rectal SCC and adenocarcinoma (AC) in population‐based cohorts. Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registry searches were performed (1998–2011), producing 42,308 nonmetastatic rectal cancer patients (999 SCC and 41,309 AC). Patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics were compared. Based on risk factors, SCC/AC groups were subdivided into low‐, intermediate‐, and high‐risk groups. Overall survival (OS) was compared between histological and risk groups using Kaplan–Meier method and log‐rank test. Multivariate logistic regression models evaluated prognostic factors for 5‐year survival. Cox regression modeling was performed on propensity‐matched data. Rectal SCC, more common in females and associated with larger tumors of higher grade, was more often treated with radiotherapy (RT) than surgery. Surgery was associated with higher OS in AC but not SCC, and RT had proportionally greater benefits in SCC. These effects of RT and surgery were retained when stratified into risk groups (particularly high/intermediate‐risk). Favorable prognostic factors for survival included younger age, non‐black race, SCC histology, size ≤3.9 cm, localized stage, lower grade, surgery, and RT. For SCC, race, tumor grade, and surgery were not prognostic factors for survival. Cox regression modeling of propensity‐matched data showed that AC histology increased risk of death versus SCC. In the largest analysis of rectal SCC to date, and in the notable absence (and unlikelihood) of prospective data, nonsurgical and RT‐based treatment is recommended.

Background A majority of breast cancer tumors express estrogen receptor (ER) and/or progesterone receptor (PR); however, the percentage of cancer cells expressing these receptors can range from 0-100%. The prognostic and therapeutic impact of the percentage of cells expressing hormone receptors in breast cancer is not fully understood. Methods A retrospective analysis of 411 breast cancer patients who were treated at the University of Nebraska Medical Center between 2010 and 2017 was performed. Patient tumors were evaluated for percentage of cells expressing ER and PR in conjunction with clinical outcomes. Results Patient tumors demonstrated a highly bimodal pattern of ER and PR staining with a majority of tumors demonstrating either a high percentage (> 80% of cells) or lack of cells (0%) staining for ER or PR. An increase in the percentage of ER positivity correlated with decreased local recurrence and improved overall survival. An increase in the percentage of PR positivity demonstrated a trend towards decreased local recurrence and improved overall survival, but was not statistically significant. Conclusions Results based on both continuous and categorical evaluation of ER expression revealed that increasing expression correlated with improved patient outcomes. Similar evaluation of PR expression demonstrated a trend towards improved patient outcomes though not statistically significant. These findings suggest that the degree of hormone receptor positivity and not a Boolean representation of positivity could provide additional prognostic value in the treatment and management of breast cancer.