Elysia Donovan

Purpose: Uterine carcinosarcomas are highly aggressive tumors of the endometrium and are associated with a poor prognosis. The optimal adjuvant treatment for both early and advanced-stage patients remains unclear. Methods: Cases of uterine carcinosarcoma were identified in our institution’s pathology database between 2000 and 2022. Kaplan–Meier estimates were calculated for the local and distant recurrence-free, disease-free and overall survival; hazard ratios were calculated using Cox proportional hazards modelling for independent prognostic factors including the stage and treatment. Results: A total of 48 patients were identified as having uterine carcinosarcoma, of whom 70.8% were surgically staged. In total, 43 patients had pelvic-confined disease, while five had positive omental or peritoneal biopsies at surgery. There were 10 pelvic (20.8%) and 19 (39.6%) distant recurrences. None of the patients with stage IA disease who received chemotherapy and brachytherapy experienced disease recurrence. The local recurrence-free survival was 54.95%, the distant recurrence-free survival was 44.7%, and the overall survival was 59.6% at 5 years. Local recurrence-free survival and overall survival were inversely associated with advanced-stage OR 1.23 (p = 0.005) and OR 1.28 (p = 0.017), respectively, and no chemotherapy was associated with OR 1.96 (p = 0.06) and OR 2.08 (p = 0.056), respectively. Conclusion: The local and distant recurrence rates were high for advanced=stage patients even when treated with aggressive adjuvant therapy regimens. Chemotherapy may improve recurrence and survival. Early-stage patients may perform well with vaginal vault brachytherapy and chemotherapy. Further prospective comparisons are required between sequential, sandwich, and concurrent approaches to chemotherapy and radiotherapy, to optimize outcomes in this high-risk population.

PURPOSE: Radiation dermatitis (RD) is common in patients undergoing breast radiotherapy. Mepitel film (MF) can reduce RD, but the results from two randomized controlled trials are conflicting. We aimed to conduct a confirmatory randomized controlled trial in patients at risk of RD. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive MF or standard care (2:1 ratio). Patients with large breasts after lumpectomy (bra size ≥ 36 inches or cup size ≥ C) or after mastectomy were eligible. Stratification factors included surgery type, dose fractionation, and administration of boost/bolus. The primary end point was grade (G) 2 or 3 RD using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0. Secondary end points included patient- and clinician-reported outcomes. RESULTS: Between January 2020 and May 2022, 376 patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. The incidence of G2 or 3 RD was significantly lower in MF patients compared with standard care (n = 39/251, 15.5%; 95% CI, 11.3 to 20.6% v n = 57/125, 45.6%; 95% CI, 36.7 to 54.8% respectively, odds ratio (OR): 0.20, P < .0001). Benefits of MF remained significant in patients who developed G 3 RD (n = 7, 2.8%; 95% CI, 1.1 to 5.7% v n = 17, 13.6%; 95% CI, 8.1 to 20.9%, OR: 0.19) and moist desquamation (n = 20, 8.0%; 95% CI, 4.9 to 12.0% v n = 24, 19.2%; 95% CI, 12.7 to 27.1%, OR: 0.36). When evaluating the combined patient and health care provider score using Radiation-Induced Skin Reaction Assessment Scale, the MF arm had significantly lower scores ( P < .0001). Individual items on the Radiation-Induced Skin Reaction Assessment Scale also favored the MF for both patient- and clinician-reported outcomes. Blistering/peeling, erythema, pigmentation, and edema were significantly reduced in the MF arm. Three patients removed the film prematurely because of rash (n = 2) and excessive pruritus (n = 1). CONCLUSION: MF significantly reduces RD in patients undergoing breast radiotherapy.

Pelvic radiotherapy is an essential component of cancer therapy for patients with cervical and other gynecological malignancies. The ovaries are particularly radiosensitive, and even low radiotherapy doses may result in impaired or complete loss of ovarian function, causing hormonal disturbances and infertility. Recent advances in both surgery and radiotherapy have facilitated the ability of some patients to maintain ovarian function through ovarian transposition and careful radiotherapy planning. Multidisciplinary discussions should be undertaken to consider which candidates are appropriate for transposition. Generally, patients under age 35 should be considered due to ovarian reserve, likelihood of oophoropexy success, and radioresistance of ovaries. Those patients with small squamous cell tumors, minimal extra-uterine extension, and no lymphovascular invasion or lymph node involvement are ideal candidates to minimize risk of ovarian metastasis. Patients should be assessed and counseled about the risks of ovarian metastasis and the likelihood of successful ovarian preservation before undergoing oophoropexy and starting treatment. Oophoropexy should be bilateral if possible, and ovaries should be placed superior and lateral to the radiotherapy field. Studies limiting the mean ovarian dose to less than 2–3 Gray have demonstrated excellent preservation of ovarian function. Intensity modulated radiotherapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy techniques have the potential to further minimize the dose to the ovary with excellent outcomes. The addition of brachytherapy to the treatment regimen will probably cause minimal risk to transposed ovaries. Oophoropexy before radiotherapy may preserve the hormonal function of ovaries for a duration, and fertility might be possible through surrogate pregnancy. Successful ovarian transposition has the potential to improve the overall health and wellbeing, reproductive options, and potentially quality of life in patients with cervical and other gynecological cancers.

Background: Radiation-induced chest wall pain (CWP) and rib fracture (RF) are late adverse effects after stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for stage i non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC); however, the literature about their incidence and risk factors shows variability. We performed a systematic review to determine the pooled incidence of CWP and RF in the relevant population. Methods: A literature search using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines considered English publications in MEDLINE and EMBASE from January 1996 to August 2017. Abstracts were screened, followed by full-text review and data extraction. Results: The database searches identified 547 records. Twenty-eight publications comprising 3892 patients met the inclusion criteria. Median reported ages and follow-up durations fell into the ranges 67–82 years and 12–84 months. Prescriptions fell into the range of 40–70 Gy in 3–10 fractions. Despite study heterogeneity, the pooled incidences of CWP and RF were estimated to be 8.94% and 5.27% respectively. Nineteen studies reported cwp grade: 58 of 308 patients (18.8%) experienced grades 3–4 CWP (no grade 5 events reported). Thirteen studies reported RF grade: grades 3–4 RF were observed in 9 of 113 patients (7.96%). A high chest wall V30 was an important predictor of CWP and RF. Conclusions: In patients with stage i nsclc, rates of CWP and RF after SBRT are low; however, tumour location, accurate toxicity reporting, and dose–fractionation schemes might alter those rates. Prospective correlation with dosimetry and quality of life assessment will further improve the understanding of CWP and RF after sbrt.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is a highly ablative local therapy which has emerged as part of the treatment paradigm for patients with oligometastatic (OM) breast cancer (defined by 5 or fewer sites). This patient group has demonstrated improved prognosis in some cases and may therefore, benefit from aggressive local treatment. The role of upfront SBRT in newly diagnosed OM breast cancer in addition to systemic therapy is not clear, yet it is being increasingly utilized within the oncology community. The Canadian medical system is an ideal platform in which to investigate SBRT into the OM breast cancer setting, as it is not routinely implemented across centers at this time, as there is potential for robust collaboration between oncologists in the small community to investigate SBRT, and there is limited financial or industry motivation for early SBRT uptake compared with other countries. It is critical therefore to define the optimal patient population and scenarios for which SBRT should be investigated, as well as offered in the interim to Canadian patients. We therefore conducted a survey of Canadian Medical Oncologists, the primary physicians and gatekeepers of patients with OM breast cancer, to characterize their beliefs, opinions, and areas of controversy in the use of SBRT for OM breast cancer.