Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy Versus Metastasectomy in Patients With Pulmonary Metastases From Soft Tissue Sarcoma

The lung is the preferred site of metastasis from soft tissue sarcoma (STS). This systematic review aims to evaluate the outcomes of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and metastasectomy (MTS) for the treatment of lung metastases from STS. A systematic review was carried out according to the PRISMA protocol. PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Ovid and Web of Knowledge databases were searched for English-language articles to December 2018 using a predefined strategy. Retrieved studies were independently screened and rated for relevance. Data were extracted by two researchers. In total, there were 1306 patients with STS: 1104 underwent MTS and 202 had SBRT. The mean age ranged from 40 to 55.8 years in the MTS group and from 47.9 to 64 years in the SBRT group. The cumulative death rate was 72% (95% confidence interval 59–85%) in the MTS group and 56% (38–74%) in the SBRT group. The cumulative mean overall survival time was 46.7 months (36.4–57.0%) in the MTS group and 47.6 months (33.7–61.5%) in the SBRT group. The cumulative rate of patients alive with disease was 5% (2–9%) in the MTS group and 15% (6–36%) in the SBRT group. Finally, the cumulative rate of patients alive without disease in the two groups was 19% (9–29%) and 20% (10–50%), respectively. Our study showed that local treatment of pulmonary metastases from STS with SBRT, compared with surgery, was associated with a lower cumulative overall death rate and similar overall survival time and survival rates without disease. By contrast, SBRT was associated with a higher survival rate with disease than MTS. Large randomised trials are necessary to confirm these findings and to establish whether SBRT may be a reliable option for early stage disease.     

Growth of the Social #RadOnc Network on Twitter

PurposeTwitter is an increasingly popular social media platform within the health care community. The objective of this analysis is to characterize the profile of radiation oncology–related tweets and Twitter users over the past 6 years.Methods and MaterialsUsing the web-based social media analytics platform Symplur Signals, we filtered tweets containing at least 1 of the following hashtags or key words: #radonc, #radiationoncology, "rad onc," or "radiation oncology." We evaluated radiation oncology–related Twitter activity between October 2014 and March 2020 for tweet frequency, tweet content, and individuals or groups posting tweets. We identified the most influential Twitter users contributing to radiation oncology–related tweets.ResultsFrom 2014 to 2020, the quarterly volume of radiation oncology–related tweets increased from 5027 to 29,763. Physicians contributed the largest growth in tweet volume. Academic radiation oncologists comprise 60% of the most influential Twitter accounts responsible for radiation oncology–related content. The number of radiation-oncology resident physicians on Twitter increased from 25 to 328 over the past 6 years, and 20% of radiation-oncology residency programs have a Twitter account. Seventy-one percent of radiation oncology–related tweets generated direct communication via mentions, and 59% of tweets contain links to external sources, including scientific articles.ConclusionsThe number of physicians contributing radiation oncology–related Twitter content has increased significantly in recent years. Academic radiation oncologists are the primary influencers of radiation oncology–related Twitter activity. Twitter is used by radiation oncologists to both professionally network and discuss findings related to the field. There remains the opportunity for radiation oncologists to broaden their audience on Twitter to encompass a more diverse community, including patients.     

Determinants of anti-PD-1 response and resistance in clear cell renal cell carcinoma

1. Download : Download high-res image (282KB)
2. Download : Download full-size image

     

Evaluation of the Visibility and Artifacts of 11 Common Fiducial Markers for Image Guided Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy in the Abdomen

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to quantitatively evaluate the visibility and artifacts of commercially available fiducial markers to optimize their selection for image guided stereotactic body radiation therapy.Methods and MaterialsFrom 6 different vendors, we selected 11 fiducials commonly used in image guided radiation therapy. The fiducials varied in material composition (e.g., gold, platinum, carbon), shape (e.g., cylindrical, notched/linear, coiled, ball-like, step), and size measured in terms of diameter (0.28-1.0 mm) and length (3.0-20.0 mm). Each fiducial was centered in 4-mm bolus within a 13-cm-thick water-equivalent phantom. Fiducials were imaged with the use of a simulation computed tomography (CT) scanner, a CT-on-rails system, and an onboard cone beam CT system. Acquisition parameters were set according to clinical protocols. Visibility was assessed in terms of contrast (Δ Hounsfield unit [HU]) and the Michelson visibility metric. Artifacts were quantified in terms of relative standard deviation and relative streak artifacts level (rSAL). Twelve radiation oncologists ranked each fiducial in terms of clinical usefulness.ResultsContrast and artifacts increased with fiducial size. For CT imaging, maximum contrast (2722 HU) and artifacts (rSAL = 2.69) occurred for the largest-diameter (0.75 mm) platinum fiducial. Minimum contrast (551 HU) and reduced artifacts (rSAL = 0.65) were observed for the smallest-diameter (0.28 mm) gold fiducial. Carbon produced the least severe artifacts (rSAL = 0.29). The survey indicated that physicians preferred gold fiducials with a 0.35- to 0.43-mm diameter, 5- to 10-mm length, and coiled or cylindrical shape that balanced contrast and artifacts.ConclusionsWe evaluated 11 different fiducials in terms of visibility and artifacts. The results of this study may assist radiation oncologists who seek to maximize contrast, minimize artifacts, or balance contrast versus artifacts by fiducial selection.