[en] Purpose: Postradiotherapy (RT) prostate biopsies are prone to problems in interpretation. False negatives due to sampling error, false positives due to delayed tumor regression, and indeterminate biopsies showing radiation effect in residual tumor of uncertain viability are common occurrences. Methods and Materials: A cohort of 498 men treated with conventional RT from 06/87-10/96 were followed prospectively with systematic transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided post-RT prostate biopsies, starting 12-18 months after RT. If there was residual tumor but further decline in serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA), biopsies were repeated every 6-12 months. Patients with negative biopsies were rebiopsied at 36 months. Residual tumor was evaluated for RT effect and proliferation markers. The 498 men had 978 biopsies. Median time of the first biopsy (n = 498) was 13 months, biopsy no. 2 (n = 342) 28 months, biopsy no. 3 (n = 110) 36 months, biopsy no. 4 (n = 28) 44 months, and biopsy no. 5 (n = 4) 55 months. Median follow-up is 54 months (range 13-131). One hundred seventy-five patients (34%) had prior hormonal therapy for a median of 5 months (range 1-60). Results: Clinical stage distribution was T1b: 46; T1c: 50; T2a: 115; T2b/c: 170; T3: 108; T4: 11; Tx: 1. Distribution by Gleason score was: 28% Gleason score 2-4; 42%: 5-6; 18%: 7; and 12%: 8-10. Seventy-one men have died, 26 of prostate cancer and 45 of other causes. Actuarial failure-free survival by T stage at 5 years is T1b: 78%; T1c: 76%; T2a: 60%; T2b/c: 55%; T3: 30%; and T4: 0%. Actuarial freedom from local failure at 5 years is T1b: 83%; T1c: 88%; T2a: 72%; T2b/c: 66%; T3: 58%; and T4: 0%. The proportion of indeterminate biopsies decreases with time, being 33% for biopsy 1, 24% for biopsy 2, 18% for biopsy 3, and 7% for biopsy 4. Thirty percent of indeterminate biopsies resolved to NED status, regardless of the degree of RT effect, 18% progressed to local failure, and 34% remained as biopsy failures with indeterminate status within the time frame of this report. Positive staining for proliferation markers was associated with both subsequent local failure and also any type of failure. In multivariate analysis, only PSA nadir (p = 0.0002) and biopsy status at 24-36 months (p = 0.0005) were independent predictors of outcome. Conclusions: Post-RT prostate biopsies are not a gold standard of treatment efficacy, but are an independent predictor of outcome. Positive immunohistochemical staining for markers of cellular proliferation is associated with subsequent local failure. Indeterminate biopsies, even when showing marked RT effect, cannot be considered negative

[en] Purpose: To assess the outcome following local excision and postoperative radiotherapy (RT) for distal rectal carcinoma. Materials and Methods: Seventy-three patients received postoperative radiotherapy following local surgery for primary rectal carcinoma at Princess Margaret Hospital from 1983 to 1998. Selection factors for postoperative RT were patient preference, poor operative risks, and 'elective' where conservative therapy was regarded as optimal therapy. Median distance of the primary lesion from the anal verge was 4 cm (range, 1-8 cm). There were 24 T1, 36 T2, and 8 T3 lesions. The T category could not be determined in 5. Of 55 tumor specimens in which margins could be adequately assessed, they were positive in 18. RT was delivered using multiple fields by 6- to 25-MV photons. Median tumor dose was 50 Gy (range, 38-60 Gy), and 62 patients received 50 Gy in 2.5-Gy daily fractions. The tumor volume included the primary with 3-5 cm margins. No patients received adjuvant chemotherapy. Median follow-up was 48 months (range, 10-165 months). Results: Overall 5-year survival and disease-free survival were 67% and 55%, respectively. Tumor recurrence was observed in 23 patients. There were 14 isolated local relapses; 6 patients developed local and distant disease; and 3 relapsed distantly only. For patients with T1, T2, and T3 lesions, 5-year local relapse-free rates were 61%, 75%, and 78%, respectively, and 5-year survival rates were 76%, 58%, and 33%, respectively. The 5-year local relapse-free rate was lower in the presence of lymphovascular invasion (LVI) compared to no LVI, 52% vs. 89%, p=0.03, or where tumor fragmentation occurred during local excision compared to no fragmentation, 51% vs. 76%, p=0.02. Eleven of 14 patients with local relapse only underwent abdominoperineal resection, 8 achieved local control, and 4 remained cancer free. The ultimate local control, including salvage surgery, was 86% at 5 and 10 years. The 5-year colostomy-free rate was 82%. There were 2 patients who experienced RTOG Grade 3 late complications, and 1 with Grade 4 complication (bowel obstruction requiring surgery). Conclusion: The local relapse rate for patients with T1 disease was high compared to other series of local excision and postoperative RT. Patients with LVI or tumor fragmentation during excision have high local relapse rates and may not be good candidates for conservative surgery and postoperative RT

[en] Purpose: To evaluate treatment errors from set-up and inter-fraction prostatic motion with port films and implanted prostate fiducial markers during conformal radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. Methods: Errors from isocentre positioning and inter-fraction prostate motion were investigated in 13 men treated with escalated dose conformal radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. To limit the effect of inter-fraction prostate motion, patients were planned and treated with an empty rectum and a comfortably full bladder, and were instructed regarding dietary management, fluid intake and laxative use. Field placement was determined and corrected with daily on-line portal imaging. A lateral portal film was taken three times weekly over the course of therapy. From these films, random and systematic placement errors were measured by matching corresponding bony landmarks to the simulator film. Superior-inferior and anterior-posterior prostate motion was measured from the displacement of three gold pins implanted into the prostate before planning. A planning target volume (PTV) was derived to account for the measured prostate motion and field placement errors. Results: From 272 port films the random and systematic isocentre positioning error was 2.2 mm (range 0.2-7.3 mm) and 1.4 mm (range 0.2-3.3 mm), respectively. Prostate motion was largest at the base compared to the apex. Base: anterior, standard deviation (SD) 2.9 mm; superior, SD 2.1 mm. Apex: anterior, SD 2.1 mm; superior, SD 2.1 mm. The margin of PTV required to give a 99% probability of the gland remaining within the 95% isodose line during the course of therapy is superior 5.8 mm, and inferior 5.6 mm. In the anterior and posterior direction, this margin is 7.2 mm at the base, 6.5 mm at the mid-gland and 6.0 mm at the apex. Conclusions: Systematic set-up errors were small using real-time isocentre placement corrections. Patient instruction to help control variation in bladder and rectal distension during therapy may explain the observed small SD for prostate motion in this group of patients. Inter-fraction prostate motion remained the largest source of treatment error, and observed motion was greatest at the gland base. In the absence of real-time pre-treatment imaging of prostate position, sequential portal films of implanted prostatic markers should improve quality assurance by confirming organ position within the treatment field over the course of therapy

[en] Highlights: • Females and absence of tenderness are associated with a false/indeterminate US. • Age, scan time, and radiologist subspecialty are not associated with US result. • Multi-categorical reporting of US provides more granular estimates of appendicitis. To identify factors associated with false or indeterminate US result for suspected appendicitis, and assess whether multi-categorical reporting of US yields more precise estimates regarding the probability of appendicitis.

[en] Purpose: To construct a predictive model for survival of patients referred to the Rapid Response Radiotherapy Program using recursive partitioning (RP). Methods and Materials: We analyzed 16 factors characterizing patients with metastases at first referral to the Rapid Response Radiotherapy Program for palliative radiotherapy in 1999 for their effect on survival. They included age, primary cancer site, site of metastases, weight loss (≥10% during the past 6 months), Karnofsky performance status (KPS), interval from the first diagnosis of cancer to the first consultation at the Rapid Response Radiotherapy Program, analgesic consumption within the previous 24 h, and the nine symptom scores from the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale. We used RP to develop a predictive model of survival for patients referred in 1999, followed by temporal validation using patients referred in 2000, and external validation using patients referred in 2002 to another institution. Results: The model was able to separate patients into three groups with different durations of survival that were defined by (1) KPS >60; (2) KPS ≤60 with bone metastases only; and (3) KPS ≤60 with other metastases. The model performed moderately well when applied to the validation sets, but a major limitation was that it led to an unequal distribution of patients, with a small proportion of patients in the intermediate group. Conclusion: We have demonstrated that RP can be used to predict the survival of patients with advanced cancer. However, this model has no advantages compared with our published prognostic models that use the survival prediction scores and number of risk factors

[en] 

Objectives

To determine the proportion of diagnostic computed tomography colonography (CTC) Reporting and Data System (C-RADS) categories in a non-screening population, and which patient factors are associated with a positive CTC (C2–4), a non-diagnostic CTC (C0), and potentially relevant extracolonic findings (ECF, E3–4).

Methods

Diagnostic CTCs performed at a single academic center from 2017 to 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. For each examination, the indications, age, sex, admission status, and C-RADS categories were recorded. Multivariate logistic regression was performed of patient demographic factors and clinical indications, with adjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals.

Results

1373 CTCs were included. The mean age was 66.4 ± 13 years (range 24–97). There were 782 women and 75 inpatients. The number of CTCs reported as C0–C4 were 194/1373 (14.1%), 970/1373 (70.6%), 77/1373 (5.6%), 86/1373 (6.3%), and 46/1373 (3.4%), respectively, and 134/1373 (9.8%), 960/1373 (69.9%), 173/1373 (12.6%), and 106/1373 (7.7%) CTCs were reported as E1–4, respectively. Factors that demonstrated the strongest associations were as follows: with C2–4, age groups 50–79 (OR 2.8, 95% confidence interval 1.4–6.1), 80–89 (6.2, 2.9–14.5) and ≥ 90 (7.6, 2.0–29.1), and inpatients (3.4, 1.8–6.4); with C0, age groups 50–79 (5.9, 2.2–24.4), 80–89 (9.8, 3.4–41.8), and ≥ 90 (22.5, 5.8–113.0), incomplete colonoscopy (3.2, 2.0–5.1) and melena or gastrointestinal bleeding (4.1, 1.8–9.4); and with E3–4, age groups 50–79 (1.6, 1.0–2.9), 80–89 (2.0, 1.1–3.9), and ≥ 90 (3.2, 1.2–8.8), and inpatients (2.3, 1.3–3.9).

Conclusion

Older age is increasingly associated with a positive test, a non-diagnostic test and potentially relevant ECF. Inpatients are also associated with positive tests and E3–4 findings. Symptoms are not strongly associated with a positive CTC.

[en] Purpose: To validate a predictive model for survival of patients attending a palliative radiotherapy clinic. Methods and Materials: We described previously a model that had good predictive value for survival of patients referred during 1999 (1). The six prognostic factors (primary cancer site, site of metastases, Karnofsky performance score, and the fatigue, appetite and shortness-of-breath items from the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale) identified in this training set were extracted from the prospective database for the year 2000. We generated a partial score whereby each prognostic factor was assigned a value proportional to its prognostic weight. The sum of the partial scores for each patient was used to construct a survival prediction score (SPS). Patients were also grouped according to the number of these risk factors (NRF) that they possessed. The probability of survival at 3, 6, and 12 months was generated. The models were evaluated for their ability to predict survival in this validation set with appropriate statistical tests. Results: The median survival and survival probabilities of the training and validation sets were similar when separated into three groups using both SPS and NRF methods. There was no statistical difference in the performance of the SPS and NRF methods in survival prediction. Conclusion: Both the SPS and NRF models for predicting survival in patients referred for palliative radiotherapy have been validated. The NRF model is preferred because it is simpler and avoids the need to remember the weightings among the prognostic factors

[en] To develop a breast cancer risk model to identify women at mammographic screening who are at higher risk of breast cancer within the general screening population. This retrospective nested case-control study used data from a population-based breast screening program (2009–2015). All women aged 40–75 diagnosed with screen-detected or interval breast cancer (n = 1882) were frequency-matched 3:1 on age and screen-year with women without screen-detected breast cancer (n = 5888). Image-derived risk factors from the screening mammogram (percent mammographic density [PMD], breast volume, age) were combined with core biopsy history, first-degree family history, and other clinical risk factors in risk models. Model performance was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Classifiers assigning women to low- versus high-risk deciles were derived from risk models. Agreement between classifiers was assessed using a weighted kappa. The AUC was 0.597 for a risk model including only image-derived risk factors. The successive addition of core biopsy and family history significantly improved performance (AUC = 0.660, p < 0.001 and AUC = 0.664, p = 0.04, respectively). Adding the three remaining risk factors did not further improve performance (AUC = 0.665, p = 0.45). There was almost perfect agreement (kappa = 0.97) between risk assessments based on a classifier derived from image-derived risk factors, core biopsy, and family history compared with those derived from a model including all available risk factors. Women in the general screening population can be risk-stratified at time of screen using a simple model based on age, PMD, breast volume, and biopsy and family history.