Background: Local cancer therapy by combining real-time surgical exploration and resection with delivery of a single dose of high-energy electron irradiation entails a very precise and effective local therapeutic approach. Integrating the benefits from minimally invasive surgical techniques with the very precise delivery of intraoperative electron irradiation results in an efficient combined modality therapy. Methods: Patients with locally advanced disease, who are candidates for laparoscopic and/or thoracoscopic surgery, received an integrated multimodal management. Preoperative treatment included induction chemotherapy and/or chemoradiation, followed by laparoscopic surgery and intraoperative electron radiation therapy. Results: In a period of 5 consecutive years, 125 rectal cancer patients were treated, of which 35% underwent a laparoscopic approach. We found no differences in cancer outcomes and tolerance between the open and laparoscopic groups. Two esophageal cancer patients were treated with IOeRT during thoracoscopic resection, with the resection specimens showing intense downstaging effects. Two oligo-recurrent prostatic cancer patients (isolated nodal progression) had a robotic-assisted surgical resection and post-lymphadenectomy electron boost on the vascular and lateral pelvic wall. Conclusions: Minimally invasive and robotic-assisted surgery is feasible to combine with intraoperative electron radiation therapy and offers a new model explored with electron-FLASH beams.

Introduction: A rapid deploy of unexpected early impact of the COVID pandemic in Spain was described in 2020. Oncology practice was revised to facilitate decision-making regarding multimodal therapy for prevalent cancer types amenable to multidisciplinary treatment in which the radiotherapy component searched more efficient options in the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic, minimizing the risks to patients whilst aiming to guarantee cancer outcomes. Methods: A novel Proton Beam Therapy (PBT), Unit activity was analyzed in the period of March 2020 to March 2021. Institutional urgent, strict and mandatory clinical care standards for early diagnosis and treatment of COVID-19 infection were stablished in the hospital following national health-authorities' recommendations. The temporary trends of patients care and research projects proposals were registered. Results: 3 out of 14 members of the professional staff involved in the PBR intra-hospital process had a positive test for COVID infection. Also, 4 out of 100 patients had positive tests before initiating PBT, and 7 out of 100 developed positive tests along the weekly mandatory special checkup performed during PBT to all patients. An update of clinical performance at the PBT Unit at CUN Madrid in the initial 500 patients treated with PBT in the period from March 2020 to November 2022 registers a distribution of 131 (26%) pediatric patients, 63 (12%) head and neck cancer and central nervous system neoplasms and 123 (24%) re-irradiation indications. In November 2022, the activity reached a plateau in terms of patients under treatment and the impact of COVID pandemic became sporadic and controlled by minor medical actions. At present, the clinical data are consistent with an academic practice prospectively (NCT05151952). Research projects and scientific production was adapted to the pandemic evolution and its influence upon professional time availability. Seven research projects based in public funding were activated in this period and preliminary data on molecular imaging guided proton therapy in brain tumors and post-irradiation patterns of blood biomarkers are reported. Conclusions: Hospital-based PBT in European academic institutions was impacted by COVID-19 pandemic, although clinical and research activities were developed and sustained. In the post-pandemic era, the benefits of online learning will shape the future of proton therapy education.

Background: Wound healing complications (WHC), osteoradionecrosis (ORN), and nerve damage (ND) are common adverse effects in adult patients with soft tissue sarcomas of the extremities and the superficial trunk treated with surgery and perioperative high dose rate brachytherapy (PHDRB) alone or combined with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). Rationale: Analysis of the treatment factors contributing to these complications can potentially minimize their occurrence and severity. Patients: A total of 169 patients enrolled in two parallel prospective studies were included in this analysis. Previously Unirradiated cases (Group 1; n = 139) were treated with surgical resection, 16-24 Gy of PHDRB and 45 Gy of EBRT. Adjuvant chemotherapy was given to selected patients with high-grade tumors. Previously irradiated cases (Group 2; n = 30) were treated with surgical resection and 32-40 Gy of PHDRB without further EBRT. Methods: Patient factors, tumor factors, surgical factors, PHDRB factors and EBRT factors were analyzed using Cox univariate and multivariate analysis. Results: In Previously Unirradiated cases, WHC, ORN and ND occurred in 38.8%, 5.0% and 19.4%. Multivariate analysis indicated that WHC increased with CTV size (p = 0.02) and CTV2cm3 Physical dose (p = 0.02). ORN increased with Bone2cm3 EQD2 ¿ 67 Gy(p = 0.01) and ND was more frequent in patients with TV100DVH-based dose (tissue volume encompassed by the 100% isodose) ¿ 84 Gy (p < 0.01). In Previously Irradiated cases, WHC, ORN and ND occurred in 63.3%, 3.3% and 23.3%. Multivariate analysis showed that WHC was more frequent in patients with Skin2cm3Lifetime EQD2 ¿ 84 Gy (p = 0.01) and ND was more frequent after CTVD90 Physical Doses ¿ 40 Gy (p < 0.01). Conclusions: WHC in Previously Unirradiated patients can be minimized by using a more conservative CTV definition together with a meticulous implant technique and planning aimed to minimize hyperdose CTV2cm3 areas. In Previously Irradiated patients WHC may be mimimized considering Lifetime EQD2 Skin2cm3 doses. ORN can be reduced by using the Bone2cm3 EQD2 constraint. ND occurs more frequently in patients with large tumors receiving high treated volume doses, but no specific constraints can be recommended due to the lack of peripheral nerve definition during brachytherapy planning.

Purpose: To evaluate the feasibility, early toxicity, and clinical outcomes of early-breast cancer patients in a single-arm, phase I/II study of an ultra-accelerated, four-fraction schedule of minimal breast irradiation (4f-AMBI) using a multicatheter, minimally-invasive, intraoperative tumor bed implant (MITBI) during breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Methods and materials: Eligible women aged >40 years with clinically and radiologically confirmed, unifocal invasive or in situ ¿3 cm tumors were considered as potential candidates for MITBI during BCS. After the pathology report, patients who met APBI criteria received ultra-accelerated four-fractions irradiation (6.2 Gy BID x 4fx over 2 days) with perioperative HDR-brachytherapy (PHDRBT). Early complications, toxicity, clinical outcomes, and cosmetic results were analyzed. Results: Of 89 patients initially implanted, 60(67.4%) were definitively included in the 4f-AMBI-protocol. The median age was 64.4 years; the median CTV was 32.1 cc (6.9-75.4 cc), and the external-V100 was 43.1 cc (12.87-107 cc), representing 5% of the breast tissue irradiated with a median CTV D90 of 6.2 Gy (5.6-6.28 Gy). The entire local treatment (BCS&MITBI-4f-AMBI) was completed at a median of 8 days (4-10 days). The rate of early complications was 11%. There were no major complications. Acute skin-subcutaneous G1 toxicity was reported in 11.7%, and late G1 toxicity on 36.7%. After a median follow-up of 27 months (11-51 months), the local, elsewhere, locoregional and distant-control rates were 100%, 98.3%, 100%, and 100% respectively. The early-cosmetic evaluation was excellent-good in 94.5% of patients evaluated. Conclusions: Ultra-accelerated, four-fraction, minimal breast irradiation (4f-AMBI) using a minimally-invasive tumor bed implant procedure is safe, dosimetrically feasible, and shows small irradiated volumes. This program provides low toxicity rates and excellent short-term clinical and cosmesis outcomes.

Background: Oligo-recurrent disease has a consolidated evidence of long-term surviving patients due to the use of intense local cancer therapy. The latter combines real-time surgical exploration/resection with high-energy electron beam single dose of irradiation. This results in a very precise radiation dose deposit, which is an essential element of contemporary multidisciplinary individualized oncology. Methods: Patient candidates to proton therapy were evaluated in Multidisciplinary Tumor Board to consider improved treatment options based on the institutional resources and expertise. Proton therapy was delivered by a synchrotron-based pencil beam scanning technology with energy levels from 70.2 to 228.7 MeV, whereas intraoperative electrons were generated in a miniaturized linear accelerator with dose rates ranging from 22 to 36 Gy/min (at Dmax) and energies from 6 to 12 MeV. Results: In a period of 24 months, 327 patients were treated with proton therapy: 218 were adults, 97 had recurrent cancer, and 54 required re-irradiation. The specific radiation modalities selected in five cases included an integral strategy to optimize the local disease management by the combination of surgery, intraoperative electron boost, and external pencil beam proton therapy as components of the radiotherapy management. Recurrent cancer was present in four cases (cervix, sarcoma, melanoma, and rectum), and one patient had a primary unresectable locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. In re-irradiated patients (cervix and rectum), a tentative radical total dose was achieved by integrating beams of electrons (ranging from 10- to 20-Gy single dose) and protons (30 to 54-Gy Relative Biological Effectiveness (RBE), in 10-25 fractions). Conclusions: Individual case solution strategies combining intraoperative electron radiation therapy and proton therapy for patients with oligo-recurrent or unresectable localized cancer are feasible. The potential of this combination can be clinically explored with electron and proton FLASH beams.

Background Pelvic recurrences from previously irradiated gynecological cancer lack solid evidence for recommendation on salvage. Methods A total of 58 patients were included in this clinical analysis. Salvage surgery was performed for locoregional relapse within previously irradiated pelvic area after initial surgery and adjuvant radiotherapy or radical external beam radiotherapy. The primary tumor diagnosis included cervical cancer (n = 47, 81%), uterine cancer (n = 4, 7%), and other types (n = 7, 12%). Thirty-three patients received adjuvant IOERT (1984-2000) at a median dose of 15 Gy (range 10-20 Gy) and 25 patients received adjuvant PHDRB (2001-2016) at a median dose of 32 Gy (range 24-40 Gy) in 6, 8, or 10 b.i.d. fractions. Results The median follow-up was 5.6 years (range 0.5-14.2 years). Twenty-nine (50.0%) patients had positive surgical margins. Grade >= 3 toxic events were recorded in 34 (58.6%) patients. The local control rate at 2 years was 51% and remained stable up to 14 years. Disease-free survival rates at 2, 5, and 10 years were 17.2, 15.5, and 15.5%, respectively. Overall survival rates at 2, 5, and 10 years were 58.1, 17.8, and 17.8%, respectively. Conclusions IOERT and PHDRB account for an effective salvage in oligorecurrent gynecological tumors. Patients with previous pelvic radiation suitable for salvage surgery and at risk of inadequate margins could benefit from adjuvant reirradiation in form of IOERT or PHDRB. However, the rate of severe grade >= 3 toxicity associated with the entire treatment program is relevant and needs to be closely counterbalanced against the expected therapeutic gain.

Aim: To establish consensus guidelines for a safe clinical practice of accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) interstitial multicatheter brachytherapy (BT). Background: APBI with interstitial multicatheter BT has proved to be effective in the treatment of early stage breast cancer. This paradigm shift in the approach to early breast cancer conservative treatment, along with the existing controversies on the clinical practice of APBI, prompted the Spanish Brachytherapy Group (GEB) of the Spanish Societies of Radiation Oncology (SEOR) and Medical Physics (SEFM) to address BT APBI in a consensus meeting. Materials and methods: Prior to the meeting, a survey with 27 questions on indication, inclusion criteria, BT modality, implant technique, image guidance and simulation, CTV and OAR definition, dose prescription and fractionation, dose calculation, implant quality metrics and OAR dose constrains was distributed. Items not reaching a level of agreement of 70% were discussed and voted during the meeting. Results: 26 Institutions completed the survey, 60% of them perform APBI procedures. The analysis of the survey showed consensus reached on approximately half the questions. An expert panel discussed the remaining items; thereafter, a voting established the definite consensus. Conclusions: This document summarizes the consensus guidelines agreed during the meeting of the Spanish Brachytherapy Group SEOR-SEFM. Institutions with BT facilities available should offer interstitial BT APBI as a treatment option to patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria. Institutions willing to implement interstitial BT APBI are encouraged to follow the consensus guidelines established herein. (C) 2020 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Greater Poland Cancer Centre.

Purpose: To evaluate our institutional experience of minimally invasive tumor bed implantation (MITBI) during breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) to deliver peri-operative high-dose-rate brachytherapy (PHDRBT) as accelerated minimal breast irradiation (AMBI) or anticipated boost (A-PHDRBT-boost). Material and methods: Patients older than 40, with clinical and radiological unifocal DCIS < 3 cm were considered potential candidates for accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) and were implanted during BCS using MITBI-technique. Patients who in final pathology reports showed free margins and no other microscopic tumor foci, received AMBI with PHDRBT (3.4 Gy BID in 5 days). Patients with adverse features received A-PHDRBT-boost with post-operative external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). Results: Forty-one patients were implanted, and 36 were treated and analyzed. According to final pathology, 24 (67%) patients were suitable for AMBI and 12 (33%) were qualified for A-PHDRBT-boost. Reoperation rate for those with clear margins was 16.6% (6/36); this rate increased to 33% (4/12) for G3 histology, and 66% (4/6) were rescued using AMBI. Early complications were documented in 5 patients (14%). With a median follow-up of 97 (range, 42-138) months, 5-year rates of local, elsewhere, locoregional, and distant control were all 97.2%. 5-year ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence rates (IBTR) were 5.6% (2/36), 8.3% (2/24) for AMBI, and 0% (0/12) for A-PHDRBT-boost patients. Both instances of IBTR were confirmed G3 tumors in pre-operative biopsies; no IBTR was documented in G1-2 tumors. Cosmetic outcomes were excellent/good in 96% of AMBI vs. 67% in A-PHDRBT-boost (p = 0.034). Conclusions: The MITBI-PHDRBT program allows selection of patients with excellent prognoses (G1-2 DCIS with negative margins and no multifocality), for whom AMBI could be a good alternative with low recurrence rate, decrease of unnecessary radiation, treatment logistics improvement, and over-treatment reduction. Patients whose pre-operative biopsy showed G3 tumor, presents with inferior local control and more risk of reoperation due to positive margins.