Background and purposeTreatment options for recurrent esophageal cancer (EC) previously treated with radiation therapy are limited. Reirradiation (reRT) with proton beam therapy (PBT) can offer lower toxicities by limiting doses to surrounding tissues. In this study, we present the first multi-institutional series reporting on toxicities and outcomes after reRT for locoregionally recurrent EC with PBT.Materials and methodsAnalysis of the prospective, multicenter, Proton Collaborative Group registry of patients with recurrent EC who had previously received photon-based RT and underwent PBT reRT was performed. Patient/tumor characteristics, treatment details, outcomes, and toxicities were collected. Local control (LC), distant-metastasis free survival (DMFS), and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Event time was determined from reRT start.ResultsBetween 2012 and 2020, 31 patients received reRT via uniform scanning/passive scattering (61.3%) or pencil beam scanning (38.7%) PBT at seven institutions. Median prior RT, PBT reRT, and cumulative doses were 50.4 Gy (range, 37.5 – 110.4), 48.6 Gy (RBE) (25.2-72.1), and 99.9 Gy (79.1-182.5), respectively. 12.9% of patients had two prior RT courses, and 67.7% received PBT with concurrent chemotherapy. Median follow-up was 7.2 months (0.9-64.7). Post PBT, there were 16.7% locoregional only, 11.1% distant only, and 16.7% locoregional and distant recurrences. Six-month LC, DMFS, and OS were 80.5%, 83.4%, and 69.1%, respectively. One-year LC, DMFS, and OS were 67.1%, 83.4%, and 27%, respectively. Acute grade ≥3 toxicities occurred in 23% of patients, with one acute grade 5 toxicity secondary to esophageal hemorrhage, unclear if related to reRT or disease progression. No grade ≥3 late toxicities were reported.ConclusionIn the largest report to date of PBT for reRT in patients with recurrent EC, we observed acceptable acute toxicities and encouraging rates of disease control. However, these findings are limited by the poor prognoses of these patients, who are at high risk of mortality. Further research is needed to better assess the long-term benefits and toxicities of PBT in this specific patient population.

Abstract BACKGROUND Standard of care treatment for recurrent malignant glioma after prior radiotherapy (RT) is not well established. Proton therapy (PT) is increasingly used for reirradiation (ReRT) at the time of recurrence; however, treatment outcomes, toxicity, and prognostic factors for patients treated with PT-ReRT remain poorly defined. METHODS The prospective, multi-institutional Proton Collaborative Group (PCG) registry was queried for patients with malignant glioma who previously received RT and underwent PT-ReRT between 7/2011-12/2023. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method, and Cox proportional hazards regression was used for uni- and multivariate analysis (UVA and MVA). Dose was calculated using equivalent dose in 2-Gy fractions (EQD2). RESULTS 143 consecutive patients were identified. Median follow-up was 11.2 months and median time interval (TI) from prior RT (median 58.5 Gy) to PT-ReRT (median 44.6 Gy) was 42.4 months. Primary histology was glioblastoma (n=74), astrocytoma (n=35), and oligodendroglioma (n=34). Median PFS and OS were 8.1 and 11.2 months, respectively. On UVA, improved OS was associated with oligodendroglioma (HR 0.37) and astrocytoma histology (HR 0.53) compared to glioblastoma, TI >60 months (HR 0.2), CNS WHO Grade 2 compared to 4 (HR 0.42), and ECOG performance status 0 (HR 0.47). On MVA, improved OS remained associated only with oligodendroglioma (HR 0.42) and TI >60 months (HR 0.49). Acute and Late Grade 3 toxicity occurred in 7% and 4% of patients. Acute Grade 3 toxicity was associated with poor performance status (HR 16.15). CONCLUSIONS In the largest series of glioma PT-ReRT reported to date, retreatment appears well tolerated with variable outcomes based on clinical prognostic factors. Toxicity rates were acceptable compared to historical photon-based literature despite a high median prescription dose.

Introduction: Unilateral radiation therapy is appropriate for select patients with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC). The use of proton beam therapy (PBT) in the unilateral setting decreases the dose to the contralateral neck and organs at risk. This study aims to evaluate contralateral recurrences in patients who received ipsilateral PBT. Methods: We evaluated the Proton Collaborative Group database for patients treated with PBT for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma between the years 2015-2020 at 12 institutions. Dosimetric analysis was performed in five cases. Results: Our analysis included 41 patients that received ipsilateral PBT with a mean follow-up of 14.7 months. 37% patients (n = 15) were treated for recurrent disease, and 63% (n = 26) were treated for de novo disease. Oropharyngeal sites included tonsillar fossa (n = 30) and base of tongue (n = 11). The median dose and BED delivered were 69.96 CGE and 84 Gy, respectively. Eight (20%) patients experienced at least one grade 3 dysphagia (n = 4) or esophagitis (n = 4) toxicity. No grade >= 4 toxicities were reported. There was one (2.4%) failure in the contralateral neck. The 1-year locoregional control was 88.9% and the freedom from distant metastasis was 95.5% (n = 2). The dosimetric analysis demonstrated similar ipsilateral level II cervical nodal region doses, whereas contralateral doses were higher with photon plans, mean: 15.5 Gy and 0.7 CGE, D5%: 25.1 Gy and 6.6 CGE. Conclusions: Our series is the first to report outcomes for patients with OPSCC receiving unilateral PBT. The contralateral neck failure rate was excellent and comparable to failure rates with photon irradiation.

Purpose We aimed to determine if ultra-hypofractionated proton therapy delivered via stereotactic body proton therapy (SBPT) is non-inferior to conventionally fractionated proton therapy (CFPT) in patients with early prostate cancer. Materials and Methods This study was a multicenter, randomized, controlled, non-inferiority phase 3 trial that included patients with histologically confirmed low-risk prostate adenocarcinoma defined by Gleason score grouping 1, PSA <10 ng/mL, and clinical stage T1-2a N0 M0 according to AJCC 7th ed. Eligible participants were randomly assigned initially at a 1:1 ratio and later at a 2:1 ratio to SBPT (38 Gy in 5 fractions) or CFPT (79.2 Gy in 44 fractions). The primary endpoint was freedom from failure (FFF) at 2 years from the date of randomization. Non-inferiority for FFF was determined based on one-sided confidence intervals. Toxicities were compared at different time points using Fisher's Exact test. Health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) was analyzed at different time points using a mixed-effects linear model. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01230866, and is closed to accrual. Results Between December 10, 2010, and September 29, 2020, 144 patients were enrolled and 135 were randomly assigned (90 to the SBPT group and 45 to the CFPT group). The median follow-up was 5 years (IQR 3.9–5.2). The 2-year FFF was 100% for both groups, with the one-sided 5-year risk difference in FFF between groups reported as 2.63% (90% CI: -1.70%–6.96%), favoring the SBRT arm, thus fulfilling the pre-specified criteria for non-inferiority of SBPT compared to CFPT. Rates of gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) G2 and G3 toxicities did not differ significantly between groups but the the study was not powered to detect significant toxicity differences. Also, HRQoL metrics did not differ significantly between groups over the study median follow up. Conclusions SBPT is non-inferior to CFPT regarding FFF, with similar long-term GU and GI toxicity rates and minimal impact in patient reported HRQoL over time.

PURPOSE:This study aimed to predict the probability of grade ≥2 pneumonitis or dyspnea within 12 months of receiving conventionally fractionated or mildly hypofractionated proton beam therapy for locally advanced lung cancer using machine learning. METHODS AND MATERIALS:Demographic and treatment characteristics were analyzed for 965 consecutive patients treated for lung cancer with conventionally fractionated or mildly hypofractionated (2.2-3 Gy/fraction) proton beam therapy across 12 institutions. Three machine learning models (gradient boosting, additive tree, and logistic regression with lasso regularization) were implemented to predict Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4 grade ≥2 pulmonary toxicities using double 10-fold cross-validation for parameter hyper-tuning without leak of information. Balanced accuracy and area under the curve were calculated, and 95% confidence intervals were obtained using bootstrap sampling. RESULTS:The median age of the patients was 70 years (range, 20-97), and they had predominantly stage IIIA or IIIB disease. They received a median dose of 60 Gy in 2 Gy/fraction, and 46.4% received concurrent chemotherapy. In total, 250 (25.9%) had grade ≥2 pulmonary toxicity. The probability of pulmonary toxicity was 0.08 for patients treated with pencil beam scanning and 0.34 for those treated with other techniques (P = 8.97e-13). Use of abdominal compression and breath hold were highly significant predictors of less toxicity (P = 2.88e-08). Higher total radiation delivered dose (P = .0182) and higher average dose to the ipsilateral lung (P = .0035) increased the likelihood of pulmonary toxicities. The gradient boosting model performed the best of the models tested, and when demographic and dosimetric features were combined, the area under the curve and balanced accuracy were 0.75 ± 0.02 and 0.67 ± 0.02, respectively. After analyzing performance versus the number of data points used for training, we observed that accuracy was limited by the number of observations. CONCLUSIONS:In the largest analysis of prospectively enrolled patients with lung cancer assessing pulmonary toxicities from proton therapy to date, advanced machine learning methods revealed that pencil beam scanning, abdominal compression, and lower normal lung doses can lead to significantly lower probability of developing grade ≥2 pneumonitis or dyspnea.

Purpose:Compared with photon-based techniques, proton beam radiation therapy (PBT) may improve the therapeutic ratio of radiation therapy (RT) for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC), but available data have been limited to single-institutional experiences. This study examined the toxicity, survival, and disease control rates among patients enrolled in a multi-institutional prospective registry study and treated with PBT for LAPC. Methods and Materials:Between March 2013 and November 2019, 19 patients with inoperable disease across 7 institutions underwent PBT with definitive intent for LAPC. Patients received a median radiation dose/fractionation of 54 Gy/30 fractions (range, 50.4-60.0 Gy/19-33 fractions). Most received prior (68.4%) or concurrent (78.9%) chemotherapy. Patients were assessed prospectively for toxicities using National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to analyze overall survival, locoregional recurrence-free survival, time to locoregional recurrence, distant metastasis-free survival, and time to new progression or metastasis for the adenocarcinoma cohort (17 patients). Results:No patients experienced grade ≥3 acute or chronic treatment-related adverse events. Grade 1 and 2 adverse events occurred in 78.7% and 21.3% of patients, respectively. Median overall survival, locoregional recurrence-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival, and time to new progression or metastasis were 14.6, 11.0, 11.0, and 13.9 months, respectively. Freedom from locoregional recurrence at 2 years was 81.7%. All patients completed treatment with one requiring a RT break for stent placement. Conclusions:Proton beam RT for LAPC offered excellent tolerability while still maintaining disease control and survival rates comparable with dose-escalated photon-based RT. These findings are consistent with the known physical and dosimetric advantages offered by proton therapy, but the conclusions are limited owing to the patient sample size. Further clinical studies incorporating dose-escalated PBT are warranted to evaluate whether these dosimetric advantages translate into clinically meaningful benefits.

Background: We present efficacy and toxicity outcomes among patients with chordoma treated on the Proton Collaborative Group prospective registry.Methods: Consecutive chordoma patients treated between 2010-2018 were evaluated. One hundred fifty patients were identified, 100 had adequate follow-up information. Locations included base of skull (61%), spine (23%), and sacrum (16%). Patients had a performance status of ECOG 0-1 (82%) and median age of 58 years. Eighty-five percent of patients underwent surgical resection. The median proton RT dose was 74 Gy (RBE) (range 21-86 Gy (RBE)) using passive scatter proton RT (PS-PBT) (13%), uniform scanning proton RT (US-PBT) (54%) and pencil beam scanning proton RT (PBS-PBT) (33%). Rates of local control (LC), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and acute and late toxicities were assessed. Results: 2/3-year LC, PFS, and OS rates are 97%/94%, 89%/74%, and 89%/83%, respectively. LC did not differ based on surgical resection (p = 0.61), though this is likely limited by most patients having undergone a prior resection. Eight patients experienced acute grade 3 toxicities, most commonly pain (n = 3), radiation dermatitis (n = 2), fatigue (n = 1), insomnia (n = 1) and dizziness (n = 1). No grade >= 4 acute toxicities were reported. No grade >= 3 late toxicities were reported, and most common grade 2 toxicities were fatigue (n = 5), headache (n = 2), CNS necrosis (n = 1), and pain (n = 1).Conclusions: In our series, PBT achieved excellent safety and efficacy outcomes with very low rates of treatment failure. CNS necrosis is exceedingly low (<1%) despite the high doses of PBT delivered. Further maturation of data and larger patient numbers are necessary to optimize therapy in chordoma. (c) 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Radiotherapy and Oncology 183 (2023) 109551

Purpose: Our objective was to report the quality of life (QoL) analysis and toxicity in patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer treated with or without androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in Proton Collaborative Group (PCG) GU003.Methods and Materials: Between 2012 and 2019, patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer were enrolled. Patients were randomized to receive moderately hypofractionated proton beam therapy (PBT) to 70 Gy relative biologic effectiveness in 28 fractions to the prostate with or without 6 months of ADT. Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite, Short-Form 12, and the American Urological Association Symptom Index instruments were given at baseline and 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after PBT. Toxicities were assessed according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 4).Results: One hundred ten patients were randomized to PBT either with 6 months of ADT (n = 55) or without ADT (n = 55). The median follow-up was 32.4 months (range, 5.5-84.6). On average, 101 out of 110 (92%) patients filled out baseline QoL and patient-reported outcome surveys. The compliance was 84%, 82%, 64%, and 42% at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months, respectively. Baseline median American Urological Association Symptom Index was comparable between arms (6 [11%] ADT vs 5 [9%] no ADT, P = .359). Acute and late grade 2+ genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity were similar between arms. The ADT arm experienced a QoL decline of mean scores in the sexual (-16.1, P < .001) and hormonal (-6.3, P < .001) domains, with the largest time-specific hormonal differences at 3 (-13.8, P < .001) and 6 (-11.2, P < .001) months. The hormonal QoL domain returned to baseline 6 months after therapy. There was a trend to baseline in sexual function 6 months after completion of ADT.Conclusions: After 6 months of ADT, sexual and hormonal domains returned to baseline 6 months after completion of treatment for men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer.& COPY; 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of American Society for Radiation Oncology. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

BackgroundData for proton therapy in high-risk prostate cancer (HRPC) are limited. Using the Proton Collaborative Group prospective registry, we evaluated outcomes for HRPC patients treated with proton therapy. MethodsA totsl of 605 men with localized HRPC treated with proton therapy from 8/2009 to 3/2019 at nine institutions were selected. Outcomes examined included freedom from progression (FFP), metastasis free survival (MFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicity. Multivariable cox/binomial regression models were used to assess predictors of FFP and toxicity. ResultsMedian age was 71 years. Gleason grade groups 4 (49.4%) and 5 (31.7%) were most common, as were clinical stage T1c (46.1%) and cT2 (41.3%). The median pretreatment prostate specific antigen (PSA) was 9.18 and median International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) was 6. Androgen deprivation therapy was given in 63.6%. Median dose was 79.2 GyE in 44 fractions. Pelvic lymph nodes were treated in 58.2% of cases. Pencil beam scanning was used in 54.5%, uniform scanning in 38.8%, and a rectal spacer in 14.2%. At a median followup of 22 months, the 3- and 5-year FFP were 90.7% and 81.4%, respectively. Five-year MFS and OS were 92.8% and 95.9%, respectively. Independent correlates of FFP included Gleason >= 8, PSA > 10, and cT2 (all p < 0.05). No grade 4 or 5 adverse events were reported. There were 23 (5%) grade 2 and 0 grade 3 gastrointestinal events. Prevalence of late grade 3, late grade 2, acute grade 3, and acute grade 2 genitourinary toxicity was 1.7%, 5.8%, 0%, and 21.8%, respectively. Prevalence of grade 2 and 3 erectile dysfunction at 2 years was 48.4% and 8.4%, respectively. ConclusionsIn the largest series published to date, our results suggest early outcomes using proton therapy for HRPC are encouraging for both safety and efficacy. Further evaluation is needed to determine if an advantage exists to use protons over other radiation techniques in this population.

Purpose: For most disease sites, level 1 evidence is lacking for proton beam therapy (PBT). By identifying target populations that would benefit most from PBT, prospective registries could overcome many of the challenges in clinical trial enrollment. Herein, we report clinical outcomes of patients treated with PBT for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC).Methods and Materials: Data were obtained from the multi-institutional prospective database of the Proton Collaborative Group (PCG). Inclusion criteria of our study were stage III de novo or recurrent LA-NSCLC, use of PBT, and availability of follow-up data. Overall survival (OS) time was calculated from the start of treatment until death or last follow-up. Kaplan-Meier curves were generated for groups of interest and compared with log-rank tests. Cox regression modeling was used to evaluate the multivariate association between selected covariates and OS.Results: A total of 195 patients were included in the analysis. PBT was given with a median equivalent dose in 2 Gy fractions (EQD2) of 63.8 Gy (relative biological effectiveness). Pencil beam scanning was used in 20% of treatments. Treatment-related grade 3 adverse events were rare: 1 pneumonitis, 2 dermatitis, and 3 esophagitis. No grade 4 events were reported. Two cardiac-related grade 5 events occurred in patients with multiple risk factors. The median follow-up time for living patients was 37.1 months and the median OS was 19.0 months. On multivariate analysis, good performance status (hazard ratio, 0.27; [95% confidence interval, 0.15-0.46]; P < .0001), pencil beam scanning use (0.55; [0.31-0.97]; P = .04), and increased EQD2 (0.80; [0.71-0.90] per 10 Gy increase; P = .0002) were associated with decreased mortality.Conclusions: PBT appears to yield low rates of adverse events with an OS similar to other retrospective studies on PBT for LANSCLC. PBS use and increased EQD2 can potentially improve OS.(c) 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of American Society for Radiation Oncology. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Purpose: Reports of proton beam therapy (PBT) utilization for cutaneous melanoma of the head and neck (HN) region is virtually non-existent. This study reports on the efficacy and acute toxicities of PBT for primary HN cutaneous melanoma. Materials and Methods: We queried the prospectively collected, multi- institutional Proton Collaborative Group registry for all consecutive patients with HN cutaneous melanoma receiving PBT from May 2010 to December 2019. Kaplan-Meier methods were used to estimate overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS), and local regional recurrence free survival (LRFS). Toxicity was reported per CTCAE version 4.0. Results: A total of 8 patients were identified with a median age of 69 (range, 37-88). All patients (100%) underwent surgery followed with postoperative PBT. There were 3 patients (37.5%) with T3 or T4 disease and 4 (50%) with N2 or N3 disease. The median radiation dose was 46 GyRBE (range, 27-70) and median dose per fraction was 2.4 GyRBE ( range, 2.0-6.0) with the most common dose fractionation being 44 or 48 GyRBE in 20 fractions (n = 4). At a median follow- up of 40.1 months (range, 1.6-62.4) the 1 and 3 year OS rates were 85.7% and 35.7%, respectively. The median PFS was 25.40 months (95% CI, 2.53-58.70) while PFS at 1 year and 3 years was 85.7% and 35.7%, respectively. LRFS was 100% at 1 year and 85.7% at 3 years. Five of the 8 patients developed distant metastases, of which 3 received immunotherapy. Acute G2thornand G3thorntoxicities occurred in 5 of 8 patients and 2 of 8 patients, respectively. G3 toxicities included radiation dermatitis ( n = 1) and immunotherapy-related rash (n = 1). No G4+ toxicities were reported. Conclusion: Single modality PBT for HN melanomas in the definitive setting provides effective and durable local control rates with tolerable acute toxicity. Distant failure remains the primary pattern of failure.

PURPOSE:Radiation therapy is a standard modality in the treatment for cancers of the head and neck, but is associated with significant short- and long-term side effects. Proton therapy, with its unique physical characteristics, can deliver less dose to normal tissues, resulting in fewer side effects. Proton therapy is currently being used for the treatment of head and neck cancer, with increasing clinical evidence supporting its use. However, barriers to wider adoption include access, cost, and the need for higher-level evidence.METHODS:The clinical evidence for the use of proton therapy in the treatment of head and neck cancer are reviewed here, including indications, advantages, and challenges.RESULTS:The Particle Therapy Cooperative Group Head and Neck Subcommittee task group provides consensus guidelines for the use of proton therapy for head and neck cancer.CONCLUSION:This report can be used as a guide for clinical use, to understand clinical trials, and to inform future research efforts.

Purpose: As patients with mediastinal lymphoma are typically young with curable disease, advanced radiation techniques such as proton therapy are often considered to minimize subacute and late toxicity. However, it is unclear which mediastinal lymphoma patients are treated with proton therapy. Within a prospective, multi-institutional proton registry, we characterized mediastinal lymphoma patients treated with proton therapy and assessed concordance with consensus recommendations published in 2018 by the International Lymphoma Radiation Oncology Group (ILROG). Methods: Eligible patients included those with lymphoma of the mediastinum treated exclusively with proton therapy for whom digital imaging and communications in medicine (DICOM) treatment data were available for review. Given the challenge with reliably visualizing the left mainstem coronary artery, the inferior-most aspect of the left pulmonary artery (PA) was used as a surrogate. Extent of disease was characterized as upper mediastinum (above level of left PA), middle mediastinum (below left PA but at or above level of T8), or low mediastinum (below T8). Results: Between November 2012 and April 2019, 56 patients were treated and met inclusion criteria. Patients treated with proton therapy were young (median, 24 y; range: 12 to 88), with over half being female (55%). Patients were most commonly treated at initial diagnosis (86%) and had Hodgkin lymphoma (79%). Most patients (96%) had mediastinal disease that extended down to the level of the heart: 48% had middle and 48% had low mediastinal involvement. Nearly all patients (96%) met the ILROG consensus recommendations: 95% had lower mediastinal disease, 46% were young females, and 9% were heavily pretreated. Heart (mean) and lung dose (mean, V5, V20) were significantly associated with lowest extent of mediastinal disease. Conclusions: Mediastinal lymphoma patients treated with proton therapy are typically young with lower mediastinal involvement. Within a prospective, multi-institutional proton registry, nearly all treated patients fit the ILROG consensus recommendations regarding which mediastinal lymphoma patients may most benefit from proton therapy.

Purpose: The optimal salvage treatment for malignant glioma after prior radiotherapy (RT) is not well established. Proton therapy (PT) is an attractive treatment modality for reirradiation (ReRT) of recurrent disease; however, data are limited.Methods: The prospective, multi-institutional Proton Collaborative Group (PCG) registry was queried for patients with malignant glioma who previously received RT and underwent PT-ReRT between 7/2011-10/2018. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards regression analysis. Results: 109 consecutive patients were identified. Median follow-up was 11.2 months and median time interval (TI) from prior RT (median 59.3 Gy) to PT-ReRT (median 49.6 Gy) was 45.7 months. Primary histology was glioblastoma (n=62), oligodendroglioma (n=26), and astrocytoma (n=20). Median PFS and OS was 6.1 and 11.1 months, respectively. On UVA, improved PFS was associated with oligodendroglioma (HR 0.39) and astrocytoma (HR 0.55) histologies, WHO Grade III (HR 0.36), TI (HR 0.989), surgical resection (HR 0.39), and PT-ReRT dose ≥50 Gy (HR 0.59) (all p<0.03), while improved OS was associated with oligodendroglioma histology (HR 0.35), WHO grade III (HR 0.33), ECOG 0 (HR 0.47), TI (HR 0.985), and PT-ReRT dose ≥50 Gy (HR 0.58) (all p<0.04). Late Grade 3 toxicities occurred in 5.6% of patients with no attributable acute or late Grade 4-5 events.Conclusion: In the largest series of glioma PT-ReRT reported to date, retreatment appears well tolerated with acceptable outcomes and favorable toxicities compared to photon historical controls. Dose escalation achievable with PT may improve outcomes for well-selected patients.

Purpose: Concurrent chemoradiation plays an integral role in the treatment of esophageal cancer. Proton beam radiation therapy has the potential to spare adjacent critical organs, improving toxicity profiles and potentially improving clinical outcomes. Methods and Materials: We evaluated the REG001-09 registry for patients undergoing proton radiation therapy for esophageal cancer. Demographic, clinicopathologic, toxicity, and dosimetry information were compiled. Results: We identified 155 patients treated at 10 institutions between 2010 and 2019. One hundred twenty (77%) had adenocarcinoma and 34 (22%) had squamous cell carcinoma. One hundred thirty-seven (88%) received concurrent chemotherapy. The median delivered dose was 50.51 Gy-equivalent (GyE; range, 41.4-70.1). Grade >= 3 toxicities occurred in 22 (14%) of patients and were most commonly dysphagia (6%), esophagitis (4%), anorexia (4%), and nausea (2%). There were no episodes of grade >= 4 lymphopenia and no grade 5 toxicities. The average mean heart, lung, and liver doses and average maximum spinal cord dose were 10.0 GyE, 4.8 GyE, 3.8 GyE, and 34.2 GyE, respectively. For gastroesophageal junction tumors, 8% of patients developed acute grade >= 3 toxicity and the mean heart, liver, right kidney, and left kidney doses were 10.5 GyE, 3.9 GyE, 0.4 GyE, and 4.9 GyE, respectively. Gastroesophageal junction location was protective against development of grade >= 3 toxicity on univariate (P = .0009) and multivariate (P = .004) analysis. Conclusions: Proton beam radiation therapy affords excellent dosimetric parameters and low toxicity in patients with esophageal cancer treated with curative intent. Prospective trials are underway investigating the comparative benefit of proton-based therapy. (C) 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of American Society for Radiation Oncology.

Intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) planning for the head and neck (HN) cancer often requires the use of the range shifter, which can increase the lateral penumbrae of the pencil proton beam in the patient, thus leading to an increase in unnecessary dose to the organs at risks (OARs) in proximity to the target volumes. The primary goal of the current study was to investigate the dosimetric benefits of utilizing beam-specific apertures for the IMPT HN cancer plans. The current retrospective study included computed tomography datasets of 10 unilateral HN cancer patients. The clinical target volume (CTV) was divided into low-risk CTV1 and high-risk CTV2. Total dose prescriptions to the CTV1 and CTV2 were 54 Gy(RBE) and 70 Gy(RBE), respectively, with a fractional dose of 2 Gy(RBE). All treatment plans were robustly optimized (patient setup uncertainty = 3 mm; range uncertainty = 3.5%) on the CTVs. For each patient, 2 sets of plans were generated: (1) without beam-specific aperture (WOBSA), and (2) with beam-specific aperture (WBSA). Specifically, both the WOBSA and WBSA of the given patient used identical beam angles, air gap, optimization structures, optimization constraints, and optimization settings. Target coverage and homogeneity index were comparable in both the WOBSA and WBSA plans with no statistical significance (p > 0.05). On average, the mean dose in WBSA plans was reduced by 12.1%, 2.9%, 3.0%, 3.8%, and 5.2% for the larynx, oral cavity, parotids, superior pharyngeal constrictor muscle, and inferior pharyngeal constrictor muscle, respectively. The dosimetric results of the OARs were found to be statistically significant (p < 0.05). The use of the beam-specific apertures did not deteriorate the coverage and homogeneity in the target volume and allowed for a reduction in mean dose to the OARs with an average difference up to 12.1%.

Background: Recent advances in radiotherapy techniques have allowed ablative doses to be safely delivered to inoperable liver tumors. In this setting, proton beam radiotherapy (PBT) provides the means to escalate radiation dose to the target volume while sparing the uninvolved liver. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of hypofractionated PBT for liver tumors, predominantly hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC). Methods: We evaluated the prospective registry of the Proton Collaborative Group for patients undergoing definitive PBT for liver tumors. Demographic, clinicopathologic, toxicity, and dosimetry information were compiled. Results: To date, 63 patients have been treated at 9 institutions between 2013-2019. Thirty (48%) had HCC and 25 (40%) had ICC. The median dose and biological equivalent dose (BED) delivered was 58.05 GyE (range, 32.5-75) and 80.5 GyE (range, 53.6-100), respectively. The median mean liver BED was 13.9 GyE. Three (4.8%) patients experienced at least one grade ³3 toxicity. With median follow-up of 5.1 months (range, 0.1-40.8), the local control (LC) rate at 1 year was 91.2% for HCC and 90.9% for ICC. The 1-year LC was significantly higher (95.7%) for patients receiving BED greater than 75.2 GyE than for patients receiving BED of 75.2 GyE or lower (84.6%, p = 0.029). The overall survival rate at 1 year was 65.6% for HCC and 81.8% for ICC. Conclusions: Hypofractionated PBT results in excellent LC, sparing of the uninvolved liver, and low toxicity, even in the setting of dose-escalation. Higher dose correlates with improved LC, highlighting the importance of PBT especially in patients with recurrent or bulky disease.