Teuta Zoto Mustafayev

Multi-institutional validation of the ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO consensus conference risk grouping in Turkish endometrial cancer patients treated with comprehensive surgical staging

In this study, 683 patients with endometrial cancer (EC) after comprehensive surgical staging were classified into four risk groups as low (LR), intermediate (IR), high-intermediate (HIR) and high-risk (HR), according to the recent consensus risk grouping. Patients with disease confined to the uterus, ≥50% myometrial invasion (MI) and/or grade 3 histology were treated with vaginal brachytherapy (VBT). Patients with stage II disease, positive/close surgical margins or extra-uterine extension were treated with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT)±VBT. The median follow-up was 56 months. The overall survival (OS) was significantly different between LR and HR groups, and there was a trend between LR and HIR groups. Relapse-free survival (RFS) was significantly different between LR and HIR, LR and HR and IR and HR groups. There was no significant difference in OS and RFS rates between the HIR and HR groups. In HR patients, the OS and RFS rates were significantly higher in stage IB - grade 3 and stage II compared to stage III and non-endometrioid histology without any difference between the two uterine-confined stages and between stage III and non-endometrioid histology. The current risk grouping does not clearly discriminate the HIR and IR groups. In patients with comprehensive surgical staging, a further risk grouping is needed to distinguish the real HR group.Impact statement

Dosimetric comparison of stereotactic MR-guided radiation therapy (SMART) and HDR brachytherapy boost in cervical cancer

The standard of care in locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC) is concomitant chemoradiotherapy followed by high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT). Although previous studies compared HDR-BT with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), there is scarce data regarding the dosimetric outcomes of stereotactic MR-guided adaptive radiation therapy (SMART) boost in lieu of HDR-BT. In this single-institutional in-silico comparative study, LACC patients who were definitively treated with external beam radiotherapy followed by HDR-BT were selected. Target volumes and organs at risk (OARs) were delineated in MRI and HDR-planning CT. An HDR-BT and a SMART boost plan were generated with a prescribed dose of 28 Gy in four fractions for all patients. The HDR-BT and SMART boost plans were compared in regard to target coverage as well OARs doses. Mean EQD2 D90 to HR-CTV and IR-CTV for HDR-BT plans were 89.7 and 70.5 Gy, respectively. For SMART, the mean EQD2 D90 to HR-PTV, HR-CTV, and IR-CTV were 82.9, 95.4, and 70.2 Gy, respectively. The mean D This dosimetric study demonstrates that SMART can be applied in cases where HDR-BT is not available or ineligible with acceptable target coverage and OAR sparing. However, prospective clinical studies are needed to validate these results.