Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Beam Chemoradiation Therapy With 5-Fluorouracil and Mitomycin-C for Definitive Treatment of Carcinoma of the Anal Canal: A Multi-institutional Pilot Feasibility Study

Long-term Outcomes of Definitive Chemoradiation With Proton Therapy for Treatment of Carcinoma of the Anal Canal: Combined Analysis of Two Prospective Trials

PURPOSE

Although definitive chemoradiation therapy (CRT) with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and mitomycin-C (MMC) (5-FU/MMC) remains the standard of care for localized anal cancer, treatment is associated with significant acute and late toxicity. Proton radiation therapy (RT) may potentially reduce such toxicity. Here, we assess the long-term outcomes of patients with anal cancer treated with CRT using proton RT in 2 prospective pilot studies.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients with stage I to III anal cancer treated with proton RT (pencil beam scanning or intensity modulated proton therapy) per Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0529 dose schema with concurrent 5-FU/MMC (2 cycles) in 2 prospective, single-arm trials were followed. Locoregional failure, distant metastases, colostomy-free survival, disease-free survival, and overall survival were assessed. Physician-graded late toxicity (>90 days from CRT) was assessed per National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4. Late toxicities were compared with RTOG 0529 via Fisher exact test. Patient-reported outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Between 2013 and 2020, 39 patients were treated; 37 (95%) patients completed treatment per protocol. The median follow-up was 63 months. The 5-year locoregional failure, distant metastases, colostomy-free survival, disease-free survival, and overall survival were 21%, 19%, 72%, 69%, and 75%, respectively. The worst late treatment toxicities were grade 1 in 38%, grade 2 in 24%, grade 3 in 19%, grade 4 in 3%, and no grade 5. Compared to RTOG 0529, rates of overall grade 2+ late toxicities were significantly lower (46% vs 75%, P = .01), attributed to lower dermatologic toxicities (0% vs 25%, P < .01), but there was no significant difference in overall grade 3+ toxicities (22% vs 20%, P = 1.00). No statistically significant correlations between organ-at-risk dosimetry and late toxicities were noted. Available patient-reported outcomes demonstrated that significant proportion of patients had persistent gastrointestinal symptoms at long term.

CONCLUSIONS

Definitive CRT with proton RT with concurrent 5-FU/MMC for the treatment of anal cancer resulted in comparable long-term disease control and grade 3+ late toxicities compared to RTOG 0529. Future studies should evaluate additional measures to minimize treatment toxicity and subsets of patients who are most likely to benefit from proton RT.

Radiation Therapy for Anal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: An ASTRO Clinical Practice Guideline

PURPOSE

This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations addressing the indications for definitive treatment of primary squamous cell carcinoma of the anal canal and anal margin.

METHODS

The American Society for Radiation Oncology convened a task force to address 4 key questions focused on (1) indications for radiation therapy (RT), concurrent systemic therapy and local excision/surgery, (2) appropriate RT techniques, (3) appropriate RT dose-fractionation regimens, target volumes, and dose constraints, and (4) appropriate surveillance strategies after definitive treatment. Recommendations are based on a systematic literature review and created using a predefined consensus-based methodology and system for grading evidence quality and recommendation strength.

RESULTS

Multidisciplinary evaluation and decision-making are recommended for all patients. Definitive treatment with combined modality therapy is recommended for most patients using concurrent 5-fluorouracil or capecitabine plus mitomycin, with cisplatin as a conditional alternative to mitomycin with RT. Select patients with early-stage disease may be considered for local excision alone. RT target volumes should include the primary tumor/anal canal and rectum, and mesorectal, presacral, internal and external iliac, obturator, and inguinal lymph nodes. Intensity modulated RT-based treatment approaches are recommended. The primary tumor should receive doses of 4500 to 5940 cGy in 25 to 33 fractions, and clinically involved lymph nodes should receive 5040 to 5400 cGy in 28 to 30 fractions, depending on disease stage and RT approach. Elective nodal volumes should receive 3600 to 4500 cGy in 20 to 30 fractions, depending on disease stage and RT approach. Dose guidance for normal tissues and measures to minimize acute and chronic treatment-related toxicity are provided. Treatment breaks should be minimized. Posttreatment surveillance strategies, including timing of clinical/digital exam, anoscopy, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography/computed tomography, are discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

These evidence-based recommendations guide clinical practice on the use of definitive therapy for localized anal squamous cell carcinoma. Future studies will further refine the optimal RT dose for early- and advanced-stage disease, use of alternative systemic agents, including immunotherapy, the role of adaptive RT, and other strategies to minimize long-term treatment-related toxicity.

Treatment of stage I-III squamous cell anal cancer: a comparative effectiveness systematic review

BACKGROUND

We sought to assess the effectiveness and harms of initial treatment strategies for stage I through III anal squamous cell anal cancer.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials between January 1, 2000, and March 2024, for randomized controlled trials and nonrandomized studies of interventions comparing initial treatment strategies. Individual study risk of bias and overall strength of evidence were evaluated for a prespecified outcome list using standardized methods.

RESULTS

We identified 33 eligible studies and extracted data. Six were deemed low to moderate risk of bias. Compared with radiation therapy alone, chemoradiation therapy (CRT) with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and mitomycin C probably shows a benefit in locoregional failure, disease-specific survival, and colostomy-free survival (moderate strength of evidence) yet may result in greater overall and acute hematological toxicity, with no difference in late harms (low strength of evidence). CRT with 5-FU plus mitomycin C may show a benefit in locoregional failure, disease-specific survival, and colostomy-free survival rates compared with 5-FU alone (low strength of evidence). CRT with 5-FU plus cisplatin vs 5-FU plus mitomycin C probably results in no differences in several effectiveness outcomes or overall acute or late harms and probably increases hematological toxicity with mitomycin C (moderate strength of evidence). Compared with CRT using capecitabine plus mitomycin C, CRT with capecitabine plus mitomycin C and paclitaxel may improve overall survival, disease-specific survival, and colostomy-free survival yet cause more acute harms (low strength of evidence). Evidence was insufficient for remaining comparisons.

CONCLUSIONS

CRT with 5-FU plus mitomycin C or 5-FU plus cisplatin is likely more effective yet incurs greater acute hematological toxicity than radiation therapy alone or single-agent CRT. Adding paclitaxel to capecitabine plus mitomycin C may increase treatment efficacy and toxicity. Evidence is insufficient comparing posttreatment surveillance strategies and patient-reported outcomes, highlighting research opportunities.

PTCOG Gastrointestinal Subcommittee Lower Gastrointestinal Tract Malignancies Consensus Statement

Purpose

Radiotherapy delivery in the definitive management of lower gastrointestinal (LGI) tract malignancies is associated with substantial risk of acute and late gastrointestinal (GI), genitourinary, dermatologic, and hematologic toxicities. Advanced radiation therapy techniques such as proton beam therapy (PBT) offer optimal dosimetric sparing of critical organs at risk, achieving a more favorable therapeutic ratio compared with photon therapy.

Materials and Methods

The international Particle Therapy Cooperative Group GI Subcommittee conducted a systematic literature review, from which consensus recommendations were developed on the application of PBT for LGI malignancies.

Results

Eleven recommendations on clinical indications for which PBT should be considered are presented with supporting literature, and each recommendation was assessed for level of evidence and strength of recommendation. Detailed technical guidelines pertaining to simulation, treatment planning and delivery, and image guidance are also provided.

Conclusion

PBT may be of significant value in select patients with LGI malignancies. Additional clinical data are needed to further elucidate the potential benefits of PBT for patients with anal cancer and rectal cancer.

Recent Advances in the Management of Anal Cancer

The incidence and mortality of squamous cell carcinoma of the anus (SCCA) is on the rise, which highlights the unmet need for advances in treatment options. The landscape of treatment for this cancer is rapidly evolving with novel combination strategies including immunotherapy, radiation therapy and biomarker-guided therapy. This review article features an overview of recent advancements in both locoregional and metastatic SCCA. The recent focus on locoregional SCCA management is to tailor treatment according to tumor burden and minimize treatment-related toxicities. Mitomycin plus either infusional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) or capecitabine is used for first-line chemoradiotherapy (CRT), and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) is the preferred modality for radiation for locoregional anal cancer. Locally recurrent disease is managed with surgical resection. Systemic treatment is first-line for metastatic SCCA and immunotherapy with nivolumab and pembrolizumab being included as second-line agents. Current and future clinical trials are evaluating treatments for SCCA including immunotherapy alone or in combination regimens, radiotherapies, targeted treatments and novel agents. Another critical aspect of current research in SCCA is the personalization of CRT and immunotherapies based on molecular characterization and biomarkers such as the programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and circulating tumor DNA.

Feasibility Trial of Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy to Reduce Toxicity in Anal Cancer Patients

PURPOSE

The purpose of this trial was to assess the patient and physician-reported toxicity in anal cancer patients undergoing definitive chemoradiation with intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT).

METHODS

Patients with stage II and III anal cancer were treated with IMPT. All patients received 2 cycles of 5-fluorouracil and mitomycin concurrently with radiation. Toxicity was assessed at baseline, weekly during chemoradiation, and in follow-up using physician-graded common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE) v 4.0 and PRO-CTCAE. The primary endpoint was to define point estimates and 95% CI for acute ≥ grade 2/3 gastrointestinal (GI), genitourinary (GU), dermatologic, and hematologic toxicity. The proportion of PRO-CTCAE questions scored ≥3 for each domain was compared with the baselinse. The proportion of ≥ grade 2 and ≥ grade 3 toxicities were compared with historic intensity-modulated radiotherapy patients treated on RTOG 0529.

RESULTS

Fourteen patients were enrolled from 2017 to 2020. Rates of physician-reported GI, GU, dermatologic, and hematologic toxicity were not significantly different between patients treated with IMPT compared with patients treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Rates of patient-reported dermatologic and GU toxicity were low at baseline with a peak at week 6 (91% and 58% PRO-CTCAE items ≥ grade 3, respectively) and normalization to baseline 3 months after IMPT. In contrast, the proportion of high-grade PRO-CTCAE GI scores was 40% at baseline, which persisted through 1-year posttreatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinician-reported toxicity was not improved with IMPT in the context of this underpowered trial. High-grade GI symptoms persisted for 12 months and were similar to baseline. Additional measures are needed to minimize acute and chronic toxicity related to chemoradiation.

Proton Beam Therapy for Esophageal Cancer

Simple Summary

Early-stage esophageal cancer is managed surgically, with the addition of radiotherapy for locally advanced disease. Current photon-based radiotherapy results in a high treatment-related complications, due to proximal organ involvement. The anatomic location of the esophagus raises challenges due to the anatomical changes associated with diaphragmatic motion, weight loss, tumor changes, and set-up variability. These propelled the interest in proton beam therapy (PBT), which theoretically offers a reduction in the radiation exposure to healthy neighboring tissues with improvements in the therapeutic ratio. In this review, we present the role of PBT for esophageal cancer, including treatment planning, early clinical comparisons with photon-based techniques, ongoing trials, current challenges, toxicities, and issues of equity and health services.

Abstract

Early-stage esophageal cancer is often primarily managed surgically, with the addition of radiotherapy for locally advanced disease. However, current photon-based radiotherapy regimens and surgery results in a high incidence of treatment-related cardiac and pulmonary complications due to the involvement of proximal organs at risk. In addition, the anatomic location of the esophagus raises challenges for radiotherapy due to the anatomical changes associated with diaphragmatic motion, weight loss, tumor changes, and set-up variability. These challenges propelled the interest in proton beam therapy (PBT), which theoretically offers a reduction in the radiation exposure to healthy neighboring tissues with improvements in the therapeutic ratio. Several dosimetric studies support the potential advantages of PBT for esophageal cancer treatment however, translation of these results to improved clinical outcomes remains unclear with limited clinical data, especially in large populations. Studies on the effect on quality of life are likewise lacking. Here, we review the existing and emerging role of PBT for esophageal cancer, including treatment planning, early clinical comparisons of PBT with photon-based techniques, recently concluded and ongoing clinical trials, challenges and toxicities, effects on quality of life, and global inequities in the treatment of esophageal cancer.

Proton Therapy in the Management of Luminal Gastrointestinal Cancers: Esophagus, Stomach, and Anorectum

While the role of proton therapy in gastric cancer is marginal, its role in esophageal and anorectal cancers is expanding. In esophageal cancer, protons are superior in sparing the organs at risk, as shown by multiple dosimetric studies. Literature is conflicting regarding clinical significance, but the preponderance of evidence suggests that protons yield similar or improved oncologic outcomes to photons at a decreased toxicity cost. Similarly, protons have improved sparing of the organs at risk in anorectal cancers, but clinical data is much more limited to date, and toxicity benefits have not yet been shown clinically. Large, randomized trials are currently underway for both disease sites.

Hematologic Toxicity Comparison of Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy and Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy in Anal Cancer Patients

PURPOSE

We hypothesize that hematologic toxicity will be lower in anal cancer patients treated definitively with intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) compared with patients treated with intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT).

METHODS

Patients enrolled on a prospective feasibility trial assessing the use of IMPT for anal cancer were compared with contemporaneous patients treated with IMRT. Blood counts were collected during chemoradiation. Hematologic events were graded according to CTCAE version 5.0. Pelvic bone marrow (PBM) and positron emission tomography-defined active bone marrow (ABM) were defined and contoured for each patient. Toxicity rates, PBM and ABM dose metrics were compared between groups.

RESULTS

Forty-one patients treated with definitive chemoradiation for anal cancer between 2015 and 2021 were included in this analysis. Of the evaluable patients, 14 patients were treated with IMPT and 27 were treated with IMRT. All PBM dose metrics were lower in patients receiving IMPT. Patients treated with IMPT versus IMRT also had a significantly lower ABM mean dose (1996 vs. 3073 Gy, P<0.01). However, there was no statistically significant difference in hematologic toxicity between the groups. Seventy percent of patients treated with IMRT had at least 1 grade ≥3 hematologic event compared with 86% in the IMPT group (P=0.48).

CONCLUSION

Proton treatment reduced bone marrow doses but was not associated with lower hematologic toxicity when compared with IMRT.

Anal Cancer: Emerging Standards in a Rare Rare Disease

The social stigma surrounding an anal cancer diagnosis has traditionally prevented open discussions about this disease. However, as recent treatment options and an increasing rate of diagnoses are made worldwide, awareness is growing. In the United States alone, 9,090 individuals were expected to be diagnosed with anal cancer in 2021. The US annual incidence of squamous cell carcinoma of the anus continues to increase by 2.7% yearly, whereas the mortality rate increases by 3.1%. The main risk factor for anal cancer is a human papillomavirus infection; those with chronic immunosuppression are also at risk. Patients with HIV are 19 times more likely to develop anal cancer compared with the general population. In this review, we have provided an overview of the carcinoma of the anal canal, the role of screening, advancements in radiation therapy, and current trials investigating acute and chronic treatment-related toxicities. This article is a comprehensive approach to presenting the existing data in an effort to encourage continuous international interest in anal cancer.

[Oncological surgery in the interdisciplinary context-On the way to personalized medicine]

Oncological surgery is a discipline which closely interacts with other clinical partners and remains in many cases the cornerstone of a curative treatment of solid tumors. Due to the progress in the field of systemic tumor treatment as well as innovations in surgical techniques, the indications in oncological surgery are also changing, such as extended indications for patients with oligometastatic disease. Surgery of metastases has long been established for colorectal cancer and is being further tested for other entities, such as pancreatic and gastric cancer, within randomized controlled clinical trials (e.g. RENAISSANCE and METAPANC). A new challenge is the handling of a clinical complete remission after total neoadjuvant therapy, for example in locally advanced rectal cancer or in esophageal cancer. Here, organ and function preservation are increasingly propagated but should only be performed within clinical trials until stratification enables the identification of patients in whom this concept is oncologically safe. The personalized use of oncological surgery is dependent on the patient, the tumor and on the total multimodal concept.

Pencil Beam Scanning (PBS) Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy (IMPT) Chemoradiotherapy for Anal Canal Cancer-Single Institution Experience

Simple Summary

Eligible patients received PBS IMPT at a single institution. Treatment was administered in two volumes: 1—tumour with margins plus involved lymph nodes; 2—regional lymph node groups: perirectal (mesorectal), obturatory, inguinal, internal, external, and common iliac. The total doses of 57.5 GyE and 45 GyE, respectively, were administered in volumes 1 and 2 in 25 fractions, 5 fractions per week, respectively (a simultaneous integrated boost). Concomitant chemotherapy cisplatinum (CDDP) plus 5-FU or CDDP plus capecitabine was administered as per protocol. This single-institution study showed the high efficacy of PBS IMPT, achieving a high rate of complete regression. The 2-year overall survival, relapse-free survival and colostomy-free survival were 94.2, 93.8 and 91.0%, respectively. The haematological acute toxicity of grade 3–4 remained low. The acute toxicity completely resolved in all patients and had no lethal outcomes.

Abstract

Background: A favourable dose distribution has been described for proton beam therapy (PBT) of anal cancer in dosimetric studies. The relationship between dosimetric parameters in bone marrow and haematologic toxicity, treatment interruptions, and treatment efficacy has also been documented. There are only few references on clinical results of PBT for anal cancer. The primary objective of the retrospective study was to assess the efficacy of pencil beam scanning intensity-modulated proton therapy (PBS IMPT) in the definitive chemoradiotherapy of anal cancer. Secondary objectives were established to identify the risks of acute chronic toxicity risks and to assess colostomy rates. Materials and methods: Patients were treated for biopsy-proven squamous cell cancer (SCC) of the anus at initial or advanced stages. Eligible patients received PBS IMPT at a single institution. Treatment was administered in two volumes: 1—tumour with margins plus involved lymph nodes; 2—regional lymph node groups: perirectal (mesorectal), obturatory, inguinal, internal, external, and common iliac. The total doses of 57.5 GyE and 45 GyE, respectively, were administered in volumes 1 and 2 in 25 fractions, 5 fractions per week, respectively (a simultaneous integrated boost). Concomitant chemotherapy cisplatinum (CDDP) plus 5-FU or CDDP plus capecitabine was administered as per protocol. The treatment effect was assessed using DRE (digital rectal examination) and MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) within the follow-up period. Toxicity was scaled using CTCAE version 4.0 criteria. Results: 39 of 41 patients treated during the period of February 2014–August 2021 were eligible for analysis. All patients completed treatment, 76.9% without interruption. The median treatment time was 35 days (32–35). The median follow-up period was 30 months, 34 patients are alive to-date, 5 patients died prior to the date of analysis, and 2 deaths were unrelated to the primary disease. The 2-year overall survival, relapse-free survival, and colostomy-free survival were 94.2%, 93.8%, and 91.0%, respectively. Complete regression was achieved in 36 patients (92.3%), partial regression was achieved in 2 (5.1%), and immediate progression at end of treatment occurred in 1 patient (2.6%). Salvage resection was indicated for two patients in partial regression and due to severe chronic dermatologic toxicity. The grade 3 and 4 haematological toxicity rates were 7.7% and 5.1%, respectively. The most frequent non-haematological acute toxicities of grade 3–4 observed were dermatitis (23.1%), diarrhoea (7.7%), and dehydration (7.7%). Chronic toxicity emerged predominantly as skin atrophy/ulceration grade 2 (26.5%) and grade 3–4 (5.8%), and radiation proctitis grade 2 (38.2%) and grade 3 (2.9%). Discussion, conclusions: This single-institution study showed the high efficacy of PBS IMPT, achieving a high rate of complete regression. The haematological acute toxicity of grade 3–4 remained low; however, the impact of altered chemotherapy (CDDP instead of mitomycin C) remains unclear. The incidence of other acute toxicities shares similarity with photon therapy investigated in large studies. The acute toxicity completely resolved in all patients, had no lethal outcomes, and never resulted in the necessity for colostomy. By contrast, it was chronic toxicity, skin ulceration, perirectal fistulation, and fibrosis that resulted in salvage surgery and/or the need for a colostomy. A challenging question remains: to what extent can PBT prevent chronic toxicity? Longer follow-up remains necessary.

Multi-institutional Comparison of Intensity Modulated Photon Versus Proton Radiation Therapy in the Management of Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Anus

Purpose

Concurrent chemoradiation therapy is a curative treatment for squamous cell carcinoma of the anus, but patients can suffer from significant treatment-related toxicities. This study was undertaken to determine whether intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) is associated with less acute toxicity than intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) using photons.

Materials and Methods

We performed a multi-institutional retrospective study comparing toxicity and oncologic outcomes of IMRT versus IMPT. Patients with stage I-IV (for positive infrarenal para-aortic or common iliac nodes only) squamous cell carcinoma of the anus, as defined by the American Joint Committee on Cancer's AJCC Staging Manual, eighth edition, were included. Patients with nonsquamous histology or mixed IMPT and IMRT treatment courses were excluded. Acute nonhematologic toxicities, per the National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4, were recorded prospectively at all sites. Acute and late toxicities, dose metrics, and oncologic outcomes were compared between IMRT and IMPT using univariable and multivariable statistical methods. To improve the robustness of our analysis, we also analyzed the data using propensity score weighting methods.

Results

A total of 208 patients were treated with either IMPT (58 patients) or IMRT (150 patients). Of the 208 total patients, 13% had stage I disease, 36% stage II, 50% stage III, and 1% stage IV. IMPT reduced the volume of normal tissue receiving low-dose radiation but not high-dose radiation to bladder and bowel. There was no significant difference between treatment groups in overall grade 3 or greater acute toxicity (IMRT, 68%; IMPT, 67%; P = .96) or 2-year overall grade 3 or greater late toxicity (IMRT, 3.5%; IMPT, 1.8%; P = .88). There was no significant difference in 2-year progression-free survival (hazard ratio, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.3-2.0).

Conclusions

Despite reducing the volume of normal tissue receiving low-dose radiation, IMPT was not associated with decreased grade 3 or greater acute toxicity as measured by CTCAE. Additional follow-up is needed to assess whether important differences arise in late toxicities and if further prospective evaluation is warranted.

Chemoradiation for Anal Cancer: Clinical Outcomes and Strategies to Optimize the Therapeutic Ratio According to HPV Status

The incidence of anal cancer in the United States has increased in recent years, primarily related to the increasing incidence of HPV-associated anal squamous cell carcinoma, which is estimated to represent 80%-95% of anal cancers. Similar to head and neck cancer, HPV association has been demonstrated to be a strong positive prognostic factor in patients with anal cancer. Encouraging results from a number of studies investigating treatment de-escalation for HPV-associated oropharyngeal cancer support the notion that similar attempts may be feasible in HPV-associated anal cancer; however, the data to support this hypothesis are currently lacking. Studies are needed to determine how, if at all, HPV status should impact the management of patients with anal cancer. This review summarizes the relationship between HPV association and outcomes for patients with anal cancer, and how HPV status may impact the treatment of patients with anal cancer going forward.

De-Escalation of Therapy for Patients with Early-Stage Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Anus

Simple Summary

Management of early-stage squamous cell carcinoma of the anus (SCCA) remains controversial. The current standard of care treatment of chemotherapy combined with radiation therapy can result in both acute and late toxicity. Alternative therapies, including radiation therapy alone or local excision, may be less toxic, but the role of these therapies in early-stage SCCA remains unclear. Additional options for reducing the intensity of therapy for early-stage SCCA include reduction of radiation dose, altering treatment volumes, modifying chemotherapy type and dosage, and using intensity-modulated radiation therapy to reduce the radiation dose to adjacent normal tissues. Multiple prospective studies are actively investigating the role of de-escalation of therapy in patients with early-stage SCCA.

Abstract

The incidence of squamous cell carcinoma of the anus (SCCA) is increasing, particularly in the elderly, with increased mortality in this age group. While the current standard of care for localized SCCA remains chemoradiation (CRT), completion of this treatment can be challenging with risks for severe acute and late toxicity. It remains unclear if full course CRT is required for the management of early-stage SCCA or if de-escalation of treatment is possible without compromising patient outcomes. Alternative therapies include radiation therapy alone or local excision for appropriate patients. Modifying standard CRT may also reduce toxicity including the routine use of intensity-modulated radiation therapy for treatment delivery, modification of treatment volumes, and selection and dosing of concurrent systemic therapy agents. Finally, we provide an overview of currently accruing prospective trials focused on defining the role of de-escalation of therapy in patients with early-stage SCCA.

Evolution of the Role of Radiotherapy for Anal Cancer

Prior to the 1980s, the primary management of localized anal cancer was surgical resection. Dr. Norman Nigro and colleagues introduced neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy prior to abdominoperineal resection. Chemoradiotherapy 5-fluorouracil and mitomycin C afforded patients complete pathologic response and obviated the need for upfront surgery. More recent studies have attempted to alter or exclude chemotherapy used in the Nigro regimen to mitigate toxicity, often with worse outcomes. Reductions in acute adverse effects have been associated with marked advancements in radiotherapy delivery using intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and image-guidance radiation delivery, resulting in increased tolerance to greater radiation doses. Ongoing trials are attempting to improve IMRT-based treatment of locally advanced disease with efforts to increase personalized treatment. Studies are also examining the role of newer treatment modalities such as proton therapy in treating anal cancer. Here we review the evolution of radiotherapy for anal cancer and describe recent advances. We also elaborate on radiotherapy's role in locally persistent or recurrent anal cancer.

Biological effects of passive scattering and spot scanning proton beams at the distal end of the spread-out Bragg peak in single cells and multicell spheroids

PURPOSE

The present study investigated the biological effects of spot scanning and passive scattering proton therapies at the distal end region of the spread-out Bragg peak (SOBP) using single cell and multicell spheroids.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The Geant4 Monte Carlo simulation was used to calculate linear energy transfer (LET) values in passive scattering and spot scanning beams. The biological doses of the two beam options at various points of the distal end region of SOBP were investigated using EMT6 single cells and 0.6-mm V79 spheroids irradiated with 6 and 15 Gy, respectively, by inserting the fractions surviving these doses onto dose-survival curves and reading the corresponding dose.

RESULTS

LET values in the entrance region of SOBP were similar between the two beam options and increased at the distal end region of SOBP, where the LET value of spot scanning beams was higher than that of passive scattering beams. Increases in biological effects at the distal end region were similarly observed in single cells and spheroids; biological doses at 2-10 mm behind the distal end were 4.5-57% and 5.7-86% higher than physical doses in passive scattering and spot scanning beams, respectively, with the biological doses of spot scanning beams being higher than those of passive scattering beams (p < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

In single cells and spheroids, the effects of proton irradiation were stronger than expected from measured physical doses at the distal end of SOBP and were correlated with LET increases.

Proton beam radiotherapy for anal and rectal cancers

Gastrointestinal cancers are bordered by radiosensitive visceral organs, resulting in a narrow therapeutic window. The search for more efficacious and tolerable therapies raises the possibility that proton beam therapy's (PBT) physical and dosimetric differences from conventional therapy may be better suited to treat both primary and recurrent disease, which carries its own unique challenges. Currently, the maximal efficacy of radiation plans for primary and recurrent anorectal cancer is constrained by delivery techniques and modalities which must consider feasibility challenges and toxicity secondary to exposure of organs at risk (OARs). Studies using volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) demonstrate that more precise dose delivery to target volumes improves local control rates and reduces complications. By reducing the low-to-moderate radiation dose-bath to bone marrow, small and large bowel, and skin, PBT may offer an improved side-effect profile. The potential to reduce toxicity, increase patient compliance, minimize treatment breaks, and enable dose escalation or hypofractionation is appealing. In cases where prognosis is favorable, PBT may mitigate long-term morbidity such as secondary malignancies, femoral fractures, and small bowel obstruction.