Background: Adverse late health outcomes after multimodal treatment for pediatric cancer are diverse and of prime interest. Currently available evidence and survivorship care guidelines are largely... Show moreBackground: Adverse late health outcomes after multimodal treatment for pediatric cancer are diverse and of prime interest. Currently available evidence and survivorship care guidelines are largely based on studies addressing side-effects of two dimensional planned radiotherapy. Aims: The Dutch pediatric 3D-planned radiotherapy (3D-RT) study aims to gain insight in the long-term health outcomes among children who had radiotherapy in the 3D era. Here, we describe the study design, data-collection methods, and baseline cohort characteristics. Methods and Results: The 3D-RT study represents an expansion of the Dutch Childhood Cancer Survivor study (DCCSS) LATER cohort, including pediatric cancer patients diagnosed during 2000-2012, who survived at least 5 years after initial diagnosis and 2 years post external beam radiotherapy. Individual cancer treatment parameters were obtained from medical files. A national infrastructure for uniform collection and archival of digital radiotherapy files (Computed Tomography [CT]-scans, delineations, plan, and dose files) was established. Health outcome information, including subsequent tumors, originated from medical records at the LATER outpatient clinics, and national registry-linkage. With a median follow-up of 10.9 (interquartile range [IQR]: 7.9-14.3) years after childhood cancer diagnosis, 711 eligible survivors were identified. The most common cancer types were Hodgkin lymphoma, medulloblastoma, and nephroblastoma. Most survivors received radiotherapy directed to the head/cranium only, the craniospinal axis, or the abdominopelvic region. Conclusion: The 3D-RT study will provide knowledge on the risk of adverse late health outcomes and radiation-associated dose-effect relationships. This information is valuable to guide follow-up care of childhood cancer survivors and to refine future treatment protocols. Show less
Purpose To evaluate and compare health-related quality of life (HRQL) of women with early-stage breast cancer (BC) treated with different radiotherapy (RT) regimens. Methods Data were collected... Show morePurpose To evaluate and compare health-related quality of life (HRQL) of women with early-stage breast cancer (BC) treated with different radiotherapy (RT) regimens. Methods Data were collected from five prospective cohorts of BC patients treated with breast-conserving surgery and different RT regimens: intraoperative RT (IORT, 1 x 23.3 Gy; n = 267), external beam accelerated partial breast irradiation (EB-APBI, 10 x 3.85 Gy; n = 206), hypofractionated whole breast irradiation(hypo-WBI, 16 x 2.67 Gy; n = 375), hypo-WBI + boost(hypo-WBI-B, 21-26 x 2.67 Gy; n = 189), and simultaneous WBI + boost(WBI-B, 28 x 2.3 Gy; n = 475). Women >= 60 years with invasive/in situ carcinoma <= 30 mm, cN0 and pN0-1a were included. Validated EORTC QLQ-C30/BR23 questionnaires were used to asses HRQL. Multivariable linear regression models adjusted for confounding (age, comorbidity, pT, locoregional treatment, systemic therapy) were used to compare the impact of the RT regimens on HRQL at 12 and 24 months. Differences in HRQL over time (3-24 months) were evaluated using linear mixed models. Results There were no significant differences in HRQL at 12 months between groups except for breast symptoms which were better after IORT and EB-APBI compared to hypo-WBI at 12 months (p < 0.001). Over time, breast symptoms, fatigue, global health status and role functioning were significantly better after IORT and EB-APBI than hypo-WBI. At 24 months, HRQL was comparable in all groups. Conclusion In women with early-stage breast cancer, the radiotherapy regimen did not substantially influence long-term HRQL with the exception of breast symptoms. Breast symptoms are more common after WBI than after IORT or EB-APBI and improve slowly until no significant difference remains at 2 years posttreatment. Show less
Advances in cancer treatments have improved clinical outcomes, leading to an increasing population of cancer survivors. However, this success is associated with high rates of short- and long-term... Show moreAdvances in cancer treatments have improved clinical outcomes, leading to an increasing population of cancer survivors. However, this success is associated with high rates of short- and long-term cardiovascular (CV) toxicities. The number and variety of cancer drugs and CV toxicity types make long-term care a complex undertaking. This requires a multidisciplinary approach that includes expertise in oncology, cardiology and other related specialties, and has led to the development of the cardio-oncology subspecialty. This paper aims to provide an overview of the main adverse events, risk assessment and risk mitigation strategies, early diagnosis, medical and complementary strategies for prevention and management, and long-term follow-up strategies for patients at risk of cancer therapy-related cardiotoxicities. Research to better define strategies for early identification, follow-up and management is highly necessary. Although the academic cardio-oncology community may be the best vehicle to foster awareness and research in this field, additional stakeholders (industry, government agencies and patient organizations) must be involved to facilitate cross-discipline interactions and help in the design and funding of cardio-oncology trials. The overarching goals of cardio-oncology are to assist clinicians in providing optimal care for patients with cancer and cancer survivors, to provide insight into future areas of research and to search for collaborations with industry, funding bodies and patient advocates. However, many unmet needs remain. This document is the product of brainstorming presentations and active discussions held at the Cardiovascular Round Table workshop organized in January 2020 by the European Society of Cardiology. Show less
Background and aim: Patient decision aids for oncological treatment options, provide information on the effect on recurrence rates and/or survival benefit, and on side-effects and/or burden of... Show moreBackground and aim: Patient decision aids for oncological treatment options, provide information on the effect on recurrence rates and/or survival benefit, and on side-effects and/or burden of different treatment options. However, often uncertainty exists around the probability estimates for recurrence/survival and side-effects which is too relevant to be ignored. Evidence is lacking on the best way to communicate these uncertainties. The aim of this study is to develop a method to incorporate uncertainties in a patient decision aid for breast cancer patients to support their decision on radiotherapy.Methods: Firstly, qualitative interviews were held with patients and health care professionals. Secondly, in the development phase, thinking aloud sessions were organized with four patients and 12 health care professionals, individual and group-wise.Results: Consensus was reached on a pictograph illustrating the whole range of uncertainty for local recurrence risks, in combination with textual explanation that a more exact personalized risk would be given by their own physician. The pictograph consisted of 100 female icons in a 10 x 10 array. Icons with a stepwise gradient color indicated the uncertainty margin. The prevalence and severity of possible sideeffects were explained using verbal labels.Conclusions: We developed a novel way of visualizing uncertainties in recurrence rates in a patient decision aid. The effect of this way of communicating risk uncertainty is currently being tested in the BRASA study (NCT03375801). (C) 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. Show less
Teepen, J.C.; Kremer, L.C.; Heiden-van der Loo, M. van der; Tissing, W.J.; Pal, H.J. van der; Heuvel-Eibrink, M.M. van den; ... ; DCOG-LATER Study Grp 2019
Purpose Childhood cancer survivors are at increased risk of developing subsequent malignant neoplasms (SMNs). We compared survival and clinical characteristics of survivors with SMNs (sarcoma,... Show morePurpose Childhood cancer survivors are at increased risk of developing subsequent malignant neoplasms (SMNs). We compared survival and clinical characteristics of survivors with SMNs (sarcoma, breast cancer, or melanoma) and a population-based sample of similar first malignant neoplasm (FMN) patients. Methods We assembled three case series of solid SMNs observed in a cohort of 5-year Dutch childhood cancer survivors diagnosed 1963-2001 and followed until 2014: sarcoma (n = 45), female breast cancer (n = 41), and melanoma (n = 17). Each SMN patient was sex-, age-, and calendar year-matched to 10 FMN patients in the population-based Netherlands Cancer Registry. We compared clinical and histopathological characteristics by Fisher's exact tests and survival by multivariable Cox regression and competing risk regression analyses. Results Among sarcoma-SMN patients, overall survival [hazard ratio (HR) 1.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.23-2.87] and sarcoma-specific mortality (HR 1.91, 95% CI 1.16-3.13) were significantly worse compared to sarcoma-FMN patients (foremost for soft-tissue sarcoma), with 15-year survival rates of 30.8% and 61.6%, respectively. Overall survival did not significantly differ for breast-SMN versus breast-FMN patients (HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.54-2.37), nor for melanoma-SMN versus melanoma-FMN patients (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.10-5.00). No significant differences in tumor characteristics were observed between breast-SMN and breast-FMN patients. Breast-SMN patients were treated more often with mastectomy without radiotherapy/chemotherapy compared to breast-FMN patients (17.1% vs. 5.6%). Conclusions Survival of sarcoma-SMN patients is worse than sarcoma-FMN patients. Although survival and tumor characteristics appear similar for breast-SMN and breast-FMN patients, treatment differs; breast-SMN patients less often receive breast-conserving therapy. Larger studies are necessary to substantiate these exploratory findings. Show less
Background and purpose: To quantify renal and diaphragmatic interfractional motion in order to estimate systematic and random errors, and to investigate the correlation between interfractional... Show moreBackground and purpose: To quantify renal and diaphragmatic interfractional motion in order to estimate systematic and random errors, and to investigate the correlation between interfractional motion and patient-specific factors.Material and methods: We used 527 retrospective abdominal-thoracic cone beam CT scans of 39 childhood cancer patients (<18 years) to quantify renal motion relative to bony anatomy in the left-right (LR), cranio-caudal (CC) and anterior-posterior (AP) directions, and diaphragmatic motion in the CC direction only. Interfractional motion was quantified by distributions of systematic and random errors in each direction (standard deviations Sigma and sigma, respectively). Also, correlation between organ motion and height was analyzed.Results: Inter-patient organ motion varied widely, with the largest movements in the CC direction. Values of Sigma in LR, CC, and AP directions were 1.1, 3.8, 2.1 mm for the right, and 1.3, 3.0, 1.5 mm for the left kidney, respectively. The sigma in these three directions was 1.1, 3.1, 1.7 mm for the right, and 1.2, 2.9, 2.1 mm for the left kidney, respectively. For the diaphragm we estimated Sigma = 5.2 mm and sigma = 4.0 mm. No correlations were found between organ motion and height.Conclusions: The large inter-patient organ motion variations and the lack of correlation between motion and patient-related factors, suggest that individualized margin approaches might be required. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved. Show less
Siesling, S.; Tjan-Heijnen, V.C.G.; Roos, M. de; Snel, Y.; Dalen, T. van; Wouters, M.W.; ... ; Visser, O. 2014
