Purpose: Non-operative management (NOM) has emerged as a promising organ-preserving strategy for patients with rectal cancer who achieve a clinical complete response (cCR) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT). However, no standardized treatment protocol has been established for watch-and-wait strategies. Materials and Methods: This prospective study evaluated oncological outcomes of NOM combined with 4 months of adjuvant capecitabine. Patients with resectable rectal cancer (≤ 8 cm from the anal verge, cT2-4 or N+) underwent CRT (50-54 Gy in 25-27 fractions with capecitabine). Eight weeks post-CRT, a multidisciplinary team assessed cCR. Patients achieving cCR received six cycles of capecitabine (2 weeks on/1 week off) and were actively monitored. Results: Among 89 patients receiving CRT (2018-2023), 17 (19.1%) achieved cCR and were included. The median age was 65 years, and 64.7% were male. Eleven (64.7%) completed all six cycles of adjuvant therapy. After a median follow-up of 31.4 months, 11 patients (64.7%) remained disease-free. Local regrowth occurred in six patients (35.3%) with 2- and 4-year rates of 34.5% and 47.6%, respectively. Five underwent radical surgery, and one received transanal excision with systemic chemotherapy. At the time of assessment, 15 patients (88.2%) showed no evidence of disease, while two (11.8%) received palliative chemotherapy. All patients were alive. Conclusion NOM with adjuvant capecitabine showed promising oncological outcomes, offering an alternative to passive watch-and-wait approaches. Further refinement through multidisciplinary strategies is warranted.

Purpose: This study compares the dosimetric properties of EBT3 and EBT4 GAFchromic films in transmission and reflection scanning modes, focusing on dose response, sensitivity, and postirradiation stability. Methods: The EBT3 and EBT4 films were irradiated at doses of 0–10 Gy using a Varian TrueBeam linear accelerator at 6 MV. The films were scanned at intervals between 1 and 336 hours after irradiation in both transmission and reflection modes. Net optical density (NetOD) values from each scan were used to evaluate dose response and sensitivity, with calibration curves created for each film and scan mode. Dose differences between calculated and delivered doses were assessed over time. Results: The EBT3 and EBT4 films exhibited similar dose–response curves and stable NetOD values across both scanning modes. However, EBT4 exhibited reduced sensitivity variability in response to dose changes. After irradiation, NetOD values increased up to 24 hours before stabilizing, suggesting that a 24-hour scan time is sufficient for consistent measurements. Dose differences between films and modes remained within ±4%. Conclusions EBT4 offers comparable dosimetric performance to EBT3, with additional benefits, such as improved dose–response linearity and reduced sensitivity fluctuations. The findings indicate that EBT4 can serve as a reliable successor to EBT3.

Purpose: This study compares the dosimetric properties of EBT3 and EBT4 GAFchromic films in transmission and reflection scanning modes, focusing on dose response, sensitivity, and postirradiation stability. Methods: The EBT3 and EBT4 films were irradiated at doses of 0–10 Gy using a Varian TrueBeam linear accelerator at 6 MV. The films were scanned at intervals between 1 and 336 hours after irradiation in both transmission and reflection modes. Net optical density (NetOD) values from each scan were used to evaluate dose response and sensitivity, with calibration curves created for each film and scan mode. Dose differences between calculated and delivered doses were assessed over time. Results: The EBT3 and EBT4 films exhibited similar dose–response curves and stable NetOD values across both scanning modes. However, EBT4 exhibited reduced sensitivity variability in response to dose changes. After irradiation, NetOD values increased up to 24 hours before stabilizing, suggesting that a 24-hour scan time is sufficient for consistent measurements. Dose differences between films and modes remained within ±4%. Conclusions EBT4 offers comparable dosimetric performance to EBT3, with additional benefits, such as improved dose–response linearity and reduced sensitivity fluctuations. The findings indicate that EBT4 can serve as a reliable successor to EBT3.

Purpose: This study compares the dosimetric properties of EBT3 and EBT4 GAFchromic films in transmission and reflection scanning modes, focusing on dose response, sensitivity, and postirradiation stability. Methods: The EBT3 and EBT4 films were irradiated at doses of 0–10 Gy using a Varian TrueBeam linear accelerator at 6 MV. The films were scanned at intervals between 1 and 336 hours after irradiation in both transmission and reflection modes. Net optical density (NetOD) values from each scan were used to evaluate dose response and sensitivity, with calibration curves created for each film and scan mode. Dose differences between calculated and delivered doses were assessed over time. Results: The EBT3 and EBT4 films exhibited similar dose–response curves and stable NetOD values across both scanning modes. However, EBT4 exhibited reduced sensitivity variability in response to dose changes. After irradiation, NetOD values increased up to 24 hours before stabilizing, suggesting that a 24-hour scan time is sufficient for consistent measurements. Dose differences between films and modes remained within ±4%. Conclusions EBT4 offers comparable dosimetric performance to EBT3, with additional benefits, such as improved dose–response linearity and reduced sensitivity fluctuations. The findings indicate that EBT4 can serve as a reliable successor to EBT3.

Purpose: This study compares the dosimetric properties of EBT3 and EBT4 GAFchromic films in transmission and reflection scanning modes, focusing on dose response, sensitivity, and postirradiation stability. Methods: The EBT3 and EBT4 films were irradiated at doses of 0–10 Gy using a Varian TrueBeam linear accelerator at 6 MV. The films were scanned at intervals between 1 and 336 hours after irradiation in both transmission and reflection modes. Net optical density (NetOD) values from each scan were used to evaluate dose response and sensitivity, with calibration curves created for each film and scan mode. Dose differences between calculated and delivered doses were assessed over time. Results: The EBT3 and EBT4 films exhibited similar dose–response curves and stable NetOD values across both scanning modes. However, EBT4 exhibited reduced sensitivity variability in response to dose changes. After irradiation, NetOD values increased up to 24 hours before stabilizing, suggesting that a 24-hour scan time is sufficient for consistent measurements. Dose differences between films and modes remained within ±4%. Conclusions EBT4 offers comparable dosimetric performance to EBT3, with additional benefits, such as improved dose–response linearity and reduced sensitivity fluctuations. The findings indicate that EBT4 can serve as a reliable successor to EBT3.

Purpose: This study compares the dosimetric properties of EBT3 and EBT4 GAFchromic films in transmission and reflection scanning modes, focusing on dose response, sensitivity, and postirradiation stability. Methods: The EBT3 and EBT4 films were irradiated at doses of 0–10 Gy using a Varian TrueBeam linear accelerator at 6 MV. The films were scanned at intervals between 1 and 336 hours after irradiation in both transmission and reflection modes. Net optical density (NetOD) values from each scan were used to evaluate dose response and sensitivity, with calibration curves created for each film and scan mode. Dose differences between calculated and delivered doses were assessed over time. Results: The EBT3 and EBT4 films exhibited similar dose–response curves and stable NetOD values across both scanning modes. However, EBT4 exhibited reduced sensitivity variability in response to dose changes. After irradiation, NetOD values increased up to 24 hours before stabilizing, suggesting that a 24-hour scan time is sufficient for consistent measurements. Dose differences between films and modes remained within ±4%. Conclusions EBT4 offers comparable dosimetric performance to EBT3, with additional benefits, such as improved dose–response linearity and reduced sensitivity fluctuations. The findings indicate that EBT4 can serve as a reliable successor to EBT3.

Purpose: Preclinical data indicate that response to radiotherapy (RT) depends on DNA damage repair. In this study, we investigated the role of mutations in genes related to DNA damage repair in treatment outcome after RT. Materials and Methods: Patients with solid tumor who participated in next generation sequencing panel screening using biopsied tumor tissue between October 2013 and February 2019 were reviewed and 97 patients that received RT were included in this study. Best response to RT and the cumulative local recurrence rate (LRR) were compared according to absence or presence of missense, nonsense, and frameshift mutations in ATM and/or BRCA1/2. Results: Of the 97 patients, five patients harbored mutation only in ATM, 22 in only BRCA1/2, and six in both ATM and BRCA1/2 (ATMmtBRCAmt). Propensity score matching was performed to select the control group without mutations (ATMwtBRCAwt, n=33). In total, 90 RT-treated target lesions were evaluated in 66 patients. Highest objective response rate of 80% was observed in ATMmtBRCAmt lesions (p=0.007), which was mostly durable. Furthermore, the cumulative 1-year LRR was the lowest in ATMmtBRCAmt lesions and the highest in ATMwtBRCAwt lesions (0% vs. 47.9%, p=0.008). RT-associated toxicities were observed in 10 treatments with no significant difference among the subgroups (p=0.680). Conclusion Tumors with ATM and BRCA1/2 mutations exhibited superior tumor response and local control after RT compared to tumors without these mutations. The results are hypothesis generating and suggest the need for integrating the tumor mutation profile of DNA repair genes during treatment planning.

PURPOSE: Although stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) is widely used therapeutic technique, predictive factors of radiation pneumonitis (RP) after SABR remain undefined. We aimed to investigate the predictive factors affecting RP in patients with primary or metastatic lung tumors who received SABR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 2012 to 2015, we reviewed 59 patients with 72 primary or metastatic lung tumors treated with SABR, and performed analyses of clinical and dosimetric variables related to symptomatic RP. SABR was delivered as 45–60 Gy in 3–4 fractions, which were over 100 Gy in BED when the α/β value was assumed to be 10. Tumor volume and other various dose volume factors were analyzed using median value as a cutoff value. RP was graded per the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.03. RESULTS: At the median follow-up period of 11 months, symptomatic RP was observed in 13 lesions (12 patients, 18.1%), including grade 2 RP in 11 lesions and grade 3 in 2 lesions. Patients with planning target volume (PTV) of ≤14.35 mL had significantly lower rates of symptomatic RP when compared to others (8.6% vs. 27%; p = 0.048). Rates of symptomatic RP in patients with internal gross tumor volume (iGTV) >4.21 mL were higher than with ≤4.21 mL (29.7% vs. 6.1%; p = 0.017). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of symptomatic RP following treatment with SABR was acceptable with grade 2 RP being observed in most patients. iGTV over 4.21 mL and PTV of over 14.35 mL were significant predictive factors related to symptomatic RP.
Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Incidence ; Lung Neoplasms ; Lung* ; Radiation Pneumonitis* ; Radiotherapy* ; Risk Factors ; Tumor Burden

PURPOSE: To report the results of a correlation analysis of skin dose assessed by in vivo dosimetry and the incidence of acute toxicity. This is a phase 2 trial evaluating the feasibility of intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) as a boost for breast cancer patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eligible patients were treated with IORT of 20 Gy followed by whole breast irradiation (WBI) of 46 Gy. A total of 55 patients with a minimum follow-up of 1 month after WBI were evaluated. Optically stimulated luminescence dosimeter (OSLD) detected radiation dose delivered to the skin during IORT. Acute toxicity was recorded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.0. Clinical parameters were correlated with seroma formation and maximum skin dose. RESULTS: Median follow-up after IORT was 25.9 weeks (range, 12.7 to 50.3 weeks). Prior to WBI, only one patient developed acute toxicity. Following WBI, 30 patients experienced grade 1 skin toxicity and three patients had grade 2 skin toxicity. Skin dose during IORT exceeded 5 Gy in two patients: with grade 2 complications around the surgical scar in one patient who received 8.42 Gy. Breast volume on preoperative images (p = 0.001), ratio of applicator diameter and breast volume (p = 0.002), and distance between skin and tumor (p = 0.003) showed significant correlations with maximum skin dose. CONCLUSIONS: IORT as a boost was well-tolerated among Korean women without severe acute complication. In vivo dosimetry with OSLD can help ensure safe delivery of IORT as a boost.
Breast Neoplasms* ; Breast* ; Cicatrix ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Incidence ; Luminescence ; Mastectomy, Segmental ; Radiotherapy* ; Seroma ; Skin