Vienna, Austria

ESTRO 2023

Session Item

Monday
May 15
16:30 - 17:30
Plenary Hall
Reirradiation
Arnaud Beddok, France;
Giulio Francolini, Italy
Proffered Papers
Clinical
16:50 - 17:00
ESTRO/EORTC consensus definition of re-irradiation paving the way for the prospective ReCare cohort
Nicolaus Andratschke, Switzerland
OC-0917

Abstract

ESTRO/EORTC consensus definition of re-irradiation paving the way for the prospective ReCare cohort
Authors:

Nicolaus Andratschke1, Jonas Willmann2, Ane Appelt3, Najlaa Alyamani4, Panagiotis Balermpas5, Brigitta Baumert6, Coen Hurkmans7, Morten Høyer8, Johannes Langendijk9, Orit Kaidar-Person10, Yvette van der Linden11, Icro Meattini12, Maximilian Niyazi13, Nick Reynaert14, Dirk de Ruysscher15, Stephanie Tanadini-Lang5, Peter Hoskin16, Philip Poortmans17, Carsten Nieder18

1University Hospital of Zurich, Dept. of Radiation Oncology, Zurich, Switzerland; 2Paul Scherrer Institute , Center for Proton Therapy, Villigen, Switzerland; 3University of Leeds, Leeds Institute of Medical Research at St. James's, Leeds, United Kingdom; 4European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium; 5University Hospital of Zurich, University of Zurich, Dept. of Radiation Oncology, Zurich, Switzerland; 6Cantonal Hospital of Graubünden, Institute of Radiation-Oncology, Chur, Switzerland; 7Catharina Hospital Eindhoven, Dept. of Radiation Oncology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands; 8Aarhus University Hospital, Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus, Denmark; 9University Medical Center Groningen, Dept. of Radiation Oncology, Groningen, The Netherlands; 10Sheba Medical Center, Breast Cancer Radiation Therapy Unit, Ramat Gan, Israel; 11University Medical Centre Leiden , Dept. of Radiation Oncology, Leiden, The Netherlands; 12Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Careggi, Radiation Oncology Unit, Oncology Department, Florence, Italy; 13University Hospital, LMU Munich, Dept. of Radiation Oncology, Munich, Germany; 14Institut Jules Bordet, Dept. of Medical Physics, Brussels, Belgium; 15Maastricht University Medical Centre, Dept. of Radiation Oncology Maastro, Maastricht, The Netherlands; 16University of Manchester, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre and Division of Cancer Sciences, Manchester, United Kingdom; 17Iridium Netwerk, University of Antwerp, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Department of Radiation Oncology , Wilrijk-Antwerp, Belgium; 18Nordland Hospital Trust, Department of Oncology and Palliative Medicine, Bodø, Norway

Show Affiliations
Purpose or Objective

With the availability of new radiation techniques, image guidance and adapted fractionation schemes, the use of re-irradiation (re-RT) for different sites is increasing, although prospective evidence is still scarce and a standardized nomenclature is lacking. We hereby present the consensus definition of re-RT and recommendations to harmonize reporting for clinical studies, prepared in the scope of the EORTC RP-2011 ReCare study.

Material and Methods

This consensus was developed during the preparation of the prospective observational ReCare cohort within the ESTRO-EORTC E2-RADIatE project, aiming to gather real-world data on safety and efficacy of high-dose re-RT to derive evidence-based dose/fractionation settings for re-RT. The 17 panellists represent experts from different professional backgrounds (e.g., radiation oncologists, clinical oncologists, medical physicists) and have been selected based on their publication track record on re-RT. The consensus is based on a systematic review and an adapted Delphi process.

Results

Fourteen potential characteristics of re-RT were collated and grouped into categories (irradiated region, prescription dose, time interval between treatments and degree of overlap). We reached consensus on: 1) a new course of RT, 2) overlap of irradiated volumes, 3) toxicity concerns from cumulative doses. The following definition of re-RT was derived: “Re-RT is a new course of RT either to a previously irradiated volume (irrespective of concerns of toxicity) or where the cumulative dose raises concerns of toxicity”. To distinguish other forms of repetitive RT, two additional terms were introduced (Figure 1). Finally, a hierarchical question-based decision tree was built to help classify patients selected for repetitive RT (Figure 2).


Figure 1: Examples for scenarios of re-RT and re-treatments with RT.


Figure 2: Decision tree for the definition of re-RT and classification for scenarios with RT re-treatment. Q1: Is there a geometrical overlap of the irradiated volumes?; Q2: Is there a concern for toxicity from the cumulative doses?; Q3: Are the target volumes of current and previous RT located in the same organ?

The EORTC RP-2011 ReCare cohort will include patients with re-RT to a prescription dose or mean GTV dose of at least 50 Gy (EQD2). EBRT (photons, electrons, particles) and brachytherapy are allowed. The first phase (target accrual n=500) will include thoracic, abdominal and pelvic re-RT. Quality of life and treatment decision agreement will be evaluated as patient reported outcomes.

Conclusion

We propose a universally applicable consensus definition of re-RT and standardised nomenclature for scenarios of repetitive RT that do not fulfil the criteria for re-RT. This will foster harmonised reporting in clinical trials, with first clinical implementation in the EORTC RP-2011 ReCare cohort.