Try a new search

Format these results:

Searched for:

in-biosketch:true

person:zelefm01

Total Results:

482


SBRT focal dose intensification using an MR-Linac adaptive planning for intermediate-risk prostate cancer: An analysis of the dosimetric impact of intra-fractional organ changes

Brennan, Victoria Sarah; Burleson, Sarah; Kostrzewa, Caroline; Godoy Scripes, Paola; Subashi, Ergys; Zhang, Zhigang; Tyagi, Neelam; Zelefsky, Michael J
INTRODUCTION:Using an magnetic resonance linear accelerator (MR-Linac) may improve the precision of visible tumor boosting with ultra-hypofractionation by accounting for daily positional changes in the target and organs at risk (OAR). PATIENTS AND METHODS:Fifteen patients with prostate cancer and an MR-detected dominant lesion were treated on the MR-Linac with stereotactic body radiation (SBRT) to 40 Gy in 5 fractions, boosting the gross tumor volume (GTV) to 45 Gy with daily adaptive planning. Imaging was acquired again after initial planning (verification scan), and immediately after treatment (post-treatment scan). Prior to beam-on, additional adjustments were made on the verification scan. Contours were retrospectively adjusted on verification and post-treatment scans, and the daily plan recalculated on these scans to estimate the true dose delivered. RESULTS:The median prostate D95% for plan 1, 2 and 3 was 40.3 Gy, 40.5 Gy and 40.3 Gy and DIL D95% was 45.7 Gy, 45.2 Gy and 44.6 Gy, respectively. Bladder filling was associated with reduced GTV coverage (p = 0.03, plan 1 vs 2) and prostate coverage (p = 0.03, plan 2 vs 3). The D0.035 cc constraint was exceeded on verification and post-treatment plans in 24 % and 33 % of fractions for the urethra, 31 % and 45 % for the bladder, and 35 % and 25 % for the rectum, respectively. CONCLUSION:MR-Linac guided, daily adaptive SBRT with focal boosting of the GTV yields acceptable planned and delivered dosimetry. Adaptive planning with a MR-Linac may reliably deliver the prescribed dose to the intended tumor target.
PMID: 36549340
ISSN: 1879-0887
CID: 5529692

Assessment of Patients With Prostate Cancer and Their Understanding of the International Prostate Symptom Score Questionnaire

Gewanter, Richard M; Sandhu, Jaspreet S; Tin, Amy L; Gross, Jeffrey P; Mazzarella, Kathleen; Urban, Joanne; Elsebai, Natalia; Hopkins, Margaret F; Vickers, Andrew J; Zelefsky, Michael J
PURPOSE/UNASSIGNED:The International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) is a widely used tool for evaluating patient-reported lower urinary tract symptoms. In this study, we assessed patients with prostate cancer and their understanding of IPSS questions. METHODS AND MATERIALS/UNASSIGNED:Consecutive patients with prostate cancer (N = 144) self-completed an online IPSS questionnaire within 1 week before their visit at our radiation oncology clinic. At the visit, a nurse reviewed each IPSS question to ensure the patient understood it and then verified the patient's answer. Preverified and nurse-verified scores were recorded and analyzed for discrepancies. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Complete concordance between preverified and nurse-verified responses to individual IPSS questions existed for 70 men (49%). In terms of overall IPSS score, 61 men (42%) had a lower or improved IPSS after nurse verification, and 9 men (6%) had a higher or worse IPSS. Before verification, patients overstated their symptoms of frequency, intermittency, and incomplete emptying. As a result of the nurse verification, 4 of 7 patients with IPSS in the severe range (20-35) were recategorized to the moderate range (8-19). Sixteen percent of patients whose preverified IPSS were in the moderate range were recategorized after nurse verification to the mild range (0-7). Treatment option eligibility changed for 10% of patients after nurse verification. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Patients frequently misunderstand the IPSS questionnaire, leading them to respond in ways that do not accurately reflect their symptoms. Clinicians should verify patient understanding of the IPSS questions, particularly when using the score to determine eligibility for treatments.
PMCID:10196226
PMID: 37213479
ISSN: 2452-1094
CID: 5529762

Quality Metric to Assess Adequacy of Hydrogel Rectal Spacer Placement for Prostate Radiation Therapy and Association of Metric Score With Rectal Toxicity Outcomes

Grossman, Craig E; Folkert, Michael R; Lobaugh, Stephanie; Desai, Neil B; Kollmeier, Marisa A; Gorovets, Daniel; McBride, Sean M; Timmerman, Robert D; Zhang, Zhigang; Zelefsky, Michael J
PURPOSE/UNASSIGNED:Although hydrogel spacer placement (HSP) minimizes rectal dose during prostate cancer radiation therapy, its potential benefit for modulating rectal toxicity could depend on the achieved prostate-rectal separation. We therefore developed a quality metric associated with rectal dose reduction and late rectal toxicity among patients treated with prostate stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). METHODS AND MATERIALS/UNASSIGNED:A quality metric consisting of prostate-rectal interspace measurements from axial T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging simulation images was applied to 42 men enrolled in a multi-institutional phase 2 study using HSP with prostate SBRT (45 Gy in 5 fractions). A score of 0, 1, or 2 was assigned to a prostate-rectal interspace measurement of <0.3 cm, 0.3 to 0.9 cm, or ≥1 cm, respectively. An overall spacer quality score (SQS) was computed from individual scores at rectal midline and ±1 cm laterally, located at the prostate base, midgland, and apex. Associations of SQS with rectal dosimetry and late toxicity were evaluated. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED: = .01). Among the 20 men who developed late grade ≥1 rectal toxicity, 57%, 71%, and 22% had an SQS of 0, 1, and 2, respectively. Men with an SQS of 0 or 1 compared with 2 had 4.67-fold (95% CI, 0.72-30.11) or 8.40-fold (95% CI, 1.83-38.57) greater odds, respectively, of developing late rectal toxicity. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:We developed a reliable and informative metric for assessing HSP, which appears to be associated with rectal dosimetry and late rectal toxicity after prostate SBRT.
PMCID:10196227
PMID: 37213478
ISSN: 2452-1094
CID: 5529752

Introduction [Editorial]

Zelefsky, Michael
PMID: 36529598
ISSN: 1873-1449
CID: 5529682

Consensus Quality Measures and Dose Constraints for Prostate Cancer From the Veterans Affairs Radiation Oncology Quality Surveillance Program and American Society for Radiation Oncology Expert Panel

Solanki, Abhishek A; Puckett, Lindsay L; Kujundzic, Ksenija; Katsoulakis, Evangelia; Park, John; Kapoor, Rishabh; Hagan, Michael; Kelly, Maria; Palta, Jatinder; Ballas, Leslie K; DeMarco, John; Hoffman, Karen E; Lawton, Colleen A F; Michalski, Jeff; Potters, Louis; Zelefsky, Michael; Kudner, Randi; Dawes, Samantha; Wilson, Emily; Sandler, Howard
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:There are no agreed upon measures to comprehensively determine the quality of radiation oncology (RO) care delivered for prostate cancer. Consequently, it is difficult to assess the implementation of scientific advances and adherence to best practices in routine clinical practice. To address this need, the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) National Radiation Oncology Program established the VA Radiation Oncology Quality Surveillance (VA ROQS) Program to develop clinical quality measures to assess the quality of RO care delivered to Veterans with cancer. This article reports the prostate cancer consensus measures. METHODS AND MATERIALS/METHODS:The VA ROQS Program contracted with the American Society for Radiation Oncology to commission a Blue Ribbon Panel of prostate cancer experts to develop a set of evidence-based measures and performance expectations. From February to June 2021, the panel developed quality, aspirational, and surveillance measures for (1) initial consultation and workup, (2) simulation, treatment planning, and delivery, and (3) follow-up. Dose-volume histogram (DVH) constraints to be used as quality measures for definitive and post-prostatectomy radiation therapy were selected. The panel also identified the optimal Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 5.0 (CTCAE V5.0), toxicity terms to assess in follow-up. RESULTS:Eighteen prostate-specific measures were developed (13 quality, 2 aspirational, and 3 surveillance). DVH metrics tailored to conventional, moderately hypofractionated, and ultrahypofractionated regimens were identified. Decision trees to determine performance for each measure were developed. Eighteen CTCAE V5.0 terms were selected in the sexual, urinary, and gastrointestinal domains as highest priority for assessment during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS:This set of measures and DVH constraints serves as a tool for assessing the comprehensive quality of RO care for prostate cancer. These measures will be used for ongoing quality surveillance and improvement among veterans receiving care across VA and community sites. These measures can also be applied to clinical settings outside of those serving veterans.
PMID: 36522277
ISSN: 1879-8519
CID: 5529672

Failure Patterns by PSMA PET for Recurrent Prostate Cancer after Prostatectomy and Salvage Radiation

Imber, Brandon S; O'Dwyer, Elisabeth; Lobaugh, Stephanie; McBride, Sean M; Hopkins, Margaret; Kollmeier, Marisa; Gorovets, Daniel; Brennan, Victoria; Pike, Luke R G; Gewanter, Richard; Mychalczak, Borys; Zhang, Zhigang; Schöder, Heiko; Zelefsky, Michael J
OBJECTIVE:To characterize patterns of failure using prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography (PSMA PET) after radical prostatectomy (RP) and salvage radiotherapy (SRT). METHODS:Ga-HBED-iPSMA PET/CT on a single-arm, prospective imaging trial (NCT03204123). Scans were centrally reviewed with pattern-of-failure analysis by involved site. Positive scans were classified using 3 failure categories: pelvic nodal, extra-pelvic nodal or distant non-nodal. Associations with failure categories were analyzed using cumulative incidence and generalized logits regression. RESULTS:We included 133 men who received SRT a median of 20 months post-RP; 56% received SRT to the prostatic fossa alone, while 44% received pelvic SRT. PSMA PET/CT was performed a median of 48 months post-SRT. Overall, 31% of PSMA PET/CT scans were negative, 2% equivocal and 67% had at least 1 positive site. Scan detection was significantly associated with PSA level prior to PSMA PET/CT. Analysis of 89 positive scans demonstrated pelvic nodal (53%) was the most common relapse and fossa relapse was low (9%). Overall, positive scans were pelvic (n = 35, 26%), extra-pelvic nodal (n = 26, 20%) or distant non-nodal failure (n = 28, 21%), and 70% of positive scans were oligorecurrent. We observed similar cumulative incidence for all failure categories and relatively few clinicodemographic associations. Men treated with pelvic SRT had reduced odds of pelvic failure versus exclusive fossa treatment. CONCLUSION:Pelvic, extra-pelvic nodal, and distant non-nodal failures occur with similar incidence post-SRT. Regional nodal relapse is relatively common, especially with fossa-only SRT. A high oligorecurrence rate suggests a potentially important role for PSMA-guided focal therapies.
PMID: 36115426
ISSN: 1527-9995
CID: 5529652

Are We Ready for Focal Dose Radio-Ablation in the Treatment of Localized Prostate Cancer? [Comment]

Zelefsky, Michael J
PMID: 35569475
ISSN: 1879-355x
CID: 5529632

Implementation Strategies to Increase Clinical Trial Enrollment in a Community-Academic Partnership and Impact on Hispanic Representation: An Interrupted Time Series Analysis

Ledesma Vicioso, Nahomy; Lin, Diana; Gomez, Daniel R; Yang, Jonathan T; Lee, Nancy Y; Rimner, Andreas; Yamada, Yoshiya; Zelefsky, Michael J; Kalman, Noah S; Rutter, Charles E; Kotecha, Rupesh R; Mehta, Minesh P; Panoff, Joseph E; Chuong, Michael D; Salner, Andrew L; Ostroff, Jamie S; Diamond, Lisa C; Mathis, Noah J; Cahlon, Oren; Pfister, David G; Zhang, Zhigang; Chino, Fumiko; Tsai, Jillian; Gillespie, Erin F
PURPOSE/UNASSIGNED:Community-academic partnerships have the potential to improve access to clinical trials for under-represented minority patients who more often receive cancer treatment in community settings. In 2017, the Memorial Sloan Kettering (MSK) Cancer Center began opening investigator-initiated clinical trials in radiation oncology in targeted community-based partner sites with a high potential to improve diverse population accrual. This study evaluates the effectiveness of a set of implementation strategies for increasing overall community-based enrollment and the resulting proportional enrollment of Hispanic patients on trials on the basis of availability in community-based partner sites. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:An interrupted time series analysis evaluating implementation strategies was conducted from April 2018 to September 2021. Descriptive analysis ofHispanic enrollment on investigator-initiated randomized therapeutic radiation trials open at community-based sites was compared with those open only at themain academic center. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Overall, 84 patients were enrolled in clinical trials in the MSK Alliance, of which 48 (56%) identified as Hispanic. The quarterly patient enrollment pre- vs postimplementation increased from 1.39 (95% CI, -3.67 to 6.46) to 9.42 (95% CI, 2.05 to 16.78; P5 .017). In the investigator-initiated randomized therapeutic radiation trials open in the MSK Alliance, Hispanic representation was 11.5% and 35.9% in twometastatic trials and 14.2% in a proton versus photon trial. Inmatched trials open only at the main academic center, Hispanic representation was 5.6%, 6.0%, and 4.0%, respectively. CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:A combination of practice-level and physician-level strategies implemented at community-based partner sites was associated with increased clinical trial enrollment, which translated to improved Hispanic representation. This supports the role Q:2 of strategic community-academic partnerships in addressing disparities in clinical trial enrollment.
PMID: 35544650
ISSN: 2688-1535
CID: 5239342

Influence of hydrogel spacer placement with prostate brachytherapy on rectal and urinary toxicity

Teyateeti, Achiraya; Grossman, Craig; Kollmeier, Marisa A; Fiasconaro, Megan; Hopkins, Margaret; McBride, Sean; Gorovets, Daniel; Shasha, Daniel; Cohen, Gilad; Zhang, Zhigang; Lesser, David J; Damato, Antonio; Zelefsky, Michael J
OBJECTIVE:To determine the influence of rectal hydrogel spacer placement (HSP) on late rectal toxicity outcomes in prostate cancer patients treated with low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy, with or without supplemental external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). PATIENTS AND METHODS:A total of 224 patients underwent LDR brachytherapy with HSP, as monotherapy or combined with EBRT, between January 2016 and December 2019. Dosimetric variables reflecting the extent of rectal sparing and late rectal toxicity outcomes were evaluated. This spacer cohort was retrospectively compared to a similar patient group (n = 139) in whom HSP was not used. RESULTS:Hydrogel spacer placement was associated with significantly reduced rectal doses for all dosimetric variables; the median percentage rectal dose to 1 cc of rectum and rectal dose to 2 cc of rectum of the spacer cohort were all significantly lower compared to the non-spacer cohort. The incidence rates of overall (any grade) and grade ≥2 rectal toxicity were lower in patients with HSP compared to patients who did not undergo HSP: 12% and 1.8% vs 31% and 5.8%, respectively. The 3-year cumulative incidence of overall rectal toxicity was significantly lower with HSP than without (15% vs 33%; P < 0.001), corresponding to an overall rectal toxicity reduction on univariable analysis (hazard ratio 0.45, 95% confidence interval 0.28-0.73; P = 0.001). In this patient cohort treated with prostate brachytherapy, none of the urethral dosimetric variables or the presence or absence of HSP was associated with late urinary toxicity. CONCLUSION:Hydrogel rectal spacer placement is a safe procedure, associated with significantly reduced rectal dose. HSP translates to a decrease in overall late rectal toxicity in patients receiving dose-escalated brachytherapy-based procedures.
PMCID:9472451
PMID: 34388295
ISSN: 1464-410x
CID: 5529582

Combined Brachytherapy and Ultra-Hypofractionated Radiotherapy for Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: Comparison of Toxicity Outcomes Using a High-Dose Rate (HDR) vs. Low-Dose Rate (LDR) Brachytherapy Boost [Meeting Abstract]

Kollmeier, M. A.; Gorovets, D.; Flynn, J.; McBride, S.; Brennan, V. S.; Beaudry, J.; Cohen, G.; Damato, A. L.; Zhang, Z.; Zelefsky, M. J.
ISI:000892639300487
ISSN: 0360-3016
CID: 5531362