The standard treatment for superficial esophageal cancer (SEC) involving muscularis mucosal (T1a-MM) or submucosal (T1b) invasion has been the surgical resection of the esophagus. However, esophagectomy with extended lymph node dissection is highly invasive. Recent reports have shown that endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) followed by chemoradiotherapy (CRT) has promising results and might become a new therapeutic approach. This retrospective study aimed to elucidate the efficacy and safety of this new treatment. Patients with clinical stage T1b tumor without apparent metastasis treated with ESD followed by CRT from 2014 to 2017 (the CRT group) were included. The outcomes on disease-free survival (DFS) of this group were compared with those of consecutive patients in a historical control group who underwent ESD followed by esophagectomy (the esophagectomy group) between 2008 and 2015. Of 32 patients analyzed, 16 were in the CRT group and 16 with similar stage cancer were in the esophagectomy group. Radiotherapy was completed in all patients, and the incidence of grade ≥ 3 nonhematologic adverse events was 6%. The 2-year overall survival rates were 100%, and locoregional control was achieved in all patients in the CRT group, and the 2-year DFS rates were 88 and 100% for the CRT and esophagectomy groups, respectively, without significant differences. Our data confirmed our new approach as being safe and effective for locoregional control and may provide a nonsurgical treatment option for patients with clinical stage T1b tumors.

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of computed tomography-magnetic resonance imaging (CT-MRI)-guided multi-catheter interstitial brachytherapy for patients with bulky (≥4 cm) and high-risk, stage IIB–IVB advanced cervical cancer. Eighteen patients who underwent concurrent chemoradiotherapy with multi-catheter interstitial brachytherapy between September 2014 and August 2020 were enrolled. The prescribed dose of external beam radiotherapy was 45–50.4 Gy, and the brachytherapy high-dose-rate aim was 25–30 Gy per 5 fractions. The endpoints were four-year local and pelvic control rates, four-year disease-free and overall survival rates, and the adverse events rate. The median follow-up period was 48.4 months (9.1–87.5 months). Fifteen patients received concurrent cisplatin therapy (40 mg/m², q1week). Four (22.2%), seven (38.9%), and seven (38.9%) patients had stage II, III, and IV cervical cancer, respectively. Pelvic and para-aortic lymph node metastases were observed in 11 (61.1%) and 2 (11.1%) patients, respectively. The median pre-treatment volume was 87.5 cm³. The four-year local control, pelvic control, disease-free survival, and overall survival rates were 100%, 100%, 81.6%, and 87.8%, respectively. Three (16.7%) patients experienced grade 3 adverse events, and none experienced grade 4–5 adverse events. CT-MRI-guided multi-catheter interstitial brachytherapy could be a promising treatment strategy for locally advanced cervical cancer.

Angiosarcoma of the face and scalp (ASFS) is an extremely aggressive tumor that frequently metastasizes, often leading to death. The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), and lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR) are inflammatory markers that predict outcome of various cancers. We aimed to examine the relationship between pretreatment inflammatory markers and ASFS outcome. We included 17 patients with ASFS and a control group of 56 age- and gender-matched healthy individuals. Total white blood counts, neutrophil, lymphocyte, monocyte, and platelet counts were recorded; NLR, PLR, and LMR were calculated. Kaplan–Meier curves were used to calculate overall survival (OS) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS). Optimal cut-off values for each inflammatory marker were calculated using receiver operating curve analysis. Median follow-up was 22 months (range, 6–75). There was a statistically significant difference in absolute neutrophil counts and NLR between patient and control groups. Two-year OS and DMFS rates were 41% and 35%, respectively. In patients with tumors < 10 cm, PLR was highly correlated with DMFS, with the 2-year DMFS for those with a high PLR being 50% compared with 100% for those with a low PLR (p = 0.06). This study suggests that PLR is superior to NLR and LMR, and is a clinically useful marker in patients with ASFS with small tumors.

To examine the efficacy of dose escalating radiotherapy into patients with cT3b or T4 localized prostate cancer, we compared Group A (86 conventional dose external beam radiotherapy: EBRT group, treated with 70–72 Gy) and group B (39 high dose EBRT group (HDEBRT group, 74–80 Gy) and 124 high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR) + EBRT (HDR boost)) using multi-institutional retrospective data. The actuarial 5-year biochemical disease-free survival (bDFS) rate, prostate cancer specific survival rate (PSS), and overall survival rate (OS) were 75.8%, 96.8%, and 93.5%. Group B showed superior 5-year bDFS rate (81.2%) as compared to the group A (66.5%) (p < 0.0001) with a hazard ratio of 0.397. Equivocal 5-year PSS (98.3% and 94.8% in group B and group A) and OS (both 93.7%) were found between those groups. Accumulated late grade ≥ 2 toxicities in gastrointestinal and genitourinary tracts were similar among those three groups. Therefore, both HDEBRT and HDR boost could be good options for improving the bDFS rate in cT3–T4 localized prostate cancer without affecting PSS and OS.