The reliability of DeepL Translator (DeepL GmbH, Cologne, Germany) for the translation for medical articles has not been verified yet. In this study, we investigated the accuracy of machine translation from Japanese to English for a medical article using the DeepL Translator. The subject of this study was an English-language medical article translated from Japanese, which had already been published. The original Japanese manuscript was translated into English using DeepL Translator. The translated English article was then back-translated into Japanese by three researchers. In turn, three other researchers compared the back-translated Japanese sentences with the original Japanese manuscript and calculated the percentage of sentences that retained the intended meaning. The mean ± standard deviation of the match rate for the entire article was 94.0 ± 2.9%. The match rate in the Results section was significantly higher than that in the other sections; while the match rate in the Materials and Methods section was significantly lower than the rate in the other sections. Compound sentences and sentences with an unclear subject and predicate appeared to be significant predictors for mismatched translation. The translation for a medical article from Japanese to English was performed accurately by DeepL Translator.

Background: The standard treatment for adenoid cystic carcinoma of the head and neck is surgical resection followed by postoperative radiotherapy (PORT). Currently, definitive radiotherapy (defRT) is considered an inadequate treatment; however, its data are based on studies using classical radiotherapy techniques. Therefore, the therapeutic effects of current radiotherapy techniques have not been adequately evaluated, and it may have underestimated the efficacy of defRT. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 44 adenoid cystic carcinoma patients treated with radiotherapy based on modern treatment techniques from 1993 to 2017. Results: Twenty-four patients underwent PORT and 20 patients underwent defRT. The 5-year overall survival rates for patients treated with PORT and defRT were 85.3% and 79.7%, respectively. The 5-year local control rates were 82.5% and 83.1%, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in the overall survival and local control of patients treated with PORT and defRT (p = 0.4392 and p = 0.0904, respectively). Conclusion: Our results show that defRT is comparable to surgical resection followed by PORT with respect to overall survival and local control. The results suggest that defRT can be an effective treatment option for adenoid cystic carcinoma of the head and neck.

The development of new treatment strategies to improve the prognosis of mucosal malignant melanoma of the head and neck (MMHN) after carbon ion radiotherapy (CIRT) is essential because of the risk of distant metastases. Therefore, our objective was to evaluate the outcomes of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment to justify its inclusion in the regimen after CIRT. Thirty-four patients who received CIRT as an initial treatment were included in the analysis and stratified into three groups: those who did not receive ICIs (Group A), those who received ICIs after recurrence or metastasis (Group B), and those who received ICIs as adjuvant therapy after CIRT (Group C). In total, 62% of the patients (n = 21) received ICIs. The 2-year local control and overall survival (OS) rates for all patients were 90.0% and 66.8%, respectively. The 2-year OS rates for patients in Groups A, B, and C were 50.8%, 66.7%, and 100%, respectively. No significant differences were observed between Groups A and B (p = 0.192) and Groups B and C (p = 0.112). However, a significant difference was confirmed between Groups A and C (p = 0.017). Adjuvant therapy following CIRT for MMHN may be a promising treatment modality that can extend patient survival.

Background/Aim: The purpose of this study was to compare the dose distribution between scanning carbon-ion radiotherapy (sCIRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy with stereotactic body radiation therapy (VMAT-SBRT) for stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and Methods: Fifteen patients with early-stage NSCLC who underwent sCIRT at Kanagawa Cancer Center between 2018-2020 were enrolled. Dose-volume histogram parameters of the planned target volume and normal organs for sCIRT and VMAT-SBRT were evaluated. Results: The homogeneity index of the target volume of sCIRT was significantly lower than that of VMAT-SBRT. The dose of sCIRT was significantly lower than that of VMAT-SBRT at low volumes in the lung, heart, spinal cord, and esophagus. Conclusion: The dose distribution of sCIRT for early-stage NSCLC was better than that of VMAT-SBRT.

The efficacy and safety of carbon-ion radiotherapy (CIRT) for prostate cancer have already been demonstrated. The number of hemodialysis (HD) patients is increasing. Although the toxicity of CIRT in HD patients may be more severe, it has been insufficiently investigated. Therefore, we retrospectively analyzed the safety of CIRT for HD patients with prostate cancer in the present study. Five HD patients with prostate cancer who underwent CIRT at the Kanagawa Cancer Center during November 2015-2020 were included in this study. CIRT was delivered by the raster scanning method (sCIRT). Adverse events were assessed using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0. The dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters of the target volume and normal organs were evaluated between initial planning computed tomography (CT) and in-room CT images. In the acute phase, Grade 1 genitourinary toxicity was recorded in one patient. In the late phase, Grade 1 genitourinary toxicity was recorded in two patients. No gastrointestinal toxicities were noted during the follow-up period. In-room CT analysis revealed no significant differences among all DVH parameters of the target volume and normal organs when compared with the treatment plan dose. The safety of sCIRT for prostate cancer in HD patients was investigated in the present study. In-room CT analysis suggested the robustness of the treatment plan. According to the present results, sCIRT for prostate cancer can be safely performed in HD patients.