Purpose: Radiotherapy is integral in the management of hematological malignancies (HM). Standard radiotherapy dose fractionation regimens range between 20 and 50 Gy in 10–25 fractions over 2–5 weeks. This study presents the outcomes of patients with HM treated with hypofractionation radiotherapy (HFRT) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Patients (n = 36) were treated with HFRT between January 2020 and September 2022. The outcomes measured were the overall response rate (ORR), freedom from local progression (FFLP), and overall survival (OS). Results: The median follow-up was 13.2 months. Thirty-three patients (92%) had non-Hodgkin (NHL) or Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). Eighteen patients (50%) had aggressive and nine (25%) had indolent NHL. Nineteen patients (53%) presented with stage I/II and fifteen (42%) with stage III/IV disease. Twenty-five (69.4%) and eleven (30%) received consolidative and definitive RT, respectively. Twenty patients (56%) received treatment to the neck and/or thorax and nine (25%) to the abdomen or pelvis. The total dose ranged from 18 to 42.5 Gy in 6–17 fractions/2.67–5 Gy per fraction. The median dose in 2 Gy fractions for an alpha/beta (α/β) ratio of 10 amounted to 39 Gy (SD ± 13.86) and 43.6 Gy (SD ± 12) for an α/β of 3. The most commonly used fractionation scheme was 39 Gy in 13 fractions. ORR was 94.4% for the entire cohort, and 100, 94.4, and 83.3% for indolent NHL, aggressive NHL, and HL patients. The two-year FFLP was 76% (95% CI: 34–93%) for the entire cohort and 100, 87 (95% CI: 56.4–96.5%), and 42% (95% CI: 1.1–84.3%) for the indolent NHL, aggressive NHL, and HL patients. Two-year OS for the entire cohort was 80% (95% CI: 59.9–90.5%) and 100, 66.1 (95% CI: 36.4–84.4%), and 100% for the indolent NHL, aggressive NHL, and HL patients. Only one patient presented with grade two pulmonary toxicity. Conclusions: HFRT in HM provides excellent local control to be validated in a larger prospective study.

Three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT), intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) are the three main radiotherapy treatment techniques for cervical cancer. Whether either technique significantly reduces the radiation exposure to organs at risk remains unclear. We dosimetrically compared the irradiated volumes of bone marrow, bladder and rectum in cervical cancer patients using 3DCRT, IMRT and VMAT techniques in those patients with FIGO stage IIIB cervical cancer, receiving chemo irradiation at our institute. A total of 10 patients were dosimetrically compared. Significant reduction in V10, V20, V30, V40, V50 Gy of bone marrow was observed with IMRT and VMAT when compared to 3DCRT. Similar results were seen with V20, V30, V40, V50 Gy of bladder, and V40, V50 Gy of rectum. While comparing IMRT and VMAT, statistically significant dose reduction was noted in V20 Gy of bone marrow and V20 and V30 Gy of bladder with VMAT. When compared with 3DCRT the use of IMRT and/or VMAT reduced the radiation exposure to bone marrow, bladder, and rectum volumes at various radiation dose levels. VMAT can further reduce the radiation exposure to bone marrow and bladder when compared with IMRT. Thus, we propose the use of VMAT in cervical cancer to reduce the OAR toxicities.

Purpose Radiotherapy is integral in the management of hematological malignancies (HM). Standard radiotherapy dose fractionation regimens range between 20-50 Gy in 10-25 fractions over 2-5 weeks. This study presents the outcomes of patients with HM treated with hypofractionation radiotherapy (HFRT) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods Patients (N=36) were treated with HFRT between January 2020 and September 2022. The outcomes measured were the overall response rate (ORR), freedom from local progression (FFLP), and overall survival (OS). Results Median follow-up was 13.2 months. Thirty-three patients (92%) had non-Hodgkin (NHL) or Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). Eighteen patients (50%) had aggressive and 9 (25%) had indolent NHL. Nineteen patients (53%) presented with stage I/II and 15(42%) with stage III/IV disease. Twenty-five (69.4%) and eleven (30%) received consolidative and definitive RT, respectively. Twenty patients (56%) received treatment to the neck and/or thorax, and 9 (25%) to the abdomen or pelvis. Total dose ranged from 18 to 42.5 Gy in 6-17 fractions/ 2.67-5 Gy per fraction. Median dose in 2 Gy fractions for an alpha/beta (α/β) ratio of 10 amounted to 39 Gy (SD ± 13.86), and 43.6 Gy (SD ± 12) for an α/β of 3. The most commonly used fractionation scheme was 39 Gy in 13 fractions. ORR was 94.4% for the entire cohort, and 100, 94.4, and 83.3% for indolent NHL, aggressive NHL, and HL patients. Two-year FFLP was 76% (95% CI: 34-93%) for the entire cohort, and 100, 87 (95%CI: 56.4-96.5%) and 42% (95% CI: 1.1-84.3%) for the indolent NHL, aggressive NHL, and HL patients. Two-year OS for the entire cohort was 80% (95% CI:59.9-90.5%), and 100, 66.1 (95% CI: 36.4-84.4%) and 100% for the indolent NHL, aggressive NHL, and HL patients. Only one patient presented with grade two pulmonary toxicity. Conclusion HFRT in HM provides excellent local control without any increase in toxicity.

Newer treatment techniques help in reducing dose to small bowel (SB) which is an organ at risk (OAR) for pelvic radiotherapy (RT). However, instead of SB, bowel bag is contoured routinely and constraints are given. In this retrospective case series, we compared the dose received by SB while using intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) techniques in patients receiving adjuvant pelvic RT for endometrial carcinoma. 10 patients with stage II EC who received VMAT were included in this single institution study. SB was contoured retrospectively in the planning computed tomography scan of these patients. An IMRT plan was also generated with a similar planning target volume coverage and organ at risk (OAR) constraints of the previously approved VMAT plan. Volume receiving 10 Gy, 20 Gy, 30 Gy, 40 Gy and 45 Gy of SB was analysed and a dosimetric comparison was made among the two plans. Anaylysis of variance (ANOVA) and unpaired t tests were used for dosimetric comparison. Mean SB volume receiving 10 Gy (V10 Gy) was 85.3% and 83.7% with IMRT and VMAT respectively. Mean SB volume receiving 45 Gy (V45 Gy) was 4.1% and 5% with IMRT and VMAT respectively. No statistically significant difference was noted in the low dose or high dose irradiated volume of SB using both techniques; however, the volume of SB getting irradiated in the absence of optimisation was found to be high in both the groups which can translate in to acute and late bowel toxicity. Further prospective studies have to be conducted to know the clinical significance of this dose-volume relationship to SB.