Schaff EM, Parikh PJ, Li P, Shah R, Khan G, Siddiqui F, Movsas B, and Kwon D. Evaluation of Practice Patterns and Outcomes after Implementing SMART for Pancreatic Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2022; 114(3):e199-e200.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
Purpose/Objective(s): Stereotactic MRI-guided adaptive radiation therapy (SMART) enables safe dose escalation for locally advanced, borderline resectable, and medically inoperable pancreatic cancer and has shown favorable toxicity and survival outcomes. In late 2018, our institution commissioned SMART for these patients, making it available to all patient referrals. We wanted to review changes in our patient population and differences in clinical outcomes for patients before and after the implementation of SMART.
Materials/Methods: In this IRB approved analysis, we retrospectively reviewed 167 consecutive patients from 2015-2021 with locally advanced, borderline resectable, or medically unresectable pancreatic cancer who were treated with radiation therapy. Chemoradiation (chemoRT) was defined as any 28-30 fraction radiation regimen that included concurrent chemotherapy. SMART was defined as 50 Gy over 5 consecutive daily fractions without concurrent chemotherapy. Baseline patient characteristics were compared between groups. Overall survival (OS) was evaluated by Kaplan-Meier (KM) and log-rank test. Univariate (UVA) and multivariate analysis (MVA) were also performed on multiple treatment variables.
Results: Of the patients included, 58 received chemoRT (2015-2018) and 109 received SMART (2018-2021). Median follow up from time of diagnosis for the chemoRT and SMART cohorts were 53.7 months and 29.2 months respectively. Cohorts did not have significant differences in age, gender, race, T or N staging, rates of surgery or surgical margin status. Patients receiving SMART had overall worse performance (p = 0.011) including a lower percentage of PS 0 patients (22.9% vs 44.8%) and a higher percentage of PS 2+ patients (34% vs 15.5%). Similarly, the SMART patients did numerically more often have locally advanced (50% vs 43%) and medically inoperable (26% vs 21%) disease (p = 0.294). The SMART cohort did have longer neoadjuvant chemotherapy with mean of 3.5 months vs 2.3 months in the chemoRT cohort (p = 0.002). There was no OS difference between each group when measured from diagnosis (p=0.79) or from first day of radiation (p=0.2). Median survival in the chemoRT and SMART groups was 18.7 vs 17.4 months from diagnosis. When including only PS 0-1 patients, the median survival in the chemoRT and SMART groups was 18.8 vs 22.3 months (p=0.37). There was also no difference in locoregional control, distant control, or progression free survival using KM. On MVA positive prognostic factors for OS from diagnosis included ECOG <2 (HR 0.54, p=0.015), increasing months of neoadjuvant chemo (HR 0.88, p=0.004) and pancreatectomy (HR 0.14, p <0.001).
Conclusion: Despite the fact that the patient cohort receiving radiation therapy per the SMART approach had poorer performance status compared with chemoRT, OS was not significantly different. The multidisciplinary team was highly supportive of SMART with increased patients being treated.