onc brain

2026-05-18

INRT-AIR & DARTBOARD (ENI omission in HNSCC)

ENI omission via INRT in HNSCC: 5-yr elective nodal recurrence 0%, 5-yr OS 87%, 5-yr PFS 74% across 117 pts.

5-yr OS 87%, 5-yr PFS 74%; 3-yr LR 9.5%, RR 4.3%, DM 11%; elective nodal recurrence 0% at 5 yrs. N=117, median f/u 3.4 yrs.
5-yr OS 87%, 5-yr PFS 74%; 3-yr LR 9.5%, RR 4.3%, DM 11%; elective nodal recurrence 0% at 5 yrs. N=117, median f/u 3.4 yrs.
  • ๐Ÿ“Š 5-yr solitary elective nodal recurrence risk: 0%
  • ๐Ÿ“Š 5-yr OS 87%, 5-yr PFS 74%
  • ๐Ÿ“Š 3-yr local recurrence 9.5%, regional recurrence 4.3%, distant metastasis 11%
  • ๐Ÿ“Š Mean composite MDADI score at 12 months: 84.9, no significant decline post-treatment
  • ๐Ÿ” Patient-level pooled analysis, 2 prospective trials (INRT-AIR + DARTBOARD), N=117, median f/u 3.4 yrs
  • ๐Ÿ” Eligibility: oropharynx, larynx, hypopharynx HNSCC, stage I-IVB (excl. T1-2N0 larynx); PET/CT + neck CT required
  • ๐Ÿ” INRT approach uses AI model to identify suspicious lymph nodes, omitting traditional ENI fields
  • โš ๏ธ No randomised comparator; pooled single-arm data from 2 non-randomised prospective trials
  • โš ๏ธ Authors explicitly state randomised evidence required before non-trial implementation
  • ๐Ÿ”— Standard CRT with ENI historically associated with significant OAR dose and long-term toxicity; MDADI preservation here suggests meaningful dysphagia benefit vs historical CRT cohorts
๐Ÿ“š Sources ยท ๐Ÿฆ 1 tweet

TORPEdO (CRUK/18/010)

TORPEdO: IMPT vs IMRT in OPSCC, no difference in patient-reported UW-QoL composite at 12 months; phase 3 RCT, N=205.

  • ๐Ÿ“Š UW-QoL physical composite: no difference between IMPT and IMRT at 3, 12, or 24 months post-RT
  • ๐Ÿ“ No numeric effect sizes in source; OCR states 'no differences in mean scores between arms' at all reported timepoints
  • ๐Ÿ” Phase 3 RCT; 2:1 IMPT:IMRT; bilateral neck OPSCC requiring concurrent CRT; N=205
  • ๐Ÿ” Dose: 70 Gy/56 Gy in 33 fractions over 6.5 weeks + cisplatin 100 mg/mยฒ D1+D22, identical both arms
  • ๐Ÿ” Stratified by T-stage, N-stage, p16 status, smoking history
  • ๐Ÿ” Clinician-reported co-primary (CTCAE G3 weight loss โ‰ฅ20% or gastrostomy dependence at 12mo) not presented in this HR-QoL report
  • โš ๏ธ Identical planning constraints across arms at predominantly novel UK proton centers may have attenuated IMPT dosimetric advantage
  • โš ๏ธ Some pts have meaningful HR-QoL deterioration up to 2 years post-CRT; 5-year follow-up ongoing
  • ๐Ÿ”— Lancet 2026 (McBride, Riaz et al., PMID 42134353): concurrent publication on proton vs photon for oropharyngeal cancer
๐Ÿ“š Sources ยท ๐Ÿฆ 2 tweets ยท ๐Ÿ“„ 1 paper
๐Ÿ“„ PAPER McBride; Riaz; Sherman et al. ยท Lancet (London, England) (2026-05)
Proton versus photon therapy for oropharyngeal cancer.
๐Ÿ“ McBride SM, Riaz N, Sherman EJ, Tsai CJ, Mell LK. Proton versus photon therapy for oropharyngeal cancer. Lancet. 2026 May 16;407(10542):1917.

2026-05-17

DIREKHT

DIREKHT: post-op RT in HNSCC with contralateral neck sparing and/or primary CTV dose reduction to 56 Gy.

  • ๐Ÿ” Post-operative RT dose de-escalation trial in HNSCC
  • ๐Ÿ’Š Interventions: contralateral neck sparing and/or primary CTV dose reduction to 56 Gy (vs standard ~60-66 Gy)
  • โš ๏ธ No effect sizes, endpoints, or outcomes reported in source tweet
  • โ“ Source tweet is a teaser with no linked data visible; full results not in source content
๐Ÿ“š Sources ยท ๐Ÿฆ 1 tweet