-
International Journal of Radiation... May 2021As part of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Working Group on Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy investigating normal tissue complication probability (NTCP)... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
As part of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Working Group on Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy investigating normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) after hypofractionated radiation therapy, data from published reports (PubMed indexed 1995-2018) were pooled to identify dosimetric and clinical predictors of radiation-induced brain toxicity after single-fraction stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) or fractionated stereotactic radiosurgery (fSRS).
METHODS AND MATERIALS
Eligible studies provided NTCPs for the endpoints of radionecrosis, edema, or symptoms after cranial SRS/fSRS and quantitative dose-volume metrics. Studies of patients with only glioma, meningioma, vestibular schwannoma, or brainstem targets were excluded. The data summary and analyses focused on arteriovenous malformations (AVM) and brain metastases.
RESULTS
Data from 51 reports are summarized. There was wide variability in reported rates of radionecrosis. Available data for SRS/fSRS for brain metastases were more amenable to NTCP modeling than AVM data. In the setting of brain metastases, SRS/fSRS-associated radionecrosis can be difficult to differentiate from tumor progression. For single-fraction SRS to brain metastases, tissue volumes (including target volumes) receiving 12 Gy (V12) of 5 cm, 10 cm, or >15 cm were associated with risks of symptomatic radionecrosis of approximately 10%, 15%, and 20%, respectively. SRS for AVM was associated with modestly lower rates of symptomatic radionecrosis for equivalent V12. For brain metastases, brain plus target volume V20 (3-fractions) or V24 (5-fractions) <20 cm was associated with <10% risk of any necrosis or edema, and <4% risk of radionecrosis requiring resection.
CONCLUSIONS
The risk of radionecrosis after SRS and fSRS can be modeled as a function of dose and volume treated. The use of fSRS appears to reduce risks of radionecrosis for larger treatment volumes relative to SRS. More standardized dosimetric and toxicity reporting is needed to facilitate future pooled analyses that can refine predictive models of brain toxicity risks.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Brain; Brain Edema; Brain Neoplasms; Brain Stem; Disease Progression; Humans; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors; Intracranial Arteriovenous Malformations; Models, Biological; Models, Theoretical; Necrosis; Organs at Risk; Probability; Radiation Dose Hypofractionation; Radiation Injuries; Radiation Tolerance; Radiosurgery; Radiotherapy Dosage; Re-Irradiation
PubMed: 32921513
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.08.013 -
Practical Radiation Oncology 2020Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is increasingly used for nonspine bone metastases (NSBM); however, there are limited data informing treatment planning. We...
PURPOSE
Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is increasingly used for nonspine bone metastases (NSBM); however, there are limited data informing treatment planning. We surveyed international experts to better understand worldwide practice patterns in delivering NSBM-SBRT.
METHODS AND MATERIALS
Nine international radiation oncologists were invited to participate based on demonstrated expertise with NSBM-SBRT. Experts were sent gross tumor volume contours and planning computed tomography and magnetic resonance images for 11 NSBM cases that covered a range of bony sites, including metastases to long bones (femur, humerus), pelvic bones (ilium, ischium, acetabulum, pubic symphysis), and thoracic bones (rib, sternum, scapula, clavicle). Experts were surveyed regarding treatment planning decisions and dose-fractionation selection. Descriptive analysis was conducted on the survey data.
RESULTS
All experts participated and completed the survey. Most (56%) routinely fused magnetic resonance imaging with planning computed tomography imaging for target delineation. Dose fractionation schedules included single-fraction (18-24 Gy/1), 2 fractions (24 Gy/2), 3 fractions (28-30 Gy/3), 5 fractions (30-50 Gy/5), and 10 fractions (42-50 Gy/10). Although doses varied considerably, all had a biological equivalent dose of ≤100 Gy. Five-fraction schedules were most common, specifically 35 Gy/5, with 56% opting for this dose-fractionation in at least 1 case. Other dose-fractionation schedules used by at least 3 experts were 20 Gy/1, 30 Gy/3, and 30 Gy/5. Three experts prescribed 2 dose volumes using a simultaneous integrated boost. The 2 dose volumes were either the gross tumor volume and clinical target volume (CTV) or a smaller CTV (CTV1) encompassed within a larger CTV (CTV2) (eg, 30 Gy/3 to gross tumor volume or CTV1 and 15-24 Gy/3 to CTV or CTV2). Dose de-escalation was recommended by all experts in the setting of previous SBRT and by most in the context of previous convevoltherapy or in weight-bearing bones, especially if moderate-to-severe cortical erosion was present.
CONCLUSIONS
Significant heterogeneity exists worldwide in radiation technique and dose-fractionation for NSBM-SBRT, which supports the need for consensus guidelines to inform practice and trial design. Nonetheless, these data demonstrate expert agreement on selecting dose schedules with a biologically effective dose ≤100 Gy, reasons for dose de-escalation, and in determining acceptable dose schedules based on bony site.
Topics: Bone Neoplasms; Dose Fractionation, Radiation; Humans; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Radiosurgery; Radiotherapy Dosage; Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted
PubMed: 32171852
DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2020.02.011 -
The Lancet. Oncology Jan 2022High-quality randomised clinical trials testing moderately fractionated breast radiotherapy have clearly shown that local control and survival is at least as effective... (Review)
Review
European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology Advisory Committee in Radiation Oncology Practice consensus recommendations on patient selection and dose and fractionation for external beam radiotherapy in early breast cancer.
High-quality randomised clinical trials testing moderately fractionated breast radiotherapy have clearly shown that local control and survival is at least as effective as with 2 Gy daily fractions with similar or reduced normal tissue toxicity. Fewer treatment visits are welcomed by patients and their families, and reduced fractions produce substantial savings for health-care systems. Implementation of hypofractionation, however, has moved at a slow pace. The oncology community have now reached an inflection point created by new evidence from the FAST-Forward five-fraction randomised trial and catalysed by the need for the global radiation oncology community to unite during the COVID-19 pandemic and rapidly rethink hypofractionation implementation. The aim of this paper is to support equity of access for all patients to receive evidence-based breast external beam radiotherapy and to facilitate the translation of new evidence into routine daily practice. The results from this European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology Advisory Committee in Radiation Oncology Practice consensus state that moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy can be offered to any patient for whole breast, chest wall (with or without reconstruction), and nodal volumes. Ultrafractionation (five fractions) can also be offered for non-nodal breast or chest wall (without reconstruction) radiotherapy either as standard of care or within a randomised trial or prospective cohort. The consensus is timely; not only is it a pragmatic framework for radiation oncologists, but it provides a measured proposal for the path forward to influence policy makers and empower patients to ensure equity of access to evidence-based radiotherapy.
Topics: Advisory Committees; Breast Neoplasms; COVID-19; Consensus; Dose Fractionation, Radiation; Europe; Evidence-Based Medicine; Female; Humans; Patient Selection; Radiation Dose Hypofractionation; Radiation Oncology
PubMed: 34973228
DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00539-8 -
Journal For Immunotherapy of Cancer Apr 2021Recent evidence indicates that ionizing radiation can enhance immune responses to tumors. Advances in radiation delivery techniques allow hypofractionated delivery of... (Review)
Review
Recent evidence indicates that ionizing radiation can enhance immune responses to tumors. Advances in radiation delivery techniques allow hypofractionated delivery of conformal radiotherapy. Hypofractionation or other modifications of standard fractionation may improve radiation's ability to promote immune responses to tumors. Other novel delivery options may also affect immune responses, including T-cell activation and tumor-antigen presentation changes. However, there is limited understanding of the immunological impact of hypofractionated and unique multifractionated radiotherapy regimens, as these observations are relatively recent. Hence, these differences in radiotherapy fractionation result in distinct immune-modulatory effects. Radiation oncologists and immunologists convened a virtual consensus discussion to identify current deficiencies, challenges, pitfalls and critical gaps when combining radiotherapy with immunotherapy and making recommendations to the field and advise National Cancer Institute on new directions and initiatives that will help further development of these two fields.This commentary aims to raise the awareness of this complexity so that the need to study radiation dose, fractionation, type and volume is understood and valued by the immuno-oncology research community. Divergence of approaches and findings between preclinical studies and clinical trials highlights the need for evaluating the design of future clinical studies with particular emphasis on radiation dose and fractionation, immune biomarkers and selecting appropriate end points for combination radiation/immune modulator trials, recognizing that direct effect on the tumor and potential abscopal effect may well be different. Similarly, preclinical studies should be designed as much as possible to model the intended clinical setting. This article describes a conceptual framework for testing different radiation therapy regimens as separate models of how radiation itself functions as an immunomodulatory 'drug' to provide alternatives to the widely adopted 'one-size-fits-all' strategy of frequently used 8 Gy×3 regimens immunomodulation.
Topics: Animals; Clinical Decision-Making; Combined Modality Therapy; Dose Fractionation, Radiation; Humans; Immunotherapy; Neoplasms; Patient Safety; Radiation Dosage; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome; Tumor Microenvironment
PubMed: 33827904
DOI: 10.1136/jitc-2020-002038 -
Radiotherapy and Oncology : Journal of... Jul 2023Target delineation in glioblastoma is still a matter of extensive research and debate. This guideline aims to update the existing joint European consensus on delineation...
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Target delineation in glioblastoma is still a matter of extensive research and debate. This guideline aims to update the existing joint European consensus on delineation of the clinical target volume (CTV) in adult glioblastoma patients.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
The ESTRO Guidelines Committee identified 14 European experts in close interaction with the ESTRO clinical committee and EANO who discussed and analysed the body of evidence concerning contemporary glioblastoma target delineation, then took part in a two-step modified Delphi process to address open questions.
RESULTS
Several key issues were identified and are discussed including i) pre-treatment steps and immobilisation, ii) target delineation and the use of standard and novel imaging techniques, and iii) technical aspects of treatment including planning techniques and fractionation. Based on the EORTC recommendation focusing on the resection cavity and residual enhancing regions on T1-sequences with the addition of a reduced 15 mm margin, special situations are presented with corresponding potential adaptations depending on the specific clinical situation.
CONCLUSIONS
The EORTC consensus recommends a single clinical target volume definition based on postoperative contrast-enhanced T1 abnormalities, using isotropic margins without the need to cone down. A PTV margin based on the individual mask system and IGRT procedures available is advised; this should usually be no greater than 3 mm when using IGRT.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Glioblastoma; Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted; Dose Fractionation, Radiation
PubMed: 37059335
DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109663 -
Journal of Clinical Oncology : Official... Mar 2020RTOG 0617 compared standard-dose (SD; 60 Gy) versus high-dose (HD; 74 Gy) radiation with concurrent chemotherapy and determined the efficacy of cetuximab for stage III... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
PURPOSE
RTOG 0617 compared standard-dose (SD; 60 Gy) versus high-dose (HD; 74 Gy) radiation with concurrent chemotherapy and determined the efficacy of cetuximab for stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
METHODS
The study used a 2 × 2 factorial design with radiation dose as 1 factor and cetuximab as the other, with a primary end point of overall survival (OS).
RESULTS
Median follow-up was 5.1 years. There were 3 grade 5 adverse events (AEs) in the SD arm and 9 in the HD arm. Treatment-related grade ≥3 dysphagia and esophagitis occurred in 3.2% and 5.0% of patients in the SD arm 12.1% and 17.4% in the HD arm, respectively ( = .0005 and < .0001). There was no difference in pulmonary toxicity, with grade ≥3 AEs in 20.6% and 19.3%. Median OS was 28.7 20.3 months ( = .0072) in the SD and HD arms, respectively, 5-year OS and progression-free survival (PFS) rates were 32.1% and 23% and 18.3% and 13% ( = .055), respectively. Factors associated with improved OS on multivariable analysis were standard radiation dose, tumor location, institution accrual volume, esophagitis/dysphagia, planning target volume and heart V5. The use of cetuximab conferred no survival benefit at the expense of increased toxicity. The prior signal of benefit in patients with higher H scores was no longer apparent. The progression rate within 1 month of treatment completion in the SD arm was 4.6%. For comparison purposes, the resultant 2-year OS and PFS rates allowing for that dropout rate were 59.6% and 30.7%, respectively, in the SD arms.
CONCLUSION
A 60-Gy radiation dose with concurrent chemotherapy should remain the standard of care, with the OS rate being among the highest reported in the literature for stage III NSCLC. Cetuximab had no effect on OS. The 2-year OS rates in the control arm are similar to the PACIFIC trial.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Carboplatin; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Cetuximab; Chemoradiotherapy; Dose Fractionation, Radiation; Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Neoplasm Staging; Paclitaxel; Progression-Free Survival; Survival Rate
PubMed: 31841363
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.19.01162 -
The Lancet. Oncology Jul 2021Conventional external beam radiotherapy is the standard palliative treatment for spinal metastases; however, complete response rates for pain are as low as 10-20%.... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Randomized Controlled Trial
Stereotactic body radiotherapy versus conventional external beam radiotherapy in patients with painful spinal metastases: an open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 2/3 trial.
BACKGROUND
Conventional external beam radiotherapy is the standard palliative treatment for spinal metastases; however, complete response rates for pain are as low as 10-20%. Stereotactic body radiotherapy delivers high-dose, ablative radiotherapy. We aimed to compare complete response rates for pain after stereotactic body radiotherapy or conventional external beam radiotherapy in patients with painful spinal metastasis.
METHODS
This open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 2/3 trial was done at 13 hospitals in Canada and five hospitals in Australia. Patients were eligible if they were aged 18 years and older, and had painful (defined as ≥2 points with the Brief Pain Inventory) MRI-confirmed spinal metastasis, no more than three consecutive vertebral segments to be included in the treatment volume, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, a Spinal Instability Neoplasia Score of less than 12, and no neurologically symptomatic spinal cord or cauda equina compression. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) with a web-based, computer-generated allocation sequence to receive either stereotactic body radiotherapy at a dose of 24 Gy in two daily fractions or conventional external beam radiotherapy at a dose of 20 Gy in five daily fractions using standard techniques. Treatment assignment was done centrally by use of a minimisation method to achieve balance for the stratification factors of radiosensitivity, the presence or absence of mass-type tumour (extraosseous or epidural disease extension, or both) on imaging, and centre. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with a complete response for pain at 3 months after radiotherapy. The primary endpoint was analysed in the intention-to-treat population and all safety and quality assurance analyses were done in the as-treated population (ie, all patients who received at least one fraction of radiotherapy). The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02512965.
FINDINGS
Between Jan 4, 2016, and Sept 27, 2019, 229 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive conventional external beam radiotherapy (n=115) or stereotactic body radiotherapy (n=114). All 229 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. The median follow-up was 6·7 months (IQR 6·3-6·9). At 3 months, 40 (35%) of 114 patients in the stereotactic body radiotherapy group, and 16 (14%) of 115 patients in the conventional external beam radiotherapy group had a complete response for pain (risk ratio 1·33, 95% CI 1·14-1·55; p=0·0002). This significant difference was maintained in multivariable-adjusted analyses (odds ratio 3·47, 95% CI 1·77-6·80; p=0·0003). The most common grade 3-4 adverse event was grade 3 pain (five [4%] of 115 patients in the conventional external beam radiotherapy group vs five (5%) of 110 patients in the stereotactic body radiotherapy group). No treatment-related deaths were observed.
INTERPRETATION
Stereotactic body radiotherapy at a dose of 24 Gy in two daily fractions was superior to conventional external beam radiotherapy at a dose of 20 Gy in five daily fractions in improving the complete response rate for pain. These results suggest that use of conformal, image-guided, stereotactically dose-escalated radiotherapy is appropriate in the palliative setting for symptom control for selected patients with painful spinal metastases, and an increased awareness of the need for specialised and multidisciplinary involvement in the delivery of end-of-life care is needed.
FUNDING
Canadian Cancer Society and the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Australia; Back Pain; Canada; Dose Fractionation, Radiation; Female; Humans; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Male; Middle Aged; Pain Measurement; Radiation Dosage; Radiosurgery; Spinal Neoplasms; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult
PubMed: 34126044
DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00196-0 -
International Journal of Radiation... Sep 2021The purpose of this critical review is to summarize the literature specific to single-fraction stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and multiple-fraction stereotactic... (Review)
Review
Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Postoperative Metastatic Surgical Cavities: A Critical Review and International Stereotactic Radiosurgery Society (ISRS) Practice Guidelines.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this critical review is to summarize the literature specific to single-fraction stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and multiple-fraction stereotactic radiation therapy (SRT) for postoperative brain metastases resection cavities and to present practice recommendations on behalf of the ISRS.
METHODS AND MATERIALS
The Medline and Embase databases were used to apply the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses approach to search for manuscripts reporting SRS/SRT outcomes for postoperative brain metastases tumor bed resection cavities with a search end date of July 20, 2018. Prospective studies, consensus guidelines, and retrospective series that included exclusively postoperative brain metastases and had at minimum 100 patients were considered eligible.
RESULTS
The Embase search revealed 157 manuscripts, of which 77 were selected for full-text screening. PubMed yielded 55 manuscripts, of which 23 were selected for full text screening. We deemed 8 retrospective series, 1 phase 2 prospective study, 3 randomized controlled trials, and 1 consensus contouring paper appropriate for inclusion. The data suggest that SRS/SRT to surgical cavities with prescription doses of 30 to 50 Gy equivalent effective dose (EQD) 2, 50 to 70 Gy EQD2, and 70 to 90 EQD2 are associated with rates of local control ranging from 60.5% to 91% (median, 80.5%). Randomized data suggest improved local control with single-fraction SRS compared with observation and improved cognitive outcomes compared with whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT). The toxicity of SRS/SRT in the postoperative setting was limited and is reviewed herein.
CONCLUSIONS
Although randomized data raise concern for poorer local control after resection cavity SRS than WBRT, these findings may be driven by factors such as conservative prescription doses used in the SRS arm. Retrospective studies suggest high rates of local control after single-fraction SRS and hypofractionated SRT for postoperative brain metastases. With a superior neurocognitive profile and no survival disadvantage to withholding WBRT, the ISRS recommends SRS as first-line treatment for eligible postoperative patients. Emerging data suggest that fractionated SRT may provide superior local control compared with single-fraction SRS, in particular, for large tumor cavity volumes/diameters and potentially for patients with a preoperative diameter greater than 2.5 cm.
Topics: Brain Neoplasms; Cognition; Cranial Irradiation; Dose Fractionation, Radiation; Humans; Meningeal Neoplasms; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Radiosurgery
PubMed: 33891979
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2021.04.016 -
Practical Radiation Oncology 2020This guideline reviews the evidence for the use of definitive and postoperative radiation therapy (RT) in patients with basal cell carcinoma (BCC) and cutaneous squamous...
Definitive and Postoperative Radiation Therapy for Basal and Squamous Cell Cancers of the Skin: Executive Summary of an American Society for Radiation Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline.
PURPOSE
This guideline reviews the evidence for the use of definitive and postoperative radiation therapy (RT) in patients with basal cell carcinoma (BCC) and cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC).
METHODS
The American Society for Radiation Oncology convened a task force to address 5 key questions focused on indications for RT in the definitive and postoperative setting for BCC and cSCC, as well as dose-fractionation schemes, target volumes, basic aspects of treatment planning, choice of radiation modality, and the role of systemic therapy in combination with radiation. Recommendations were based on a systematic literature review and created using a predefined consensus-building methodology and system for grading evidence quality and recommendation strength.
RESULTS
The guideline recommends definitive RT as primary treatment for patients with BCC and cSCC who are not surgical candidates while conditionally recommending RT with an emphasis on shared decision-making in those situations in which adequate resection can lead to a less than satisfactory cosmetic or functional outcome. In the postoperative setting, a number of indications for RT after an adequate resection are provided while distinguishing the strength of the recommendations between BCC and cSCC. One key question is dedicated to defining indications for regional nodal irradiation. The task force suggests a range of appropriate dose-fractionation schemes for treatment of primary and nodal volumes in definitive and postoperative scenarios. The guideline also recommends against the use of carboplatin concurrently with adjuvant RT and conditionally recommends the use of systemic therapies for unresectable primaries where treatment may need escalation.
CONCLUSIONS
Defining the role of RT in the management of BCC and cSCC has been hindered by a lack of high-quality evidence. This document synthesizes available evidence to define practice guidelines for the most common clinical situations. We encourage practitioners to enroll patients in prospective trials and to approach care in a multidisciplinary fashion whenever possible.
Topics: Carcinoma, Basal Cell; Carcinoma, Squamous Cell; Dose Fractionation, Radiation; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Patient Selection; Radiation Oncology; Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted; Radiotherapy, Adjuvant; Skin Neoplasms; Societies, Medical; United States
PubMed: 31831330
DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2019.10.014 -
Journal of Cellular and Molecular... Oct 2021Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have shown chondroprotective effects in clinical models of osteoarthritis (OA). However, effects of MSC-derived exosomes on OA remain...
Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have shown chondroprotective effects in clinical models of osteoarthritis (OA). However, effects of MSC-derived exosomes on OA remain unclear. The study aimed to investigate the therapeutic potential of exosomes from human bone marrow MSCs (BM-MSCs) in alleviating OA. The anterior cruciate ligament transection (ACLT) and destabilization of the medial meniscus (DMM) surgery were performed on the knee joints of a rat OA model, followed by intra-articular injection of BM-MSCs or their exosomes. In addition, BM-MSC-derived exosomes were administrated to primary human chondrocytes to observe the functional and molecular alterations. Both of BM-MSCs and BM-MSC-derived exosomes alleviated cartilage destruction and subchondral bone remodelling in OA rat model. Administration of BM-MSCs and exosomes could reduce joint damage and restore the trabecular bone volume fraction, trabecular number and connectivity density of OA rats. In addition, in vitro assays showed that BM-MSCs-exosomes could maintain the chondrocyte phenotype by increasing collagen type II synthesis and inhibiting IL-1β-induced senescence and apoptosis. Furthermore, exosomal lncRNA MEG-3 also reduced the senescence and apoptosis of chondrocytes induced by IL-1β, indicating that lncRNA MEG-3 might partially account the anti-OA effects of BM-MSC exosomes. The exosomes from BM-MSCs exerted beneficial therapeutic effects on OA by reducing the senescence and apoptosis of chondrocytes, suggesting that MSC-derived exosomes might provide a candidate therapy for OA treatment.
Topics: Animals; Apoptosis; Biological Therapy; Cellular Senescence; Chemical Fractionation; Chondrocytes; Cytokines; Disease Models, Animal; Exosomes; Immunohistochemistry; Inflammation Mediators; Injections, Intra-Articular; Mesenchymal Stem Cells; Osteoarthritis; RNA, Long Noncoding; Rats; X-Ray Microtomography
PubMed: 34448527
DOI: 10.1111/jcmm.16860