ESTRO 36 Abstract Book

S562 ESTRO 36 _______________________________________________________________________________________________

patients didn´t start the treatment and 1 patient stopped after 4 sessions). Statistical significant toxicity improvement (p<0.05) was observed after the hyperbaric oxygen treatment. 60% of the patients presented a Major Response, and 18% presented a Minor Response. 9% (3) of our patients were no responders. In our patients, no relationship was founded between the response and the age, the number of sessions of HBOT, or the time relapsed since radiation treatment to the indication of the HBOT. Table 1 presents the patients outcomes according the toxicity.

Results For the four patients, the DGART resulted to only one replanning during the first week of treatment. For the rectum wall V 72 , the overdose was on average reduced of 50% (100% maximum) and the mean dose reduced of 4.5 Gy compared to standard IGRT. For the bladder wall V 70 , the overdose was on average reduced of 19% (37% maximum) and the mean dose reduced of 6.6 Gy compared to standard IGRT. For the prostate, the D 99 was on average 0.5 Gy higher (0.7 Gy maximum) using DGART compared to standard IGRT. Conclusion DGART with only one replanning applied to a selected sub- group of patients may reduce the rectum and bladder overdose in prostate IGRT. PO-1018 Improvement of radiation-induced late toxicity after hyperbaric oxygen treatment R. Roncero 1 , J. Pardo 1 , E. Jimenez-Jimenez 1 , D. Morera 2 , N. Aymar 1 , I. Ortiz 1 , M. Vidal 1 1 Hospital Universitari Son Espases, Radiation Oncology, palma de mallorca, Spain 2 Hospital Universitari Son Espases, Medical Physics, palma de mallorca, Spain Purpose or Objective To assess the efficacy of hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) in the management of patients with radiation- induced late effects, in which more conservative We retrospectively reviewed the clinical records of 33 patients treated at our Department, from 2012 to 2016, who developed late toxicity (Grade IV CTCAE4.0) and which did not respond to conservative treatment, and recorded the variation, if occurred, in the degree of toxicity after hyperbaric treatment. The average age of the patients was 61 +/- 12 years and the mean dose delivered during the radiotherapy treatment was 52 +/- 12Gy with standard fractionation. Regarding HBOT, they received an average of 61 sessions. The patients presented the following toxicities: enteritis/proctitis in 33%, bone necrosis and sacroileitis in 30%, skin injury 9%, Cystitis 6% and others 9% (neurocognitive impairment, dysphagia and xerostomy). In order to its evaluation, responses were classified into three groups according the CTCAE4.0 scoring: Major Response Group : Improvement of toxicity from Grade IV to Grade I or 0 (without toxicity, or minor toxicity not requiring medical treatment), Minor Response Group : Improvement from Grade IV to Grade III/II (permanent toxicity controlled with medical treatment) and No Response Group . The statistical study was carried out by using SPSS_22. Results Ninety-one percent of the patients (30) completed the treatment sessions with hyperbaric chamber scheduled (2 treatments have failed Material and Methods Poster: RTT track: Patient care, side effects and communication

Conclusion In our patients, there is a significant improvement in late radiation toxicity after HBOT, with the best responses being observed in gastro-intestinal and bone toxicity. PO-1019 Mobile Oncology: Survey with Healthcare Professionals about Telemedicine, mHealth and mobile Apps K. Kessel 1,2 , M. Vogel 1 , F. Schmidt-Graf 3 , S. Combs 2,3 1 Technical University Munich TUM, Department of Radiation Oncology, München, Germany 2 Institute for Innovative Radiotherapy iRT, Department of Radiation Sciences DRS, Neuherberg, Germany 3 Technical University Munich TUM, Department of Neurology, München, Germany Purpose or Objective Mobile applications (apps) are an evolving trend in the medical field. To date, no native mobile applications for smartphones or tablets in an oncological setting exist, which support patients during therapy and follow-up and allow for data analysis and/or direct feedback about therapy parameters. Moreover, there is an ongoing discussion whether such apps are really valuable, and whether healthcare professionals (HCP) will accept their use in clinical day-to-day life. Hence, we analyzed their attitude about telemedicine, mHealth, and mobile apps. Material and Methods We developed an online survey with 24 questions evaluating HCPs’ attitude towards telemedicine and patients using medical mobile apps in general, as well as specified questions on functionality and possible disadvantages of an app. A link to the survey was sent to all HCPs of our hospital via an in-house e-mail distributor and lasted for six weeks. Results A total of 108 HCPs completed the survey. Of all, 88.9% consider telemedicine as useful, 84.3% versus 15.7% support the idea of an oncological app complementing classical treatment. Automatic reminders, timetables, laboratory results, and assessing side effects as well as quality of life during therapy were rated as the most important functions. In contrast, uncertainty regarding medical responsibility (88.2%) and data security (82.3%) were reasons mostly named by critics. The wish for personal contact between HCP and patient (41.2%), missing technical skills (23.5%) and disbelieving in improvements of data documentation (23.5%) are additional reasons. Of all respondents, 77.8% (84/108) believe in a resulting time saving if collected data by an