Chronic radiation proctitis: tricks to prevent and treat Vanneste, Ben G. L.; Van De Voorde, Lien; de Ridder, Rogier J. ...
International Journal of Colorectal Disease,
10/2015, Letnik:
30, Številka:
10
Journal Article, Book Review
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
Objective
The purpose of this study was to give an overview of the measures used to prevent chronic radiation proctitis (CRP) and to provide an algorithm for the treatment of CRP.
Methods
Medical ...literature databases including PubMed and Medline were screened and critically analyzed for relevance in the scope of our purpose.
Results
CRP is a relatively frequent late side effect (5–20%) and mainly dependent on the dose and volume of irradiated rectum. Radiation treatment (RT) techniques to prevent CRP are constantly improving thanks to image-guided RT and intensity-modulated RT. Also, newer techniques like protons and new devices such as rectum spacers and balloons have been developed to spare rectal structures. Biopsies do not contribute to diagnosing CRP and should be avoided because of the risk of severe rectal wall damage, such as necrosis and fistulas. There is no consensus on the optimal treatment of CRP. A variety of possibilities is available and includes topical and oral agents, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, and endoscopic interventions.
Conclusions
CRP has a natural history of improving over time, even without treatment. This is important to take into account when considering these treatments: first be conservative (topical and oral agents) and be aware that invasive treatments can be very toxic.
Abstract Background and purpose To compare the cost-effectiveness of treating prostate cancer patients with intensity-modulated radiation therapy and a spacer (IMRT+S) versus IMRT-only without a ...spacer (IMRT-O). Materials and methods A decision-analytic Markov model was constructed to examine the effect of late rectal toxicity and compare the costs and quality-adjusted Life Years (QALYs) of IMRT-O and IMRT+S. The main assumption of this modeling study was that disease progression, genito-urinary toxicity and survival were equal for both comparators. Results For all patients, IMRT+S revealed a lower toxicity than IMRT-O. Treatment follow-up and toxicity costs for IMRT-O and IMRT+S amounted to €1604 and €1444, respectively, thus saving €160 on the complication costs at an extra charge of €1700 for the spacer in IMRT+S. The QALYs yielded for IMRT-O and IMRT+S were 3.542 and 3.570, respectively. This results in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €55,880 per QALY gained. For a ceiling ratio of €80,000, IMRT+S had a 77% probability of being cost-effective. Conclusion IMRT+S is cost-effective compared to IMRT-O based on its potential to reduce radiotherapy-related toxicity.
Abstract Background and purpose Previous studies confirmed that implantable rectum spacers (IRS) decreased acute gastro-intestinal (GI) toxicity in a significant percentage of prostate cancer ...patients undergoing intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). We developed decision rules based on clinical risk factors (CRFs) to select those patients who are expected to benefit most from IRS implantation. Materials and methods For 26 patients dose distributions with (IMRT + IRS) and without (IMRT − IRS) IRS were calculated. Validated nomograms based on CRFs and dosimetric criteria (anorectal V40Gy and V75Gy ) were used to predict probabilities for grade 2–3 (G2–3) acute GI toxicity, G2–3 late rectal bleeding (LRB), G3 LRB, and G2–3 faecal incontinence (FI) for IMRT + IRS and IMRT − IRS. All permutations of CRFs were generated to identify most benefit scenarios (MBS) in which a predicted toxicity reduction of ⩾5% points in ⩾25% of the cohort was present due to IRS implantation. Results IMRT + IRS revealed a significant reduction in V40Gy ( p = 0.0357) and V75Gy ( p < 0.0001) relative to IMRT − IRS. For G2-3 acute GI toxicity and G2–3 LRB, the predicted toxicity rates decreased in 17/26 (65%) and 20/26 (77%) patients, and decision rules were derived for 22/32 (69%) and 12/64 (19%) MBS, respectively. From the decision rules, it follows that diabetes status has no impact on G2–3 acute toxicity, and in absence of pre-RT abdominal surgery, the implantation of an IRS is predicted to show no clinically relevant benefit for G2–3 LRB. Conclusions Prostate cancer patients who are expected to benefit most from IRS implantation can be identified prior to IMRT based on their CRFs profile.
Patient decision aids (PDAs) can support the treatment decision making process and empower patients to take a proactive role in their treatment pathway while using a shared decision-making (SDM) ...approach making participatory medicine possible. The aim of this study was to develop a PDA for prostate cancer that is accurate and user-friendly.
We followed a user-centered design process consisting of five rounds of semi-structured interviews and usability surveys with topics such as informational/decisional needs of users and requirements for PDAs. Our user-base consisted of 8 urologists, 4 radiation oncologists, 2 oncology nurses, 8 general practitioners, 19 former prostate cancer patients, 4 usability experts and 11 healthy volunteers.
Informational needs for patients centered on three key factors: treatment experience, post-treatment quality of life, and the impact of side effects. Patients and clinicians valued a PDA that presents balanced information on these factors through simple understandable language and visual aids. Usability questionnaires revealed that patients were more satisfied overall with the PDA than clinicians; however, both groups had concerns that the PDA might lengthen consultation times (42 and 41%, respectively). The PDA is accessible on http://beslissamen.nl/ .
User-centered design provided valuable insights into PDA requirements but challenges in integrating diverse perspectives as clinicians focus on clinical outcomes while patients also consider quality of life. Nevertheless, it is crucial to involve a broad base of clinical users in order to better understand the decision-making process and to develop a PDA that is accurate, usable, and acceptable.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
Radiotherapy (RT) for prostate cancer (PC) has steadily evolved over the last decades, with improving biochemical disease-free survival. Recently population based research also revealed an ...association between overall survival and doses ≥ 75.6 Gray (Gy) in men with intermediate- and high-risk PC. Examples of improved RT techniques are image-guided RT, intensity-modulated RT, volumetric modulated arc therapy, and stereotactic ablative body RT, which could facilitate further dose escalation. Brachytherapy is an internal form of RT that also developed substantially. New devices such as rectum spacers and balloons have been developed to spare rectal structures. Newer techniques like protons and carbon ions have the intrinsic characteristics maximising the dose on the tumour while minimising the effect on the surrounding healthy tissue, but clinical data are needed for confirmation in randomised phase III trials. Furthermore, it provides an overview of an important discussion issue in PC treatment between urologists and radiation oncologists: the comparison between radical prostatectomy and RT. Current literature reveals that all possible treatment modalities have the same cure rate, but a different toxicity pattern. We recommend proposing the possible different treatment modalities with their own advantages and side-effects to the individual patient. Clinicians and patients should make treatment decisions together (shared decision-making) while using patient decision aids.
Brachytherapy is employed to treat a wide variety of cancers. However, an accurate treatment verification method is currently not available. This study describes a pre-treatment verification system ...that uses an imaging panel (IP) to verify important aspects of the treatment plan. A detailed modelling of the IP was only possible with an extensive calibration performed using a robotic arm. Irradiations were performed with a high dose rate (HDR) 192Ir source within a water phantom. An empirical fit was applied to measure the distance between the source and the detector so 3D Cartesian coordinates of the dwell positions can be obtained using a single panel. The IP acquires 7.14 fps to verify the dwell times, dwell positions and air kerma strength (Sk). A gynecological applicator was used to create a treatment plan that was registered with a CT image of the water phantom used during the experiments for verification purposes. Errors (shifts, exchanged connections and wrong dwell times) were simulated to verify the proposed verification system. Cartesian source positions (panel measurement plane) have a standard deviation of about 0.02 cm. The measured distance between the source and the panel (z-coordinate) have a standard deviation up to 0.16 cm and maximum absolute error of 0.6 cm if the signal is close to sensitive limit of the panel. The average response of the panel is very linear with Sk. Therefore, Sk measurements can be performed with relatively small errors. The measured dwell times show a maximum error of 0.2 s which is consistent with the acquisition rate of the panel. All simulated errors were clearly identified by the proposed system. The use of IPs is not common in brachytherapy, however, it provides considerable advantages. It was demonstrated that the IP can accurately measure Sk, dwell times and dwell positions.
External beam radiotherapy (EBRT) is one of the curative treatment options for prostate cancer patients. The aim of this treatment option is to irradiate tumor tissue, while sparing normal tissue as ...much as possible. Frequent imaging during the course of the treatment (image guided radiotherapy) allows for determination of the location and shape of the prostate (target) and of the organs at risk. This information is used to increase accuracy in radiation dose delivery resulting in better tumor control and lower toxicity. Ultrasound imaging is harmless for the patient, it is cost-effective, and it allows for real-time volumetric organ tracking. For these reasons, it is an ideal technique for image guidance during EBRT workflows. Review papers have been published in which the use of ultrasound imaging in EBRT workflows for different cancer sites (prostate, breast, etc.) was extensively covered. This new review paper aims at providing the readers with an update on the current status for prostate cancer ultrasound guided EBRT treatments.
Purpose Testicular cancer (TC) treatment increases risk of subsequent malignant neoplasms (SMNs). It is unknown whether changes in TC treatment over time have affected SMN risk. Methods Solid SMN ...risk was evaluated in a multicenter cohort comprising 5,848 1-year survivors treated for TC before age 50 years between 1976 and 2007. SMN incidence was compared with cancer incidence in the general population. Treatment-specific risks were assessed using multivariable regression in a case-cohort design. Results After a median follow-up of 14.1 years, 350 solid SMNs were observed, translating into a 1.8-fold (95% CI, 1.6-2.0) increased risk compared with general population rates. Solid SMN risk was increased in patients with seminoma and those with nonseminoma (standardized incidence ratio, 1.52 and 2.21, respectively). Patients with nonseminoma experienced increased risk of SMNs of the thyroid, lung, stomach, pancreas, colon, and bladder and of melanoma and soft tissue sarcoma, whereas those with seminoma experienced increased risk of SMNs of the small intestine, pancreas, and urinary bladder. The 25-year cumulative incidence of solid SMNs was 10.3% (95% CI, 9.0% to 11.6%). In multivariable analysis, platinum-based chemotherapy was associated with increased risk of a solid SMN (hazard ratio HR, 2.40; 95% CI, 1.58 to 3.62), colorectal SMN (HR, 3.85; 95% CI, 1.67 to 8.92), and noncolorectal GI SMN (HR, 5.00; 95% CI, 2.28 to 10.95). Receipt of platinum 400 to 499 and ≥ 500 mg/m
increased solid SMN risk compared with surgery only (HR, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.40 to 4.23 and HR, 2.42; 95% CI, 1.50 to 3.90, respectively), whereas risk was not significantly increased with lower doses (HR, 1.75; 95% CI, 0.90 to 3.43). The HR of a GI SMN increased by 53% (95% CI, 26% to 80%) per 100 mg/m
of platinum-containing chemotherapy. The HR of an infradiaphragmatic SMN increased by 8% per Gray of radiation dose administered (95% CI, 6% to 9%; P < .001). Conclusion Radiotherapy and platinum-containing chemotherapy are associated with increased solid SMN risk, specifically with GI SMNs.
Stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) is a novel non-invasive alternative for patients with primary renal cell cancer who do not undergo surgical resection. The FASTRACK II clinical trial ...investigated the efficacy of SABR for primary renal cell cancer in a phase 2 trial.
This international, non-randomised, phase 2 study was conducted in seven centres in Australia and one centre in the Netherlands. Eligible patients aged 18 years or older had biopsy-confirmed diagnosis of primary renal cell cancer, with only a single lesion; were medically inoperable, were at high risk of complications from surgery, or declined surgery; and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–2. A multidisciplinary decision that active treatment was warranted was required. Key exclusion criteria were a pre-treatment estimated glomerular filtration rate of less than 30 mL/min per 1·73 m2, previous systemic therapies for renal cell cancer, previous high-dose radiotherapy to an overlapping region, tumours larger than 10 cm, and direct contact of the renal cell cancer with the bowel. Patients received either a single fraction SABR of 26 Gy for tumours 4 cm or less in maximum diameter, or 42 Gy in three fractions for tumours more than 4 cm to 10 cm in maximum diameter. The primary endpoint was local control, defined as no progression of the primary renal cell cancer, as evaluated by the investigator per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (version 1.1). Assuming a 1-year local control of 90%, the null hypothesis of 80% or less was considered not to be worthy of proceeding to a future randomised controlled trial. All patients who commenced trial treatment were included in the primary outcome analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02613819, and has completed accrual.
Between July 28, 2016, and Feb 27, 2020, 70 patients were enrolled and initiated treatment. Median age was 77 years (IQR 70–82). Before enrolment, 49 (70%) of 70 patients had documented serial growth on initial surveillance imaging. 49 (70%) of 70 patients were male and 21 (30%) were female. Median tumour size was 4·6 cm (IQR 3·7–5·5). All patients enrolled had T1–T2a and N0–N1 disease. 23 patients received single-fraction SABR of 26 Gy and 47 received 42 Gy in three fractions. Median follow-up was 43 months (IQR 38–60). Local control at 12 months from treatment commencement was 100% (p<0·0001). Seven (10%) patients had grade 3 treatment-related adverse events, with no grade 4 adverse events observed. Grade 3 treatment-related adverse events were nausea and vomiting (three 4% patients), abdominal, flank, or tumour pain (four 6%), colonic obstruction (two 3%), and diarrhoea (one 1%). No treatment-related or cancer-related deaths occurred.
To our knowledge, this is the first multicentre prospective clinical trial of non-surgical definitive therapy in patients with primary renal cell cancer. In a cohort with predominantly T1b or larger disease, SABR was an effective treatment strategy with no observed local failures or cancer-related deaths. We observed an acceptable side-effect profile and renal function after SABR. These outcomes support the design of a future randomised trial of SABR versus surgery for primary renal cell cancer.
Cancer Australia Priority-driven Collaborative Cancer Research Scheme.
A paradigm shift from current population based medicine to personalized and participative medicine is underway. This transition is being supported by the development of clinical decision support ...systems based on prediction models of treatment outcome. In radiation oncology, these models ‘learn’ using advanced and innovative information technologies (ideally in a distributed fashion — please watch the animation: http://youtu.be/ZDJFOxpwqEA) from all available/appropriate medical data (clinical, treatment, imaging, biological/genetic, etc.) to achieve the highest possible accuracy with respect to prediction of tumor response and normal tissue toxicity. In this position paper, we deliver an overview of the factors that are associated with outcome in radiation oncology and discuss the methodology behind the development of accurate prediction models, which is a multi-faceted process. Subsequent to initial development/validation and clinical introduction, decision support systems should be constantly re-evaluated (through quality assurance procedures) in different patient datasets in order to refine and re-optimize the models, ensuring the continuous utility of the models. In the reasonably near future, decision support systems will be fully integrated within the clinic, with data and knowledge being shared in a standardized, dynamic, and potentially global manner enabling truly personalized and participative medicine.
Display omitted
PDF
