Purpose Although intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is increasingly used to treat locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), IMRT and three-dimensional conformal external beam ...radiation therapy (3D-CRT) have not been compared prospectively. This study compares 3D-CRT and IMRT outcomes for locally advanced NSCLC in a large prospective clinical trial. Patients and Methods A secondary analysis was performed to compare IMRT with 3D-CRT in NRG Oncology clinical trial RTOG 0617, in which patients received concurrent chemotherapy of carboplatin and paclitaxel with or without cetuximab, and 60- versus 74-Gy radiation doses. Comparisons included 2-year overall survival (OS), progression-free survival, local failure, distant metastasis, and selected Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 3) ≥ grade 3 toxicities. Results The median follow-up was 21.3 months. Of 482 patients, 53% were treated with 3D-CRT and 47% with IMRT. The IMRT group had larger planning treatment volumes (median, 427 v 486 mL; P = .005); a larger planning treatment volume/volume of lung ratio (median, 0.13 v 0.15; P = .013); and more stage IIIB disease (30.3% v 38.6%, P = .056). Two-year OS, progression-free survival, local failure, and distant metastasis-free survival were not different between IMRT and 3D-CRT. IMRT was associated with less ≥ grade 3 pneumonitis (7.9% v 3.5%, P = .039) and a reduced risk in adjusted analyses (odds ratio, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.171 to 0.986; P = .046). IMRT also produced lower heart doses ( P < .05), and the volume of heart receiving 40 Gy (V40) was significantly associated with OS on adjusted analysis ( P < .05). The lung V5 was not associated with any ≥ grade 3 toxicity, whereas the lung V20 was associated with increased ≥ grade 3 pneumonitis risk on multivariable analysis ( P = .026). Conclusion IMRT was associated with lower rates of severe pneumonitis and cardiac doses in NRG Oncology clinical trial RTOG 0617, which supports routine use of IMRT for locally advanced NSCLC.
Radiation dose escalation has been shown to improve local control and survival in patients with non-small cell lung cancer in some studies, but randomized data have not supported this premise, ...possibly owing to adverse effects. Because of the physical characteristics of the Bragg peak, proton therapy (PT) delivers minimal exit dose distal to the target volume, resulting in better sparing of normal tissues in comparison to photon-based radiation therapy. This is particularly important for lung cancer given the proximity of the lung, heart, esophagus, major airways, large blood vessels, and spinal cord. However, PT is associated with more uncertainty because of the finite range of the proton beam and motion for thoracic cancers. PT is more costly than traditional photon therapy but may reduce side effects and toxicity-related hospitalization, which has its own associated cost. The cost of PT is decreasing over time because of reduced prices for the building, machine, maintenance, and overhead, as well as newer, shorter treatment programs. PT is improving rapidly as more research is performed particularly with the implementation of 4-dimensional computed tomography-based motion management and intensity modulated PT. Given these controversies, there is much debate in the oncology community about which patients with lung cancer benefit significantly from PT. The Particle Therapy Co-operative Group (PTCOG) Thoracic Subcommittee task group intends to address the issues of PT indications, advantages and limitations, cost-effectiveness, technology improvement, clinical trials, and future research directions. This consensus report can be used to guide clinical practice and indications for PT, insurance approval, and clinical or translational research directions.
Summary Background Malignant tumours arising within the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses are rare and composed of several histological types, rendering controlled clinical trials to establish the ...best treatment impractical. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the clinical outcomes of patients treated with charged particle therapy with those of individuals receiving photon therapy. Methods We identified studies of nasal cavity and paranasal sinus tumours through searches of databases including Embase, Medline, Scopus, and the Cochrane Collaboration. We included treatment-naive cohorts (both primary and adjuvant radiation therapy) and those with recurrent disease. Primary outcomes of interest were overall survival, disease-free survival, and locoregional control, at 5 years and at longest follow-up. We used random-effect models to pool outcomes across studies and compared event rates of combined outcomes for charged particle therapy and photon therapy using an interaction test. Findings 43 cohorts from 41 non-comparative observational studies were included. Median follow-up for the charged particle therapy group was 38 months (range 5–73) and for the photon therapy group was 40 months (14–97). Pooled overall survival was significantly higher at 5 years for charged particle therapy than for photon therapy (relative risk 1·51, 95% CI 1·14–1·99; p=0·0038) and at longest follow-up (1·27, 1·01–1·59; p=0·037). At 5 years, disease-free survival was significantly higher for charged particle therapy than for photon therapy (1·93, 1·36–2·75, p=0·0003) but, at longest follow-up, this event rate did not differ between groups (1·51, 1·00–2·30; p=0·052). Locoregional control did not differ between treatment groups at 5 years (1·06, 0·68–1·67; p=0·79) but it was higher for charged particle therapy than for photon therapy at longest follow-up (1·18, 1·01–1·37; p=0·031). A subgroup analysis comparing proton beam therapy with intensity-modulated radiation therapy showed significantly higher disease-free survival at 5 years (relative risk 1·44, 95% CI 1·01–2·05; p=0·045) and locoregional control at longest follow-up (1·26, 1·05–1·51; p=0·011). Interpretation Compared with photon therapy, charged particle therapy could be associated with better outcomes for patients with malignant diseases of the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses. Prospective studies emphasising collection of patient-reported and functional outcomes are strongly encouraged. Funding Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research.
Optimizing the Radiotherapy of Lung Cancer Schild, Steven E.
Journal of thoracic oncology,
October 2020, 2020-October, 2020-10-00, 20201001, Letnik:
15, Številka:
10
Journal Article
To compare 2 stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) schedules for medically inoperable early-stage lung cancer to determine which produces the lowest rate of grade ≥3 protocol-specified adverse ...events (psAEs) at 1 year.
Patients with biopsy-proven peripheral (≥2 cm from the central bronchial tree) T1 or T2, N0 (clinically node negative by positron emission tomography), M0 tumors were eligible. Patients were randomized to receive either 34 Gy in 1 fraction (arm 1) or 48 Gy in 4 consecutive daily fractions (arm 2). Rigorous central accreditation and quality assurance confirmed treatment per protocol guidelines. This study was designed to detect a psAEs rate >17% at a 10% significance level (1-sided) and 90% power. Secondary endpoints included rates of primary tumor control (PC), overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS) at 1 year. Designating the better of the 2 regimens was based on prespecified rules of psAEs and PC for each arm.
Ninety-four patients were accrued between September 2009 and March 2011. The median follow-up time was 30.2 months. Of 84 analyzable patients, 39 were in arm 1 and 45 in arm 2. Patient and tumor characteristics were balanced between arms. Four (10.3%) patients on arm 1 (95% confidence interval CI 2.9%-24.2%) and 6 (13.3%) patients on arm 2 (95% CI 5.1%-26.8%) experienced psAEs. The 2-year OS rate was 61.3% (95% CI 44.2%-74.6%) for arm 1 patients and 77.7% (95% CI 62.5%-87.3%) for arm 2. The 2-year DFS was 56.4% (95% CI 39.6%-70.2%) for arm 1 and 71.1% (95% CI 55.5%-82.1%) for arm 2. The 1-year PC rate was 97.0% (95% CI 84.2%-99.9%) for arm 1 and 92.7% (95% CI 80.1%-98.5%) for arm 2.
34 Gy in 1 fraction met the prespecified criteria and, of the 2 schedules, warrants further clinical research.
The purpose of this study was to compare the impact of uncertainties and interplay on 3-dimensional (3D) and 4D robustly optimized intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) plans for lung cancer in ...an exploratory methodology study.
IMPT plans were created for 11 nonrandomly selected non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cases: 3D robustly optimized plans on average CTs with internal gross tumor volume density overridden to irradiate internal target volume, and 4D robustly optimized plans on 4D computed tomography (CT) to irradiate clinical target volume (CTV). Regular fractionation (66 Gy relative biological effectiveness; RBE in 33 fractions) was considered. In 4D optimization, the CTV of individual phases received nonuniform doses to achieve a uniform cumulative dose. The root-mean-square dose-volume histograms (RVH) measured the sensitivity of the dose to uncertainties, and the areas under the RVH curve (AUCs) were used to evaluate plan robustness. Dose evaluation software modeled time-dependent spot delivery to incorporate interplay effect with randomized starting phases of each field per fraction. Dose-volume histogram (DVH) indices comparing CTV coverage, homogeneity, and normal tissue sparing were evaluated using Wilcoxon signed rank test.
4D robust optimization plans led to smaller AUC for CTV (14.26 vs 18.61, respectively; P=.001), better CTV coverage (Gy RBE) (D95% CTV: 60.6 vs 55.2, respectively; P=.001), and better CTV homogeneity (D5%-D95% CTV: 10.3 vs 17.7, respectively; P=.002) in the face of uncertainties. With interplay effect considered, 4D robust optimization produced plans with better target coverage (D95% CTV: 64.5 vs 63.8, respectively; P=.0068), comparable target homogeneity, and comparable normal tissue protection. The benefits from 4D robust optimization were most obvious for the 2 typical stage III lung cancer patients.
Our exploratory methodology study showed that, compared to 3D robust optimization, 4D robust optimization produced significantly more robust and interplay-effect-resistant plans for targets with comparable dose distributions for normal tissues. A further study with a larger and more realistic patient population is warranted to generalize the conclusions.
Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality not only in the United States but also around the world. In North America, lung cancer has become more predominant among former than ...current smokers. Yet in some countries, such as China, which has experienced a dramatic increase in the cigarette smoking rate during the past 2 decades, a peak in lung cancer incidence is still expected. Approximately two-thirds of adult Chinese men are smokers, representing one-third of all smokers worldwide. Non-small cell lung cancer accounts for 85% of all lung cancer cases in the United States. After the initial diagnosis, accurate staging of non-small cell lung cancer using computed tomography or positron emission tomography is crucial for determining appropriate therapy. When feasible, surgical resection remains the single most consistent and successful option for cure. However, close to 70% of patients with lung cancer present with locally advanced or metastatic disease at the time of diagnosis. Chemotherapy is beneficial for patients with metastatic disease, and the administration of concurrent chemotherapy and radiation is indicated for stage III lung cancer. The introduction of angiogenesis, epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors, and other new anticancer agents is changing the present and future of this disease and will certainly increase the number of lung cancer survivors. We identified studies for this review by searching the MEDLINE and PubMed databases for English-language articles published from January 1, 1980, through January 31, 2008. Key terms used for this search included non-small cell lung cancer, adenocarcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, bronchioalveolar cell carcinoma, large cell carcinoma, lung cancer epidemiology, genetics, survivorship, surgery, radiation therapy, chemotherapy, targeted therapy, bevacizumab, erlotinib, and epidermal growth factor receptor.
•Recommendations for risk-mitigation pandemic scenario:•Do not to compromise the prognosis of lung cancer patients by departing from guideline-recommended radiotherapy practice.•Postponement or ...interruption of radiotherapy of COVID-19 positive patients is generally recommended Severe pandemic scenario characterized by reduced resources:•Factors for patient triage include potential for cure, relative benefit of radiation, life expectancy, and performance status.
The COVID-19 pandemic has caused radiotherapy resource pressures and led to increased risks for lung cancer patients and healthcare staff. An international group of experts in lung cancer radiotherapy established this practice recommendation pertaining to whether and how to adapt radiotherapy for lung cancer in the COVID-19 pandemic.
For this ESTRO & ASTRO endorsed project, 32 experts in lung cancer radiotherapy contributed to a modified Delphi consensus process. We assessed potential adaptations of radiotherapy in two pandemic scenarios. The first, an early pandemic scenario of risk mitigation, is characterized by an altered risk–benefit ratio of radiotherapy for lung cancer patients due to their increased susceptibility for severe COVID-19 infection, and minimization of patient travelling and exposure of radiotherapy staff. The second, a later pandemic scenario, is characterized by reduced radiotherapy resources requiring patient triage. Six common lung cancer cases were assessed for both scenarios: peripherally located stage I NSCLC, locally advanced NSCLC, postoperative radiotherapy after resection of pN2 NSCLC, thoracic radiotherapy and prophylactic cranial irradiation for limited stage SCLC and palliative thoracic radiotherapy for stage IV NSCLC.
In a risk-mitigation pandemic scenario, efforts should be made not to compromise the prognosis of lung cancer patients by departing from guideline-recommended radiotherapy practice. In that same scenario, postponement or interruption of radiotherapy treatment of COVID-19 positive patients is generally recommended to avoid exposure of cancer patients and staff to an increased risk of COVID-19 infection. In a severe pandemic scenario characterized by reduced resources, if patients must be triaged, important factors for triage include potential for cure, relative benefit of radiation, life expectancy, and performance status. Case-specific consensus recommendations regarding multimodality treatment strategies and fractionation of radiotherapy are provided.
This joint ESTRO-ASTRO practice recommendation established pragmatic and balanced consensus recommendations in common clinical scenarios of radiotherapy for lung cancer in order to address the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic.
“True” malignant epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC) is used here to describe a lesion compressing of infiltrating the spinal cord associated with neurologic deficits. Radiotherapy alone is the ...most common treatment, for which several dose-fractionation regimens are available including single-fraction, short-course and longer-course regimens. Since these regimens are similarly effective regarding functional outcomes, patients with poor survival are optimally treated with short-course or even single-fraction radiotherapy. Longer-course radiotherapy results in better local control of malignant epidural spinal cord compression. Since most in-field recurrences occur 6 months or later, local control is particularly important for longer-term survivors who, therefore, should receive longer-course radiotherapy. It is important to estimate survival prior to treatment, which is facilitated by scoring tools. Radiotherapy should be supplemented by corticosteroids, if safely possible. Bisphosphonates and RANK-ligand inhibitors may improve local control. Selected patients can benefit from upfront decompressive surgery. Identification of these patients is facilitated by prognostic instruments considering degree of compression, myelopathy, radio-sensitivity, spinal stability, post-treatment ambulatory status, and patients’ performance status and survival prognoses. Many factors including patients’ preferences must be considered when designing personalized treatment regimens.
The COVID-19 pandemic has caused radiotherapy resource pressures and led to increased risks for lung cancer patients and healthcare staff. An international group of experts in lung cancer ...radiotherapy established this practice recommendation pertaining to whether and how to adapt radiotherapy for lung cancer in the COVID-19 pandemic.
For this ESTRO & ASTRO endorsed project, 32 experts in lung cancer radiotherapy contributed to a modified Delphi consensus process. We assessed potential adaptations of radiotherapy in two pandemic scenarios. The first, an early pandemic scenario of risk mitigation, is characterized by an altered risk–benefit ratio of radiotherapy for lung cancer patients due to their increased susceptibility for severe COVID-19 infection, and minimization of patient travelling and exposure of radiotherapy staff. The second, a later pandemic scenario, is characterized by reduced radiotherapy resources requiring patient triage. Six common lung cancer cases were assessed for both scenarios: peripherally located stage I NSCLC, locally advanced NSCLC, postoperative radiotherapy after resection of pN2 NSCLC, thoracic radiotherapy and prophylactic cranial irradiation for limited stage SCLC and palliative thoracic radiotherapy for stage IV NSCLC.
In a risk-mitigation pandemic scenario, efforts should be made not to compromise the prognosis of lung cancer patients by departing from guideline-recommended radiotherapy practice. In that same scenario, postponement or interruption of radiotherapy treatment of COVID-19 positive patients is generally recommended to avoid exposure of cancer patients and staff to an increased risk of COVID-19 infection. In a severe pandemic scenario characterized by reduced resources, if patients must be triaged, important factors for triage include potential for cure, relative benefit of radiation, life expectancy, and performance status. Case-specific consensus recommendations regarding multimodality treatment strategies and fractionation of radiotherapy are provided.
This joint ESTRO-ASTRO practice recommendation established pragmatic and balanced consensus recommendations in common clinical scenarios of radiotherapy for lung cancer in order to address the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic.
•Recommendations for risk-mitigation pandemic scenario:•Do not to compromise the prognosis of lung cancer patients by departing from guideline-recommended radiotherapy practice.•Postponement or interruption of radiotherapy of COVID-19 positive patients is generally recommended Severe pandemic scenario characterized by reduced resources:•Factors for patient triage include potential for cure, relative benefit of radiation, life expectancy, and performance status.
PDF
