Volumetric decrease of pancreas after abdominal irradiation, it is time to consider pancreas as an organ at risk for radiotherapy planning

Background

Volumetric shrinkage of normal tissues such as salivary glands, kidneys, hippocampus are observed after radiotherapy. We aimed to assess the alterations in pancreatic volume of patients who received abdominal radiotherapy and define pancreas as an organ at risk for radiation treatment planning.

Material-methods

Forty-nine patients operated for gastric adenocarcinoma who received adjuvant abdominal radiotherapy were in the study group, 27 patients with early stage disease who did not need adjuvant treatment after surgery comprised the control group. An experienced radiologist contoured the pancreas of all the patients from computed tomographies imported to the planning system obtained either for radiation planning purpose or for follow-up after surgery. The same procedure was repeated one year later for both groups. Measured volume of the pancreas was expressed in cm³.

Results

Mean pancreatic volumes were similar in both groups at the onset of the study, 51,34 ± 20,33 cm³, and 50,12 ± 23,75 cm³ in the irradiated and the control groups respectively (p = 0,63). One year later, mean pancreatic volumes were significantly decreased in each group; 22,48 ± 10,53 cm³, 44,18 ± 23,08 cm³ respectively, p < 0,001. However, the decrease in pancreatic volume was significantly more pronounced in the irradiated group in comparison to the control group, p < 0,001.

Conclusion

Volumetric decrease in normal tissues after radiotherapy is responsible for loss of organ function and radiation related late side effects. Although pancreas is a radiation sensitive organ losing its volume and function after radiation exposure, it is not yet considered as an organ at risk for radiation treatment planning. Pancreas should be contoured as an organ at risk, dose-volume histogram for the organ should be created, and safe organ doses should be determined. This is the first study declaring pancreas as an organ at risk for radiation toxicity and the necessity of defining dose constraints for the organ.

Osteoporosis development and vertebral fractures after abdominal irradiation in patients with gastric cancer

Background

Decrease in bone mineral density, osteoporosis development, bone toxicity and resulting insufficiency fractures as late effect of radiotherapy are not well known. Osteoporosis development related to radiotherapy has not been investigated properly and insufficiency fractures are rarely reported for vertebral bones.

Methods

Ninety-seven patients with gastric adenocarcinoma were evaluated for adjuvant treatment after surgery. While 73 out of 97 patients treated with adjuvant chemoradiotherapy comprised the study group, 24 out of 97 patients with early stage disease without need of adjuvant treatment comprised the control group. Bone mineral densities (BMD) of lumbar spine and femoral neck were measured by dual energy x-ray absorptiometry after surgery, and one year later in both groups.

Results

There was statistically significant decline in BMDs after one year in each group itself, however the decline in BMDs of the patients in the irradiated group was more pronounced when compared with the patients in the control group; p values were 0.02 for the decline in BMDs of lumbar spine, and 0.01 for femoral neck respectively. Insufficiency fractures were observed only in the irradiated patients (7 out of 73 patients) with a cumulative incidence of 9.6%.

Conclusions

Abdominal irradiation as in the adjuvant treatment of gastric cancer results in decrease in BMD and osteoporosis. Insufficiency fracture risk in the radiation exposed vertabral bones is increased. Calcium and vitamin D replacement and other measures for prevention of osteoporosis and insufficiency fractures should be considered after abdominal irradiation.

Radiation field size and dose determine oncologic outcome in esophageal cancer

Background

Locoregional recurrence is a major problem in esophageal cancer patients treated with definitive concomitant chemoradiotherapy. Approximately half of the patients fail locoregionally. We analyzed the impact of enlarged radiation field size and higher radiation dose incorporated to chemoradiotherapy on oncologic outcome.

Methods

Seventy-four consecutive patients with histologically proven nonmetastatic squamous or adenocarcinoma of the esophagus were included in this retrospective analysis. All patients were locally advanced cT3–T4 and/or cN0-1. Treatment consisted of either definitive concomitant chemoradiotherapy (Def-CRT) (n = 49, 66 %) or preoperative concomitant chemoradiotherapy (Pre-CRT) followed by surgical resection (n = 25, 34 %). Patients were treated with longer radiation fields. Clinical target volume (CTV) was obtained by giving 8–10 cm margins to the craniocaudal borders of gross tumor volume (GTV) instead of 4–5 cm globally accepted margins, and some patients in Def-CRT group received radiation doses higher than 50 Gy.

Results

Isolated locoregional recurrences were observed in 9 out of 49 patients (18 %) in the Def-CRT group and in 1 out of 25 patients (3.8 %) in the Pre-CRT group (p = 0.15). The 5-year survival rate was 59 % in the Def-CRT group and 50 % in the Pre-CRT group (p = 0.72). Radiation dose was important in the Def-CRT group. Patients treated with >50 Gy (11 out of 49 patients) had better survival with respect to patients treated with 50 Gy (38 out of 49 patients). Five-year survivals were 91 and 50 %, respectively (p = 0.013).

Conclusions

Radiation treatment planning by enlarged radiation fields in esophageal cancer decreases locoregional recurrences considerably with respect to the results reported in the literature by standard radiation fields (18 vs >50 %). Radiation dose is as important as radiation field size; patients in the Def-CRT group treated with ≥50 Gy had better survival in comparison to patients treated with 50 Gy.

Is there any role of intravenous iron for the treatment of anemia in cancer?

BACKGROUND

Anemia is a major cause of morbidity in patients with cancer resulting in poor physical performance, prognosis and therapy outcome. The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy of intravenous (iv) iron administration for the correction of anemia, for the prevention of exacerbation of anemia, for decreasing blood transfusion rates, and for the survival of cancer patients.

METHODS

Patients with different solid tumor diagnosis who received iv iron during their cancer treatment were evaluated retrospectively. Sixty-three patients with hemoglobin (Hgb) levels between ≥ 9 g/dL, and ≤ 10 g/dL, and no urgent need for red blood cell transfusion were included in this retrospective analysis. The aim of cancer treatment was palliative for metastatic patients (36 out of 63), or adjuvant or curative for patients with localized disease (27 out of 63). All the patients received 100 mg of iron sucrose which was delivered intravenously in 100 mL of saline solution, infused within 30 min, 5 infusions every other day. Complete blood count, serum iron, and ferritin levels before and at every 1 to 3 months subsequently after iv iron administration were followed regularly.

RESULTS

Initial mean serum Hgb, serum ferritin and serum iron levels were 9.33 g/dL, 156 ng/mL, and 35.9 μg/dL respectively. Mean Hgb, ferritin, and iron levels 1 to 3 months, and 6 to 12 months after iv iron administration were 10.4 g/dL, 11.2 g/dL, 298.6 ng/mL, 296.7 ng/mL, and 71.6 μg/dL, 67.7 μg/dL respectively with a statistically significant increase in the levels (p < 0.001). Nineteen patients (30 %) however had further decrease in Hgb levels despite iv iron administration, and blood transfusion was necessary in 18 of these 19 patients (28.5 %). The 1-year overall survival rates differed in metastatic cancer patients depending on their response to iv iron; 61.1 % in responders versus 35.3 % in non-responders, (p = 0.005), furthermore response to iv iron correlated with tumor response to cancer treatment, and this relation was statistically significant, (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Iv iron administration in cancer patients undergoing active oncologic treatment is an effective and safe measure for correction of anemia, and prevention of worsening of anemia. Amelioration of anemia and increase in Hgb levels with iv iron administration in patients with disseminated cancer is associated with increased tumor response to oncologic treatment and overall survival. Response to iv iron may be both a prognostic and a predictive factor for response to cancer treatment and survival.

Whole-brain radiation therapy for brain metastases: detrimental or beneficial?

Stereotactic radiosurgery is frequently used, either alone or together with whole-brain radiation therapy to treat brain metastases from solid tumors. Certain experts and radiation oncology groups have proposed replacing whole-brain radiation therapy with stereotactic radiosurgery alone for the management of brain metastases. Although randomized trials have favored adding whole-brain radiation therapy to stereotactic radiosurgery for most end points, a recent meta-analysis demonstrated a survival disadvantage for patients treated with whole-brain radiation therapy and stereotactic radiosurgery compared with patients treated with stereotactic radiosurgery alone. However the apparent detrimental effect of adding whole-brain radiation therapy to stereotactic radiosurgery reported in this meta-analysis may be the result of inhomogeneous distribution of the patients with respect to tumor histologies, molecular histologic subtypes, and extracranial tumor stages between the groups rather than a real effect. Unfortunately, soon after this meta-analysis was published, even as an abstract, use of whole-brain radiation therapy in managing brain metastases has become controversial among radiation oncologists. The American Society of Radiation Oncology recently recommended, in their “Choose Wisely” campaign, against routinely adding whole-brain radiation therapy to stereotactic radiosurgery to treat brain metastases. However, this situation creates conflict for radiation oncologists who believe that there are enough high level of evidence for the effectiveness of whole-brain radiation therapy in the treatment of brain metastases.

Risk of endocrine pancreatic insufficiency in patients receiving adjuvant chemoradiation for resected gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant radiotherapy combined with 5-fluorouracil based chemotherapy has become the new standard after curative resection in high risk gastric cancer. Beside many complications due to surgery, the addition of chemotherapy and radiotherapy as adjuvant treatment may lead to both acute and late toxicities. Pancreatic tissue irradiation during this adjuvant treatment because of incidental and unavoidable inclusion of the organ within the radiation field may affect exocrine and endocrine functions of the organ.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifty-three patients with gastric adenocarcinoma were evaluated for adjuvant chemoradiotherapy after surgery. While 37 out of 53 patients were treated postoperatively due to either serosal or adjacent organ or lymph node involvement, 16 patients without these risk factors were followed up regularly without any additional treatment and they served as the control group. Fasting blood glucose (FBG), hemoglobin A1c (HBA1c), insulin and C-peptide levels were measured in the control and study groups after the surgery and 6 months and 1 year later.

RESULTS

At the baseline there was no difference in FBG, HbA1c, C-peptide and insulin levels between the control and the study groups. At the end of the study there was a statistically significant decline in insulin and C-peptide levels in the study group, (7.5 ± 6.0 vs 4.5 ± 4.4 IU/L, p: 0.002 and 2.3 ± 0.9 vs 1.56 ± 0.9 ng/ml, p: 0.001) respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvant radiotherapy in gastric cancer leads to a decrease in beta cell function and insulin secretion capacity of the pancreas with possible diabetes risk. Radiation-induced pancreatic injury and late effects of radiation on normal pancreatic tissue are unknown, but pancreas is more sensitive to radiation than known. This organ should be studied extensively in order to determine the tolerance doses and it should be contoured during abdominal radiotherapy planning as an organ at risk.

Lhermitte's sign: Review with special emphasis in oncology practice

Lhermitte's sign (LS) is characterized by electric shock like sensation, spreading along the spine in a cervico-caudal direction and also into both arms and legs, which is felt upon forward flexion of the neck. It is a myelopathy resulting from damage to sensory axons at the dorsal columns of the cervical or thoracic spinal cord and a well-known clinical sign in neurology practice. Patients with cancer may present with LS due to various causes either related to the tumor itself or to its treatment. Spinal cord tumors, radiotherapy and chemotherapy are possible causes of LS observed in oncology practice. While LS is observed with a frequency of 3.6-13% in large patient groups receiving radiotherapy for head and neck and thoracic malignancies, the true incidence of chemotherapy and spinal cord tumor induced LS is unknown with only few reported cases in the literature. In the present article, various pathologies causing Lhermitte's sign are reviewed with special emphasis on the implications of this sign in oncology practice.

Tumour Lysis Syndrome in Solid Tumours

Tumour lysis syndrome (TLS) is an oncological emergency that results from massive cytolysis of malignant cells with a sudden release of their cellular contents, such as intracellular ions and metabolic by-products, into the systemic circulation. This syndrome is common in tumours with rapid cell turnover and growth rates, and in bulky tumours with high sensitivity to antineoplastic treatments. It is, therefore, a well-recognised clinical problem in haematological malignancies. It is rarely observed in solid tumours. Here, published studies are reviewed, beginning with the first report of TLS in solid tumours. Reported solid TLS cases are evaluated according to their common features and differences, and their similarities with those seen in haematological malignancies. Basic principles for the prevention and management of TLS are mentioned, with particular emphasis on solid tumours.