|
1
|
Cantaloube M, Castan F, Creoff M, Prunaretty J, Bordeau K, Michalet M, Assenat E, Guiu B, Pageaux GP, Ychou M, Aillères N, Fenoglietto P, Azria D, Riou O. Image-Guided Liver Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy Using VMAT and Real-Time Adaptive Tumor Gating: Evaluation of the Efficacy and Toxicity for Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13194853. [PMID: 34638336 PMCID: PMC8507769 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13194853] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/20/2021] [Revised: 09/15/2021] [Accepted: 09/20/2021] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Although the use of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in the management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains unclear, it is a therapeutic option often considered in patients not eligible to or recurring after other local therapies. Liver SBRT can be delivered using a wide range of techniques and linear accelerators. We report the first evaluation for HCC of SBRT using volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and real-time adaptive tumor gating, which is a mainly completely non-invasive procedure (no fiducial markers for 65.2% of the patients). Our study showed that this SBRT technique has very favorable outcomes with optimal local control and a low toxicity rate. Abstract Liver SBRT is a therapeutic option for the treatment of HCC in patients not eligible for other local therapies. We retrospectively report the outcomes of a cohort of consecutive patients treated with SBRT for HCC at the Montpellier Cancer Institute. Between March 2013 and December 2018, 66 patients were treated with image-guided liver SBRT using VMAT and real-time adaptive tumor gating in our institute. The main endpoints considered in this study were local control, disease-free survival, overall survival, and toxicity. The median follow-up was 16.8 months. About 66.7% had prior liver treatment. Most patients received 50 Gy in five fractions of 10 Gy. No patient had local recurrence. Overall survival and disease-free survival were, respectively, 83.9% and 46.7% at one year. In multivariate analysis, the diameter of the lesions was a significant prognostic factor associated with disease-free survival (HR = 2.57 (1.19–5.53) p = 0.02). Regarding overall survival, the volume of PTV was associated with lower overall survival (HR = 2.84 (1.14–7.08) p = 0.025). No grade 3 toxicity was observed. One patient developed a grade 4 gastric ulcer, despite the dose constraints being respected. Image-guided liver SBRT with VMAT is an effective and safe treatment in patients with inoperable HCC, even in heavily pre-treated patients. Further prospective evaluation will help to clarify the role of SBRT in the management of HCC patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marie Cantaloube
- Montpellier Cancer Institute (ICM), University Federation of Radiation Oncology of Mediterranean Occitanie, Montpellier University, INSERM U1194 IRCM, 34298 Montpellier, France; (M.C.); (M.C.); (J.P.); (K.B.); (M.M.); (N.A.); (P.F.); (D.A.)
| | - Florence Castan
- Biometrics Unit ICM, Montpellier Cancer Institute, University Montpellier, 34298 Montpellier, France;
| | - Morgane Creoff
- Montpellier Cancer Institute (ICM), University Federation of Radiation Oncology of Mediterranean Occitanie, Montpellier University, INSERM U1194 IRCM, 34298 Montpellier, France; (M.C.); (M.C.); (J.P.); (K.B.); (M.M.); (N.A.); (P.F.); (D.A.)
- Oncodoc, 34500 Béziers, France
| | - Jessica Prunaretty
- Montpellier Cancer Institute (ICM), University Federation of Radiation Oncology of Mediterranean Occitanie, Montpellier University, INSERM U1194 IRCM, 34298 Montpellier, France; (M.C.); (M.C.); (J.P.); (K.B.); (M.M.); (N.A.); (P.F.); (D.A.)
| | - Karl Bordeau
- Montpellier Cancer Institute (ICM), University Federation of Radiation Oncology of Mediterranean Occitanie, Montpellier University, INSERM U1194 IRCM, 34298 Montpellier, France; (M.C.); (M.C.); (J.P.); (K.B.); (M.M.); (N.A.); (P.F.); (D.A.)
| | - Morgan Michalet
- Montpellier Cancer Institute (ICM), University Federation of Radiation Oncology of Mediterranean Occitanie, Montpellier University, INSERM U1194 IRCM, 34298 Montpellier, France; (M.C.); (M.C.); (J.P.); (K.B.); (M.M.); (N.A.); (P.F.); (D.A.)
| | - Eric Assenat
- Service d’Oncologie Médicale, CHU St Eloi, 34000 Montpellier, France;
| | - Boris Guiu
- Imagerie Médicale St Eloi, 34000 Montpellier, France;
| | | | - Marc Ychou
- Medical Oncology Department, Montpellier Cancer Institute (ICM), Montpellier University, INSERM U1194 IRCM, 34298 Montpellier, France;
| | - Norbert Aillères
- Montpellier Cancer Institute (ICM), University Federation of Radiation Oncology of Mediterranean Occitanie, Montpellier University, INSERM U1194 IRCM, 34298 Montpellier, France; (M.C.); (M.C.); (J.P.); (K.B.); (M.M.); (N.A.); (P.F.); (D.A.)
| | - Pascal Fenoglietto
- Montpellier Cancer Institute (ICM), University Federation of Radiation Oncology of Mediterranean Occitanie, Montpellier University, INSERM U1194 IRCM, 34298 Montpellier, France; (M.C.); (M.C.); (J.P.); (K.B.); (M.M.); (N.A.); (P.F.); (D.A.)
| | - David Azria
- Montpellier Cancer Institute (ICM), University Federation of Radiation Oncology of Mediterranean Occitanie, Montpellier University, INSERM U1194 IRCM, 34298 Montpellier, France; (M.C.); (M.C.); (J.P.); (K.B.); (M.M.); (N.A.); (P.F.); (D.A.)
| | - Olivier Riou
- Montpellier Cancer Institute (ICM), University Federation of Radiation Oncology of Mediterranean Occitanie, Montpellier University, INSERM U1194 IRCM, 34298 Montpellier, France; (M.C.); (M.C.); (J.P.); (K.B.); (M.M.); (N.A.); (P.F.); (D.A.)
- Correspondence:
| |
Collapse
|
|
2
|
Loi M, Comito T, Franzese C, Dominici L, Lo Faro L, Clerici E, Franceschini D, Mancosu P, Reggiori G, Gallo P, Badalamenti M, Scorsetti M. Stereotactic body radiotherapy in hepatocellular carcinoma: patient selection and predictors of outcome and toxicity. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2020; 147:927-936. [PMID: 32945972 DOI: 10.1007/s00432-020-03389-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/23/2020] [Accepted: 09/08/2020] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) emerged as a valuable option in early to advanced-stage Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) as defined by Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) system. The aim of our study is to evaluate SBRT in HCC patients and to identify predictors of outcome and toxicity. MATERIALS AND METHODS A retrospective review of HCC patients treated at our Institution between November 2011 and December 2018 was carried out. SBRT was delivered in 3-10 fractions to a median Biologically Effective Dose (BED10) of 103 Gy10. RESULTS SBRT was performed in 128 patients to 217 HCC localizations, accounting for 142 treatment courses. BCLC stage was A, B, C in, respectively, 40 (31%), 72 (56%) and 16 (13%) patients. Local Control (LC), Progression Free Survival (PFS) and Overall Survival (OS) at 2 years were, respectively: 78%, 15% and 58%. LC was influenced by BED10 > 120 Gy10 (Hazard Ratio, HR: 0.08, 95% CI 0.01-0.59; p = 0.013) and size ≥ 3 cm (HR: 2.71, 95% CI 1.10-6.66; p = 0.03). BCLC stage was correlated to PFS (median 14 vs 12 vs 5 months, p = 0.012). In BCLC stage A-B disease (n = 112), LC was associated with improved survival (median 30 months vs not reached, p = 0.036). Acute and late toxicity rate was 26% (n = 37) and 8% (n = 11). Patients with BCLC B-C stage disease showed increased acute toxicity (HR: 2.9, 95% CI 1.10-7.65; p = 0.032). CONCLUSION Delivery of ablative doses > 120 Gy10 and tumor size are determinants of LC. Prolonged PFS and improved OS can be obtained in BCLC A-B patients. Grade 3 liver dysfunction is infrequent.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mauro Loi
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano, Milan, Italy.
| | - Tiziana Comito
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Ciro Franzese
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Milan, Italy
| | - Luca Dominici
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
- Radiotherapy Department, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Lorenzo Lo Faro
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Elena Clerici
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Davide Franceschini
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Pietro Mancosu
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Giacomo Reggiori
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Pasqualina Gallo
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Marco Badalamenti
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
- Radiotherapy Department, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Milan, Italy
| | - Marta Scorsetti
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
|
3
|
[Liver stereotactic body radiotherapy: Clinical features and technical consequences, results. Which treatment machine in which situation?]. Cancer Radiother 2019; 23:636-650. [PMID: 31444078 DOI: 10.1016/j.canrad.2019.07.159] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/07/2019] [Revised: 07/05/2019] [Accepted: 07/05/2019] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
Liver stereotactic body radiotherapy is a developing technique for the treatment of primary tumours and metastases. Its implementation is complex because of the particularities of the treated organ and the comorbidities of the patients. However, this technique is a treatment opportunity for patients otherwise in therapeutic impasse. The scientific evidence of liver stereotactic body radiotherapy has been considered by the French health authority as insufficient for its widespread use outside specialized and experienced centers, despite a growing and important number of retrospective and prospective studies, but few comparative data. This article focuses on the specific features of stereotactic body radiotherapy for liver treatments and the results of published studies of liver stereotactic body radiotherapy performed with classic linear accelerators and dedicated radiosurgery units.
Collapse
|
|
4
|
Kan X, Wang Y, Han P, Yao Q, Qian K, Xiong B, Zheng C. Combined ultrasound/computed tomography guidance in percutaneous radiofrequency ablation after transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma in the hepatic dome. Cancer Manag Res 2019; 11:7751-7757. [PMID: 31616188 PMCID: PMC6699493 DOI: 10.2147/cmar.s212127] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/13/2019] [Accepted: 07/28/2019] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose To assess the value of the combined ultrasound (US)/computed tomography (CT) guidance (US guidance was firstly used for puncture with the electrode needle to the site close to the tumor, and subsequently, CT guidance was used for precise positioning of the electrode tips) in percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) after transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in the hepatic dome. Methods From January 1, 2013 to June 30, 2017, medical records of 65 patients with HCCs in the hepatic dome who received TACE treatment before RFA procedure were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 34 patients with 35 liver tumors underwent percutaneous RFA under combined US/CT guidance, and 31 patients with 35 liver tumors received percutaneous RFA under CT guidance alone. The efficacy of combined US/CT-guided RFA was analyzed, and the procedure time and safety between the two groups were compared. Results In the combined US/CT-guided RFA group, the 1-, 3-, and 5-year local recurrence rates were 3%, 6%, 9%, respectively, and the 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rates were 100%, 97%, 94%, respectively. The mean procedure time in the CT-guided RFA group was significantly longer than that of the combined US/CT-guided RFA group (P<0.001). Although the overall complication rates between the two groups were not statistically significant, there were no occurrences of RFA-related complications in the combined US/CT-guided RFA group. The incidence of postoperative adverse reaction of right upper quadrant pain in the CT-guided RFA group was greater than that of the combined US/CT-guided RFA group (P=0.01). Conclusion Percutaneous RFA under the combined US/CT guidance was helpful for HCC in the hepatic dome.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xuefeng Kan
- Department of Radiology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430022, China.,Hubei Province Key Laboratory of Molecular Imaging, Wuhan 430022, China
| | - Yong Wang
- Department of Radiology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430022, China.,Hubei Province Key Laboratory of Molecular Imaging, Wuhan 430022, China.,Department of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Hainan Medical University, Haikou 570311, China
| | - Ping Han
- Department of Radiology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430022, China.,Hubei Province Key Laboratory of Molecular Imaging, Wuhan 430022, China
| | - Qi Yao
- Department of Radiology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430022, China.,Hubei Province Key Laboratory of Molecular Imaging, Wuhan 430022, China
| | - Kun Qian
- Department of Radiology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430022, China.,Hubei Province Key Laboratory of Molecular Imaging, Wuhan 430022, China
| | - Bin Xiong
- Department of Radiology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430022, China.,Hubei Province Key Laboratory of Molecular Imaging, Wuhan 430022, China
| | - Chuansheng Zheng
- Department of Radiology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430022, China.,Hubei Province Key Laboratory of Molecular Imaging, Wuhan 430022, China
| |
Collapse
|