1
|
Isabelle Choi J, Wojcieszynski A, Amos RA, Giap H, Apisarnthanarax S, Ashman JB, Anand A, Perles LA, Williamson T, Ramkumar S, Molitoris J, Simone CB, Chuong MD. PTCOG Gastrointestinal Subcommittee Lower Gastrointestinal Tract Malignancies Consensus Statement. Int J Part Ther 2024; 11:100019. [PMID: 38757077 PMCID: PMC11095104 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpt.2024.100019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/29/2023] [Accepted: 01/02/2024] [Indexed: 05/18/2024] Open
Abstract
Purpose Radiotherapy delivery in the definitive management of lower gastrointestinal (LGI) tract malignancies is associated with substantial risk of acute and late gastrointestinal (GI), genitourinary, dermatologic, and hematologic toxicities. Advanced radiation therapy techniques such as proton beam therapy (PBT) offer optimal dosimetric sparing of critical organs at risk, achieving a more favorable therapeutic ratio compared with photon therapy. Materials and Methods The international Particle Therapy Cooperative Group GI Subcommittee conducted a systematic literature review, from which consensus recommendations were developed on the application of PBT for LGI malignancies. Results Eleven recommendations on clinical indications for which PBT should be considered are presented with supporting literature, and each recommendation was assessed for level of evidence and strength of recommendation. Detailed technical guidelines pertaining to simulation, treatment planning and delivery, and image guidance are also provided. Conclusion PBT may be of significant value in select patients with LGI malignancies. Additional clinical data are needed to further elucidate the potential benefits of PBT for patients with anal cancer and rectal cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J. Isabelle Choi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
- New York Proton Center, New York, New York, USA
| | | | - Richard A. Amos
- Department of Medical Physics & Biomedical Engineering, University College London, London, UK
| | - Huan Giap
- Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA
| | - Smith Apisarnthanarax
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | | | - Aman Anand
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Arizona, USA
| | - Luis A. Perles
- Department of Radiation Physics, UT MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Tyler Williamson
- Department of Radiation Physics, UT MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | | | - Jason Molitoris
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Charles B. Simone
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
- New York Proton Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Michael D. Chuong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Miami, Florida, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Bakhtiar M, Butala AA, Berlin EE, Metz JM, Bradley JD, Jones JA, Lukens JN, Paydar I, Taunk NK. Factors Associated With and Characteristics of Patients Receiving Proton Therapy at the End of Life. Int J Part Ther 2024; 11:100014. [PMID: 38757084 PMCID: PMC11095101 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpt.2024.100014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/27/2023] [Revised: 03/10/2024] [Accepted: 03/11/2024] [Indexed: 05/18/2024] Open
Abstract
Purpose To identify the characteristics, indications, and toxicities among patients receiving proton beam therapy (PBT) in the final year of life at an academic medical center. Materials and Methods A retrospective review of patients who received PBT within the final 12 months of life was performed. Electronic medical records were reviewed for patient and treatment details from 2010 to 2019. Patients were followed from the start of PBT until death or last follow-up. Acute (3 months) toxicities were graded using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0. Imaging response was assessed using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1. The χ2 test was used to evaluate factors associated with palliative treatment. Simple logistic regression was used to evaluate factors associated with toxicity. Results Bet299 patients were treated at the end of life (EOL) out of 5802 total patients treated with PBT (5.2%). Median age was 68 years (19-94 years), 58% male. The most common cancer was nonsmall cell lung cancer (27%). Patients were treated for symptom palliation alone (11%), durable control (57%), curative intent (16%), local recurrence (14%), or oligometastatic disease (2%). Forty-five percent received reirradiation. Median treatment time was 32 days (1-189 days). Acute toxicity was noted in 85% of the patients (31% G1, 53% G2, 15% G3). Thirteen patients (4%) experienced chronic toxicity. Breast and hematologic malignancy were associated with palliative intent χ2 (1, N = 14) = 17, P = .013; (χ2 (1, N = 14) = 18, P = .009). Conclusion The number of patients treated with PBT at the EOL was low compared to all comers. Many of these patients received treatment with definitive doses and concurrent systemic therapy. Some patients spent a large portion of their remaining days on treatment. A prognostic indicator may better optimize patient selection for PBT at the EOL.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mina Bakhtiar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA
- Harvard Radiation Oncology Program, Dana Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital & Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA 02215, USA
| | - Anish A. Butala
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA
| | - Eva E. Berlin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA
| | - James M. Metz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA
| | - Jeffrey D. Bradley
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA
| | - Joshua A. Jones
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA
| | - John Nicholas Lukens
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA
| | - Ima Paydar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA
| | - Neil K. Taunk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Preoperative short-course radiation therapy with PROtons compared to photons in high-risk RECTal cancer (PRORECT): Initial dosimetric experience. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2022; 39:100562. [PMID: 36582423 PMCID: PMC9792362 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2022.100562] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/27/2022] [Revised: 12/08/2022] [Accepted: 12/14/2022] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Background and purpose Neoadjuvant short-course radiotherapy (SCRT) followed by full-dose systemic chemotherapy is an established treatment modality in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). Until recently, SCRT has been exclusively delivered with photons. Proton beam therapy (PBT) may minimize acute toxicity, which in turn likely impacts favorably on the tolerability to subsequent chemotherapy. The aim of this study is a dosimetric comparison between SCRT with photons and protons in the randomized phase II trial PRORECT (NCT04525989). Materials and methods From June 2021 to June 2022, twenty consecutive patients with LARC have been treated according to study protocol. For each patient, both a VMAT and a PBT treatment plans have been generated and compared pairwise. Results Dose-volume histogram (DVH) analysis revealed that SCRT with protons significantly reduced radiation dose to pelvic organs at risk including bladder, bones, and bowel in comparison to SCRT with photons. Photon and proton treatment plans had equivalent conformity and homogeneity indexes. Conclusion Preoperative SCRT with protons offers a significant reduction of radiation dose to normal tissues compared with current photon-based radiotherapy technique. Demonstrated dosimetric advantages may translate into measurable clinical benefits in patients with LARC. Clinical implications of the dosimetric superiority of SCRT with protons will be presented in the coming reports from the PRORECT trial.
Collapse
|
4
|
Jones BM, Goodman KA. BID It to Win It. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2022; 114:831. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.09.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/19/2022] [Revised: 08/22/2022] [Accepted: 09/04/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
|
5
|
Kobeissi JM, Simone CB, Hilal L, Wu AJ, Lin H, Crane CH, Hajj C. Proton Therapy in the Management of Luminal Gastrointestinal Cancers: Esophagus, Stomach, and Anorectum. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:2877. [PMID: 35740544 PMCID: PMC9221464 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14122877] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/30/2022] [Revised: 05/28/2022] [Accepted: 06/07/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
While the role of proton therapy in gastric cancer is marginal, its role in esophageal and anorectal cancers is expanding. In esophageal cancer, protons are superior in sparing the organs at risk, as shown by multiple dosimetric studies. Literature is conflicting regarding clinical significance, but the preponderance of evidence suggests that protons yield similar or improved oncologic outcomes to photons at a decreased toxicity cost. Similarly, protons have improved sparing of the organs at risk in anorectal cancers, but clinical data is much more limited to date, and toxicity benefits have not yet been shown clinically. Large, randomized trials are currently underway for both disease sites.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jana M. Kobeissi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, School of Medicine, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut 1007, Lebanon; (J.M.K.); (L.H.)
| | - Charles B. Simone
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center, New York, NY 10035, USA; (C.B.S.II); (H.L.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10027, USA; (A.J.W.); (C.H.C.)
| | - Lara Hilal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, School of Medicine, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut 1007, Lebanon; (J.M.K.); (L.H.)
| | - Abraham J. Wu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10027, USA; (A.J.W.); (C.H.C.)
| | - Haibo Lin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center, New York, NY 10035, USA; (C.B.S.II); (H.L.)
| | - Christopher H. Crane
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10027, USA; (A.J.W.); (C.H.C.)
| | - Carla Hajj
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10027, USA; (A.J.W.); (C.H.C.)
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Beddok A, Calugaru V, de Marzi L, Graff P, Dumas JL, Goudjil F, Dendale R, Minsat M, Verrelle P, Buvat I, Créhange G. Clinical and technical challenges of cancer reirradiation: Words of wisdom. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2022; 174:103655. [PMID: 35398521 DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2022.103655] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/18/2021] [Revised: 03/13/2022] [Accepted: 03/15/2022] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Since the development of new radiotherapy techniques that have improved healthy tissue sparing, reirradiation (reRT) has become possible. The selection of patients eligible for reRT is complex given that it can induce severe or even fatal side effects. The first step should therefore be to assess, in the context of multidisciplinary staff meeting, the patient's physical status, the presence of sequelae resulting from the first irradiation and the best treatment option available. ReRT can be performed either curatively or palliatively to treat a cancer-related symptom that is detrimental to the patient's quality of life. The selected techniques for reRT should provide the best protection of healthy tissue. The construction of target volumes and the evaluation of constraints regarding the doses that can be used in this context have not yet been fully codified. These points raised in the literature suggest that randomized studies should be undertaken to answer pending questions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arnaud Beddok
- Department of Radiation Oncology. Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Paris - Saint Cloud-Orsay. France; Laboratoire d'Imagerie Translationnelle en Oncologie (LITO), U1288 Université Paris Saclay/Inserm/Institut Curie. Orsay. France; Proton Therapy Center. Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Orsay. France.
| | - Valentin Calugaru
- Department of Radiation Oncology. Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Paris - Saint Cloud-Orsay. France; Proton Therapy Center. Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Orsay. France
| | - Ludovic de Marzi
- Department of Radiation Oncology. Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Paris - Saint Cloud-Orsay. France; Laboratoire d'Imagerie Translationnelle en Oncologie (LITO), U1288 Université Paris Saclay/Inserm/Institut Curie. Orsay. France; Proton Therapy Center. Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Orsay. France
| | - Pierre Graff
- Department of Radiation Oncology. Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Paris - Saint Cloud-Orsay. France
| | - Jean-Luc Dumas
- Department of Radiation Oncology. Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Paris - Saint Cloud-Orsay. France
| | - Farid Goudjil
- Department of Radiation Oncology. Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Paris - Saint Cloud-Orsay. France; Proton Therapy Center. Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Orsay. France
| | - Rémi Dendale
- Department of Radiation Oncology. Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Paris - Saint Cloud-Orsay. France; Proton Therapy Center. Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Orsay. France
| | - Mathieu Minsat
- Department of Radiation Oncology. Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Paris - Saint Cloud-Orsay. France
| | - Pierre Verrelle
- Department of Radiation Oncology. Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Paris - Saint Cloud-Orsay. France
| | - Irène Buvat
- Laboratoire d'Imagerie Translationnelle en Oncologie (LITO), U1288 Université Paris Saclay/Inserm/Institut Curie. Orsay. France
| | - Gilles Créhange
- Department of Radiation Oncology. Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Paris - Saint Cloud-Orsay. France; Laboratoire d'Imagerie Translationnelle en Oncologie (LITO), U1288 Université Paris Saclay/Inserm/Institut Curie. Orsay. France; Proton Therapy Center. Institut Curie, PSL Research University, Orsay. France
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Taunk N. The role of proton therapy in gynecological radiation oncology. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2022; 32:414-420. [DOI: 10.1136/ijgc-2021-002459] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/24/2021] [Accepted: 01/06/2022] [Indexed: 11/04/2022] Open
Abstract
Proton beam therapy is an external beam radiotherapy modality that offers potentially similar efficacy and reduced toxicity compared with photon radiotherapy due to little to no exit dose of radiation beyond the intended target. Improvements in radiotherapy from two-dimensional, to three-dimensional, to intensity-modulated radiation therapy have offered comparable to improved efficacy of radiation therapy with progressive reductions in toxicity. Proton beam therapy may offer further improvements, with multiple dosimetric studies demonstrating potential reductions in exposure of normal tissue to radiation, particularly bowel and bone marrow. Proton beam therapy offers avenues for dose escalation or re-irradiation, which were previously not feasible with photon radiotherapy. Although early clinical data generally demonstrate safety, feasibility, and efficacy in a few series, prospective clinical trials are limited and needed to better define who might benefit from proton therapy. In this review, we discuss the history, dosimetry, available clinical data, and technical needs to deliver high-quality proton therapy.
Collapse
|
8
|
Chuong MD, Bryant JM, Herrera R, McCulloch J, Contreras J, Kotecha R, Romaguera T, Alvarez D, Hall MD, Rubens M, Mehta MP, Kaiser A, Tom M, Gutierrez AN, Mittauer KE. Dose-Escalated Magnetic Resonance Image–Guided Abdominopelvic Reirradiation With Continuous Intrafraction Visualization, Soft Tissue Tracking, and Automatic Beam Gating. Adv Radiat Oncol 2022; 7:100840. [PMID: 35146215 PMCID: PMC8802055 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2021.100840] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/17/2021] [Revised: 09/01/2021] [Accepted: 10/05/2021] [Indexed: 11/03/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Methods and Materials Results Conclusions
Collapse
|
9
|
Chuter R, Glassborow E, Speight R, Clarke M, Murray L, Radhakrishna G, Lavin V, Aspin L, Aldred M, Gregory S, Richardson J, Handley J. A treatment planning comparison of photon stereotactic ablative radiotherapy and proton beam therapy for the re-irradiation of pelvic cancer recurrence. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 2022; 21:78-83. [PMID: 35243036 PMCID: PMC8881531 DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2022.02.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/24/2021] [Revised: 02/16/2022] [Accepted: 02/17/2022] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Patients who experience a pelvic cancer recurrence in or near a region that received initial radiotherapy, typically have few options for treatment. Organs at risk (OAR) have often reached their dose constraint limits leaving minimal dose remaining for standard re-irradiation (reRT). However, photon based stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) has been utilised for reRT with promising initial results although meeting OAR constraints can be challenging. Proton beam therapy (PBT) could offer an advantage. MATERIALS AND METHODS SABR plans used for treatment for ten pelvic reRT patients were dosimetrically compared to PBT plans retrospectively planned using the same CT and contour data. PBT plans were created to match the CTV dose coverage of SABR treatment plans with V100% ≥95%. An 'as low as reasonably achievable' approach was taken to OAR tolerances with consideration of OAR dose from the initial radiation (using equivalent dose in 2 Gy fractions). RESULTS Dosimetric comparison of relevant OAR statistics showed a decrease in OAR dose using PBT over SABR in all patients, with equivalent target coverage. The largest statistically significant reduction was seen for the colon D0.5 cm3 with a median reduction from 13.1 Gy to 5.9 Gy. There were statistically significant dose reductions in the median dose to small bowel, sacral plexus and cauda equina. CONCLUSION PBT has the potential for significant dose reductions for OARs in the pelvic reRT setting compared to SABR. However, it remains unclear if the magnitude of these OAR dose reductions will translate into clinical benefit.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R. Chuter
- Christie Medical Physics and Engineering, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Road, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
- Division of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Heath, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Road, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
| | - E. Glassborow
- Christie Medical Physics and Engineering, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Road, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
| | - R. Speight
- Leeds Cancer Centre, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK
| | - M. Clarke
- Christie Medical Physics and Engineering, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Road, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
| | - L. Murray
- Leeds Cancer Centre, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK
- Leeds Institute of Medical Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - G. Radhakrishna
- Clinical Oncology, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Road, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
| | - V. Lavin
- Clinical Oncology, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Road, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
| | - L. Aspin
- Leeds Cancer Centre, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK
| | - M Aldred
- Leeds Cancer Centre, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK
| | - S Gregory
- Leeds Cancer Centre, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK
| | - J. Richardson
- Christie Medical Physics and Engineering, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Road, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
- Division of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Heath, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Road, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
| | - J. Handley
- Christie Medical Physics and Engineering, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Road, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Rønde HS, Kallehauge JF, Kronborg CJS, Nyvang L, Rekstad BL, Hanekamp BA, Appelt AL, Guren MG, Spindler KLS. Intensity modulated proton therapy planning study for organ at risk sparing in rectal cancer re-irradiation. Acta Oncol 2021; 60:1436-1439. [PMID: 34264785 DOI: 10.1080/0284186x.2021.1953139] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/22/2021] [Accepted: 07/05/2021] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- H S Rønde
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - J F Kallehauge
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - C J S Kronborg
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - L Nyvang
- Department of Medical Physics, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - B L Rekstad
- Department of Medical Physics, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - B A Hanekamp
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - A L Appelt
- Leeds Cancer Centre, St James's University Hospital, and Leeds Institute of Medical Research at St James's, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - M G Guren
- Department of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - K L S Spindler
- Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Fok M, Toh S, Easow J, Fowler H, Clifford R, Parsons J, Vimalachandran D. Proton beam therapy in rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Oncol 2021; 38:101638. [PMID: 34340196 DOI: 10.1016/j.suronc.2021.101638] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/15/2021] [Revised: 07/09/2021] [Accepted: 07/24/2021] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Locally advanced rectal cancer is often treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery. Radiotherapy carries significant risk of toxicity to organs at risk (OAR). Proton beam therapy (PBT) has demonstrated to be effective in other cancers, delivering equivalent dosimetric radiation but with the benefit of improved sparing of OAR. This review compares dosimetric irradiation of OAR and oncological outcomes for PBT versus conventional photon-based radiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer. METHODS An electronic literature search was performed for studies with comparative cohorts receiving proton beam therapy and photon-based radiotherapy for rectal cancer. RESULTS Eight articles with a total of 127 patients met the inclusion criteria. There was significantly less irradiated small bowel with PBT compared to three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) (MD -17.01, CI [-24.06, -9.96], p < 0.00001 and MD -6.96, CI [-12.99, -0.94], p = 0.02, respectively). Similar dosimetric results were observed for bladder and pelvic bone marrow. Three studies reported clinical and oncological results for PBT in recurrent rectal cancer with overall survival reported as 43 %, 68 % and 77.2 %, and one study in primary rectal cancer with 100 % disease free survival. CONCLUSION PBT treatment plans revealed significantly less irradiation of OAR for rectal cancer compared to conventional photon-based radiotherapy. Trials for recurrent rectal cancer and PBT have shown promising results. There are currently no ongoing clinical trials for primary rectal cancer and PBT. More research is required to validate its potential role in dose escalation, higher complete response rate and organ preservation without increasing toxicity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew Fok
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Countess of Chester NHS Foundation Trust, UK; Institute of Systems, Molecular and Integrative Biology, University of Liverpool, 200 London Road, Liverpool, L3 9TA, UK
| | - Steven Toh
- School of Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L3 9TA, UK
| | - Jeremy Easow
- School of Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L3 9TA, UK
| | - Hayley Fowler
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Countess of Chester NHS Foundation Trust, UK; Institute of Systems, Molecular and Integrative Biology, University of Liverpool, 200 London Road, Liverpool, L3 9TA, UK
| | - Rachael Clifford
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Countess of Chester NHS Foundation Trust, UK; Institute of Systems, Molecular and Integrative Biology, University of Liverpool, 200 London Road, Liverpool, L3 9TA, UK
| | - Jason Parsons
- Institute of Systems, Molecular and Integrative Biology, University of Liverpool, 200 London Road, Liverpool, L3 9TA, UK; Clatterbridge Cancer Centre NHS Foundation Trust, Clatterbridge Road, Bebington, CH63 4JY, UK
| | - Dale Vimalachandran
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Countess of Chester NHS Foundation Trust, UK; Institute of Systems, Molecular and Integrative Biology, University of Liverpool, 200 London Road, Liverpool, L3 9TA, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Doyen J, Aloi D, Groulier A, Vidal M, Lesueur P, Calugaru V, Bondiau PY. Role of proton therapy in reirradiation and in the treatment of sarcomas. Cancer Radiother 2021; 25:550-553. [PMID: 34284969 DOI: 10.1016/j.canrad.2021.06.024] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/31/2021] [Revised: 06/11/2021] [Accepted: 06/16/2021] [Indexed: 01/12/2023]
Abstract
Reirradiation and irradiation of sarcoma is often difficult due to the frequent need for a high dose of radiation in order to increase tumor control. This can result in a greater risk of toxicity which can be mitigated with the use of proton therapy. The present review aims to summarize the role of proton therapy in these 2 clinical contexts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J Doyen
- Department of radiation oncology, Centre Antoine-Lacassagne, University of Côte d'Azur, 33, avenue de Valombrose, 06189 Nice, France.
| | - D Aloi
- Department of radiation oncology, Centre Antoine-Lacassagne, University of Côte d'Azur, 33, avenue de Valombrose, 06189 Nice, France
| | - A Groulier
- Department of radiation oncology, Centre Antoine-Lacassagne, University of Côte d'Azur, 33, avenue de Valombrose, 06189 Nice, France
| | - M Vidal
- Department of radiation oncology, Centre Antoine-Lacassagne, University of Côte d'Azur, 33, avenue de Valombrose, 06189 Nice, France
| | - P Lesueur
- Department of radiation oncology, Centre François Baclesse, Centre de Protonthérapie de Normandie, University of Caen Normandie, Caen, France
| | - V Calugaru
- Department of radiation oncology, Institut Curie, Centre de Protonthérapie d'Orsay, Orsay, France
| | - P Y Bondiau
- Department of radiation oncology, Centre Antoine-Lacassagne, University of Côte d'Azur, 33, avenue de Valombrose, 06189 Nice, France
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Denost Q, Frison E, Salut C, Sitta R, Rullier A, Harji D, Maillou-Martinaud H, Rullier E, Smith D, Vendrely V. A phase III randomized trial evaluating chemotherapy followed by pelvic reirradiation versus chemotherapy alone as preoperative treatment for locally recurrent rectal cancer - GRECCAR 15 trial protocol. Colorectal Dis 2021; 23:1909-1918. [PMID: 33843133 DOI: 10.1111/codi.15670] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/10/2020] [Revised: 03/14/2021] [Accepted: 03/23/2021] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
AIM Treatment strategies in locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) are complex and need to be balanced against previous treatments received for the primary rectal cancer. Radiotherapy is an important component of treatment in LRRC. However, there is little high-quality evidence on the role of reirradiation in this cohort. Therefore, the aim of this trial is to assess the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by pelvic reirradiation versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone on the rate of curative surgery (R0) in previously irradiated patients with LRRC. METHOD GRECCAR 15 is a prospective, multicentre, open-label, outcome assessor-blinded, superiority randomized controlled phase III clinical trial comparing neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by pelvic reirradiation versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone in patients with LRRC previously irradiated for the primary cancer. Adult patients (>18 years old) with a histologically proven resectable LRRC, who have previously received pelvic radiotherapy for their primary rectal cancer at a dose of 25-50.4 Gy, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of <2 will be eligible to participate. The pelvic reirradiation will consist of conformational intensity-modulated external irradiation, delivering a dose of 30.6 Gy with concomitant chemotherapy using capecitabine. The primary outcome of this trial is the R0 resection rate. Overall, GRECCAR 15 aims to recruit 186 patients to detect an absolute difference of 20% in the R0 resection rate with 80% power and 5% two-sided significance level. CONCLUSION The GRECCAR 15 trial is the first, definitive, phase III trial to investigate reirradiation in LRRC. The results of this trial will inform definitively the neoadjuvant treatment strategy in previously irradiated patients and assess whether there is any associated benefit of reirradiation in combination with induction chemotherapy in improving R0 resection rates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Quentin Denost
- Département de Chirurgie Colorectal, Hôpital Haut-Lévèque, CHU, Bordeaux, France
| | - Eric Frison
- Inserm, CIC1401-EC, Bordeaux, Service D'information Médicale, CHU, Bordeaux, France
| | - Cécile Salut
- Service de Radiologie, Hôpital Haut-Lévèque, CHU, Bordeaux, France
| | - Remy Sitta
- Inserm, CIC1401-EC, Bordeaux, Service D'information Médicale, CHU, Bordeaux, France
| | - Anne Rullier
- Service d'Anatomopathologie, Hôpital Pellegrin, CHU, Bordeaux, France
| | - Deena Harji
- Département de Chirurgie Colorectal, Hôpital Haut-Lévèque, CHU, Bordeaux, France
| | | | - Eric Rullier
- Département de Chirurgie Colorectal, Hôpital Haut-Lévèque, CHU, Bordeaux, France
| | - Denis Smith
- Service D'oncologie, Hôpital Haut-Lévèque, CHU, Bordeaux, France
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
Koroulakis A, Molitoris J, Kaiser A, Hanna N, Bafford A, Jiang Y, Bentzen S, Regine WF. Reirradiation for Rectal Cancer Using Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Therapy: A Single Institutional Experience. Adv Radiat Oncol 2020; 6:100595. [PMID: 33490730 PMCID: PMC7807140 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2020.10.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/24/2020] [Accepted: 10/05/2020] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Reirradiation for rectal cancer (RC) after prior pelvic radiation therapy (RT) has been shown to be safe and effective. However, limited data exist for proton therapy (PT), including pencil beam scanning proton therapy (PBS-PT). We hypothesize that PT is safe and feasible for re-treatment and may allow for decreased toxicity and treatment escalation. Methods and materials A single-institution, retrospective, institutional review board–approved analysis of all patients with RC and prior pelvic RT receiving PBS-PT reirradiation was performed. Data on patient and treatment characteristics and outcomes were collected. Local progression, progression-free survival, overall survival, and late grade >3 toxicity were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results Twenty-eight patients (median follow-up: 28.6 months) received PBS-PT reirradiation between 2016 and 2019, including 18 patients with recurrent RC (median prior dose: 54.0 Gy) and 10 patients with de novo RC and variable prior RT. The median reirradiation dose was 44.4 Gy (range, 16.0-60.0 Gy; 21 of 28 twice daily), and 24 of 28 patients received concurrent chemotherapy. Six underwent surgical resection. Three (10.7%) experienced grade 3 acute toxicities, and 1 did not complete RT owing to toxicity. Four (14.2%) had late grade <3 toxicity, including 1 grade 5 toxicity in a patient with a prior RT-related injury. The 1-year local progression, progression-free survival, and overall survival rates were 33.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 14.5%-52.9%), 45.0% (95% CI, 26.2%-63.8%), and 81.8% (95% CI, 67.3%-96.3%), respectively. Conclusions This is the largest series using PT for reirradiation for RC and the first study using PBS-PT. Low acute toxicity rates and acceptable late toxicity support PBS-PT as an option for this high-risk patient population, with a need for continued follow-up.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Antony Koroulakis
- University of Maryland Medical Center, Radiation Oncology, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Jason Molitoris
- University of Maryland School of Medicine, Radiation Oncology, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Adeel Kaiser
- University of Maryland School of Medicine, Radiation Oncology, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Nader Hanna
- University of Maryland School of Medicine, Surgical Oncology, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Andrea Bafford
- University of Maryland School of Medicine, Surgical Oncology, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Yixing Jiang
- University of Maryland School of Medicine, Medical Oncology, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Søren Bentzen
- University of Maryland School of Medicine, Radiation Oncology, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - William F Regine
- University of Maryland School of Medicine, Radiation Oncology, Baltimore, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Smith T, O'Cathail SM, Silverman S, Robinson M, Tsang Y, Harrison M, Hawkins MA. Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Reirradiation for Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer: Outcomes and Toxicity. Adv Radiat Oncol 2020; 5:1311-1319. [PMID: 33305093 PMCID: PMC7718547 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2020.07.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/22/2020] [Revised: 07/16/2020] [Accepted: 07/27/2020] [Indexed: 12/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has emerged as a potential therapeutic option for locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) but contemporaneous clinical data are limited. We aimed to evaluate the local control, toxicity, and survival outcomes in a cohort of patients previously treated with neoadjuvant pelvic radiation therapy for nonmetastatic locally recurrent rectal cancer, now treated with SBRT. Methods and Materials Inoperable rectal cancer patients with ≤3 sites of pelvic recurrence and >6 months since prior pelvic radiation therapy were identified from a prospective registry over 4 years. SBRT dose was 30 Gy in 5 fractions, daily or alternate days, using cumulative organ at risk dose constraints. Primary outcome was local control (LC). Secondary outcomes were progression free survival, overall survival, toxicity, and patient reported quality of life scores using the EQ visual analog scale (EQ-VAS) tool. Results Thirty patients (35 targets) were included. Median gross tumor volume size was 14.3 cm3. In addition, 27 of 30 (90%) previously received 45 to 50.4 Gy in 25 of 28 fractions, with 10% receiving an alternative prescription. All patients received the planned reirradiation SBRT dose. The median follow-up was 24.5 months (interquartile range, 17.8-28.8). The 1-year LC was 84.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 70.6-99) and a 2-year LC was 69% (95% CI, 51.8-91.9). The median progression free survival was 12.1 months (95% CI, 8.6-17.66), and median overall survival was 28.3 months (95% CI, 17.88-39.5 months). No patient experienced >G2 acute toxicity and only 1 patient experienced late G3 toxicity. Patient-reported QoL outcomes were improved at 3 months after SBRT (Δ EQ-VAS, +10 points, Wilcoxon signed-rank, P = .009). Conclusions Our study demonstrates that, for small volume pelvic disease relapses from rectal cancer, reirradiation with 30 Gy in 5 fractions is well tolerated and achieves an excellent balance between high local control rates with limited toxicity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas Smith
- Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, East and North Herefordshire NHS Trust, Middlesex, UK
| | - Sean M O'Cathail
- Institute of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
| | - Sabrina Silverman
- Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, East and North Herefordshire NHS Trust, Middlesex, UK
| | | | - Yatman Tsang
- Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, East and North Herefordshire NHS Trust, Middlesex, UK
| | - Mark Harrison
- Institute of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
| | - Maria A Hawkins
- Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London and University, London, England, UK.,College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, England, UK
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Simone CB, Plastaras JP, Jabbour SK, Lee A, Lee NY, Choi JI, Frank SJ, Chang JY, Bradley J. Proton Reirradiation: Expert Recommendations for Reducing Toxicities and Offering New Chances of Cure in Patients With Challenging Recurrence Malignancies. Semin Radiat Oncol 2020; 30:253-261. [PMID: 32503791 PMCID: PMC10870390 DOI: 10.1016/j.semradonc.2020.02.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
Local and regional recurrences are common following an initial course of radiotherapy, yet management of these recurrences remains a challenge. Reirradiation may be an optimal treatment approach for providing durable tumor control and even offering select patients with locoregional recurrences or new primary tumors a chance of cure, but photon reirradiation can be associated with considerable risks of high grade acute and late toxicities. The high conformality and lack of exit dose with proton therapy offer significant advantages for reirradiation. By decreasing dose to adjacent normal tissues, proton therapy can more safely deliver definitive instead of palliative doses of reirradiation, more safely dose escalate reirradiation treatment, and more safely allow for concurrent systemic therapy in the reirradiation setting. In this case-based analysis, renowned experts in the fields of proton therapy and of reirradiation present cases for which they recently employed proton reirradiation. This manuscript focuses on case studies in patients with lung cancer, head and neck malignancies, and pelvic malignancies. Considerations for when to deliver proton therapy in the reirradiation setting and the pros and cons of proton therapy are discussed, and the existing literature supporting the use of proton reirradiation for these disease sites is assessed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charles B Simone
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
| | - John P Plastaras
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Salma K Jabbour
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ
| | - Anna Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Nancy Y Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - J Isabelle Choi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Steven J Frank
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Joe Y Chang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Jeffrey Bradley
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Saini G, Shukla R, Sood KS, Shukla SK, Chandra R. Role of Proton Beam Therapy in Current Day Radiation Oncology Practice. ASIAN JOURNAL OF ONCOLOGY 2020. [DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1713703] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/24/2022] Open
Abstract
AbstractProton beam therapy (PBT), because of its unique physics of no–exit dose deposition in the tissue, is an exciting prospect. The phenomenon of Bragg peak allows protons to deposit their almost entire energy towards the end of the path of the proton and stops any further dose delivery. Braggs peak equips PBT with superior dosimetric advantage over photons or electrons because PBT doesn’t traverse the target/body but is stopped sharply at an energy dependent depth in the target/body. It also has no exit dose. Because of no exit dose and normal tissue sparing, PBT is hailed for its potential to bring superior outcomes. Pediatric malignancies is the most common malignancy where PBT have found utmost application. Nowadays, PBT is also being used in the treatment of other malignancies such as carcinoma prostate, carcinoma breast, head and neck malignancies, and gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies. Despite advantages of PBT, there is not only a high cost of setting up of PBT centers but also a lack of definitive phase-III data. Therefore, we review the role of PBT in current day practice of oncology to bring out the nuances that must guide the practice to choose suitable patients for PBT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gagan Saini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MAX Super Speciality Hospital Patparganj and Vaishali, New Delhi, India
| | - Rashmi Shukla
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MAX Super Speciality Hospital Patparganj and Vaishali, New Delhi, India
| | - Kanika S. Sood
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dharamshila Narayana Superspeciality Hospital, New Delhi, India
| | - Sujit K. Shukla
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Vardhaman Mahavir Medical College and Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, India
| | - Ritu Chandra
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MAX Super Speciality Hospital Patparganj and Vaishali, New Delhi, India
| |
Collapse
|