1
|
Garrido-Hernandez G, Henjum H, Winter RM, Alsaker MD, Danielsen S, Boer CG, Ytre-Hauge KS, Redalen KR. Interim 18F-FDG-PET based response-adaptive dose escalation of proton therapy for head and neck cancer: a treatment planning feasibility study. Phys Med 2024; 123:103404. [PMID: 38852365 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2024.103404] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/28/2023] [Revised: 05/06/2024] [Accepted: 06/05/2024] [Indexed: 06/11/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Image-driven dose escalation to tumor subvolumes has been proposed to improve treatment outcome in head and neck cancer (HNC). We used 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) acquired at baseline and into treatment (interim) to identify biologic target volumes (BTVs). We assessed the feasibility of interim dose escalation to the BTV with proton therapy by simulating the effects to organs at risk (OARs). METHODS We used the semiautomated just-enough-interaction (JEI) method to identify BTVs in 18F-FDG-PET images from nine HNC patients. Between baseline and interim FDG-PET, patients received photon radiotherapy. BTV was identified assuming that high standardized uptake value (SUV) at interim reflected tumor radioresistance. Using Eclipse (Varian Medical Systems), we simulated a 10% (6.8 Gy(RBE1.1)) and 20% (13.6 Gy(RBE1.1)) dose escalation to the BTV with protons and compared results with proton plans without dose escalation. RESULTS At interim 18F-FDG-PET, radiotherapy resulted in reduced SUV compared to baseline. However, spatial overlap between high-SUV regions at baseline and interim allowed for BTV identification. Proton therapy planning demonstrated that dose escalation to the BTV was feasible, and except for some 20% dose escalation plans, OAR doses did not significantly increase. CONCLUSION Our in silico analysis demonstrated the potential for interim 18F-FDG-PET response-adaptive dose escalation to the BTV with proton therapy. This approach may give more efficient treatment to HNC with radioresistant tumor subvolumes without increasing normal tissue toxicity. Studies in larger cohorts are required to determine the full potential for interim 18F-FDG-PET-guided dose escalation of proton therapy in HNC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Helge Henjum
- Department of Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
| | - René Mario Winter
- Department of Physics, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway
| | - Mirjam Delange Alsaker
- Department of Radiotherapy, Cancer Clinic, St. Olav's Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway
| | - Signe Danielsen
- Department of Physics, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway; Department of Oncology, St. Olav's Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway
| | | | | | - Kathrine Røe Redalen
- Department of Physics, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Holtzman AL, Mohammadi H, Furutani KM, Koffler DM, McGee LA, Lester SC, Gamez ME, Routman DM, Beltran CJ, Liang X. Impact of Relative Biologic Effectiveness for Proton Therapy for Head and Neck and Skull-Base Tumors: A Technical and Clinical Review. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:1947. [PMID: 38893068 PMCID: PMC11171304 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16111947] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/02/2024] [Revised: 05/17/2024] [Accepted: 05/18/2024] [Indexed: 06/21/2024] Open
Abstract
Proton therapy has emerged as a crucial tool in the treatment of head and neck and skull-base cancers, offering advantages over photon therapy in terms of decreasing integral dose and reducing acute and late toxicities, such as dysgeusia, feeding tube dependence, xerostomia, secondary malignancies, and neurocognitive dysfunction. Despite its benefits in dose distribution and biological effectiveness, the application of proton therapy is challenged by uncertainties in its relative biological effectiveness (RBE). Overcoming the challenges related to RBE is key to fully realizing proton therapy's potential, which extends beyond its physical dosimetric properties when compared with photon-based therapies. In this paper, we discuss the clinical significance of RBE within treatment volumes and adjacent serial organs at risk in the management of head and neck and skull-base tumors. We review proton RBE uncertainties and its modeling and explore clinical outcomes. Additionally, we highlight technological advancements and innovations in plan optimization and treatment delivery, including linear energy transfer/RBE optimizations and the development of spot-scanning proton arc therapy. These advancements show promise in harnessing the full capabilities of proton therapy from an academic standpoint, further technological innovations and clinical outcome studies, however, are needed for their integration into routine clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adam L. Holtzman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL 32224, USA
| | - Homan Mohammadi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL 32224, USA
| | - Keith M. Furutani
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL 32224, USA
| | - Daniel M. Koffler
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL 32224, USA
| | - Lisa A. McGee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ 85054, USA
| | - Scott C. Lester
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - Mauricio E. Gamez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - David M. Routman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - Chris J. Beltran
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL 32224, USA
| | - Xiaoying Liang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL 32224, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Meiller TF, Fraser CM, Grant-Beurmann S, Humphrys M, Tallon L, Sadzewicz LD, Jabra-Rizk MA, Alfaifi A, Kensara A, Molitoris JK, Witek M, Mendes WS, Regine WF, Tran PT, Miller RC, Sultan AS. A Longitudinal Metagenomic Comparative Analysis of Oral Microbiome Shifts in Patients Receiving Proton Radiation versus Photon Radiation for Head and Neck Cancer. JOURNAL OF CANCER & ALLIED SPECIALTIES 2024; 10:579. [PMID: 38259673 PMCID: PMC10793722 DOI: 10.37029/jcas.v10i1.579] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/24/2023] [Accepted: 12/01/2023] [Indexed: 01/24/2024]
Abstract
Introduction Due to the radiation-sparing effects on salivary gland acini, changes in the composition of the oral microbiome may be a driver for improved outcomes in patients receiving proton radiation, with potentially worse outcomes in patients exposed to photon radiation therapy. To date, a head-to-head comparison of oral microbiome changes at a metagenomic level with longitudinal sampling has yet to be performed in these patient cohorts. Methods and Materials To comparatively analyze oral microbiome shifts during head and neck radiation therapy, a prospective pilot cohort study was performed at the Maryland Proton Treatment Center and the University of Maryland Marlene and Stewart Greenebaum Comprehensive Cancer Center. A longitudinal metagenomic comparative analysis of oral microbiome shifts was performed at three time points (pre-radiation, during radiation, and immediately post-radiation). Head and neck cancer patients receiving proton radiation (n = 4) were compared to photon radiation (n = 4). Additional control groups included healthy age- and sex-matched controls (n = 5), head and neck cancer patients who never received radiation therapy (n = 8), and patients with oral inflammatory disease (n = 3). Results Photon therapy patients presented with lower microbial alpha diversity at all timepoints, and there was a trend towards reduced species richness as compared with proton therapy. Healthy controls and proton patients exhibited overall higher and similar diversity. A more dysbiotic state was observed in patients receiving photon therapy as compared to proton therapy, in which oral microbial homeostasis was maintained. Mucositis was observed in 3/4 photon patients and was not observed in any proton patients during radiation therapy. The bacterial de novo pyrimidine biosynthesis pathway and the nitrate reduction V pathway were comparatively higher following photon exposure. These functional changes in bacterial metabolism may suggest that photon exposure produces a more permissive environment for the proliferation of pathogenic bacteria. Conclusion Oral microbiome dysbiosis in patients receiving photon radiation may be associated with increased mucositis occurrence. Proton radiation therapy for head and neck cancer demonstrates a safer side effect profile in terms of oral complications, oral microbiome dysbiosis, and functional metabolic status.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Timothy F. Meiller
- Department of Oncology and Diagnostic Sciences, School of Dentistry, University of Maryland, Baltimore, United States
- University of Maryland Marlene and Stewart Greenebaum Comprehensive Cancer Center, Baltimore, United States
| | - Claire M. Fraser
- Department of Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, United States
- Institute for Genome Sciences, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, United States
| | - Silvia Grant-Beurmann
- Institute for Genome Sciences, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, United States
| | - Mike Humphrys
- Institute for Genome Sciences, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, United States
| | - Luke Tallon
- Institute for Genome Sciences, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, United States
| | - Lisa D. Sadzewicz
- Institute for Genome Sciences, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, United States
| | - Mary Ann Jabra-Rizk
- Department of Oncology and Diagnostic Sciences, School of Dentistry, University of Maryland, Baltimore, United States
- Department of Microbiology and Immunology, School of Medicine, University of Maryland, Baltimore, United States
| | - Areej Alfaifi
- Department of Oncology and Diagnostic Sciences, School of Dentistry, University of Maryland, Baltimore, United States
- Department of Restorative and Prosthetic Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Anmar Kensara
- Department of Advanced Oral Sciences and Therapeutics, School of Dentistry, University of Maryland, Baltimore, United States
- Department of Restorative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Umm Al Qura University, Makkah, Saudi Arabia
| | - Jason K. Molitoris
- University of Maryland Marlene and Stewart Greenebaum Comprehensive Cancer Center, Baltimore, United States
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, United States
- Maryland Proton Treatment Center, 850 W Baltimore St, Baltimore, United States
| | - Matthew Witek
- University of Maryland Marlene and Stewart Greenebaum Comprehensive Cancer Center, Baltimore, United States
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, United States
- Maryland Proton Treatment Center, 850 W Baltimore St, Baltimore, United States
| | - William S. Mendes
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, United States
| | - William F. Regine
- University of Maryland Marlene and Stewart Greenebaum Comprehensive Cancer Center, Baltimore, United States
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, United States
- Maryland Proton Treatment Center, 850 W Baltimore St, Baltimore, United States
| | - Phuoc T. Tran
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, United States
- Maryland Proton Treatment Center, 850 W Baltimore St, Baltimore, United States
| | - Robert C. Miller
- Department of Radiation Medicine, University of Kentucky College of Medicine, Lexington, United States
| | - Ahmed S. Sultan
- Department of Oncology and Diagnostic Sciences, School of Dentistry, University of Maryland, Baltimore, United States
- University of Maryland Marlene and Stewart Greenebaum Comprehensive Cancer Center, Baltimore, United States
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Chiu KW, Yu TP, Kao YS. A systematic review and meta-analysis of osteoradionecrosis following proton therapy in patients with head and neck cancer. Oral Oncol 2024; 148:106649. [PMID: 38035508 DOI: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2023.106649] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/11/2023] [Revised: 10/24/2023] [Accepted: 11/20/2023] [Indexed: 12/02/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Head and neck cancer ranks as the seventh most common cancer worldwide. Proton therapy is widely used in head and neck cancer. Osteoradionecrosis(ORN) is currently a commonly investigated side effect of proton therapy. A meta-analysis is needed to investigate this topic. MATERIAL/METHODS Two authors searched three databases, including PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library; the search period was from inception to June 2023. The search keyword was set to be ((("osteoradionecrosis") OR ("osteonecrosis")) AND ("proton")). RESULTS We initially collected 410 articles, and after article selections, 22 articles remained in our systematic reviews. Due to the overlapping of patient populations, 17 studies were finally included in our meta-analysis. The pooled grade 3 or more ORN rate is 0.01(95 % CI = 0.01-0.03). Subgroup analysis showed that IMPT didn't reduce grade 3 or more ORN compared with 3DCPT (p = 0.15). CONCLUSIONS Our meta-analysis showed that severe ORN rarely occurred in proton therapy for head and neck cancer patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kun-Wei Chiu
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan, ROC
| | - Tzu-Ping Yu
- Department of Medical Education, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan, ROC
| | - Yung-Shuo Kao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Taoyuan General Hospital, Ministry of Health and Welfare, Taoyuan, Taiwan, ROC.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Amstutz F, Krcek R, Bachtiary B, Weber DC, Lomax AJ, Unkelbach J, Zhang Y. Treatment planning comparison for head and neck cancer between photon, proton, and combined proton-photon therapy - From a fixed beam line to an arc. Radiother Oncol 2024; 190:109973. [PMID: 37913953 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109973] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/11/2023] [Revised: 09/25/2023] [Accepted: 10/26/2023] [Indexed: 11/03/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE This study investigates whether combined proton-photon therapy (CPPT) improves treatment plan quality compared to single-modality intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) for head and neck cancer (HNC) patients. Different proton beam arrangements for CPPT and IMPT are compared, which could be of specific interest concerning potential future upright-positioned treatments. Furthermore, it is evaluated if CPPT benefits remain under inter-fractional anatomical changes for HNC treatments. MATERIAL AND METHODS Five HNC patients with a planning CT and multiple (4-7) repeated CTs were studied. CPPT with simultaneously optimized photon and proton fluence, single-modality IMPT, and IMRT treatment plans were optimized on the planning CT and then recalculated and reoptimized on each repeated CT. For CPPT and IMPT, plans with different degrees of freedom for the proton beams were optimized. Fixed horizontal proton beam line (FHB), gantry-like, and arc-like plans were compared. RESULTS The target coverage for CPPT without adaptation is insufficient (average V95%=88.4 %), while adapted plans can recover the initial treatment plan quality for target (average V95%=95.5 %) and organs-at-risk. CPPT with increased proton beam flexibility increases plan quality and reduces normal tissue complication probability of Xerostomia and Dysphagia. On average, Xerostomia NTCP reductions compared to IMRT are -2.7 %/-3.4 %/-5.0 % for CPPT FHB/CPPT Gantry/CPPT Arc. The differences for IMPT FHB/IMPT Gantry/IMPT Arc are + 0.8 %/-0.9 %/-4.3 %. CONCLUSION CPPT for HNC needs adaptive treatments. Increasing proton beam flexibility in CPPT, either by using a gantry or an upright-positioned patient, improves treatment plan quality. However, the photon component is substantially reduced, therefore, the balance between improved plan quality and costs must be further determined.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Florian Amstutz
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland; Department of Physics, ETH Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Reinhardt Krcek
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland; Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Switzerland
| | | | - Damien C Weber
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland; Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, Switzerland; Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Switzerland
| | - Antony J Lomax
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland; Department of Physics, ETH Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Jan Unkelbach
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Ye Zhang
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Mohamed AS, Martin GV, Ng SP, Takiar V, Beadle BM, Zafereo M, Garden AS, Frank SJ, David Fuller C, Brandon Gunn G, Morrison WH, Rosenthal DI, Reddy J, Moreno A, Lee A, Phan J. Patterns of failure for recurrent head and neck squamous cell carcinoma treated with salvage surgery and postoperative IMRT reirradiation. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2024; 44:100700. [PMID: 38058404 PMCID: PMC10695834 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2023.100700] [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: 05/18/2023] [Revised: 10/21/2023] [Accepted: 11/05/2023] [Indexed: 12/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose/Objectives The purpose of this study was to evaluate patterns of locoregional recurrence (LRR) after surgical salvage and adjuvant reirradiation with IMRT for recurrent head and neck squamous cell cancer (HNSCC). Materials/Methods Patterns of LRR for 61 patients treated consecutively between 2003 and 2014 who received post-operative IMRT reirradiation to ≥ 60 Gy for recurrent HNSCC were determined by 2 methods: 1) physician classification via visual comparison of post-radiotherapy imaging to reirradiation plans; and 2) using deformable image registration (DIR). Those without evaluable CT planning image data were excluded. All recurrences were verified by biopsy or radiological progression. Failures were defined as in-field, marginal, or out-of-field. Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify predictors for LRR. Results A total of 55 patients were eligible for analysis and 23 (42 %) had documented LRR after reirradiation. Location of recurrent disease prior to salvage surgery (lymphatic vs. mucosal) was the most significant predictor of LRR after post-operative reirradiation with salvage rate of 67 % for lymphatic vs. 33 % for mucosal sites (p = 0.037). Physician classification of LRR yielded 14 (61 %) in-field failures, 3 (13 %) marginal failures, and 6 (26 %) out-of-field failures, while DIR yielded 10 (44 %) in-field failures, 4 (17 %) marginal failures, and 9 (39 %) out-of-field failures. Most failures (57 %) occurred within the original site of recurrence or first echelon lymphatic drainage. Of patients who had a free flap placed during salvage surgery, 56 % of failures occurred within 1 cm of the surgical flap. Conclusion Our study highlights the role of DIR in enhancing the accuracy and consistency of POF analysis. Compared to traditional visual inspection, DIR reduces interobserver variability and provides more nuanced insights into dose-specific and spatial parameters of locoregional recurrences. Additionally, the study identifies the location of the initial recurrence as a key predictor of subsequent locoregional recurrence after salvage surgery and re-IMRT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Abdallah S.R. Mohamed
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Geoffrey V. Martin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Sweet Ping Ng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Austin Health, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Vinita Takiar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Cincinnati, OH, USA
| | - Beth M. Beadle
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Mark Zafereo
- Department of Head and Neck Surgery, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Adam S. Garden
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Steven J. Frank
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - C. David Fuller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - G. Brandon Gunn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - William H. Morrison
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - David I. Rosenthal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Jay Reddy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Amy Moreno
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Anna Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Jack Phan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Friborg J, Jensen K, Eriksen JG, Samsøe E, Maare C, Farhadi M, Sibolt P, Nielsen M, Andersen M, Holm AIS, Skyt P, Smulders B, Johansen J, Overgaard J, Grau C, Hansen CR. Considerations for study design in the DAHANCA 35 trial of protons versus photons for head and neck cancer. Radiother Oncol 2024; 190:109958. [PMID: 37871751 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109958] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/09/2022] [Revised: 08/10/2023] [Accepted: 09/26/2023] [Indexed: 10/25/2023]
Abstract
Proton radiotherapy offers a dosimetric advantage compared to photon therapy in sparing normal tissue, but the clinical evidence for toxicity reductions in the treatment of head and neck cancer is limited. The Danish Head and Neck Cancer Group (DAHANCA) has initiated the DAHANCA 35 randomised trial to clarify the value of proton therapy (NCT04607694). The DAHANCA 35 trial is performed in an enriched population of patients selected by an anticipated benefit of proton therapy to reduce the risk of late dysphagia or xerostomia based on normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) modelling. We present our considerations on the trial design and a test of the selection procedure conducted before initiating the randomised study.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J Friborg
- Danish Center of Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark; Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, Denmark. %
| | - K Jensen
- Danish Center of Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark
| | - J G Eriksen
- Department of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark; Aarhus University Hospital, Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Denmark
| | - E Samsøe
- Department of Oncology, Zealand University Hospital Næstved, Denmark
| | - C Maare
- Department of Oncology, Copenhagen University Hospital - Herlev and Gentofte, Denmark
| | - M Farhadi
- Department of Oncology, Zealand University Hospital Næstved, Denmark
| | - P Sibolt
- Department of Oncology, Copenhagen University Hospital - Herlev and Gentofte, Denmark
| | - M Nielsen
- Department of Oncology, Aalborg University Hospital, Denmark
| | - M Andersen
- Department of Oncology, Aalborg University Hospital, Denmark
| | - A I S Holm
- Department of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark
| | - P Skyt
- Danish Center of Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark
| | - B Smulders
- Danish Center of Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark; Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, Denmark
| | - J Johansen
- Department of Oncology, Odense University Hospital, Denmark
| | - J Overgaard
- Aarhus University Hospital, Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Denmark
| | - C Grau
- Danish Center of Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark
| | - C R Hansen
- Danish Center of Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark; Department of Oncology, Odense University Hospital, Denmark; Institute of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
R PB, M S A, Kamath A. A Systematic Review of the Economic Burden of Proton Therapy in Head and Neck Cancer. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2023; 24:3643-3653. [PMID: 38019221 PMCID: PMC10772765 DOI: 10.31557/apjcp.2023.24.11.3643] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/13/2023] [Accepted: 11/20/2023] [Indexed: 11/30/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Radiation therapy is used to treat head and neck cancer (HNC) patients. Proton beam therapy (PBT) is one of the newer treatment options. This systematic review will describe the cost and cost-effectiveness of PBT compared with other first-line treatment options based on available literature and provide a better understanding of its usage in HNC in the future. METHODS This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Systematic searches were conducted in PUBMED, EMBASE and SCOPUS till February 2022. Original pharmacoeconomic articles written in English that considered PBT for HNC were included; the title, abstract and full text of the search items were screened. The included studies were critically appraised using the Drummond Checklist followed by data extraction. RESULTS Eight of the ten included studies were of good quality; most were cost-effectiveness or cost comparison studies and used the Markov model and lifetime horizon. The dominant comparator was intensity-modulated radiotherapy. The willingness to pay threshold ranged from $30,828 to $150,000 per QALY. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was between $4,436.1 and $695,000 per QALY. In HNC patients with human papillomavirus infection, the ICER was lower ($288,000/QALY) from the payer's perspective, but much higher ($390,000/QALY) from the societal perspective. CONCLUSION Our systematic review showed that appropriate patient selection can make PBT cost-effective. HPV-associated tumors can be cost-effectively treated with PBT. From the payer's perspective, PBT is a cost-effective treatment option. In younger patients, PBT can result in lesser incidence of adverse effects, and hence, can reduce the subsequent need for long-term supportive care. Lower fractionation schedules can also make PBT a cost-effective treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Poovizhi Bharathi R
- Department of Pharmacology, Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
| | - Athiyamaan M S
- Department of Radiotherapy and Oncology, Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
| | - Ashwin Kamath
- Department of Pharmacology, Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Choi JI, Simone CB, Lozano A, Frank SJ. Advances and Challenges in Conducting Clinical Trials With Proton Beam Therapy. Semin Radiat Oncol 2023; 33:407-415. [PMID: 37684070 PMCID: PMC10503212 DOI: 10.1016/j.semradonc.2023.06.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/10/2023]
Abstract
Advances in proton therapy have garnered much attention and speculation in recent years as the indications for proton therapy have grown beyond pediatric, prostate, spine, and ocular tumors. To achieve and maintain consistent access to this cancer treatment and to ensure the future viability and availability of proton centers in the United States, a call for evidence has been heard and answered by proton radiation oncologists. Answers provided in this review include the evolution of proton therapy research, rationale for proton clinical trial design, challenges in and barriers to the conduct of proton therapy research, and other unique considerations for the study of proton therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J Isabelle Choi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.; New York Proton Center, New York, NY..
| | - Charles B Simone
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.; New York Proton Center, New York, NY
| | - Alicia Lozano
- Center for Biostatistics and Health Data Science, Department of Statistics, Virginia Tech, Roanoke, VA
| | - Steven J Frank
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Mendenhall WM, Beitler JJ, Saba NF, Shaha AR, Nuyts S, Strojan P, Bollen H, Cohen O, Smee R, Ng SP, Eisbruch A, Ng WT, Kirwan JM, Ferlito A. Proton Beam Radiation Therapy for Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma. Int J Part Ther 2023; 9:243-252. [PMID: 37169005 PMCID: PMC10166016 DOI: 10.14338/ijpt-22-00030.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/25/2022] [Accepted: 03/10/2023] [Indexed: 05/13/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose To discuss the role of proton beam therapy (PBT) in the treatment of patients with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC). Materials and Methods A review of the pertinent literature. Results Proton beam therapy likely results in reduced acute and late toxicity as compared with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). The extent of the reduced toxicity, which may be modest, depends on the endpoint and technical factors such as pencil beam versus passive scattered PBT and adaptive replanning. The disease control rates after PBT are likely similar to those after IMRT. Conclusion Proton beam therapy is an attractive option to treat patients with OPSCC. Whether it becomes widely available depends on access.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- William M. Mendenhall
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL, USA
| | - Jonathan J. Beitler
- Harold Alfonds Center for Cancer Care, Maine General Hospital, Augusta, ME, USA
| | - Nabil F. Saba
- Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Ashok R. Shaha
- Department of Head and Neck Surgery and Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Sandra Nuyts
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leuven Cancer Institute, University Hospitals Leuven, KU Leuven - University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
- Laboratory of Experimental Radiotherapy, Department of Oncology, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Primož Strojan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institute of Oncology, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | - Heleen Bollen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leuven Cancer Institute, University Hospitals Leuven, KU Leuven - University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Oded Cohen
- Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery and Oncology, Soroka Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Affiliated with Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel
| | - Robert Smee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Prince of Wales Cancer Centre, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Sweet Ping Ng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Olivia Newton-John Cancer Centre, Austin Health, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Avraham Eisbruch
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
| | - Wai Tong Ng
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
| | - Jessica M. Kirwan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL, USA
| | - Alfio Ferlito
- Coordinator of the International Head and Neck Scientific Group, Padua, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Yahya N, Manan HA. Quality of Life and Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Proton Therapy for Oropharyngeal Carcinoma: A Systematic Review. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:cancers15082252. [PMID: 37190180 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15082252] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/08/2022] [Revised: 03/09/2023] [Accepted: 03/10/2023] [Indexed: 05/17/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Complex anatomy surrounding the oropharynx makes proton therapy (PT), especially intensity-modulated PT (IMPT), a potentially attractive option due to its ability to reduce the volume of irradiated healthy tissues. Dosimetric improvement may not translate to clinically relevant benefits. As outcome data are emerging, we aimed to evaluate the evidence of the quality of life (QOL) and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) following PT for oropharyngeal carcinoma (OC). MATERIALS AND METHODS We searched PubMed and Scopus electronic databases (date: 15 February 2023) to identify original studies on QOL and PROs following PT for OC. We employed a fluid strategy in the search strategy by tracking citations of the initially selected studies. Reports were extracted for information on demographics, main results, and clinical and dose factor correlates. Quality assessment was performed using the NIH's Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies. The PRISMA guidelines were followed in the preparation of this report. RESULTS Seven reports were selected, including one from a recently published paper captured from citation tracking. Five compared PT and photon-based therapy, although none were randomized controlled trials. Most endpoints with significant differences favored PT, including xerostomia, cough, need for nutritional supplements, dysgeusia, food taste, appetite, and general symptoms. However, some endpoints favored photon-based therapy (sexual symptoms) or showed no significant difference (e.g., fatigue, pain, sleep, mouth sores). The PROs and QOL improve following PT but do not appear to return to baseline. CONCLUSION Evidence suggests that PT causes less QOL and PRO deterioration than photon-based therapy. Biases due to the non-randomized study design remain obstacles to a firm conclusion. Whether or not PT is cost-effective should be the subject of further investigation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Noorazrul Yahya
- Diagnostic Imaging and Radiotherapy, Center for Diagnostic, Therapeutic and Investigative Studies (CODTIS), Faculty of Health Sciences, National University of Malaysia, Jalan Raja Muda Aziz, Kuala Lumpur 50300, Malaysia
| | - Hanani Abdul Manan
- Functional Image Processing Laboratory, Department of Radiology, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Medical Centre, Cheras, Kuala Lumpur 56000, Malaysia
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Shishido K, Reinders A, Asuthkar S. Epigenetic regulation of radioresistance: insights from preclinical and clinical studies. Expert Opin Investig Drugs 2022; 31:1359-1375. [PMID: 36524403 DOI: 10.1080/13543784.2022.2158810] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Oftentimes, radiation therapy (RT) is ineffective due to the development of radioresistance (RR). However, studies have shown that targeting epigenetic modifiers to enhance radiosensitivity represents a promising direction of clinical investigation. AREAS COVERED This review discusses the mechanisms by which epigenetic modifiers alter radiosensitivity through dysregulation of MAPK-ERK and AKT-mTOR signaling. Finally, we discuss the clinical directions for targeting epigenetic modifiers and current radiology techniques used in the clinic. METHODOLOGY We searched PubMed and ScienceDirect databases from April 4th, 2022 to October 18th, 2022. We examined 226 papers related to radioresistance, epigenetics, MAPK, and PI3K/AKT/mTOR signaling. 194 papers were selected for this review. Keywords used for this search include, 'radioresistance,' 'radiosensitivity,' 'radiation,' 'radiotherapy,' 'particle radiation,' 'photon radiation,' 'epigenetic modifiers,' 'MAPK,' 'AKT,' 'mTOR,' 'cancer,' and 'PI3K.' We examined 41 papers related to clinical trials on the aforementioned topics. Outcomes of interest were safety, overall survival (OS), dose-limiting toxicities (DLT), progression-free survival (PFS), and maximum tolerated dose (MTD). EXPERT OPINION Current studies focusing on epigenetic mechanisms of RR strongly support the use of targeting epigenetic modifiers as adjuvants to standard cancer therapies. To further the success of such treatments and their clinical benefit , both preclinical and clinical studies are needed to broaden the scope of known radioresistant mechanisms.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katherine Shishido
- Department of Cancer Biology and Pharmacology and Department of Pediatrics, University of Illinois College of Medicine Peoria, Peoria, IL, United States of America
| | - Alexis Reinders
- Department of Cancer Biology and Pharmacology and Department of Pediatrics, University of Illinois College of Medicine Peoria, Peoria, IL, United States of America
| | - Swapna Asuthkar
- Department of Cancer Biology and Pharmacology and Department of Pediatrics, University of Illinois College of Medicine Peoria, Peoria, IL, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Recent advances in the oncological management of head and neck cancer and implications for oral toxicity. Br Dent J 2022; 233:737-743. [DOI: 10.1038/s41415-022-5195-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/13/2022] [Accepted: 09/30/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022]
|
14
|
Zhang W, Kong L, Lu JJ. A cross-sectional analysis of registered clinical trials on the use of particle beam radiation therapy in head and neck cancers. ANNALS OF TRANSLATIONAL MEDICINE 2022; 10:1192. [PMID: 36544687 PMCID: PMC9761119 DOI: 10.21037/atm-20-7760] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/17/2020] [Accepted: 03/12/2021] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
Background To present and analyze the current status of registered clinical trials on particle beam (including proton and carbon ion beam) radiation therapy (PBRT) for head and neck (H&N) malignancies, and to provide insights for future clinical research, we designed the cross-sectional analysis. Methods We identified and analyzed all clinical trials of interest registered on ClinicalTrials.gov and PTCOG.ch until March 22, 2020. Results We identified 57 registered clinical trials related to the use of proton therapy or carbon ion radiation therapy (CIRT) in H&N malignancies. There were 20, 27, and 5 trials focused on CIRT, proton therapy, and both ions, respectively. The eligible trials were registered between 2007 and 2020, mainly focused on adenoid cystic carcinoma (ACC), squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), sinonasal malignancies (SNM), skull base tumors, locally advanced, and recurrent tumors. The nature of 23 (40%) trials were not stated and could not be identified. A total of 25 (44%) registered trials were phase II, including randomized controlled trials (RCTs). There were 14 RCTs (7 phase II, 2 phase II/III, 2 phase III, 1 phase I/II, and 2 phase not applicable), and 25 studies including RCTs were registered before the first enrolment. There were 11 completed clinical trials among the eligible trials, including 7 with published trial-related results. Conclusions Less than 10% of the countries with PBRT treatment facilities in operation have initiated clinical trials on H&N cancer. Furthermore, among all registered trials, less than 10% have been completed with results published. More clinical trials, especially high quality trials, are needed for optimizing and standardizing treatment techniques of PBRT for H&N malignancies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wenna Zhang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Shanghai Proton and Heavy Ion Center, Shanghai, China;,Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Proton and Heavy Ion Radiation Therapy, Shanghai, China
| | - Lin Kong
- Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Proton and Heavy Ion Radiation Therapy, Shanghai, China;,Department of Radiation Oncology, Shanghai Proton and Heavy Ion Center, Fudan University Cancer Hospital, Shanghai, China
| | - Jiade J. Lu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Shanghai Proton and Heavy Ion Center, Shanghai, China;,Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Proton and Heavy Ion Radiation Therapy, Shanghai, China
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Svajdova M, Dubinsky P, Kazda T, Jeremic B. Human Papillomavirus-Related Non-Metastatic Oropharyngeal Carcinoma: Current Local Treatment Options and Future Perspectives. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:5385. [PMID: 36358801 PMCID: PMC9658535 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14215385] [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: 09/26/2022] [Revised: 10/26/2022] [Accepted: 10/31/2022] [Indexed: 08/26/2023] Open
Abstract
Over the last two decades, human papillomavirus (HPV) has caused a new pandemic of cancer in many urban areas across the world. The new entity, HPV-associated oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC), has been at the center of scientific attention ever since, not only due to its distinct biological behavior, but also because of its significantly better prognosis than observed in its HPV-negative counterpart. The very good treatment outcomes of the disease after primary therapy (minimally-invasive surgery, radiation therapy with or without chemotherapy) resulted in the creation of a separate staging system, reflecting this excellent prognosis. A substantial proportion of newly diagnosed HPV-driven OPSCC is diagnosed in stage I or II, where long-term survival is observed worldwide. Deintensification of the primary therapeutic methods, aiming at a reduction of long-term toxicity in survivors, has emerged, and the quality of life of the patient after treatment has become a key-point in many clinical trials. Current treatment recommendations for the treatment of HPV-driven OPSCC do not differ significantly from HPV-negative OPSCC; however, the results of randomized trials are eagerly awaited and deemed necessary, in order to include deintensification into standard clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michaela Svajdova
- Department of Radiation and Clinical Oncology, General Hospital Rimavska Sobota, 979 01 Rimavska Sobota, Slovakia
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, 625 00 Brno, Czech Republic
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Masaryk Memorial Cancer Institute, 602 00 Brno, Czech Republic
| | - Pavol Dubinsky
- Department of Radiation Oncology, East Slovakia Oncology Institute, 040 01 Kosice, Slovakia
- Faculty of Health, Catholic University Ruzomberok, 034 01 Ruzomberok, Slovakia
| | - Tomas Kazda
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, 625 00 Brno, Czech Republic
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Masaryk Memorial Cancer Institute, 602 00 Brno, Czech Republic
| | - Branislav Jeremic
- School of Medicine, University of Kragujevac, 340 00 Kragujevac, Serbia
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Kim KN, Harton J, Mitra N, Lukens JN, Lin A, Amaniera I, Doucette A, Gabriel P, Baumann B, Metz J, Wojcieszynski A. Acute toxicity in patients treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy with proton versus intensity-modulated radiation therapy for nonmetastatic head and neck cancers. Head Neck 2022; 44:2386-2394. [PMID: 35822438 DOI: 10.1002/hed.27146] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/31/2022] [Revised: 06/10/2022] [Accepted: 06/28/2022] [Indexed: 11/07/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND We evaluated if proton therapy is associated with decreased acute toxicities compared to intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in patients receiving concurrent chemoradiotherapy for head and neck cancers. METHODS We analyzed 580 patients with nonmetastatic head and neck cancers. Primary endpoint was any 90-day grade ≥3 toxicity, prospectively collected and graded per CTCAEv4. Modified Poisson regression models were used. RESULTS Ninety-five patients received proton and 485 IMRT. The proton group had more HPV-positive tumors (65.6 vs. 58.0%, p = 0.049), postoperative treatment (76.8 vs. 62.1%, p = 0.008), unilateral neck treatment (18.9 vs. 6.6%, p < 0.001) and significantly lower doses to organs-at-risk compared to IMRT group. Adjusted for patient and treatment characteristics, the proton group had decreased grade 2 dysgeusia (RR0.67, 95%CI 0.53-0.84, p = 0.004) and a trend toward lower grade ≥3 toxicities (RR0.60, 95%CI 0.41-0.88, p = 0.06). CONCLUSIONS Proton therapy was associated with significantly reduced grade 2 dysgeusia and nonstatistically significant decrease in acute grade ≥3 toxicities compared to IMRT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kristine N Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Joanna Harton
- Division of Biostatistics, Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Nandita Mitra
- Division of Biostatistics, Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - John N Lukens
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Alexander Lin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Isabella Amaniera
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Abigail Doucette
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Peter Gabriel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Brian Baumann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine in Saint Louis, St Louis, Missouri, USA
| | - James Metz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Andrzej Wojcieszynski
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Nuyts S, Bollen H, Ng SP, Corry J, Eisbruch A, Mendenhall WM, Smee R, Strojan P, Ng WT, Ferlito A. Proton Therapy for Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck: Early Clinical Experience and Current Challenges. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14112587. [PMID: 35681568 PMCID: PMC9179360 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14112587] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/28/2022] [Revised: 05/18/2022] [Accepted: 05/20/2022] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Proton therapy is a promising type of radiation therapy used to destroy tumor cells. It has the potential to further improve the outcomes for patients with head and neck cancer since it allows to minimize the radiation dose to vital structures around the tumor, leading to less toxicity. This paper describes the current experience worldwide with proton therapy in head and neck cancer. Abstract Proton therapy (PT) is a promising development in radiation oncology, with the potential to further improve outcomes for patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (HNSCC). By utilizing the finite range of protons, healthy tissue can be spared from beam exit doses that would otherwise be irradiated with photon-based treatments. Current evidence on PT for HNSCC is limited to comparative dosimetric analyses and retrospective single-institution series. As a consequence, the recognized indications for the reimbursement of PT remain scarce in most countries. Nevertheless, approximately 100 PT centers are in operation worldwide, and initial experiences for HNSCC are being reported. This review aims to summarize the results of the early clinical experience with PT for HNSCC and the challenges that are currently faced.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sandra Nuyts
- Laboratory of Experimental Radiotherapy, Department of Oncology, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium;
- Department of Oncology, Leuven Cancer Institute, Universitair Ziekenhuis Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
- Correspondence:
| | - Heleen Bollen
- Laboratory of Experimental Radiotherapy, Department of Oncology, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium;
- Department of Oncology, Leuven Cancer Institute, Universitair Ziekenhuis Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
| | - Sweet Ping Ng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Austin Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3000, Australia;
| | - June Corry
- Division of Medicine, Department of Radiation Oncology, St. Vincent’s Hospital, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3000, Australia;
| | - Avraham Eisbruch
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA;
| | - William M Mendenhall
- Department of Radiation Oncology, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32209, USA;
| | - Robert Smee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Prince of Wales Cancer Centre, Sydney, NSW 2031, Australia;
| | - Primoz Strojan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institute of Oncology, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia;
| | - Wai Tong Ng
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China;
| | - Alfio Ferlito
- Coordinator of the International Head and Neck Scientific Group, 35125 Padua, Italy;
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Tawk B, Debus J, Abdollahi A. Evolution of a Paradigm Switch in Diagnosis and Treatment of HPV-Driven Head and Neck Cancer—Striking the Balance Between Toxicity and Cure. Front Pharmacol 2022; 12:753387. [PMID: 35126105 PMCID: PMC8810823 DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2021.753387] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/04/2021] [Accepted: 12/09/2021] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
More than a decade after the discovery of p16 immunohistochemistry (IHC) as a surrogate for human papilloma virus (HPV)-driven head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), p16-IHC has become a routinely evaluated biomarker to stratify oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) into a molecularly distinct subtype with favorable clinical prognosis. Clinical trials of treatment de-escalation frequently use combinations of biomarkers (p16-IHC, HPV-RNA in situ hybridization, and amplification of HPV-DNA by PCR) to further improve molecular stratification. Implementation of these methods into clinical routine may be limited in the case of RNA by the low RNA quality of formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue blocks (FFPE) or in the case of DNA by cross contamination with HPV-DNA and false PCR amplification errors. Advanced technological developments such as investigation of tumor mutational landscape (NGS), liquid-biopsies (LBx and cell-free cfDNA), and other blood-based HPV immunity surrogates (antibodies in serum) may provide novel venues to further improve diagnostic uncertainties. Moreover, the value of HPV/p16-IHC outside the oropharynx in HNSCC patients needs to be clarified. With regards to therapy, postoperative (adjuvant) or definitive (primary) radiochemotherapy constitutes cornerstones for curative treatment of HNSCC. Side effects of chemotherapy such as bone-marrow suppression could lead to radiotherapy interruption and may compromise the therapy outcome. Therefore, reduction of chemotherapy or its replacement with targeted anticancer agents holds the promise to further optimize the toxicity profile of systemic treatment. Modern radiotherapy gradually adapts the dose. Higher doses are administered to the visible tumor bulk and positive lymph nodes, while a lower dose is prescribed to locoregional volumes empirically suspected to be invaded by tumor cells. Further attempts for radiotherapy de-escalation may improve acute toxicities, for example, the rates for dysphagia and feeding tube requirement, or ameliorate late toxicities like tissue scars (fibrosis) or dry mouth. The main objective of current de-intensification trials is therefore to reduce acute and/or late treatment-associated toxicity while preserving the favorable clinical outcomes. Deep molecular characterization of HPV-driven HNSCC and radiotherapy interactions with the tumor immune microenvironment may be instructive for the development of next-generation de-escalation strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bouchra Tawk
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Core Center Heidelberg, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Clinical Cooperation Units (CCU) Translational Radiation Oncology and Radiation Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg University Hospital (UKHD), Heidelberg, Germany
- Division of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg Faculty of Medicine (MFHD), Heidelberg University Hospital (UKHD), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg University Hospital (UKHD), Heidelberg, Germany
- *Correspondence: Bouchra Tawk,
| | - Jürgen Debus
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Core Center Heidelberg, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Clinical Cooperation Units (CCU) Translational Radiation Oncology and Radiation Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg University Hospital (UKHD), Heidelberg, Germany
- Division of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg Faculty of Medicine (MFHD), Heidelberg University Hospital (UKHD), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg University Hospital (UKHD), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Amir Abdollahi
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Core Center Heidelberg, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Clinical Cooperation Units (CCU) Translational Radiation Oncology and Radiation Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg University Hospital (UKHD), Heidelberg, Germany
- Division of Molecular and Translational Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg Faculty of Medicine (MFHD), Heidelberg University Hospital (UKHD), Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg University Hospital (UKHD), Heidelberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
van Dijk LV, Frank SJ, Yuan Y, Gunn B, Moreno AC, Mohamed AS, Preston KE, Qing Y, Spiotto MT, Morrison WH, Lee A, Phan J, Garden AS, Rosenthal DI, Langendijk JA, Fuller CD. Proton Image-guided Radiation Assignment for Therapeutic Escalation via Selection of locally advanced head and neck cancer patients [PIRATES]: A Phase I safety and feasibility trial of MRI-guided adaptive particle radiotherapy. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2022; 32:35-40. [PMID: 34841093 PMCID: PMC8606299 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2021.11.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/28/2021] [Accepted: 11/06/2021] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Radiation dose-escalation for head and neck cancer (HNC) patients aiming to improve cure rates is challenging due to the increased risk of unacceptable treatment-induced toxicities. With "Proton Image-guided Radiation Assignment for Therapeutic Escalation via Selection of locally advanced head and neck cancer patients" (PIRATES), we present a novel treatment approach that is designed to facilitate dose-escalation while minimizing the risk of dose-limiting toxicities for locally advanced HPV-negative HNC patients. The aim of this Phase I trial is to assess the safety & feasibility of PIRATES approach. METHODS The PIRATES protocol employs a multi-faceted dose-escalation approach to minimize the risk of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs): 1) sparing surrounding normal tissue from extraneous dose with intensity-modulated proton therapy, 2) mid-treatment hybrid hyper-fractionation for radiobiologic normal tissue sparing; 3) Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) guided mid-treatment boost volume adaptation, and 4) iso-effective restricted organ-at-risk dosing to mucosa and bone tissues.The time-to-event Bayesian optimal interval (TITE-BOIN) design is employed to address the challenge of the long DLT window of 6 months and find the maximum tolerated dose. The primary endpoint is unacceptable radiation-induced toxicities (Grade 4, mucositis, dermatitis, or Grade 3 myelopathy, osteoradionecrosis) occurring within 6 months following radiotherapy. The second endpoint is any grade 3 toxicity occurring in 3-6 months after radiation. DISCUSSION The PIRATES dose-escalation approach is designed to provide a safe avenue to intensify local treatment for HNC patients for whom therapy with conventional radiation dose levels is likely to fail. PIRATES aims to minimize the radiation damage to the tissue surrounding the tumor volume with the combination of proton therapy and adaptive radiotherapy and within the high dose tumor volume with hybrid hyper-fractionation and not boosting mucosal and bone tissues. Ultimately, if successful, PIRATES has the potential to safety increase local control rates in HNC patients with high loco-regional failure risk.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04870840; Registration date: May 4, 2021.Netherlands Trial Register ID: NL9603; Registration date: July 15, 2021.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lisanne V. van Dijk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
| | - Steven J. Frank
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Ying Yuan
- Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Brandon Gunn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Amy C. Moreno
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Abdallah S.R. Mohamed
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Kathryn E. Preston
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Yun Qing
- Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Michael T. Spiotto
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - William H. Morrison
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Anna Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Jack Phan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Adam S. Garden
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - David I. Rosenthal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Johannes A. Langendijk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
| | - Clifton D. Fuller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Vreugdenhil M, Fong C, Iqbal G, Roques T, Evans M, Palaniappan N, Yang H, O'Toole L, Sanghera P, Nutting C, Foran B, Sen M, Al Booz H, Fulton-Lieuw T, Dalby M, Dunn J, Hartley A, Mehanna H. Improvement in Dysphagia Outcomes Following Clinical Target Volume Reduction in the De-ESCALaTE Study. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2021; 33:795-803. [PMID: 34340917 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2021.07.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/08/2021] [Revised: 06/02/2021] [Accepted: 07/14/2021] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
AIMS The De-ESCALaTE study showed an overall survival advantage for the administration of synchronous cisplatin chemotherapy with radiotherapy in low-risk oropharyngeal cancer when compared with synchronous cetuximab. During the trial, a radiotherapy quality assurance protocol amendment permitted centres to swap from the original radiotherapy contouring protocol (incorporating the whole oropharynx into the high-dose clinical target volume (CTV); anatomical protocol) to a protocol that incorporated the gross tumour volume with a 10 mm margin into the CTV (volumetric protocol). The purpose of this study was to examine both toxicity and tumour control related to this protocol amendment. MATERIALS AND METHODS Overall survival and recurrence at 2 years were used to compare tumour control in the two contouring cohorts. For toxicity, the cohorts were compared by both the number of severe (grades 3-5) and all grades acute and late toxicities. In addition, quality of life and swallowing were compared using EORTC-C30 and MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory, respectively. RESULTS Of 327 patients included in this study, 185 were contoured according to the anatomical protocol and 142 by the volumetric protocol. The two cohorts were well balanced, with the exception of significantly more patients in the anatomical cohort undergoing prophylactic feeding tube insertion (P < 0.001). With a minimum of 2 years of follow-up there was no significant difference in overall survival or recurrence between the two contouring protocols. Similarly, there was no significant difference in the rate of reported severe or all grades acute or late toxicity and no sustained significant difference in quality of life. However, there was a significant difference in favour of volumetric contouring in several domains of the MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory questionnaire at 1 year, which persisted to 2 years in the dysphagia functional (P = 0.002), dysphagia physical (P = 0.009) and dysphagia overall function (P = 0.008) domains. CONCLUSION In the context of the unplanned post-hoc analysis of a randomised trial, measurable improvement in long-term dysphagia has been shown following a reduction in the CTV. Further reductions in the CTV should be subject to similar scrutiny within the confines of a prospective study.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Vreugdenhil
- Hall-Edwards Radiotherapy Research Group, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, UK
| | - C Fong
- Hall-Edwards Radiotherapy Research Group, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, UK
| | - G Iqbal
- Warwick Clinical Trials Unit, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
| | - T Roques
- Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals, Norwich, UK
| | - M Evans
- Velindre University NHS Trust, Cardiff, UK
| | | | - H Yang
- Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK
| | - L O'Toole
- Castle Hill Hospital, Cottingham, UK
| | - P Sanghera
- Hall-Edwards Radiotherapy Research Group, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, UK
| | | | - B Foran
- Weston Park Hospital, Sheffield, UK
| | - M Sen
- St James' Institute of Oncology, Leeds, UK
| | - H Al Booz
- Bristol Haematology and Oncology Centre, Bristol, UK
| | - T Fulton-Lieuw
- Institute of Head and Neck Studies and Education (InHANSE), University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - M Dalby
- Warwick Clinical Trials Unit, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
| | - J Dunn
- Warwick Clinical Trials Unit, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
| | - A Hartley
- Hall-Edwards Radiotherapy Research Group, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, UK.
| | - H Mehanna
- Institute of Head and Neck Studies and Education (InHANSE), University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Mohamed N, Lee A, Lee NY. Proton beam radiation therapy treatment for head and neck cancer. PRECISION RADIATION ONCOLOGY 2021. [DOI: 10.1002/pro6.1135] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/06/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Nader Mohamed
- Department of Radiation Oncology Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center New York NY USA
| | - Anna Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center Houston TX USA
| | - Nancy Y. Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center New York NY USA
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Williams VM, Parvathaneni U, Laramore GE, Aljabab S, Wong TP, Liao JJ. Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy for Nasopharynx Cancer: 2-year Outcomes from a Single Institution. Int J Part Ther 2021; 8:28-40. [PMID: 34722809 PMCID: PMC8489486 DOI: 10.14338/ijpt-20-00057.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/31/2020] [Accepted: 02/22/2021] [Indexed: 01/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose Advances in radiotherapy have improved tumor control and reduced toxicity in the management of nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). Local failure remains a problem for some patients with advanced primary tumors, and toxicities are significant given the large treatment volume and tumor proximity to critical structures, even with modern photon-based radiotherapy. Proton therapy has unique dosimetric advantages, and recent technological advances now allow delivery of intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT), which can potentially improve the therapeutic ratio in NPC. We report our 2-year clinical outcomes with IMPT for NPC. Materials and Methods We retrospectively reviewed treatment records of patients with NPC treated with IMPT at our center. Demographics, dosimetry, tumor response, local regional control (LRC), distant metastasis, overall survival, and acute and late toxicity outcomes were reviewed. Analyses were performed with descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier method. Toxicity was graded per Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 4.0). Results Twenty-six patients were treated from 2015 to 2020. Median age was 48 years (range, 19–73 years), 62% (n = 16) had T3-T4 disease, 92% (n = 24) were node positive, 92% (n = 24) had stage III-IV disease, and 69% (n = 18) had positive results for Epstein-Barr virus. Dose-painted pencil-beam IMPT was used. Most patients (85%; 22 of 26) were treated with 70 Gy(RBE) in 33 fractions once daily; 4 (15%) underwent hyperfractionated accelerated treatment twice daily. All received concurrent cisplatin chemotherapy; 7 (27%) also received induction chemotherapy. All patients (100%) completed the planned radiotherapy, and no acute or late grade 4 or 5 toxicities were observed. At median follow-up of 25 months (range, 4-60), there were 2 local regional failures (8%) and 3 distant metastases (12%). The Kaplan-Meier 2-year LRC, freedom from distant metastasis, and overall survival were 92%, 87%, and 85% respectively. Conclusion IMPT is feasible in locally advanced NPC with early outcomes demonstrating excellent LRC and favorable toxicity profile. Our data add to the growing body of evidence supporting the clinical use of IMPT for NPC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vonetta M Williams
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | | | - George E Laramore
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Saif Aljabab
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY, USA
| | - Tony P Wong
- Seattle Cancer Care Alliance Proton Therapy Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Jay J Liao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Gordon KB, Smyk DI, Gulidov IA. Proton Therapy in Head and Neck Cancer Treatment: State of the Problem and Development Prospects (Review). Sovrem Tekhnologii Med 2021; 13:70-80. [PMID: 34603766 PMCID: PMC8482826 DOI: 10.17691/stm2021.13.4.08] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/11/2021] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Proton therapy (PT) due to dosimetric characteristics (Bragg peak formation, sharp dose slowdown) is currently one of the most high-tech techniques of radiation therapy exceeding the standards of photon methods. In recent decades, PT has traditionally been used, primarily, for head and neck cancers (HNC) including skull base tumors. Regardless of the fact that recently PT application area has significantly expanded, HNC still remain a leading indication for proton radiation since PT’s physic-dosimetric and radiobiological advantages enable to achieve the best treatment results in these tumors. The present review is devoted to PT usage in HNC treatment in the world and Russian medicine, the prospects for further technique development, the assessment of PT’s radiobiological features, a physical and dosimetric comparison of protons photons distribution. The paper shows PT’s capabilities in the treatment of skull base tumors, HNC (nasal cavity, paranasal sinuses, nasopharynx, oropharynx, and laryngopharynx, etc.), eye tumors, sialomas. The authors analyze the studies on repeated radiation and provide recent experimental data on favorable profile of proton radiation compared to the conventional radiation therapy. The review enables to conclude that currently PT is a dynamic radiation technique opening up new opportunities for improving therapy of oncology patients, especially those with HNC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K B Gordon
- Senior Researcher, Proton Therapy Department; A. Tsyb Medical Radiological Research Centre - Branch of the National Medical Research Radiological Centre of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, 4 Koroleva St., Kaluga Region, Obninsk, 249036, Russia
| | - D I Smyk
- Junior Researcher, Proton Therapy Department; A. Tsyb Medical Radiological Research Centre - Branch of the National Medical Research Radiological Centre of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, 4 Koroleva St., Kaluga Region, Obninsk, 249036, Russia
| | - I A Gulidov
- Professor, Head of the Proton Therapy Department; A. Tsyb Medical Radiological Research Centre - Branch of the National Medical Research Radiological Centre of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, 4 Koroleva St., Kaluga Region, Obninsk, 249036, Russia
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Li G, Xia YF, Huang YX, Okat D, Qiu B, Doyen J, Bondiau PY, Benezery K, Gao J, Qian CN. Optimizing oropharyngeal cancer management by using proton beam therapy: trends of cost-effectiveness. BMC Cancer 2021; 21:944. [PMID: 34419008 PMCID: PMC8380358 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-021-08638-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/11/2020] [Accepted: 07/28/2021] [Indexed: 02/01/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Proton beam therapy (PBT) is a new-emerging cancer treatment in China but its treatment costs are high and not yet covered by Chinese public medical insurance. The advanced form of PBT, intensity-modulated proton radiation therapy (IMPT), has been confirmed to reduce normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) as compared to conventional intensity-modulated photon-radiation therapy (IMRT) in patients with oropharyngeal cancer (OPC). Herein, we evaluated the cost-effectiveness and applicability of IMPT versus IMRT for OPC patients in China, aiming at guiding the proper use of PBT. METHODS A 7-state Markov model was designed for analysis. Base-case evaluation was performed on a 56-year-old (median age of OPC in China) patient under the assumption that IMPT could provide a 25% NTCP-reduction in long-term symptomatic dysphagia and xerostomia. Model robustness was examined using probabilistic sensitivity analysis, cohort analysis, and tornado diagram. One-way sensitivity analyses were conducted to identify the cost-effective scenarios. IMPT was considered as cost-effective if the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was below the societal willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold. RESULTS Compared with IMRT, IMPT provided an extra 0.205 quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) at an additional cost of 34,926.6 US dollars ($), and had an ICER of $170,082.4/ QALY for the base case. At the current WTP of China ($33,558 / QALY) and a current IMPT treatment costs of $50,000, IMPT should provide a minimum NTCP-reduction of 47.5, 50.8, 55.6, 63.3 and 77.2% to be considered cost-effective for patient age levels of 10, 20, 30, 40 and 50-year-old, respectively. For patients at the median age level, reducing the current IMPT costs ($50,000) to a $30,000 level would make the minimum NTCP-reduction threshold for "cost-effective" decrease from 91.4 to 44.6%, at the current WTP of China (from 69.0 to 33.5%, at a WTP of $50,000 / QALY; and from 39.7 to 19.1%, at a WTP of $100,000 / QALY). CONCLUSIONS Cost-effective scenarios of PBT exist in Chinese OPC patients at the current WTP of China. Considering a potential upcoming increase in PBT use in China, such cost-effective scenarios may further expand if a decrease of proton treatment costs occurs or an increase of WTP level.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Guo Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Affiliated Cancer Hospital & Institute of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510095, P. R. China
| | - Yun-Fei Xia
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China and Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, 651 Dongfeng East Road, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510060, P. R. China
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510060, P. R. China
| | - Yi-Xiang Huang
- Department of Health Management, Public Health Institute of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510000, P. R. China
| | - Deniz Okat
- Department of Finance, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Kowloon, Hong Kong, P. R. China
| | - Bo Qiu
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China and Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, 651 Dongfeng East Road, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510060, P. R. China
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510060, P. R. China
| | - Jerome Doyen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Antoine Lacassagne Cancer Center, University of Nice-Sophia, 06189, Nice, France
- Mediterranean Institute of Proton Therapy, Antoine Lacassagne Cancer Center, University of Nice-Sophia, 06200, Nice, France
| | - Pierre-Yves Bondiau
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Antoine Lacassagne Cancer Center, University of Nice-Sophia, 06189, Nice, France
- Mediterranean Institute of Proton Therapy, Antoine Lacassagne Cancer Center, University of Nice-Sophia, 06200, Nice, France
| | - Karen Benezery
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Antoine Lacassagne Cancer Center, University of Nice-Sophia, 06189, Nice, France
- Mediterranean Institute of Proton Therapy, Antoine Lacassagne Cancer Center, University of Nice-Sophia, 06200, Nice, France
| | - Jin Gao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of University of Science and Technology of China, Division of Life Sciences and Medicine, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, Anhui, 230031, P. R. China
| | - Chao-Nan Qian
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China and Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, 651 Dongfeng East Road, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510060, P. R. China.
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Guangzhou Concord Cancer Center, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510045, P. R. China.
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Leach K, Tang S, Sturgeon J, Lee AK, Grover R, Sanghvi P, Urbanic J, Chang C. Beam-Specific Spot Guidance and Optimization for PBS Proton Treatment of Bilateral Head and Neck Cancers. Int J Part Ther 2021; 8:50-61. [PMID: 34285935 PMCID: PMC8270101 DOI: 10.14338/ijpt-20-00060.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/01/2020] [Accepted: 02/19/2021] [Indexed: 12/05/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE A multi-field optimization (MFO) technique that uses beam-specific spot placement volumes (SPVs) and spot avoidance volumes (SAVs) is introduced for bilateral head and neck (H&N) cancers. These beam-specific volumes are used to guide the optimizer to consistently achieve optimal organ-at-risk (OAR) sparing with target coverage and plan robustness. MATERIALS AND METHODS Implementation of this technique using a 4-beam, 5-beam, and variant 5-beam arrangement is discussed. The generation of beam-specific SPVs and SAVs derived from target and OARs are shown. The SPVs for select fields are further partitioned into optimization volumes for uniform dose distributions that resemble those of single-field optimization (SFO). A conventional MFO plan that does not use beam-specific spot placement guidance (MFOcon) and an MFO plan that uses only beam-specific SPV (MFOspv) are compared with current technique (MFOspv/sav), using both simulated scenarios and forward-calculated plans on weekly verification computed tomography (VFCT) scans. RESULTS Dose distribution characteristics of the 4-beam, 5-beam, and variant 5-beam technique are demonstrated with discussion on OAR sparing. When comparing the MFOcon, MFOspv, and MFOspv/sav, the MFOspv/sav is shown to have superior OAR sparing in 9 of the 14 OARs examined. It also shows clinical plan robustness when evaluated by using both simulated uncertainty scenarios and forward-calculated weekly VFCTs throughout the 7-week treatment course. CONCLUSION The MFOspv/sav technique is a systematic approach using SPVs and SAVs to guide the optimizer to consistently reach desired OAR dose values and plan robustness.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karla Leach
- California Protons Cancer Therapy Center, San Diego, CA, USA
- Texas Center for Proton Therapy, Irving, TX, USA
| | - Shikui Tang
- Texas Center for Proton Therapy, Irving, TX, USA
| | | | | | - Ryan Grover
- California Protons Cancer Therapy Center, San Diego, CA, USA
- Department of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California, San Diego, CA, USA
| | - Parag Sanghvi
- California Protons Cancer Therapy Center, San Diego, CA, USA
- Department of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California, San Diego, CA, USA
| | - James Urbanic
- California Protons Cancer Therapy Center, San Diego, CA, USA
- Department of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California, San Diego, CA, USA
| | - Chang Chang
- California Protons Cancer Therapy Center, San Diego, CA, USA
- Department of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California, San Diego, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Bahig H, Gunn BG, Garden AS, Ye R, Hutcheson K, Rosenthal DI, Phan J, Fuller CD, Morrison WH, Reddy JP, Ng SP, Gross ND, Sturgis EM, Ferrarotto R, Gillison M, Frank SJ. Patient-Reported Outcomes after Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy for Oropharynx Cancer. Int J Part Ther 2021; 8:213-222. [PMID: 34285948 PMCID: PMC8270092 DOI: 10.14338/ijpt-20-00081.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/27/2020] [Accepted: 02/02/2021] [Indexed: 01/01/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To report patient-reported outcomes (PROs) derived from the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Head and Neck (FACT-HN) tool, in patients with oropharynx cancer (OPC) treated with intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) in the context of first-course irradiation. MATERIALS AND METHODS Patients with locally advanced OPC treated with radical IMPT between 2011 and 2018 were included in a prospective registry. FACT-HN scores were measured serially during and 24 months following IMPT. PRO changes in the FACT-HN scores over time were assessed with mixed-model analysis. RESULTS Fifty-seven patients met inclusion criteria. Median age was 60 years (range, 41-84), and 91% had human papillomavirus-associated disease. In total, 28% received induction chemotherapy and 68% had concurrent chemotherapy. Compliance to FACT-HN questionnaire completion was 59%, 48%, and 42% at 6, 12, and 24 months after treatment, respectively. The mean FACT-General (G), FACT-Total, and FACT-Trial Outcome Index (TOI) score changes were statistically and clinically significant relative to baseline from week 3 of treatment up to week 2 after treatment. Nadir was reached at week 6 of treatment for all scores, with maximum scores dropping by 15%, 20%, and 39% compared to baseline for FACT-G, FACT-Total, and FACT-TOI, respectively. Subdomain scores of physical well-being, functional well-being, and head and neck additional concerns decreased from baseline during treatment and returned to baseline at week 4 after treatment. CONCLUSIONS IMPT was associated with a favorable PRO trajectory, characterized by an acute decline followed by rapid recovery to baseline. This study establishes the expected acute, subacute, and chronic trajectory of PROs for patients undergoing IMPT for OPC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Houda Bahig
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
,Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Montreal, Canada
| | - Brandon G. Gunn
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Adam S. Garden
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Rong Ye
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Kate Hutcheson
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | | | - Jack Phan
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | | | | | - Jay Paul Reddy
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Sweet Ping Ng
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
,Peter MacCallum Cancer Center, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Neil D. Gross
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Erich M. Sturgis
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | | | - Maura Gillison
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Steven J. Frank
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Gunn GB, Garden AS, Ye R, Ausat N, Dahlstrom KR, Morrison WH, Fuller CD, Phan J, Reddy JP, Shah SJ, Mayo LL, Chun SG, Chronowski GM, Moreno AC, Myers JN, Hanna EY, Esmaeli B, Gillison ML, Ferrarotto R, Hutcheson KA, Chambers MS, Ginsberg LE, El-Naggar AK, Rosenthal DI, Zhu XR, Frank SJ. Proton Therapy for Head and Neck Cancer: A 12-Year, Single-Institution Experience. Int J Part Ther 2021; 8:108-118. [PMID: 34285940 PMCID: PMC8270083 DOI: 10.14338/ijpt-20-00065.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/08/2020] [Accepted: 11/02/2020] [Indexed: 02/03/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To characterize our experience and the disease control and toxicity of proton therapy (PT) for patients with head and neck cancer (HNC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Clinical outcomes for patients with HNC treated with PT at our institution were prospectively collected in 2 institutional review board-approved prospective studies. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize patient characteristics and outcomes. Overall survival, local-regional control, and disease-free survival were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Treatment-related toxicities were recorded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 4.03) scale. RESULTS The cohort consisted of 573 patients treated from February 2006 to June 2018. Median patient age was 61 years. Oropharynx (33.3%; n = 191), paranasal sinus (11%; n = 63), and periorbital tissues (11%; n = 62) were the most common primary sites. Patients with T3/T4 or recurrent disease comprised 46% (n = 262) of the cohort. The intent of PT was definitive in 53% (n = 303), postoperative in 37% (n = 211), and reirradiation in 10% (n = 59). Median dose was 66 Gy (radiobiological equivalent). Regarding systemic therapy, 43% had received concurrent (n = 244), 3% induction (n = 19), and 15% (n = 86) had both. At a median follow-up of 2.4 years, 88 patients (15%) had died and 127 (22%) developed disease recurrence. The overall survival, local-regional control, and disease-free survival at 2 and 5 years were, respectively, 87% and 75%, 87% and 78%, and 74% and 63%. Maximum toxicity (acute or late) was grade 3 in 293 patients (51%), grade 2 in 234 patients (41%), and grade 1 in 31 patients (5%). There were 381 acute grade 3 and 190 late grade 3 unique toxicities across 212 (37%) and 150 (26%) patients, respectively. There were 3 late-grade 4 events across 2 patients (0.3%), 2 (0.3%) acute-grade 5, and no (0%) late-grade 5 events. CONCLUSIONS The overall results from this prospective study of our initial decade of experience with PT for HNC show favorable disease control and toxicity outcomes in a multidisease-site cohort and provide a reference benchmark for future comparison and study.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- G. Brandon Gunn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Adam S. Garden
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Rong Ye
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Noveen Ausat
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Kristina R. Dahlstrom
- Department of Head and Neck Surgery, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - William H. Morrison
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - C. David Fuller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Jack Phan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Jay P. Reddy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Shalin J. Shah
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Lauren L. Mayo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Stephen G. Chun
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Gregory M. Chronowski
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Amy C. Moreno
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Jeffery N. Myers
- Department of Head and Neck Surgery, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Ehab Y. Hanna
- Department of Head and Neck Surgery, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Bita Esmaeli
- Ophthalmic Plastic Surgery, Department of Plastic Surgery, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Maura L. Gillison
- Department of Medical Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Renata Ferrarotto
- Department of Medical Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Katherine A. Hutcheson
- Department of Head and Neck Surgery, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Mark S. Chambers
- Department of Head and Neck Surgery, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Lawrence E. Ginsberg
- Department of Neuroradiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Adel K. El-Naggar
- Department of Pathology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - David I. Rosenthal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Xiaorong Ronald Zhu
- Department of Radiation Physics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Steven J. Frank
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Gamez ME, Ma DJ. Deintensification Strategies Using Proton Beam Therapy for HPV-Related Oropharyngeal Cancer. Int J Part Ther 2021; 8:223-233. [PMID: 34285949 PMCID: PMC8270104 DOI: 10.14338/ijpt-20-00073.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/02/2020] [Accepted: 12/09/2020] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Oropharyngeal cancers related to the human papillomavirus are a growing segment of head and neck cancers throughout the world. These cancers are biologically and demographically unique with patients presenting at younger ages and with more curable disease. This combination of factors heightens the importance of normal tissue sparing because patients will live a long time with treatment sequelae. Proton therapy has demonstrated benefits in reducing normal tissue exposure, which may lead to less toxicity, a higher quality of life, less immunologic suppression, and lower cost. Research investigating deintensified radiation volumes and doses are also underway. These deintensification studies synergize well with the beam characteristics of proton beam therapy and can decrease that already reduced normal tissue exposure enabled by proton therapy. Future studies should refine patient selection to best allow for volume and dose reduction paired with proton therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mauricio E. Gamez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Daniel J. Ma
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Sherry AD, Pasalic D, Gunn GB, Fuller CD, Phan J, Rosenthal DI, Morrison WH, Sturgis EM, Gross ND, Gillison ML, Ferrarotto R, El-Naggar AK, Garden AS, Frank SJ. Proton Beam Therapy for Head and Neck Carcinoma of Unknown Primary: Toxicity and Quality of Life. Int J Part Ther 2021; 8:234-247. [PMID: 34285950 PMCID: PMC8270080 DOI: 10.14338/ijpt-20-00034.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/23/2020] [Accepted: 09/21/2020] [Indexed: 12/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Proton radiation therapy (PRT) may offer dosimetric and clinical benefit in the treatment of head and neck carcinoma of unknown primary (HNCUP). We sought to describe toxicity and quality of life (QOL) in patients with HNCUP treated with PRT. Patients and Methods Toxicity and QOL were prospectively tracked in patients with HNCUP from 2011 to 2019 after institutional review board approval. Patients received PRT to the mucosa of the nasopharynx, oropharynx, and bilateral cervical lymph nodes with sparing of the larynx and hypopharynx. Patient-reported outcomes were tracked with the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory–Head and Neck Module, the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Head and Neck, the MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory, and the Xerostomia-Related QOL Scale. Primary study endpoints were the incidence of grade ≥ 3 (G3) toxicity and QOL patterns. Results Fourteen patients (median follow-up, 2 years) were evaluated. Most patients presented with human papillomavirus–positive disease (n = 12, 86%). Rates of G3 oral mucositis, xerostomia, and dermatitis were 7% (n = 1), 21% (n = 3), and 36% (n = 5), respectively. None required a gastrostomy. During PRT, QOL was reduced relative to baseline and recovered shortly after PRT. At 2 years after PRT, the local regional control, disease-free survival, and overall survival were 100% (among 7 patients at risk), 79% (among 6 patients at risk), and 90% (among 7 patients at risk), respectively. Conclusion Therefore, PRT for HNCUP was associated with highly favorable dosimetric and clinical outcomes, including minimal oral mucositis, xerostomia, and dysphagia. Toxicity and QOL may be superior with PRT compared with conventional radiation therapy and PRT maintains equivalent oncologic control. Further prospective studies are needed to evaluate late effects and cost-effectiveness.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Dario Pasalic
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - G Brandon Gunn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - C David Fuller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Jack Phan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - David I Rosenthal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - William H Morrison
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Erich M Sturgis
- Department of Head and Neck Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Neil D Gross
- Department of Head and Neck Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Maura L Gillison
- Department of Thoracic/Head and Neck Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Renata Ferrarotto
- Department of Thoracic/Head and Neck Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Adel K El-Naggar
- Department of Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Adam S Garden
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Steven J Frank
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Proton Therapy for HPV-Associated Oropharyngeal Cancers of the Head and Neck: a De-Intensification Strategy. Curr Treat Options Oncol 2021; 22:54. [PMID: 34086150 PMCID: PMC8178129 DOI: 10.1007/s11864-021-00847-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 03/16/2021] [Indexed: 12/02/2022]
Abstract
The rise in the incidence of human papillomavirus (HPV)-associated oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPC), the relatively young age at which it is diagnosed, and its favorable prognosis necessitate the use of treatment techniques that reduce the likelihood of side effects during and after curative treatment. Intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) is a form of radiotherapy that de-intensifies treatment through dose de-escalation to normal tissues without compromising dose to the primary tumor and involved, regional lymph nodes. Preclinical studies have demonstrated that HPV-positive squamous cell carcinoma is more sensitive to proton radiation than is HPV-negative squamous cell carcinoma. Retrospective studies comparing intensity-modulated photon (X-ray) radiotherapy to IMPT for OPC suggest comparable rates of disease control and lower rates of pain, xerostomia, dysphagia, dysgeusia, gastrostomy tube dependence, and osteoradionecrosis with IMPT—all of which meaningfully affect the quality of life of patients treated for HPV-associated OPC. Two phase III trials currently underway—the “Randomized Trial of IMPT versus IMRT for the Treatment of Oropharyngeal Cancer of the Head and Neck” and the “TOxicity Reduction using Proton bEam therapy for Oropharyngeal cancer (TORPEdO)” trial—are expected to provide prospective, level I evidence regarding the effectiveness of IMPT for such patients.
Collapse
|
31
|
Intensity-modulated proton therapy for oropharyngeal cancer reduces rates of late xerostomia. Radiother Oncol 2021; 160:32-39. [PMID: 33839202 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2021.03.036] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/18/2020] [Revised: 03/23/2021] [Accepted: 03/28/2021] [Indexed: 01/13/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE To determine rates of xerostomia after intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) or intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) for oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) and identify dosimetric factors associated with xerostomia risk. MATERIALS AND METHODS Patients with OPC who received IMRT (n = 429) or IMPT (n = 103) from January 2011 through June 2015 at a single institution were studied retrospectively. Every 3 months after treatment, each patient completed an eight-item self-reported xerostomia-specific questionnaire (XQ; summary XQ score, 0-100). An XQ score of 50 was selected as the demarcation value for moderate-severe (XQs ≥ 50) and no-mild (XQs < 50) xerostomia. The mean doses and percent volumes of organs at risk receiving various doses (V5-V70) were extracted from the initial treatment plans. The dosimetric variables and xerostomia risk were compared using an independent-sample t-test or chi-square test. RESULTS The median follow-up time was 36.2 months. The proportions of patients with moderate-severe xerostomia were similar in the two treatment groups up to 18 months after treatment. However, moderate-severe xerostomia was less common in the IMPT group than in the IMRT group at 18-24 months (6% vs. 20%; p = 0.025) and 24-36 months (6% vs. 20%; p = 0.01). During the late xerostomia period (24-36 months), high dose/volume exposures (V25-V70) in the oral cavity were associated with high proportions of patients with moderate-severe xerostomia (all p < 0.05), but dosimetric variables regarding the salivary glands were not associated with late xerostomia. CONCLUSION IMPT was associated with less late xerostomia than was IMRT in OPC patients. Oral cavity dosimetric variables were related to the occurrence of late xerostomia.
Collapse
|
32
|
Brodin NP, Kabarriti R, Schechter CB, Pankuch M, Gondi V, Kalnicki S, Garg MK, Tomé WA. Individualized quality of life benefit and cost-effectiveness estimates of proton therapy for patients with oropharyngeal cancer. Radiat Oncol 2021; 16:19. [PMID: 33478544 PMCID: PMC7819210 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-021-01745-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/17/2020] [Accepted: 01/02/2021] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Proton therapy is a promising advancement in radiation oncology especially in terms of reducing normal tissue toxicity, although it is currently expensive and of limited availability. Here we estimated the individual quality of life benefit and cost-effectiveness of proton therapy in patients with oropharyngeal cancer treated with definitive radiation therapy (RT), as a decision-making tool for treatment individualization.
Methods and materials Normal tissue complication probability models were used to estimate the risk of dysphagia, esophagitis, hypothyroidism, xerostomia and oral mucositis for 33 patients, comparing delivered photon intensity-modulated RT (IMRT) plans to intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) plans. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) lost were calculated for each complication while accounting for patient-specific conditional survival probability and assigning quality-adjustment factors based on complication severity. Cost-effectiveness was modeled based on upfront costs of IMPT and IMRT, and the cost of acute and/or long-term management of treatment complications. Uncertainties in all model parameters and sensitivity analyses were included through Monte Carlo sampling.
Results The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) showed considerable variability in the cost of QALYs spared between patients, with median $361,405/QALY for all patients, varying from $54,477/QALY to $1,508,845/QALY between individual patients. Proton therapy was more likely to be cost-effective for patients with p16-positive tumors ($234,201/QALY), compared to p16-negative tumors ($516,297/QALY). For patients with p16-positive tumors treated with comprehensive nodal irradiation, proton therapy is estimated to be cost-effective in ≥ 50% of sampled cases for 8/9 patients at $500,000/QALY, compared to 6/24 patients who either have p16-negative tumors or receive unilateral neck irradiation. Conclusions Proton therapy cost-effectiveness varies greatly among oropharyngeal cancer patients, and highlights the importance of individualized decision-making. Although the upfront cost, societal willingness to pay and healthcare administration can vary greatly among different countries, identifying patients for whom proton therapy will have the greatest benefit can optimize resource allocation and inform prospective clinical trial design.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- N Patrik Brodin
- Institute for Onco-Physics, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, 10461, USA. .,Department of Radiation Oncology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY, 10461, USA.
| | - Rafi Kabarriti
- Institute for Onco-Physics, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, 10461, USA.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY, 10461, USA
| | - Clyde B Schechter
- Department of Family and Social Medicine, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, 10461, USA
| | - Mark Pankuch
- Northwestern Medicine Chicago Proton Center, Warrenville, IL, 60555, USA
| | - Vinai Gondi
- Northwestern Medicine Chicago Proton Center, Warrenville, IL, 60555, USA
| | - Shalom Kalnicki
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY, 10461, USA.,Department of Urology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY, 10461, USA
| | - Madhur K Garg
- Institute for Onco-Physics, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, 10461, USA.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY, 10461, USA.,Department of Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY, 10461, USA.,Department of Urology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY, 10461, USA
| | - Wolfgang A Tomé
- Institute for Onco-Physics, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, 10461, USA. .,Department of Radiation Oncology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY, 10461, USA. .,Department of Neurology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, 10461, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Wang L, Fossati P, Paganetti H, Ma L, Gillison M, Myers JN, Hug E, Frank SJ. The Biological Basis for Enhanced Effects of Proton Radiation Therapy Relative to Photon Radiation Therapy for Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma. Int J Part Ther 2021; 8:3-13. [PMID: 34285931 PMCID: PMC8270087 DOI: 10.14338/ijpt-20-00070.1] [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: 09/17/2020] [Accepted: 02/09/2021] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCCs) often present as local-regionally advanced disease at diagnosis, for which a current standard of care is x-ray-based radiation therapy, with or without chemotherapy. This approach provides effective local regional tumor control, but at the cost of acute and late toxicity that can worsen quality of life and contribute to mortality. For patients with human papillomavirus (HPV)-associated oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) in particular, for whom the prognosis is generally favorable, de-escalation of the radiation dose to surrounding normal tissues without diminishing the radiation dose to tumors is desired to mitigate radiation-related toxic effects. Proton radiation therapy (PRT) may be an excellent de-escalation strategy because of its physical properties (that eliminate unnecessary radiation to surrounding tissues) and because of its biological properties (including tumor-specific variations in relative biological effectiveness [RBE] and linear energy transfer [LET]), in combination with concurrent systemic therapy. Early clinical evidence has shown that compared with x-ray-based radiation therapy, PRT offers comparable disease control with fewer and less severe treatment-related toxicities that can worsen the quality of life for patients with HNSCC. Herein, we review aspects of the biological basis of enhanced HNSCC cell response to proton versus x-ray irradiation in terms of radiation-induced gene and protein expression, DNA damage and repair, cell death, tumor immune responses, and radiosensitization of tumors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Li Wang
- Department of Experimental Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Piero Fossati
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| | - Harald Paganetti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Li Ma
- Department of Experimental Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Maura Gillison
- Department of Thoracic-Head & Neck Med Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Jeffrey N. Myers
- Department of Head & Neck Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Eugen Hug
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MedAustron Ion Therapy Center, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| | - Steven J. Frank
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Li X, Lee A, Cohen MA, Sherman EJ, Lee NY. Past, present and future of proton therapy for head and neck cancer. Oral Oncol 2020; 110:104879. [PMID: 32650256 DOI: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2020.104879] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/17/2020] [Accepted: 06/22/2020] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
Proton therapy has recently gained substantial momentum worldwide due to improved accessibility to the technology and sustained interests in its advantage of better tissue sparing compared to traditional photon radiation. Proton therapy in head and neck cancer has a unique advantage given the complex anatomy and proximity of targets to vital organs. As head and neck cancer patients are living longer due to epidemiological shifts and advances in treatment options, long-term toxicity from radiation treatment has become a major concern that may be better mitigated by proton therapy. With increased utilization of proton therapy, new proton centers breaking ground, and as excitement about the technology continue to increase, we aim to comprehensively review the evidence of proton therapy in major subsites within the head and neck, hoping to facilitate a greater understanding of the full risks and benefits of proton therapy for head and neck cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xingzhe Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, United States
| | - Anna Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, United States
| | - Marc A Cohen
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, United States
| | - Eric J Sherman
- Department of Medical Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, United States
| | - Nancy Y Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, United States.
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Chang CF, Islam A, Liu PF, Zhan JH, Chueh PJ. Capsaicin acts through tNOX (ENOX2) to induce autophagic apoptosis in p53-mutated HSC-3 cells but autophagy in p53-functional SAS oral cancer cells. Am J Cancer Res 2020; 10:3230-3247. [PMID: 33163267 PMCID: PMC7642647] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/08/2020] [Accepted: 09/01/2020] [Indexed: 06/11/2023] Open
Abstract
Despite the progress that has been made in diagnosing and treating oral cancers, they continue to have a poor prognosis, with a 5-year overall survival rate of approximately 50%. We have intensively studied the anticancer properties of capsaicin (a burning constituent of chili pepper), mainly focusing on its apoptotic properties. Here, we investigated the interplay between apoptosis and autophagy in capsaicin-treated oral cancer cells with either functional or mutant p53. Cytotoxicity was determined by cell impedance measurements and WST-1 assays, and cell death was analyzed by flow cytometry. The interaction between capsaicin and tumor-associated NADH oxidase (tNOX, ENOX2) was studied by cellular thermal shift assay (CETSA) and isothermal dose-response fingerprint curves (ITDRFCETSA). Our CETSA data suggested that capsaicin directly engaged with tNOX, resulting in its degradation through the ubiquitin-proteasome and the autophagy-lysosome systems. In p53-functional SAS cells, capsaicin induced significant cytotoxicity via autophagy but not apoptosis. Given that tNOX catalyzes the oxidation of NADH, the direct binding of capsaicin to tNOX also inhibited the NAD+-dependent activity of sirtuin 1 (SIRT1) deacetylase, we found that capsaicin-induced autophagy involved enhanced acetylation of ULK1, which is a key player in autophagy activation, possibly through SIRT1 inhibition. In p53-mutated HSC-3 cells, capsaicin triggered both autophagy and apoptosis. In this case, autophagy occurred before apoptosis: during this early stage, autophagy seemed to inhibit apoptosis; at a later stage, in contrast, autophagy appeared to be essential for the induction of apoptosis. Western blot analysis revealed that the reduction in tNOX and SIRT1 associated with enhanced ULK1 acetylation and c-Myc acetylation, which in turn, reactivated the TRAIL pathway, ultimately leading to apoptosis. Taken together, our data highlight the potential value of leveraging capsaicin and tNOX in therapeutic strategies against oral cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chin-Fang Chang
- Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Jen-Ai HospitalTaichung 41265, Taiwan
- Department of Medical Education and Research, Jen-Ai HospitalTaichung 41265, Taiwan
- Cancer Medicine Center, Jen-Ai HospitalTaichung 41265, Taiwan
- Basic Medical Education Center, Central Taiwan University of Science and TechnologyTaichung 40601, Taiwan
| | - Atikul Islam
- Institute of Biomedical Sciences, National Chung Hsing University145 Xingda Road, Taichung 40227, Taiwan
| | - Pei-Fen Liu
- Department of Food Science and Biotechnology, National Chung Hsing University145 Xingda Road, South District, Taichung 40227, Taiwan
| | - Jun-Han Zhan
- Bachelor Program of Biotechnology, National Chung Hsing University145 Xingda Road, Taichung 40227, Taiwan
| | - Pin Ju Chueh
- Institute of Biomedical Sciences, National Chung Hsing University145 Xingda Road, Taichung 40227, Taiwan
- Department of Medical Research, China Medical University HospitalTaichung 40402, Taiwan
- Graduate Institute of Basic Medicine, China Medical UniversityTaichung 40402, Taiwan
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Elhalawani H, Mohamed ASR, Elgohari B, Lin TA, Sikora AG, Lai SY, Abusaif A, Phan J, Morrison WH, Gunn GB, Rosenthal DI, Garden AS, Fuller CD, Sandulache VC. Tobacco exposure as a major modifier of oncologic outcomes in human papillomavirus (HPV) associated oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma. BMC Cancer 2020; 20:912. [PMID: 32967643 PMCID: PMC7513300 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-020-07427-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/30/2020] [Accepted: 09/16/2020] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The incidence of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) in the US is rapidly increasing, driven largely by the epidemic of human papillomavirus (HPV)-mediated OPSCC. Although survival for patients with HPV mediated OPSCC (HPV+ OPSCC) is generally better than that of patients with non-virally mediated OPSCC, this effect is not uniform. We hypothesized that tobacco exposure remains a critical modifier of survival for HPV+ OPSCC patients. Methods We conducted a retrospective analysis of 611 OPSCC patients with concordant p16 and HPV testing treated at a single institute (2002–2013). Survival analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox regression. Recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) was used to define tobacco exposure associated with survival (p < 0.05). Results Tobacco exposure impacted overall survival (OS) for HPV+ patients on univariate and multivariate analysis (p = 0.002, p = 0.003 respectively). RPA identified 30 pack-years (PY) as a threshold at which survival became significantly worse in HPV+ patients. OS and disease-free survival (DFS) for HPV+ > 30 PY patients didn’t differ significantly from HPV- patients (p = 0.72, p = 0.27, respectively). HPV+ > 30 PY patients had substantially lower 5-year OS when compared to their ≤30 PYs counterparts: 78.4% vs 91.6%; p = 0.03, 76% vs 88.3%; p = 0.07, and 52.3% vs 74%; p = 0.05, for stages I, II, and III (AJCC 8th Edition Manual), respectively. Conclusions Tobacco exposure can eliminate the survival benefit associated with HPV+ status in OPSCC patients. Until this effect can be clearly quantified using prospective datasets, de-escalation of treatment for HPV + OPSCC smokers should be avoided.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hesham Elhalawani
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd, 0097, FCT10.6002, Houston, TX, 77030, USA
| | - Abdallah S R Mohamed
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd, 0097, FCT10.6002, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.,MD Anderson Cancer Center UTHealth Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Baher Elgohari
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd, 0097, FCT10.6002, Houston, TX, 77030, USA
| | - Timothy A Lin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd, 0097, FCT10.6002, Houston, TX, 77030, USA
| | - Andrew G Sikora
- ENT Section, Operative Care Line, Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, TX, USA.,Bobby R. Alford Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, One Baylor Plaza, MS: NA102, Houston, TX, 77030, USA
| | - Stephen Y Lai
- Department of Head and Neck Surgery, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.,Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Abdelrahman Abusaif
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd, 0097, FCT10.6002, Houston, TX, 77030, USA
| | - Jack Phan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd, 0097, FCT10.6002, Houston, TX, 77030, USA
| | - William H Morrison
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd, 0097, FCT10.6002, Houston, TX, 77030, USA
| | - G Brandon Gunn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd, 0097, FCT10.6002, Houston, TX, 77030, USA
| | - David I Rosenthal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd, 0097, FCT10.6002, Houston, TX, 77030, USA
| | - Adam S Garden
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd, 0097, FCT10.6002, Houston, TX, 77030, USA
| | - Clifton D Fuller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd, 0097, FCT10.6002, Houston, TX, 77030, USA. .,Medical Physics Program, The University of Texas Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Houston, TX, USA.
| | - Vlad C Sandulache
- ENT Section, Operative Care Line, Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, TX, USA. .,Bobby R. Alford Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, One Baylor Plaza, MS: NA102, Houston, TX, 77030, USA. .,Center for Translational Research on Inflammatory Diseases, Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, TX, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Grant SR, Hutcheson KA, Ye R, Garden AS, Morrison WH, Rosenthal DI, Gunn GB, Fuller C, Phan J, Reddy JP, Moreno AC, Lewin JS, Sturgis EM, Ferrarotto R, Frank SJ. Prospective longitudinal patient-reported outcomes of swallowing following intensity modulated proton therapy for oropharyngeal cancer. Radiother Oncol 2020; 148:133-139. [PMID: 32361662 PMCID: PMC9815953 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2020.04.021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/12/2020] [Revised: 04/14/2020] [Accepted: 04/15/2020] [Indexed: 01/11/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE With an enlarging population of long-term oropharyngeal cancer survivors, dysphagia is an increasingly important toxicity following oropharynx cancer treatment. While lower doses to normal surrounding structures may be achieved with intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) compared to photon-based radiation, the clinical benefit is uncertain. METHODS AND MATERIALS Seventy-one patients with stage III/IV oropharyngeal cancer (AJCC 7th edition) undergoing definitive IMPT on a longitudinal prospective cohort study who had completed the MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI) at pre-specified time points were included. RESULTS The majority of patients had HPV-positive tumors (85.9%) and received bilateral neck radiation (81.4%) with concurrent systemic therapy (61.8%). Mean composite MDADI scores decreased from 88.2 at baseline to 59.6 at treatment week 6, and then increased to 74.4 by follow up week 10, 77.0 by 6 months follow up, 80.5 by 12 months follow up, and 80.1 by 24 months follow up. At baseline, only 5.6% of patients recording a poor composite score (lower than 60), compared to 61.2% at treatment week 6, 19.1% at follow up week 10, 13.0% at 6 months follow up, 13.5% at 1 year follow up, and 11.1% at 2 years follow up. CONCLUSIONS Patient reported outcomes following IMPT for oropharyngeal cancer demonstrates decreased swallowing function at completion of treatment with relatively rapid recovery by 10 weeks follow up and steady improvement through 2 years. The results are comparable to similar longitudinal studies of photon-based radiotherapy for oropharynx cancer, and suggest that IMPT confers no additional excess toxicity related to swallowing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stephen R. Grant
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Katherine A. Hutcheson
- Department of Head and Neck Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Rong Ye
- Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Adam S. Garden
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - William H. Morrison
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - David I. Rosenthal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - G. Brandon Gunn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - C.D. Fuller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Jack Phan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Jay P. Reddy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Amy C. Moreno
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Jan S. Lewin
- Department of Head and Neck Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Erich M. Sturgis
- Department of Head and Neck Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Renata Ferrarotto
- Department of Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Steven J Frank
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Abstract
Background: Dose-painting has recently been investigated in early-phase trials in head-and-neck cancer (HNC) with the aim of improving local tumor control. At the same time proton therapy has been reported as potentially capable of decreasing toxicity. Here, we investigate whether protons could be applied in a dose-painting setting by comparing proton dose distributions with delivered photon plans from a phase-I trial of FDG-PET based dose-painting at our institution.Material and methods: Eleven oropharynx (5), hypopharynx (2) and larynx cancer (4) patients from the recently conducted phase I trial were used for comparison of proton and photon dose-painting techniques. Robust optimization (3.5%/3 mm) was used for proton plans. Plan robustness and difference in dose metrics to targets and organs at risk were evaluated.Results: The proton plans met target dose constraints, while having lower non-target dose than photon plans (body-minus-CTV, mean dose 3.9 Gy vs 7.2 Gy, p = .004). Despite the use of robust proton planning for plan max dose, photon plan max doses were more robust (p = .006). Max dose to medulla, brainstem and mandible were lower in the proton plans, while there was no significant difference in mean dose to submandibular- and parotid glands.Conclusion: Proton dose-painting for HNC seems feasible and can reduce the non-target dose overall, however not significantly to certain organs close to the target, such as the salivary glands. Max dose in proton plans had a lower robustness compared to photons, requiring caution to avoid unintended hot spots in consideration of the risk of mucosal toxicity.
Collapse
|
39
|
Proton therapy for head and neck squamous cell carcinomas: A review of the physical and clinical challenges. Radiother Oncol 2020; 147:30-39. [PMID: 32224315 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2020.03.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/10/2019] [Revised: 02/21/2020] [Accepted: 03/05/2020] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
The quality of radiation therapy has been shown to significantly influence the outcomes for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) patients. The results of dosimetric studies suggest that intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) could be of added value for HNSCC by being more effective than intensity-modulated (photon) radiation therapy (IMRT) for reducing side effects of radiation therapy. However, the physical properties of protons make IMPT more sensitive than photons to planning uncertainties. This could potentially have a negative effect on the quality of IMPT planning and delivery. For this review, the three French proton therapy centers collaborated to evaluate the differences between IMRT and IMPT. The review explored the effects of these uncertainties and their management for developing a robust and optimized IMPT treatment delivery plan to achieve clinical outcomes that are superior to those for IMRT. We also provide practical suggestions for the management of HNSCC carcinoma with IMPT. Because metallic dental implants can increase range uncertainties (3-10%), patient preparation for IMPT may require more systematic removal of in-field alien material than is done for IMRT. Multi-energy CT may be an alternative to calculate more accurately the dose distribution. The practical aspects that we describe are essential to guarantee optimal quality in radiation therapy in both model-based and randomized clinical trials.
Collapse
|
40
|
Barsky AR, Reddy VK, Plastaras JP, Ben-Josef E, Metz JM, Wojcieszynski AP. Proton beam re-irradiation for gastrointestinal malignancies: a systematic review. J Gastrointest Oncol 2020; 11:187-202. [PMID: 32175122 DOI: 10.21037/jgo.2019.09.03] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Radiotherapy (RT) is part of the standard of care management of most gastrointestinal (GI) cancers. Even with advanced RT, systemic therapy, and surgical techniques, locoregional recurrences or second primary cancers can still occur within previously irradiated fields, which can present challenges in delivering effective and safe treatment. Options for reirradiation are often limited, but given the favorable dosimetric aspects of proton-beam RT, it may provide an effective and safe re-irradiation option for patients with recurrent or second primary GI cancers. Methods We conducted a systematic review as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement protocol, assessing for reports of proton-beam reirradiation for recurrent or second primary GI cancers, primarily via PubMed. From the initial 373 articles identified, 7 articles were ultimately included in the analysis. Results The 7 included studies reported on proton-beam re-irradiation for the following disease sites: esophageal (n=2), pancreas (n=1), liver (n=2), rectal (n=1), and anal (n=1). Study sizes varied from as few as 1 to as many as 83 patients. Across studies, in patients who presented with tumor-related symptoms, palliation (stability/improvement) was achieved in 80-100% of the cases. Local control rates, with variable follow-up, ranged from 36-100%. All median overall survival values, when reported, were greater than 1 year. Across both liver studies, there were no cases of radiation-induced liver disease (RILD) from proton-beam re-irradiation. Across all studies, there were 2 acute (esophagopleural fistula in esophageal cancer, small bowel perforation in pancreatic cancer) and 1 late (esophageal ulcer in esophageal cancer) grade 5 toxicities, all favored to be due to progressive disease, rather than proton-beam re-irradiation. Two studies (1 esophageal, 1 rectal) generated comparison photon plans. One found that proton therapy reduced mean heart and lung doses, spinal cord dose, and lung V5Gy as compared to photon treatment, while resulting in higher lung V20Gy and V30Gy. The other found that protons decreased bowel V10Gy, V20Gy, and the dose to 200 and 150 cc of bowel, as compared to photons. Conclusions Based upon the published experiences, proton-beam re-irradiation for recurrent or second primary GI cancers appears effective for palliation, with good disease-control, limited toxicity, favorable dosimetry, and overall compares well with published non-proton-beam experiences. Given short follow-up, additional studies are warranted to determine if dosimetric advantages from proton therapy will translate into comparative toxicity benefits.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrew R Barsky
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine of the University of Pennsylvania, Perelman Center for Advanced Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Vishruth K Reddy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine of the University of Pennsylvania, Perelman Center for Advanced Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - John P Plastaras
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine of the University of Pennsylvania, Perelman Center for Advanced Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Edgar Ben-Josef
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine of the University of Pennsylvania, Perelman Center for Advanced Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - James M Metz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine of the University of Pennsylvania, Perelman Center for Advanced Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Andrzej P Wojcieszynski
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine of the University of Pennsylvania, Perelman Center for Advanced Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Radiation resistance in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: dire need for an appropriate sensitizer. Oncogene 2020; 39:3638-3649. [PMID: 32157215 PMCID: PMC7190570 DOI: 10.1038/s41388-020-1250-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 72] [Impact Index Per Article: 18.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/13/2019] [Revised: 02/18/2020] [Accepted: 02/25/2020] [Indexed: 01/11/2023]
Abstract
Radiation is a significant treatment for patients with head and neck cancer. Despite advances to improve treatment, many tumors acquire radiation resistance resulting in poor survival. Radiation kills cancer cells by inducing DNA double-strand breaks. Therefore, radiation resistance is enhanced by efficient repair of damaged DNA. Head and neck cancers overexpress EGFR and have a high frequency of p53 mutations, both of which enhance DNA repair. This review discusses the clinical criteria for radiation resistance in patients with head and neck cancer and summarizes how cancer cells evade radiation-mediated apoptosis by p53- and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mediated DNA repair. In addition, we explore the role of cancer stem cells in promoting radiation resistance, and how the abscopal effect provides rationale for combination strategies with immunotherapy.
Collapse
|
42
|
Price J, Hall E, West C, Thomson D. TORPEdO - A Phase III Trial of Intensity-modulated Proton Beam Therapy Versus Intensity-modulated Radiotherapy for Multi-toxicity Reduction in Oropharyngeal Cancer. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2020; 32:84-88. [PMID: 31604604 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2019.09.052] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/31/2019] [Accepted: 08/14/2019] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- J Price
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - E Hall
- Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - C West
- Division of Cancer Science, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - D Thomson
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Division of Cancer Science, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Aljabab S, Liu A, Wong T, Liao JJ, Laramore GE, Parvathaneni U. Proton Therapy for Locally Advanced Oropharyngeal Cancer: Initial Clinical Experience at the University of Washington. Int J Part Ther 2019; 6:1-12. [PMID: 32582809 DOI: 10.14338/ijpt-19-00053.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/06/2019] [Accepted: 10/26/2019] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Proton therapy can potentially improve the therapeutic ratio over conventional radiation therapy for oropharyngeal squamous cell cancer (OPSCC) by decreasing acute and late toxicity. We report our early clinical experience with intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT). Materials and Methods We retrospectively reviewed patients with OPSCC treated with IMPT at our center. Endpoints include local regional control (LRC), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), tumor response, and toxicity outcomes. Toxicity was graded as per the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.03. Descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier method were used. Results We treated 46 patients from March 2015 to August 2017. Median age was 58 years, 93.5% were male, 67% were nonsmokers, 98% had stage III-IVB disease per the 7th edition of the AJCC [American Joint Committee on Cancer] Cancer Staging Manual, and 89% were p16 positive. Twenty-eight patients received definitive IMPT to total dose of 70 to 74.4 Gy(RBE), and 18 patients received postoperative IMPT to 60 to 66 Gy(RBE) following transoral robotic surgery (TORS). Sixty-four percent of patients received concurrent systemic therapy. There were no treatment interruptions or observed acute grade 4 or 5 toxicities. Eighteen patients had percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube placement; the majority (14) were placed prophylactically. The most common grade 3 acute toxicities were dermatitis (76%) and mucositis (72%). The most common late toxicity was grade 2 xerostomia (30%). At a median follow-up time of 19.2 months (interquartile range [IQR], 11.2-28.4), primary complete response was 100% and nodal complete response was 92%. One patient required a salvage neck dissection owing to an incomplete response at 4 months. There were no recorded local regional or marginal recurrences, PFS was 93.5%, and OS was 95.7%. Conclusion Our early results for IMPT in OPSCC are promising with no local regional or marginal recurrences and a favorable toxicity profile. Our data add to a body of evidence that supports the clinical use of IMPT. Randomized comparative trials are encouraged.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Saif Aljabab
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Roswell Park Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY, USA
| | - Andrew Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington Medical Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Tony Wong
- Seattle Cancer Care Alliance Proton Therapy Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Jay J Liao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington Medical Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - George E Laramore
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington Medical Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Upendra Parvathaneni
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington Medical Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
McCulloch MM, Anderson BM, Cazoulat G, Peterson CB, Mohamed ASR, Volpe S, Elhalawani H, Bahig H, Rigaud B, King JB, Ford AC, Fuller CD, Brock KK. Biomechanical modeling of neck flexion for deformable alignment of the salivary glands in head and neck cancer images. Phys Med Biol 2019; 64:175018. [PMID: 31269475 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ab2f13] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Abstract
During head and neck (HN) cancer radiation therapy, analysis of the dose-response relationship for the parotid glands (PG) relies on the ability to accurately align soft tissue organs between longitudinal images. In order to isolate the response of the salivary glands to delivered dose, from deformation due to patient position, it is important to resolve the patient postural changes, mainly due to neck flexion. In this study we evaluate the use of a biomechanical model-based deformable image registration (DIR) algorithm to estimate the displacements and deformations of the salivary glands due to postural changes. A total of 82 pairs of CT images of HN cancer patients with varying angles of neck flexion were retrospectively obtained. The pairs of CTs of each patient were aligned using bone-based rigid registration. The images were then deformed using biomechanical model-based DIR method that focused on the mandible, C1 vertebrae, C3 vertebrae, and external contour. For comparison, an intensity-based DIR was also performed. The accuracy of the biomechanical model-based DIR was assessed using Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) for all images and for the subset of images where the PGs had a volume change within 20%. The accuracy was compared to the intensity-based DIR. The PG mean ± STD DSC were 0.63 ± 0.18, 0.80 ± 0.08, and 0.82 ± 0.15 for the rigid registration, biomechanical model-based DIR, and intensity based DIR, respectively, for patients with a PG volume change up to 20%. For the entire cohort of patients, where the PG volume change was up to 57%, the PG mean ± STD DSC were 0.60 ± 0.18, 0.78 ± 0.09, and 0.81 ± 0.14 for the rigid registration, biomechanical model-based DIR, and intensity based DIR, respectively. The difference in DSC of the intensity and biomechanical model-based DIR methods was not statistically significant when the volume change was less than 20% (two-sided paired t-test, p = 0.12). When all volume changes were considered, there was a significant difference between the two registration approaches, although the magnitude was small. These results demonstrate that the proposed biomechanical model with boundary conditions on the bony anatomy can serve to describe the varying angles of neck flexion appearing in images during radiation treatment and to align the salivary glands for proper analysis of dose-response relationships. It also motivates the need for dose response modeling following neck flexion for cases where parotid gland response is noted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Molly M McCulloch
- Department of Imaging Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, United States of America. Department of Nuclear Engineering and Radiological Sciences, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, United States of America. Author to whom any correspondence should be addressed
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
45
|
Bagley AF, Ye R, Garden AS, Gunn GB, Rosenthal DI, Fuller CD, Morrison WH, Phan J, Sturgis EM, Ferrarotto R, Wu R, Liu AY, Frank SJ. Xerostomia-related quality of life for patients with oropharyngeal carcinoma treated with proton therapy. Radiother Oncol 2019; 142:133-139. [PMID: 31431373 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2019.07.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/18/2019] [Revised: 05/17/2019] [Accepted: 07/09/2019] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE We report longitudinal patient-reported quality-of-life (QoL) outcomes related to xerostomia in patients with oropharyngeal cancer treated with intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT). MATERIALS AND METHODS Patients treated from May 2012 through December 2016 at a single institution for AJCC7 stage III-IV, M0 oropharyngeal cancer were given the 15-item Xerostomia-Related QoL Scale (XeQoLS) before, during, and for up to 2 years after treatment. We evaluated the evolution of xerostomia-related QoL over that time, and examined potential associations between those measures with clinical characteristics. RESULTS Sixty-nine patients had XeQoLS scores at baseline and at least once either during or after treatment. The mean (±SD) XeQoLS score (0-4) was 0.24 ± 0.57 at baseline. Subsequent scores were 2.00 ± 1.01 at 6 weeks on treatment, and 1.03 ± 0.76, 0.97 ± 0.78, 0.82 ± 0.69, and 0.70 ± 0.75 at 10 weeks, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years after treatment, respectively. All were statistically different from baseline (p < 0.001). Univariate analyses demonstrated associations between XeQoLS score and time (p < 0.0001 for each interval), baseline XeQoLS score (p < 0.0001), stage (p = 0.008), N status (p = 0.006), and mean oral cavity dose (p = 0.038), but not for age, sex, T status, receipt of chemotherapy, smoking history, disease site, laterality of neck irradiation, mean parotid dose, or mean submandibular dose. Multivariate analysis suggested that baseline XeQoLS scores, phase of treatment, and N status were associated with XeQoLS scores measured during treatment and recovery. CONCLUSIONS Patients receiving IMPT reported the greatest xerostomia-related QoL impairment at 6 weeks on treatment, with a 49% improvement by 10 weeks after treatment; however, XeQoLS scores remained above baseline after 2 years. As we aim to establish the value of IMPT in oropharyngeal tumors to de-intensify treatment over conventional therapy, these data help inform discussions about xerostomia-related quality of life for patients with oropharyngeal cancer treated with IMPT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexander F Bagley
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - Rong Ye
- Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - Adam S Garden
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - Gary Brandon Gunn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - David I Rosenthal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - Clifton David Fuller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - William H Morrison
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - Jack Phan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - Erich M Sturgis
- Department of Head & Neck Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - Renata Ferrarotto
- Department of Thoracic/Head & Neck Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - Richard Wu
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - Amy Y Liu
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - Steven J Frank
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Beddok A, Vela A, Calugaru V, Tessonnier T, Kubes J, Dutheil P, Gérard A, Vidal M, Goudjil F, Florescu C, Kammerer E, Bénézery K, Hérault J, Bourhis J, Thariat J. [Proton therapy for head and neck squamous cell carcinomas: From physics to clinic]. Cancer Radiother 2019; 23:439-448. [PMID: 31358445 DOI: 10.1016/j.canrad.2019.05.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/29/2019] [Revised: 05/09/2019] [Accepted: 05/16/2019] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is presently the recommended technique for the treatment of locally advanced head and neck carcinomas. Proton therapy would allow to reduce the volume of irradiated normal tissue and, thus, to decrease the risk of late dysphagia, xerostomia, dysgeusia and hypothyroidism. An exhaustive research was performed with the search engine PubMed by focusing on the papers about the physical difficulties that slow down use of proton therapy for head and neck carcinomas. Range uncertainties in proton therapy (±3 %) paradoxically limit the use of the steep dose gradient in distality. Calibration uncertainties can be important in the treatment of head and neck cancer in the presence of materials of uncertain stoichiometric composition (such as with metal implants, dental filling, etc.) and complex heterogeneities. Dental management for example may be different with IMRT or proton therapy. Some uncertainties can be somewhat minimized at the time of optimization. Inter- and intrafractional variations and uncertainties in Hounsfield units/stopping power can be integrated in a robust optimization process. Additional changes in patient's anatomy (tumour shrinkage, changes in skin folds in the beam patch, large weight loss or gain) require rescanning. Dosimetric and small clinical studies comparing photon and proton therapy have well shown the interest of proton therapy for head and neck cancers. Intensity-modulated proton therapy is a promising treatment as it can reduce the substantial toxicity burden of patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma compared to IMRT. Robust optimization will allow to perform an optimal treatment and to use proton therapy in current clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Beddok
- Département d'oncologie-radiothérapie, institut Curie, 25, rue d'Ulm, 75005 Paris, France
| | - A Vela
- Département d'oncologie-radiothérapie, centre François-Baclesse, Caen, 3, avenue du Général-Harris, 14000 Caen, France; Unicaen - Normandie Université, 14000 Caen, France; Advanced Resource Centre for Hadrontherapy in Europe (Archade), 3, avenue du Général-Harris, 14000 Caen, France
| | - V Calugaru
- Département d'oncologie-radiothérapie, institut Curie, 25, rue d'Ulm, 75005 Paris, France
| | - T Tessonnier
- Département d'oncologie-radiothérapie, centre François-Baclesse, Caen, 3, avenue du Général-Harris, 14000 Caen, France; Unicaen - Normandie Université, 14000 Caen, France; Advanced Resource Centre for Hadrontherapy in Europe (Archade), 3, avenue du Général-Harris, 14000 Caen, France
| | - J Kubes
- Proton Therapy Centre Czech, Prague, République tchèque
| | - P Dutheil
- Département d'oncologie-radiothérapie, centre François-Baclesse, Caen, 3, avenue du Général-Harris, 14000 Caen, France; Unicaen - Normandie Université, 14000 Caen, France; Advanced Resource Centre for Hadrontherapy in Europe (Archade), 3, avenue du Général-Harris, 14000 Caen, France
| | - A Gérard
- Centre Antoine-Lacassagne, département d'oncologie-radiothérapie, 33, avenue Valombrose, 06000 Nice, France
| | - M Vidal
- Centre Antoine-Lacassagne, département d'oncologie-radiothérapie, 33, avenue Valombrose, 06000 Nice, France
| | - F Goudjil
- Département d'oncologie-radiothérapie, institut Curie, 25, rue d'Ulm, 75005 Paris, France
| | - C Florescu
- Département d'oncologie-radiothérapie, centre François-Baclesse, Caen, 3, avenue du Général-Harris, 14000 Caen, France; Unicaen - Normandie Université, 14000 Caen, France; Advanced Resource Centre for Hadrontherapy in Europe (Archade), 3, avenue du Général-Harris, 14000 Caen, France
| | - E Kammerer
- Département d'oncologie-radiothérapie, centre François-Baclesse, Caen, 3, avenue du Général-Harris, 14000 Caen, France; Unicaen - Normandie Université, 14000 Caen, France; Advanced Resource Centre for Hadrontherapy in Europe (Archade), 3, avenue du Général-Harris, 14000 Caen, France
| | - K Bénézery
- Centre Antoine-Lacassagne, département d'oncologie-radiothérapie, 33, avenue Valombrose, 06000 Nice, France
| | - J Hérault
- Centre Antoine-Lacassagne, département d'oncologie-radiothérapie, 33, avenue Valombrose, 06000 Nice, France
| | - J Bourhis
- Département d'oncologie-radiothérapie, centre hospitalier universitaire vaudois, Lausanne, Suisse
| | - J Thariat
- Département d'oncologie-radiothérapie, centre François-Baclesse, Caen, 3, avenue du Général-Harris, 14000 Caen, France; Unicaen - Normandie Université, 14000 Caen, France; Advanced Resource Centre for Hadrontherapy in Europe (Archade), 3, avenue du Général-Harris, 14000 Caen, France; Laboratoire de physique corpusculaire IN2P3/Ensicaen - UMR6534, Unicaen - Normandie Université, 14000 Caen, France.
| | -
- Département d'oncologie-radiothérapie, institut Curie, 25, rue d'Ulm, 75005 Paris, France; Département d'oncologie-radiothérapie, centre François-Baclesse, Caen, 3, avenue du Général-Harris, 14000 Caen, France; Unicaen - Normandie Université, 14000 Caen, France; Proton Therapy Centre Czech, Prague, République tchèque; Centre Antoine-Lacassagne, département d'oncologie-radiothérapie, 33, avenue Valombrose, 06000 Nice, France; Département d'oncologie-radiothérapie, centre hospitalier universitaire vaudois, Lausanne, Suisse; Laboratoire de physique corpusculaire IN2P3/Ensicaen - UMR6534, Unicaen - Normandie Université, 14000 Caen, France
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Alterio D, Marvaso G, Ferrari A, Volpe S, Orecchia R, Jereczek-Fossa BA. Modern radiotherapy for head and neck cancer. Semin Oncol 2019; 46:233-245. [PMID: 31378376 DOI: 10.1053/j.seminoncol.2019.07.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 129] [Impact Index Per Article: 25.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/28/2019] [Accepted: 07/15/2019] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
Radiation therapy (RT) plays a key role in curative-intent treatments for head and neck cancers. Its use is indicated as a sole therapy in early stage tumors or in combination with surgery or concurrent chemotherapy in advanced stages. Recent technologic advances have resulted in both improved oncologic results and expansion of the indications for RT in clinical practice. Despite this, RT administered to the head and neck region is still burdened by a high rate of acute and late side effects. Moreover, about 50% of patients with high-risk disease experience loco-regional recurrence within 3 years of follow-up. Therefore, in recent decades, efforts have been dedicated to optimize the cost/benefit ratio of RT in this subset of patients. The aim of the present review was to highlight modern concepts of RT for head and neck cancers considering both the technological advances that have been achieved and recent knowledge that has informed the biological interaction between radiation and both tumor and healthy tissues.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniela Alterio
- Division of Radiotherapy, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Giulia Marvaso
- Division of Radiotherapy, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
| | - Annamaria Ferrari
- Division of Radiotherapy, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Stefania Volpe
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Barbara Alicja Jereczek-Fossa
- Division of Radiotherapy, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Kadoya N, Kito S, Kurooka M, Saito M, Takemura A, Tohyama N, Tominaga M, Nakajima Y, Fujita Y, Miyabe Y. Factual survey of the clinical use of deformable image registration software for radiotherapy in Japan. JOURNAL OF RADIATION RESEARCH 2019; 60:546-553. [PMID: 31125076 PMCID: PMC6640912 DOI: 10.1093/jrr/rrz034] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/09/2019] [Revised: 02/24/2019] [Indexed: 05/02/2023]
Abstract
Deformable image registration (DIR) has recently become commercially available in the field of radiotherapy. However, there was no detailed information regarding the use of DIR software at each medical institution. Thus, in this study, we surveyed the status of the clinical use of DIR software for radiotherapy in Japan. The Japan Society of Medical Physics and the Japanese Society for Radiation Oncology mailing lists were used to announce this survey. The questionnaire was created by investigators working under the research grant of the Japanese Society for Radiation Oncology (2017-2018) and intended for the collection of information regarding the use of DIR in radiotherapy. The survey was completed by 161 institutions in Japan. The survey results showed that dose accumulation was the most frequent purpose for which DIR was used in clinical practice (73%). Various commissioning methods were performed, although they were not standardized. Qualitative evaluation with actual patient images was the most commonly used method (28%), although 30% of the total number of responses (42% of institutions) reported that they do not perform commissioning. We surveyed the current status of clinical use of DIR software for radiotherapy in Japan for the first time. Our results indicated that a certain number of institutions used DIR software for clinical practice, and various commissioning methods were performed, although they were not standardized. Taken together, these findings highlight the need for a technically unified approach for commissioning and quality assurance for the use of DIR software in Japan.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Noriyuki Kadoya
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan
- Corresponding author. Department of Radiation Oncology, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, 1-1 Seiryo-machi, Aoba-ku, Sendai, 980-8574 Japan. Tel: +81-22-717-7312; Fax: +81-22-717-7316; E-mail:
| | - Satoshi Kito
- Department of Radiotherapy, Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Diseases Center Komagome Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| | | | - Masahide Saito
- Department of Radiology, University of Yamanashi, Yamanashi, Japan
| | - Akihiro Takemura
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Institute of Medical, Pharmaceutical and Health Sciences, Kanazawa University, Kanazawa, Japan
| | - Naoki Tohyama
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tokyo Bay Advanced Imaging and Radiation Oncology Clinic Makuhari, Chiba, Japan
| | - Masahide Tominaga
- Department of Therapeutic Radiology, Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Tokushima University Graduate School, Tokushima, Japan
| | - Yujiro Nakajima
- Department of Radiotherapy, Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Diseases Center Komagome Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Yukio Fujita
- Department of Radiological Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, Komazawa University, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Yuki Miyabe
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Image-applied Therapy, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Head and Neck Cancer Adaptive Radiation Therapy (ART): Conceptual Considerations for the Informed Clinician. Semin Radiat Oncol 2019; 29:258-273. [PMID: 31027643 DOI: 10.1016/j.semradonc.2019.02.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 46] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
For nearly 2 decades, adaptive radiation therapy (ART) has been proposed as a method to account for changes in head and neck tumor and normal tissue to enhance therapeutic ratios. While technical advances in imaging, planning and delivery have allowed greater capacity for ART delivery, and a series of dosimetric explorations have consistently shown capacity for improvement, there remains a paucity of clinical trials demonstrating the utility of ART. Furthermore, while ad hoc implementation of head and neck ART is reported, systematic full-scale head and neck ART remains an as yet unreached reality. To some degree, this lack of scalability may be related to not only the complexity of ART, but also variability in the nomenclature and descriptions of what is encompassed by ART. Consequently, we present an overview of the history, current status, and recommendations for the future of ART, with an eye toward improving the clarity and description of head and neck ART for interested clinicians, noting practical considerations for implementation of an ART program or clinical trial. Process level considerations for ART are noted, reminding the reader that, paraphrasing the writer Elbert Hubbard, "Art is not a thing, it is a way."
Collapse
|
50
|
Hu M, Jiang L, Cui X, Zhang J, Yu J. Proton beam therapy for cancer in the era of precision medicine. J Hematol Oncol 2018; 11:136. [PMID: 30541578 PMCID: PMC6290507 DOI: 10.1186/s13045-018-0683-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 47] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/01/2018] [Accepted: 11/28/2018] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Precision radiotherapy, which accurately delivers the dose on a tumor and confers little or no irradiation to the surrounding normal tissue and organs, results in maximum tumor control and decreases the toxicity to the utmost extent. Proton beam therapy (PBT) provides superior dose distributions and has a dosimetric advantage over photon beam therapy. Initially, the clinical practice and study of proton beam therapy focused on ocular tumor, skull base, paraspinal tumors (chondrosarcoma and chordoma), and unresectable sarcomas, which responded poorly when treated with photon radiotherapy. Then, it is widely regarded as an ideal mode for reirradiation and pediatrics due to reducing unwanted side effects by lessening the dose to normal tissue. During the past decade, the application of PBT has been rapidly increasing worldwide and gradually expanding for the treatment of various malignancies. However, to date, the role of PBT in clinical settings is still controversial, and there are considerable challenges in its application. We systematically review the latest advances of PBT and the challenges for patient treatment in the era of precision medicine.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Man Hu
- Shandong Cancer Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University, Jinan, China
- Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences, Jinan, China
- Departments of Radiation Oncology and Shandong Province Key Laboratory of Radiation Oncology, Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute, Jinan, China
| | - Liyang Jiang
- Shandong Cancer Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University, Jinan, China
- Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences, Jinan, China
- Departments of Radiation Oncology and Shandong Province Key Laboratory of Radiation Oncology, Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute, Jinan, China
| | - Xiangli Cui
- Province Key Laboratory of Medical Physics and Technology, Center of Medical Physics and Technology, Hefei Institutes of Physical Science, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hefei, Anhui, China
| | - Jianguang Zhang
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, Zibo Wanjie Cancer Hospital, Zibo, Shandong, China
| | - Jinming Yu
- Shandong Cancer Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University, Jinan, China.
- Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences, Jinan, China.
- Departments of Radiation Oncology and Shandong Province Key Laboratory of Radiation Oncology, Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute, Jinan, China.
| |
Collapse
|