Volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy for esophageal cancer

Unveiling Therapeutic Targets for Esophageal Cancer: A Comprehensive Review

Esophageal cancer is a highly aggressive and deadly disease, ranking as the sixth leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Despite advances in treatment, the prognosis remains poor. A multidisciplinary approach is crucial for achieving complete remission, with treatment options varying based on disease stage. Surgical intervention and endoscopic treatment are used for localized cancer, while systemic treatments like chemoradiotherapy and targeted drug therapy play a crucial role. Molecular markers such as HER2 and EGFR can be targeted with drugs like trastuzumab and cetuximab, and immunotherapy drugs like pembrolizumab and nivolumab show promise by targeting immune checkpoint proteins. Epigenetic modifications offer new avenues for targeted therapy. Treatment selection depends on factors like stage, tumor location, and patient health, with post-operative and rehabilitation care being essential. Early diagnosis, appropriate treatment, and supportive care are key to improving outcomes. Continued research is needed to develop effective targeted drugs with minimal side effects. This review serves as a valuable resource for clinicians and researchers dedicated to enhancing esophageal cancer treatment outcomes.

Incidental nodal irradiation in patients with esophageal cancer undergoing (chemo)radiation with 3D-CRT or VMAT

The extent of elective nodal irradiation (ENI) in patients undergoing definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) remains unclear. The aim of this dosimetric study was to evaluate the extent of incidental nodal irradiation using modern radiation techniques. A planning target volume (PTV) was generated for 30 patients with node-negative esophageal carcinoma (13 cervical/upper third, 7 middle third, 10 lower third/abdomen). Thereby, no elective nodal irradiation (ENI) was intended. Both three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatment plans (50 Gy in 25 fractions) were calculated for all patients. Fifteen nodal stations were contoured according to the definitions of the AJCC and investigated in regard to dosimetric parameters. Compared to 3D-CRT, VMAT was associated with lower dose distribution to the organs at risk (lower D_mean, V20 and V30 for the lungs and lower D_mean and V30 for the heart). For both techniques, the median D_mean surpassed 40 Gy in 12 of 15 (80%) nodal stations. However, VMAT resulted in significantly lower D_means and equivalent uniform doses (EUD) compared to 3D-CRT for eight nodal stations (1L, 2L, 2R, 4L, 7, 8L, 10L, 15), while differences did not reach significance for seven nodal station (1R, 4R, 8U, 8M, 10R, 16). For dCRT of ESCC, the use of VMAT was associated with significantly lower median (incidental) doses to eight of 15 regional lymph node areas compared to 3D-CRT. However, given the small absolute differences, these differences probably do not impair (regional) tumor control rates.

Dose-volume comparison of intensity modulated proton therapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy for cervical esophageal cancer

Proton therapy for cervical esophageal cancer has many issues to be considered, such as the physiological curvature of the spine and the large range change from the neck to the trunk. We clarified the dosimetric characteristics of intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) for cervical esophageal cancer by comparing with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Ten patients with cervical esophageal cancer were retrospectively planned for VMAT, 2-field IMPT (2F-IMPT), and 3-field IMPT (3F-IMPT). All plans were optimized to reach clinically acceptable levels. For planning target volume (PTV) coverage, 95% of the PTV should be covered by 95% of the prescription dose, unless the spinal cord limit is violated. The organs at risk included the lung, spinal cord, larynx, skin, and whole body. The prescription dose was 60 Gy relative biological effectiveness (RBE) in 30 fractions to the PTV. We compared the results according to dose-volume metrics. Significant dose reductions were achieved at lung doses, especially at low dose volumes of 20 Gy RBE or less in IMPT plans compared with VMAT plans (p < 0.05). Although the spinal cord PRV was below the tolerance level, the results were also significantly higher in VMAT plans than in IMPT plans (p < 0.001). Spinal cord PRV D_mean was significantly higher in 3F-IMPT than in 2F-IMPT (p < 0.001). In addition, it was confirmed that the integral whole body dose can be dramatically reduced in IMPT plans compared with VMAT plans. Both of 2F-IMPT and 3F-IMPT could effectively reduce spinal cord dose, as well as low integral whole body dose to a certain extent, while maintaining similar target coverage compared to VMAT. IMPT could be a promising treatment technique for patients with cervical esophageal cancer.

Radiation Pneumonitis after Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy for Esophageal Cancer: Institutional Data and a Systematic Review

Radiation pneumonitis (RP) is a serious complication that can occur after thoracic radiotherapy. The goal of this study is to investigate the incidence of RP after radiochemotherapy with intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in patients with esophageal cancer and correlate this with dose volume histogram (DVH) related parameters. For this purpose, the clinical course of 73 patients was evaluated and irradiation doses to the lungs were extracted from radiotherapy treatment plans. Furthermore, a systematic review on this topic was conducted across PubMed. In our institutional cohort, Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) grade II or higher RP occurred in four patients (5.5%). The systematic review identified 493 titles of which 19 studies reporting 874 patients qualified for the final analysis. No grade IV or V RP after radiochemotherapy with IMRT for esophageal cancer was reported in the screened literature. Grade II or higher RP is reported in 6.6% of the patients. A higher incidence can be seen with increasing values for lung V20. In conclusion, our institutional data and the literature consistently show a low incidence of symptomatic RP after radiochemotherapy in patients with esophageal cancer treated with IMRT. However, efforts should be made to keep the lung V20 below 23% and specific caution is warranted in patients with pre-existing lung conditions.

Radiation Matters of the Heart: A Mini Review

Radiation Therapy (RT) has been critical in cancer treatment regimens to date. However, it has been shown that ionizing radiation is also associated with increased risk of damage to healthy tissues. At high radiation doses, varied effects including inactivation of cells in treated tissue and associated functional impairment are seen. These range from direct damage to the heart; particularly, diffuse fibrosis of the pericardium and myocardium, adhesion of the pericardium, injury to the blood vessels and stenosis. Cardiac damage is mostly a late responding end-point, occurring anywhere between 1 and 10 years after radiation procedures. Cardiovascular disease following radiotherapy was more common with radiation treatments used before the late 1980s. Modern RT regimens with more focused radiation beams, allow tumors to be targeted more precisely and shield the heart and other healthy tissues for minimizing the radiation damage to normal cells. In this review, we discuss radiation therapeutic doses used and post-radiation damage to the heart muscle from published studies. We also emphasize the need for early detection of cardiotoxicity and the need for more cardio-protection approaches where feasible.

Advances in radiotherapy for esophageal cancer

Esophageal cancer is a common type of malignancy worldwide and usually requires multidisciplinary care. Radiotherapy plays an important part in management of the disease. During the past few years, researchers have made much progress about radiotherapy for esophageal cancer, which was revealed in every aspect of clinical practice. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy remains the standard treatment for locally advanced esophageal cancer, whereas neoadjuvant chemotherapy appears to show less toxicities and non-inferior prognosis. What's more, definitive chemoradiotherapy could be an option for non-surgical candidates and good responders to chemoradiotherapy. Advances in radiation techniques result in higher conformity, homogeneity, more normal tissue sparing and less treatment time. Promising prognoses and less toxicities were also seen in advanced techniques. As radiation dose higher than 50 Gy obtains better local control and survival, simultaneously integrated boost is designed to increase primary tumor dosage and keep prophylactic dose to subclinical areas. Elective nodal irradiation brings about better local control but do not show advantages in survival compared with involved field irradiation (IFI). As a trend, more tolerable chemoradiotherapy regimen would be taken into account in dealing with elderly patients.

Radiation Therapy for Locally Advanced Esophageal Cancer

The treatment of locally advanced esophageal cancer is controversial. For patients who are candidates for surgical resection, multiple prospective clinical trials have demonstrated the advantages of neoadjuvant chemoradiation. For patients who are medically inoperable, definitive chemoradiation is an alternative approach with survival rates comparable to trimodality therapy. Although trials of dose escalation are ongoing, the standard radiation dose remains 50.4 Gy. Modern radiotherapy techniques such as image-guided radiation therapy with motion management and intensity-modulated radiation therapy are strongly encouraged with a planning objective to maximize conformity to the intended target volume while reducing dose delivered to uninvolved normal tissues.

A broad scope knowledge based model for optimization of VMAT in esophageal cancer: validation and assessment of plan quality among different treatment centers

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the performance of a broad scope model-based optimisation process for volumetric modulated arc therapy applied to esophageal cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A set of 70 previously treated patients in two different institutions, were selected to train a model for the prediction of dose-volume constraints. The model was built with a broad-scope purpose, aiming to be effective for different dose prescriptions and tumour localisations. It was validated on three groups of patients from the same institution and from another clinic not providing patients for the training phase. Comparison of the automated plans was done against reference cases given by the clinically accepted plans.

RESULTS

Quantitative improvements (statistically significant for the majority of the analysed dose-volume parameters) were observed between the benchmark and the test plans. Of 624 dose-volume objectives assessed for plan evaluation, in 21 cases (3.3 %) the reference plans failed to respect the constraints while the model-based plans succeeded. Only in 3 cases (<0.5 %) the reference plans passed the criteria while the model-based failed. In 5.3 % of the cases both groups of plans failed and in the remaining cases both passed the tests.

CONCLUSIONS

Plans were optimised using a broad scope knowledge-based model to determine the dose-volume constraints. The results showed dosimetric improvements when compared to the benchmark data. Particularly the plans optimised for patients from the third centre, not participating to the training, resulted in superior quality. The data suggests that the new engine is reliable and could encourage its application to clinical practice.

Esophageal cancer management controversies: Radiation oncology point of view

Esophageal cancer treatment has evolved from single modality to trimodality therapy. There are some controversies of the role, target volumes and dose of radiotherapy (RT) in the literature over decades. The present review focuses primarily on RT as part of the treatment modalities, and highlight on the RT volume and its dose in the management of esophageal cancer. The randomized adjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) trial, intergroup trial (INT 0116) enrolled 559 patients with resected adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction. They were randomly assigned to surgery plus postoperative CRT or surgery alone. Analyses show robust treatment benefit of adjuvant CRT in most subsets for postoperative CRT. The Chemoradiotherapy for Oesophageal Cancer Followed by Surgery Study (CROSS) used a lower RT dose of 41.4 Gray in 23 fractions with newer chemotherapeutic agents carboplatin and paclitaxel to achieve an excellent result. Target volume of external beam radiation therapy and its coverage have been in debate for years among radiation oncologists. Pre-operative and post-operative target volumes are designed to optimize for disease control. Esophageal brachytherapy is effective in the palliation of dysphagia, but should not be given concomitantly with chemotherapy or external beam RT. The role of brachytherapy in multimodality management requires further investigation. On-going studies of multidisciplinary treatment in locally advanced cancer include: ZTOG1201 trial (a phase II trial of neoadjuvant and adjuvant CRT) and QUINTETT (a phase III trial of neoadjuvant vs adjuvant therapy with quality of life analysis). These trials hopefully will shed more light on the future management of esophageal cancer.

Dosimetric benefits of IMRT and VMAT in the treatment of middle thoracic esophageal cancer: is the conformal radiotherapy still an alternative option?

The purpose of this study is to investigate the dosimetric differences among conformal radiotherapy (CRT), intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), and volumetric-modulated radiotherapy (VMAT) in the treatment of middle thoracic esophageal cancer, and determine the most appropriate treatment modality. IMRT and one-arc VMAT plans were generated for eight middle thoracic esophageal cancer patients treated previous with CRT. The planning target volume (PTV) coverage and protections on organs at risk of three planning schemes were compared. All plans have sufficient PTV coverage and no significant differences were observed, except for the conformity and homogeneity. The lung V5, V10, and V13 in CRT were 47.9% ± 6.1%, 36.5% ± 4.6%, and 33.2% ± 4.2%, respectively, which were greatly increased to 78.2% ± 13.7% (p < 0.01), 80.8% ± 14.9% (p < 0.01), 48.4% ± 8.2% (p = 0.05) in IMRT and 58.6% ± 10.5% (p = 0.03), 67.7% ± 14.0% (p < 0.01), and 53.0% ± 10.1% (p < 0.01) in VMAT, respectively. The lung V20 (p = 0.03) in VMAT and the V30 (p = 0.04) in IMRT were lower than those in CRT. Both IMRT and VMAT achieved a better protection on heart. However, the volumes of the healthy tissue outside of PTV irradiated by a low dose were higher for IMRT and VMAT. IMRT and VMAT also had a higher MU, optimization time, and delivery time compared to CRT. In conclusion, all CRT, IMRT, and VMAT plans are able to meet the prescription and there is no clear distinction on PTV coverage. IMRT and VMAT can only decrease the volume of lung and heart receiving a high dose, but at a cost of delivering low dose to more volume of lung and normal tissues. CRT is still a feasible option for middle thoracic esophageal cancer radiotherapy, especially for the cost-effective consideration.

Reduced lung dose during radiotherapy for thoracic esophageal carcinoma: VMAT combined with active breathing control for moderate DIBH

Background

Lung radiation injury is a critical complication of radiotherapy (RT) for thoracic esophageal carcinoma (EC). Therefore, the goal of this study was to investigate the feasibility and dosimetric effects of reducing the lung tissue irradiation dose during RT for thoracic EC by applying volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT) combined with active breathing control (ABC) for moderate deep inspiration breath-hold (mDIBH).

Methods

Fifteen patients with thoracic EC were randomly selected to undergo two series of computed tomography (CT) simulation scans with ABC used to achieve mDIBH (representing 80% of peak DIBH value) versus free breathing (FB). Gross tumor volumes were contoured on different CT images, and planning target volumes (PTVs) were obtained using different margins. For PTV_-FB, intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) was designed with seven fields, and VMAT included two whole arcs. For PTV_-DIBH, VMAT with three 135° arcs was applied, and the corresponding plans were named: IMRT_-FB, VMAT_-FB, and VMAT_-DIBH, respectively. Dosimetric differences between the different plans were compared.

Results

The heart volumes decreased by 19.85%, while total lung volume increased by 52.54% in mDIBH, compared to FB (p < 0.05). The mean conformality index values and homogeneity index values for VMAT_-DIBH (0.86, 1.07) were slightly worse than those for IMRT_-FB (0.90, 1.05) and VMAT_-FB (0.90, 1.06) (p > 0.05). Furthermore, compared to IMRT_-FB and VMAT_-FB, VMAT_-DIBH reduced the mean total lung dose by 18.64% and 17.84%, respectively (p < 0.05); moreover, the V₅, V₁₀, V₂₀, and V₃₀ values for IMRT_-FB and VMAT_-FB were reduced by 10.84% and 10.65% (p > 0.05), 12.5% and 20% (p < 0.05), 30.77% and 33.33% (p < 0.05), and 50.33% and 49.15% (p < 0.05), respectively. However, the heart dose-volume indices were similar between VMAT_-DIBH and VMAT_-FB which were lower than IMRT_-FB without being statistically significant (p > 0.05). The monitor units and treatment time of VMAT_-DIBH were also the lowest (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

VMAT combined with ABC to achieve mDIBH is a feasible approach for RT of thoracic EC. Furthermore, this method has the potential to effectively reduce lung dose in a shorter treatment time and with better targeting accuracy.

CRT combined with a sequential VMAT boost in the treatment of upper thoracic esophageal cancer

The purpose of this study is to investigate the potential benefits of conformal radiotherapy (CRT) combined with a sequential volumetric‐modulated arc therapy (VMAT) boost in the treatment of upper thoracic esophageal cancer. Ten patients with upper thoracic esophageal cancer previously treated with CRT plus a sequential VMAT boost plan were replanned with CRT plus an off‐cord CRT boost plan and a full course of VMAT plan. Dosimetric parameters were compared. Results indicated that CRT plus off‐cord CRT boost was inferior in planning target volume (PTV) coverage, as indicated by the volume covered by 93% (p = 0.05) and 95% (p = 0.02) of the prescription dose. The full course VMAT plan was superior in conformal index (CI) and conformation number (CN), and produced the highest protection for the spinal cord. CRT plus a VMAT boost demonstrated significant advantages in decreasing the volume of the lung irradiated by a dose of 10 Gy (V10, p = 0.007),13 Gy (V13, p = 0.003), and 20 Gy (V20, p = 0.001). The full course VMAT plan demonstrated the lowest volume of lung receiving a dose of 30 Gy. CRT plus a VMAT boost for upper thoracic esophageal cancer can improve the target coverage and reduce the volume of lung irradiated by an intermediate dose. This combination may be a promising treatment technique for patients with upper thoracic esophageal cancer.

PACS number: 87.53.Kn, 87.55.x, 87.55.D, 87.55.dk

The effect of the target-organ geometric complexity on the choice of delivery between RapidArc and sliding-window IMRT for nasopharyngeal carcinoma

We attempted to assess the effect of target-organ geometric complexity on the plan quality of sliding-window intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), double-arc (RA2), and triple-arc (RA3) RapidArc volumetric-modulated arc radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). Plans for 9-field sliding-window IMRT, RA2, and RA3 were optimized for 36 patients with NPC ranging from T1 to T4 tumors. Initially the patients were divided into 2 groups, with group A representing the most simple early stage (T1 and T2) cases, whereas group B represented the more complex advanced cases (T3 and T4). Evaluation was performed based on target conformity, target dose homogeneity, organ-sparing capability, and delivery efficiency. Based on the plan quality results, a subgroup of advanced cases, group B2, representing the most demanding task was distinguished and reported separately from the rest of the group B cases, B1. Detailed analysis was performed on the anatomic features for each group of cases, so that planners can easily identify the differences between B1 and B2. For the group A cases, RA3 plans were superior to the IMRT plans in terms of organ sparing, whereas target conformity and dose homogeneity were similar. For the group B1 cases, the RA3 plans produced almost equivalent plan quality as the IMRT plans. For the group B2 cases, for most of which large target volumes were adjacent to (5mm or less) and wrapping around the brain stem, RA2 and RA3 were inferior to the IMRT regarding both target dose homogeneity and conformity. RA2 plans were slightly inferior to IMRT and RA3 plans for most cases. The plan comparison results depend on the target to brain stem distances and the target sizes. The plan quality results together with the anatomic information may allow the evaluation of the 3 treatment options before actual planning.

Radiotherapy for tumors of the stomach and gastroesophageal junction--a review of its role in multimodal therapy

There is broad consensus on surgical resection being the backbone of curative therapy of gastric- and gastroesophageal junction carcinoma. Nevertheless, details on therapeutic approaches in addition to surgery, such as chemotherapy, radiotherapy or radiochemotherapy are discussed controversially; especially whether external beam radiotherapy should be applied in addition to chemotherapy and surgery is debated in both entities and differs widely between regions and centers. Early landmark trials such as the Intergroup-0116 and the MAGIC trial must be interpreted in the context of potentially insufficient lymph node resection. Despite shortcomings of both trials, benefits on overall survival by radiochemotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy were confirmed in populations of D2-resected gastric cancer patients by Asian trials.

Recent results on junctional carcinoma patients strongly suggest a survival benefit of neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy in curatively resectable patients. An effect of chemotherapy in the perioperative setting as given in the MAGIC study has been confirmed by the ACCORD07 trial for junctional carcinomas; however both the studies by Stahl et al. and the excellent outcome in the CROSS trial as compared to all other therapeutic approaches indicate a superiority of neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy as compared to perioperative chemotherapy in junctional carcinoma patients. Surgery alone without neoadjuvant or perioperative therapy is considered suboptimal in patients with locally advanced disease.

In gastric carcinoma patients, perioperative chemotherapy has not been compared to adjuvant radiochemotherapy in a randomized setting. Nevertheless, the results of the recently published ARTIST trial and the Chinese data by Zhu and coworkers, indicate a superiority of adjuvant radiochemotherapy as compared to adjuvant chemotherapy in terms of disease free survival in Asian patients with advanced gastric carcinoma. The ongoing CRITICS trial is supposed to provide reliable conclusions about which therapy should be preferred in Western patients with gastric carcinoma. If radiotherapy is performed, modern approaches such as intensity-modulated radiotherapy and image guidance should be applied, as these methods reduce dose to organs at risk and provide a more homogenous coverage of planning target volumes.