1
|
DeLaney TF, Chen YL, Baldini EH, Wang D, Adams J, Hickey SB, Yeap BY, Hahn SM, De Amorim Bernstein K, Nielsen GP, Choy E, Mullen JT, Yoon SS. Phase 1 trial of preoperative image guided intensity modulated proton radiation therapy with simultaneously integrated boost to the high risk margin for retroperitoneal sarcomas. Adv Radiat Oncol 2017; 2:85-93. [PMID: 28740917 PMCID: PMC5514168 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2016.12.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 51] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/01/2016] [Revised: 11/29/2016] [Accepted: 12/02/2016] [Indexed: 11/05/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To conduct phase 1 and 2 trials with photon intensity modulated radiation therapy and intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) arms to selectively escalate the retroperitoneal sarcoma preoperative radiation dose to tumor volume (clinical target volume [CTV] 2) that is judged to be at a high risk for positive margins and aim to reduce local recurrence. We report on the IMPT study arm in phase 1. METHODS AND MATERIALS Patients aged ≥18 years with primary or locally recurrent retroperitoneal sarcoma were treated with preoperative IMPT, 50.4 GyRBE in 28 fractions, to CTV1 (gross tumor volume and adjacent tissues at risk of subclinical disease) with a simultaneous integrated boost to CTV2 to doses of 60.2, 61.6, and 63.0 GyRBE in 28 fractions of 2.15, 2.20, and 2.25 GyRBE, respectively. The primary objective of the phase 1 study was to determine the maximum tolerated dose to CTV2, which will be further tested in the phase 2 study. RESULTS Eleven patients showed increasing IMPT dose levels without acute dose limiting toxicities that prevented dose escalation to maximum tolerated dose. Acute toxicity was generally mild with no radiation interruptions. No unexpected perioperative morbidity was noted. Eight months postoperatively, one patient developed hydronephrosis that was treated by stent with ureter dissected off tumor and received 57.5 GyRBE. Retained ureter(s) was (were) subsequently constrained to 50.4 GyRBE without further problem. With an 18-month median follow-up, there were no local recurrences. CONCLUSIONS IMPT dose escalation to CTV2 to 63 GyRBE was achieved without acute dose limiting toxicities. The phase 2 study of IMPT will accrue patients to that dose. Parallel intensity modulated radiation therapy phase 1 arm is currently accruing at the initial dose level. Ureters that undergo a high dose radiation and/or surgery are at risk for late hydro-ureter. Future studies will constrain retained ureters to 50.4 GyRBE to avoid ureteral stricture.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas F. DeLaney
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Yen-Lin Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Elizabeth H. Baldini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Dian Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Judith Adams
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Shea B. Hickey
- Cancer Center Protocol Office, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Beow Y. Yeap
- Biostatistics/Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Stephen M. Hahn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Karen De Amorim Bernstein
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - G. Petur Nielsen
- Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Edwin Choy
- Medical Oncology Section, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - John T. Mullen
- Surgical Oncology Section, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Sam S. Yoon
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Abstract
Retroperitoneal soft-tissue sarcoma is an uncommon cancer of mesodermal origin, which is difficult to treat owing to its location and proximity to vital structures. Complete gross resection, often involving en bloc resection, is the standard of care as it represents the only treatment that improves overall survival. Unlike extremity sarcoma, retroperitoneal soft-tissue sarcoma tumor mortality is from local recurrence. Radiation therapy is the only adjuvant treatment that has improved local control in several institutional series. However, there remains no definitive prospective, randomized trial that establishes the role of adjuvant radiation versus no radiation. Owing to significant radiation morbidity with adjacent organs, especially the small bowel, there exists no consensus on radiation timing, delivery method or dosing. Recent and current protocols use preoperative external-beam radiation with or without a method of focal boost dosing. Methods of boost dosing include brachytherapy, intraoperative radiation therapy and intensity-modulated radiation therapy. Further studies are needed to definitively include radiation therapy in the standard treatment of retroperitoneal soft-tissue sarcoma and to find the optimal balance between acceptable radiation toxicity and effective local control in treatment protocols.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ching-Wei D Tzeng
- Surgical Oncology Research Fellow, Department of Surgery, University of Alabama-Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Pezner RD, Liu A, Han C, Chen YJ, Schultheiss TE, Wong JYC. Dosimetric comparison of helical tomotherapy treatment and step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiotherapy of retroperitoneal sarcoma. Radiother Oncol 2006; 81:81-7. [PMID: 17005280 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2006.08.025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 40] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/28/2005] [Revised: 08/17/2006] [Accepted: 08/21/2006] [Indexed: 10/24/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To compare step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiation therapy (SAS-IMRT) and helical tomotherapy (Tomo) dosimetry plans for patients who have received adjuvant radiation therapy for retroperitoneal sarcomas (RSTS). METHODS AND MATERIALS A retrospective review was performed for seven patients who received either SAS-IMRT or Tomo as adjuvant radiation therapy for RSTS. In each case, a treatment plan of the other modality was generated so that SAS-IMRT and Tomo could be compared. RESULTS The average percentage of clinical target volume (CTV) that received less than the prescription dose was 1.4% for Tomo compared to 3.8% for SAS-IMRT. Both SAS-IMRT and Tomo plans provided comparable and significant reductions in volume of small bowel receiving greater than 45 Gy compared to simple opposing standard radiation fields. For the ipsilateral kidney, Tomo significantly reduced the volume of kidney that received at least 15 Gy (average 22% for Tomo vs. 56% for SAS-IMRT). CONCLUSION Both SAS-IMRT and Tomo can encompass the large CTV often required for patients with RSTS, although Tomo provides superior dose uniformity. Both SAS-IMRT and Tomo can minimize the volume of small bowel receiving greater than 45 Gy. Tomo was superior to SAS-IMRT in minimizing the volume of ipsilateral kidney irradiated to greater than 15 Gy when the CTV is adjacent to a kidney. Dose escalation and target margin expansion may thus become realistic possibilities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Richard D Pezner
- Division of Radiation Oncology, City of Hope Medical Center, Duarte, CA 91010, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
DeLaney TF, Trofimov AV, Engelsman M, Suit HD. Advanced-technology radiation therapy in the management of bone and soft tissue sarcomas. Cancer Control 2005; 12:27-35. [PMID: 15668650 DOI: 10.1177/107327480501200104] [Citation(s) in RCA: 72] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND For patients with sarcomas, radiotherapy can be used as neoadjuvant, adjuvant, or primary local therapy, depending on the site and type of sarcoma, the surgical approach, and the efficacy of chemotherapy. METHODS The authors review the current status of advanced technology radiation therapy in the management of bone and soft tissue sarcoma. RESULTS Advances in radiotherapy have resulted in improved treatment for bone and soft tissue sarcomas. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) uses modifications in the intensity of the photon-beam from a linear accelerator across the irradiated fields to enhance dose conformation in three dimensions. For proton-beam radiation therapy, the nuclei of hydrogen atoms are accelerated in cyclotrons or synchrotrons, extracted, and transported to treatment rooms where the proton beam undergoes a series of modifications that conform the dose in a particular patient to the tumor target. Brachytherapy and intraoperative radiation therapy have generally been used to treat microscopic residual disease in patients with sarcomas. These technologies deliver dose to tumor cells with irradiation of limited volumes of normal tissue. Patients who may benefit from technically advanced radiotherapy include those with skull base and spine/paraspinal sarcomas, Ewing's sarcoma, and retroperitoneal/extremity sarcomas. CONCLUSIONS Advances in radiation therapy technology, particularly IMRT, proton-beam or other charged-particle radiation therapy, brachytherapy, and intraoperative radiation therapy, have led to improved treatment for patients with bone and soft tissue sarcomas.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas F DeLaney
- Northeast Proton Therapy Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA 02114, USA.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|