Reirradiation using robotic image-guided stereotactic radiotherapy of recurrent head and neck cancer

Interdisciplinary Approach Toward Reirradiation of Cancer Patients

As systemic therapies, alongside radiation, for cancer treatment continue to evolve, the radiation oncology community is facing an increasing number of reirradiation (re-RT) of tumor sites subject to recurrences. There are multiple factors associated with choosing re-RT as a treatment option for a previously irradiated site. The factors include the site of previous radiotherapy (RT), the current extent of the disease, the nature of recurrence, the technique used for previous irradiation, and the previous RT details including dose and dose fractionation. There is a persistent heterogeneity in the workflow and decision-making in cancer care centers worldwide. The current review is an attempt to dive into the practices of decision-making for re-RT, interdisciplinary attention given to the re-RT patients, and acceptable doses to the organ at risk (OAR) deduced from the understanding of previous RT and radiobiology of the tumor and sites evidence of better techniques for effective execution.

Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy in Recurrent and Oligometastatic Head and Neck Tumours

The treatment of head and neck cancers (HNCs) encompasses a complex paradigm involving a combination of surgery, radiotherapy, and systemic treatment. Locoregional recurrence is a common cause of treatment failure, and few patients are suitable for salvage surgery. Reirradiation with conventional radiation techniques is challenging due to normal tissue tolerance limits and the risk of significant toxicities. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has emerged as a highly conformal modality that offers the potential for cure while limiting the dose to surrounding tissue. There is also growing research that shows that those with oligometastatic disease can benefit from curative intent local ablative therapies such as SBRT. This review will look at published evidence regarding the use of SBRT in locoregional recurrent and oligometastatic HNCs.

Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for treating primary head and neck cancer and locoregional recurrence: A comprehensive review of the literature

Introduction

Although stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) has advance to standard-of-care for many different indications like lung and liver malignancies, it still remains in its infancy for treating head and neck cancer. Nevertheless there is a growing body of experience and evidence, which is summarized in this review Methods A thorough search of the literature was performed and critically reviewed both for SABR as a primary treatment as well as for treating locoregionally recurrent disease in a pre-irradiated field.

Results

There exist only few prospective data published so far for treating head and neck cancer with SABR. In the primary situation especially implementing SABR as a boost after definitive radiotherapy or a single-modality for locally limited, small glottic cancer appear promising. On the other hand, SABR can be a useful modality for treating local recurrence in a pre-irradiated field. However, caution is needed in the case of proximity to a pre-irradiated carotid artery or other serial organs at risk. Usually only limited gross volumes are treated with 3-6 fractions every other day and a cumulative dose of 24-44 Gy in dedicated radiosurgery platforms or modern linacs with the possibility of online image-guidance and adequate immobilsation.

Conclusions

SABR is an innovative, effective and promising treatment modality for small targets, especially in near proximity to organs at risk or in a pre-irradiated region. Prospective trials are further needed for this technique to become standard-of care.

Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy in Recurrent Head and Neck Cancer: Where Do We Stand?

This review explores the difficulties encountered in the management of head and neck cancer (HNC), with special attention to the challenges presented by locoregional recurrences, which impact a substantial number of patients. While maximal surgical resection remains the gold standard for treatment, surgery is often not feasible due to various factors. In such cases, reirradiation has emerged as a potential strategy, albeit with a heightened risk of severe toxicity. Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) is introduced as a promising approach for unresectable recurrent HNC. SBRT offers precise radiation doses and shorter treatment durations, making it a potentially optimal treatment modality. Despite the growing interest in SBRT, there is a lack of consensus guidelines for its use in HNC, particularly in India. Nevertheless, recommendations are provided for the benefit of SBRT in reirradiation settings, considering factors like tumour size, dose, and treatment duration. The article highlights the safety and effectiveness of SBRT-based reirradiation with existing evidence. The literature review discusses various studies and their findings, emphasizing the importance of high-dose SBRT for improved overall survival. The article also explores the combination of SBRT with systemic therapy as a potential synergistic approach to enhance patient outcomes. In conclusion, SBRT shows promise as a valuable therapeutic tool for patients with inoperable recurrent HNC, offering acceptable safety. However, further research and well-designed trials are needed to optimize its use and identify the most suitable patient cohorts. Establishing comprehensive working guidelines and a nationwide prospective database will be crucial in advancing this treatment approach.

Re-irradiation for isolated neck recurrence in head and neck tumor: impact of rN category

Unresectable, isolated lymph node recurrence after radiotherapy is rare but a candidate for re-irradiation. However, severe toxicity is anticipated. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the efficacy and toxicity of re-irradiation in isolated lymph node recurrence of head and neck lesions. We analyzed 46 patients who received re-irradiation for lymph node recurrence without local progression. The primary tumor sites included the oral cavity in 17 patients, the hypopharynx in 12, the oropharynx in seven, the larynx in three, the nasopharynx in two, and other sites. During a median follow-up time of 10 months, the median survival time was 10.6 months, and the 1-year overall survival rate was 45.5%. The 1-year local control and progression-free survival rates were 49.8% and 39.3%, respectively. According to univariate analysis, age (≥ 65 years), the interval between treatment (≥ 12 months), rN category (rN1), and gross tumor volume (GTV < 25 cm3) were predisposing factors for better survival. In the multivariate analysis, the rN category and interval were identified as statistically significant predictors. Late toxicity grade ≥ 3 occurred in four patients (8.6%). These were all Grade 5 carotid blowout syndrome, which associated with tumor invasion of the carotid artery and/ or high doses administration for the carotid artery. Small-volume rN1 tumor that recur after a longer interval is a feasible candidate for re-irradiation. However, strict patient selection and meticulous care for the carotid are required.

Reirradiation of head and neck squamous cell carcinomas: a pragmatic approach-part I: prognostic factors and indications to treatment

INTRODUCTION

Reirradiation (reRT) of locally recurrent/second primary tumors of the head and neck region is a potentially curative treatment for patients not candidate to salvage surgery. Aim of the present study is to summarize available literature on both prognostic factors and indications to curative reRT in this clinical setting.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A narrative review of the literature was performed on two topics: (1) patients' selection according to prognostic factors and (2) dosimetric feasibility of reRT. Postoperative reRT and palliative intent treatments were out of the scope of this work.

RESULTS

Patient-tumor and treatment-related prognostic factors were analyzed, together with dosimetric parameters concerning target volume and organs at risk. Based on available evidence, a stepwise approach has been proposed aiming to provide a useful tool to identify suitable candidates for curative reRT in clinical practice. This was then applied to two clinical cases, proposed at the end of this work.

CONCLUSION

A second course of RT in head and neck recurrence/second primary tumors is a personalized approach that can be offered to selected patients only in centers with expertise and dedicated equipment following a multidisciplinary team discussion.

The immunogenic radiation and new players in immunotherapy and targeted therapy for head and neck cancer

Although treatment modalities for head and neck cancer have evolved considerably over the past decades, survival rates have plateaued. The treatment options remained limited to definitive surgery, surgery followed by fractionated radiotherapy with optional chemotherapy, and a definitive combination of fractionated radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Lately, immunotherapy has been introduced as the fourth modality of treatment, mainly administered as a single checkpoint inhibitor for recurrent or metastatic disease. While other regimens and combinations of immunotherapy and targeted therapy are being tested in clinical trials, adapting the appropriate regimens to patients and predicting their outcomes have yet to reach the clinical setting. Radiotherapy is mainly regarded as a means to target cancer cells while minimizing the unwanted peripheral effect. Radiotherapy regimens and fractionation are designed to serve this purpose, while the systemic effect of radiation on the immune response is rarely considered a factor while designing treatment. To bridge this gap, this review will highlight the effect of radiotherapy on the tumor microenvironment locally, and the immune response systemically. We will review the methodology to identify potential targets for therapy in the tumor microenvironment and the scientific basis for combining targeted therapy and radiotherapy. We will describe a current experience in preclinical models to test these combinations and propose how challenges in this realm may be faced. We will review new players in targeted therapy and their utilization to drive immunogenic response against head and neck cancer. We will outline the factors contributing to head and neck cancer heterogeneity and their effect on the response to radiotherapy. We will review in-silico methods to decipher intertumoral and intratumoral heterogeneity and how these algorithms can predict treatment outcomes. We propose that (a) the sequence of surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and targeted therapy should be designed not only to annul cancer directly, but to prime the immune response. (b) Fractionation of radiotherapy and the extent of the irradiated field should facilitate systemic immunity to develop. (c) New players in targeted therapy should be evaluated in translational studies toward clinical trials. (d) Head and neck cancer treatment should be personalized according to patients and tumor-specific factors.

Reirradiation of head and neck squamous cell carcinomas: a pragmatic approach, part II: radiation technique and fractionations

INTRODUCTION

Reirradiation (reRT) of local recurrent/second primary tumors of the head and neck represents a potential curative treatment for patients not candidate to a salvage surgery. Aim of the present study is to summarize literature data on modern radiation techniques and fractionations used in this setting of patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A narrative review of the literature was conducted on three topics: (1) target volume delineation (2) reRT dose and techniques and (3) ongoing studies. Patients treated with postoperative reRT and palliative intent were not considered for the current analysis.

RESULTS

Recommendations on the target volume contouring have been reported. 3D-Conformal Radiotherapy, Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy, Stereotactic body Radiotherapy Intraoperative Radiotherapy, Brachytherapy and Charged Particles have been analyzed in terms of indication and fractionation in the field of reRT. Ongoing studies on the topic have been reported for IMRT and Charged Particles. Moreover, according to literature data a stepwise approach has been proposed aiming to provide a useful tool to select patients candidate to a curative reRT in daily clinical practice. Two clinical cases were also provided for its application.

CONCLUSION

Different radiation techniques and fractionations can be used for a second course of radiotherapy in patients with recurrent/second primary tumor of head and neck region. Tumor characteristics as well as radiobiological considerations should be take into account to define the best reRT approach.

Reirradiation for local recurrence of oral, pharyngeal, and laryngeal cancers: a multi-institutional study

This study aimed to examine the efficacy and toxicity of reirradiation in patients with locally recurrent oral, pharyngeal, and laryngeal cancers. We conducted a retrospective, multi-institutional analysis of 129 patients with previously irradiated cancer. The most frequent primary sites were the nasopharynx (43.4%), oral cavity (24.8%), and oropharynx (18.6%). With a median follow-up duration of 10.6 months, the median overall survival was 14.4 months and the 2-year overall survival rate was 40.6%. For each primary site, the 2-year overall survival rates were 32.1%, 34.6%, 30%, 60.8%, and 5.7% for the hypopharynx, oral cavity, larynx, nasopharynx, and oropharynx, respectively. Prognostic factors for overall survival were primary site (nasopharynx versus other sites) and gross tumor volume (GTV) (≤ 25 cm³ versus > 25 cm³). The 2-year local control rate was 41.2%. Twenty-four patients (18.6%) presented with grade ≥ 3 toxicities, including nine with hemorrhages that led to grade 5 toxicities in seven patients. All nine tumors that caused hemorrhage showed tumor encasement of the carotid ≥ 180 degrees and eight of nine tumors had larger GTV > 25 cm³. Reirradiation is a feasible treatment option for small local recurrence of oral, pharyngeal, and laryngeal cancers, with the requirement of a strict eligibility assessment for large tumors with carotid encasement.

Current radiotherapy for recurrent head and neck cancer in the modern era: a state-of-the-art review

BACKGROUND

In the management of head and neck cancer (HNC) patients, local recurrence is a common cause of treatment failure. Only a few patients with recurrent HNC (rHNC) are eligible for salvage surgery and the majority of patients receive systemic therapy and radiotherapy. In recent years, with the development of irradiation technology, radiotherapy for rHNC patients has markedly attracted clinicians' attention and its therapeutic effects on patients with end-stage cancer are worthy of investigation as well.

METHODS

Several studies have investigated the role of radiotherapy in the treatment of rHNC patients. We reviewed retrospective reports and prospective trials published in recent decades that concentrated on the management of rHNC.

RESULTS

A growing body of evidence supported the application of irradiation to rHNC patients. According to the results of this review, current radiotherapy could achieve a better efficacy with a lower incidence of toxicity.

CONCLUSION

Radiotherapy is a promising treatment for rHNC patients.

Retreatment of Recurrent or Second Primary Head and Neck Cancer After Prior Radiation: Executive Summary of the American Radium Society® (ARS) Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC): Expert Panel on Radiation Oncology - Head and Neck Cancer

BACKGROUND

Re-treatment of recurrent or second primary head and neck cancers occurring in a previously irradiated field is complex. Few guidelines exist to support practice.

METHODS

We performed an updated literature search of peer-reviewed journals in a systematic fashion. Search terms, key questions, and associated clinical case variants were formed by panel consensus. The literature search informed the committee during a blinded vote on the appropriateness of treatment options via the modified Delphi method.

RESULTS

The final number of citations retained for review was 274. These informed five key questions, which focused on patient selection, adjuvant re-irradiation, definitive re-irradiation, stereotactic body radiation (SBRT), and re-irradiation to treat non-squamous cancer. Results of the consensus voting are presented along with discussion of the most current evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

This provides updated evidence-based recommendations and guidelines for the re-treatment of recurrent or second primary cancer of the head and neck.

Multicenter study of re-irradiation using carbon-ions for head and neck malignancies after photon radiotherapy

Purpose

The goal of this multicenter retrospective study of patients with head and neck malignancies was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of carbon‐ion (C‐ion) radiotherapy (RT) after photon RT.

Methods

We enrolled 56 patients with head and neck malignancies who underwent re‐irradiation (re‐RT) using C‐ions between November 2003 and March 2019, treated previously with photon RT. The tumors at re‐RT were located in the sinonasal cavities (n = 20, 35.7%), skull base (n = 12, 21.4%), and orbit (n = 7, 12.5%). The tumors at the initial RT were located in the sinonasal cavities (n = 13, 23.2%), skull base (n = 9, 16.1%), and orbit (n = 9, 16.1%). The median period between the initial RT and re‐RT was 41 (4–568) months. The most common histology of re‐RT was squamous cell carcinoma (n = 11, 19.6%). The most commonly used protocol was 57.6 Gy (relative biological effectiveness) in 16 fractions (n = 23, 41.1%). Surgery preceded re‐RT in three patients (5.4%). One patient with malignant melanoma received concurrent chemotherapy.

Results

The 2‐year local control, progression‐free survival, and overall survival rates were 66.5%, 36.9%, and 67.9%, respectively. The median follow‐up time was 28 months. Two patients (3.6%) developed grade ≥ 3 acute toxicities, and 14 (25.0%) developed grade ≥ 3 late toxicities. A single patient had confirmed grade 5 dermatitis with infection.

Conclusion

Re‐RT using C‐ions for head and neck malignancies after photon RT is an effective treatment with tolerable toxicity.

Clinical and technical challenges of cancer reirradiation: Words of wisdom

Since the development of new radiotherapy techniques that have improved healthy tissue sparing, reirradiation (reRT) has become possible. The selection of patients eligible for reRT is complex given that it can induce severe or even fatal side effects. The first step should therefore be to assess, in the context of multidisciplinary staff meeting, the patient's physical status, the presence of sequelae resulting from the first irradiation and the best treatment option available. ReRT can be performed either curatively or palliatively to treat a cancer-related symptom that is detrimental to the patient's quality of life. The selected techniques for reRT should provide the best protection of healthy tissue. The construction of target volumes and the evaluation of constraints regarding the doses that can be used in this context have not yet been fully codified. These points raised in the literature suggest that randomized studies should be undertaken to answer pending questions.

Cyberknife Radiosurgery for the Treatment of Head and Neck Cancer: A Systematic Review

Cyberknife radiosurgery is a frameless stereotactic robotic radiosurgery which has shown to deliver better treatment outcomes in the treatment of advanced head and neck (H&N) carcinomas, especially in previously irradiated and recurrent cases. The aim of the study was to perform a systematic review of the available data on the outcomes of Cyberknife radiosurgery for treatment of head and neck cancer and to evaluate its collective outcomes. This systematic review was registered with the university with the registration no. FRP/2019/63 and was approved by the Institutional Review Board (RC/IRB/2019/132). Literature search was performed in the following: PubMed, Science direct, SciELO, MyScienceWork, Microsoft Academ EMBASE, Directory of Open Access Journals, and Cochrane databases with the keywords “Cyberknife,” “oral cancer,” “oropharyngeal cancer,” and “head and neck cancer” and data was extracted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The records identified were 147 manuscripts. Excluded articles included 5 duplicate articles, 33 abstracts, 101 full text articles due to being off-topic, case reports, review, non-English, 1 survey, and 2 other articles containing data extracted from a main study which was already included. A total of 5 articles were evaluated for qualitative synthesis. The mean dose of Cyberknife radiosurgery delivered for previously irradiated recurrent H&N carcinoma patients was 34.57 Gy, with a mean sample size of 5 studied during the period of 2000 to 2016. The available evidence from the systematic review indicates that Cyberknife can be an efficacious treatment option for recurrent previously irradiated H&N carcinoma, especially for nonresectable tumors. There is paucity of homogenous data and studies in this arena; hence, meta-analysis could not be performed. Further standardized studies are essential, especially where the treatment of H&N carcinoma is considered.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for primary non-metastatic head and neck cancer: When less is enough

The advantage of highly conformal dose distribution and steep dose gradient has resulted in rapidly increasing use of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in multiple cancer sites. Also there has been a surge in the use of SBRT in head neck cancer over the last decade. It is predominantly exploited in retreatment setting for recurrent and second primary head neck cancer as well as in metastatic setting. The literature on SBRT in primary non-metastatic head neck cancer is sparse and evolving. In the current review, available literature was critically analyzed focusing on the potential applications of SBRT in primary untreated non-metastatic head neck cancer. SBRT boost following external beam radiotherapy is temping as a method of dose escalation. Special attention was paid to the application of SBRT as a sole modality of treatment. The shorter treatment schedule makes it an attractive option for treatment in primary head neck cancer especially in elderly, co-morbid and medically unfits patients. Future investigation is needed to establish SBRT as an additional armamentarium in the radiotherapeutic management of head and neck cancers.

Highly conformal reirradiation in patients with prior oropharyngeal radiation: Clinical efficacy and toxicity outcomes

BACKGROUND

Reirradiation of head and neck cancer is associated with high rates of locoregional failure and potentially severe treatment-related toxicity. We report our institutional experience of reirradiation using modern highly conformal radiotherapy approaches in patients with prior oropharyngeal radiation.

METHODS

We reviewed patients receiving curative-intent reirradiation with intensity-modulated radiation therapy, stereotactic body radiation therapy, and proton beam radiotherapy at our institution from 1999 to 2019. Disease control, survival, and toxicity rates following reirradiation were determined.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine patients were evaluated. Local control (LC), progression-free survival, and overall survival at 2 years following reirradiation were 77%, 35%, and 51%, respectively. Grade 3 or greater (G3+) late toxicities occurred in 46% of patients and 41% required feeding tube placement during or after reirradiation.

CONCLUSIONS

In select patients with prior oropharyngeal radiation, highly conformal reirradiation offers acceptable LC, but G3+ toxicity and out-of-field failure rates remain high. These findings warrant continued evaluation of new multimodality approaches to improve oncologic outcomes.

Carotid blowout syndrome after reirradiation for head and neck malignancies: a comprehensive systematic review for a pragmatic multidisciplinary approach

AIM

To provide a literature review on risk factors and strategies to prevent acute carotid blowout (CBO) syndrome in patients who underwent reirradiation (reRT) for recurrent head and neck (HN) malignancies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Inclusion criteria were: 1) CBO following reRT in the HN region, 2) description on patient-, tumor- or treatment-related risk factors, 3) clinical or radiological signs of threatened or impending CBO, and 4) CBO prevention strategies.

RESULTS

Thirty-five studies were selected for the analysis from five hundred seventy-seven records. Results provided indications on clinical, radiological and dosimetric parameters possibly associated with higher risk of CBO. Endovascular procedures (artery occlusion and stenting) to prevent acute massive hemorrhage in high risk patients were discussed.

CONCLUSION

Literature data are still scarce with a low level of evidence. Nevertheless, the present work provides a comprehensive review useful for clinicians as a multidisciplinary pragmatic tool in their clinical practice.

Complex Clinical Decision-Making Process of Re-Irradiation

As patients live longer with their cancer as a result of more effective treatment, recurrences and second malignancies in a previously irradiated field are an increasing challenge. The technical advances that enable high-dose radiation to limited volumes, excluding critical normal tissues, have increased the use of re-irradiation for many tumour sites. Minimising the volume, selecting patients with good performance status, negative metastatic screening and longer disease-free intervals are important principles. Despite this there is a narrow therapeutic window, and careful consideration with open discussion, including the patient, of the probable benefit and the implications of potential toxicities will always be essential. In this overview we evaluate the various radiobiological factors that need to be considered for re-irradiation, tissue recovery and dose tolerances in the setting of re-irradiation and summarise the available literature to guide clinicians in their decision-making for re-irradiation to primary and metastatic site/s of disease.

Estimating PTV Margins in Head and Neck Stereotactic Ablative Radiation Therapy (SABR) Through Target Site Analysis of Positioning and Intrafractional Accuracy

PURPOSE

Recurrent or previously irradiated head and neck cancers (HNC) are therapeutically challenging and may benefit from high-dose, highly accurate radiation techniques, such as stereotactic ablative radiation therapy (SABR). Here, we compare set-up and positioning accuracy across HNC subsites to further optimize the treatment process and planning target volume (PTV) margin recommendations for head and neck SABR.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We prospectively collected data on 405 treatment fractions across 79 patients treated with SABR for recurrent/previously irradiated HNC. First, interfractional error was determined by comparing ExacTrac x-ray to the treatment plan. Patients were then shifted and residual error was measured with repeat x-ray. Next, cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) was compared with ExacTrac for positioning agreement, and final shifts were applied. Lastly, intrafractional error was measured with x-ray before each arc. Results were stratified by treatment site into skull base, neck/parotid, and mucosal.

RESULTS

Most patients (66.7%) were treated to 45 Gy in 5 fractions (range, 21-47.5 Gy in 3-5 fractions). The initial mean ± standard deviation interfractional errors were -0.2 ± 1.4 mm (anteroposterior), 0.2 ± 1.8 mm (craniocaudal), and -0.1 ± 1.7 mm (left-right). Interfractional 3-dimensional vector error was 2.48 ± 1.44, with skull base significantly lower than other sites (2.22 vs 2.77; P = .0016). All interfractional errors were corrected to within 1.3 mm and 1.8°. CBCT agreed with ExacTrac to within 3.6 mm and 3.4°. CBCT disagreements and intrafractional errors of >1 mm or >1° occurred at significantly lower rates in skull base sites (CBCT: 16.4% vs 50.0% neck, 52.0% mucosal, P < .0001; intrafractional: 22.0% vs 48.7% all others, P < .0001). Final PTVs were 1.5 mm (skull base), 2.0 mm (neck/parotid), and 1.8 mm (mucosal).

CONCLUSIONS

Head and neck SABR PTV margins should be optimized by target site. PTV margins of 1.5 to 2 mm may be sufficient in the skull base, whereas 2 to 2.5 mm may be necessary for neck and mucosal targets. When using ExacTrac, skull base sites show significantly fewer uncertainties throughout the treatment process, but neck/mucosal targets may require the addition of CBCT to account for positioning errors and internal organ motion.

Efficacy and Feasibility of Salvage Re-Irradiation with CyberKnife for In-Field Neck Lymph Node Recurrence: A Retrospective Study

Neck lymph node (LN) recurrence in the irradiated field represents an important aspect of treatment failure after primary radiotherapy owing to the lack of a standard treatment. The aim of this study is to investigate the efficacy and safety of CyberKnife treatment for neck LN recurrence after radiotherapy. Between 2008 and 2016, 55 neck LN recurrences after radiotherapy in 16 patients were treated with CyberKnife. The median follow-up period was 17 months (range, 2–53 months). The median previous radiotherapy dose was 68 Gy (range, 50–70 Gy). The median marginal dose as equivalent dose delivered in 2-Gy fractions (α/β = 10) was 50 Gy (range, 40–58 Gy). The one-year local control (LC) and overall survival rates were 81% and 71%, respectively. The one-year LC was higher with a target volume ≤1.0 cm³ than that with a target volume >1.0 cm³ (p = 0.006). Fatal bleeding was observed in one patient who had large (91 cm³) and widespread tumor with invasion to the carotid artery before CyberKnife treatment. CyberKnife treatment for neck LN recurrence is safe and feasible in most cases. Indication for the treatment should be carefully considered for large and widespread tumors.

Selection of systemic therapy in patients with locally advanced and recurrent/metastatic head and neck cancer: RAND-based expert opinion by an Italian multidisciplinary panel

BACKGROUND

Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is a heterogeneous disease often presenting at an already advanced stage. Cisplatin chemoradiotherapy is the standard treatment for locally advanced disease, although its efficacy varies according to different studies. Thus, treatment selection is a challenge, especially in older patients, who frequently have several comorbidities. Moreover, the majority of patients with recurrent and/or metastatic disease are unsuitable for local treatment, either surgery or radiation therapy. The only treatment option for them is systemic therapy, but prognosis remains poor, with a median overall survival of less than 12 months.

METHODS

A group of Italian key opinion leaders in the field of HNSCC gathered several times in 2018 in order to retrieve a set of statements to help clinicians in their daily decision-making process for the treatment of patients with different scenarios of HNSCC.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

The panel agreed on 22 statements that were identified as "good clinical points" based on the available literature or after discussion of the most relevant aspect of the underlying diseases when no international consensus was available. The panel identified a number of possible scenarios (namely 71) in which these statements may be helpful to guide decision-making for the best treatment selection.

Modern radiotherapy for head and neck cancer

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.

Prospective Study of Isolated Recurrent Tumor Re-irradiation With Carbon-Ion Beams

Purpose: To perform a prospective study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of isolated recurrent tumor re-irradiation with carbon-ion radiotherapy (RT).

Methods and Materials: The inclusion criteria were clinically proven recurrent tumors, measurable by computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging, patients ≥ 16 years old, performance status scores between 0 and 2, isolated tumor at a previously irradiated site, and a life expectancy > 6 months. The exclusion criteria were tumor invasion into the gastrointestinal tract or a major blood vessel, uncontrolled infection, early recurrence (<3 months), and severe concomitant diseases. The primary end-point was the local control rate, the secondary end-points including the overall survival rate, and adverse events.

Results: Between December 2013 and March 2016, 22 patients were enrolled in this prospective study. All patients were re-irradiated with carbon-ion RT with radical intent. Five patients had rectal cancer, 4 had sarcoma, 4 had lung cancer, 3 had hepatic cell carcinoma, and 6 had other tumors. The median follow-up time was 26 months. Eight patients developed local recurrence, and the 1- and 2-year local control rates were 71 and 60%, respectively. Eight patients died of their cancers and 2 died of other diseases. The 1- and 2-year overall survival rates were 76 and 67%, respectively. There were no grade 2 or higher acute adverse events and 4 patients (18%) developed grade 3 late adverse events. The group with the longer interval (>16 months) between the first RT and re-irradiation had significantly better outcomes than the shorter interval group (≤ 16 months).

Conclusions: Re-irradiation, using carbon-ion RT with radical intent, had favorable local control and overall survival rates without severe toxicities for selected patients. Re-irradiation has the potential to improve clinical outcomes for isolated, local, recurrent tumors; further investigations are required to confirm the therapeutic efficacy.

Dose-response modeling the risk of carotid bleeding events after stereotactic body radiation therapy for previously irradiated head and neck cancer

Given the lack of clear dose constraints for the carotid artery, we created dose-response models to better quantify the risk of carotid bleeding events following re-irradiation stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for head and neck cancer (HNC). We performed a retrospective analysis on 75 patients treated with SBRT for recurrent, previously irradiated HNC. Logistic dose-response models were created to predict the risk of a carotid bleeding event, defined as any mucosal bleeding event or bleeding resulting from rupture of the carotid artery or its major branches in the setting of controlled disease. According to the models, the risk of a carotid bleeding event with a cumulative D_0.1cc of 20 Gy from SBRT is 0.8% (95% CI 0.1%-3.9%), and rises to 5.0% with a D_0.1cc of 50 Gy. No patient experienced a carotid bleeding event with D_0.1cc < 39.4 Gy, and none experienced carotid blowout syndrome with a cumulative D_0.1cc < 47.6 Gy.

Second infield re-irradiation with a resulting cumulative equivalent dose (EQD2max ) of >180 Gy for patients with recurrent head and neck cancer

BACKGROUND

For locally recurrent head and neck cancer, re-irradiation with modern techniques like stereotactic body radiotherapy is a promising, possibly curative alternative to palliative systemic therapy.

METHODS

We report on 1 patient with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) and 1 patient with cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). Both patients received full dose primary treatment (>66 Gy, EQD2), full dose re-irradiation (>50 Gy, EQD2), and a second course of re-irradiation via robotic radiosurgery (CyberKnife) for a second local recurrence.

RESULTS

Both treatments resulted in adequate tumor response. No grade III-IV acute or late toxicities occurred. Follow-up at 6 months after third irradiation showed partial remission for the patient with NPC. In the second case (SCC), no toxicities occurred and the tumor was in remission 18 months after last treatment.

CONCLUSION

These cases show that a second course of re-irradiation utilizing modern techniques like robotic radiosurgery might be feasible for carefully selected patients with head and neck cancer.

The Effectiveness and Prognostic Factors of CT-Guided Radioactive I-125 Seed Implantation for the Treatment of Recurrent Head and Neck Cancer After External Beam Radiation Therapy

PURPOSE

To analyze the efficacy and safety of radioactive I-125 seed implantation in the treatment of recurrent head and neck tumors after radiation therapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The data of 101 patients with recurrent head and neck cancer after radiation therapy who received computed tomography guided radioactive I-125 seed implantation were analyzed. The median previous cumulative external irradiation dose was 66 Gy, and the median dose to 90% of the target volume (D90) after operation was 117 Gy. The short-term efficacy was evaluated by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1, and the adverse event was evaluated by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0.

RESULTS

The 5-year local control rate was 26.6%, and the 5-year overall survival rate was 15.5%. Univariate analysis showed that factors related to local control rate included age, pathologic type, implantation site, lesion volume, and D90. The 5-year local control rate was 11.5% (2-year) if D90 was <120 Gy and 44.2% if D90 was ≥120 Gy (P = .001). Multivariate analysis showed that pathologic type, lesion volume, and D90 were independent factors related to local control (P = .002, 0, .014, respectively); Karnofsky performance status and lesion volume were independent factors associated with survival (P = .021 and 0, respectively). For the side effects, there were 26 cases of skin or mucosa ulceration (25.7%), 14 cases of pain (13.9%), and 2 cases of dry mouth (2%). The correlation between toxicity and dose had not been found.

CONCLUSIONS

Radioactive I-125 seed implantation in the treatment of recurrent head and neck cancer after radiation therapy showed acceptable efficacy and safety. Nonsquamous carcinoma, small lesion volume, and high dose (D90) were correlated with better local control.

[Technical aspects and indications of extracranial stereotactic radiotherapy]

Extracranial stereotactic radiotherapy has developed considerably in recent years and is now an important part of the therapeutic alternatives to be offered to patients with cancer. It offers opportunities that have progressively led physicians to reconsider the therapeutic strategy, for example in the case of local recurrence in irradiated territory or oligometastatic disease. The literature on the subject is rich but, yet, there is no real consensus on therapeutic indications. This is largely due to the lack of prospective, randomized studies that have evaluated this technique with sufficient recoil. We propose a review of the literature on the technical aspects and indications of extracranial stereotactic radiotherapy.

Carotid Dosimetry and the Risk of Carotid Blowout Syndrome After Reirradiation With Head and Neck Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy

PURPOSE

To correlate carotid dose and risk of carotid blowout syndrome (CBOS) after stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), hypothesizing that carotid dose does not correlate with CBOS.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We retrospectively reviewed 186 patients with recurrent, previously irradiated head and neck cancer treated between January 2008 and March 2013. Patients treated early in our experience with incomplete dosimetry were excluded from analysis (n = 111). A total of 75 patients were identified, providing 150 carotid arteries for analysis. Median follow-up was 8 months (range, 1-91 months) for all patients, and 37 months for surviving patients (range, 31-91 months). Patients were treated with linear accelerator-based SBRT to a median dose up to 44 Gy (range, 40-50 Gy) in 5 fractions delivered on a twice-weekly basis. Concurrent cetuximab was used in 63 patients (84%). The bilateral common, internal, and external carotid arteries were delineated 2 cm above and below the planning target volume. The maximum dose to 0.1 cm³ (D_0.1cc), 1 cm³ (D_1cc), and 2 cm³ (D_2cc) of the carotid and the mean carotid dose from SBRT were recorded and analyzed for association with carotid bleeding events, using binary logistic regression.

RESULTS

Median reirradiation interval was 20 months (range, 3-423 months), and median prior radiation dose was 70 Gy (range, 52.5-140 Gy). Sixteen patients (21.3%) received more than 1 course of SBRT, and the cumulative carotid doses from fused summary plans were recorded. The overall median D_0.1cc, D_1cc, D_2cc, and mean carotid doses were 40.8 Gy (interquartile range [IQR], 21.6-47.6 Gy), 26.8 Gy (IQR, 14.1-42.1 Gy), 15.4 Gy (IQR, 8.4-32.7 Gy), and 15.0 Gy (IQR, 8.9-23.3 Gy), respectively. There were a total of 4 bleeding events (5.3%): 2 patients (2.7%) had mucosal bleeds that resolved after embolization of carotid branches, and 2 patients (2.7%) died from complications of CBOS. In the 2 patients with CBOS the D_0.1cc was 48.4 Gy and 47.6 Gy, respectively. There was no significant association between bleeding events and D_1cc (P = .280), D_2cc (P = .571), or mean dose (P = .568). There was a trend toward increased risk of bleeding and D_0.1cc (P = .080).

CONCLUSIONS

These results demonstrate a low risk of bleeding after reirradiation with SBRT when 5 fractions are delivered on nonconsecutive days, even when tumor is completely encasing the carotid artery. Although limited by the low number of events, no significant association was found between dose-volume parameters and the risk of carotid bleeding. No CBOS was noted when D_0.1cc was <47.6 Gy.

Reirradiation of Skull Base Tumors With Advanced Highly Conformal Techniques

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Skull base reirradiation is challenging due to complex anatomy, enrichment of treatment-resistant clonogens, and increased risk of severe treatment complications. Without local therapy, early mortality is certain and tumor progression can result in debilitating symptoms. Modern radiotherapy advancements, such as image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT), intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), particle therapy, and stereotactic radiation therapy (SRT), are attractive for skull base reirradiation.

RECENT FINDINGS

Although limited by their retrospective nature and heterogeneous patient populations, several studies have demonstrated that reirradiation with these highly conformal techniques is feasible. Compared to IMRT or particle therapy reirradiation, SRT reirradiation appears promising with lower toxicity and increased convenience. Here, we provide thorough explanations for each technology and summarize the most relevant and recent studies, with particular attention to efficacy and toxicity. Skull base reirradiation using these extremely conformal therapy techniques requires meticulous treatment planning and should be delivered by experienced teams.

Reirradiation for recurrent head and neck cancers using charged particle or photon radiotherapy

OBJECTIVE

To examine the outcomes of reirradiation for recurrent head and neck cancers using different modalities.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 26 patients who received charged particle radiotherapy (CP) and 150 who received photon radiotherapy (117 CyberKnife radiotherapy [CK] and 36 intensity-modulated radiotherapy [IMRT]). Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) involving propensity scores was used to reduce background selection bias.

RESULTS

Higher prescribed doses were used in CP than photon radiotherapy. The 1‑year overall survival (OS) rates were 67.9% for CP and 54.1% for photon radiotherapy (p = 0.15; 55% for CK and 51% for IMRT). In multivariate Cox regression, the significant prognostic factors for better survival were nasopharyngeal cancer, higher prescribed dose, and lower tumor volume. IPTW showed a statistically significant difference between CP and photon radiotherapy (p = 0.04). The local control rates for patients treated with CP and photon radiotherapy at 1 year were 66.9% (range 46.3-87.5%) and 67.1% (range 58.3-75.9%), respectively. A total of 48 patients (27%) experienced toxicity grade ≥3 (24% in the photon radiotherapy group and 46% in the CP group), including 17 patients with grade 5 toxicity. Multivariate analysis revealed that younger age and a larger planning target volume (PTV) were significant risk factors for grade 3 or worse toxicity.

CONCLUSION

CP provided superior survival outcome compared to photon radiotherapy. Tumor volume, primary site (nasopharyngeal), and prescribed dose were identified as survival factors. Younger patients with a larger PTV experienced toxicity grade ≥3.