Optimization strategies for pulsed low-dose-rate IMRT of recurrent lung and head and neck cancers

Pulsed low-dose rate radiotherapy for recurrent bone sarcomas: case reports and brief review

PURPOSE

Re-irradiation for bulky recurrent sarcoma carries significant risks. Pulsed low-dose rate radiotherapy (PLDR) is an attractive option for re-irradiation due to inherent radiobiological advantages.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We present two patients who underwent reirradiation using PLDR technique, followed by a literature review.

RESULTS

The first case is that of a 76-year-old male who developed an in-field recurrence of a bulky pelvic bone high-grade chondrosarcoma after he was treated with definitive radiotherapy using helical TomoTherapy with a total dose of 66 Gy. The patient was re-irradiated using PLDR with a shrinking field technique; 50 Gy in 2 Gy fractions followed by a boost of 20 Gy in 2 Gy fractions. The patient remains disease-free without significant toxicity 60 months post-irradiation. The second case is that of an 82-year-old female who was treated with a definitive irradiation of 66 Gy in 33 fractions for a right shoulder grade II chondrosarcoma. She developed an in-field recurrence 28 months later and presented with bulky disease causing brachial plexopathy and lymphedema. The patient was re-irradiated with a palliative intent to a total dose of 50 Gy in 2 Gy fractions over 5 weeks using PLDR. Brachial plexopathy resolved shortly after re-irradiation, but local progression near the surface was evident 8 months later. She passed away from unrelated causes 11 months later.

CONCLUSION

We present two cases highlighting our early experience with PLDR, which was effective in the reirradiation of recurrent bony sarcoma. Our study highlights PLDR as an option for reirradiation in recurrent unresectable tumors.

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.

Pulsed low dose-rate radiotherapy: radiobiology and dosimetry

Pulsed low dose-rate radiotherapy (PLDR) relies on two radiobiological findings, the hyper-radiosensitivity of tumor cells at small doses and the reduced normal tissue toxicity at low dose rates. This is achieved by delivering the daily radiation dose of 2 Gy in 10 sub-fractions (pulses) with a 3 min time interval, resulting in an effective low dose rate of 0.067 Gy min−1. In vitro cell studies and in vivo animal experiments demonstrated the therapeutic potential of PLDR treatments and provided useful preclinical data. Various treatment optimization strategies and delivery techniques have been developed for PLDR on existing linear accelerators. Preliminary results from early clinical studies have shown favorable outcomes for various treatment sites especially for recurrent cancers. This paper reviews the experimental findings of PLDR and dosimetric requirements for PLDR treatment planning and delivery, and summarizes major clinical studies on PLDR cancer treatments.

Local Control and Toxicity of External Beam Reirradiation With a Pulsed Low-dose-rate Technique

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of external beam reirradiation using a pulsed low-dose-rate (PLDR) technique.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We evaluated patients treated with PLDR reirradiation from 2009 to 2016 at a single institution. Toxicity was graded using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0, and local control was assessed using the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors, version 1.1. On univariate analysis (UVA), the χ2 and Fisher exact tests were used to assess the toxicity outcomes. Competing risk analysis using cumulative incidence function estimates were used to assess local progression.

RESULTS

A total of 39 patients were treated to 41 disease sites with PLDR reirradiation. These patients had a median follow-up time of 8.8 months (range 0.5-64.7). The targets were the thorax, abdomen, and pelvis, including 36 symptomatic sites. The median interval from the first radiation course and reirradiation was 26.2 months; the median dose of the first and second course of radiation was 50.4 Gy and 50 Gy, respectively. Five patients (13%) received concurrent systemic therapy. Of the 39 patients, 9 (23%) developed grade ≥2 acute toxicity, most commonly radiation dermatitis (5 of 9). None developed grade ≥4 acute or subacute toxicity. The only grade ≥2 late toxicity was late skin toxicity in 1 patient. On UVA, toxicity was not significantly associated with the dose of the first course of radiation or reirradiation, the interval to reirradiation, or the reirradiation site. Of the 41 disease sites treated with PLDR reirradiation, 32 had pre- and post-PLDR scans to evaluate for local control. The local progression rate was 16.5% at 6 months and 23.8% at 12 months and was not associated with the dose of reirradiation, the reirradiation site, or concurrent systemic therapy on UVA. Of the 36 symptomatic disease sites, 25 sites (69%) achieved a symptomatic response after PLDR, including 6 (17%) with complete symptomatic relief.

CONCLUSION

Reirradiation with PLDR is effective and well-tolerated. The risk of late toxicity and the durability of local control were limited by the relatively short follow-up duration in the present cohort.

Intensity modulated radiation therapy with pulsed reduced dose rate as a reirradiation strategy for recurrent central nervous system tumors: An institutional series and literature review

BACKGROUND

Pulsed reduced dose rate (PRDR) is a reirradiation technique that potentially overcomes volume and dose limitations in the setting of previous radiation therapy for recurrent central nervous system (CNS) tumors. Intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) has not yet been reported as a PRDR delivery technique. We reviewed our IMRT PRDR outcomes and toxicity and reviewed the literature of available PRDR series for CNS reirradiation.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A total of 24 patients with recurrent brain tumors received PRDR reirradiation between August 2012 and December 2014. Twenty-two patients were planned with IMRT. Linear accelerators delivered an effective dose rate of 0.0667 Gy/minute. Data collected included number of prior interventions, diagnosis, tumor grade, radiation therapy dose and fractionation, normal tissue dose, radiation therapy planning parameters, time to progression, overall survival, and adverse events.

RESULTS

The median time to PRDR from completion of initial radiation therapy was 47.8 months (range, 11-389.1 months). The median PRDR dose was 54 Gy (range, 38-60 Gy). The mean planning target volume was 369.1 ± 177.9 cm³. The median progression-free survival and 6-month progression-free survival after PRDR treatment was 3.1 months and 31%, respectively. The median overall survival and 6-month overall survival after PRDR treatment was 8.7 months and 71%, respectively. Fifty percent of patients had ≥4 chemotherapy regimens before PRDR. Toxicity was similar to initial treatment, including no cases of radiation necrosis.

CONCLUSION

IMRT PRDR reirradiation is a feasible and appropriate treatment strategy for large volume recurrent CNS tumors resulting in acceptable overall survival with reasonable toxicity in our patients who were heavily pretreated. Prospective studies are necessary to determine the optimal timing of PRDR reirradiation, the role of concurrent systemic agents, and the ideal patient population who would receive the maximal benefit from this treatment approach.

SUMMARY

Intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) has not yet been reported as a pulsed reduced dose rate (PRDR) delivery technique for recurrent brain tumors and may allow for safe and comprehensive reirradiation for large volume tumors. We reviewed our IMRT PRDR outcomes and toxicity and reviewed the literature of available PRDR series for recurrent central nervous system tumors. We conclude that IMRT PRDR reirradiation is a feasible and appropriate treatment strategy for large volume recurrent brain tumors resulting in acceptable overall survival with reasonable toxicity in our patients who were heavily pretreated.

Local Tumor Control and Normal Tissue Toxicity of Pulsed Low-Dose Rate Radiotherapy for Recurrent Lung Cancer: An In Vivo Animal Study

OBJECTIVES

This study investigates (1) local tumor control and (2) normal tissue toxicity of pulsed low-dose rate radiotherapy (PLDR) for recurrent lung cancer.

METHODS

For study 1, nude mice were implanted with A549 tumors and divided into the following 3 groups: (1) control (n = 10), (2) conventional radiotherapy (RT; n = 10), and (3) PLDR (n = 10). Tumor-bearing mice received 2 Gy daily dose for 2 consecutive days. Weekly magnetic resonance imaging was used for tumor growth monitoring. For study 2, 20 mice received 8 Gy total body irradiation either continuously (n = 10) or 40 × 0.2 Gy pulses with 3-minute intervals (n = 10).

RESULTS

For study 1, both conventional RT and PLDR significantly inhibited the growth of A549 xenografts compared with the control group (>35% difference in the mean tumor volume; P < .05). The PLDR results were slightly better than conventional RT (8% difference in the mean tumor volume; P > .05). For study 2, the average weight was 20.94 ± 1.68 g and 25.69 ± 1.27 g and the survival time was 8 days and 12 days for mice treated with conventional RT and PLDR (P < .05), respectively.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that PLDR could control A549 tumors as effectively as conventional RT, and PLDR induced much less normal tissue toxicity than conventional RT. Thus, PLDR would be a good modality for recurrent lung cancers.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

This article reports our results of an in vivo animal investigation of PLDR for the treatment of recurrent cancers, which may not be eligible for treatment because of the dose limitations on nearby healthy organs that have been irradiated in previous treatments. This was the first in vivo study to quantify the tumor control and normal tissue toxicities of PLDR using mice with implanted tumors, and our findings provided evidence to support the clinical trials that employ PLDR treatment techniques.