1
|
Tham JLM, Ng SP, Khor R, Wada M, Gan H, Thai AA, Corry J, Bahig H, Mäkitie AA, Nuyts S, De Bree R, Strojan P, Ng WT, Eisbruch A, Chow JCH, Ferlito A. Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy in Recurrent and Oligometastatic Head and Neck Tumours. J Clin Med 2024; 13:3020. [PMID: 38892731 PMCID: PMC11173254 DOI: 10.3390/jcm13113020] [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: 02/13/2024] [Revised: 05/13/2024] [Accepted: 05/14/2024] [Indexed: 06/21/2024] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jodie L. M. Tham
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Olivia Newton-John Cancer and Wellness Centre, Austin Health, Melbourne 3084, Australia
| | - Sweet Ping Ng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Olivia Newton-John Cancer and Wellness Centre, Austin Health, Melbourne 3084, Australia
| | - Richard Khor
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Olivia Newton-John Cancer and Wellness Centre, Austin Health, Melbourne 3084, Australia
| | - Morikatsu Wada
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Olivia Newton-John Cancer and Wellness Centre, Austin Health, Melbourne 3084, Australia
| | - Hui Gan
- Department of Medical Oncology, Olivia Newton-John Cancer and Wellness Centre, Austin Health, Melbourne 3084, Australia
| | - Alesha A. Thai
- Department of Medical Oncology, Olivia Newton-John Cancer and Wellness Centre, Austin Health, Melbourne 3084, Australia
| | - June Corry
- GenesisCare, St Vincent’s Hospital, Melbourne 3065, Australia
| | - Houda Bahig
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier de L’Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC H2X 3E4, Canada
| | - Antti A. Mäkitie
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Research Program in Systems Oncology, Helsinki University Hospital, University of Helsinki, 00100 Helsinki, Finland
| | - Sandra Nuyts
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leuven Cancer Institute, University Hospitals Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
| | - Remco De Bree
- Department of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery, VU University Medical Centre, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Primož Strojan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institute of Oncology, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | - Wai Tong Ng
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China
| | - Avraham Eisbruch
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA
| | - James C. H. Chow
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Queens Elizabeth Hospital, Hong Kong SAR, China
| | - Alfio Ferlito
- International Head and Neck Scientific Group, 35100 Padua, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Wang H, Yang J, Lee A, Phan J, Lim TY, Fuller CD, Han EY, Rhee DJ, Salzillo T, Zhao Y, Chopra N, Pham M, Castillo P, Sobremonte A, Moreno AC, Reddy JP, Rosenthal D, Garden AS, Wang X. MR-guided stereotactic radiation therapy for head and neck cancers. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2024; 46:100760. [PMID: 38510980 PMCID: PMC10950743 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100760] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/31/2023] [Revised: 02/01/2024] [Accepted: 03/06/2024] [Indexed: 03/22/2024] Open
Abstract
Purpose MR-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) has the advantage of utilizing high soft tissue contrast imaging to track daily changes in target and critical organs throughout the entire radiation treatment course. Head and neck (HN) stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has been increasingly used to treat localized lesions within a shorter timeframe. The purpose of this study is to examine the dosimetric difference between the step-and-shot intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plans on Elekta Unity and our clinical volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans on Varian TrueBeam for HN SBRT. Method Fourteen patients treated on TrueBeam sTx with VMAT treatment plans were re-planned in the Monaco treatment planning system for Elekta Unity MR-Linac (MRL). The plan qualities, including target coverage, conformity, homogeneity, nearby critical organ doses, gradient index and low dose bath volume, were compared between VMAT and Monaco IMRT plans. Additionally, we evaluated the Unity adaptive plans of adapt-to-position (ATP) and adapt-to-shape (ATS) workflows using simulated setup errors for five patients and assessed the outcomes of our treated patients. Results Monaco IMRT plans achieved comparable results to VMAT plans in terms of target coverage, uniformity and homogeneity, with slightly higher target maximum and mean doses. The critical organ doses in Monaco IMRT plans all met clinical goals; however, the mean doses and low dose bath volumes were higher than in VMAT plans. The adaptive plans demonstrated that the ATP workflow may result in degraded target coverage and OAR doses for HN SBRT, while the ATS workflow can maintain the plan quality. Conclusion The use of Monaco treatment planning and online adaptation can achieve dosimetric results comparable to VMAT plans, with the additional benefits of real-time tracking of target volume and nearby critical structures. This offers the potential to treat aggressive and variable tumors in HN SBRT and improve local control and treatment toxicity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- He Wang
- Department of Radiation Physics, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Jinzhong Yang
- Department of Radiation Physics, 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
| | - Tze Yee Lim
- Department of Radiation Physics, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Clifton D. Fuller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Eun Young Han
- Department of Radiation Physics, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Dong Joo Rhee
- Department of Radiation Physics, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Travis Salzillo
- Department of Radiation Physics, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Yao Zhao
- Department of Radiation Physics, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Nitish Chopra
- Department of Radiation Physics, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Mary Pham
- Department of Radiation Physics, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Pam Castillo
- Department of Radiation Physics, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Angela Sobremonte
- Department of Radiation Physics, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Amy C. Moreno
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Jay P. Reddy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - David Rosenthal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Adam S. Garden
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Xin Wang
- Department of Radiation Physics, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
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
|
4
|
Zhang S, Zeng N, Yang J, He J, Zhu F, Liao W, Xiong M, Li Y. Advancements of radiotherapy for recurrent head and neck cancer in modern era. Radiat Oncol 2023; 18:166. [PMID: 37803477 PMCID: PMC10559506 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-023-02342-0] [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] [Received: 05/17/2023] [Accepted: 08/31/2023] [Indexed: 10/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Head and neck cancer is a kind of cancer which can be eradicated from radical radiation therapy. However, with best efforts, nearly 40% patients will experience locoregional recurrence. Locoregional recurrence is the main cause of cancer-related death in head and neck cancers, so local treatments play a key role in improving progression free survival. In the last decades, radiation techniques have been tremendously developed, highly conformal radiation techniques such as intensity-modulated radiotherapy, stereotactic body radiation therapy, brachytherapy and proton or heavy ion radiation therapy have their unique radiobiological advances. Although reirradiation is widely used in clinical practice, but little is known when comparing the different techniques. In this review, we will provide a comprehensive overview of the role of reirradiation in recurrent head and neck cancers including radiation techniques, patient selection, overall clinical benefits, and toxicities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shu Zhang
- Department of Head and Neck Oncology, Cancer Center, West China Hospital, SCU, Chengdu, Sichuan, China
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cancer Center, West China Hospital, SCU, Chengdu, Sichuan, China
| | - Ni Zeng
- Department of Head and Neck Oncology, Cancer Center, West China Hospital, SCU, Chengdu, Sichuan, China
| | - Jiangping Yang
- Department of Head and Neck Oncology, Cancer Center, West China Hospital, SCU, Chengdu, Sichuan, China
| | - Jinlan He
- Department of Head and Neck Oncology, Cancer Center, West China Hospital, SCU, Chengdu, Sichuan, China
| | - Fubin Zhu
- Department of Oncology, Chengdu Seventh People's Hospital (Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Chengdu Medical College), Chengdu, China
| | - Wenjun Liao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Radiation Oncology Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Sichuan Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Sichuan Cancer Center, Sichuan Cancer Hospital& Institute, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan, China
| | - Maoqi Xiong
- West China Clinical Skills Training Center, West China School of Medicine, West China Hospital, SCU, Chengdu, Sichuan, China
| | - Yan Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cancer Center, West China Hospital, SCU, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
- Lung Cancer Center, West China Hospital, SCU, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Buciuman N, Marcu LG. Dosimetric and clinical aspects of head and neck cancer reirradiation with intensity modulated radiotherapy techniques over the last decade. Phys Med 2023; 112:102650. [PMID: 37556868 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2023.102650] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/26/2023] [Revised: 07/14/2023] [Accepted: 07/31/2023] [Indexed: 08/11/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Tumor recurrence in head and neck cancer (HNC) is very common, given that locoregional disease relapse occurs in up to 50% of patients. The clinical approach towards cancer recurrence is either by surgery and/or chemo-radiotherapy. Irrespective of the treatment, the management of HNC recurrence is highly challenging and often administered with palliative intent only. The aim of this work was to analyze clinical and dosimetric aspects, such as dose prescription, organ at risk sparing, overall survival and locoregional control of HNC after reirradiation with intensity modulated radiotherapy techniques based on studies published over the last decade, due to the wide clinical implementation of the intensity modulated radiotherapy and particularly of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for this malignancy. METHODS A systematic search of the literature was conducted within Pub-med/Medline databases to find relevant studies. Of the 130 articles fulfilling the initial search criteria, 15 were selected for final analysis that encompassed all set requirements. RESULTS Clinical studies revealed the multitude of factors influencing treatment outcome, including anatomical location, histological tumor type, patient-related factors (smoking / comorbidities), cumulative dose and fractionation schedule, reirradiated volume and time between the irradiation of primary and recurrent tumor. CONCLUSIONS Since the literature reports no specific data related to the type of intensity modulation used in reirradiation or any correlation with treatment outcome, IMRT and VMAT might offer comparable result after HNC reirradiation. Patient selection is potentially the main factor leading to an efficient outcome.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nikolett Buciuman
- Faculty of Physics, West University of Timisoara, Timisoara, Romania; OncoHelp Foundation, Timisoara, Romania
| | - Loredana G Marcu
- Faculty of Physics, West University of Timisoara, Timisoara, Romania; Faculty of Informatics & Science, University of Oradea, Oradea, Romania; UniSA Allied Health & Human Performance, University of South Australia, Adelaide SA 5001, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Scolari C, Buchali A, Franzen A, Förster R, Windisch P, Bodis S, Zwahlen DR, Schröder C. Re-irradiation for head and neck cancer: outcome and toxicity analysis using a prospective single institution database. Front Oncol 2023; 13:1175609. [PMID: 37456239 PMCID: PMC10346436 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1175609] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/27/2023] [Accepted: 06/05/2023] [Indexed: 07/18/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose Re-irradiation (re-RT) in head and neck cancer is challenging. This study prospectively explored the feasibility of re-RT in patients with loco-regionally recurrent or second primary head and neck cancer (LRR/SP HNC). Methods From 2004 to 2021, 61 LRR/SP HNC patients were treated with re-RT, defined as having a second course of RT with curative intent resulting in a cumulative dose of ≥100 Gy in an overlapping volume. Postoperative or definitive dynamic intensity-modulated and/or volumetric modulated re-RT was administered using twice daily hyperfractionation to 60 Gy combined with cisplatin or carboplatin/5-fluorouracil. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), locoregional control (LRC) and distant metastasis control (DMC) were analyzed and prognostic factors evaluated. Toxicity was prospectively recorded and graded. Results The median follow-up was 9.8 months. In 41 patients (67.1%), complete administration of the intended treatment was not feasible. In 9 patients (15%) re-RT was interrupted prematurely and in other 9, the complete re-RT dose was lower than 60 Gy, and 37 patients (61%) could not receive or complete chemotherapy. Two-year OS, PFS and LRC rates were 19%, 18% and 30%, respectively. 20 patients (33%) received the complete intended treatment, and 1- and 2-year OS rates were 70% and 47%, respectively. Charlson comorbidity index was an important predictor for treatment completion. Multivariate analysis revealed recurrent N stage 0-1, age, chemotherapy administration and re-RT dose of 60 Gy as prognostic factors for clinical outcomes. No grade 5 re-RT-related toxicity was observed. The most common new grade ≥3 acute toxicities were dysphagia (52%) and mucositis (46%). Late toxicity included grade ≥3 dysphagia in 5% and osteoradionecrosis in 10% of evaluable patients, respectively. 6 patients (10%) were alive after 9 years without progression and no late toxicity grade ≥3, except for 2 patients presenting with osteoradionecrosis. Conclusion Hyperfractionated re-RT with 60 Gy combined with platinum-based chemotherapy was a curative treatment option with acceptable toxicity in LRR/SP patients. Patients with higher comorbidity had a higher probability of failing to receive and complete the intended therapy. Consequently, they derived unsatisfactory benefits from re-RT, highlighting the importance of patient selection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chiara Scolari
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Ruppin-Brandenburg, Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane (MHB), Neuruppin, Germany
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cantonal Hospital Winterthur (KSW), Winterthur, Switzerland
| | - André Buchali
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Ruppin-Brandenburg, Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane (MHB), Neuruppin, Germany
| | - Achim Franzen
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital Ruppin-Brandenburg, Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane (MHB), Neuruppin, Germany
- Faculty of Health Sciences Brandenburg, Joint Faculty of the University of Potsdam, Brandenburg university of Technology Cottbus-Senftenberg and Brandenburg Medical School, Potsdam, Germany
| | - Robert Förster
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cantonal Hospital Winterthur (KSW), Winterthur, Switzerland
| | - Paul Windisch
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cantonal Hospital Winterthur (KSW), Winterthur, Switzerland
| | - Stephan Bodis
- Center for Radiation Oncology, Cantonal Hospital Aarau and Baden (KSA-KSB), Aarau/Baden, Switzerland
| | - Daniel R. Zwahlen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cantonal Hospital Winterthur (KSW), Winterthur, Switzerland
| | - Christina Schröder
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cantonal Hospital Winterthur (KSW), Winterthur, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Weinberger JM, Abd El Qadir N, Hirshoren N. Double trouble: A cohort study of re-irradiation and laryngectomy - Severity of and risk for pharyngocutaneous fistula. Oral Oncol 2022; 134:106069. [PMID: 35969945 DOI: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2022.106069] [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: 08/04/2022] [Revised: 08/06/2022] [Accepted: 08/06/2022] [Indexed: 10/31/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Pharyngocutaneous fistula (PCF) is a devastating complication of laryngectomy. Different factors, principally previous irradiation, increases the risk for PCF formation. The current study objectives is to investigate the potential negative effect of re-irradiation on fistula development. Materilas and methods This is a single, referral, medical center retrospective, cohort study, conducted between the years 2011-2021. Electronic medical files, surgical notes, laboratory records and radiation plan (dose and time interval in case of re-irradiation) were examined. Main outcomes and measures Risk and predictors associated with PCF formation. Risk and severity of PCF in the setting of re-irradiation. RESULTS Overall, 27 laryngectomized patients were investigated, of whom 21 patients had single radiation (pre or post-operative radiation) and the other 6 patients had two radiation treatments (before and after laryngectomy). The fistula rate was 33.33% (7/21) in the single radiation compared (p = 0.14) to 66.66% (4/6) in the re-irradiation group of patients (including late-onset fistulas). All single radiation PCF were self-limited, whereas, 3 out of 4 fistulas in the re-irradiation group were longstanding or permanent. In the re-irradiation group of patients, a shorter time interval between the first and second radiation treatments was demonstrated among those with fistula formation compared to patients with uneventful laryngectomy (p = 0.08). CONCLUSION Re-irradiation and especially a brief interval between the radiation treatments is associated with a severe PCF.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jeffrey M Weinberger
- Department of Otolaryngology Head & Neck Surgery, Hadassah - Hebrew University Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel
| | - Narmeen Abd El Qadir
- Department of Otolaryngology Head & Neck Surgery, Hadassah - Hebrew University Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel
| | - Nir Hirshoren
- Department of Otolaryngology Head & Neck Surgery, Hadassah - Hebrew University Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Ward MC, Koyfman SA, Bakst RL, Margalit DN, Beadle BM, Beitler JJ, Chang SSW, Cooper JS, Galloway TJ, Ridge JA, Robbins JR, Sacco AG, Tsai CJ, Yom SS, Siddiqui F. 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. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2022; 113:759-786. [PMID: 35398456 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.03.034] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/27/2021] [Revised: 02/16/2022] [Accepted: 03/28/2022] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew C Ward
- Levine Cancer Institute, Atrium Health, Charlotte, North Carolina; Southeast Radiation Oncology Group, Charlotte, North Carolina.
| | | | | | - Danielle N Margalit
- Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women's Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Beth M Beadle
- Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California
| | | | | | | | | | - John A Ridge
- Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Jared R Robbins
- University of Arizona College of Medicine Tucson, Tucson, Arizona
| | - Assuntina G Sacco
- University of California San Diego Moores Cancer Center, La Jolla, California
| | - C Jillian Tsai
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Sue S Yom
- University of California, San Francisco, California
| | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Yura Y, Hamada M. Oral Immune-Related Adverse Events Caused by Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: Salivary Gland Dysfunction and Mucosal Diseases. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14030792. [PMID: 35159059 PMCID: PMC8834130 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14030792] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/25/2021] [Revised: 01/29/2022] [Accepted: 02/02/2022] [Indexed: 12/04/2022] Open
Abstract
Conventional chemotherapy and targeted therapies have limited efficacy against advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). The immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) such as antibodies against CTLA-4, PD-1, and PD-L1 interrupt the co-inhibitory pathway of T cells and enhance the ability of CD8+ T cells to destroy tumors. Even in advanced HNSCC patients with recurrent diseases and distant metastasis, ICI therapy shows efficiency and become an effective alternative to conventional chemotherapy. However, as this therapy releases the immune tolerance state, cytotoxic CD8+ T cells can also attack organs and tissues expressing self-antigens that cross-react with tumor antigens and induce immune-related adverse events (irAEs). When patients with HNSCC are treated with ICIs, autoimmune diseases occur in multiple organs including the skin, digestive tract, endocrine system, liver, and respiratory tract. Treatment of various malignancies, including HNSCC, with ICIs may result in the appearance of oral irAEs. In the oral cavity, an oral lichenoid reaction (OLR) and pemphigoid develop. Sicca syndrome also occurs in association with ICIs, affecting the salivary glands to induce xerostomia. It is necessary to elucidate the pathogenic mechanisms of these intractable diseases that are not seen with conventional therapy. Early diagnosis and appropriate approaches to irAEs are needed for efficient treatment of advanced HNSCC by ICIs.
Collapse
|
10
|
Lee HI, Kim JH, Ahn SH, Chung EJ, Keam B, Eom KY, Jeong WJ, Kim JW, Wee CW, Wu HG. Re-irradiation for recurrent or second primary head and neck cancer. Radiat Oncol J 2022; 39:279-287. [PMID: 34986549 PMCID: PMC8743457 DOI: 10.3857/roj.2021.00640] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/23/2021] [Accepted: 08/17/2021] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose To investigate the efficacy and safety of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT)-based re-irradiation (reRT) for recurrent or second primary head and neck cancer (HNC). Materials and Methods Patients who underwent IMRT-based reRT for recurrent or second primary HNC between 2007 and 2019 at two institutions were included. Medical records and dosimetric data were retrospectively reviewed. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), severe late toxicities, and clinicopathological prognostic factors were analyzed. Results A total of 42 patients were analyzed. With a median follow-up of 15.1 months (range, 3.7 to 85.8 months), the median OS was 28.9 months with a 2-year OS rate of 54.6%. The median PFS and 2-year PFS rates were 10.0 months and 30.9%, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that good performance (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group [ECOG] 0 or 1), a longer time interval (≥24 months) between radiotherapy courses, and higher reRT dose (>60 Gy) were significantly favorable factors for OS (all p < 0.05). Higher reRT dose and salvage surgery were significantly associated with improved PFS (all p < 0.05). Regarding the Multi‐Institution Reirradiation (MIRI) Collaborative RPA classification, the 2-year OS rates of each class were 87.5% in class I, 51.8% in class II, and 0% in class III (p = 0.008). Grade ≥3 late toxicity was reported in 10 (23.8%) patients. There was no significant factor associated with increased late toxicities. Conclusion IMRT-based reRT should be considered as a treatment option for patients with recurrent or second primary HNC. Further trials are needed to establish a subset of patients who may benefit from reRT without severe late toxicity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hye In Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Jin Ho Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Soon-Hyun Ahn
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Eun-Jae Chung
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Bhumsuk Keam
- Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Keun-Yong Eom
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seongnam, Korea
| | - Woo-Jin Jeong
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seongnam, Korea
| | - Ji-Won Kim
- Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seongnam, Korea
| | - Chan Woo Wee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul Metropolitan Government Seoul National University Boramae Medical Center, Seoul, Korea
| | - Hong-Gyun Wu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.,Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.,Institute of Radiation Medicine, Medical Research Center, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Re-Irradiation for Head and Neck Cancer: Cumulative Dose to Organs at Risk and Late Side Effects. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13133173. [PMID: 34202135 PMCID: PMC8269009 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13133173] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/17/2021] [Revised: 06/17/2021] [Accepted: 06/21/2021] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Local recurrences of head and neck cancer are unfortunately common and can be difficult to treat. The treatment is challenging, partly due to the location, with several important organs in the head and neck area, but also because recurrence often occurs in an area already treated with radiotherapy. It has been shown that repeat radiotherapy, re-irradiation, can offer long-lasting tumor control and sometimes even cure in selected patients. However, there is a risk of normal tissue close to the tumor being damaged by high cumulative doses of radiotherapy. In this study, we aim to establish levels of cumulative dose to specific organs that could be considered reasonably safe to deliver at re-irradiation without causing high rates of severe side effects. Increased knowledge in dose–response relationships in re-irradiation for head and neck cancer will facilitate a tailored treatment for the individual patient. Abstract Re-irradiation in head and neck cancer is challenging, and cumulative dose constraints and dose/volume data are scarce. In this study, we present dose/volume data for patients re-irradiated for head and neck cancer and explore the correlations of cumulative dose to organs at risk and severe side effects. We analyzed 54 patients re-irradiated for head and neck cancer between 2011 and 2017. Organs at risk were delineated and dose/volume data were collected from cumulative treatment plans of all included patients. Receiver–operator characteristics (ROC) analysis assessed the association between dose/volume parameters and the risk of toxicity. The ROC-curve for a logistic model of carotid blowout vs. maximum doses to the carotid arteries showed AUC = 0.92 (95% CI 0.83 to 1.00) and a cut-off value of 119 Gy (sensitivity 1.00/specificity 0.89). The near-maximum dose to bones showed an association with the risk of osteoradionecrosis: AUC = 0.74 (95% CI 0.52 to 0.95) and a cut-off value of 119 Gy (sensitivity 1.00/specificity 0.52). Our analysis showed an association between cumulative dose to organs at risk and the risk of developing osteoradionecrosis and carotid blowout, and our results support the existing dose constraint for the carotid arteries of 120 Gy. The confirmation of these dose–response relationships will contribute to further improvements of re-irradiation strategies.
Collapse
|
12
|
Bagley AF, Garden AS, Reddy JP, Moreno AC, Frank SJ, Rosenthal DI, Morrison WH, Gunn GB, Fuller CD, Shah SJ, Ferrarotto R, Sturgis EM, Gross ND, Phan J. Highly conformal reirradiation in patients with prior oropharyngeal radiation: Clinical efficacy and toxicity outcomes. Head Neck 2020; 42:3326-3335. [PMID: 32776401 PMCID: PMC7722120 DOI: 10.1002/hed.26384] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/03/2020] [Revised: 05/29/2020] [Accepted: 06/26/2020] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexander F. Bagley
- Department of Radiation Oncology, 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
| | - Jay P. Reddy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - Amy C. Moreno
- Department of Radiation Oncology, 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
| | - David I. Rosenthal
- 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
| | - G. Brandon Gunn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - Clifton D. Fuller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - Shalin J. Shah
- Department of Radiation Oncology, 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
| | - Erich M. Sturgis
- Department of Head & Neck Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - Neil D. Gross
- Department of Head & Neck Surgery, 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
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Svajdova M, Dubinsky P, Kazda T. Radical external beam re-irradiation in the treatment of recurrent head and neck cancer: Critical review. Head Neck 2020; 43:354-366. [PMID: 32996265 DOI: 10.1002/hed.26485] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/13/2020] [Revised: 08/28/2020] [Accepted: 09/21/2020] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Abstract
Management of patients with recurrent head and neck cancer remains a challenge for the surgeon as well as the treating radiation oncologist. Even in the era of modern radiotherapy, the rate of severe toxicity remains high with unsatisfactory treatment results. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), and heavy-ion irradiation have all emerged as highly conformal and precise techniques that offer many radiobiological advantages in various clinical situations. Although re-irradiation is now widespread in clinical practice, little is known about the differences in treatment response and toxicity using diverse re-irradiation techniques. In this review, we provide a comprehensive overview of the role of radiation therapy in recurrent or second primary head and neck cancer including patient selection, therapeutic outcome, and risk using different re-irradiation techniques. Critical review of published evidence on IMRT, SBRT, and heavy-ion full-dose re-irradiation is presented including data on locoregional control, overall survival, and toxicity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michaela Svajdova
- Clinic of Radiation and Clinical Oncology, Central Military Hospital-Teaching Hospital Ruzomberok, Slovakia.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic
| | - Pavol Dubinsky
- Department of Radiation Oncology, East Slovakia Oncology Institute, Kosice, Slovakia.,Faculty of Health, Catholic University, Ruzomberok, Slovakia
| | - Tomas Kazda
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Masaryk Memorial Cancer Institute, Brno, Czech Republic.,Research Centre for Applied Molecular Oncology, Masaryk Memorial Cancer Institute, Brno, Czech Republic
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Alterio D, Turturici I, Volpe S, Ferrari A, Russell-Edu SW, Vischioni B, Mardighian D, Preda L, Gandini S, Marvaso G, Augugliaro M, Durante S, Arculeo S, Patti F, Boccuzzi D, Casbarra A, Starzynska A, Santoni R, Jereczek-Fossa BA. Carotid blowout syndrome after reirradiation for head and neck malignancies: a comprehensive systematic review for a pragmatic multidisciplinary approach. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2020; 155:103088. [PMID: 32956946 DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2020.103088] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/12/2020] [Revised: 07/30/2020] [Accepted: 08/17/2020] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniela Alterio
- Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Irene Turturici
- Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Stefania Volpe
- Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
| | - Annamaria Ferrari
- Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Barbara Vischioni
- National Center of Oncological Hadrontherapy (Fondazione CNAO), Pavia, Italy
| | | | - Lorenzo Preda
- Department of Clinical, Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy; Department of Radiology, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo Pavia, Pavia, Italy
| | - Sara Gandini
- Department of Experimental Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCSS, Milan, Italy
| | - Giulia Marvaso
- Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Matteo Augugliaro
- Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Stefano Durante
- Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Simona Arculeo
- Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Filippo Patti
- Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Dario Boccuzzi
- Diagnostic Radiology Residency School, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy
| | - Alessia Casbarra
- Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Anna Starzynska
- Department of Oral Surgery, Medical University of Gdansk, Poland
| | - Riccardo Santoni
- Radiation Oncology Department, Fondazione Policlinico Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy
| | - Barbara Alicja Jereczek-Fossa
- Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Xu AJ, Luo L, Leeman JE, Romesser PB, Spielsinger D, Sabol C, Waldenberg T, Brinkman T, Riaz N, McBride S, Kang J, Lee N, Tsai CJ. Beyond reirradiation: Efficacy and safety of three or more courses of radiation for head and neck malignancies. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2020; 23:30-34. [PMID: 32382663 PMCID: PMC7200775 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2020.04.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/01/2020] [Revised: 04/19/2020] [Accepted: 04/21/2020] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Median local recurrence free survival after repeat reirradiation was 9.1 months. Grade 4 toxicities were reported in 21% of patients. 61% of patients underwent subsequent therapies following repeat reirradiation. Subsequent therapies following repeat reirradiation included surgery, chemotherapy and immunotherapy. Repeat reirradiation is feasible and should be balanced against risk for toxicities.
Purpose Recurrent head and neck cancers are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Outcomes of multiple courses of radiation have not yet been described. Methods and Materials A single institution database was queried to retrospectively review treatment plans and select patients who underwent ≥ 3 courses of radiation to the head and neck region. Results Thirty-three patients were found to have ≥ 3 courses of radiation with overlapping fields. Median local recurrence free survival after last course of reirradiation was 9.1 months and median overall survival was 10 months. Grade 3 and above toxicities were reported in 15 patients (45%). Grade 4 and above toxicities were reported in seven patients (21%). There was no grade 5 toxicity. 20 patients (61%) underwent subsequent therapies following completion of repeat reirradiation. Conclusions Repeat reirradiation to the head and neck region is feasible and carries significant risks that are most appropriately managed with a multi-disciplinary team and must be balanced against the potential for local control and opportunities for emerging systemic therapies.
Collapse
|
16
|
Embring A, Onjukka E, Mercke C, Lax I, Berglund A, Bornedal S, Wennberg B, Friesland S. Overlapping volumes in re-irradiation for head and neck cancer - an important factor for patient selection. Radiat Oncol 2020; 15:147. [PMID: 32513217 PMCID: PMC7278185 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-020-01587-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/06/2020] [Accepted: 05/28/2020] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND There is a lack of consensus concerning the definition of re-irradiation and re-irradiation volumes in head and neck cancer (HNC). The aim of the present study is to introduce a more strict definition of the re-irradiated volume that might better predict the risk of serious side-effects from treatment. METHODS Fifty-four consecutive patients re-irradiated for HNC cancer were retrospectively analysed. CT images were deformably registered and the dose distributions accumulated after conversion to EQD2. Patients with a cumulative dose of ≥100 Gy in the overlapping volume (V100) were included in the study. Survival data and radiation-related acute and late toxicities were recorded. RESULTS The overall survival of all included patients at 2 and 5 years was 42.6 and 27.3% respectively and the progression free survival at 2 and 5 years was 32.5 and 28.5% respectively. The overall rate of any event of severe (grade ≥ 3) acute and late toxicity was 26 and 51%, respectively. We found that severe acute toxicity was more common in patients who had a larger overlapping volume (V100 > mean) where 43% of the patients experienced grade ≥ 3 acute toxicity, compared to the patients with smaller overlapping volumes (V100 < mean) where only 11% had severe toxicity (p = 0.02). The seemingly high rates of late toxicity in the present study could be due to the use of a more strict definition of re-irradiation. In previous studies also patients with low dose overlap are included and our results imply that there is a risk that previous studies might have overestimated the risk-benefit ratio in re-irradiation of HNC. CONCLUSIONS Our study describes the outcome of a patient material where a more strict definition of the re-irradiated volume is used. With this definition, which could better describe the volume of highest risk for serious complications, we found that larger such overlapping volumes result in an increase in severe acute side-effects. A clear definition of re-irradiation and re-irradiation volumes is of utmost importance for future studies of HNC to make results from different studies comparable.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna Embring
- Department of Oncology, Karolinska University Hospital, Anna Steckséns gata 41, 171 76, Stockholm, Solna, Sweden. .,Department of Oncology-Pathology, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
| | - Eva Onjukka
- Department of Oncology-Pathology, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.,Medical Radiation Physics and Nuclear Medicine, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Claes Mercke
- Department of Oncology, Karolinska University Hospital, Anna Steckséns gata 41, 171 76, Stockholm, Solna, Sweden.,Department of Oncology-Pathology, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Ingmar Lax
- Medical Radiation Physics and Nuclear Medicine, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Anders Berglund
- Epistat Epidemiology and Statistics Consulting, Uppsala, Sweden
| | - Sara Bornedal
- Medical Radiation Physics and Nuclear Medicine, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Berit Wennberg
- Medical Radiation Physics and Nuclear Medicine, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Signe Friesland
- Department of Oncology, Karolinska University Hospital, Anna Steckséns gata 41, 171 76, Stockholm, Solna, Sweden.,Department of Oncology-Pathology, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Lee J, Shin IS, Kim WC, Yoon WS, Koom WS, Rim CH. Reirradiation with intensity-modulated radiation therapy for recurrent or secondary head and neck cancer: Meta-analysis and systematic review. Head Neck 2020; 42:2473-2485. [PMID: 32437021 DOI: 10.1002/hed.26264] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/13/2019] [Revised: 03/14/2020] [Accepted: 05/05/2020] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND To summarize outcomes of reirradiation with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for recurrent or secondary head and neck cancer (HNC). METHODS Primary endpoints were 2-year local control (LC) and overall survival (OS). Studies involving only recurrent nasopharyngeal patients with cancer were excluded. RESULTS A total of 17 studies involving 1635 patients were included. Fourteen (82%) of those were retrospective, and 15 (88%) were from single institution. Reirradiation with IMRT produced pooled 2-year LC and OS rates of 52% (95% confidence interval [CI], 46%-57%) and 46% (95% CI, 41%-50%), respectively. In subgroup analyses, the rate of salvage surgery (<42% vs ≥42%) influenced the pooled 2-year LC rate (45.9% vs 58.5%, P = .011). The pooled rates of late grade ≥ 3 and grade 5 toxicities were 26% (95% CI, 20%-32%) and 3.1% (95% CI, 2%-5%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS Reirradiation with IMRT was an effective modality compared to historical outcomes in the pre-IMRT era.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jeongshim Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inha University Hospital, Inha University College of Medicine, Incheon, South Korea.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - In-Soo Shin
- Graduate School of Education, Dongguk University, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Woo Chul Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inha University Hospital, Inha University College of Medicine, Incheon, South Korea
| | - Won Sup Yoon
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ansan Hospital, Korea University Medical College, Ansan, South Korea
| | - Woong Sub Koom
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Chai Hong Rim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ansan Hospital, Korea University Medical College, Ansan, South Korea
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Ng SP, Wang H, Pollard C, Nguyen T, Bahig H, Fuller CD, Gunn GB, Garden AS, Reddy JP, Morrison WH, Shah S, Rosenthal DI, Frank SJ, Guha-Thakurta N, Ferrarotto R, Hanna EY, Su SY, Phan J. Patient Outcomes after Reirradiation of Small Skull Base Tumors using Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy, Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy, or Proton Therapy. J Neurol Surg B Skull Base 2019; 81:638-644. [PMID: 33381367 DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1694052] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/02/2019] [Accepted: 06/11/2019] [Indexed: 10/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose The aim of this study was to evaluate outcomes of patients who received reirradiation for small skull base tumors utilizing either intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), and proton radiotherapy (PRT). Methods Patients who received IMRT, SBRT or PRT reirradiation for recurrent or new small skull base tumors (< 60 cc) between April 2000 and July 2016 were identified. Those with < 3 months follow-up were excluded. Clinical outcomes and treatment toxicity were assessed. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the local control (LC), regional control (RC), distant control (DC), progression free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Results Of the 75 patients eligible, 30 (40%) received SBRT, 30 (40%) received IMRT, and 15 (20%) received PRT. The median retreatment volume was 28 cc. The median reirradiation dose was 66 Gy in 33 fractions for IMRT/PRT, and 45 Gy in 5 fractions for SBRT. The median time to reirradiation was 41 months. With a median follow-up of 24 months, the LC, RC, DC, PFS, and OS rates were 84%, 79%, 82%, 60%, and 87% at 1 year, and 75%, 72%, 80%, 49%, and 74% at 2 years. There was no difference in OS between radiation modalities. The 1- and 2-year late Grade 3 toxicity rates were 3% and 11% respectively.. Conclusions Reirradiation of small skull base tumors utilizing IMRT, PRT, or SBRT provided good local tumor control and low rates of Grade 3 late toxicity. A prospective clinical trial is needed to guide selection of radiation treatment modalities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sweet Ping Ng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, Unites States.,Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - He Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, Unites States
| | - Courtney Pollard
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, Unites States
| | - Theresa Nguyen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, Unites States
| | - Houda Bahig
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, Unites States
| | - Clifton D Fuller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, Unites States
| | - G Brandon Gunn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, Unites States
| | - Adam S Garden
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, Unites States
| | - Jay P Reddy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, Unites States
| | - William H Morrison
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, Unites States
| | - Shalin Shah
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, Unites States
| | - David I Rosenthal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, Unites States
| | - Steven J Frank
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, Unites States
| | - Nandita Guha-Thakurta
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, Unites States
| | - Renata Ferrarotto
- Department of Thoracic Head and Neck Medical Oncology, Division of Cancer Medicine, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, Unites States
| | - Ehab Y Hanna
- Department of Head and Neck Surgery, Division of Surgery, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, Unites States
| | - Shirley Y Su
- Department of Head and Neck Surgery, Division of Surgery, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, Unites States
| | - Jack Phan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, Unites States
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
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
|
20
|
Ho JC, Phan J. Reirradiation of head and neck cancer using modern highly conformal techniques. Head Neck 2018; 40:2078-2093. [DOI: 10.1002/hed.25180] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/19/2017] [Revised: 12/06/2017] [Accepted: 02/20/2018] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer C. Ho
- Department of Radiation Oncology; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center; Houston Texas
| | - Jack Phan
- Department of Radiation Oncology; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center; Houston Texas
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Ward MC, Riaz N, Caudell JJ, Dunlap NE, Isrow D, Zakem SJ, Dault J, Awan MJ, Vargo JA, Heron DE, Higgins KA, Beitler JJ, Marcrom S, Boggs DH, Hassanzadeh C, Reddy CA, Bonner JA, Yao M, Machtay M, Siddiqui F, Trotti AM, Lee NY, Koyfman SA. Refining Patient Selection for Reirradiation of Head and Neck Squamous Carcinoma in the IMRT Era: A Multi-institution Cohort Study by the MIRI Collaborative. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2018; 100:586-594. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.06.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 55] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/22/2016] [Revised: 04/04/2017] [Accepted: 06/12/2017] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
|
22
|
Caudell JJ, Ward MC, Riaz N, Zakem SJ, Awan MJ, Dunlap NE, Isrow D, Hassanzadeh C, Vargo JA, Heron DE, Marcrom S, Boggs DH, Reddy CA, Dault J, Bonner JA, Higgins KA, Beitler JJ, Koyfman SA, Machtay M, Yao M, Trotti AM, Siddiqui F, Lee NY. Volume, Dose, and Fractionation Considerations for IMRT-based Reirradiation in Head and Neck Cancer: A Multi-institution Analysis. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2018; 100:606-617. [PMID: 29413274 PMCID: PMC7269162 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.11.036] [Citation(s) in RCA: 56] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/08/2017] [Revised: 11/12/2017] [Accepted: 11/24/2017] [Indexed: 01/04/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Limited data exist to guide the treatment technique for reirradiation of recurrent or second primary squamous carcinoma of the head and neck. We performed a multi-institution retrospective cohort study to investigate the effect of the elective treatment volume, dose, and fractionation on outcomes and toxicity. METHODS AND MATERIALS Patients with recurrent or second primary squamous carcinoma originating in a previously irradiated field (≥40 Gy) who had undergone reirradiation with intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT); (≥40 Gy re-IMRT) were included. The effect of elective nodal treatment, dose, and fractionation on overall survival (OS), locoregional control, and acute and late toxicity were assessed. The Kaplan-Meier and Gray's competing risks methods were used for actuarial endpoints. RESULTS From 8 institutions, 505 patients were included in the present updated analysis. The elective neck was not treated in 56.4% of patients. The median dose of re-IMRT was 60 Gy (range 39.6-79.2). Hyperfractionation was used in 20.2%. Systemic therapy was integrated for 77.4% of patients. Elective nodal radiation therapy did not appear to decrease the risk of locoregional failure (LRF) or improve the OS rate. Doses of ≥66 Gy were associated with improvements in both LRF and OS in the definitive re-IMRT setting. However, dose did not obviously affect LRF or OS in the postoperative re-IMRT setting. Hyperfractionation was not associated with improved LRF or OS. The rate of acute grade ≥3 toxicity was 22.1% overall. On multivariable logistic regression, elective neck irradiation was associated with increased acute toxicity in the postoperative setting. The rate of overall late grade ≥3 toxicity was 16.7%, with patients treated postoperatively with hyperfractionation experiencing the highest rates. CONCLUSIONS Doses of ≥66 Gy might be associated with improved outcomes in high-performance patients undergoing definitive re-IMRT. Postoperatively, doses of 50 to 66 Gy appear adequate after removal of gross disease. Hyperfractionation and elective neck irradiation were not associated with an obvious benefit and might increase toxicity.
Collapse
MESH Headings
- Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/mortality
- Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/radiotherapy
- Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/virology
- Dose Fractionation, Radiation
- Female
- Head and Neck Neoplasms/mortality
- Head and Neck Neoplasms/radiotherapy
- Head and Neck Neoplasms/virology
- Humans
- Kaplan-Meier Estimate
- Logistic Models
- Lymphatic Irradiation
- Male
- Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/mortality
- Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/radiotherapy
- Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/virology
- Neoplasms, Second Primary/mortality
- Neoplasms, Second Primary/radiotherapy
- Neoplasms, Second Primary/virology
- Radiation Dose Hypofractionation
- Radiation Injuries/etiology
- Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated/adverse effects
- Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated/methods
- Re-Irradiation/adverse effects
- Re-Irradiation/methods
- Retrospective Studies
- Treatment Outcome
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jimmy J Caudell
- Department of Radiation Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, Florida.
| | - Matthew C Ward
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Nadeem Riaz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Sara J Zakem
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Case Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Musaddiq J Awan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Case Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Neal E Dunlap
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky
| | - Derek Isrow
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan
| | | | - John A Vargo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
| | - Dwight E Heron
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Division of Head and Neck Surgery, Department of Otolaryngology, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
| | - Samuel Marcrom
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Alabama, Birmingham, Alabama
| | - Drexell H Boggs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Alabama, Birmingham, Alabama
| | - Chandana A Reddy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Joshua Dault
- Department of Internal Medicine, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia
| | - James A Bonner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Alabama, Birmingham, Alabama
| | - Kristin A Higgins
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Jonathan J Beitler
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Shlomo A Koyfman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Mitchell Machtay
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Case Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Min Yao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Case Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Andy M Trotti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, Florida
| | - Farzan Siddiqui
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan
| | - Nancy Y Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Kinj R, Bénézery K, Florescu C, Gery B, Habrand JL, Thariat J. [Re-irradiation of head and neck cancers: Target volumes, technical evolutions and prospects]. Cancer Radiother 2018; 22:171-179. [PMID: 29428789 DOI: 10.1016/j.canrad.2017.09.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/23/2017] [Revised: 08/02/2017] [Accepted: 09/15/2017] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
Malignant tumors of the head and neck have a predominantly regional recurrence pattern, with most deaths resulting from this progression. Optimization of re-radiation in recurrence setting is a major objective for these patients. Extensive research has been carried out with the PubMed search engine to find publications dealing with this topic. The first attempts to reirradiate the ORL sphere date back to the 1980s and the first to be performed by intensity modulation conformational radiotherapy (IMRT) date back to the late 1990s. Compared to 3 dimensional conformal radiotherapy, IMRT improves clinical outcomes and reduces toxicity. In IMRT series, associated or not with concomitant chemotherapy, the locoregional control obtained at 2 years was of the order of 45 to 65% and the overall survival of 15 to 60%, depending on predictive factors. Grade 3 acute toxicity occurred on the order of 10 to 30% and late-grade 3 toxicity on the order of 15 to 50%. In a selected population with low volumes tumors, stereotactic re-irradiation at a minimum dose of 35Gy obtained outcome comparable to IMRT. Re-irradiation of head and neck tumors by proton therapy is rare. The toxicity rate appears to be lower than that usually seen after photon therapy. However, we do not have a long follow-up. This technique therefore remains reserved for search protocols and represents a future perspective in these situations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R Kinj
- Service de radiothérapie, centre Antoine-Lacassagne, 33, avenue de Valombrose, 06189 Nice, France.
| | - K Bénézery
- Service de radiothérapie, centre Antoine-Lacassagne, 33, avenue de Valombrose, 06189 Nice, France
| | - C Florescu
- Service de radiothérapie, centre de lutte contre le cancer François-Baclesse, 3, avenue du Général-Harris, 14000 Caen, France
| | - B Gery
- Service de radiothérapie, centre de lutte contre le cancer François-Baclesse, 3, avenue du Général-Harris, 14000 Caen, France
| | - J L Habrand
- Service de radiothérapie, centre de lutte contre le cancer François-Baclesse, 3, avenue du Général-Harris, 14000 Caen, France
| | - J Thariat
- Service de radiothérapie, centre de lutte contre le cancer François-Baclesse, 3, avenue du Général-Harris, 14000 Caen, France
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|
25
|
Facteurs pronostiques de la ré-irradiation des cancers des voies aérodigestives supérieures : revue de la littérature. Cancer Radiother 2017; 21:316-338. [DOI: 10.1016/j.canrad.2017.02.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/24/2016] [Revised: 01/06/2017] [Accepted: 02/27/2017] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
|
26
|
Chang JH, Wu CC, Yuan KSP, Wu ATH, Wu SY. Locoregionally recurrent head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: incidence, survival, prognostic factors, and treatment outcomes. Oncotarget 2017; 8:55600-55612. [PMID: 28903447 PMCID: PMC5589686 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.16340] [Citation(s) in RCA: 120] [Impact Index Per Article: 17.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/09/2016] [Accepted: 02/15/2017] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose For locoregionally recurrent head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), appropriate therapeutic decisions remain unclear. We examined the treatment outcomes of a national cohort to determine suitable treatments for and prognostic factors in patients with locoregionally recurrent HNSCCs at different stages and sites. Patients and methods We analyzed data of >20-year-old patients with HNSCC at American Joint Committee on Cancer clinical stages I–IV without metastasis from Taiwan National Health Insurance and cancer registry databases. The index date was the date of recurrent HNSCC diagnosis. Recurrent HNSCC was defined as the annotation of locoregional recurrence with tissue proof in cancer registry databases. The enrolled patients were categorized into three groups: Group 1 comprised those undergoing chemotherapy (CT) alone; Group 2 comprised those receiving reirradiation (re-RT) alone (total radiation dose ≥ 60 Gy through intensity modulation radiation therapy [IMRT]); Group 3 comprised those receiving concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) alone (irradiation total dose ≥60 Gy through IMRT); and Group 4 comprised those receiving salvage surgery with or without RT or CT. Results We enrolled 4,839 and 28,664 HNSCC patients with and without locoregional recurrence, respectively (median follow-up, 3.25 years). Locoregional recurrence rate and incidence were 14.44% and 40.73 per 1,000 person-years, respectively. Age ≥ 65 years, Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) score > 6, advanced clinical stage at first diagnosis, and recurrence-free interval < 1 year were significant independent prognostic risk factors for overall survival as per univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses. After adjusting for age, sex, CCI scores, clinical stage at first diagnosis, and recurrence-free interval, adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs; 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) for overall mortality in recurrent clinical stages I and II were 0.63 (0.45–0.89, p = 0.009), 0.65 (0.52–0.83, p < 0.001), and 0.32 (0.26–0.40, p < 0.001) in Groups 2, 3, and 4, respectively, whereas they were 1.23 (0.99–1.52, p = 0.062), 0.69 (0.60–0.79, p < 0.001), and 0.39 (0.34–0.44, p < 0.001) for Groups 2, 3, and 4, respectively, for overall mortality in recurrent clinical stage III and IV. Conclusions Age, CCI score, clinical stage at first diagnosis, and recurrence-free interval are significant independent prognostic factors for overall survival of recurrent HNSCC patients. Regardless of recurrence stage or site, salvage surgery is the recommended first recurrent HNSCC treatment choice. Re-RT alone and CCRT are more suitable for inoperable recurrent early-stage oral and nonoral cavity recurrent HNSCCs, respectively.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jer-Hwa Chang
- Division of Pulmonary Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Wan Fang Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.,School of Respiratory Therapy, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Chia-Che Wu
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Wan Fang Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Kevin Sheng-Po Yuan
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Wan Fang Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Alexander T H Wu
- The Ph.D. Program for Translational Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Szu-Yuan Wu
- Institute of Toxicology, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Wan Fang Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.,Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Bots WTC, van den Bosch S, Zwijnenburg EM, Dijkema T, van den Broek GB, Weijs WLJ, Verhoef LCG, Kaanders JHAM. Reirradiation of head and neck cancer: Long-term disease control and toxicity. Head Neck 2017; 39:1122-1130. [PMID: 28263446 PMCID: PMC5485062 DOI: 10.1002/hed.24733] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/21/2016] [Revised: 12/06/2016] [Accepted: 12/29/2016] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The purpose of this study was to report long‐term disease control and late radiation toxicity for patients reirradiated for head and neck cancer. Methods We conducted a retrospective analysis of 137 patients reirradiated with a prescribed dose ≥45 Gy between 1986 and 2013 for a recurrent or second primary malignancy. Endpoints were locoregional control, overall survival (OS), and grade ≥4 late complications according to European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC)/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) criteria. Results Five‐year locoregional control rates were 46% for patients reirradiated postoperatively versus 20% for patients who underwent reirradiation as the primary treatment (p < .05). Sixteen cases of serious (grade ≥4) late toxicity were seen in 11 patients (actuarial 28% at 5 years). In patients reirradiated with intensity‐modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), a borderline improved locoregional control was observed (49% vs 36%; p = .07), whereas late complication rates did not differ. Conclusion Reirradiation should be considered for patients with a recurrent or second primary head and neck cancer, especially postoperatively, if indicated. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck39: 1122–1130, 2017
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wouter T C Bots
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Sven van den Bosch
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Ellen M Zwijnenburg
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Tim Dijkema
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Guido B van den Broek
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Willem L J Weijs
- Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Lia C G Verhoef
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Johannes H A M Kaanders
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Chen AM, Cao M, Hsu S, Lamb J, Mikaeilian A, Yang Y, Agazaryan N, Low DA, Steinberg ML. Magnetic resonance imaging guided reirradiation of recurrent and second primary head and neck cancer. Adv Radiat Oncol 2017; 2:167-175. [PMID: 28740928 PMCID: PMC5514244 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2017.02.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/12/2016] [Revised: 02/04/2017] [Accepted: 02/14/2017] [Indexed: 01/08/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To report a single-institutional experience using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) guided radiation therapy for the reirradiation of recurrent and second cancers of the head and neck. METHODS AND MATERIALS Between October 2014 and August 2016, 13 consecutive patients with recurrent or new primary cancers of the head and neck that occurred in a previously irradiated field were prospectively enrolled in an institutional registry trial to investigate the feasibility and efficacy of MRI guided radiation therapy using a 0.35-T MRI scanner with a cobalt-60 radiation therapy source called the ViewRay system (ViewRay Inc., Cleveland, OH). Eligibility criteria included biopsy-proven evidence of recurrent or new primary squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck, measurable disease, and previous radiation to >60 Gy. MRI guided reirradiation was delivered either using intensity modulated radiation therapy with conventional fractionation to a median dose of 66 Gy or stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) using 7 to 8 Gy fractions on nonconsecutive days to a median dose of 40 Gy. Two patients (17%) received concurrent chemotherapy. RESULTS The 1- and 2-year estimates of in-field control were 72% and 72%, respectively. A total of 227 daily MRI scans were obtained to guide reirradiation. The 2-year estimates of overall survival and progression-free survival were 53% and 59%, respectively. There were no treatment-related fatalities or hospitalizations. Complications included skin desquamation, odynophagia, otitis externa, keratitis and/or conjunctivitis, and 1 case of aspiration pneumonia. CONCLUSIONS Our preliminary findings show that reirradiation with MRI guided radiation therapy results in effective disease control with relatively low morbidity for patients with recurrent and second primary cancers of the head and neck. The superior soft tissue resolution of the MRI scans that were used for planning and delivery has the potential to improve the therapeutic ratio.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Allen M Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California
| | - Minsong Cao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California
| | - Sophia Hsu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California
| | - James Lamb
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California
| | - Argin Mikaeilian
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California
| | - Yingli Yang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California
| | - Nzhde Agazaryan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California
| | - Daniel A Low
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California
| | - Michael L Steinberg
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Merlotti A, Mazzola R, Alterio D, Alongi F, Bacigalupo A, Bonomo P, Maddalo M, Russi EG, Orlandi E. What is the role of postoperative re-irradiation in recurrent and second primary squamous cell cancer of head and neck? A literature review according to PICO criteria. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2017; 111:20-30. [PMID: 28259292 DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2017.01.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/18/2016] [Revised: 12/18/2016] [Accepted: 01/12/2017] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Re-irradiation has been increasingly offered as a potential effective treatment for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) loco-regional recurrence as well as second primary tumor in previously irradiated area. This review focused on the role of postoperative re-irradiation (POreRT) in terms of feasibility, toxicity and long-term outcomes in HNSCC patients. The key issue for the research was formulated in two questions according to the PICO (population, intervention, control, and outcomes) criteria. A total of 16 publications met the inclusion criteria for a total of 919 patients; in 522 patients POreRT was performed. POreRT in recurrent and second primary HNSCC seems to be feasible in highly selected patients with the intent to guarantee an acceptable LC compared to surgery alone. The optimal RT schedule remains unclear due to the heterogeneity of literature data.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna Merlotti
- Radiation Oncology, A.S.O. S.Croce e Carle, Cuneo, Italy
| | - Rosario Mazzola
- Radiation Oncology, Sacro Cuore-Don Calabria Cancer Care Center, Negrar-Verona, Italy
| | - Daniela Alterio
- Radiation Oncology, Advanced Radiotherapy Center, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy
| | - Filippo Alongi
- Radiation Oncology, Sacro Cuore-Don Calabria Cancer Care Center, Negrar-Verona, Italy.
| | - Almalina Bacigalupo
- Radiation Oncology, AOU IRCCS San Martino - IST National Cancer Research Institute and University, Genoa, Italy
| | - Pierluigi Bonomo
- Radiation Oncology, Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Marta Maddalo
- Radiation Oncology, Brescia University, Brescia, Italy
| | | | - Ester Orlandi
- Radiotherapy 2 Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Chen JH, Yen YC, Chen TM, Yuan KSP, Lee FP, Lin KC, Lai MT, Wu CC, Chang CL, Wu SY. Survival prognostic factors for metachronous second primary head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Cancer Med 2016; 6:142-153. [PMID: 27987269 PMCID: PMC5269705 DOI: 10.1002/cam4.976] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/14/2016] [Revised: 10/25/2016] [Accepted: 10/25/2016] [Indexed: 12/02/2022] Open
Abstract
We examined the overall survival rates of a national cohort to determine optimal treatments and prognostic factors for patients with metachronous second primary head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (mspHNSCCs) at different stages and sites. We analyzed data of mspHNSCC patients collected from the Taiwan Cancer Registry database. The patients were categorized into four groups based on the treatment modality: Group 1 (control arm; chemotherapy [CT] alone), Group 2 (reirradiation [re‐RT] alone with intensity‐modulated radiotherapy [IMRT]), Group 3 (concurrent chemoradiotherapy alone [irradiation with IMRT]), and Group 4 (salvage surgery with or without RT or CT). We enrolled 1741 mspHNSCC patients without distant metastasis. Multivariate Cox regression analyses revealed that Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) ≥6, stage of second HNSCC, stage of first HNSCC, and duration from first primary HNSCC of <3 years were significant poor independent prognostic risk factors for overall survival. After adjustment, adjusted hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for the overall all‐cause mortality risk at mspHNSCC clinical stages III and IV were 0.72 (0.40–1.82), 0.52 (0.35–0.75), and 0.32 (0.22–0.45) in Groups 2, 3, and 4, respectively. A Cox regression analysis indicated that a re‐RT dose of ≥6000 cGy was an independent protective prognostic factor for treatment modalities. CCI ≥ 6, stage of second HNSCC, stage of first HNSCC, and duration from first primary HNSCC of <3 years were significant poor independent prognostic risk factors for overall survival. A re‐RT dose of ≥6000 cGy may be necessary for mspHNSCCs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jin-Hua Chen
- Biostatistics Center and School of Public Health, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Yu-Chun Yen
- Biostatistics Center and School of Public Health, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Tsung-Ming Chen
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Shuang-Ho Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Kevin Sheng-Po Yuan
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Wan Fang Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Fei-Peng Lee
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Shuang-Ho Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Kuan-Chou Lin
- Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Wan Fang Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Ming-Tang Lai
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Wan Fang Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Chia-Che Wu
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Wan Fang Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Chia-Lun Chang
- Department of Hemato-Oncology, Wan Fang Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Szu-Yuan Wu
- Institute of Toxicology, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Wan Fang Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.,Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.,Department of Biotechnology, Hungkuang University, Taichung, Taiwan
| |
Collapse
|