Daytime pulsed dose rate brachytherapy as a new treatment option for previously irradiated patients with recurrent oesophageal cancer

Complex Clinical Decision-Making Process of Re-Irradiation

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

Esophageal brachytherapy: Institut Gustave Roussy's experience

PURPOSE

Esophageal cancer is characterized by its propension to local evolution, which conditions prognosis and quality of life. Brachytherapy may be a therapeutic option for all stages of esophageal cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

This retrospective unicentric study included all consecutive patients treated for an esophageal high-dose-rate brachytherapy in our institution from 1992 to 2018.

RESULTS

Ninety patients were included. They were treated in four distinct indications: exclusive (7 patients), boost after external beam radiotherapy (41), reirradiation (36), or palliative aim (6). Most frequently prescribed schemes were 3 × 5 Gy (boost) or 6 × 5 Gy (exclusive treatment and reirradiation) at applicator's surface or at 5 mm. At the end of follow-up, 50% of patients had presented with local recurrence. Seventeen percent of patients had a metastatic relapse. Median overall survival was 15 months in the whole cohort: 22 months in the boost setting, 25 months for exclusive brachytherapy, 15 months for reirradiation, and only 2 months for palliative treatment. Tumor length at brachytherapy, brachytherapy dose, and interfraction response were significantly associated to overall survival. 40% of patients presented with grade 2+ toxicity, mostly esophagitis, including three toxic deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

Although local control outcomes are still poor, one must remember that patients are unfit for any curative therapeutic option and that palliative chemotherapy offers mediocre results. The most promising setting probably is reirradiation because brachytherapy offers a remarkable dose gradient allowing best organ at risk sparing, with an encouraging rate of long survivors (19% at 2 years). Esophageal brachytherapy deserves to be further investigated because some patients, even unfit, may benefit from it, with acceptable toxicity.

Application of red light phototherapy in the treatment of radioactive dermatitis in patients with head and neck cancer

BACKGROUND

To observe the effect of red light phototherapy (RLPT) on radioactive dermatitis (RD) caused by radiotherapy in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC).

METHODS

Sixty patients with HNC admitted to our hospital were randomly divided into experimental group and control group, 30 patients in each group. The control group received routine daily care during radiotherapy treatment. In the experimental group, in addition to routine daily care during radiotherapy treatment, photon therapy apparatus RLPT was added, 10 min/time, 2 times/day, and lasted until the end of radiotherapy. The pain and conditions of the patients' skin were assessed daily, and the skin pain and dermatitis grades of the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

In terms of the reaction degree of RD, experimental group was mainly grade 0-2, and control group was mainly grade 2-3, with a significant difference (P < 0.05). In terms of skin pain, according to the pain records at week 2, 3, and 4, the pain degree increased with time. However, the score of wound pain in experimental group was significantly lower than that in control group, and there was a significant difference between the two groups (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The application of RLPT in the treatment of RD can help accelerate wound healing and significantly shorten healing time. It can not only reduce wounds pain of patients, promote inflammation and ulcer healing, but also ensure the smooth progress of patients' radiotherapy and improve their quality of lives, which is worth popularization and application in the clinical practice.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS AND MATERIALS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Preserving the legacy of reirradiation: A narrative review of historical publications

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to illustrate the historical development of reirradiation during several decades of the 20th century, in particular between 1920 and 1960.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We chose the format of a narrative review because the historical articles are heterogeneous. No systematic extraction of baseline data, treatment details, or follow-up care was possible in many cases.

RESULTS

Both hematological malignancies and solid tumors were treated with a second course of radiation therapy, and indications included local relapse, regional nodal recurrence, and second primary tumors developing in a previously treated region. The literature consists of retrospective single-institution analyses describing treatment approaches that included external beam radiation therapy, brachytherapy, or combinations thereof. Data on toxicities and survival were often provided. Breast cancer and gynecological, head and neck, brain, and skin tumors are among the entities included in this review.

CONCLUSIONS

The leading pioneers in the field are fully aware of many of the challenges we continue to debate today. These include the process of late tissue changes and development of personalized treatment approaches and better ways to select patients who are likely to benefit from a second course of radiation therapy.

A review of the clinical experience in pulsed dose rate brachytherapy

Pulsed dose rate (PDR) brachytherapy is a treatment modality that combines physical advantages of high dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy with the radiobiological advantages of low dose rate brachytherapy. The aim of this review was to describe the effective clinical use of PDR brachytherapy worldwide in different tumour locations. We found 66 articles reporting on clinical PDR brachytherapy including the treatment procedure and outcome. Moreover, PDR brachytherapy has been applied in almost all tumour sites for which brachytherapy is indicated and with good local control and low toxicity. The main advantage of PDR is, because of the small pulse sizes used, the ability to spare normal tissue. In certain cases, HDR resembles PDR brachytherapy by the use of multifractionated low-fraction dose.

Salvage high-dose-rate brachytherapy for esophageal cancer in previously irradiated patients: A retrospective analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate outcomes after exclusive salvage high-dose-rate (HDR) intraluminal esophageal brachytherapy given to previously irradiated patients with recurrent esophageal cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We reviewed medical records of 30 patients who were treated by salvage HDR brachytherapy for local esophageal cancer. Brachytherapy delivered four to six fractions of 5-7 Gy at 5 mm from the applicator surface and 20 mm above and below the macroscopic tumor volume.

RESULTS

Eighty percentage of patients received treatment as initially planned. Complete response rate, evaluated 1 month after brachytherapy by endoscopy and biopsy, was 53%. Squamous histology and complete endoscopic tumor response at 1 month were significantly associated with better local tumor control. Median local progression-free survival was 9.8 months. Overall survival was 31.5% and 17.5% at 1 and 2 years, respectively. On univariate analysis, preserved performance status and limited weight loss (<10%) before salvage brachytherapy were associated with better overall survival. Severe toxicity (Grade ≥3) occurred in 7 patients (23%).

CONCLUSIONS

Although esophageal cancer in previously irradiated patients is associated with poor outcomes, HDR brachytherapy may be a valuable salvage treatment for inoperable patients with locally limited esophageal cancer, particularly in the subset of patients with preserved performance status and limited weight loss (≤10%) before salvage brachytherapy.

Re-irradiation of recurrent esophageal cancer after primary definitive radiotherapy

PURPOSE

For recurrent esophageal cancer after primary definitive radiotherapy, no general treatment guidelines are available. We evaluated the toxicities and clinical outcomes of re-irradiation (re-RT) for recurrent esophageal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analyzed 10 patients with recurrent esophageal cancer treated with re-RT after primary definitive radiotherapy. The median time interval between primary radiotherapy and re-RT was 15.6 months (range, 4.8 to 36.4 months). The total dose of primary radiotherapy was a median of 50.4 Gy (range, 50.4 to 63.0 Gy). The total dose of re-RT was a median of 46.5 Gy (range, 44.0 to 50.4 Gy).

RESULTS

The median follow-up period was 4.9 months (range, 2.6 to 11.4 months). The tumor response at 3 months after the end of re-RT was complete response (n = 2), partial response (n = 1), stable disease (n = 2), and progressive disease (n = 5). Grade 5 tracheoesophageal fistula developed in three patients. The time interval between primary radiotherapy and re-RT was less than 12 months in two of these three patients. Late toxicities included grade 1 dysphagia (n = 1).

CONCLUSION

Re-RT of recurrent esophageal cancer after primary radiotherapy can cause severe toxicity.

Multimodal approaches including three-dimensional conformal re-irradiation for recurrent or persistent esophageal cancer: preliminary results

The purpose of this study was to assess the toxicity and efficacy of multimodal approaches, including three-dimensional conformal re-irradiation, for patients with recurrent or persistent esophageal cancer after radiotherapy. Thirty-one patients with esophageal cancer treated with three-dimensional conformal re-irradiation were retrospectively analyzed. Of the 31 patients, 27 patients received concurrent chemotherapy, and 14 patients underwent regional hyperthermia during the re-irradiation. We divided the patients into two groups on the basis of their clinical condition: the curative group (n = 11) or the palliative group (n = 20). Severe toxicities were detected in one patient with Grade 3 esophageal perforation in the curative group, and 5 patients had a Grade 3 or higher toxicity of the esophagus in the palliative group. Advanced T stage at the time of re-irradiation was found to be significantly correlated with Grade 3 or higher toxicity in the esophagus. For the curative group, 10 (91%) of 11 patients had an objective response. For the palliative group, symptom relief was recognized in 8 (57%) of 14 patients with obvious swallowing difficulty. In conclusion, in the curative group with early-stage recurrent or persistent esophageal cancer, the multimodal approaches, including three-dimensional conformal re-irradiation, may be feasible, showing acceptable toxicity and a potential value of promising results, although further evaluations especially for the toxicities of the organs at risk are required. In the palliative group, the benefit of our therapy may be restrictive because severe esophageal toxicities were not uncommon in the patients with advanced T stage at the time of re-irradiation.

Pulsed brachytherapy: a modelled consideration of repair parameter uncertainties and their influence on treatment duration extension and daytime-only "block-schemes"

OBJECTIVES

The radiobiological modelling of all types of protracted brachytherapy is susceptible to uncertainties in the values of tissue repair parameters. Although this effect has been explored for many aspects of pulsed brachytherapy (PB), it is usually considered within the constraint of a fixed brachytherapy treatment time. Here the impact of repair parameter uncertainty is assessed for PB treatments of variable duration. The potential use of "block-schemes" (blocks of PB pulses separated by night-time gaps) is also investigated.

METHODS

PB schedule constraints are based on the cervical cancer protocols of the Royal Marsden Hospital (RMH), but the methodology is applicable to any combination of starting schedule and treatment constraint. Calculations are performed using the biologically effective dose (BED) as a tissue-specific comparison metric. The ratio of normal tissue BED to tumour BED is considered for PB regimens with varying total pulse numbers and/or "block-schemes".

RESULTS

For matched brachytherapy duration, PB has a good "window of opportunity" relative to the existing RMH continuous low dose rate (CLDR) practice for all modelled repair half-times. The most clear-cut route to radiobiological optimisation of PB is via modest temporal extension of the PB regimen relative to the CLDR reference. This option may be practicable for those centres with scope to extend their relatively short CLDR treatment durations.

CONCLUSION

Although daytime-only "block-scheme" PB for cervical cancer has not yet been employed clinically, the possibilities appear to be theoretically promising, providing the overall (external beam plus brachytherapy) treatment duration is not extended relative to current practice, such that additional tumour repopulation becomes a concern.

Pulsed dose rate brachytherapy - is it the right way?

Pulsed dose rate (PDR-BT) treatment is a brachytherapy modality that combines physical advantages of high-dose-rate (HDR-BT) technology (isodose optimization, radiation safety) with the radiobiological advantages of low-dose-rate (LDR-BT) brachytherapy. Pulsed brachytherapy consists of using stronger radiation source than for LDR-BT and producing series of short exposures of 10 to 30 minutes in every hour to approximately the same total dose in the same overall time as with the LDR-BT. Modern afterloading equipment offers certain advantages over interstitial or intracavitary insertion of separate needles, tubes, seeds or wires. Isodose volumes in tissues can be created flexibly by a combination of careful placement of the catheter and the adjustment of the dwell times of the computerized stepping source. Automatic removal of the radiation sources into a shielded safe eliminates radiation exposures to staff and visitors. Radiation exposure is also eliminated to the staff who formerly loaded and unloaded multiplicity of radioactive sources into the catheters, ovoids, tubes etc. This review based on summarized clinical investigations, analyses the feasibility and the background to introduce this brachytherapy technique and chosen clinical applications of PDR-BT.

Pulsed-dose-rate intracavitary brachytherapy for cervical carcinoma: the AIIMS experience

OBJECTIVE

The aim of present study was to analyze the results of pulsed-dose-rate (PDR) brachytherapy in patients with cervical carcinoma treated at our center.

METHODS

From September 2003 to September 2005, 48 patients with histopathologically proved cervical carcinoma, stages IB to IVA, were treated with PDR intracavitary radiotherapy (ICRT) and pelvic irradiation at our center. Radiotherapy consisted of whole pelvis external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) with a dose of 40 Gy in 22 fractions over 4.5 weeks followed by 10 Gy in 5 fractions over 1 week with midline shielding. Weekly chemotherapy (Cisplatin, 40 mg/m) was administered during the course of EBRT to suitable patients. After an interval of 1 to 2 weeks, a single session of standard ICRT application was done to deliver a dose of 27 Gy to point A by PDR (hourly pulse, 70 cGy).

RESULTS

Median age was 50 years (range: 30-65). FIGO stage distribution of the patients was as follows: stage IB, 6; stage IIA, 1; stage IIB, 15; stage IIIB, 25; and stage IVA, 1. Follow-up period ranged from 3 to 50 months (median: 15 months). Ten patients had disease recurrence (5 each in stage IIB and stage IIIB). Eight patients had pelvic failure, 1 had bone metastases, and 1 had supraclavicular node metastases. Overall grades III to IV late toxicity rate at 50 months was 6%. For the median follow-up period of 15 months, the actuarial recurrence-free survival in stages I to II was 82% and stages III to IV was 78%.

CONCLUSION

Our results reveal that PDR ICRT in combination with pelvic EBRT provides excellent pelvic disease control, survival, and low radiation related morbidity rate in the patients with cervical carcinoma.