1
|
Kessel KA, Deichl A, Gempt J, Meyer B, Posch C, Diehl C, Zimmer C, Combs SE. Outcomes after stereotactic radiosurgery of brain metastases in patients with malignant melanoma and validation of the melanoma molGPA. Clin Transl Oncol 2021; 23:2020-2029. [PMID: 33993415 PMCID: PMC8390419 DOI: 10.1007/s12094-021-02607-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/12/2021] [Accepted: 03/22/2021] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Malignant melanoma is the third most common primary in the diagnosis of brain metastases. Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is a well-established treatment option in limited brain disease. We analyzed outcomes of SRS with a particular focus on the graded prognostic assessment (GPA, melanoma molGPA), prognostic factors, and toxicity. METHODS We evaluated 173 brain metastases in 83 patients with malignant melanoma. All were treated with SRS median dose of 20 Gy prescribed to the 80 or 100% isodose line between 2002 and 2019. All patients were followed-up regularly, including contrast-enhanced brain imaging as well as clinical examination, initially 6 weeks after treatment, then in quarterly follow-up. RESULTS The median age was 61 years (range 27-80); 36 female and 47 male patients were treated. After a median follow-up of 5.7 months, median OS (overall survival) was 9.7 months 95%-KI 4.7-14.7). LC (local control) at 6 months, 12, 24 months was 89%, 86%, and 72%, respectively (median was not reached). Median DBC (distant brain control) was 8.2 months (95%-KI 4.7-11.7). For OS, a KPS ≥ 80%, a positive BRAF mutation status, a small PTV (planning target volume), the absence of extracranial metastases, as well as a GPA and melanoma molGPA > 2 were prognostic factors. In the MVA, a small PTV and a melanoma molGPA > 2 remained significant. CONCLUSION The present survival outcomes support the use of the disease-specific melanoma molGPA as reliable prognostic score. Favorable outcomes for SRS compared to other studies were observed. In the treatment of brain metastases of malignant melanoma patients, a multidisciplinary approach consisting of surgery, SRS, chemotherapy, and immunotherapy should be considered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K A Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Institute of Radiation Medicine (IRM), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany.,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), DKTK Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - A Deichl
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.
| | - J Gempt
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), DKTK Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany.,Department of Neurosurgery, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - B Meyer
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), DKTK Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany.,Department of Neurosurgery, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - C Posch
- Department of Dermatology and Allergy, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany.,Faculty of Medicine, Sigmund Freud University, Vienna, Austria
| | - C Diehl
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), DKTK Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - C Zimmer
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), DKTK Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany.,Department of Neuroradiology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - S E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Institute of Radiation Medicine (IRM), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany.,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), DKTK Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Lämmer F, Delbridge C, Würstle S, Neff F, Meyer B, Schlegel J, Kessel KA, Schmid TE, Schilling D, Combs SE. Correction: Cytosolic Hsp70 as a biomarker to predict clinical outcome in patients with glioblastoma. PLoS One 2021; 16:e0248612. [PMID: 33705498 PMCID: PMC7951894 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0248612] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/27/2022] Open
|
3
|
Kraus KM, Oechsner M, Wilkens JJ, Kessel KA, Münch S, Combs SE. Patient individual phase gating for stereotactic radiation therapy of early stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Sci Rep 2021; 11:5870. [PMID: 33712667 PMCID: PMC7955128 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-85031-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/28/2020] [Accepted: 02/23/2021] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) applies high doses and requires advanced techniques to spare surrounding tissue in the presence of organ motion. In this work patient individual phase gating is investigated. We studied peripheral and central primary lung tumors. The internal target volume (ITV) was defined including different numbers of phases picked from a 4D Computed tomography (CT) defining the gating window (gw). Planning target volume (PTV) reductions depending on the gw were analyzed. A treatment plan was calculated on a reference phase CT (rCT) and the dose for each breathing phase was calculated and accumulated on the rCT. We compared the dosimetric results with the dose calculated when all breathing phases were included for ITV definition. GWs including 1 to 10 breathing phases were analyzed. We found PTV reductions up to 38.4%. The mean reduction of the lung volume receiving 20 Gy due to gating was found to be 25.7% for peripheral tumors and 16.7% for central tumors. Gating considerably reduced esophageal doses. However, we found that simple reduction of the gw does not necessarily influence the dose in a clinically relevant range. Thus, we suggest a patient individual definition of the breathing phases included within the gw.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K M Kraus
- School of Medicine and Klinikum Rechts Der Isar, Department of Radiation Oncology, Technichal University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany.
| | - M Oechsner
- School of Medicine and Klinikum Rechts Der Isar, Department of Radiation Oncology, Technichal University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - J J Wilkens
- School of Medicine and Klinikum Rechts Der Isar, Department of Radiation Oncology, Technichal University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - K A Kessel
- School of Medicine and Klinikum Rechts Der Isar, Department of Radiation Oncology, Technichal University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany.,Institute of Radiation Medicine (IRM), Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Helmholtz Zentrum München (HMGU), Neuherberg, Germany.,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - S Münch
- School of Medicine and Klinikum Rechts Der Isar, Department of Radiation Oncology, Technichal University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - S E Combs
- School of Medicine and Klinikum Rechts Der Isar, Department of Radiation Oncology, Technichal University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany.,Institute of Radiation Medicine (IRM), Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Helmholtz Zentrum München (HMGU), Neuherberg, Germany.,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Rusthoven CG, Yamamoto M, Bernhardt D, Smith DE, Gao D, Serizawa T, Yomo S, Aiyama H, Higuchi Y, Shuto T, Akabane A, Sato Y, Niranjan A, Faramand AM, Lunsford LD, McInerney J, Tuanquin LC, Zacharia BE, Chiang V, Singh C, Yu JB, Braunstein S, Mathieu D, Touchette CJ, Lee CC, Yang HC, Aizer AA, Cagney DN, Chan MD, Kondziolka D, Bernstein K, Silverman JS, Grills IS, Siddiqui ZA, Yuan JC, Sheehan JP, Cordeiro D, Nosaki K, Seto T, Deibert CP, Verma V, Day S, Halasz LM, Warnick RE, Trifiletti DM, Palmer JD, Attia A, Li B, Cifarelli CP, Brown PD, Vargo JA, Combs SE, Kessel KA, Rieken S, Patel S, Guckenberger M, Andratschke N, Kavanagh BD, Robin TP. Evaluation of First-line Radiosurgery vs Whole-Brain Radiotherapy for Small Cell Lung Cancer Brain Metastases: The FIRE-SCLC Cohort Study. JAMA Oncol 2021; 6:1028-1037. [PMID: 32496550 DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.1271] [Citation(s) in RCA: 100] [Impact Index Per Article: 33.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
Importance Although stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is preferred for limited brain metastases from most histologies, whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) has remained the standard of care for patients with small cell lung cancer. Data on SRS are limited. Objective To characterize and compare first-line SRS outcomes (without prior WBRT or prophylactic cranial irradiation) with those of first-line WBRT. Design, Setting, and Participants FIRE-SCLC (First-line Radiosurgery for Small-Cell Lung Cancer) was a multicenter cohort study that analyzed SRS outcomes from 28 centers and a single-arm trial and compared these data with outcomes from a first-line WBRT cohort. Data were collected from October 26, 2017, to August 15, 2019, and analyzed from August 16, 2019, to November 6, 2019. Interventions SRS and WBRT for small cell lung cancer brain metastases. Main Outcomes and Measures Overall survival, time to central nervous system progression (TTCP), and central nervous system (CNS) progression-free survival (PFS) after SRS were evaluated and compared with WBRT outcomes, with adjustment for performance status, number of brain metastases, synchronicity, age, sex, and treatment year in multivariable and propensity score-matched analyses. Results In total, 710 patients (median [interquartile range] age, 68.5 [62-74] years; 531 men [74.8%]) who received SRS between 1994 and 2018 were analyzed. The median overall survival was 8.5 months, the median TTCP was 8.1 months, and the median CNS PFS was 5.0 months. When stratified by the number of brain metastases treated, the median overall survival was 11.0 months (95% CI, 8.9-13.4) for 1 lesion, 8.7 months (95% CI, 7.7-10.4) for 2 to 4 lesions, 8.0 months (95% CI, 6.4-9.6) for 5 to 10 lesions, and 5.5 months (95% CI, 4.3-7.6) for 11 or more lesions. Competing risk estimates were 7.0% (95% CI, 4.9%-9.2%) for local failures at 12 months and 41.6% (95% CI, 37.6%-45.7%) for distant CNS failures at 12 months. Leptomeningeal progression (46 of 425 patients [10.8%] with available data) and neurological mortality (80 of 647 patients [12.4%] with available data) were uncommon. On propensity score-matched analyses comparing SRS with WBRT, WBRT was associated with improved TTCP (hazard ratio, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.26-0.55; P < .001), without an improvement in overall survival (median, 6.5 months [95% CI, 5.5-8.0] for SRS vs 5.2 months [95% CI, 4.4-6.7] for WBRT; P = .003) or CNS PFS (median, 4.0 months for SRS vs 3.8 months for WBRT; P = .79). Multivariable analyses comparing SRS and WBRT, including subset analyses controlling for extracranial metastases and extracranial disease control status, demonstrated similar results. Conclusions and Relevance Results of this study suggest that the primary trade-offs associated with SRS without WBRT, including a shorter TTCP without a decrease in overall survival, are similar to those observed in settings in which SRS is already established.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chad G Rusthoven
- University of Colorado School of Medicine, Department of Radiation Oncology, Aurora
| | | | - Denise Bernhardt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Derek E Smith
- University of Colorado Cancer Center, Biostatistics Core, Aurora
| | - Dexiang Gao
- University of Colorado Cancer Center, Biostatistics Core, Aurora
| | - Toru Serizawa
- Tokyo Gamma Unit Center, Tsukiji Neurological Clinic, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Shoji Yomo
- Aizawa Comprehensive Cancer Center, Division of Radiation Oncology, Aizawa Hospital, Matsumoto, Japan
| | | | - Yoshinori Higuchi
- Chiba University Graduate School of Medicine, Department of Neurological Surgery, Chiba, Japan
| | - Takashi Shuto
- Yokohama Rosai Hospital, Department of Neurosurgery, Yokohama, Japan
| | - Atsuya Akabane
- Gamma Knife Center, NTT Medical Center Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Yasunori Sato
- Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Ajay Niranjan
- Department of Neurological Surgery and Radiation Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
| | - Andrew M Faramand
- Department of Neurological Surgery and Radiation Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
| | - L Dade Lunsford
- Department of Neurological Surgery and Radiation Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
| | - James McInerney
- Department of Neurosurgery, Penn State Health Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, Pennsylvania
| | - Leonard C Tuanquin
- Department of Neurosurgery, Penn State Health Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, Pennsylvania
| | - Brad E Zacharia
- Department of Neurosurgery, Penn State Health Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, Pennsylvania
| | - Veronica Chiang
- Department of Neurosurgery, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
| | - Charu Singh
- Department of Neurosurgery, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
| | - James B Yu
- Department of Neurosurgery, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
| | - Steve Braunstein
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco
| | - David Mathieu
- Division of Neurosurgery, Université de Sherbrooke, Centre de Recherche du CHUS, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada
| | - Charles J Touchette
- Division of Neurosurgery, Université de Sherbrooke, Centre de Recherche du CHUS, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada
| | - Cheng-Chia Lee
- Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Department of Neurosurgery, Neurological Institute, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Huai-Che Yang
- Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Department of Neurosurgery, Neurological Institute, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Ayal A Aizer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Daniel N Cagney
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Michael D Chan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina
| | - Douglas Kondziolka
- Department of Neurosurgery, New York University Langone Medical Center, New York
| | - Kenneth Bernstein
- Department of Neurosurgery, New York University Langone Medical Center, New York
| | - Joshua S Silverman
- Department of Neurosurgery, New York University Langone Medical Center, New York
| | - Inga S Grills
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Beaumont Health System, Royal Oak, Michigan
| | - Zaid A Siddiqui
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Beaumont Health System, Royal Oak, Michigan
| | - Justin C Yuan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Beaumont Health System, Royal Oak, Michigan
| | - Jason P Sheehan
- Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville
| | - Diogo Cordeiro
- Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville
| | - Kename Nosaki
- National Hospital Organization Kyushu Cancer Center, Department of Thoracic Oncology, Fukuoka, Japan
| | - Takahashi Seto
- National Hospital Organization Kyushu Cancer Center, Department of Thoracic Oncology, Fukuoka, Japan
| | | | - Vivek Verma
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Allegheny General Hospital, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
| | - Samuel Day
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle
| | - Lia M Halasz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle
| | - Ronald E Warnick
- Department of Neurosurgery, Jewish Hospital-Mercy Health, Cincinnati, Ohio
| | - Daniel M Trifiletti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Jacksonville, Jacksonville, Florida
| | - Joshua D Palmer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ohio State University, Columbus
| | - Albert Attia
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Benjamin Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee
| | | | - Paul D Brown
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - John A Vargo
- Department of Neurological Surgery and Radiation Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.,Department of Neurosurgery, West Virginia University, Morgantown
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Kerstin A Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Stefan Rieken
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Samir Patel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
| | - Matthias Guckenberger
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, The University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Nicolaus Andratschke
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, The University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Brian D Kavanagh
- University of Colorado School of Medicine, Department of Radiation Oncology, Aurora
| | - Tyler P Robin
- University of Colorado School of Medicine, Department of Radiation Oncology, Aurora
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Scharl S, Kessel KA, Diehl C, Gempt J, Meyer B, Zimmer C, Straube C, Combs SE. Is local radiotherapy a viable option for patients with an opening of the ventricles during surgical resection of brain metastases? Radiat Oncol 2020; 15:276. [PMID: 33303000 PMCID: PMC7730779 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-020-01725-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/03/2020] [Accepted: 12/06/2020] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Local hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (HFSRT) of the resection cavity is emerging as the standard of care in the treatment of patients with a limited number of brain metastases as it warrants less neurological impairment compared to whole brain radiotherapy. In periventricular metastases surgical resection can lead to an opening of the ventricles and subsequently carries a potential risk of cerebrospinal tumour cell dissemination. The aim of this study was to assess whether local radiotherapy of the resection cavity is viable in these cases. Methods From our institutional database we analyzed the data of 125 consecutive patients with resected brain metastases treated in our institution with HFSRT between 2009 and 2017. The incidence of LMD, overall survival (OS), local recurrence (LC) and distant recurrence were evaluated depending on ventricular opening (VO) during surgery. Results From all 125 patients, the ventricles were opened during surgery in 14 cases (11.2%). None of the patients with VO and 7 patients without VO during surgery developed LMD (p = 0.371). OS (p = 0.817), LC (p = 0.524) and distant recurrence (p = 0.488) did not differ in relation to VO during surgical resection. However, the incidence of distant intraventricular recurrence was slightly increased in patients with VO (14.3% vs. 2.7%, p < 0.01). Conclusion VO during neurosurgical resection did not affect the outcome after HFSRT of the resection cavity in patients with brain metastases. Particularly, the incidence of LMD was not increased in patients receiving local HFSRT after VO. HFSRT can therefore be offered independently of VO as a local treatment of tumor bed after resection of brain metastases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sophia Scharl
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - Kerstin A Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany.,Institute of Radiation Medicine (IRM), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, Neuherberg, Germany.,Deutsches Konsortium Für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Christian Diehl
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - Jens Gempt
- Department of Neurosurgery, Technische Universität München (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - Bernhard Meyer
- Department of Neurosurgery, Technische Universität München (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - Claus Zimmer
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - Christoph Straube
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany.,Deutsches Konsortium Für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany. .,Institute of Radiation Medicine (IRM), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, Neuherberg, Germany. .,Deutsches Konsortium Für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Salfelder MEA, Kessel KA, Thiel U, Burdach S, Kampfer S, Combs SE. Prospective evaluation of multitarget treatment of pediatric patients with helical intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Strahlenther Onkol 2020; 196:1103-1115. [PMID: 32748147 PMCID: PMC7686189 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-020-01670-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/11/2019] [Accepted: 07/07/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
Background and purpose Radiotherapy (RT) is persistently gaining significance in the treatment of pediatric tumors. However, individual features of a growing body and multifocal stages complicate this approach. Tomotherapy offers advantages in the treatment of anatomically complex tumors with low risks of side effects. Here we report on toxicity incidence and outcome of tomotherapy with a focus on multitarget RT (mtRT). Materials and methods From 2008 to 2017, 38 children diagnosed with sarcoma were treated with tomotherapy. The median age was 15 years (6–19 years). Toxicity was graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v.4.03 and classified into symptoms during RT, acutely (0–6 months) and late (>6 months) after RT, and long-term sideeffects (>24 months). Results The main histologies were Ewing sarcoma (n = 23 [61%]) and alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma (n = 5 [13%]). RT was performed with a median total dose of 54 Gy (40.5–66.0 Gy) and a single dose of 2 Gy (1.80–2.27 Gy). Twenty patients (53%) received mtRT. Median follow-up was 29.7 months (95% confidence interval 15.3–48.2 months) with a 5-year survival of 55.2% (±9.5%). The 5‑year survival rate of patients with mtRT (n = 20) was 37.1 ± 13.2%, while patients who received single-target RT (n = 18) had a 5-year survival rate of 75 ± 10.8%. Severe toxicities (grade 3 and 4) emerged in 14 patients (70%) with mtRT and 7 patients (39%) with single-target RT. Two non-hematological grade 4 toxicities occurred during RT: one mucositis and one radiodermatitis. After mtRT 5 patients had grade 3 toxicities acute and after single-target RT 4 patients. One patient had acute non-hematological grade 4 toxicities (gastritis, pericarditis, and pericardial effusion) after mtRT. Severe late effects of RT occurred in 2 patients after mtRT and in none of the single-target RT patients. No severe long-term side effects appeared. Conclusion Our results showed acceptable levels of acute and late toxicities, considering the highly advanced diseases and multimodal treatment. Hence, tomotherapy is a feasible treatment method for young patients with anatomically complex tumors or multiple targets. Especially mtRT is a promising and innovative treatment approach for pediatric sarcomas, delivering unexpectedly high survival rates for patients with multifocal Ewing sarcomas in this study, whereby the limited number of patients should invariably be considered in the interpretation. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s00066-020-01670-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maria-Elena A. Salfelder
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675 Munich, Germany
| | - Kerstin A. Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675 Munich, Germany
- DKTK Partner Site Munich, Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Munich, Germany
- Institute of Radiation Medicine (IRM), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, Neuherberg, Germany
| | - Uwe Thiel
- Department of Pediatrics and Children’s Cancer Research Center, Kinderklinik München Schwabing, Technical University of Munich School for Medicine, Munich, Germany
| | - Stefan Burdach
- Department of Pediatrics and Children’s Cancer Research Center, Kinderklinik München Schwabing, Technical University of Munich School for Medicine, Munich, Germany
| | - Severin Kampfer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675 Munich, Germany
| | - Stephanie E. Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675 Munich, Germany
- DKTK Partner Site Munich, Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Munich, Germany
- Institute of Radiation Medicine (IRM), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, Neuherberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Voglhuber T, Kessel KA, Oechsner M, Vogel MME, Gschwend JE, Combs SE. Single-institutional outcome-analysis of low-dose stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) of adrenal gland metastases. BMC Cancer 2020; 20:536. [PMID: 32513136 PMCID: PMC7282163 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-020-07030-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/19/2019] [Accepted: 06/02/2020] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Adrenal gland metastases are a common diagnostic finding in various tumor diseases. Due to the increased use of imaging methods, they are diagnosed more frequently, especially in asymptomatic patients. SBRT has emerged as a new, alternative treatment option in the field of radiation oncology. In the past, it was often used for treating inoperable lung, liver, prostate, and brain tumors. Meanwhile, it is also an established keystone in the treatment of oligometastatic diseases. This retrospective study aims to evaluate the effect of low-dose SBRT in patients with adrenal metastases. METHODS We analyzed a group of 31 patients with 34 adrenal gland lesions treated with low-dose SBRT between July 2006 and July 2019. Treatment-planning was performed through contrast-enhanced CT, followed by image-guided stereotactic radiotherapy using cone-beam CT. The applied cumulative median dose was 35 Gy; the median single dose was 7 Gy. We focused on local control (LC), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), as well as acute and late toxicity. RESULTS Seven adrenal gland metastases (20.6%) experienced local failure, 80.6% of the patients faced a distant progression. Fourteen patients were still alive. Median follow-up for all patients was 9.8 months and for patients alive 14.4 months. No treatment-related side-effects >grade 2 occurred. Of all, 48.4% suffered from acute gastrointestinal disorders; 32.3% reported acute fatigue, throbbing pain in the renal area, and mild adrenal insufficiency. Altogether, 19.4% of the patients faced late-toxicities, which were as follows: Grade 1: 12.9% gastrointestinal disorders, 3.2% fatigue, Grade 2: 9.7% fatigue, 6.5% headache, 3.2% loss of weight. The 1-year OS and probability of LF were 64 and 25.9%, respectively. CONCLUSION Low-dose SBRT has proven as an effective and safe method with promising outcomes for treating adrenal metastases. There appeared no high-grade toxicities >grade 2, and 79.4% of treated metastases were progression-free. Thus, SBRT should be considered as a therapy option for adrenal metastases as an individual therapeutic concept in the interdisciplinary discussion as an alternative to surgical or systemic treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Theresa Voglhuber
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany.
| | - Kerstin A Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany.,Institute of Radiation Medicine (IRM), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, Neuherberg, Germany.,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Markus Oechsner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - Marco M E Vogel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - Jürgen E Gschwend
- Department of Urology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany.,Institute of Radiation Medicine (IRM), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, Neuherberg, Germany.,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Heidelberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Kessel KA, Grosser RCE, Kraus KM, Hoffmann H, Oechsner M, Combs SE. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in patients with lung metastases - prognostic factors and long-term survival using patient self-reported outcome (PRO). BMC Cancer 2020; 20:442. [PMID: 32429940 PMCID: PMC7236290 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-020-6635-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/21/2019] [Accepted: 02/14/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The present study aims to evaluate long-term side-effects and outcomes and confirm prognostic factors after stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) of pulmonary lesions. This is the first work that combines the investigated data from patient charts and patient-reported outcome (PRO) up to 14 years after therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS We analyzed 219 patients and 316 lung metastases treated between 2004 and 2019. The pulmonary lesions received a median dose and dose per fraction of 35 Gy (range: 14-60.5 Gy) and 8 Gy (range: 3-20 Gy) to the surrounding isodose. During the last 1.5 years of monitoring, we added PRO assessment to our follow-up routine. We sent an invitation to a web-based survey questionnaire to all living patients whose last visit was more than 6 months ago. RESULTS Median OS was 27.6 months. Univariate analysis showed a significant influence on OS for KPS ≥90%, small gross tumor volume (GTV) and planning target volume (PTV), the absence of external metastases, ≤3 pulmonary metastases, and controlled primary tumor. The number of pulmonary metastases and age influenced local control (LC) significantly. During follow-up, physicians reported severe side-effects ≥ grade 3 in only 2.9% within the first 6 months and in 2.5% after 1 year. Acute symptomatic pneumonitis grade 2 was observed in 9.7%, as grade 3 in 0.5%. During PRO assessment, 39 patients were contacted, 38 patients participated, 14 participated twice during follow-up. Patients reported 15 cases of severe side effects (grade ≥ 3) according to PROCTCAE classification. Severe dyspnea (n = 6) was reported mostly. CONCLUSION We could confirm excellent local control and low toxicity rates. PROs improve and complement follow-up care. They are an essential measure in addition to the physician-reported outcomes. Future research must be conducted regarding the correct interpretation of PRO data.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kerstin A Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany. .,Institute of Radiation Medicine (IRM), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany. .,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany.
| | - Rebekka C E Grosser
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - Kim Melanie Kraus
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - Hans Hoffmann
- Division of Thoracic Surgery, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Markus Oechsner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Institute of Radiation Medicine (IRM), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany.,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Straube C, Kessel KA, Antoni S, Gempt J, Meyer B, Schlegel J, Schmidt-Graf F, Combs SE. A balanced score to predict survival of elderly patients newly diagnosed with glioblastoma. Radiat Oncol 2020; 15:97. [PMID: 32375830 PMCID: PMC7201994 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-020-01549-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/03/2020] [Accepted: 04/24/2020] [Indexed: 01/10/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Over the past years, several treatment regimens have been recommended for elderly patients with glioblastoma (GBM), ranging from ultrahypofractionated radiotherapy (RT) over monochemotherapy (ChT) to combined radiochemotherapy (RChT). The current guidelines recommend active treatment in elderly patients in cases with a KPS of at least 60%. We established a score for selecting patients with a very poor prognosis from patients with a better prognosis. Methods One hundred eighty one patients ≥65 years old, histologically diagnosed with GBM, were retrospectively evaluated. Clinical characteristics were analysed for their impact on the overall survival (OS). Factors which were significant in univariate analysis (log-rank test, p < 0.05) were included in a multi-variate model (multi-variate Cox regression analysis, MVA). The 9-month OS for the significant factors after MVA (p < 0.05) was included in a prognostic score. Score sums with a median OS of < and > 6 months were summarized as Group A and B, respectively. Results Age, KPS, MGMT status, the extent of resection, aphasia after surgery and motor dysfunction after surgery were significantly associated with OS on univariate analysis (p < 0.05). On MVA age (p 0.002), MGMT promotor methylation (p 0.013) and Karnofsky performance status (p 0.005) remained significant and were included in the score. Patients were divided into two groups, group A (median OS of 2.7 months) and group B (median OS of 7.8 months). The score was of prognostic significance, independent of the adjuvant treatment regimen. Conclusions The score distinguishes patients with a poor prognosis from patients with a better prognosis. Its inclusion in future retrospective or prospective trials could help enhance the comparability of results. Before its employment on a routine basis, external validation is recommended.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christoph Straube
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, School of Medicine, Munich, Germany. .,Deutsches Konsortium für translationale Krebsforschung (dktk), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany.
| | - Kerstin A Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, School of Medicine, Munich, Germany
| | - Stefanie Antoni
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, School of Medicine, Munich, Germany.,Department of Neuropathology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Jens Gempt
- Department of Neurosurgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Bernhard Meyer
- Department of Neurosurgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Juergen Schlegel
- Department of Neuropathology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Friederike Schmidt-Graf
- Department of Neurology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, School of Medicine, Munich, Germany.,Deutsches Konsortium für translationale Krebsforschung (dktk), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany.,Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Institut für Strahlenmedizin (IRM), Helmholtz Zentrum München (HMGU), Neuherberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Scharl S, Kirstein A, Kessel KA, Diehl C, Oechsner M, Straube C, Meyer B, Zimmer C, Combs SE. Stereotactic irradiation of the resection cavity after surgical resection of brain metastases - when is the right timing? Acta Oncol 2019; 58:1714-1719. [PMID: 31368403 DOI: 10.1080/0284186x.2019.1643917] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate whether an early beginning of the adjuvant stereotactic radiotherapy after macroscopic complete resection of 1-3 brain metastases is essential or whether longer intervals between surgery and radiotherapy are feasible.Material and methods: Sixty-six patients with 69 resection cavities treated with HFSRT after macroscopic complete resection of 1-3 brain metastases between 2009 and 2016 in our institution were included in this study. Overall survival, local recurrence and locoregional recurrence were evaluated depending on the time interval from surgery to the start of radiation therapy.Results: Patients that started radiotherapy within 21 days from surgery had a significantly decreased OS compared to patients treated after a longer interval from surgery (p < .01). There was no significant difference between patients treated ≥ 34 and 22-33 days from surgery (p = .210). In the univariate analysis, local control was superior for patients starting treatment 22-33 days from surgery compared to a later start (p = .049). This effect did not prevail in a multivariate model. There was no significant difference between patients treated within 21 days and patients treated more than 33 days after surgery (p = .203). Locoregional control was not influenced by RT timing (p = .508).Conclusion: A short delay in the start of radiotherapy does not seem to negatively impact the outcome in patients with resected brain metastases. We even observed an unexpected reduction in OS in patients treated within 21 days from surgery. Further studies are needed to define the optimal timing of postoperative radiotherapy to the resection cavity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sophia Scharl
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Anna Kirstein
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany
- Institute of Radiation Medicine (IRM), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Oberschleißheim, Germany
| | - Kerstin A. Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany
- Institute of Radiation Medicine (IRM), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Oberschleißheim, Germany
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site, Munich, Germany
| | - Christian Diehl
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Markus Oechsner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Christoph Straube
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site, Munich, Germany
| | - Bernhard Meyer
- Department of Neurosurgery, Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Claus Zimmer
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Stephanie E. Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany
- Institute of Radiation Medicine (IRM), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Oberschleißheim, Germany
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Kessel KA, Diehl CD, Oechsner M, Meyer B, Gempt J, Zimmer C, Schmidt-Graf F, Combs SE. Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) as an Addition to Long-Term Results after High-Precision Stereotactic Radiotherapy in Patients with Secreting and Non-Secreting Pituitary Adenomas: A Retrospective Cohort Study up to 17-Years Follow-Up. Cancers (Basel) 2019; 11:cancers11121884. [PMID: 31783579 PMCID: PMC6966568 DOI: 10.3390/cancers11121884] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/30/2019] [Revised: 11/10/2019] [Accepted: 11/18/2019] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
High-precision radiotherapy has been established as a valid and effective treatment option in patients with pituitary adenomas. We report on outcome after fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (FSRT) in correlation with patient-reported outcomes (PROs). We analyzed 69 patients treated between 2000 and 2019. FSRT was delivered with a median total dose of 54 Gy (single fraction: 1.8 Gy). PRO questionnaires were sent to 28 patients. Median overall survival was 17.2 years; mean local control was 15.6 years (median not reached). Median follow-up was 5.8 years. Twenty (71%) patients participated in the PRO assessment. Physicians reported symptoms grade ≥3 in 6 cases (9%). Of all, 35 (51%) patients suffered from hypopituitarism at baseline, and during follow-up, new or progressive hypopituitarism was observed in 11 cases (16%). Patients reported 10 cases of severe side effects. Most of these symptoms were already graded as CTCAE (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events) grade 2 by a physician in a previous follow-up exam. PROs are an essential measure and only correlate to a certain extent with the physician-reported outcomes. For high-precision radiotherapy of pituitary adenomas, they confirm excellent overall outcomes and low toxicity. In the future, the integration of PROs paired with high-end treatment will further improve outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kerstin A. Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), 81675 Munich, Germany; (C.D.D.); (M.O.); (S.E.C.)
- Institute of Radiation Medicine (IRM), Helmholtz Zentrum München, 85764 Neuherberg, Germany
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), DKTK Partner Site, 81675 Munich, Germany; (B.M.); (J.G.); (C.Z.)
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +49-089-4140-4502
| | - Christian D. Diehl
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), 81675 Munich, Germany; (C.D.D.); (M.O.); (S.E.C.)
| | - Markus Oechsner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), 81675 Munich, Germany; (C.D.D.); (M.O.); (S.E.C.)
| | - Bernhard Meyer
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), DKTK Partner Site, 81675 Munich, Germany; (B.M.); (J.G.); (C.Z.)
- Department of Neurosurgery, Technical University of Munich (TUM), 81675 Munich, Germany
| | - Jens Gempt
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), DKTK Partner Site, 81675 Munich, Germany; (B.M.); (J.G.); (C.Z.)
- Department of Neurosurgery, Technical University of Munich (TUM), 81675 Munich, Germany
| | - Claus Zimmer
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), DKTK Partner Site, 81675 Munich, Germany; (B.M.); (J.G.); (C.Z.)
- Department of Neuroradiology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), 81675 Munich, Germany
| | | | - Stephanie E. Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), 81675 Munich, Germany; (C.D.D.); (M.O.); (S.E.C.)
- Institute of Radiation Medicine (IRM), Helmholtz Zentrum München, 85764 Neuherberg, Germany
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), DKTK Partner Site, 81675 Munich, Germany; (B.M.); (J.G.); (C.Z.)
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Kessel KA, Combs SE. Digital biomarkers: Importance of patient stratification for re-irradiation of glioma patients - Review of latest developments regarding scoring assessment. Phys Med 2019; 67:20-26. [PMID: 31622876 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2019.10.021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/04/2019] [Revised: 08/27/2019] [Accepted: 10/06/2019] [Indexed: 01/12/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To review scoring assessments in re-irradiation of high-grade glioma (HGG) patients and how to use scoring for patient stratification. The next aim was to investigate the different approaches employed by the scoring systems and the way they can be applied to build homogeneous patient groups for a reliable prognosis. METHODS We searched the Medline/Pubmed and Web of science databases for relevant articles regarding scores for re-irradiation of recurrent HGG. All references were divided into the following groups: novel score establishment (n = 5), score validation (n = 6), not relevant to this evaluation (n = 26). RESULTS We identified five scoring systems. Two are modifications of an already existing score. Calculations differ immensely from easy point addition to a more complex formula with including three up to 10 individual parameters. Six validation articles were found for three of the scores; one was validated four times. Two scores were never validated. CONCLUSION For recurrent HGG, the clinical situation remains demanding. Due to the heterogeneity of data at re-irradiation, patient stratification is important. Several scoring systems have been developed to predict prognosis. As a digital biomarker, scores are of high value regarding quick patient assessment and therapy decision making. For the next generation of digital biomarkers, easy calculation, and inclusion of easily available parameters are crucial.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kerstin A Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany; Institute for Radiation Medicine (IRM), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, Neuherberg, Germany; Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), DKTK Partner Site Munich, Germany.
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany; Institute for Radiation Medicine (IRM), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, Neuherberg, Germany; Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), DKTK Partner Site Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Combs SE, Kessel KA, Hesse J, Straube C, Zimmer C, Schmidt-Graf F, Schlegel J, Gempt J, Meyer B. Moving Second Courses of Radiotherapy Forward: Early Re-Irradiation After Surgical Resection for Recurrent Gliomas Improves Efficacy With Excellent Tolerability. Neurosurgery 2019; 83:1241-1248. [PMID: 29462372 DOI: 10.1093/neuros/nyx629] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/19/2017] [Accepted: 12/27/2017] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Generally, re-irradiation (Re-RT) is offered to patients with glioma recurrences with macroscopic lesions. Results are discussed controversially, and some centers postulate limited benefit of Re-RT. Re-RT is generally offered to tumors up to 4 cm in diameter. Re-resection is also discussed controversially; however, recent studies have shown significant benefit. OBJECTIVE To combine proactive re-resection and early Re-RT in patients with recurrent glioma. METHODS We included 108 patients treated between 2002 and 2016 for recurrent glioma. All patients underwent surgical resection for recurrence; Re-RT was applied with a median dose of 37.5 Gy (range 25 Gy-57Gy/equivalent dose in 2Gy fractions [EQD2]) with high-precision techniques. All patients were followed prospectively in an interdisciplinary follow-up program. RESULTS Median follow-up after Re-RT was 7 mo. Median survival after surgery and Re-RT was 12 mo (range 1-102 mo). Complete resection had a significant impact on the outcome (P = .03). The strongest predictors of outcome were MGMT-promotor methylation and Karnofsky Performance Score and time interval between primary and second RT. CONCLUSION Proactive resection of tumor recurrences combined with early Re-RT conveys into promising outcome in recurrent glioma. Complete resection and early Re-RT lead to improved survival. Thus, moving Re-RT to an earlier timepoint during the treatment of recurrent glioma, eg after complete macroscopic removal of the tumor, may be crucial for treatment optimization. Using advanced RT techniques, side effects are low. Currently, this concept is evaluated in the GLIOCAVE/NOA 17 trial.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany.,Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy ( i RT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany.,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (dktk), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Kerstin A Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany.,Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy ( i RT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany
| | - Josefine Hesse
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Christoph Straube
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Claus Zimmer
- Department of Neuroradiology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | | | - Jürgen Schlegel
- Department of Neuropathology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Jens Gempt
- Department of Neurosurgery, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - Bernhard Meyer
- Department of Neurosurgery, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Straube C, Kessel KA, Zimmer C, Schmidt-Graf F, Schlegel J, Gempt J, Meyer B, Combs SE. A Second Course of Radiotherapy in Patients with Recurrent Malignant Gliomas: Clinical Data on Re-irradiation, Prognostic Factors, and Usefulness of Digital Biomarkers. Curr Treat Options Oncol 2019; 20:71. [PMID: 31324990 DOI: 10.1007/s11864-019-0673-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
OPINION STATEMENT The treatment of malignant gliomas has undergone a significant intensification during the past decade, and the interdisciplinary treatment team has learned that all treatment opportunities, including surgery and radiotherapy (RT), also have a central role in recurrent gliomas. Throughout the decades, re-irradiation (re-RT) has achieved a prominent place in the treatment of recurrent gliomas. A solid body of evidence supports the safety and efficacy of re-RT, especially when modern techniques are used, and justifies the early use of this regimen, especially in the case when macroscopic disease is present. Additionally, a second adjuvant re-RT to the resection cavity is currently being investigated by several investigators and seems to offer promising results. Although advanced RT technologies, such as stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (FSRT), intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), and image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) have become available in many centers, re-RT should continue to be kept in experienced hands so that they can select the optimal regimen, the ideal treatment volume, and the appropriate techniques from their tool-boxes. Concomitant or adjuvant use of systemic treatment options should also strongly be taken into consideration, especially because temozolomide (TMZ), cyclohexyl-nitroso-urea (CCNU), and bevacizumab have shown a good safety profile; they should be considered, if available. Nonetheless, the selection of patients for re-RT remains crucial. Single factors, such as patient age or the progression-free interval (PFI), fall too short. Therefore, powerful prognostic scores have been generated and validated, and these scores should be used for patient selection and counseling.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christoph Straube
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
- Institute for Radiation Medicine (IRM), Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, 85764, Neuherberg, Germany
| | - Kerstin A Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
- Institute for Radiation Medicine (IRM), Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, 85764, Neuherberg, Germany
| | - Claus Zimmer
- Department of Neuroradiology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Friederike Schmidt-Graf
- Department of Neurology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Jürgen Schlegel
- Department of Neuroradiology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Jens Gempt
- Department of Neurosurgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Bernhard Meyer
- Department of Neurosurgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany.
- Institute for Radiation Medicine (IRM), Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, 85764, Neuherberg, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Fuchs F, Habl G, Devečka M, Kampfer S, Combs SE, Kessel KA. Interfraction variation and dosimetric changes during image-guided radiation therapy in prostate cancer patients. Radiat Oncol J 2019; 37:127-133. [PMID: 31137087 PMCID: PMC6610012 DOI: 10.3857/roj.2018.00514] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/20/2018] [Accepted: 03/15/2019] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose The aim of this study was to identify volume changes and dose variations of rectum and bladder during radiation therapy in prostate cancer (PC) patients. Materials and Methods We analyzed 20 patients with PC treated with helical tomotherapy. Daily image guidance was performed. We re-contoured the entire bladder and rectum including its contents as well as the organ walls on megavoltage computed tomography once a week. Dose variations were analyzed by means of Dmedian, Dmean, Dmax, V10 to V75, as well as the organs at risk (OAR) volume. Further, we investigated the correlation between volume changes and changes in Dmean of OAR. Results During treatment, the rectal volume ranged from 62% to 223% of its initial volume, the bladder volume from 22% to 375%. The average Dmean ranged from 87% to 118% for the rectum and 58% to 160% for the bladder. The Pearson correlation coefficients between volume changes and corresponding changes in Dmean were -0.82 for the bladder and 0.52 for the rectum. The comparison of the dose wall histogram (DWH) and the dose volume histogram (DVH) showed that the DVH underestimates the percentage of the rectal and bladder volume exposed to the high dose region. Conclusion Relevant variations in the volume of OAR and corresponding dose variations can be observed. For the bladder, an increase in the volume generally leads to lower doses; for the rectum, the correlation is weaker. Having demonstrated remarkable differences in the dose distribution of the DWH and the DVH, the use of DWHs should be considered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Frederik Fuchs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Germany
| | - Gregor Habl
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Germany
| | - Michal Devečka
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Germany
| | - Severin Kampfer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Germany
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Germany.,Institute of Radiation Medicine, Department of Radiation Sciences, Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany
| | - Kerstin A Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Germany.,Institute of Radiation Medicine, Department of Radiation Sciences, Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Peeken JC, Knie C, Kessel KA, Habermehl D, Kampfer S, Dapper H, Devecka M, von Eisenhart-Rothe R, Specht K, Weichert W, Wörtler K, Knebel C, Wilkens JJ, Combs SE. Neoadjuvant image-guided helical intensity modulated radiotherapy of extremity sarcomas - a single center experience. Radiat Oncol 2019; 14:2. [PMID: 30626408 PMCID: PMC6327451 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-019-1207-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/13/2018] [Accepted: 01/02/2019] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Advanced radiotherapy (RT) techniques allow normal tissue to be spared in patients with extremity soft tissue sarcoma (STS). This work aims to evaluate toxicity and outcome after neoadjuvant image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) as helical intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with reduced margins based on MRI-based target definition in patients with STS. Methods Between 2010 to 2014, 41 patients with extremity STS were treated with IGRT delivered as helical IMRT on a tomotherapy machine. The tumor site was in the upper extremity in 6 patients (15%) and lower extremity in 35 patients (85%). Reduced margins of 2.5 cm in longitudinal direction and 1.0 cm in axial direction were used to expand the MRI-defined gross tumor volume, including peritumoral edema, to the clinical target volume. An additional margin of 5 mm was added to receive the planning target volume. The full total dose of 50 Gy in 2 Gy fractions was sucessfully applied in 40 patients. Two patients received chemotherapy instead of surgery due to systemic progression. All patients were included into a strict follow-up program and were seen interdisciplinarily by the Departments of Orthopaedic Surgery and Radiation Oncology. Results Thirty eight patients that received total RT total dose and subsequent resection were analyzed for outcome. After a median follow-up of 38.5 months cumulative OS, local PFS and systemic PFS at 2 years were determined at 78.2, 85.2 and 54.5%, respectively. Two of 6 local recurrences were proximal marginal misses. Negative resection margins were achieved in 84% of patients. The rate of major wound complications was comparable to previous IMRT studies with 36.8%. RT was overall tolerable with low toxicity rates. Conclusions IMRT-IGRT offers neoadjuvant treatment for extremity STS with reduced safety margins and thus low toxicity rates. Wound complication rates were comparable to previously reported frequencies. Two reported marginal misses suggest a word of caution for reduction of longitudinal safety margins. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13014-019-1207-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jan C Peeken
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany. .,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany.
| | - Christoph Knie
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - Kerstin A Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, Neuherberg, Germany.,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Daniel Habermehl
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - Severin Kampfer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - Hendrik Dapper
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - Michal Devecka
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - Rüdiger von Eisenhart-Rothe
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - Katja Specht
- Department of Pathology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Wilko Weichert
- Department of Pathology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Klaus Wörtler
- Department of Radiology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - Carolin Knebel
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - Jan J Wilkens
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, Neuherberg, Germany
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, Neuherberg, Germany.,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Peeken JC, Goldberg T, Pyka T, Bernhofer M, Wiestler B, Kessel KA, Tafti PD, Nüsslin F, Braun AE, Zimmer C, Rost B, Combs SE. Combining multimodal imaging and treatment features improves machine learning-based prognostic assessment in patients with glioblastoma multiforme. Cancer Med 2018; 8:128-136. [PMID: 30561851 PMCID: PMC6346243 DOI: 10.1002/cam4.1908] [Citation(s) in RCA: 35] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/25/2018] [Revised: 11/14/2018] [Accepted: 11/14/2018] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Background For Glioblastoma (GBM), various prognostic nomograms have been proposed. This study aims to evaluate machine learning models to predict patients' overall survival (OS) and progression‐free survival (PFS) on the basis of clinical, pathological, semantic MRI‐based, and FET‐PET/CT‐derived information. Finally, the value of adding treatment features was evaluated. Methods One hundred and eighty‐nine patients were retrospectively analyzed. We assessed clinical, pathological, and treatment information. The VASARI set of semantic imaging features was determined on MRIs. Metabolic information was retained from preoperative FET‐PET/CT images. We generated multiple random survival forest prediction models on a patient training set and performed internal validation. Single feature class models were created including "clinical," "pathological," "MRI‐based," and "FET‐PET/CT‐based" models, as well as combinations. Treatment features were combined with all other features. Results Of all single feature class models, the MRI‐based model had the highest prediction performance on the validation set for OS (C‐index: 0.61 [95% confidence interval: 0.51‐0.72]) and PFS (C‐index: 0.61 [0.50‐0.72]). The combination of all features did increase performance above all single feature class models up to C‐indices of 0.70 (0.59‐0.84) and 0.68 (0.57‐0.78) for OS and PFS, respectively. Adding treatment information further increased prognostic performance up to C‐indices of 0.73 (0.62‐0.84) and 0.71 (0.60‐0.81) on the validation set for OS and PFS, respectively, allowing significant stratification of patient groups for OS. Conclusions MRI‐based features were the most relevant feature class for prognostic assessment. Combining clinical, pathological, and imaging information increased predictive power for OS and PFS. A further increase was achieved by adding treatment features.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jan C Peeken
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar der Technischem Universität München (TUM), München, Germany.,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany.,Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany
| | | | - Thomas Pyka
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar der Technischen Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Michael Bernhofer
- Department for Bioinformatics and Computational Biology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Garching, Germany
| | - Benedikt Wiestler
- Department of Neuroradiology, Klinikum rechts der Isar der Technischen Universität, Munich (TUM), München, Germany
| | - Kerstin A Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar der Technischem Universität München (TUM), München, Germany.,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany.,Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany
| | | | - Fridtjof Nüsslin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar der Technischem Universität München (TUM), München, Germany
| | | | - Claus Zimmer
- Department of Neuroradiology, Klinikum rechts der Isar der Technischen Universität, Munich (TUM), München, Germany
| | - Burkhard Rost
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar der Technischen Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar der Technischem Universität München (TUM), München, Germany.,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany.,Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Wank M, Schilling D, Schmid TE, Meyer B, Gempt J, Barz M, Schlegel J, Liesche F, Kessel KA, Wiestler B, Bette S, Zimmer C, Combs SE. Human Glioma Migration and Infiltration Properties as a Target for Personalized Radiation Medicine. Cancers (Basel) 2018; 10:cancers10110456. [PMID: 30463322 PMCID: PMC6266328 DOI: 10.3390/cancers10110456] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/29/2018] [Revised: 11/14/2018] [Accepted: 11/16/2018] [Indexed: 01/28/2023] Open
Abstract
Gliomas are primary brain tumors that present the majority of malignant adult brain tumors. Gliomas are subdivided into low- and high-grade tumors. Despite extensive research in recent years, the prognosis of malignant glioma patients remains poor. This is caused by naturally highly infiltrative capacities as well as high levels of radio- and chemoresistance. Additionally, it was shown that low linear energy transfer (LET) irradiation enhances migration and invasion of several glioma entities which might counteract today’s treatment concepts. However, this finding is discussed controversially. In the era of personalized medicine, this controversial data might be attributed to the patient-specific heterogeneity that ultimately could be used for treatment. Thus, current developments in glioma therapy should be seen in the context of intrinsic and radiation-enhanced migration and invasion. Due to the natural heterogeneity of glioma cells and different radiation responses, a personalized radiation treatment concept is suggested and alternative radiation concepts are discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michaela Wank
- Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Helmholtz Zentrum München, 85764 Neuherberg, Germany.
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, 81675 Munich, Germany.
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, 81675 Munich, Germany.
| | - Daniela Schilling
- Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Helmholtz Zentrum München, 85764 Neuherberg, Germany.
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, 81675 Munich, Germany.
| | - Thomas E Schmid
- Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Helmholtz Zentrum München, 85764 Neuherberg, Germany.
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, 81675 Munich, Germany.
| | - Bernhard Meyer
- Department of Neurosurgery, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, 81675 Munich, Germany.
| | - Jens Gempt
- Department of Neurosurgery, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, 81675 Munich, Germany.
| | - Melanie Barz
- Department of Neurosurgery, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, 81675 Munich, Germany.
| | - Jürgen Schlegel
- Department of Neuropathology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), 81675 Munich, Germany.
| | - Friederike Liesche
- Department of Neuropathology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), 81675 Munich, Germany.
| | - Kerstin A Kessel
- Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Helmholtz Zentrum München, 85764 Neuherberg, Germany.
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, 81675 Munich, Germany.
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, 81675 Munich, Germany.
| | - Benedikt Wiestler
- Department of Neuroradiology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, 81675 Munich, Germany.
| | - Stefanie Bette
- Department of Neuroradiology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, 81675 Munich, Germany.
| | - Claus Zimmer
- Department of Neuroradiology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, 81675 Munich, Germany.
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Helmholtz Zentrum München, 85764 Neuherberg, Germany.
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, 81675 Munich, Germany.
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, 81675 Munich, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Kessel KA, Vogel MME, Kessel C, Bier H, Biedermann T, Friess H, Herschbach P, von Eisenhart-Rothe R, Meyer B, Kiechle M, Keller U, Peschel C, Bassermann F, Schmid R, Schwaiger M, Combs SE. Cancer clinical trials - Survey evaluating patient participation and acceptance in a university-based Comprehensive Cancer Center (CCC). Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2018; 13:44-49. [PMID: 30345398 PMCID: PMC6192009 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2018.10.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/22/2018] [Revised: 09/23/2018] [Accepted: 10/01/2018] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
>50% of patients are willing to participate in clinical trials, only 18% are currently enrolled. The top reason to participate in trials was to serve medical progress and cancer research. Reasons for refusing were extensive travel time, no therapeutic advantage and too time-consuming. Good information strategies need to be implemented, and doctors need to be aware of running trials. Trial concepts must include patients’ needs, e.g. number of appointments, risk-benefit profile.
Introduction Prospective clinical trials are essential to translate new therapy concepts or rather any scientific development into the medical routine. Besides a sophisticated trial protocol, the success of clinical trials depends on patient recruitment and participation. Patient recruitment remains a challenge and depends on several factors. To get a current picture of the patients’ attitude, we conducted the present survey. Methods We designed a survey with seven questions, which was given to all oncological patients treated within a timeframe of three months between Mai and July 2017. Participation was voluntary and anonymous. The questionnaire mainly inquires patients’ participation in clinical trials in a university-based setting, their attitude towards clinical trials regarding risks and benefits, and their source of information in this context. Results 771 patients (1:1 male/female) participated with a median age of 61 years (range 18–91 years) with a response rate of 71.5%. Of all, 17.8% (137/771) were participating in a clinical trial. The most mentioned reason was to serve medical progress and cancer research. Out of the patients not currently participating in a trial, 79 (12.7%, 79/623) refusers named the following main reasons: extensive travel time to the clinic, no therapeutic advantage, and too time-consuming. Out of the patients not offered to take part in a trial, 265 (51.0%, 265/520) would participate if offered. Of all patients, 8.3% (64/771) used the clinics' homepage as a source of information, of those 79.7% (51/64) were satisfied with its content. To enhance patient recruitment strategies, we asked how patients wish to be informed about possible trials: More than half (52.0%) of the questioned patients preferred an individual medical consultation with their physician. We further analyzed the trial participation depending on age, gender, unit, and tumor entity. We could show a significant influence of age (p < 0.001) but not for gender (p = 0.724). The trial participation was also significantly associated with the treating unit (p < 0.001) and tumor entity (p = 0.001). Conclusion Patients are willing to participate in clinical trials. Better information strategies need to be implemented. Physicians need to be aware of running trials within their department and must counseling counsel patients effectively to improve recruitment. Trial concepts should keep in mind patients’ needs including an adequate number of appointments, positive risk-benefit profiles, and information material.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kerstin A Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany.,Institute for Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, Neuherberg, Germany.,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), DKTK Partner Site Munich, Germany
| | - Marco M E Vogel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany.,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), DKTK Partner Site Munich, Germany
| | - Carmen Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany.,Onkologisches Zentrum im RHCCC am Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany.,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), DKTK Partner Site Munich, Germany
| | - Henning Bier
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), DKTK Partner Site Munich, Germany.,Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - Tilo Biedermann
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), DKTK Partner Site Munich, Germany.,Department of Dermatology and Allergy Biederstein, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Biedersteiner Straße 29, Munich, Germany
| | - Helmut Friess
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), DKTK Partner Site Munich, Germany.,Department of Surgery, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - Peter Herschbach
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), DKTK Partner Site Munich, Germany.,Roman Herzog Comprehensive Cancer Center (RHCCC), Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Trogerstraße 26, Munich, Germany
| | - Rüdiger von Eisenhart-Rothe
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), DKTK Partner Site Munich, Germany.,Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - Bernhard Meyer
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), DKTK Partner Site Munich, Germany.,Department of Neurosurgery, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - Marion Kiechle
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), DKTK Partner Site Munich, Germany.,Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - Ulrich Keller
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), DKTK Partner Site Munich, Germany.,3rd Department of Internal Medicine (Hematology and Oncology), Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - Christian Peschel
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), DKTK Partner Site Munich, Germany.,3rd Department of Internal Medicine (Hematology and Oncology), Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - Florian Bassermann
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), DKTK Partner Site Munich, Germany.,3rd Department of Internal Medicine (Hematology and Oncology), Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - Roland Schmid
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), DKTK Partner Site Munich, Germany.,Department of Gastroentereology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - Markus Schwaiger
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), DKTK Partner Site Munich, Germany.,Department of Nuclear Medicine, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany.,Institute for Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, Neuherberg, Germany.,Onkologisches Zentrum im RHCCC am Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany.,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), DKTK Partner Site Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Straube C, Kessel KA, Schmidt-Graf F, Krieg SM, Meyer B, Gempt J, Combs SE. A trend towards a more intense adjuvant treatment of low-grade-gliomas in tertiary centers in Germany after RTOG 9802 - results from a multi-center survey. BMC Cancer 2018; 18:907. [PMID: 30241469 PMCID: PMC6151028 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-018-4825-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/04/2018] [Accepted: 09/14/2018] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The treatment recommendations for Low-grade Gliomas (LGG) underwent profound changes due to results from RTOG 9802 published in April 2016. This work aims to investigate whether the results from the trial were already incorporated into the treatment recommendations at German oncology centers before an update of the official guidelines. METHODS An online based questionnaire with questions covering all aspects of adjuvant treatments of LGGs was generated, including three cases with distinct clinical situations. We contacted all members of the neuro-oncologic working group (NOA) of the German Cancer Society (DKG) as well as all German-speaking members of the European Low-Grade Glioma Network via E-mail. RESULTS We collected 38 responses. All responders were at least specialists; they predominantly worked at tertiary hospitals with a high volume of LGGs treated annually (75% with more than 10 cases per year). All responders stated to consent treatment recommendation for LGGs within interdisciplinary oncologic boards. The treatment recommendations for LGGs changed profoundly between 2015 and 12/2016. There is a trend towards PCV-based multimodal treatments, especially for oligodendroglial LGGs, as well as a trend away from watchful-waiting-policies for astrocytic LGGs. CONCLUSION Neurooncologists do adapt results from clinical trials quickly. None the less, there is still an immense heterogeneity within the treatment recommendations, predominantly for astrocytic LGGs. Well planned clinical trials and concise treatment recommendations are warranted; additionally, individual counseling of patients is essential.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christoph Straube
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
- Deutsches Konsortium Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Kerstin A. Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
- Institut für Innovative Radiotherapie (iRT), Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Munich, Germany
- Department of Neurology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Friederike Schmidt-Graf
- Department of Neurology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Sandro M. Krieg
- Department of Neurosurgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Bernhard Meyer
- Department of Neurosurgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Jens Gempt
- Department of Neurosurgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Stephanie E. Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
- Institut für Innovative Radiotherapie (iRT), Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Munich, Germany
- Deutsches Konsortium Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Vogel MME, Kessel KA, Gschwend JE, Weichert W, Wilkens JJ, Combs SE. Early and late toxicity profiles of patients receiving immediate postoperative radiotherapy versus salvage radiotherapy for prostate cancer after prostatectomy. Strahlenther Onkol 2018; 195:131-144. [PMID: 30182246 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-018-1359-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/22/2018] [Accepted: 08/17/2018] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE The present study aims to evaluate both early and late toxicity profiles of patients receiving immediate postoperative radiotherapy (RT; adjuvant RT or additive RT) compared to salvage RT. METHODS We evaluated 253 patients with prostate cancer treated with either immediate postoperative (adjuvant RT, n = 42; additive RT, n = 39) or salvage RT (n = 137). Thirty-five patients received salvage treatment but did not achieve a postoperative prostate specific antigen (PSA) level <0.1 ng/ml and thus were excluded from analysis. RESULTS A significantly higher rate of early grade 1/2 proctitis in the immediate postoperative RT group without additional pelvic RT was observed (p = 0.02). Patients in the immediate postoperative RT group without additional pelvic RT showed significantly more early urinary tract obstructions (p = 0.003). Toxicity rates of early (<3 months) and late (3-6 months) postoperative RT were similar (p > 0.05). Baseline recovery rate of erectile dysfunction was better in patients with immediate postoperative RT without additional pelvic RT (p = 0.02; hazard ratio (HR) = 2.22, 95%-confidence interval, 95%-CI: 1.12-4.37). Recovery rate of urinary incontinence showed no significant difference in all groups (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION Patients receiving immediate postoperative RT (adjuvant or additive RT) without additional pelvic RT experience early gastrointestinal (GI) side effect proctitis and, as well as early genitourinary (GU) toxicity urinary tract obstruction more frequently than patients treated with salvage RT. Therefore, complete recovery after surgery is essential. However, we suggest basing the treatment decision on the patient's postoperative clinical condition and evaluation of any adverse risk factors, since many studies demonstrate a clear benefit for immediate postoperative RT (adjuvant or additive RT) in terms of oncological outcome.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marco M E Vogel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
- Institute for Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany
| | - Kerstin A Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
- Institute for Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany
- Partner Site Munich, Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Munich, Germany
| | - Jürgen E Gschwend
- Department of Urology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Wilko Weichert
- Department of Pathology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Jan J Wilkens
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.
- Institute for Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany.
- Partner Site Munich, Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Munich, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
El Shafie RA, Czech M, Kessel KA, Habermehl D, Weber D, Rieken S, Bougatf N, Jäkel O, Debus J, Combs SE. Evaluation of particle radiotherapy for the re-irradiation of recurrent intracranial meningioma. Radiat Oncol 2018; 13:86. [PMID: 29739417 PMCID: PMC5941671 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-018-1026-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/26/2017] [Accepted: 04/12/2018] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND With the advance of modern irradiation techniques, the role of radiotherapy (RT) for intracranial meningioma has increased significantly throughout the past years. Despite that tumor's generally favorable outcome with local control rates of up to 90% after ten years, progression after RT does occur. In those cases, re-irradiation is often difficult due to the limited radiation tolerance of the surrounding tissue. The aim of this analysis is to determine the value of particle therapy with its better dose conformity and higher biological efficacy for re-irradiating recurrent intracranial meningioma. It was performed within the framework of the "clinical research group heavy ion therapy" and funded by the German Research Council (DFG, KFO 214). METHODS Forty-two patients treated with particle RT (protons (n = 8) or carbon ions (n = 34)) for recurrent intracranial meningioma were included in this analysis. Location of the primary lesion varied, including skull base (n = 31), convexity (n = 5) and falx (n = 6). 74% of the patients were categorized high-risk according to histology with a WHO grading of II (n = 25) or III (n = 6), in the remaining cases histology was either WHO grade I (n = 10) or unknown (n = 1). Median follow-up was 49,7 months. RESULTS In all patients, re-irradiation could be performed safely without interruptions due to side effects. No grade IV or V toxicities according to CTCAE v4.0 were observed. Particle RT offered good overall local control rates with 71% progression-free survival (PFS) after 12 months, 56,5% after 24 months and a median PFS of 34,3 months (95% CI 11,7-56,9). Histology had a significant impact on PFS yielding a median PFS of 25,7 months (95% CI 5,8-45,5) for high-risk histology (WHO grades II and III) while median PFS was not reached for low-risk tumors (WHO grade I) (p = 0,03). Median time to local progression was 15,3 months (Q1-Q3 8,08-34,6). Overall survival (OS) after re-irradiation was 89,6% after 12 months and 71,4% after 24 months with a median OS of 61,0 months (95% CI 34,2-87,7). Again, WHO grading had an effect, as median OS for low-risk patients was not reached whereas for high-risk patients it was 45,5 months (95% CI 35,6-55,3). CONCLUSION Re-irradiation using particle therapy is an effective method for the treatment of recurrent meningiomas. Interdisciplinary decision making is necessary to guarantee best treatment for every patient.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rami A El Shafie
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. .,National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Maja Czech
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.,National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Kerstin A Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, 85764, Oberschleißheim, Germany
| | - Daniel Habermehl
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, 85764, Oberschleißheim, Germany
| | - Dorothea Weber
- Institute for Medical Biometry and Informatics (IMBI), Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Stefan Rieken
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.,National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.,Heavy Ion Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 450, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Nina Bougatf
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.,National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.,Heavy Ion Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 450, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Oliver Jäkel
- Department of Medical Physics, Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum, Im Neuenheimer Feld 270, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jürgen Debus
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.,Heavy Ion Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 450, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.,Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology (E050), German Cancer Research Center (dkfz), Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, 85764, Oberschleißheim, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
El Shafie RA, Czech M, Kessel KA, Habermehl D, Weber D, Rieken S, Bougatf N, Jäkel O, Debus J, Combs SE. Clinical outcome after particle therapy for meningiomas of the skull base: toxicity and local control in patients treated with active rasterscanning. Radiat Oncol 2018; 13:54. [PMID: 29587795 PMCID: PMC5870393 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-018-1002-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/28/2017] [Accepted: 03/16/2018] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Meningiomas of the skull base account for 25-30% of all meningiomas. Due to the complex structure of the cranial base and its close proximity to critical structures, surgery is often associated with substantial morbidity. Treatment options include observation, aggressive surgical intervention, stereotactic or conventional radiotherapy. In this analysis we evaluate the outcome of 110 patients with meningiomas of the skull base treated with particle therapy. It was performed within the framework of the "clinical research group heavy ion therapy" and supported by the German Research Council (DFG, KFO 214). METHODS Between May 2010 and November 2014, 110 Patients with skull base meningioma were treated with particle radiotherapy at the Heidelberg Ion Therapy Center (HIT). Primary localizations included the sphenoid wing (n = 42), petroclival region (n = 23), cavernous sinus (n = 4), sella (n = 10) and olfactory nerve (n = 4). Sixty meningiomas were benign (WHO °I); whereas 8 were high-risk (WHO °II (n = 7) and °III (n = 1)). In 42 cases histology was not examined, since no surgery was performed. Proton (n = 104) or carbon ion (n = 6) radiotherapy was applied at Heidelberg Ion Therapy Center (HIT) using raster-scanning technique for active beam delivery. Fifty one patients (46.4%) received radiotherapy due to tumor progression, 17 (15.5%) after surgical resection and 42 (38.2%) as primary treatment. RESULTS Median follow-up in this analysis was 46,8 months (95% CI 39,9-53,7; Q1-Q3 34,3-61,7). Particle radiotherapy could be performed safely without toxicity-related interruptions. No grade IV or V toxicities according to CTCAE v4.0 were observed. Particle RT offered excellent overall local control rates with 100% progression-free survival (PFS) after 36 months and 96.6% after 60 months. Median PFS was not reached due to the small number of events. Histology significantly impacted PFS with superior PFS after 5 years for low-risk tumors (96.6% vs. 75.0%, p = 0,02). Overall survival was 96.2% after 60 months and 92.0% after 72 months from therapy. Of six documented deaths, five were definitely not and the sixth probably not meningioma-related. CONCLUSION Particle radiotherapy is an excellent treatment option for patients with meningiomas of the skull base and can lead to long-term tumor control with minimal side effects. Other prospective studies with longer follow-up will be necessary to further confirm the role of particle radiotherapy in skull base meningioma.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rami A El Shafie
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. .,Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Maja Czech
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.,Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Kerstin A Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Helmholtz Zentrum München, Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, Munich, Germany.,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Daniel Habermehl
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Helmholtz Zentrum München, Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, Munich, Germany.,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Dorothea Weber
- Institute for Medical Biometry and Informatics (IMBI), Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Stefan Rieken
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.,Heidelberg Ion Therapy Center (HIT), Im Neuenheimer Feld 470, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.,Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Nina Bougatf
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.,Heidelberg Ion Therapy Center (HIT), Im Neuenheimer Feld 470, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.,Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Oliver Jäkel
- Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum (dkfz), Abteilung Medizinphysik, Im Neuenheimer Feld 270, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.,Heidelberg Ion Therapy Center (HIT), Im Neuenheimer Feld 470, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jürgen Debus
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.,Heidelberg Ion Therapy Center (HIT), Im Neuenheimer Feld 470, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.,Clinical Cooperation Unit Radiation Oncology (E050), German Cancer Research Center (dkfz), Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Helmholtz Zentrum München, Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, Munich, Germany.,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Combs SE, Niyazi M, Adeberg S, Bougatf N, Kaul D, Fleischmann DF, Gruen A, Fokas E, Rödel CM, Eckert F, Paulsen F, Oehlke O, Grosu AL, Seidlitz A, Lattermann A, Krause M, Baumann M, Guberina M, Stuschke M, Budach V, Belka C, Debus J, Kessel KA. Re-irradiation of recurrent gliomas: pooled analysis and validation of an established prognostic score-report of the Radiation Oncology Group (ROG) of the German Cancer Consortium (DKTK). Cancer Med 2018; 7:1742-1749. [PMID: 29573214 PMCID: PMC5943421 DOI: 10.1002/cam4.1425] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/05/2018] [Revised: 02/08/2018] [Accepted: 02/09/2018] [Indexed: 12/28/2022] Open
Abstract
The heterogeneity of high‐grade glioma recurrences remains an ongoing challenge for the interdisciplinary neurooncology team. Response to re‐irradiation (re‐RT) is heterogeneous, and survival data depend on prognostic factors such as tumor volume, primary histology, age, the possibility of reresection, or time between primary diagnosis and initial RT and re‐RT. In the present pooled analysis, we gathered data from radiooncology centers of the DKTK Consortium and used it to validate the established prognostic score by Combs et al. and its modification by Kessel et al. Data consisted of a large independent, multicenter cohort of 565 high‐grade glioma patients treated with re‐RT from 1997 to 2016 and a median dose of 36 Gy. Primary RT was between 1986 and 2015 with a median dose of 60 Gy. Median age was 54 years; median follow‐up was 7.1 months. Median OS after re‐RT was 7.5, 9.5, and 13.8 months for WHO IV, III, and I/II gliomas, respectively. All six prognostic factors were tested for their significance on OS. Aside from the time from primary RT to re‐RT (P = 0.074) and the reresection status (P = 0.101), all factors (primary histology, age, KPS, and tumor volume) were significant. Both the original and new score showed a highly significant influence on survival with P < 0.001. Both prognostic scores successfully predict survival after re‐RT and can easily be applied in the routine clinical workflow. Now, further prognostic features need to be found to even improve treatment decisions regarding neurooncological interventions for recurrent glioma patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany.,Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany.,Partner sites Munich, Heidelberg, Berlin, Frankfurt, Tübingen, Freiburg, Dresden, Essen, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Berlin, Germany
| | - Maximilian Niyazi
- Partner sites Munich, Heidelberg, Berlin, Frankfurt, Tübingen, Freiburg, Dresden, Essen, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Berlin, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Sebastian Adeberg
- Partner sites Munich, Heidelberg, Berlin, Frankfurt, Tübingen, Freiburg, Dresden, Essen, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Berlin, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Nina Bougatf
- Partner sites Munich, Heidelberg, Berlin, Frankfurt, Tübingen, Freiburg, Dresden, Essen, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Berlin, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - David Kaul
- Partner sites Munich, Heidelberg, Berlin, Frankfurt, Tübingen, Freiburg, Dresden, Essen, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Berlin, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Charité-University Hospital Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Daniel F Fleischmann
- Partner sites Munich, Heidelberg, Berlin, Frankfurt, Tübingen, Freiburg, Dresden, Essen, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Berlin, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Arne Gruen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Charité-University Hospital Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Emmanouil Fokas
- Partner sites Munich, Heidelberg, Berlin, Frankfurt, Tübingen, Freiburg, Dresden, Essen, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Berlin, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Johann Wolfgang Goethe University, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Claus M Rödel
- Partner sites Munich, Heidelberg, Berlin, Frankfurt, Tübingen, Freiburg, Dresden, Essen, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Berlin, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Johann Wolfgang Goethe University, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Franziska Eckert
- Partner sites Munich, Heidelberg, Berlin, Frankfurt, Tübingen, Freiburg, Dresden, Essen, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Berlin, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Tübingen, Eberhard Karls University Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Frank Paulsen
- Partner sites Munich, Heidelberg, Berlin, Frankfurt, Tübingen, Freiburg, Dresden, Essen, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Berlin, Germany
| | - Oliver Oehlke
- Partner sites Munich, Heidelberg, Berlin, Frankfurt, Tübingen, Freiburg, Dresden, Essen, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Berlin, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Anca-Ligia Grosu
- Partner sites Munich, Heidelberg, Berlin, Frankfurt, Tübingen, Freiburg, Dresden, Essen, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Berlin, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Annekatrin Seidlitz
- Partner sites Munich, Heidelberg, Berlin, Frankfurt, Tübingen, Freiburg, Dresden, Essen, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Berlin, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology and OncoRay, National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Annika Lattermann
- Partner sites Munich, Heidelberg, Berlin, Frankfurt, Tübingen, Freiburg, Dresden, Essen, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Berlin, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology and OncoRay, National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.,Institute of Radiooncology, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
| | - Mechthild Krause
- Partner sites Munich, Heidelberg, Berlin, Frankfurt, Tübingen, Freiburg, Dresden, Essen, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Berlin, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology and OncoRay, National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.,Institute of Radiooncology, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
| | - Michael Baumann
- Partner sites Munich, Heidelberg, Berlin, Frankfurt, Tübingen, Freiburg, Dresden, Essen, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Berlin, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology and OncoRay, National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.,Institute of Radiooncology, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany.,Partner site Dresden, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Dresden, Germany.,Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Maja Guberina
- Partner sites Munich, Heidelberg, Berlin, Frankfurt, Tübingen, Freiburg, Dresden, Essen, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Berlin, Germany.,Department of Radiotherapy, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Martin Stuschke
- Partner sites Munich, Heidelberg, Berlin, Frankfurt, Tübingen, Freiburg, Dresden, Essen, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Berlin, Germany.,Department of Radiotherapy, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Volker Budach
- Partner sites Munich, Heidelberg, Berlin, Frankfurt, Tübingen, Freiburg, Dresden, Essen, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Berlin, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Charité-University Hospital Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Claus Belka
- Partner sites Munich, Heidelberg, Berlin, Frankfurt, Tübingen, Freiburg, Dresden, Essen, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Berlin, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Jürgen Debus
- Partner sites Munich, Heidelberg, Berlin, Frankfurt, Tübingen, Freiburg, Dresden, Essen, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Berlin, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Kerstin A Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany.,Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany.,Partner sites Munich, Heidelberg, Berlin, Frankfurt, Tübingen, Freiburg, Dresden, Essen, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Berlin, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Peeken JC, Goldberg T, Knie C, Komboz B, Bernhofer M, Pasa F, Kessel KA, Tafti PD, Rost B, Nüsslin F, Braun AE, Combs SE. Treatment-related features improve machine learning prediction of prognosis in soft tissue sarcoma patients. Strahlenther Onkol 2018; 194:824-834. [PMID: 29557486 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-018-1294-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/05/2017] [Accepted: 03/05/2018] [Indexed: 12/01/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Current prognostic models for soft tissue sarcoma (STS) patients are solely based on staging information. Treatment-related data have not been included to date. Including such information, however, could help to improve these models. MATERIALS AND METHODS A single-center retrospective cohort of 136 STS patients treated with radiotherapy (RT) was analyzed for patients' characteristics, staging information, and treatment-related data. Therapeutic imaging studies and pathology reports of neoadjuvantly treated patients were analyzed for signs of response. Random forest machine learning-based models were used to predict patients' death and disease progression at 2 years. Pre-treatment and treatment models were compared. RESULTS The prognostic models achieved high performances. Using treatment features improved the overall performance for all three classification types: prediction of death, and of local and systemic progression (area under the receiver operatoring characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.87, 0.88, and 0.84, respectively). Overall, RT-related features, such as the planning target volume and total dose, had preeminent importance for prognostic performance. Therapy response features were selected for prediction of disease progression. CONCLUSIONS A machine learning-based prognostic model combining known prognostic factors with treatment- and response-related information showed high accuracy for individualized risk assessment. This model could be used for adjustments of follow-up procedures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jan C Peeken
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany. .,Partner Site Munich, Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Munich, Germany.
| | | | - Christoph Knie
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - Basil Komboz
- Allianz SE, Königinstraße 28, 80802, Munich, Germany
| | - Michael Bernhofer
- Department for Bioinformatics and Computational Biology, Informatik 12, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Boltzmannstraße 3, 85748, Garching, Germany
| | - Francesco Pasa
- Department of Computer Science, Informatik 9, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Boltzmannstraße 3, 85748, Garching, Germany.,Chair of Biomedical Physics, Department of Physics, Technical University of Munich (TUM), James-Franck-Straße 1, 85748, Garching, Germany
| | - Kerstin A Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstaedter Landstraße 1, 85764, Neuherberg, Germany.,Partner Site Munich, Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Munich, Germany
| | - Pouya D Tafti
- Allianz SE, Königinstraße 28, 80802, Munich, Germany
| | - Burkhard Rost
- Department for Bioinformatics and Computational Biology, Informatik 12, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Boltzmannstraße 3, 85748, Garching, Germany
| | - Fridtjof Nüsslin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | | | - Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstaedter Landstraße 1, 85764, Neuherberg, Germany.,Partner Site Munich, Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Kessel KA, Vogel MM, Alles A, Dobiasch S, Fischer H, Combs SE. Mobile App Delivery of the EORTC QLQ-C30 Questionnaire to Assess Health-Related Quality of Life in Oncological Patients: Usability Study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2018; 6:e45. [PMID: 29463489 PMCID: PMC5840479 DOI: 10.2196/mhealth.9486] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/24/2017] [Revised: 12/27/2017] [Accepted: 01/02/2018] [Indexed: 01/21/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Mobile apps are evolving in the medical field. However, ongoing discussions have questioned whether such apps are really valuable and whether patients will accept their use in day-to-day clinical life. Therefore, we initiated a usability study in our department. Objective We present our results of the first app prototype and patient testing of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) assessment in oncological patients. Methods We developed an app prototype for the iOS operating system within eight months in three phases: conception, initial development, and pilot testing. For the HRQoL assessment, we chose to implement only the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30; German version 3). Usability testing was conducted for three months. Participation was voluntary and pseudonymized. After completion of the QLQ-C30 questionnaire using iPads provided by our department, we performed a short survey with 10 questions. This survey inquired about patients’ opinions regarding general aspects, including technical advances in medicine, mobile and app assistance during cancer treatment, and the app-specific functions (eg, interface and navigation). Results After logging into the app, the user can choose between starting a questionnaire, reviewing answers (administrators only), and logging out. The questionnaire is displayed with the same information, questions, and answers as on the original QLQ-C30 sheet. No alterations in wording were made. Usability was tested with 81 patients; median age was 55 years. The median time for completing the HRQoL questionnaire on the iPad was 4.0 minutes. Of all participants, 84% (68/81) owned a mobile device. Similarly, 84% (68/81) of participants would prefer a mobile version of the HRQoL questionnaire instead of a paper-based version. Using the app in daily life during and after cancer treatment would be supported by 83% (67/81) of participants. In the prototype version of the app, data were stored on the device; in the future, 79% (64/81) of the patients would agree to transfer data via the Internet. Conclusions Our usability test showed good results regarding attractiveness, operability, and understandability. Moreover, our results demonstrate a high overall acceptance of mobile apps and telemedicine in oncology. The HRQoL assessment via the app was accepted thoroughly by patients, and individuals are keen to use it in clinical routines, while data privacy and security must be ensured.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kerstin A Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.,Institute for Innovative Radiotherapy, Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany
| | - Marco Me Vogel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.,Institute for Innovative Radiotherapy, Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany
| | - Anna Alles
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Sophie Dobiasch
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Hanna Fischer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.,Institute for Innovative Radiotherapy, Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Peeken JC, Hesse J, Haller B, Kessel KA, Nüsslin F, Combs SE. Semantic imaging features predict disease progression and survival in glioblastoma multiforme patients. Strahlenther Onkol 2018; 194:580-590. [PMID: 29442128 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-018-1276-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/17/2017] [Accepted: 01/29/2018] [Indexed: 01/20/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND For glioblastoma (GBM), multiple prognostic factors have been identified. Semantic imaging features were shown to be predictive for survival prediction. No similar data have been generated for the prediction of progression. The aim of this study was to assess the predictive value of the semantic visually accessable REMBRANDT [repository for molecular brain neoplasia data] images (VASARI) imaging feature set for progression and survival, and the creation of joint prognostic models in combination with clinical and pathological information. METHODS 189 patients were retrospectively analyzed. Age, Karnofsky performance status, gender, and MGMT promoter methylation and IDH mutation status were assessed. VASARI features were determined on pre- and postoperative MRIs. Predictive potential was assessed with univariate analyses and Kaplan-Meier survival curves. Following variable selection and resampling, multivariate Cox regression models were created. Predictive performance was tested on patient test sets and compared between groups. The frequency of selection for single variables and variable pairs was determined. RESULTS For progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), univariate significant associations were shown for 9 and 10 VASARI features, respectively. Multivariate models yielded concordance indices significantly different from random for the clinical, imaging, combined, and combined + MGMT models of 0.657, 0.636, 0.694, and 0.716 for OS, and 0.602, 0.604, 0.633, and 0.643 for PFS. "Multilocality," "deep white-matter invasion," "satellites," and "ependymal invasion" were over proportionally selected for multivariate model generation, underlining their importance. CONCLUSIONS We demonstrated a predictive value of several qualitative imaging features for progression and survival. The performance of prognostic models was increased by combining clinical, pathological, and imaging features.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jan C Peeken
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany. .,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany.
| | - Josefine Hesse
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - Bernhard Haller
- Institut for Medical Statistics and Epidemiology, Technical University Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - Kerstin A Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Institut for Medical Statistics and Epidemiology, Technical University Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Fridtjof Nüsslin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstaedter Landstraße 1, 85764, Neuherberg, Germany.,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Asadpour R, Kessel KA, Bruckner T, Sertel S, Combs SE. Randomized study exploring the combination of radiotherapy with two types of acupuncture treatment (ROSETTA): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials 2017; 18:398. [PMID: 28851420 PMCID: PMC5575840 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-017-2139-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/21/2016] [Accepted: 08/03/2017] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Adverse effects such as fatigue, pain, erythema, nausea and vomiting are commonly known in patients undergoing irradiation (RT) alone or in combination with chemotherapy (RCHT). Patients suffering from these symptoms are limited in their daily life and their quality of life (QOL) is often reduced. As addressed in several trials, acupuncture can cause amelioration of these specific disorders. Especially for pain symptoms, several groups have shown efficacy of acupuncture. To what extent the difference between traditional acupuncture (verum acupuncture) and false acupuncture (sham acupuncture) is in reducing side effects and improvement of QOL is not clear. Methods/design ROSETTA is a prospective randomized phase II trial (version 1.0) to examine the efficacy of traditional acupuncture in patients with RT-related side effects. In the experimental (verum) arm (n = 37) an experienced acupuncture-trained person will treat dedicated acupuncture points. In the control (sham) arm (n = 37) sham acupuncture will be performed to provide a blinded comparison of results. Discussion This is the first randomized prospective trial to evaluate the effect of traditional acupuncture on RT-related side effects such as fatigue and QOL. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02674646. Registered on 8 December 2015. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-2139-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rebecca Asadpour
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - Kerstin A Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, 85764, Oberschleißheim, Germany
| | - Tom Bruckner
- Department of Medical Biometry, Institute of Medical Biometry and Informatics (IMBI), Universität Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 305, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Serkan Sertel
- Praxisgemeinschaft Prof. Sertel & Dr. Passerino , Rottstrasse 39, 67061, Ludwigshafen am Rhein, Germany.,Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head & Neck Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.,Department of 325 Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital CHUV, 326 Bâtiment hospitalier, Rue du Bugnon 46, 1011, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Klinikum rechts der Isar, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany. .,Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, 85764, Oberschleißheim, Germany. .,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Habl G, Straube C, Schiller K, Duma MN, Oechsner M, Kessel KA, Eiber M, Schwaiger M, Kübler H, Gschwend JE, Combs SE. Oligometastases from prostate cancer: local treatment with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). BMC Cancer 2017; 17:361. [PMID: 28532400 PMCID: PMC5440986 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-017-3341-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 61] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/27/2016] [Accepted: 05/11/2017] [Indexed: 01/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Background The impact of local tumor ablative therapy in oligometastasized prostate cancer (PC) is still under debate. To gain data for this approach, we evaluated oligometastasized PC patients receiving stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) to bone metastases. Methods In this retrospective study, 15 oligometastasized PC patients with a total of 20 bone metastases were evaluated regarding biochemical progression-free survival (PSA-PFS), time to initiation of ADT, and local control rate (LCR). Three patients received concomitant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Results The median follow-up after RT was 22.5 months (range 7.0–53.7 months). The median PSA-PFS was 6.9 months (range 1.1–28.4 months). All patients showing a decrease of PSA level after RT of at least factor 10 reveal a PSA-PFS of >12 months. Median PSA-PFS of this sub-group was 23.1 months (range 12.1–28.4 months). Local PFS (LPFS) after 2 years was 100%. One patient developed a local failure after 28.4 months. Median distant PFS (DPFS) was 7.36 months (range 1.74–54.34 months). The time to initiation of ADT in patients treated without ADT was 9.3 months (range 2.6–36.1 months). In all patients, the time to intensification of systemic therapy or the time to initiation of ADT increased from 9.3 to 12.3 months (range 2.6–36.1 months). Gleason-Score, ADT or the localization of metastasis had no impact on PFS or time to intensification of systemic therapy. No SBRT related acute or late toxicities were observed. Conclusion Our study shows that SBRT of bone metastases is a highly effective therapy with an excellent risk-benefit profile. However, PFS was limited due to a high distant failure rate implying the difficulty for patient selection for this oligometastatic concept. SBRT offers high local cancer control rates in bone oligometastases of PC and should be evaluated with the aim of curation or to delay modification of systemic treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gregor Habl
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Strasse 22, 81675, Munich, Germany. .,Zentrum für Stereotaxie und personalisierte Hochpräzisionsstrahlentherapie (StereotakTUM), Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany.
| | - Christoph Straube
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Strasse 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Zentrum für Stereotaxie und personalisierte Hochpräzisionsstrahlentherapie (StereotakTUM), Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Kilian Schiller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Strasse 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Zentrum für Stereotaxie und personalisierte Hochpräzisionsstrahlentherapie (StereotakTUM), Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Marciana Nona Duma
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Strasse 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Zentrum für Stereotaxie und personalisierte Hochpräzisionsstrahlentherapie (StereotakTUM), Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Markus Oechsner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Strasse 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Zentrum für Stereotaxie und personalisierte Hochpräzisionsstrahlentherapie (StereotakTUM), Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Kerstin A Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Strasse 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Zentrum für Stereotaxie und personalisierte Hochpräzisionsstrahlentherapie (StereotakTUM), Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany.,Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany
| | - Matthias Eiber
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Technical University Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Markus Schwaiger
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Technical University Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Hubert Kübler
- Department of Urology, Technical University Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany.,Department of Urology, University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Jürgen E Gschwend
- Department of Urology, Technical University Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Strasse 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Zentrum für Stereotaxie und personalisierte Hochpräzisionsstrahlentherapie (StereotakTUM), Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany.,Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Vogel MME, Combs SE, Kessel KA. mHealth and Application Technology Supporting Clinical Trials: Today's Limitations and Future Perspective of smartRCTs. Front Oncol 2017; 7:37. [PMID: 28348978 PMCID: PMC5346562 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2017.00037] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/05/2017] [Accepted: 02/27/2017] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Nowadays, applications (apps) for smartphones and tablets have become indispensable especially for young generations. The estimated number of mobile devices will exceed 2.16 billion in 2016. Over 2.2 million apps are available in the Google Play store®, and about 1.8 million apps are available in the Apple App Store®. Google and Apple distribute nearly 70,000 apps each in the category Health and Fitness, and about 33,000 and 46,000 each in medical apps. It seems like the willingness to use mHealth apps is high and the intention to share data for health research is existing. This leads to one conclusion: the time for app-accompanied clinical trials (smartRCTs) has come. In this perspective article, we would like to point out the stones put in the way while trying to implement apps in clinical research. Further, we try to offer a glimpse of what the future of smartRCT research may hold.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marco M E Vogel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany; Institute for Innovative Radiotherapy, Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany; Institute for Innovative Radiotherapy, Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany
| | - Kerstin A Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany; Institute for Innovative Radiotherapy, Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Kessel KA, Hesse J, Straube C, Zimmer C, Schmidt-Graf F, Schlegel J, Meyer B, Combs SE. Validation of an established prognostic score after re-irradiation of recurrent glioma. Acta Oncol 2017; 56:422-426. [PMID: 28075197 DOI: 10.1080/0284186x.2016.1276621] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Re-irradiation (Re-RT) is offered widely in clinical routine, and has been established as a key element in the treatment of recurrent gliomas. At our center, generally re-resection is performed widely by an experienced neurosurgical team. Thus, Re-RT mostly offered to patients with macroscopic residuals or irresectable lesions, is applied later compared to other centers. Therefore, we sought to validate the Combs Prognostic Score developed in 2012 using our independent patient cohort. PATIENTS AND METHODS We included 199 patients treated from 2002 until April 2016 for recurrent glioma at the Department of Radiation Oncology at the Klinikum Rechts der Isar, Munich. Different concepts of Re-RT were applied. RESULTS Median follow-up after Re-RT was 2.5 months. Median overall survival (OS) after Re-RT was 7.9 months for WHO IV gliomas, 11.3 months for WHO III gliomas, and 13.6 months for low-grade gliomas (WHO I/II). Univariate analyses confirmed the prognostic factors primary histology (p = 0.001), age (p = 0.002), and time between primary radiotherapy and Re-RT (p < 0.001). We also tested Karnofsky Performance Score (KPS), gender, and neurological symptoms before Re-RT as well as planning target volume and found only KPS also significant at p < 0.001. Comparing the prognostic score groups, the outcome was highly statistically significant at p < 0.001. CONCLUSION In our analysis, we validated the Combs Prognostic Score. Validation in this independent large patient cohort confirms the significance of the score for glioma recurrences. Thus, the role of the Combs Prognostic Score might be an essential component of future clinical decision making and patient stratification.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kerstin A. Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany
- Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany
| | - Josefine Hesse
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Christoph Straube
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Claus Zimmer
- Department of Neuroradiology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | | | - Jürgen Schlegel
- Department of Neuropathology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Bernhard Meyer
- Department of Neurosurgery, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Stephanie E. Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany
- Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Kessel KA, Fischer H, Vogel MM, Oechsner M, Bier H, Meyer B, Combs SE. Erratum to: Fractionated vs. single-fraction stereotactic radiotherapy in patients with vestibular schwannoma : Hearing preservation and patients' self-reported outcome based on an established questionnaire. Strahlenther Onkol 2016; 193:171. [PMID: 27981336 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-016-1087-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Kerstin A Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 1675, Munich, Germany.
- Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, Neuherberg, Germany.
| | - H Fischer
- Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, Neuherberg, Germany
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - M M Vogel
- Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, Neuherberg, Germany
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - M Oechsner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - H Bier
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - B Meyer
- Department of Neurosurgery, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - S E Combs
- Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, Neuherberg, Germany
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Kessel KA, Vogel MME, Schmidt-Graf F, Combs SE. Mobile Apps in Oncology: A Survey on Health Care Professionals' Attitude Toward Telemedicine, mHealth, and Oncological Apps. J Med Internet Res 2016; 18:e312. [PMID: 27884810 PMCID: PMC5146327 DOI: 10.2196/jmir.6399] [Citation(s) in RCA: 54] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/25/2016] [Revised: 10/19/2016] [Accepted: 11/08/2016] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Mobile apps are an evolving trend in the medical field. To date, few apps in an oncological context exist. Objective The aim was to analyze the attitude of health care professionals (HCPs) toward telemedicine, mHealth, and mobile apps in the field of oncology. Methods We developed and conducted an online survey with 24 questions evaluating HCPs’ general attitude toward telemedicine and patients using medical mobile apps. Specific questions on the possible functionality for patients and the resulting advantages and disadvantages for both the patients’ and HCPs’ daily clinical routine were evaluated. Results A total of 108 HCPs completed the survey. In all, 88.9% (96/108) considered telemedicine useful and 84.3% (91/108) supported the idea of an oncological app complementing classical treatment. Automatic reminders, timetables, and assessment of side effects and quality of life during therapy were rated as the most important functions. In contrast, uncertainty regarding medical responsibility and data privacy were reasons mostly named by critics. Most (64.8%, 70/108) were in favor of an alert function due to data input needing further clarification, and 94% (66/70) were willing to contact the patient after a critical alert. In all, 93.5% (101/108) supported the idea of using the collected data for scientific research. Moreover, 75.0% (81/108) believed establishing a mobile app could be beneficial for the providing hospital. Conclusions A majority of HCPs are in favor of telemedicine and the use of oncological apps by patients. Assessing side effects can lead to quicker response and thus lower inconvenience for patients. Clinical data, such as life quality and treatment satisfaction, could be used to evaluate and improve the therapy workflow. Eventually, a mobile app would enhance the patients’ relationship to their treating department because they are in permanent contact.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kerstin A Kessel
- Klinikum rechts der Isar, Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany.,Institute for Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Helmholtz Zentrum München (HMGU), Neuherberg, Germany
| | - Marco M E Vogel
- Klinikum rechts der Isar, Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany.,Institute for Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Helmholtz Zentrum München (HMGU), Neuherberg, Germany
| | - Friederike Schmidt-Graf
- Klinikum rechts der Isar, Department of Neurology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Klinikum rechts der Isar, Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany.,Institute for Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Department of Radiation Sciences (DRS), Helmholtz Zentrum München (HMGU), Neuherberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Kessel KA, Lettner S, Kessel C, Bier H, Biedermann T, Friess H, Herrschbach P, Gschwend JE, Meyer B, Peschel C, Schmid R, Schwaiger M, Wolff KD, Combs SE. Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) as Part of the Oncological Treatment: Survey about Patients' Attitude towards CAM in a University-Based Oncology Center in Germany. PLoS One 2016; 11:e0165801. [PMID: 27812163 PMCID: PMC5094772 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0165801] [Citation(s) in RCA: 39] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/20/2016] [Accepted: 10/18/2016] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION To understand if and which patients would be open-minded to Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) use parallel to their oncological treatment. Moreover, we sought to determine which methods are most accepted and which are the primary motivators to use CAM. METHODS We developed and anonymously conducted a questionnaire for patients in the oncology center (TU Munich). Questions focus on different CAM methods, previous experiences, and willingness to apply or use CAM when offered in a university-based setting. RESULTS A total of 171 of 376 patients (37.4% women, 62.0% men, 0.6% unknown) participated. This corresponds to a return rate of 45%. Median age was 64 years (17-87 years). Of all participants, 15.2% used CAM during their oncological therapy; 32.7% have used it in the past. The majority (81.9%) was not using CAM during therapy; 55.5% have not used CAM in the past respectively. The analysis revealed a significant correlation between education and CAM use during therapy (r = 0.18; p = 0.02), and CAM use in the past (r = 0.17; p = 0.04). Of all patients using CAM during therapy, favored methods were food supplements (42.3%), vitamins/minerals (42.3%), massage (34.6%). Motivations are especially the reduction of side effect and stress, the positive effect of certain CAM-treatments on the immune system and tumor therapy. Results showed no difference between women and men. Most patients not having had any experience with CAM complain about the deficiency of information by their treating oncologist (31.4%) as well as missing treatment possibilities (54.3%). CONCLUSION Since many patients believe in study results demonstrating the efficacy of CAM, it stresses our task to develop innovative study protocols to investigate the outcomes of certain CAM on symptom reduction or other endpoints. Thus, prospective trials and innovative evidence-based treatment concepts to include CAM into high-end oncology is what patients demand and what a modern oncology center should offer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kerstin A. Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
- Institute for Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, Neuherberg, Germany
- * E-mail:
| | - Sabrina Lettner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - Carmen Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
- Onkologisches Zentrum im RHCCC am Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - Henning Bier
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - Tilo Biedermann
- Department of Dermatology and Allergy Biederstein, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Biedersteiner Straße 29, Munich, Germany
| | - Helmut Friess
- Department of Surgery, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - Peter Herrschbach
- Roman-Herzog-Krebszentrum Comprehensive Cancer Center (RHCCC), Technical University of Munich (TUM), Trogerstraße 26, Munich, Germany
| | - Jürgen E. Gschwend
- Department of Urology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - Bernhard Meyer
- Department of Neurosurgery, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - Christian Peschel
- 3rd Department of Internal Medicine, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - Roland Schmid
- 2nd Department of Internal Medicine, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - Markus Schwaiger
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - Klaus-Dietrich Wolff
- Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - Stephanie E. Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
- Institute for Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, Neuherberg, Germany
- Onkologisches Zentrum im RHCCC am Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Kessel KA, Fischer H, Vogel MME, Oechsner M, Bier H, Meyer B, Combs SE. Fractionated vs. single-fraction stereotactic radiotherapy in patients with vestibular schwannoma : Hearing preservation and patients' self-reported outcome based on an established questionnaire. Strahlenther Onkol 2016; 193:192-199. [PMID: 27803960 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-016-1070-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/28/2016] [Accepted: 10/06/2016] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Stereotactic radiotherapy (RT) has been established as a valid treatment alternative in patients with vestibular schwannoma (VS). There is ongoing controversy regarding the optimal fractionation. Hearing preservation may be the primary goal for patients with VS, followed by maintenance of quality of life (QoL). METHODS From 2002 to 2015, 184 patients with VS were treated with radiosurgery (RS) or fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (FSRT). A survey on current symptoms and QoL was conducted between February and June 2016. RESULTS Median follow-up after RT was 7.5 years (range 0-14.4 years). Mean overall survival (OS) after RT was 31.1 years, with 94 and 87% survival at 5 and 10 years, respectively [corrected]. Mean progression-free survival (PFS) was 13.3 years, with 5‑ and 10-year PFS of 92%. Hearing could be preserved in RS patients for a median of 36.3 months (range 2.3-13.7 years). Hearing worsened in 17 (30%) cases. Median hearing preservation for FSRT was 48.7 months (range 0.0-13.8 years); 29 (23%) showed hearing deterioration. The difference in hearing preservation was not significant between RS and FSRT (p = 0.3). A total of 123/162 patients participated in the patient survey (return rate 76%). The results correlate well with the information documented in the patient files for tinnitus and facial and trigeminal nerve toxicity. Significant differences appeared regarding hearing impairment, gait uncertainty, and imbalance. CONCLUSION These data confirm that RS and FSRT are comparable in terms of local control for VS. RS should be reserved for smaller lesions, while FSRT can be offered independently of tumor size. Patient self-reported outcome during follow-up is of high value. The established questionnaire could be validated in the independent cohort.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kerstin A Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany. .,Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, Neuherberg, Germany.
| | - Hanna Fischer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, Neuherberg, Germany
| | - Marco M E Vogel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, Neuherberg, Germany
| | - Markus Oechsner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - Henning Bier
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - Bernhard Meyer
- Department of Neurosurgery, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, Neuherberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Asadpour R, Meng Z, Kessel KA, Combs SE. Use of acupuncture to alleviate side effects in radiation oncology: Current evidence and future directions. Adv Radiat Oncol 2016; 1:344-350. [PMID: 28740905 PMCID: PMC5514158 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2016.08.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/02/2016] [Revised: 07/30/2016] [Accepted: 08/03/2016] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Several reports have shown that acupuncture is an effective method of complementary medicine; however, only a few of these reports have focused on oncological patients treated with radiation therapy. Most of these studies discuss a benefit of acupuncture for side-effect reduction; however, not all could demonstrate significant improvements. Thus, innovative trial designs are necessary to confirm that acupuncture can alleviate side effects related to radiation therapy. In the present manuscript, we perform a broad review and discuss pitfalls and limitations of acupuncture in parallel with standard radiation therapy, which lead the way to novel treatment concepts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rebecca Asadpour
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, München, Germany
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung, Munich, Germany
| | - Zhiqiang Meng
- Department of Integrative Oncology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China
| | - Kerstin A. Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, München, Germany
- Department of Radiation Sciences, Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy, Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany
| | - Stephanie E. Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, München, Germany
- Department of Radiation Sciences, Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy, Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany
- Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung, Munich, Germany
- Corresponding author. Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675 München, GermanyDepartment of Radiation OncologyKlinikum rechts der IsarTechnical University of Munich (TUM)Ismaninger Straße 2281675 MünchenGermany
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Kessel KA, Combs SE. Review of Developments in Electronic, Clinical Data Collection, and Documentation Systems over the Last Decade - Are We Ready for Big Data in Routine Health Care? Front Oncol 2016; 6:75. [PMID: 27066456 PMCID: PMC4812063 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2016.00075] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/13/2016] [Accepted: 03/18/2016] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Recently, information availability has become more elaborate and widespread, and treatment decisions are based on a multitude of factors, including imaging, molecular or pathological markers, surgical results, and patient’s preference. In this context, the term “Big Data” evolved also in health care. The “hype” is heavily discussed in literature. In interdisciplinary medical specialties, such as radiation oncology, not only heterogeneous and voluminous amount of data must be evaluated but also spread in different styles across various information systems. Exactly this problem is also referred to in many ongoing discussions about Big Data – the “three V’s”: volume, velocity, and variety. We reviewed 895 articles extracted from the NCBI databases about current developments in electronic clinical data management systems and their further analysis or postprocessing procedures. Few articles show first ideas and ways to immediately make use of collected data, particularly imaging data. Many developments can be noticed in the field of clinical trial or analysis documentation, mobile devices for documentation, and genomics research. Using Big Data to advance medical research is definitely on the rise. Health care is perhaps the most comprehensive, important, and economically viable field of application.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kerstin A Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany; Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany; Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Specht HM, Kessel KA, Oechsner M, Meyer B, Zimmer C, Combs SE. HFSRT of the resection cavity in patients with brain metastases. Strahlenther Onkol 2016; 192:368-76. [PMID: 26964777 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-016-0955-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/04/2015] [Accepted: 02/03/2016] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Aim of this single center, retrospective study was to assess the efficacy and safety of linear accelerator-based hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (HFSRT) to the resection cavity of brain metastases after surgical resection. Local control (LC), locoregional control (LRC = new brain metastases outside of the treatment volume), overall survival (OS) as well as acute and late toxicity were evaluated. PATIENTS AND METHODS 46 patients with large (> 3 cm) or symptomatic brain metastases were treated with HFSRT. Median resection cavity volume was 14.16 cm(3) (range 1.44-38.68 cm(3)) and median planning target volume (PTV) was 26.19 cm(3) (range 3.45-63.97 cm(3)). Patients were treated with 35 Gy in 7 fractions prescribed to the 95-100 % isodose line in a stereotactic treatment setup. LC and LRC were assessed by follow-up magnetic resonance imaging. RESULTS The 1-year LC rate was 88 % and LRC was 48 %; 57% of all patients showed cranial progression after HFSRT (4% local, 44% locoregional, 9% local and locoregional). The median follow-up was 19 months; median OS for the whole cohort was 25 months. Tumor histology and recursive partitioning analysis score were significant predictors for OS. HFSRT was tolerated well without any severe acute side effects > grade 2 according to CTCAE criteria. CONCLUSION HFSRT after surgical resection of brain metastases was tolerated well without any severe acute side effects and led to excellent LC and a favorable OS. Since more than half of the patients showed cranial progression after local irradiation of the resection cavity, close patient follow-up is warranted. A prospective evaluation in clinical trials is currently being performed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hanno M Specht
- Klinik für RadioOnkologie und Strahlentherapie, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - Kerstin A Kessel
- Klinik für RadioOnkologie und Strahlentherapie, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Institut für Innovative Radiotherapie, Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, 85764, Oberschleißheim, Germany
| | - Markus Oechsner
- Klinik für RadioOnkologie und Strahlentherapie, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - Bernhard Meyer
- Neurochirurgische Klinik und Poliklinik, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - Claus Zimmer
- Abteilung Neuroradiologie, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, 81675, Munich, Germany.,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung, Technische Universität München, 81675, Munich, Germany
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Klinik für RadioOnkologie und Strahlentherapie, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany. .,Institut für Innovative Radiotherapie, Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, 85764, Oberschleißheim, Germany. .,Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung, Technische Universität München, 81675, Munich, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Habl G, Uhl M, Katayama S, Kessel KA, Hatiboglu G, Hadaschik B, Edler L, Tichy D, Ellerbrock M, Haberer T, Wolf MB, Schlemmer HP, Debus J, Herfarth K. Acute Toxicity and Quality of Life in Patients With Prostate Cancer Treated With Protons or Carbon Ions in a Prospective Randomized Phase II Study--The IPI Trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2016; 95:435-443. [PMID: 27084659 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.02.025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 42] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/05/2015] [Revised: 02/01/2016] [Accepted: 02/05/2016] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to compare safety and feasibility of proton therapy with that of carbon ion therapy in hypofractionated raster-scanned irradiation of the prostate, in a prospective randomized phase 2 trial. METHODS AND MATERIALS In this trial, 92 patients with localized prostate cancer were enrolled. Patients were randomized to receive either proton therapy (arm A) or carbon ion therapy (arm B) and treated with a total dose of 66 Gy(relative biological effectiveness [RBE]) administered in 20 fractions (single dose of 3.3 Gy[RBE]). Patients were stratified by the use of antihormone therapy. Primary endpoint was the combined assessment of safety and feasibility. Secondary endpoints were specific toxicities, prostate-specific antigen progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and quality of life (QoL). RESULTS Ninety-one patients completed therapy and have had a median follow-up of 22.3 months. Among acute genitourinary toxicities, grade 1 cystitis rates were 34.1% (39.1% in A; 28.9% in B) and 17.6% grade 2 (21.7% in A; 13.3% in B). Seven patients (8%) required urinary catheterization during treatment due to urinary retention, 5 of whom were in arm A. Regarding acute gastrointestinal toxicities, 2 patients treated with protons developed grade 3 rectal fistulas. Grade 1 radiation proctitis occurred in 12.1% (13.0% in A; 11.1% in B) and grade 2 in 5.5% (8.7% in A; 2.2% in B). No statistically significant differences in toxicity profiles between arms were found. Reduced QoL was evident mainly in fatigue, pain, and urinary symptoms during therapy and 6 weeks thereafter. All European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and -PR25 scores improved during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS Hypofractionated irradiation using either carbon ions or protons results in comparable acute toxicities and QoL parameters. We found that hypofractionated particle irradiation is feasible and may be safe. Due to the occurrence of gel in the rectal wall and the consecutive occurrence of 2 rectal fistulas, we stopped using the insertion of spacer gel. Longer follow-up is necessary for evaluation of PFS and OS. (Ion Prostate Irradiation (IPI); NCT01641185; ClinicalTrials.gov.).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gregor Habl
- National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany
| | - Matthias Uhl
- National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Sonja Katayama
- National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Kerstin A Kessel
- National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany
| | - Gencay Hatiboglu
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Boris Hadaschik
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Lutz Edler
- Department of Biostatistics, German Cancer Research Center of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Diana Tichy
- Department of Biostatistics, German Cancer Research Center of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Malte Ellerbrock
- National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Thomas Haberer
- National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Maja B Wolf
- Department of Radiology, German Cancer Research Center of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Heinz-Peter Schlemmer
- Department of Radiology, German Cancer Research Center of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jürgen Debus
- National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Klaus Herfarth
- National Center for Radiation Oncology (NCRO), Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Kessel KA, Combs SE. Data management, documentation and analysis systems in radiation oncology: a multi-institutional survey. Radiat Oncol 2015; 10:230. [PMID: 26572494 PMCID: PMC4647666 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-015-0543-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/14/2015] [Accepted: 11/11/2015] [Indexed: 01/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Introduction Recently, information availability has become more elaborate and widespread, and treatment decisions are based on a multitude of factors. Gathering relevant data, also referred to as Big Data, is therefore critical for reaching the best patient care, and enhancing interdisciplinary and clinical research. Combining patient data from all involved systems is essential to prepare unstructured data for analyses. This demands special coordination in data management. Our study aims to characterize current developments in German-speaking hospital departments and practices. We successfully conducted the survey with the members of the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Radioonkologie (DEGRO). Methods A questionnaire was developed consisting of 17 questions related to data management, documentation and clinical trial analyses, reflecting the clinical topics such as basic patient information, imaging, follow-up information as well as connection of documentation tools with radiooncological treatment planning machines. Results A total of 44 institutions completed the online survey (University hospitals n = 17, hospitals n = 13, practices/institutes n = 14). University hospitals, community hospitals and private practices are equally equipped concerning IT infrastructure for clinical use. However, private practices have a low interest in research work. All respondents stated the biggest obstacles about introducing a documentation system into their unit lie in funding and support of the central IT departments. Only 27 % (12/44) of responsible persons are specialists for documentation and data management. Conclusion Our study gives an understanding of the challenges and solutions we need to be looking at for medical data storage. In the future, inter-departmental cross-links will enable the radiation oncology community to generate large-scale analyses. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13014-015-0543-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kerstin A Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany. .,Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, Neuherberg, Germany.
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany. .,Institute of Innovative Radiotherapy (iRT), Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, Neuherberg, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Habl G, Katayama S, Uhl M, Kessel KA, Edler L, Debus J, Herfarth K, Sterzing F. Helical intensity-modulated radiotherapy of the pelvic lymph nodes with a simultaneous integrated boost to the prostate--first results of the PLATIN 1 trial. BMC Cancer 2015; 15:868. [PMID: 26547188 PMCID: PMC4637144 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-015-1886-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/11/2015] [Accepted: 10/30/2015] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Definitive, percutaneous irradiation of the prostate and the pelvic lymph nodes in high-risk prostate cancer is the alternative to prostatectomy plus lymphadenectomy. To date, the role of whole pelvis radiotherapy (WPRT) has not been clarified especially taking into consideration the benefits of high conformal IMRT (intensity modulated radiotherapy) of complex-shaped target volumes. Methods From 2009 to 2012, 40 patients of high-risk prostate cancer with an increased risk of microscopic lymph node involvement were enrolled into this prospective phase II trial. Patients received at least two months of antihormonal treatment (AT) before radiotherapy continuing for at least 2 years. Helical IMRT (tomotherapy) of the pelvic lymph nodes (51.0 Gy) with a simultaneous integrated, moderate hypofractionated boost (single dose of 2.25 Gy) to the prostate (76.5 Gy) was performed in 34 fractions. PSA levels, prostate-related symptoms and quality of life were assessed at regular intervals for 24 months. Results Of the 40 patients enrolled, 38 finished the treatment as planned. Overall acute toxicity rates were low and no acute grade 3 or 4 gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity occurred. 21.6 % of patients experienced acute grade 2 but no late grade ≥2 GI toxicity. Regarding GU side effects, results showed 48.6 % acute grade 2 and 6.4 % late grade 2 toxicity. After a median observation time of 23.4 months the PLATIN 1 trial can be considered as sufficiently safe meeting the prospectively defined aims of the trial. With 34/37 patients free of a PSA recurrence it shows promising efficacy. Conclusion Tomotherapy of the pelvic lymph nodes with a simultaneous integrated boost to the prostate can be performed safely and without excessive toxicity. The combined irradiation of both prostate and pelvic lymph nodes seems to be as well tolerated as the irradiation of the prostate alone. Trial registration Trial Numbers: ARO 2009–05, ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01903408.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gregor Habl
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany. .,Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany.
| | - Sonja Katayama
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Matthias Uhl
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Kerstin A Kessel
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Lutz Edler
- Department of Biostatistics, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Juergen Debus
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Klaus Herfarth
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Florian Sterzing
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Abstract
UNLABELLED Curative treatment of pediatric cancer not only focuses on long-term survival, but also on reducing treatment-related side effects. Advantages of particle therapy are mainly due to their physical ability of significantly reducing integral dose. METHODS Between January 2009 and December 2012, we treated 83 pediatric patients (aged 21 and younger) at the Heidelberg Ion Therapy Center at University Hospital of Heidelberg (HIT). In total 56 patients (67%) received proton irradiation, while 25 (30%) patients were treated with carbon ions (C12). Two patients received both treatments (3%). Treatment toxicity was analyzed retrospectively and documented according to the CTCAE/RTOG classification. In a second step, treatment toxicity from ion therapy was analyzed in comparison to treatment toxicity during photon irradiation of a comparable historical group of 19 pediatric patients. RESULTS In all patients, particle therapy was tolerated well (median follow-up time 3.7 months), children (20 patients) with at least two follow-up visits showed a median follow-up time of 10.2 months. During the first two months patients mainly suffered from radiogenic skin reaction (63%), mucositis (30%), headache and dizziness (35%) as well as nausea and vomiting (13%). Severe toxicity reaction (grade II-IV) was only seen in patients who had intensive simultaneous chemotherapy or who had undergone several operations in the irradiated area before radiotherapy (18%). Treatment toxicity during ion therapy was comparable to treatment toxicity from photon irradiation of a historical group. CONCLUSIONS In comparison to conventional therapy, patients with particle therapy do not suffer from increased acute treatment-related toxicity during the first months. More experience with particle therapy will be needed during the next years to help to thoroughly evaluate the high potential of ion therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Juliane G. Rieber
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology, Germany
| | - Kerstin A. Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology, Germany
| | - Olaf Witt
- CCU Pediatric Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Wolfgang Behnisch
- Department of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Andreas E. Kulozik
- Department of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jürgen Debus
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology, Germany
| | - Stephanie E. Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum Rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute of Radiation Oncology, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Kessel KA, Jäger A, Habermehl D, Rüppell J, Bendl R, Debus J, Combs SE. Changes in Gross Tumor Volume and Organ Motion Analysis During Neoadjuvant Radiochemotherapy in Patients With Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Using an In-House Analysis System. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2015; 15:348-54. [PMID: 25824268 DOI: 10.1177/1533034615577515] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/27/2014] [Accepted: 02/14/2015] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE During radiation treatment, movement of the target and organs at risks as well as tumor response can significantly influence dose distribution. This is highly relevant in patients with pancreatic cancer, where organs at risk lie in close proximity to the target. MATERIAL AND METHODS Data sets of 10 patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer were evaluated. Gross tumor volume deformation was analyzed. Dose changes to organs at risk were determined with focus on kidneys both without adaptive radiotherapy compensation and with replanning based on weekly acquired computed tomography scans. RESULTS During irradiation, gross tumor volume changes between 0% and 26% and moves within a radius of 5 to 16 mm. Required maximal dose to organs at risk for kidneys can be met with the current practice of matching computed tomography scans during treatment and adjusting patient position accordingly. Comparison of the mean doses and V15, V20 volumes demonstrated that weekly replanning could bring a significant dose sparing of the left kidney. CONCLUSION Manual matching with focus on bony structures can lead to overall acceptable positioning of patients during treatment. Thus, tolerance doses of organs at risk, such as the kidneys, can be met. With adequate margins, normal tissue constraints to organs at risk can be kept as well. Adaptive radiotherapy approaches (in this case with weekly rescanning) reduced dose to organs at risk, which may be especially important for hypofractionated approaches.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kerstin A Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Andreas Jäger
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Department of Medical Physics in Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Daniel Habermehl
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Jan Rüppell
- German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Department of Medical Physics in Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Rolf Bendl
- German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Department of Medical Physics in Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany Department of Medical Informatics, Heilbronn University, Heilbronn, Germany
| | - Jürgen Debus
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Department of Medical Physics in Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technische Universität München (TUM), Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Combs SE, Habermehl D, Kessel KA, Bergmann F, Werner J, Naumann P, Jäger D, Büchler MW, Debus J. Prognostic impact of CA 19-9 on outcome after neoadjuvant chemoradiation in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2014; 21:2801-7. [PMID: 24916745 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-014-3607-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/18/2013] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND To asses the impact of CA 19-9 and weight loss/gain on outcome after neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). METHODS We analyzed 289 patients with LAPC treated with CRT for LAPC. All patients received concomitant chemotherapy parallel to radiotherapy and adjuvant treatments. CA 19-9 and body weight were collected as prognostic and predictive markers. All patients were included into a regular follow-up with reassessment of resectability. RESULTS Median overall survival in all patients was 14 months. Actuarial overall survival was 37 % at 12 months, 12 % at 24 months, and 4 % at 36 months. Secondary resectability was achieved in 35 % of the patients. R0/R1 resection was significantly associated with increase in overall survival (p = 0.04). Intraoperative radiotherapy was applied in 50 patients, but it did not influence overall survival (p = 0.05). Pretreatment CA 19-9 significantly influenced overall survival using different cutoff values. With increase in CA 19-9 levels, the possibility of secondary surgical resection decreased from 46 % in patients with CA 19-9 levels below 90 U/ml to 31 % in the group with CA 19-9 levels higher than 269 U/ml. DISCUSSION This large group of patients with LAPC treated with neoadjuvant CRT confirms that CA 19-9 and body weight are strong predictive and prognostic factors of outcome. In the future, individual patient factors should be taken into account to tailor treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany,
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
45
|
Kessel KA, Bohn C, Engelmann U, Oetzel D, Bougatf N, Bendl R, Debus J, Combs SE. Five-year experience with setup and implementation of an integrated database system for clinical documentation and research. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 2014; 114:206-217. [PMID: 24629596 DOI: 10.1016/j.cmpb.2014.02.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/08/2013] [Revised: 01/30/2014] [Accepted: 02/06/2014] [Indexed: 06/03/2023]
Abstract
In radiation oncology, where treatment concepts are elaborated in interdisciplinary collaborations, handling distributed, large heterogeneous amounts of data efficiently is very important, yet challenging, for an optimal treatment of the patient as well as for research itself. This becomes a strong focus, as we step into the era of modern personalized medicine, relying on various quantitative data information, thus involving the active contribution of multiple medical specialties. Hence, combining patient data from all involved information systems is inevitable for analyses. Therefore, we introduced a documentation and data management system integrated in the clinical environment for electronic data capture. We discuss our concept and five-year experience of a precise electronic documentation system, with special focus on the challenges we encountered. We specify how such a system can be designed and implemented to plan, tailor and conduct (multicenter) clinical trials, ultimately reaching the best clinical performance, and enhancing interdisciplinary and clinical research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kerstin A Kessel
- Heidelberg University Hospital, Department of Radiation Oncology, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Christian Bohn
- CHILI GmbH, Friedrich-Ebert-Str. 2, 69221 Dossenheim, Germany
| | - Uwe Engelmann
- CHILI GmbH, Friedrich-Ebert-Str. 2, 69221 Dossenheim, Germany
| | - Dieter Oetzel
- Heidelberg University Hospital, Department of Radiation Oncology, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Nina Bougatf
- Heidelberg University Hospital, Department of Radiation Oncology, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Rolf Bendl
- Heilbronn University, Department of Medical Informatics, Max-Planck-Str. 39, 74081 Heilbronn, Germany
| | - Jürgen Debus
- Heidelberg University Hospital, Department of Radiation Oncology, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Heidelberg University Hospital, Department of Radiation Oncology, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany; Technical University of Munich (TUM), Department of Radiation Oncology, Ismaninger Straße 122, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Kessel KA, Habermehl D, Jäger A, Floca RO, Zhang L, Bendl R, Debus J, Combs SE. Development and validation of automatic tools for interactive recurrence analysis in radiation therapy: optimization of treatment algorithms for locally advanced pancreatic cancer. Radiat Oncol 2013; 8:138. [PMID: 24499557 PMCID: PMC3682901 DOI: 10.1186/1748-717x-8-138] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/25/2013] [Accepted: 06/04/2013] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND In radiation oncology recurrence analysis is an important part in the evaluation process and clinical quality assurance of treatment concepts. With the example of 9 patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer we developed and validated interactive analysis tools to support the evaluation workflow. METHODS After an automatic registration of the radiation planning CTs with the follow-up images, the recurrence volumes are segmented manually. Based on these volumes the DVH (dose volume histogram) statistic is calculated, followed by the determination of the dose applied to the region of recurrence and the distance between the boost and recurrence volume. We calculated the percentage of the recurrence volume within the 80%-isodose volume and compared it to the location of the recurrence within the boost volume, boost + 1 cm, boost + 1.5 cm and boost + 2 cm volumes. RESULTS Recurrence analysis of 9 patients demonstrated that all recurrences except one occurred within the defined GTV/boost volume; one recurrence developed beyond the field border/outfield. With the defined distance volumes in relation to the recurrences, we could show that 7 recurrent lesions were within the 2 cm radius of the primary tumor. Two large recurrences extended beyond the 2 cm, however, this might be due to very rapid growth and/or late detection of the tumor progression. CONCLUSION The main goal of using automatic analysis tools is to reduce time and effort conducting clinical analyses. We showed a first approach and use of a semi-automated workflow for recurrence analysis, which will be continuously optimized. In conclusion, despite the limitations of the automatic calculations we contributed to in-house optimization of subsequent study concepts based on an improved and validated target volume definition.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kerstin A Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, Heidelberg, 69120, Germany.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
47
|
Combs SE, Salehi-Allameh B, Habermehl D, Kessel KA, Welzel T, Debus J. Clinical response and tumor control based on long-term follow-up and patient-reported outcomes in patients with chemodectomas of the skull base and head and neck region treated with highly conformal radiation therapy. Head Neck 2013; 36:22-7. [DOI: 10.1002/hed.23274] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 01/21/2013] [Indexed: 11/08/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Stephanie E. Combs
- University Hospital of Heidelberg; Department of Radiation Oncology; Im Neuenheimer Feld 400 69120 Heidelberg Germany
| | - Bahar Salehi-Allameh
- University Hospital of Heidelberg; Department of Radiation Oncology; Im Neuenheimer Feld 400 69120 Heidelberg Germany
| | - Daniel Habermehl
- University Hospital of Heidelberg; Department of Radiation Oncology; Im Neuenheimer Feld 400 69120 Heidelberg Germany
| | - Kerstin A. Kessel
- University Hospital of Heidelberg; Department of Radiation Oncology; Im Neuenheimer Feld 400 69120 Heidelberg Germany
| | - Thomas Welzel
- University Hospital of Heidelberg; Department of Radiation Oncology; Im Neuenheimer Feld 400 69120 Heidelberg Germany
| | - Jürgen Debus
- University Hospital of Heidelberg; Department of Radiation Oncology; Im Neuenheimer Feld 400 69120 Heidelberg Germany
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Kessel KA, Habermehl D, Bohn C, Jäger A, Floca RO, Zhang L, Bougatf N, Bendl R, Debus J, Combs SE. [Database supported electronic retrospective analyses in radiation oncology: establishing a workflow using the example of pancreatic cancer]. Strahlenther Onkol 2012; 188:1119-24. [PMID: 23108385 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-012-0214-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/18/2012] [Accepted: 07/16/2012] [Indexed: 01/27/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Especially in the field of radiation oncology, handling a large variety of voluminous datasets from various information systems in different documentation styles efficiently is crucial for patient care and research. To date, conducting retrospective clinical analyses is rather difficult and time consuming. With the example of patients with pancreatic cancer treated with radio-chemotherapy, we performed a therapy evaluation by using an analysis system connected with a documentation system. MATERIALS AND METHODS A total number of 783 patients have been documented into a professional, database-based documentation system. Information about radiation therapy, diagnostic images and dose distributions have been imported into the web-based system. RESULTS For 36 patients with disease progression after neoadjuvant chemoradiation, we designed and established an analysis workflow. After an automatic registration of the radiation plans with the follow-up images, the recurrence volumes are segmented manually. Based on these volumes the DVH (dose volume histogram) statistic is calculated, followed by the determination of the dose applied to the region of recurrence. All results are saved in the database and included in statistical calculations. CONCLUSION The main goal of using an automatic analysis tool is to reduce time and effort conducting clinical analyses, especially with large patient groups. We showed a first approach and use of some existing tools, however manual interaction is still necessary. Further steps need to be taken to enhance automation. Already, it has become apparent that the benefits of digital data management and analysis lie in the central storage of data and reusability of the results. Therefore, we intend to adapt the analysis system to other types of tumors in radiation oncology.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K A Kessel
- Abteilung für Radioonkolgie und Strahlentherapie, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Deutschland.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
49
|
Combs SE, Kessel KA, Herfarth K, Jensen A, Oertel S, Blattmann C, Ecker S, Hoess A, Martin E, Witt O, Jäkel O, Kulozik AE, Debus J. Treatment of pediatric patients and young adults with particle therapy at the Heidelberg Ion Therapy Center (HIT): establishment of workflow and initial clinical data. Radiat Oncol 2012; 7:170. [PMID: 23072718 PMCID: PMC3504515 DOI: 10.1186/1748-717x-7-170] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/13/2012] [Accepted: 10/13/2012] [Indexed: 12/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Background To report on establishment of workflow and clinical results of particle therapy at the Heidelberg Ion Therapy Center. Materials and methods We treated 36 pediatric patients (aged 21 or younger) with particle therapy at HIT. Median age was 12 years (range 2-21 years), five patients (14%) were younger than 5 years of age. Indications included pilocytic astrocytoma, parameningeal and orbital rhabdomyosarcoma, skull base and cervical chordoma, osteosarcoma and adenoid-cystic carcinoma (ACC), as well as one patient with an angiofibroma of the nasopharynx. For the treatment of small children, an anesthesia unit at HIT was established in cooperation with the Department of Anesthesiology. Results Treatment concepts depended on tumor type, staging, age of the patient, as well as availability of specific study protocols. In all patients, particle radiotherapy was well tolerated and no interruptions due to toxicity had to be undertaken. During follow-up, only mild toxicites were observed. Only one patient died of tumor progression: Carbon ion radiotherapy was performed as an individual treatment approach in a child with a skull base recurrence of the previously irradiated rhabdomyosarcoma. Besides this patient, tumor recurrence was observed in two additional patients. Conclusion Clinical protocols have been generated to evaluate the real potential of particle therapy, also with respect to carbon ions in distinct pediatric patient populations. The strong cooperation between the pediatric department and the department of radiation oncology enable an interdisciplinary treatment and stream-lined workflow and acceptance of the treatment for the patients and their parents.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, Heidelberg, 69120, Germany.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
50
|
Kessel KA, Bougatf N, Bohn C, Habermehl D, Oetzel D, Bendl R, Engelmann U, Orecchia R, Fossati P, Pötter R, Dosanjh M, Debus J, Combs SE. Connection of European particle therapy centers and generation of a common particle database system within the European ULICE-framework. Radiat Oncol 2012; 7:115. [PMID: 22828013 PMCID: PMC3464964 DOI: 10.1186/1748-717x-7-115] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/06/2012] [Accepted: 07/24/2012] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Background To establish a common database on particle therapy for the evaluation of clinical studies integrating a large variety of voluminous datasets, different documentation styles, and various information systems, especially in the field of radiation oncology. Methods We developed a web-based documentation system for transnational and multicenter clinical studies in particle therapy. 560 patients have been treated from November 2009 to September 2011. Protons, carbon ions or a combination of both, as well as a combination with photons were applied. To date, 12 studies have been initiated and more are in preparation. Results It is possible to immediately access all patient information and exchange, store, process, and visualize text data, any DICOM images and multimedia data. Accessing the system and submitting clinical data is possible for internal and external users. Integrated into the hospital environment, data is imported both manually and automatically. Security and privacy protection as well as data validation and verification are ensured. Studies can be designed to fit individual needs. Conclusions The described database provides a basis for documentation of large patient groups with specific and specialized questions to be answered. Having recently begun electronic documentation, it has become apparent that the benefits lie in the user-friendly and timely workflow for documentation. The ultimate goal is a simplification of research work, better study analyses quality and eventually, the improvement of treatment concepts by evaluating the effectiveness of particle therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kerstin A Kessel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|