Outcomes after intensity-modulated compared with 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy with chemotherapy for squamous cell carcinoma of the anal canal

Purpose

We report our institution's treatment techniques, disease outcomes, and complication rates after radiotherapy for the management of anal canal carcinoma with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (imrt) and concurrent chemotherapy relative to prior cases managed with 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-crt).

Methods

In a retrospective review of the medical records of 21 patients diagnosed with biopsy-proven stage i (23%), stage ii (27%), or stage iii (50%) squamous-cell carcinoma of the anal canal treated with curative chemotherapy and imrt between July 2009 and December 2014, patient outcomes were determined. Results for patients treated with 3D-crt by the same group were previously reported. The median initial radiation dose to the pelvic and inguinal nodes at risk was 45 Gy (range: 36-50.4 Gy), and the median total dose, including local anal canal primary tumour boost, was 59.4 Gy (range: 41.4-61.2 Gy). Patients received those doses over a median of 32 fractions (range: 23-34 fractions). Chemotherapy consisted of 2 cycles of concurrent fluorouracil-cisplatin (45%) or fluorouracil-mitomycin C (55%).

Results

Median follow-up was 3.1 years (range: 0.38-6.4 years). The mean includes a patient who died of septic shock at 38 days. The 3-year rates of overall survival, metastasis-free survival, locoregional control, and colostomy-free survival were 95%, 100%, 100%, and 100% respectively. No patients underwent abdominoperitoneal resection after chemoradiotherapy or required diverting colostomy during or after treatment. Those outcomes compare favourably with the previously published series that used 3D-crt with or without brachytherapy in treating anal canal cancers. Of the 21 patients in the present series, 10 (48%) experienced acute grade 3, 4, or 5 toxicities related to treatment.

Conclusions

The recommended use of imrt with concurrent chemotherapy as an improvement over 3D-crt for management of anal canal carcinoma achieves a high probability of local control and colostomy-free survival without excessive risk for acute or late treatment-related toxicities.

Comparison of intensity-modulated radiotherapy vs 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy for patients with non-metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma receiving definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy: A population-based propensity-score-matched analysis

Whether the survival outcome of patients with non-metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (NM-ESCC) receiving definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) is better with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) or with 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) has been debated in the literature. We designed this population-based propensity-score (PS)-matched analysis to address this question. We identified eligible patients diagnosed between 2008 and 2015 from the Taiwan Cancer Registry and constructed a PS-matched cohort (1:1 for IMRT vs 3DCRT) to balance observable potential confounders. We compared the hazard ratio (HR) of death between IMRT and 3DCRT during the entire follow-up period. We also evaluated freedom from local regional recurrence (FFLRR) and esophageal cancer-specific survival (ECSS). Sensitivity analyses (SA) were performed to examine the robustness of our findings. Our study population constituted 558 patients who were well balanced with regard to the measured covariables. The HR of death with IMRT compared to 3DCRT was 0.43 (95% confidence interval 0.35-0.52, P < .001). The results remained significant for FFLRR and ECSS. In SA, our results remained significant when additional covariables were taken into consideration. The survival outcome of patients with NM-ESCC receiving CCRT might be better with IMRT vs 3DCRT. These study results should be interpreted with caution given some possible covariates lacking in the registry. Further studies are needed to clarify this issue.

Comparison of survival rates between 3D conformal radiotherapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy in patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer

Purpose

Randomized trials showing a clear survival benefit of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) over 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) in the treatment of lung cancer are lacking. This study compared the survival rates of patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer who were treated with either 3D-CRT or IMRT and analyzed the prognostic factors for survival.

Methods

From January 2008 to July 2015, 19 patients were treated with IMRT and 30 were treated with 3D-CRT in our institution. The choice between 3D-CRT and IMRT was determined by the physician based on tumor extent and general condition of the patients. The primary endpoint of this study was overall survival. The secondary endpoints were loco-regional recurrence-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival, and the incidence of radiation-induced lung and esophageal toxicities.

Results

The 1- and 2-year overall survival rates were 94.7% and 77.1% in the IMRT group and 76.7% and 52.5% in the 3D-CRT group, respectively. The overall survival rates of the IMRT group were higher than those of the 3D-CRT group; however, these differences were not statistically significant (P=0.072). Gross tumor volume was significantly associated with the overall survival rate. The 1- and 2-year loco-regional recurrence-free survival rates were 63.2% and 51% in the IMRT group and 67.5% and 48.1% in the 3D-CRT group (P=0.897), respectively. The 1- and 2-year distant metastasis-free survival rates were 78.9% and 68.4% in the IMRT group and 62.6% and 40.9% in the 3D-CRT group (P=0.120), respectively. Chemotherapy and treatment interruption were significantly associated with distant metastasis-free survival.

Conclusion

IMRT showed comparable or better overall survival compared with 3D-CRT in patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer. To confirm the results of this study, further randomized prospective trials comparing IMRT with 3D-CRT are warranted.

Radiation modality use and cardiopulmonary mortality risk in elderly patients with esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

It is currently unclear whether the superior normal organ-sparing effect of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) compared with 3-dimensional radiotherapy (3D) has a clinical impact on survival and cardiopulmonary mortality in patients with esophageal cancer (EC).

METHODS

The authors identified 2553 patients aged > 65 years from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare and Texas Cancer Registry-Medicare databases who had nonmetastatic EC diagnosed between 2002 and 2009 and were treated with either 3D (2240 patients) or IMRT (313 patients) within 6 months of diagnosis. The outcomes of the 2 cohorts were compared using inverse probability of treatment weighting adjustment.

RESULTS

Except for marital status, year of diagnosis, and SEER region, both radiation cohorts were well balanced with regard to various patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics, including the use of IMRT versus 3D in urban/metropolitan or rural areas. IMRT use increased from 2.6% in 2002 to 30% in 2009, whereas the use of 3D decreased from 97.4% in 2002 to 70% in 2009. On propensity score inverse probability of treatment weighting-adjusted multivariate analysis, IMRT was not found to be associated with EC-specific mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 0.93; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.80-1.10) or pulmonary mortality (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.37-3.36), but was significantly associated with lower all-cause mortality (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.72-0.95), cardiac mortality (HR, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.06-0.54), and other-cause mortality (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.35-0.84). Similar associations were noted after adjusting for the type of chemotherapy, physician experience, and sensitivity analysis removing hybrid radiation claims.

CONCLUSIONS

In this population-based analysis, the use of IMRT was found to be significantly associated with lower all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, and other-cause mortality in patients with EC.

Adjuvant and salvage radiotherapy after prostatectomy: AUA/ASTRO Guideline

PURPOSE

The purpose of this guideline is to provide a clinical framework for the use of radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy as adjuvant or salvage therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic literature review using the PubMed®, Embase, and Cochrane databases was conducted to identify peer-reviewed publications relevant to the use of radiotherapy after prostatectomy. The review yielded 294 articles; these publications were used to create the evidence-based guideline statements. Additional guidance is provided as Clinical Principles when insufficient evidence existed.

RESULTS

Guideline statements are provided for patient counseling, the use of radiotherapy in the adjuvant and salvage contexts, defining biochemical recurrence, and conducting a re-staging evaluation.

CONCLUSIONS

Physicians should offer adjuvant radiotherapy to patients with adverse pathologic findings at prostatectomy (i.e., seminal vesicle invasion, positive surgical margins, extraprostatic extension) and should offer salvage radiotherapy to patients with prostatic specific antigen or local recurrence after prostatectomy in whom there is no evidence of distant metastatic disease. The offer of radiotherapy should be made in the context of a thoughtful discussion of possible short- and long-term side effects of radiotherapy as well as the potential benefits of preventing recurrence. The decision to administer radiotherapy should be made by the patient and the multi-disciplinary treatment team with full consideration of the patient's history, values, preferences, quality of life, and functional status. Please visit the ASTRO and AUA websites (http://www.redjournal.org/webfiles/images/journals/rob/RAP%20Guideline.pdf and http://www.auanet.org/education/guidelines/radiation-after-prostatectomy.cfm) to view this guideline in its entirety, including the full literature review.

Patient-reported outcomes after 3-dimensional conformal, intensity-modulated, or proton beam radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Recent studies have suggested differing toxicity patterns for patients with prostate cancer who receive treatment with 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT), intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), or proton beam therapy (PBT).

METHODS

The authors reviewed patient-reported outcomes data collected prospectively using validated instruments that assessed bowel and urinary quality of life (QOL) for patients with localized prostate cancer who received 3DCRT (n = 123), IMRT (n = 153) or PBT (n = 95). Clinically meaningful differences in mean QOL scores were defined as those exceeding half the standard deviation of the baseline mean value. Changes from baseline were compared within groups at the first post-treatment follow-up (2-3 months from the start of treatment) and at 12 months and 24 months.

RESULTS

At the first post-treatment follow-up, patients who received 3DCRT and IMRT, but not those who received PBT, reported a clinically meaningful decrement in bowel QOL. At 12 months and 24 months, all 3 cohorts reported clinically meaningful decrements in bowel QOL. Patients who received IMRT reported clinically meaningful decrements in the domains of urinary irritation/obstruction and incontinence at the first post-treatment follow-up. At 12 months, patients who received PBT, but not those who received IMRT or 3DCRT, reported a clinically meaningful decrement in the urinary irritation/obstruction domain. At 24 months, none of the 3 cohorts reported clinically meaningful changes in urinary QOL.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who received 3DCRT, IMRT, or PBT reported distinct patterns of treatment-related QOL. Although the timing of toxicity varied between the cohorts, patients reported similar modest QOL decrements in the bowel domain and minimal QOL decrements in the urinary domains at 24 months. Prospective randomized trials are needed to further examine these differences.