Carlos Eduardo Cintra Vita Abreu

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy for head and neck cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) provides the possibility of dose-escalation with better normal tissue sparing. This study was performed to assess whether IMRT can improve clinical outcomes when compared with two-dimensional (2D-RT) or three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) in patients with head and neck cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS Only prospective phase III randomized trials comparing IMRT with 2D-RT or 3D-CRT were eligible. Combined surgery and/or chemotherapy were allowed. Two authors independently selected and assessed the studies regarding eligibility criteria and risk of bias. RESULTS Five studies were selected. A total of 871 patients were randomly assigned for 2D-RT or 3D-CRT (437), versus IMRT (434). Most patients presented with nasopharyngeal cancers (82%), and stages III/IV (62.1%). Three studies were classified as having unclear risk and two as high risk of bias. A significant overall benefit in favor of IMRT was found (hazard ratio - HR=0.76; 95% CI: 0.66, 0.87; p<0.0001) regarding xerostomia scores grade 2-4, with similar loco-regional control and overall survival. CONCLUSIONS IMRT reduces the incidence of grade 2-4 xerostomia in patients with head and neck cancers without compromising loco-regional control and overall survival.

Outcomes of high-dose intensity-modulated radiotherapy alone with 1 cm planning target volume posterior margin for localized prostate cancer.

BackgroundClinically localized prostate cancer may be treated by different approaches of radiation therapy. The aim of this study was to report the results of disease control and toxicity in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer treated with high dose IMRT alone with 1 cm PTV posterior margin.MethodsFrom September 2001 to April 2008, 140 patients with localized prostate cancer were treated with definitive IMRT (dose ≥ 74 Gy) without hormone therapy. Outcomes were measured from the conclusion of radiotherapy. Biochemical failure was defined as PSA nadir + 2.0 ng/dL. Toxicities were assessed using the NCI-CTCAE-version 3.0. Median follow-up was 58 months.ResultsBiochemical failure occurred in 13.6% of patients. Actuarial 5-year biochemical control rates were 91.7%, 82.5% and 85.9% for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk patients, respectively. Stage T2 patients presented a risk of biochemical failure almost three times higher than stage T1 (RR = 2.91; 95% CI: 1.04; 8.17). Distant metastases occurred in 3 (2%) patients. Five-year metastasis-free and overall survivals were 96% and 97.5%, respectively. Late grade 3 genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity rates were, respectively, 1.6% and 3%.ConclusionHigh-dose IMRT alone with 1 cm posterior PTV margin was effective and safe for patients with localized prostate cancer.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy in lung cancer: an update

Abstract For early-stage lung cancer, the treatment of choice is surgery. In patients who are not surgical candidates or are unwilling to undergo surgery, radiotherapy is the principal treatment option. Here, we review stereotactic body radiotherapy, a technique that has produced quite promising results in such patients and should be the treatment of choice, if available. We also present the major indications, technical aspects, results, and special situations related to the technique.

Self-reported Conflicts of Interest and Trial Sponsorship of Clinical Trials in Prostate Cancer Involving Radiotherapy.

Objectives: To examine the association between trial sponsorship and conflicts of interest (COI) with clinical trial conclusions for prostate cancer trials related to radiotherapy. Materials and Methods: The MEDLINE database was searched for all prostate cancer clinical trials published between 2004 and 2013 and identified 1396 studies. Two investigators independently identified trials published in the English language of ≥30 patients, and extracted relevant data. Clinical trials were classified according to trial characteristics, sponsorship source and type, COI, and study conclusion, and analyzed by univariable and multivariable logistic regression. Results: Of 240 eligible trials, 160 (67.5%) evaluated drugs without radiotherapy, 60 (25%) involved radiotherapy, and 18 (7.5%) involved procedures without radiotherapy. Of the 60 radiotherapy trials eligible for analysis, positive sponsorship and potential COI were present in 58.3% and 20% of trials, respectively. Study conclusions were positive, negative, or neutral in 78.3%, 5%, and 16.7% of trials, respectively. No association was found between positive conclusions and either industry support of potential COI. Positive conclusions were reported in 86.7% and 83.3% of trials with sponsorship and COI, respectively, as compared with 75.6% and 77.1% of those without sponsorship (P=0.37) and COI (P=0.64). Sponsorship was significantly associated with radiotherapy trials combined with drugs (odds ratio 5.5, P=0.01) and higher-risk disease (odds ratio 4.71, P=0.01). Conclusions: The presence of sponsorship was associated with radiotherapy trials involving drugs or studying higher-risk prostate cancer. However, there were no identified associations between study conclusion and sponsorship type or COI.

Long-term outcomes of dose-escalated intensity modulated radiation therapy alone without androgen deprivation therapy for patients with intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer

Objective The addition of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) to conventional radiation therapy improves overall survival (OS) in intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer. The benefit of ADT to added to dose-escalated radiotherapy is less clear. The aim of this study was to report disease control outcomes and to identify prognostic variables associated with favorable outcomes in patients with intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer treated with dose-escalated radiation therapy without ADT. Methods and materials From September 2001 to March 2010, 127 patients with intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer were treated with dose-escalated radiation otherapy without ADT. Biochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS), distant metastases-free survival (DMFS), prostate cancer–specific mortality, and OS were assessed. Univariate and multivariate analyses using Cox regression modeling were performed. Results The median follow-up was 6.5 years, and the 5-year estimated bRFS, DMFS, prostate cancer–specific mortality, and OS for all patients was 89%, 96.1%, 98.4%, and 96.9% respectively. On multivariate analysis, factors that predict bRFS include risk group and PSA nadir, and factors that predict DMFS include perineural invasion, risk group, and PSA nadir. Conclusions Patients with favorable intermediate-risk cancer could likely be treated with dose-escalated radiation therapy without ADT. Patients with high-risk and unfavorable intermediate-risk cancer, perineural invasion, and PSA nadir ≥1ng/dL had worse outcomes and likely need distinct therapeutic approaches.

Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Biopsy-Proven Primary Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Experience of Patients With Inoperable Cancer at a Single Brazilian Institution

Purpose Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has emerged as a treatment option for patients with non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We report the clinical outcomes and toxicity for patients with inoperable primary NSCLC treated with SBRT. Methods Between 2007 and 2015, 102 consecutive lung lesions were treated with SBRT at our center, of which 59 primary NSCLC lesions (from 54 patients with inoperable disease) were retrospectively reviewed (43 lesions were excluded because of metastases or because there was no biopsy specimen). We report infield local control (LC) per SBRT target, regional or distant failure-free survival, and overall survival (OS) per patient, using Kaplan-Meier estimates. Serious toxicity was retrospectively scored using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4. Results Most of the 54 patients were men (n = 41; 76%), median age was 75 years; stage IA (n = 36; 66%) and adenocarcinoma (n = 43; 80%) were the most common stage and histologic diagnosis, respectively. Five patients had two lung lesions. A median of three fractions (range, 3 to 5 fractions) and a total median dose of 54 Gy (range, 45 to 60 Gy) per lesion were prescribed. The median follow-up was 17.8 months (range, 4 to 56.4 months). The 2-year rates of LC, regional or distant failure-free survival, and OS were 89.1% (95% CI, 72.2% to 96%), 79% (95% CI, 59.8% to 89.8%), and 80% (95% CI, 64% to 89.8%), respectively. Grade 3 to 4 toxicities were observed in two patients (3%): grade 3 pneumonitis (n = 1) and grade 4 skin toxicity (n = 1). Conclusion SBRT results in high rates of 2-year LC, regional or distant failure-free survival, and OS with low rates of severe toxicity in patients with inoperable primary NSCLC disease.