Peter Wust

Hyperthermia in combined treatment of cancer

Hyperthermia, the procedure of raising the temperature of tumour-loaded tissue to 40-43 degrees C, is applied as an adjunctive therapy with various established cancer treatments such as radiotherapy and chemotherapy. The potential to control power distributions in vivo has been significantly improved lately by the development of planning systems and other modelling tools. This increased understanding has led to the design of multiantenna applicators (including their transforming networks) and implementation of systems for monitoring of E-fields (eg, electro-optical sensors) and temperature (particularly, on-line magnetic resonance tomography). Several phase III trials comparing radiotherapy alone or with hyperthermia have shown a beneficial effect of hyperthermia (with existing standard equipment) in terms of local control (eg, recurrent breast cancer and malignant melanoma) and survival (eg, head and neck lymph-node metastases, glioblastoma, cervical carcinoma). Therefore, further development of existing technology and elucidation of molecular mechanisms are justified. In recent molecular and biological investigations there have been novel applications such as gene therapy or immunotherapy (vaccination) with temperature acting as an enhancer, to trigger or to switch mechanisms on and off. However, for every particular temperature-dependent interaction exploited for clinical purposes, sophisticated control of temperature, spatially as well as temporally, in deep body regions will further improve the potential.

Presentation of a new magnetic field therapy system for the treatment of human solid tumors with magnetic fluid hyperthermia

Magnetic fluid hyperthermia (MFH) selectively heats up tissue by coupling alternating current (AC) magnetic fields to targeted magnetic fluids, so that boundaries of different conductive tissues do not interfere with power absorption. In this paper, a new AC magnetic field therapy system for clinical application of MFH is described. With optimized magnetic nanoparticle preparations it will be used for target-specific glioblastoma and prostate carcinoma therapy.

Clinical hyperthermia of prostate cancer using magnetic nanoparticles: Presentation of a new interstitial technique

The aim of this pilot study was to evaluate whether the technique of magnetic fluid hyperthermia can be used for minimally invasive treatment of prostate cancer. This paper presents the first clinical application of interstitial hyperthermia using magnetic nanoparticles in locally recurrent prostate cancer. Treatment planning was carried out using computerized tomography (CT) of the prostate. Based on the individual anatomy of the prostate and the estimated specific absorption rate (SAR) of magnetic fluids in prostatic tissue, the number and position of magnetic fluid depots required for sufficient heat deposition was calculated while rectum and urethra were spared. Nanoparticle suspensions were injected transperineally into the prostate under transrectal ultrasound and flouroscopy guidance. Treatments were delivered in the first magnetic field applicator for use in humans, using an alternating current magnetic field with a frequency of 100 kHz and variable field strength (0–18 kA m−1). Invasive thermometry of the prostate was carried out in the first and last of six weekly hyperthermia sessions of 60 min duration. CT-scans of the prostate were repeated following the first and last hyperthermia treatment to document magnetic nanoparticle distribution and the position of the thermometry probes in the prostate. Nanoparticles were retained in the prostate during the treatment interval of 6 weeks. Using appropriate software (AMIRA), a non-invasive estimation of temperature values in the prostate, based on intra-tumoural distribution of magnetic nanoparticles, can be performed and correlated with invasively measured intra-prostatic temperatures. Using a specially designed cooling device, treatment was well tolerated without anaesthesia. In the first patient treated, maximum and minimum intra-prostatic temperatures measured at a field strength of 4.0–5.0 kA m−1 were 48.5°C and 40.0°C during the 1st treatment and 42.5°C and 39.4°C during the 6th treatment, respectively. These first clinical experiences prompted us to initiate a phase I study to evaluate feasibility, toxicity and quality of life during hyperthermia using magnetic nanoparticles in patients with biopsy-proven local recurrence of prostate cancer following radiotherapy with curative intent. To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first report on clinical application of interstitial hyperthermia using magnetic nanoparticles in the treatment of human cancer.

Neo-adjuvant chemotherapy alone or with regional hyperthermia for localised high-risk soft-tissue sarcoma: a randomised phase 3 multicentre study

BACKGROUND The optimum treatment for high-risk soft-tissue sarcoma (STS) in adults is unclear. Regional hyperthermia concentrates the action of chemotherapy within the heated tumour region. Phase 2 studies have shown that chemotherapy with regional hyperthermia improves local control compared with chemotherapy alone. We designed a parallel-group randomised controlled trial to assess the safety and efficacy of regional hyperthermia with chemotherapy. METHODS Patients were recruited to the trial between July 21, 1997, and November 30, 2006, at nine centres in Europe and North America. Patients with localised high-risk STS (> or = 5 cm, Fédération Nationale des Centres de Lutte Contre le Cancer [FNCLCC] grade 2 or 3, deep to the fascia) were randomly assigned to receive either neo-adjuvant chemotherapy consisting of etoposide, ifosfamide, and doxorubicin (EIA) alone, or combined with regional hyperthermia (EIA plus regional hyperthermia) in addition to local therapy. Local progression-free survival (LPFS) was the primary endpoint. Efficacy analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT 00003052. FINDINGS 341 patients were enrolled, with 169 randomly assigned to EIA plus regional hyperthermia and 172 to EIA alone. All patients were included in the analysis of the primary endpoint, and 332 patients who received at least one cycle of chemotherapy were included in the safety analysis. After a median follow-up of 34 months (IQR 20-67), 132 patients had local progression (56 EIA plus regional hyperthermia vs 76 EIA). Patients were more likely to experience local progression or death in the EIA-alone group compared with the EIA plus regional hyperthermia group (relative hazard [RH] 0.58, 95% CI 0.41-0.83; p=0.003), with an absolute difference in LPFS at 2 years of 15% (95% CI 6-26; 76% EIA plus regional hyperthermia vs 61% EIA). For disease-free survival the relative hazard was 0.70 (95% CI 0.54-0.92, p=0.011) for EIA plus regional hyperthermia compared with EIA alone. The treatment response rate in the group that received regional hyperthermia was 28.8%, compared with 12.7% in the group who received chemotherapy alone (p=0.002). In a pre-specified per-protocol analysis of patients who completed EIA plus regional hyperthermia induction therapy compared with those who completed EIA alone, overall survival was better in the combined therapy group (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.45-0.98, p=0.038). Leucopenia (grade 3 or 4) was more frequent in the EIA plus regional hyperthermia group compared with the EIA-alone group (128 of 165 vs 106 of 167, p=0.005). Hyperthermia-related adverse events were pain, bolus pressure, and skin burn, which were mild to moderate in 66 (40.5%), 43 (26.4%), and 29 patients (17.8%), and severe in seven (4.3%), eight (4.9%), and one patient (0.6%), respectively. Two deaths were attributable to treatment in the combined treatment group, and one death was attributable to treatment in the EIA-alone group. INTERPRETATION To our knowledge, this is the first randomised phase 3 trial to show that regional hyperthermia increases the benefit of chemotherapy. Adding regional hyperthermia to chemotherapy is a new effective treatment strategy for patients with high-risk STS, including STS with an abdominal or retroperitoneal location. FUNDING Deutsche Krebshilfe, Helmholtz Association (HGF), European Organisation of Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC), European Society for Hyperthermic Oncology (ESHO), and US National Institute of Health (NIH).

Hyperfractionated Accelerated Chemoradiation With Concurrent Fluorouracil-Mitomycin Is More Effective Than Dose-Escalated Hyperfractionated Accelerated Radiation Therapy Alone in Locally Advanced Head and Neck Cancer: Final Results of the Radiotherapy Cooperative Clinical Trials Group of the German Cancer Society 95-06 Prospective Randomized Trial

PURPOSE To report the results and corresponding acute and late reactions of a prospective, randomized, clinical study in locally advanced head and neck cancer comparing concurrent fluorouracil (FU) and mitomycin (MMC) chemotherapy and hyperfractionated accelerated radiation therapy (C-HART; 70.6 Gy) to hyperfractionated accelerated radiation therapy alone (HART; 77.6 Gy). PATIENTS AND METHODS Three hundred eighty-four stage III (6%) and IV (94%) oropharyngeal (59.4%), hypopharyngeal (32.3%), and oral cavity (8.3%) cancer patients were randomly assigned to receive either 30 Gy (2 Gy every day) followed by 1.4 Gy bid to a total of 70.6 Gy concurrently with FU (600 mg/m(2), 120 hours continuous infusion) days 1 through 5 and MMC (10 mg/m(2)) on days 5 and 36 (C-HART) or 14 Gy (2 Gy every day) followed by 1.4 Gy bid to a total dose of 77.6 Gy (HART). The data were analyzed on an intent-to-treat basis. RESULTS At 5 years, the locoregional control and overall survival rates were 49.9% and 28.6% for C-HART versus 37.4% and 23.7% for HART, respectively (P = .001 and P = .023, respectively). Progression-free and freedom from metastases rates were 29.3% and 51.9% for C-HART versus 26.6% and 54.7% for HART, respectively (P = .009 and P = .575, respectively). For C-HART, maximum acute reactions of mucositis, moist desquamation, and erythema were lower than with HART, whereas no differences in late reactions and overall rates of secondary neoplasms were observed. CONCLUSION C-HART (70.6 Gy) is superior to dose-escalated HART (77.6 Gy) with comparable or less acute reactions and equivalent late reactions, indicating an improvement of the therapeutic ratio.

Morbidity and quality of life during thermotherapy using magnetic nanoparticles in locally recurrent prostate cancer: Results of a prospective phase I trial

Purpose: To investigate the treatment-related morbidity and quality of life (QoL) during thermotherapy using superparamagnetic nanoparticles in patients with locally recurrent prostate cancer. Materials and Methods: Ten patients with biopsy-proven locally recurrent prostate cancer following primary therapy with curative intent and no detectable metastases were entered on a prospective phase I trial. Endpoints were feasibility, toxicity and QoL. Following intraprostatic injection of a nanoparticle dispersion, six thermal therapy sessions of 60 min duration were delivered at weekly intervals using an alternating magnetic field. National Cancer Institute (NCI) common toxicity criteria (CTC) and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 and QLQ-PR25 questionnaires were used to evaluate toxicity and QoL, respectively. In addition, prostate specific antigen (PSA) measurements were carried out. Results: Maximum temperatures up to 55°C were achieved in the prostates at 25–30% of the available magnetic field strength. Nanoparticle deposits were detectable in the prostates one year after thermal therapy. At a median follow-up of 17.5 months (3–24), no systemic toxicity was observed. Acute urinary retention occurred in four patients with previous history of urethral stricture. Treatment-related morbidity was moderate and QoL was only temporarily impaired. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) declines were observed in eight patients. Conclusions: Interstitial heating using magnetic nanoparticles was feasible and well tolerated in patients with locally recurrent prostate cancer. Deposition of nanoparticles in the prostate was highly durable. Further refinement of the technique is necessary to allow application of higher magnetic field strengths.

Magnetic nanoparticle hyperthermia for prostate cancer

Magnetic nanoparticles are increasingly used for clinical applications such as drug delivery, magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic fluid hyperthermia. A novel method of interstitial heating of tumours following direct injection of magnetic nanoparticles has been evaluated in humans in recent clinical trials. In prostate cancer this approach has been investigated in two separate phase I studies, employing magnetic nanoparticle thermotherapy alone and in combination with permanent seed brachytherapy. The feasibility and good tolerability was shown in both trials, using the first prototype of an alternating magnetic field applicator. As with any other heating technique, this novel approach requires specific tools for planning, quality control and thermal monitoring, based on appropriate imaging and modelling techniques. In these first clinical trials a newly developed method for planning and non-invasive calculations of the 3-dimensional temperature distribution based on computed tomography was validated. Limiting factors of the new approach at present are patient discomfort at high magnetic field strengths and irregular intratumoural heat distribution. Until these limitations are overcome and thermoablation can safely be applied as a monotherapy, this treatment modality is being evaluated in combination with irradiation in patients with localised prostate cancer.

Magnetic nanoparticles for interstitial thermotherapy - : feasibility, tolerance and achieved temperatures

Background: The concept of magnetic fluid hyperthermia is clinically evaluated after development of the whole body magnetic field applicator MFH® 300F and the magnetofluid MFL 082AS. This new system for localized thermotherapy is suitable either for hyperthermia or thermoablation. The magnetic fluid, composed of iron oxide nanoparticles dispersed in water, must be distributed in the tumour and is subsequently heated by exposing to an alternating magnetic field in the applicator. We performed a feasibility study with 22 patients suffering from heavily pretreated recurrences of different tumour entities, where hyperthermia in conjunction with irradiation and/or chemotherapy was an option. The potential to estimate (by post-implantation analyses) and to achieve (by improving the technique) a satisfactory temperature distribution was evaluated in dependency on the implantation technique. Material and methods: Three implantation methods were established: Infiltration under CT fluoroscopy (group A), TRUS (transrectal ultrasound) – guided implantation with X-fluoroscopy (group B) and intra-operative infiltration under visual control (group C). In group A and B the distribution of the nanoparticles can be planned prior to implantation on the basis of three-dimensional image datasets. The specific absorption rates (SAR in W/kg) can be derived from the particle distribution imaged via CT together with the actual H-field strength (in kA/m). The temperature distribution in the tumour region is calculated using the bioheat-transfer equation assessing a mean perfusion value, which is determined by matching calculated temperatures to direct (invasive or endoluminal) temperature measurements in reference points in or near the target region. Results: Instillation of the magnetic fluid and the thermotherapy treatments were tolerated without or with only moderate side effects, respectively. Using tolerable H-field-strengths of 3.0–6.0 kA/m in the pelvis, up to 7.5 kA/m in the thoracic and neck region and >10.0 kA/m for the head, we achieved SAR of 60–380 W/kg in the target leading to a 40°C heat-coverage of 86%. However, the coverage with ≥42°C is unsatisfactory at present (30% of the target volume in group A and only 0.2% in group B). Conclusion: Further improvement of the temperature distribution is required by refining the implantation techniques or simply by increasing the amount of nanofluid or elevation of the magnetic field strength. From the actual nanoparticle distribution and derived temperatures we can extrapolate, that already a moderate increase of the H-field by only 2 kA/m would significantly improve the 42°C coverage towards 100% (98%). This illustrates the great potential of the nanofluid-based heating technology.

Description and characterization of the novel hyperthermia- and thermoablation-system MFH 300F for clinical magnetic fluid hyperthermia.

Magnetic fluid hyperthermia (MFH) is a new approach to deposit heat power in deep tissues by overcoming limitations of conventional heat treatments. After infiltration of the target tissue with nanosized magnetic particles, the power of an alternating magnetic field is transformed into heat. The combination of the 100 kHz magnetic field applicator MFH 300F and the magnetofluid (MF), which both are designed for medical use, is investigated with respect to its dosage recommendations and clinical applicability. We found a magnetic field strength of up to 18 kA/m in a cylindrical treatment area of 20 cm diameter and aperture height up to 300 mm. The specific absorption rate (SAR) can be controlled directly by the magnetic field strength during the treatment. The relationship between magnetic field strength and the iron normalized SAR (SAR(Fe)) is only slightly depending on the concentration of the MF and can be used for planning the target SAR. The achievable energy absorption rates of the MF distributed in the tissue is sufficient for either hyperthermia or thermoablation. The fluid has a visible contrast in therapeutic concentrations on a CT scanner and can be detected down to 0.01 g/l Fe in the MRI. The system has proved its capability and practicability for heat treatment in deep regions of the human body.

Preoperative hyperthermia combined with radiochemotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer: a phase II clinical trial

OBJECTIVE A prospective phase II study was performed to determine the feasibility and efficacy in terms of response rate, resectability, and morbidity in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who received preoperative regional hyperthermia combined with radiochemotherapy (HRCT). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA Recent studies suggest that preoperative radiochemotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer can induce downstaging, but after resection the incidence of local recurrences remains high. Hyperthermia (HT) may add tumoricidal effects and improve the efficacy of radiochemotherapy in a trimodal approach. PATIENTS AND METHODS Thirty-seven patients with histologically proven rectal cancer and T3 or T4 lesions, as determined by endorectal ultrasound and computed tomography, entered the trial. 5-Fluorouracil (300-350 mg/m2) and leucovorin (50 mg) were administered on days 1 to 5 and 22 to 26. Regional HT using the SIGMA 60 applicator (BSD-2000) was given once a week before radiotherapy (45 Gy with 1.8-Gy fractions for 5 weeks). Surgery followed 4 to 6 weeks after completion of HRCT. RESULTS Preoperative treatment was generally well tolerated, with 16% of patients developing grade III toxicity. No grade IV complications were observed. The overall resectability rate was 32 of 36 patients (89%), and 31 resection specimens had negative margins (R0). One patient refused surgery. In 5 patients (14%), the histopathologic report confirmed no evidence of residual tumor (pCR). A partial remission (PR) was observed in 17 patients (46%). The survival rate after 38 months was 86%. In none of the patients was local recurrence detected after R0(L), but five patients developed distant metastases. CONCLUSION Preoperative HRCT is feasible and effective and may contribute to locoregional tumor control of advanced rectal cancer, which is to be proven in an ongoing phase III trial.