Sarat Chander

Australasian Gastrointestinal Trials Group (AGITG) Contouring Atlas and Planning Guidelines for Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy in Anal Cancer

PURPOSE To develop a high-resolution target volume atlas with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) planning guidelines for the conformal treatment of anal cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS A draft contouring atlas and planning guidelines for anal cancer IMRT were prepared at the Australasian Gastrointestinal Trials Group (AGITG) annual meeting in September 2010. An expert panel of radiation oncologists contoured an anal cancer case to generate discussion on recommendations regarding target definition for gross disease, elective nodal volumes, and organs at risk (OARs). Clinical target volume (CTV) and planning target volume (PTV) margins, dose fractionation, and other IMRT-specific issues were also addressed. A steering committee produced the final consensus guidelines. RESULTS Detailed contouring and planning guidelines and a high-resolution atlas are provided. Gross tumor and elective target volumes are described and pictorially depicted. All elective regions should be routinely contoured for all disease stages, with the possible exception of the inguinal and high pelvic nodes for select, early-stage T1N0. A 20-mm CTV margin for the primary, 10- to 20-mm CTV margin for involved nodes and a 7-mm CTV margin for the elective pelvic nodal groups are recommended, while respecting anatomical boundaries. A 5- to 10-mm PTV margin is suggested. When using a simultaneous integrated boost technique, a dose of 54 Gy in 30 fractions to gross disease and 45 Gy to elective nodes with chemotherapy is appropriate. Guidelines are provided for OAR delineation. CONCLUSION These consensus planning guidelines and high-resolution atlas complement the existing Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) elective nodal ano-rectal atlas and provide additional anatomic, clinical, and technical instructions to guide radiation oncologists in the planning and delivery of IMRT for anal cancer.

High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy as a Monotherapy for Favorable-Risk Prostate Cancer: A Phase II Trial

PURPOSE There are multiple treatment options for favorable-risk prostate cancer. High-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy as a monotherapy is appealing, but its use is still investigational. A Phase II trial was undertaken to explore the value of such treatment in low-to-intermediate risk prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS This was a single-institution, prospective study. Eligible patients had low-risk prostate cancer features but also Gleason scores of 7 (51% of patients) and stage T2b to T2c cancer. Treatment with HDR brachytherapy with a single implant was administered over 2 days. One of four fractionation schedules was used in a dose escalation study design: 3 fractions of 10, 10.5, 11, or 11.5 Gy. Patients were assessed with the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 2.0 for urinary toxicity, the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group/European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer scoring schema for rectal toxicity, and the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) questionnaire to measure patient-reported health-related quality of life. Biochemical failure was defined as a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) nadir plus 2 ng/ml. RESULTS Between 2003 and 2008, 79 patients were enrolled. With a median follow-up of 39.5 months, biochemical relapse occurred in 7 patients. Three- and 5-year actuarial biochemical control rates were 88.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 78.0-96.2%) and 85.1% (95% CI, 72.5-94.5%), respectively. Acute grade 3 urinary toxicity was seen in only 1 patient. There was no instance of acute grade 3 rectal toxicity. Rates of late grade 3 rectal toxicity, dysuria, hematuria, urinary retention, and urinary incontinence were 0%, 10.3%, 1.3%, 9.0%, and 0%, respectively. No grade 4 or greater toxicity was recorded. Among the four (urinary, bowel, sexual, and hormonal) domains assessed with the EPIC questionnaire, only the sexual domain did not recover with time. CONCLUSIONS HDR brachytherapy as a monotherapy for favorable-risk prostate cancer, administered using a single implant over 2 days, is feasible and has acceptable acute and late toxicities. Further follow-up is still required to better evaluate the efficacy of such treatment.

Direct 2-Arm Comparison Shows Benefit of High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy Boost vs External Beam Radiation Therapy Alone for Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE To evaluate the outcomes of patients treated for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer with a single schedule of either external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) and high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDRB) boost or EBRT alone. METHODS AND MATERIALS From 2001-2006, 344 patients received EBRT with HDRB boost for definitive treatment of intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer. The prescribed EBRT dose was 46 Gy in 23 fractions, with a HDR boost of 19.5 Gy in 3 fractions. This cohort was compared to a contemporaneously treated cohort who received EBRT to 74 Gy in 37 fractions, using a matched pair analysis. Three-dimensional conformal EBRT was used. Matching was performed using a propensity score matching technique. High-risk patients constituted 41% of the matched cohorts. Five-year clinical and biochemical outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS Initial significant differences in prognostic indicators between the unmatched treatment cohorts were rendered negligible after matching, providing a total of 688 patients. Median biochemical follow-up was 60.5 months. The 5-year freedom from biochemical failure was 79.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 74.3%-85.0%) and 70.9% (95% CI, 65.4%-76.0%) for the HDRB and EBRT groups, respectively, equating to a hazard ratio of 0.59 (95% CI, 0.43-0.81, P=.0011). Interaction analyses showed no alteration in HDR efficacy when planned androgen deprivation therapy was administered (P=.95), but a strong trend toward reduced efficacy was shown compared to EBRT in high-risk cases (P=.06). Rates of grade 3 urethral stricture were 0.3% (95% CI, 0%-0.9%) and 11.8% (95% CI, 8.1%-16.5%) for EBRT and HDRB, respectively (P<.0001). No differences in clinical outcomes were observed. CONCLUSIONS This comparison of 2 individual contemporaneously treated HDRB and EBRT approaches showed improved freedom from biochemical progression with the HDR approach. The benefit was more pronounced in intermediate- risk patients but needs to be weighed against an increased risk of urethral toxicity.

Acute toxicity in prostate cancer patients treated with and without image-guided radiotherapy

BackgroundImage-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) increases the accuracy of treatment delivery through daily target localisation. We report on toxicity symptoms experienced during radiotherapy treatment, with and without IGRT in prostate cancer patients treated radically.MethodsBetween 2006 and 2009, acute toxicity data for ten symptoms were collected prospectively onto standardized assessment forms. Toxicity was scored during radiotherapy, according to the Common Terminology Criteria Adverse Events V3.0, for 275 prostate cancer patients before and after the implementation of a fiducial marker IGRT program and dose escalation from 74Gy in 37 fractions, to 78Gy in 39 fractions. Margins and planning constraints were maintained the same during the study period. The symptoms scored were urinary frequency, cystitis, bladder spasm, urinary incontinence, urinary retention, diarrhoea, haemorrhoids, proctitis, anal skin discomfort and fatigue. Analysis was conducted for the maximum grade of toxicity and the median number of days from the onset of that toxicity to the end of treatment.ResultsIn the IGRT group, 14228 toxicity scores were analysed from 249 patients. In the non-IGRT group, 1893 toxicity scores were analysed from 26 patients. Urinary frequency ≥G3 affected 23% and 7% in the non-IGRT and IGRT group respectively (p = 0.0188). Diarrhoea ≥G2 affected 15% and 3% of patients in the non-IGRT and IGRT groups (p = 0.0174). Fatigue ≥G2 affected 23% and 8% of patients in the non-IGRT and IGRT groups (p = 0.0271). The median number of days with a toxicity was higher for ≥G2 (p = 0.0179) and ≥G3 frequency (p = 0.0027), ≥G2 diarrhoea (p = 0.0033) and ≥G2 fatigue (p = 0.0088) in the non-IGRT group compared to the IGRT group. Other toxicities were not of significant statistical difference.ConclusionsIn this study, prostate cancer patients treated radically with IGRT had less severe urinary frequency, diarrhoea and fatigue during treatment compared to patients treated with non-IGRT. Onset of these symptoms was earlier in the non-IGRT group. IGRT results in less acute toxicity during radiotherapy in prostate cancer.

Twenty-Five-Year Experience With Radical Chemoradiation for Anal Cancer

PURPOSE To evaluate the prognostic factors, patterns of failure, and late toxicity in patients treated with chemoradiation (CRT) for anal cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS Consecutive patients with nonmetastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the anus treated by CRT with curative intent between February 1983 and March 2008 were identified through the institutional database. Chart review and telephone follow-up were undertaken to collect demographic data and outcome. RESULTS Two hundred eighty-four patients (34% male; median age 62 years) were identified. The stages at diagnosis were 23% Stage I, 48% Stage II, 10% Stage IIIA, and 18% Stage IIIB. The median radiotherapy dose to the primary site was 54 Gy. A complete clinical response to CRT was achieved in 89% of patients. With a median follow-up time of 5.3 years, the 5-year rates of locoregional control, distant control, colostomy-free survival, and overall survival were 83% (95% confidence interval [CI] 78-88), 92% (95% CI, 89-96), 73% (95% CI, 68-79), and 82% (95% CI, 77-87), respectively. Higher T stage and male sex predicted for locoregional failure, and higher N stage predicted for distant metastases. Locoregional failure occurred most commonly at the primary site. Omission of elective inguinal irradiation resulted in inguinal failure rates of 1.9% and 12.5% in T1N0 and T2N0 patients, respectively. Pelvic nodal failures were very uncommon. Late vaginal and bone toxicity was observed in addition to gastrointestinal toxicity. CONCLUSIONS CRT is a highly effective approach in anal cancer. However, subgroups of patients fare relatively poorly, and novel approaches are needed. Elective inguinal irradiation can be safely omitted only in patients with Stage I disease. Vaginal toxicity and insufficiency fractures of the hip and pelvis are important late effects that require prospective evaluation.

A phase Ib/II translational study of sunitinib with neoadjuvant radiotherapy in soft-tissue sarcoma.

Background:Preoperative radiotherapy (RT) is commonly used to treat localised soft-tissue sarcomas (STS). Hypoxia is an important determinant of radioresistance. Whether antiangiogenic therapy can ‘normalise’ tumour vasculature, thereby improving oxygenation, remains unknown.Methods:Two cohorts were prospectively enrolled. Cohort A evaluated the implications of hypoxia in STS, using the hypoxic tracer 18F-azomycin arabinoside (FAZA-PET). In cohort B, sunitinib was added to preoperative RT in a dose-finding phase 1b/2 design.Results:In cohort A, 13 out of 23 tumours were hypoxic (FAZA-PET), correlating with metabolic activity (r2=0.85; P<0.001). Two-year progression-free (PFS) and overall (OS) survival were 61% (95% CI: 0.44–0.84) and 87% (95% CI: 0.74–1.00), respectively. Hypoxia was associated with radioresistance (P=0.012), higher local recurrence (Hazard ratio (HR): 10.2; P=0.02), PFS (HR: 8.4; P=0.02), and OS (HR: 41.4; P<0.04). In Cohort B, seven patients received sunitinib at dose level (DL): 0 (50 mg per day for 2 weeks before RT; 25 mg per day during RT) and two patients received DL: −1 (37.5 mg per day for entire period). Dose-limiting toxicities were observed in 4 out of 7 patients at DL 0 and 2 out of 2 patients at DL −1, resulting in premature study closure. Although there was no difference in PFS or OS, patients receiving sunitinib had higher local failure (HR: 8.1; P=0.004).Conclusion:In STS, hypoxia is associated with adverse outcomes. The combination of sunitinib with preoperative RT resulted in unacceptable toxicities, and higher local relapse rates.

Outcomes of preoperative radiotherapy and resection of retroperitoneal sarcoma.

Preoperative radiotherapy (RT) is an important component of the management of retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS). We aimed to establish the feasibility of this approach by determining the accuracy of computed tomography (CT)‐guided core biopsy, proportion of patients completing treatment, rates of acute toxicity and surgical complications, and treatment outcomes.

Impact of stereotactic radiotherapy on kidney function in primary renal cell carcinoma: Establishing a dose–response relationship

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE To evaluate renal dysfunction after stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) for inoperable primary renal cell carcinoma (RCC) using nuclear medicine assessments. MATERIALS AND METHODS In a prospective clinical trial, patients received single fraction renal SABR (26 Gy) for tumours <5 cm, or fractionated SABR (3 × 14 Gy) for tumours ⩾5 cm. Global and regional glomerular filtration rate (GFR) was calculated through (51)Cr-EDTA and (99m)Tc-DMSA SPECT/CT, respectively, at baseline and post-treatment (14, 90 days and at 1-year). Regional loss in function was correlated to the absolute and biologically effective doses (BED) delivered. RESULTS In 21 patients the mean (range) tumour size was 48 mm (21-75 mm). The mean ± SD GFR at baseline was 52 ± 24 ml/min. Net change in mean GFR was +0.6 ± 11.3, +3.2 ± 14.5 and -8.7 ± 13.4 ml/min (p=0.03) at 2 weeks, 3 months and 1 year, respectively. For every 10 Gy of physical dose delivered, an exponential decline in affected kidney GFR was observed at 39% for 26 Gy/1 fraction and 25% for 42 Gy/3 fractions. When normalised to BED3Gy, the dose-response relationship for each treatment prescription was similar with a plateau beyond 100 Gy. The R50% conformity index correlated with GFR loss (p=0.04). No patient required dialysis. CONCLUSIONS SABR results in clinically acceptable and dose-dependent renal dysfunction at 1-year. Sparing functional kidney from high-dose regions (>50% isodoses) may help reduce risk of functional loss.

Stereotactic Ablative Body Radiotherapy for Inoperable Primary Kidney Cancer: A Prospective Clinical Trial

To assess the feasibility and safety of stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in patients unsuitable for surgery. Secondary objectives were to assess oncological and functional outcomes.

Outcomes of unplanned sarcoma excision: impact of residual disease

This study aimed to compare the oncological results between unplanned excision (UE) and planned excision (PE) of malignant soft tissue tumor and to examine the impact of residual tumor (ReT) after UE. Nonmetastatic soft tissue sarcomas surgically treated in 1996–2012 were included in this study. Disease‐specific survival (DSS), metastasis‐free survival (MFS), and local‐recurrence‐free survival (LRFS) were stratified according to the tumor location and American Joint Committee on Cancer Classification 7th edition stage. Independent prognostic parameters were identified by Cox proportional hazard models. Two‐hundred and ninety PEs and 161 UEs were identified. Significant difference in oncological outcome was observed only for LRFS probability of retroperitoneal sarcomas (5‐year LRFS: 33.0% [UE] vs. 71.0% [PE], P = 0.018). Among the 142 UEs of extremity and trunk, ReT in re‐excision specimen were found in 75 cases (53%). UEs with ReT had significantly lower survival probabilities and a higher amputation rate than UEs without ReT (5‐year DSS: 68.8% vs. 92%, P < 0.001; MFS: 56.1% vs. 90.9%, P < 0.001; LRFS: 75.8% vs. 98.4%, P = <0.001; amputation rate 18.5% vs. 1.8%, P = 0.003). The presence of ReT was an independent poor prognostic predictor for DSS, MFS, and LRFS with hazard ratios of 2.02 (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.25–3.26), 1.62 (95% CI, 1.05–2.51) and 1.94 (95% CI, 1.05–3.59), respectively. Soft tissue sarcomas should be treated in specialized centers and UE should be avoided because of its detrimental effect especially when ReT remains after UE.