Defining Clinical Indications of Proton Beam Therapy at National Level in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

The Saudi Particle Therapy Centre (SPTC) is establishing proton beam therapy (PBT) services within Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). Thus, national guidelines for the pertinent draft, and recommendations of PBT for cancer patients are utmost important. Saudi Particle Therapy Centre invited a panel of expert radiation oncologists practicing within KSA to formulate national clinical practice guidelines for the referral, absolute and relative indications and dose/fractionation for PBT. After identifying the key clinical questions, ample search through PubMed, EMBASE, and various search drives was accomplished for appropriate meta-analyses, clinical trials, case-control, and case series studies, and case reports. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was incorporated to formulate various recommendations. Saudi Particle Therapy Centre expert panel recommended PBT as utter modality for ocular tumors, base of skull/spine tumors, hepatocellular carcinoma, all pediatric central nervous system (CNS) malignancies, para-nasal sinuses/nasal cavity tumors and for re-irradiation of all sites aimed for cure. However, PBT may be contemplated, as a relative indication if no other parallel option is available, or when photon therapy plans exceed the dose constraints for critical structures.  Further, panel did not recommend routine PBT for other sites beyond clinical trials. However, individual oncology patients can be considered for PBT after a multidisciplinary approach and expert's opinion.

Safety and efficacy of cetuximab-chemotherapy combination in Saudi patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Cetuximab-based combination chemotherapy (CBCC) proved safe and effective as second-line strategy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This prospective phase-II study was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of CBCC as first-, second- or third-line among Saudi patients with mCRC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with mCRC were offered CBCC to assess time-to-disease progression (TTP), response rate and duration, overall survival (OS) and safety. RESULTS: Nineteen patients were eligible and their median age was 51 years. Seven patients received CBCC as first-line and 12 as second- or third-line. Responses: 11 (58%) partial responses, 5 (26%) stable disease and 3 (16%) disease progressions. The median response duration was 4.3 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 3.4-5.2 months]. The median TTP was 6.8 months (95% CI: 2-13.9 months) for all 19 patients compared to 9.3 months (95% CI: 3.9-14.6 months) for the seven patients who received CBCC as first-line. The median OS for the entire population was 12.3 months (95% CI could not be determined). On the other hand, while the median OS for those who received CBCC as first-line have not been reached, the median OS for those who received CBCC after failure of other salvage therapies was 12.3 months (95% CI: 3.2-21.4 months). CBCC was generally tolerable. One patient had a severe hypersensitivity reaction and another fatal cardiac arrest. CONCLUSION: CBCC is active with an acceptable safety profile. Until results from phase-III clinical trials are available, using CBCC as first-line is probably justified.