A Retrospective Comparison of Toxicity, Response and Survival of Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy Versus Three-Dimensional Conformal Radiation Therapy in the Treatment of Rectal Carcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: The main target of neoadjuvant treatment in rectal cancer is to downstage and downsize large tumours to increase the chance of complete surgical resection, and therefore decrease the chances of local recurrence. With or without the addition of chemotherapy, until recently, three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) used to be the radiotherapy treatment modality of choice. However, intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) is being increasingly adopted by many radiotherapy centres as a more modern, conformal technique due to its ability to minimize radiation dose to nearby organs. The aim of our analysis was to assess the difference in toxicity, response to treatment, and survival between the patients treated with these two different treatment modalities in our institution. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of data and compared two groups of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who were treated with either 3D-CRT or IMRT. The main outcomes were radiation toxicity and response to treatment. Overall survival was a secondary outcome. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-six patients were included in the study: 71 patients treated with 3D-CRT and 65 patients treated with IMRT. With regard to toxicity, there was no significant difference between the groups for bladder and skin toxicity, but there was a significant reduction in acute grade 2 bowel toxicity in patients treated with a long course of IMRT [3D-CRT 77% (48/62) vs IMRT 64% (30/47) p=0.042]. There was no statistically significant difference in the treatment response rates of these two radiotherapy treatment modalities, as well as in overall survival between the groups (p=0.604).  Conclusion: Our study showed that IMRT can significantly reduce acute bowel side effects for patients undergoing neoadjuvant radiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancers. Further studies are needed to confirm the clinical advantage of IMRT in rectal carcinoma.

A midline for oxaliplatin infusion: the myth of safety devices.

Oxaliplatin is a platinum compound mainly used in the treatment of colorectal cancer. According to its manufacturer it is not considered vesicant agent though it has been shown to cause severe tissue damage if extravasation occurs in large doses. Several cases of extravasation have been reported; most of them from incorrectly placed peripheral cannula or incorrect use of central venous access devices. To reduce these risks, peripherally inserted central catheters and midline catheters have been increasingly used and are especially helpful if poor peripheral venous access. Midlines are mainly used for patients not receiving vesicant drugs, and are generally inserted without radiological guidance. They are believed to be safe, but we present the first ever-documented oxaliplatin extravasation injury from a midline catheter.