ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To compare three different radiotherapy devices able to perform pulmonary stereotactic radiotherapy: CyberKnife® (CK), Helical Tomotherapy® (HT), and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). This study aims to define the patients' outcome in terms of SBRT efficacy and toxicities depending of the device choice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical, radiological, and dosimetric data of patients treated with lung SBRT between 2016 and 2020 at Lausanne University Hospital, using the Chi2 test for proportions, the t-test for means comparisons, the Kaplan-Meier method for survival, and the Log-rank test and Cox-regression for intergroups comparisons. RESULTS: We identified 111 patients treated by either CK (59.9%), VMAT (38.0%), or HT (2.1%). Compared to other techniques, CK treated comparable gross tumor volume (GTV; 2.1 vs. 1.4cm3, P=0.84) with smaller planning treatment volume (PTV; 12.3 vs. 21.9cm3, P=0.013) and lower V5 (13.5 vs. 19.9cm3, P=0.002). Local control rates at 2years were not different whatever the irradiation device, respectively of 96.2% (range, 90.8-100) and 98.1% (range, 94.4-100), P=0.68. Toxicity incidence significantly increased with V5 value>17.2% (56.0 vs. 77.4%, P=0.021). CONCLUSION: Compared to other SBRT techniques, CK treatments permitted to treat comparable GTV with reduced PTV and V5. Toxicity incidence was less frequent when reducing the V5. CK is particularly attractive in case of multiple courses of lung SBRT or lung reirradiation.
Subject(s)
Lung Neoplasms , Radiosurgery , Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated , Humans , Radiosurgery/adverse effects , Radiosurgery/methods , Retrospective Studies , Lung Neoplasms/pathology , Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated/adverse effects , Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated/methods , Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted/methods , Radiotherapy Dosage , LungABSTRACT
Spinal metastasis are a daily challenge in clinical practice. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) allows delivery of definitive treatment with excellent long-term control rates. Its implementation needs dedicated devices and day-to-day image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT). The XSight™ spine tracking system, integrates with the CyberKnife® (Accuray™), provides a fiducial-free tracking system for spinal SBRT. We report a rare case of tracking failure during treatment due to the occurrence of a vertebral compression fracture (VCF).
Subject(s)
Fractures, Compression/diagnostic imaging , Radiosurgery/instrumentation , Spinal Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Spinal Neoplasms/secondary , Aged , Brain Neoplasms/secondary , Brain Neoplasms/therapy , Dose Fractionation, Radiation , Fatal Outcome , Fractures, Compression/complications , Fractures, Compression/surgery , Humans , Kyphoplasty , Lung Neoplasms/pathology , Male , Neck Pain/etiology , Radiosurgery/methods , Radiotherapy, Image-Guided/instrumentation , Spinal Cord/radiation effects , Spinal Fractures , Spinal Neoplasms/diagnostic imagingABSTRACT
PURPOSE: In experimental and clinical trials, tamoxifen (TAM) has been shown to increase radiation-induced lung fibrosis (RILF). Furthermore, aromatase inhibitors (AI) have been shown to be superior to TAM in the adjuvant setting and preclinical data suggest that letrozole (LET) sensitizes breast cancer cells to ionizing radiation in other studies. In this experimental study, we evaluated whether AI have any impact on the development of RILF in rats. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 60 female wistar- albino rats were divided into 6 groups: Control (group A), RT alone (group B), RT + TAM (group C), RT + anastrozole (ANA group D), RT + LET (group E), and RT + exemestane (EXE, group F). RT consisted of 30 Gy in 10 fractions to both lungs with an anterior field at 2 cm depth. Equivalent doses for 60 kg adult dose per day of TAM, ANA, LET, and EXE were calculated according to the mean weight of rats and orally administrated with a feeding tube. Percentage of lung with fibrosis was quantified with image analysis of histological sections of the lung. The mean score values were calculated for each group. the significance of the differences among groups were calculated using one way ANOVA test and Tukey HSD post-hoc test. RESULTS: Mean values of fibrosis were 1.7, 5.9, 6.7, 2.5, 2 and 2.2 for groups A, B, C, D, E, and F, respectively (p = 0.000). TAM increased RT-induced lung fibrosis but without statistical significance. Groups treated with RT + AI showed significantly less lung fibrosis than groups treated with RT alone or RT + TAM (p = 0.000). RT + AI groups showed nearly similar RT-induced lung fibrosis than control group. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we found that AI decreased RT-induced lung fibrosis to the control group level suggesting protective effect.