Radical treatment for oesophageal cancer patients unfit for surgery and chemotherapy. A 10-year experience from the Norwegian Radium Hospital.

BACKGROUND: Over a 10-year period from 1990, 445 patients with carcinoma of the oesophagus were admitted to the Norwegian Radium Hospital and 184 of these patients received treatment with curative intent. Even though surgery is the treatment of choice for these patients, many of them suffer from medical conditions that increase the risk for postoperative mortality and morbidity. In a retrospective study, the effect of the curative treatment offered to patients was explored with a particular focus on patients unfit for surgery. METHODS: Medical data of the 184 patients treated with curative intent were reviewed and additional clinical information was retrieved from local hospitals and general practitioners. Preoperative radiotherapy followed by surgery was the standard curative treatment for operable patients. Medically inoperable patients were offered radical split-course hyperfractionated radiotherapy followed by a brachytherapy boost. RESULTS: More than 50% (103/184) received non-surgical treatment only. Patients who received radical surgery (n = 81) were younger, had better performance status, less weight loss and dysphagia compared to patients treated with radical radiotherapy (n = 102). One patient received only photodynamic therapy. The 3-year survival was 29% for patients treated with radical surgery, and 8% for patients who received radical radiotherapy. The overall median crude survival for the two groups of patients were 20 months and seven months respectively. CONCLUSION: The hyperfractionated radiotherapy provided symptom relief without extensive toxicity and with a possibility for cure for patients with oesophageal cancer who are unfit for surgery and chemoradiotherapy. The literature supports the curative potential of high dose accelerated hyperfractionated radiotherapy even though the optimal radiotherapy regimen still needs to be explored.

Side effects and quality of life after inadvertent radiation overdosage in brachytherapy of head-and-neck cancer.

PURPOSE: By comparing our old (DP5, in use from 1978 to 1994) and new (Plato, Nucletron) dose planning system, we found that the old system underestimated doses by 20-25%. To study the possible consequences for the patients treated between 1978 and 1994, all who were still alive were invited to undergo an examination with respect to side effects and quality of life (QOL). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The degree of overdosage was calculated by comparing the isodose distribution generated on the two dose planning systems. Eighty-four patients were then invited to undergo an examination with respect to side effects and QOL. The side effects were scored according to the LENT SOMA system and QOL according to European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30), and EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire-Head & Neck 35 (QLQ-H&N35). RESULTS: The mean overdosage of brachytherapy was 19.3%. No association was found between overdosage and side effects or QOL. For implants in the lateral border of the tongue, we found a statistically significant correlation between osteoradionecrosis and the following parameters: linear activity, total activity, dose rate, and extrapolated response dose. By multivariate analysis, only total implanted activity and the use of lead protection during brachytherapy were found to be of prognostic significance with respect to development of osteoradionecrosis. CONCLUSION: The incidence of side effects after brachytherapy at the Norwegian Radium Hospital seems to have been somewhat higher in the period under investigation than at other institutions. There may be several explanations, including the use of external beam radiotherapy before brachytherapy and departure from the Paris system among others. However, the side effects were not associated with the overdosage that was the basis for the study. As opposed to the general consensus of opinion, long-term QOL was found to be worse after brachytherapy than after external beam radiotherapy. This calls for increased awareness and a systematic prospective registration of the long-term side effects of brachytherapy.