Phase II study of de-intensified intensity-modulated radiotherapy and concurrent carboplatin/5-fluorouracil in lateralized p16-associated oropharyngeal carcinoma.

PURPOSE: To assess cancer control and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after de-intensified intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in lateralized p16-associated oropharyngeal cancer (p16-OPC). METHODS: Lateralized p16-OPC treated with radiotherapy and concurrent Carboplatin/5-fluorouracil between 2011 and 2014 were enrolled. De-intensified IMRT consisted in elective neck dose of 43.2 Gy/24 fractions and omission of contralateral retropharyngeal/level IV nodes. PROs were assessed using the EORTC QLC-C30 and QLQ-HN35 scales. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients were included. Median follow-up was 44 months. As per AJCC 7th Ed, 7%, 83% and 10% of patients had stage III, IVa and IVb. 5-year locoregional control and overall survival rates were 100% and 100%, respectively. Rates of acute were 52% and 35%, respectively. At 2 years post-treatment, 50% and 14% of patients had grade 1 xerostomia and dysgueusia, respectively. Most PROs scores returned to baseline within 8 months post-treatment. CONCLUSION: De-intensified IMRT was associated with excellent cancer outcomes, and rapid recovery of PROs in lateralized p16-OPC.

Treatment options for patients with brain metastases from EGFR/ALK-driven lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Brain metastases in EGFR/ALK-driven NSCLC frequently pose treatment dilemmas. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) can control extracranial disease, but radiotherapy is often required for intracranial control. We aimed to evaluate the impact of first-line whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT), stereotactic radiotherapy (SRS) or TKI alone on outcomes of patients with brain metastases from EGFR/ALK-driven NSCLC. METHODS: This single center retrospective review included 184 patients with brain metastases from EGFR/ALK-driven NSCLC, and analyzed effect of treatment choice on time to intracranial progression (TTIP) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: First-line treatment for brain metastases consisted of WBRT in 120 patients, SRS in 37 and TKI alone in 27. WBRT-treated patients had more brain metastases, and more baseline symptoms. Median TTIP was longer in the WBRT group at 50.5months than SRS or TKI groups at 12 and 15months (p=0.0038). No significant difference was seen in median OS: 21.6months in the WBRT group, 23.9months in the SRS group and 22.6months in the TKI group (p=0.67). In multivariable analysis, age>65years (HR 2.2, p=0.0014), greater number of brain metastases (HR 2.48, p=0.0002) and greater number of extracranial metastatic sites (2 vs 0-1 HR=2.05, p=0.014 and 3+ vs 0-1 HR=2.95, p=0.0001 were associated with shorter OS. No independent effect was seen from first-line CNS treatment choice. CONCLUSIONS: First-line WBRT for brain metastases from EGFR/ALK-driven NSCLC was associated with longer TTIP than SRS or TKI alone, with no difference in OS. These results could support deferral of WBRT until intracranial progression in selected patients who are closely monitored.

Predictive factors of survival and treatment tolerance in older patients treated with chemotherapy and radiotherapy for locally advanced head and neck cancer.

PURPOSE: To report outcomes and predictive factors of overall survival, hospitalization and treatment completion rates in elderly patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients aged 70years or older treated with concurrent CRT for locally advanced head and neck cancer was conducted. Univariate and multivariate analysis as well as competing risk survival analysis were used to determine predictors of mortality. Logistic regression was used to predict for hospitalization and treatment completion rates. RESULTS: In total, 129 patients were included. Median follow-up was 27months (range: 1.7-125months). Completion rate of combined CRT was 84%. Actuarial OS and DSS at 4years were 56% and 75%. Hospitalization rate was 36%. On multivariate analysis, a Karnofsky performance status (KPS) ⩽80 was predictive of mortality. Using competing risks, KPS ⩽80 and weight loss >5% were predictive of cancer mortality whereas Charlson score ⩾3 was predictive of mortality due to other causes. On logistic regression, patients with abnormal renal function and lower body mass index were more likely to be hospitalized during their treatment course. Charlson score and chemotherapy regimen were predictive of treatment completion. CONCLUSION: Concurrent CRT may be a feasible treatment option for healthier older patients at the cost of high hospitalization rates. Pre-treatment factors linked to physiological age such as KPS ⩽80, Charlson score ⩾3, abnormal renal function should be considered at the time of treatment decision.

Xerostomia in patients treated for oropharyngeal carcinoma: comparing linear accelerator-based intensity-modulated radiation therapy with helical tomotherapy.

BACKGROUND: In comparison to sliding-window intensity-modulated radiation therapy (sw-IMRT), we hypothesized that helical tomotherapy (HT) would achieve similar locoregional control and, at the same time, decrease the parotid gland dose, thus leading to a xerostomia reduction. METHODS: The association between radiation techniques, mean parotid dose, and xerostomia incidence, was reviewed in 119 patients with advanced oropharyngeal carcinoma treated with concurrent chemoradiation using sw-IMRT (n = 59) or HT (n = 60). RESULTS: Ipsilateral and contralateral parotid mean doses were significantly lower for patients treated with HT versus sw-IMRT: 24 Gy versus 32 Gy ipsilaterally and 20 Gy versus 25 Gy contralaterally. The incidence of grade ≥2 xerostomia was significantly lower in the HT group than in the sw-IMRT group: 12% versus 78% at 6 months, 3% versus 51% at 12 months, and 0% versus 25% at 24 months. Total parotid mean dose <25 Gy was strongly associated to a lower incidence of grade ≥2 xerostomia at 6, 12, and 24 months. CONCLUSION: This retrospective series suggests that using HT can better spare the parotid glands while respecting quantitative analysis of normal tissue effects in the clinic (QUANTEC)'s criteria.

Effect of statins and anticoagulants on prostate cancer aggressiveness.

PURPOSE: Statins and anticoagulants (ACs) have both been associated with a less-aggressive prostate cancer (PCa) and a better outcome after treatment of localized PCa. The results of these studies might have been confounded because patients might often take both medications. We examined their respective influence on PCa aggressiveness at initial diagnosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed 381 patients treated with either external beam radiotherapy or brachytherapy for low-risk (n = 152), intermediate-risk (n = 142), or high-risk (n = 87) localized PCa. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to investigate an association between these drug classes and prostate cancer aggressiveness. We tested whether the concomitant use of statins and ACs had a different effect than that of either AC or statin use alone. RESULTS: Of the 381 patients, 172 (45.1%) were taking statins and 141 (37.0%) ACs; 105 patients (27.6%) used both. On univariate analysis, the statin and AC users were associated with the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level (p = .017) and National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk group (p = .0022). On multivariate analysis, statin use was associated with a PSA level <10 ng/mL (odds ratio, 2.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-6.8; p = .012) and a PSA level >20 ng/mL (odds ratio, 0.29; 95% confidence interval, 0.08-0.83; p = .03). The use of ACs was associated with a PSA level >20 ng/mL (odds ratio, 0.13; 95% confidence interval, 0.02-0.59, p = .02). CONCLUSION: Both AC and statins have an effect on PCa aggressiveness, with statins having a more stringent relationship with the PSA level, highlighting the importance of considering statin use in studies of PCa aggressiveness.

Bone marrow-sparing intensity-modulated radiation therapy for Stage I seminoma.

BACKGROUND: A direct association between radiotherapy dose, side-effects and secondary cancers has been described in patients with seminoma. A treatment planning study was performed in order to compare computed tomography-based traditional radiotherapy (CT-tRT) versus bone marrow-sparing intensity-modulated radiation therapy (BMS-IMRT) in patients with Stage I seminoma. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We optimized in 10 patients a CT-tRT and a BMS-IMRT treatment plan to deliver 20 Gy to the para-aortic nodes. CT-tRT and IMRT consisted of anteroposterior-posterioranterior parallel-opposed and seven non-opposed coplanar fields using 16 and 6-MV photon energies, respectively. Dose-Volume Histograms for clinical target volume (CTV), planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OARs) were compared for both techniques using Wilcoxon matched-pair signed rank-test. RESULTS: D(mean) to CTV and PTV were similar for both techniques, even if CT-tRT showed a slightly improved target coverage in terms of PTV-D(95%) (19.7 vs. 19.5 Gy, p = 0.005) and PTV-V(95%) (100 vs. 99.7%, p = 0.011) compared to BMS-IMRT. BMS-IMRT resulted in a significant reduction (5.2 Gy, p = 0.005) in the D(mean) to the active bone marrow (ABM). The V(100%) and V(75%) of the OARs were reduced with BMS-IMRT by: ABM-V(100%) = 51.7% and ABM-V(75%) = 42.3%; bowel-V(100%) = 15.7% and bowel-V(75%) = 16.8%; stomach-V(100%) = 22% and stomach-V(75%) = 27.7%; pancreas-V(100%) = 37.1% and pancreas-V(75%) = 35.9% (p = 0.005 for all variables). CONCLUSIONS: BMS-IMRT reduces markedly the dose to the OARs compared to CT-tRT. This should translate into a reduction in acute and long-term toxicity, as well as into the risk of secondary solid and hematological cancers.