Costs of treatment intensification for head and neck cancer: concomitant chemoradiation randomised for radioprotection with amifostine.

This study presents an overview of costs of a chemoradiation protocol in head and neck cancer patients and an analysis of whether prevention of acute toxicity with amifostine results in a reduction to costs. Fifty-four patients treated with weekly paclitaxel concomitant with radiation were randomised for treatment with subcutaneously administered amifostine (500 mg) and analysed with respect to costs of treatment. Total costs for work-up, treatment and toxicity were calculated per treatment arm. No significant differences were found between treatment arms in preliminary results regarding response (98%), toxicity and 2-year survival (77%). Average costs for toxicity were Euro 3.789, largely influenced by hospital admissions (Euro 3.013). Total costs for amifostine administration amounted to Euro 6.495 per patient. The average total costs of treatment were Euro 19.647 versus Euro 13.592 with or without amifostine, respectively. The applied (subcutaneous) dose of amifostine appeared to be insufficient for radioprotection and reduction of related costs in the concomitant chemoradiation scheme, whereas total costs increased remarkably. Although it would be accompanied by a further cost raise, applying a higher amifostine dose might reduce (mucosal) toxicity and therefore in the long run lower related costs for hospital admission and tube feeding.

Rotterdam and Brussels CT-based neck nodal delineation compared with the surgical levels as defined by the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE: Rotterdam and Brussels have independently published guidelines for the definition and delineation of CT-based neck nodal Levels I-VI. This paper first reports on the adequacy of contouring of the Rotterdam delineation protocol. Rotterdam and Brussels differed slightly in translating the original surgical level definitions as proposed by the 2002 American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery (AAO-HNS) to CT guidelines. To adapt to the surgical level definitions to come to a unifying concept, adjustments of both CT-based classifications are proposed. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The clinical neck nodal target volumes of patients irradiated in Rotterdam by three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) between December 1998 and March 2001 were reviewed. Thirty-four patients with N0 and 27 patients with N+ disease with primary tumors located in the oral cavity (n = 1) oropharynx (n = 24), hypopharynx (n = 7), and larynx (n = 29) were evaluated. Seven patients underwent unilateral (3 N0 patients, 4 N+ patients) and 54 underwent bilateral (31 N0 patients, 23 N+ patients) irradiation of the neck. In 11 N+ patients, 3D-CRT of the neck was followed by unilateral neck dissection. The dose to the primary and nonresected N+ necks was 70 Gy and to the N0 neck was 46 Gy. Neck levels were analyzed for adequacy of contouring, dose distribution, and patterns of relapse. The mean dose and the percentage of the volume receiving a minimum of 95% (V95) or >107% (V107) of the prescribed dose was computed. RESULTS: In 4 patients treated with bilateral 3D-CRT, contouring was not in concordance with the guidelines of the protocol. The V95 and V107 in the 81 adequately contoured N0 necks (63 irradiated N0 necks from 33 N0 patients, 18 irradiated N0 necks from 24 N+ patients) was 95.6% and 6.3%, respectively. For the 26 N+ necks (15 N+ necks from 13 N+ RT-only patients, 11 N+ necks from 11 preoperatively irradiated patients), the V95 and V107 was 94.6% and 6.7%, respectively. With a median follow-up of 29 months, in 4 (8.6%) of 46 patients treated by 3D-CRT only, regional relapse was found. An actuarial regional and locoregional relapse-free survival and disease-free survival rate at 3 years of 90%, 78%, and 68%, respectively, was observed. All regional relapses were observed in the N0 necks of patients with supraglottic laryngeal carcinoma. Taking the surgical 2002 AAO-HNS classification as a reference, adjustments are proposed for the Rotterdam and Brussels delineation protocols to arrive at a unified CT-based neck nodal classification. CONCLUSION: Adequate dose coverage for the Rotterdam CT-based contours of the neck nodal levels was found. In the RT-only patients, only four failures were observed: one regional and three locoregional relapses. As a next step in optimizing the current Rotterdam and Brussels CT-based delineation protocols, adaptations are proposed to resolve the discrepancies compared with the 2002 AAO-HNS surgical classification.

CT-based delineation of lymph node levels and related CTVs in the node-negative neck: DAHANCA, EORTC, GORTEC, NCIC,RTOG consensus guidelines.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The appropriate application of 3-D CRT and IMRT for HNSCC requires a standardization of the procedures for the delineation of the target volumes. Over the past few years, two proposals--the so-called Brussels guidelines from Grégoire et al., and the so-called Rotterdam guidelines from Nowak et al.--emerged from the literature for the delineation of the neck node levels. Detailed examination of these proposals however revealed some important discrepancies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Within this framework, the Brussels and Rotterdam groups decided to review their guidelines and derive a common set of recommendations for delineation of neck node levels. This proposal was then discussed with representatives of major cooperative groups in Europe (DAHANCA, EORTC, GORTEC) and in North America (NCIC, RTOG), which, after some additional refinements, have endorsed them. The objective of the present article is to present the consensus guidelines for the delineation of the node levels in the node-negative neck. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: First a short discussion of the discrepancies between the previous Brussels and the Rotterdam guidelines is presented. The general philosophy of the consensus guidelines and the methodology used to resolve the various discrepancies are then described. The consensus proposal is then presented and representative CTVs that are consistent with these guidelines are illustrated on CT sections. Last, the limitations of the consensus guidelines are discussed and some concerns about the direct applications of these guidelines to the node-positive neck and the post-operative neck are described.

Tools for optimal tissue sparing in concomitant chemoradiation of advanced head and neck cancer: subcutaneous amifostine and computed tomography-based target delineation.

Organ preservation in patients with head and neck cancer can be achieved using concomitant chemoradiation protocols. Critical tissues can be spared using highly conformal radiation therapy techniques and/or radiation protectors. With three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT) tight target definitions of the primary tumor and neck nodal levels are mandatory. In 2000, a clinical trial for advanced-stage head and neck squamous cell carcinoma was initiated in Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Patients are treated with paclitaxel administered concomitantly with 3DCRT and randomized to receive subcutaneous (SC) amifostine or no amifostine. Those in the radioprotectant arm received amifostine 500 mg SC before each radiation therapy (RT) fraction. This article presents early findings on toxicity. Acute toxicity is evaluated according to Radiation Therapy Oncology Group criteria. Xerostomia was scored subjectively and by whole saliva measurements. Neck nodal levels were delineated in accordance with previously published computed tomography (CT)-based guidelines developed in Rotterdam. Forty-one patients are the subject of this report. In patients treated with amifostine, mucositis and dysphagia took longer to resolve than with conventional RT schedules. No difference in objective and subjective evaluation of xerostomia was seen between treatment arms. So far in this ongoing study, no advantage of SC amifostine has been detected. This might be because of the toxicity of the concomitant treatment itself, the dose of amifostine, the route of administration, or the insufficient sparing of critical structures by 3DCRT. These early findings and the ongoing development of better tissue-sparing techniques with more accurate CT-based target delineation protocols and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) are discussed.