Intraoperative radiation therapy opportunities for clinical practice normalization: Data recording and innovative development.

BACKGROUND: Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) refers to the delivery of a high dose of radiation at the time of surgery. AIM: To analyze clinical and research-oriented innovative activities developed in a 17-year period using intraoperative electron-radiation therapy (IOeRT) as a component of treatment in a multidisciplinary approach for cancer management. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 01/1995 to 03/2012 IOeRT procedures were registered in a specific Hospital-based database. Research and developments in imaging and recording for treatment planning implementation are active since 2006. RESULTS: 1004 patients were treated and 1036 IORT procedures completed. Median age of patients was 61 (range 5 months to 94 years). Gender distribution was male in 54% of cases and female in 46%. Disease status at the time of IORT was 796 (77%) primary and 240 (23%) recurrent. Cancer type distribution included: 62% gastrointestinal, 18% sarcoma, 5% pancreas, 2% paediatric, 3% breast, 77 7% oligotopic recurrences, 2% other. IORT technical characteristics were: Applicator size 5 cm 22%, 6 cm 21%, 7 cm 21%, 8 cm 15%, 9 cm 6%, 10 cm 7% 12 cm 5% 15 cm 3%. Electron energies: 6 MeV 19%, 8 MeV 15%, 10 MeV 15%, 12 MeV 23%, 15 MeV 19%, 18 MeV 6%, other 3%. Multiple fields: 108 (11%). Dose: 7.5 Gy 3%, 10 Gy 35%, 12 Gy 3%, 12.5 Gy 49%, 15 Gy 5%, other 5%. CONCLUSION: An IORT programme developed in an Academic Hospital based on practice-oriented medical decisions is an attractive interdisciplinary oncology initiative proven to be able to generate an intensive clinical activity for cancer patient quality care and a competitive source of scientific patient-oriented research, development and innovation.

Interval between neoadjuvant treatment and definitive surgery in locally advanced rectal cancer: impact on response and oncologic outcomes.

PURPOSE: The optimal waiting period between neoadjuvant treatment completion and surgery in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is controversial. The specific purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of prolonging this interval on the pathologic response, postoperative morbidity, and long-term oncologic outcomes. METHODS: Retrospective data analysis is reported from LARC patients who had been treated with chemoradiation followed by surgery and intra-operative radiotherapy, between February 1995 and December 2012. In total, two groups were studied, according to the time elapsed between neoadjuvant treatment and surgery: conventional interval (CI; <6 weeks) and delayed interval (DI; ≥6 weeks). Clinicopathological data related to tumor response, postoperative morbidity, and oncologic outcomes were compared. RESULTS: This study included 335 consecutive LARC patients. There was a higher proportion of patients with clinical staging nodal involvement (cN+) in the DI group (76.6 vs. 64.1 %; p = 0.01). The pathologic complete response (pCR) was not significantly different among groups (8.8 vs. 12.1 %; p = 0.34). Longer intervals did not affect complication incidence or severity or hospital admission length. Certain postneoadjuvant tumor effect parameters were significantly increased in the DI group, including N-downstaging and T-downsizing. After a median follow-up of 71 months, patients in the DI group presented with superior 5-year overall survival (OS) (55.9 vs. 70.4 %, p = 0.014); however, no statistically significant differences were observed in 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) or 5-year local control (LC) (69.9 vs. 74.9 %, p = 0.223; 90.4 vs. 94.5 %, p = 0.123, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: A modest surgical interval delay (≥6 weeks) did not increase postoperative complications and was identified as a favorable prognostic factor for OS, although no differences were observed in pCR, LC, or DFS. Innovative multidisciplinary strategies incorporating further time extension of the surgical interval can be safely explored.

Chemoradiation for resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma with or without intraoperative radiation therapy boost: Long-term outcomes.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: To analyze prognostic factors associated with long-term outcomes in patients with pancreatic cancer treated with chemoradiation therapy (CRT) and surgery with or without intraoperative electron beam radiotherapy (IOERT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: From January 1995 to December 2012, 60 patients with adenocarcinoma of the pancreas and locoregional disease (clinical stage IB [n = 13; 22%], IIA [n = 16; 27%], IIB [n = 22; 36%], IIIC [n = 9; 15%]) were treated with CRT (45-50.4 Gy before surgery [n = 19; 32%] and after surgery [n = 41; 68%]) and curative resection (R0 [n = 34; 57%], R1 [n = 26, 43%]). Twenty-nine patients (48%) also received a pre-anastomosis IOERT boost (applicator diameter size, 7-10 cm; dose, 10-15 Gy; beam energy, 9-18 MeV). RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 15.9 months (range, 1-182), 5-year overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and locoregional control were 20%, 13%, and 58%, respectively. Univariate analyses showed that R1 margin resection status (HR, 3.17; p = 0.04), not receiving IOERT (HR, 7.33; p = 0.01), and postoperative CRT (HR, 5.12; p = 0.04) were associated with a higher risk of locoregional recurrence. In the multivariate analysis, only margin resection status (HR, 3.0; p = 0.05) and not receiving IOERT (HR, 6.75; p = 0.01) retained significance with regard to locoregional recurrence. Postoperative mortality and perioperative complications were 3% (n = 2) and 43% (n = 26). CONCLUSIONS: Although local control is good in the radiation-boosted area, OS remains modest owing to high risk of distant metastases. Intensified locoregional treatment needs to be tested in the context of more efficient systemic therapy.

Prognostic impact of external beam radiation therapy in patients treated with and without extended surgery and intraoperative electrons for locally recurrent rectal cancer: 16-year experience in a single institution.

PURPOSE: To analyze prognostic factors associated with survival in patients after intraoperative electrons containing resective surgical rescue of locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC). METHODS AND MATERIALS: From January 1995 to December 2011, 60 patients with LRRC underwent extended surgery (n=38: multiorgan [43%], bone [28%], soft tissue [38%]) or nonextended (n=22) surgical resection, including a component of intraoperative electron-beam radiation therapy (IOERT) to the pelvic recurrence tumor bed. Twenty-eight (47%) of these patients also received external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) (range, 30.6-50.4 Gy). Survival outcomes were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method, and risk factors were identified by univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: The median follow-up time was 36 months (range, 2-189 months), and the 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year rates for locoregional control (LRC) and overall survival (OS) were 86%, 52%, and 44%; and 78%, 53%, 43%, respectively. On multivariate analysis, R1 resection, EBRT at the time of pelvic rerecurrence, no tumor fragmentation, and non-lymph node metastasis retained significance with regard to LRR. R1 resection and no tumor fragmentation showed a significant association with OS after adjustment for other covariates. CONCLUSIONS: EBRT treatment integrated for rescue, resection radicality, and not involved fragmented resection specimens are associated with improved LRC in patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer. Additionally, tumor fragmentation could be compensated by EBRT. Present results suggest that a significant group of patients with LRRC may benefit from EBRT treatment integrated with extended surgery and IOERT.

¹8F-FDG PET/CT-based treatment response evaluation in locally advanced rectal cancer: a prospective validation of long-term outcomes.

PURPOSE: To prospectively evaluate the usefulness of (18)F-FDG PET/CT) imaging for predicting histopathological response and long-term clinical outcomes in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). METHODS: This prospective study included 38 patients with a confirmed diagnosis of LARC (cT3-4 or cN+) who underwent (18)F-FDG PET/CT before and after neoadjuvant therapy (NAT). Total mesorectal excision was scheduled 6 weeks after NAT and was followed by an expert histopathological analysis of the surgical specimen. Baseline variables and previously identified maximum FDG standardized uptake value (SUVmax) cut-off values before NAT (SUVmaxPRE ≥6) and after NAT (SUVmaxPOST ≥2), and the absolute and percentage reductions from baseline SUVmax (∆SUVmax <4 and ∆SUVmax% <65 %, respectively) were applied to differentiate patients showing a metabolic tumour response from nonresponders. These features were correlated with tumour regression grade (TRG), disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Significantly higher 5-year DFS and OS were seen in 19 responders (TRG 3 or 4) than in 19 nonresponders (TRG 0-2; 94.4 vs. 48.8 %, p = 0.001; 94.7 vs. 63.2 %, p = 0.02, respectively). In multivariate analysis the only PET/CT SUVmax-based parameter significantly correlated with the likelihood of recurrence and survival was ∆SUV% <65 % (HR = 5.95, p = 0.02, for DFS; HR = 5.26, p = 0.04, for OS) CONCLUSION: This prospective study proved that (18)F-FDG PET/CT is a valuable imaging tool for assessing rectal cancer TRG and long-term prognosis, and could potentially serve as an intermediate endpoint in treatment optimization research and rectal cancer patient care.

Postchemoradiation resected locally advanced esophageal and gastroesophageal junction carcinoma: long-term outcome with or without intraoperative radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: To report feasibility, tolerance, anatomical topography of locoregional recurrence (LRR), and long-term outcome for esophageal and esophagogastric (EG) cancer patients treated with preoperative chemoradiation (CRT) and surgery with or without a radiation boost of intraoperative electron beam radiotherapy (IOERT). METHODS: From January 1995 to December 2010, 53 patients with primary esophageal (n = 26; 44 %) or EG carcinoma (n = 30; 56 %), and disease confined to locoregional area [clinical stage: IIb (n = 30; 57 %), IIIa (n = 14; 26 %), IIIb (n = 6; 11 %), IIIc (n = 3; 6 %)], were treated with preoperative CRT, curative (R0) resection with an extended (two-field) lymph node dissection in all cases. Thirty-seven patients also received a preanastomotic reconstruction IOERT boost (applicator diameter size 6-9 cm, dose 10-15 Gy, beam energy 6-15 MeV) over the tumor bed in the mediastinum and upper abdominal lymph node area. RESULTS: With a median follow-up time of 27.9 months (range, 0.2-148), LRR rate was 15 % (n = 8). Five-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival was 48 and 36 %, respectively. Univariate log-rank analyses showed that receiving IOERT was associated with lower risk of LRR (p = 0.004). On multivariate analysis, only the IOERT group retained significance in relation to LRR (odds ratio, 0.08; 95 % confidence interval, 0.01-0.48; p = 0.01). Postoperative mortality and perioperative complications were 11 % (n = 6) and 30 % (n = 16). CONCLUSIONS: Local control is high in the radiation-boosted area, but OS remains modest, given the high risk of distant metastases. Intensified locoregional treatment needs to be tested in the context of more efficient concurrent, neo-, and adjuvant systemic therapy.

Recidiva bioquímica en los pacientes con cáncer de próstata después de tratamiento radical. Estudio comparativo entre prostatectomía y radioterapia / Biochemical recurrence in patients with prostate cancer after radical treatment. Comparative study of prostatectomy vs. radiotherapy

OBJETIVO: Comparar la supervivencia libre de recidiva bioquímica entre la prostatectomía radical y la radioterapia en los pacientes con cáncer de próstata localizado de riesgo bajo e intermedio. MÉTODO: Estudio retrospectivo de 435 pacientes con cáncer de próstata localizado, el 65% tratado con prostatectomía y el 35% con radioterapia. El método de Kaplan-Meier se ha utilizado para evaluar la supervivencia libre de recidiva bioquímica y el test de long rank, Breslow y Tarone-Ware para evaluar sus diferencias entre los distintos grupos con sus intervalos de confianza al 95%. RESULTADOS: La mediana de seguimiento de la serie fue de 60 meses (3-106). Presentaron recidiva bioquímica el 21% de los pacientes, el 22% de los tratados con prostatectomía y el 19% de los tratados con radioterapia (p=0,47). No se observaron diferencias significativas en ambos grupos de riesgo en función del tratamiento realizado (p=0,60 en el de bajo riesgo y p=0,32 en el de riesgo intermedio). La supervivencia libre de recidiva bioquímica a los 3, 5 y 7 años para la prostatectomía fue del 84%, 75% y 70%, mientras que para la radioterapia fue del 97%, 84% y 64% respectivamente. CONCLUSIONES: No existen diferencias significativas en la supervivencia actuarial libre de recidiva bioquímica en los pacientes con cáncer de próstata localizado de riesgo bajo e intermedio tratados con prostatectomía o radioterapia. Debido al entrecruzamiento de las curvas de supervivencia no descartamos que con un seguimiento más prolongado estos resultados pudieran modificarse(AU)

OBJECTIVES: To compare the biochemical relapse-free survival between radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy in patients with localized prostate cancer of low and intermediate recurrence risk. METHODS: A retrospective study of 435 patients with localized prostate cancer, radical prostatectomy was performed in 65% of patients and radiotherapy was completed in 35%. The Kaplan-Meier Estimator was used to assess the biochemical relapse-free survival and long-rank test, Breslow and Tarone-Ware to evaluate the differences between the groups with confidence intervals at 95%. RESULTS: The median follow-up of the series was 60 months (3-106). Biochemical recurrence was diagnosed in 21% of patients: 22% of those were treated with prostatectomy and 19% with radiotherapy (p = 0.47). No significant differences were observed according to risk group (p = 0.60 in the low risk and p = 0.32 in the intermediate risk). Tree, five and seven-year actuarial biochemical recurrence-free survival for prostatectomy were 84%, 75% and 70%, while for radiotherapy were 97%, 84% and 64% respectively. CONCLUSIONS: There are no significant differences in actuarial biochemical recurrence free survival in patients with localized prostate cancer of low and intermediate risk treated with prostatectomy or radiation therapy. Due to the crossing of the survival curves we do not rule out that with longer follow-up these results could be modified(AU)

Radical prostatectomy versus external-beam radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: long-term effect on biochemical control-in search of the optimal treatment.

BACKGROUND: The optimal management of patients with clinically localized prostate carcinoma remains undefined due in part to the absence of well-designed, randomized trials. METHODS: This retrospective study comprised 505 patients diagnosed with low- or intermediate- risk prostate cancer in 1998-2005 and treated at Hospital Gregorio Marañón (Spain) with radical prostatectomy (RP) or external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT). No adjuvant therapy was administered. Biochemical relapse was defined as a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level ≥0.4 ng/ml for RP cases and nadir + 2 for EBRT cases. RP was performed in 271 patients (53.6%) and EBRT in 234 patients (46.4%). The median follow-up was 60 months. The analysis end point was to compare the biochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS) between the two groups. RESULTS: The 5-year bRFS rates for RP and EBRT were 79 ± 2% and 86 ± 2%, respectively (P = 0.48). Multivariate analysis indicated that initial PSA (P = 0.00), perineural invasion in the biopsy specimen (P = 0.00), Gleason score (P = 0.04), EBRT dose (P = 0.02), and positive margins (P = 0.00) were independent predictors of relapse. A decision tree model was constructed with these variables. In the EBRT cohort, a nadir PSA of <0.3 ng/ml was associated with the best 5-year bRFS (96.6 vs. 56.5% if nadir PSA > 1.3 ng/ml). Late biochemical failure (>5 years) was more frequent in the RT group and with low-dose EBRT (≤72 Gy). CONCLUSIONS: The biochemical failure rates were similar between PR and EBRT in low- and intermediate-risk subgroups. Outcome was determined by classic pre-treatment features, perineural invasion, low-dose EBRT (≤72 Gy), and nadir PSA value in the RT cohort.

(18)F-FDG PET bio-metabolic monitoring of neoadjuvant therapy effects in rectal cancer: focus on nodal disease characteristics.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate efficacy of (18)F-FDG PET(CT) in the staging and re staging of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer, its potential role in predicting pathological response to neoadjuvant therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with confirmed diagnosis of rectal cancer (T2-4 or N+) were prospectively studied with (18)F-FDG PET before and after neoadjuvant therapy. Surgery was programmed 4-6 weeks after treatment followed by an expert histological analysis of the surgical specimen. Response to neoadjuvant treatment was assessed using two specific variables: difference in SUV (difSUV) pre/post-neoadjuvant treatment and response index (RI). RESULTS: A total of 64 patients were enrolled for pathological and bio-metabolic response assessment. Compared to cN0, cN+ patients had a higher SUV(1) mean value (6.5 vs. 7.6, p=0.04) and ypN+ patients had higher SUV(2) mean values (2.4 vs 3.5, p=0.06). difSUV values of ≥4 was the most efficient diagnostic parameter (sensitivity=45.8%, specificity=86.2%, positive predictive value (PPV)=73.3%, negative predictive value(NPV)=65.7%). With an RI of 66.6%, the sensitivity was 38.5%, specificity=81.5%, PPV=66.6%, and NPV=57.8%. Patients who experienced disease progression had an RI≤66% and a difSUV≤4. CONCLUSION: (18)F-FDG PET has proven to be an accurate diagnostic technique for assessing rectal cancer response to neoadjuvant therapy. The results in terms of sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV were similar, if not superior, to those reported with other diagnostic imaging techniques.

Prognostic factors for disease-free survival in patients with T3-4 or N+ rectal cancer treated with preoperative chemoradiation therapy, surgery, and intraoperative irradiation.

PURPOSE: Fluoropyrimidine-radiosensitizing agents in conjunction with preoperative radiotherapy have proven to induce tumor and nodal downstaging effects, sphincter preservation promotion, and mid-term favorable survival rates. Intraoperative electron beam radiation therapy may improve pelvic control in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer stages. Potential predictive factors for response and disease-free survival, with intense local multidisciplinary approach, are analyzed. METHODS AND MATERIALS: One hundred fifteen patients with rectal cancer were treated with oral 5-fluorouracil or Tegafur with preoperative radiotherapy, surgery, and intraoperative electron beam radiation therapy to identify potential pre- and on-treatment characteristics that might be of prognostic value for disease outcome. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. RESULTS: Older patients and those treated with Tegafur were more likely to achieve a major histologic response, categorized as persistence of minimal residual microscopic disease foci in the surgical specimen ("mic" response). Factors unfavorably associated with disease-free survival in the multivariate model were male gender and persistence of macroscopic disease in the rectal wall ("mac" response). Accordingly, 3-year disease-free survival rates in the groups of patients with 0, 1, or 2 of these risk factors were 100%, 81%, and 53%, respectively (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Females with an intense pathologic response (pT(mic) residue) to preoperative chemoradiotherapy have an excellent 3-year disease-free survival. This information might be of interest for stratification of patients in the development of adjuvant treatment trials.

Preoperative chemoradiation with oral tegafur within a multidisciplinary therapeutic approach in patients with T3-4 rectal cancer.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the activity in terms of downstaging histologic patterns of residual tumor and clinical tolerance of a neoadjuvant chemoradiation program with oral tegafur for rectal cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: From May 1998 to May 2001, 62 consecutive patients with cT(3-4) or cN(+) rectal cancer, or both, were treated with 45-50 Gy (1.8 Gy/day; 25 fractions) and oral tegafur 1200 mg/day. Surgery was performed 6 weeks after the completion of chemoradiation. All patients received a boost with intraoperative electron beam radiotherapy (IOERT) over the presacral space. RESULTS: Grade 3-4 hematologic toxicity consisted on Grade 3 anemia in 1 patient. Nonhematologic toxicity was mild. Fifteen patients (23%) had Grade 3 dermatitis, 16 (25%) had Grade 3, and 2 (3%) had Grade 4 proctitis. The median dose of radiotherapy was 50.4 Gy. Surgery consisted on anterior resection in 38 patients (61%) and abdominoperineal amputation in 24 (39%). Five complete pathologic responses were observed (8%), and 29 patients (47%) had a minimal microscopic residual tumor (mic category). The total downstaging rate was 68%. With a median follow-up of 46 months, the pelvic control rate was 95%, disease-free survival 74.1%, and overall survival 76.5%. CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant chemoradiation with oral tegafur is feasible, well tolerated, and active, with the additional advantage of offering the convenience of oral chemotherapy.

Neoadjuvant chemoradiation with tegafur in cancer of the pancreas: initial analysis of clinical tolerance and outcome.

The early institutional experience in the neoadjuvant treatment of potentially resectable pancreatic carcinoma using oral Tegafur as radioenhancing agent is analyzed. Fifteen patients (10 male and 5 female, mean age of 61 years) were treated over a 30-month period. Tegafur dose was 1,200 mg/d along the external radiotherapy period (45-55 consecutive days). Preoperative radiotherapy achieved a total dose of 45 to 50 Gy (1.8 Gy/d). Intraoperative electron boost (10-15 Gy) was delivered at the time of surgery. Hematologic tolerance showed a significant decrease of neutrophil and platelet counts from the outset to the end of the neoadjuvant period (p = 0.001 and p = 0.004, respectively). Five grade III vomiting episodes (33%) were also registered. In 9 patients (60%), surgical resection was performed after chemoradiation. Three complete pathologic responses (pT0 specimens) were identified; in seven cases, the resection achieved tumor-free surgical margins of the specimen. With a median follow-up of 21 months, median survival time was 17 months, with actuarial rates of 45% at 1 year and 24% at 3 years. Median survival for the resected patients was 23 months, and for the unresected patients median survival was 8 months (p = 0.02). The overall median survival in completely resected patients was 28 months, with a 71% survival rate at 1 and 3 years. It is concluded that the treatment scheme described is feasible and acceptably tolerated. The use of oral Tegafur seems to induce results similar to those of other therapeutic protocols using intravenous radioenhancing chemotherapy.

Intraoperative presacral electron boost following preoperative chemoradiation in T3-4Nx rectal cancer: initial local effects and clinical outcome analysis.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To analyze early results of a single institution experience using adjuvant intraoperative electron radiation therapy (IOERT) presacral boost in locally advanced rectal cancer following preoperative chemoradiation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a 63 month period (March 1995-June 2000), 100 consecutive T(3-4)N(x) rectal cancer patients were treated with preoperative chemoradiation (45-50 Gy plus oral Tegafur or 5-Fluorouracil continuous intravenous infusion), radical surgery and IOERT presacral boost (mean dose, 12.5 Gy; range, 10-15 Gy). Adjuvant chemotherapy (5-FU-leucovorin: 4-6 cycles) was given to 52 patients. The median age was 63 years, and 39 patients were >or=70 years old (65 males). Clinical staging was performed with computed tomography (94%) and/or endorectal ultrasound (71%) categorizing 90 cT(3), 10 cT(4), 20 cN(x), and 36 cN(+). Abdomino-perineal resection was performed in 41 cases. RESULTS: The IOERT cancellation rate was 6%. With a median follow-up of 23 months in IOERT treated patients, three developed pelvic recurrence: one anastomotic and one in the posterior vaginal wall (simultaneously with distant metastatic disease); and one presacral (in-field IOERT) as the only site of initial failure. Distant metastasis has been observed in 14 patients (exceptionally in pT(0-1) downstaged patients: 1/20; 5%). Overall treatment tolerances, including neoadjuvant and surgical segments, were acceptable. The actuarial 4-year estimations of local control, disease-free and overall survival are 94, 75 and 65%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: IOERT electron boost to the presacral region is feasible to integrate systematically in the intensive combined treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer, including neoadjuvant chemoradiation segment. Topography of pelvic recurrences identified 2/3 relapses located in non-IOERT boosted anatomic intrapelvic sites: posterior vaginal wall and anastomotic suture. Presacral recurrence in locally advanced rectal cancer seems to be of low incidence, in a non-subspecialized academic surgical practice coordinated with a multidisciplinary oncology evaluation context, if an IOERT boost is included as a component of treatment together with preoperative chemoradiation.