Cargando…
Dose escalation in oropharyngeal cancer: a comparison of simultaneous integrated boost and brachytherapy boost
BACKGROUND: Local recurrence is the most common pattern of failure in head and neck cancer. It can therefore be hypothesised that some of these patients would benefit from an intensified local treatment, such as radiation dose escalation of the primary tumour. This study compares treatment and toxic...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10082532/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37029424 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-023-02256-x |
_version_ | 1785021332503658496 |
---|---|
author | Embring, Anna Onjukka, Eva Mercke, Claes Lax, Ingmar Berglund, Anders Friesland, Signe |
author_facet | Embring, Anna Onjukka, Eva Mercke, Claes Lax, Ingmar Berglund, Anders Friesland, Signe |
author_sort | Embring, Anna |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Local recurrence is the most common pattern of failure in head and neck cancer. It can therefore be hypothesised that some of these patients would benefit from an intensified local treatment, such as radiation dose escalation of the primary tumour. This study compares treatment and toxicity outcomes from two different boost modalities in oropharyngeal cancer: simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) and brachytherapy boost. METHODS: Two hundred and forty-four consecutive patients treated with > 72 Gy for oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma between 2011 and 2018 at our institution were retrospectively analysed. Data on side effects were collected from a local quality registry and supplemented with a review of medical records. Patients receiving a brachytherapy boost first had external beam radiotherapy consisting of 68 Gy in 2 Gy fractions to the gross tumour volume (GTV), and elective radiotherapy to the neck bilaterally. The brachytherapy boost was typically given using pulsed dose rate, 15 fractions and 0.56–0.66 Gy per fraction [total dose in EQD2 = 75.4–76.8 Gy (α/β = 10)]. The typical dose escalated radiotherapy with external beam radiotherapy only, was delivered using SIB with 74,8 Gy in 2.2 Gy fractions [EQD2 = 76.0 Gy (α/β = 10)] to the primary tumour, 68 Gy in 2 Gy fractions to GTV + 10 mm margin and elective radiotherapy to the neck bilaterally. RESULTS: Dose escalation by SIB was given to 111 patients and brachytherapy boost to 134 patients. The most common type of cancer was base of tongue (55%), followed by tonsillar cancer (42%). The majority of patients had T3- or T4-tumours and 84% were HPV-positive. The 5-year OS was 72,4% (95% CI 66.9–78.3) and the median follow-up was 6.1 years. Comparing the two different dose escalation modalities we found no significant differences in OS or PFS and these results remained after a propensity-score matched analysis was performed. The analysis of grade ≥ 3 side effects showed no significant differences between the two different dose escalation techniques. CONCLUSIONS: We found no significant differences in survival or grade ≥ 3 side effects comparing simultaneous integrated boost and brachytherapy boost as alternative dose escalation modalities in the treatment of oropharyngeal cancer. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13014-023-02256-x. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10082532 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-100825322023-04-09 Dose escalation in oropharyngeal cancer: a comparison of simultaneous integrated boost and brachytherapy boost Embring, Anna Onjukka, Eva Mercke, Claes Lax, Ingmar Berglund, Anders Friesland, Signe Radiat Oncol Research BACKGROUND: Local recurrence is the most common pattern of failure in head and neck cancer. It can therefore be hypothesised that some of these patients would benefit from an intensified local treatment, such as radiation dose escalation of the primary tumour. This study compares treatment and toxicity outcomes from two different boost modalities in oropharyngeal cancer: simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) and brachytherapy boost. METHODS: Two hundred and forty-four consecutive patients treated with > 72 Gy for oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma between 2011 and 2018 at our institution were retrospectively analysed. Data on side effects were collected from a local quality registry and supplemented with a review of medical records. Patients receiving a brachytherapy boost first had external beam radiotherapy consisting of 68 Gy in 2 Gy fractions to the gross tumour volume (GTV), and elective radiotherapy to the neck bilaterally. The brachytherapy boost was typically given using pulsed dose rate, 15 fractions and 0.56–0.66 Gy per fraction [total dose in EQD2 = 75.4–76.8 Gy (α/β = 10)]. The typical dose escalated radiotherapy with external beam radiotherapy only, was delivered using SIB with 74,8 Gy in 2.2 Gy fractions [EQD2 = 76.0 Gy (α/β = 10)] to the primary tumour, 68 Gy in 2 Gy fractions to GTV + 10 mm margin and elective radiotherapy to the neck bilaterally. RESULTS: Dose escalation by SIB was given to 111 patients and brachytherapy boost to 134 patients. The most common type of cancer was base of tongue (55%), followed by tonsillar cancer (42%). The majority of patients had T3- or T4-tumours and 84% were HPV-positive. The 5-year OS was 72,4% (95% CI 66.9–78.3) and the median follow-up was 6.1 years. Comparing the two different dose escalation modalities we found no significant differences in OS or PFS and these results remained after a propensity-score matched analysis was performed. The analysis of grade ≥ 3 side effects showed no significant differences between the two different dose escalation techniques. CONCLUSIONS: We found no significant differences in survival or grade ≥ 3 side effects comparing simultaneous integrated boost and brachytherapy boost as alternative dose escalation modalities in the treatment of oropharyngeal cancer. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13014-023-02256-x. BioMed Central 2023-04-07 /pmc/articles/PMC10082532/ /pubmed/37029424 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-023-02256-x Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Embring, Anna Onjukka, Eva Mercke, Claes Lax, Ingmar Berglund, Anders Friesland, Signe Dose escalation in oropharyngeal cancer: a comparison of simultaneous integrated boost and brachytherapy boost |
title | Dose escalation in oropharyngeal cancer: a comparison of simultaneous integrated boost and brachytherapy boost |
title_full | Dose escalation in oropharyngeal cancer: a comparison of simultaneous integrated boost and brachytherapy boost |
title_fullStr | Dose escalation in oropharyngeal cancer: a comparison of simultaneous integrated boost and brachytherapy boost |
title_full_unstemmed | Dose escalation in oropharyngeal cancer: a comparison of simultaneous integrated boost and brachytherapy boost |
title_short | Dose escalation in oropharyngeal cancer: a comparison of simultaneous integrated boost and brachytherapy boost |
title_sort | dose escalation in oropharyngeal cancer: a comparison of simultaneous integrated boost and brachytherapy boost |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10082532/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37029424 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-023-02256-x |
work_keys_str_mv | AT embringanna doseescalationinoropharyngealcanceracomparisonofsimultaneousintegratedboostandbrachytherapyboost AT onjukkaeva doseescalationinoropharyngealcanceracomparisonofsimultaneousintegratedboostandbrachytherapyboost AT merckeclaes doseescalationinoropharyngealcanceracomparisonofsimultaneousintegratedboostandbrachytherapyboost AT laxingmar doseescalationinoropharyngealcanceracomparisonofsimultaneousintegratedboostandbrachytherapyboost AT berglundanders doseescalationinoropharyngealcanceracomparisonofsimultaneousintegratedboostandbrachytherapyboost AT frieslandsigne doseescalationinoropharyngealcanceracomparisonofsimultaneousintegratedboostandbrachytherapyboost |