Cargando…
Follow up after IMRT in oral cavity cancer: update
PURPOSE: Except for early stages (T1/2 N0), the prognosis for patients with oral cavity cancer (OCC) is known to be worse than for those with pharyngeal carcinoma. While definitive intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT)-chemotherapy affords loco-regional control rates (LRC) of approximately 80...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2012
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3488022/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22686297 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-7-84 |
_version_ | 1782248568346640384 |
---|---|
author | Studer, Gabriela Brown, Michelle Bredell, Marius Graetz, Klaus W Huber, Gerhard Linsenmeier, Claudia Najafi, Yousef Riesterer, Oliver Rordorf, Tamara Schmid, Stephan Glanzmann, Christoph |
author_facet | Studer, Gabriela Brown, Michelle Bredell, Marius Graetz, Klaus W Huber, Gerhard Linsenmeier, Claudia Najafi, Yousef Riesterer, Oliver Rordorf, Tamara Schmid, Stephan Glanzmann, Christoph |
author_sort | Studer, Gabriela |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: Except for early stages (T1/2 N0), the prognosis for patients with oral cavity cancer (OCC) is known to be worse than for those with pharyngeal carcinoma. While definitive intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT)-chemotherapy affords loco-regional control rates (LRC) of approximately 80% in advanced pharyngeal cancer, corresponding rates are reported to be much lower for OCC. The aim of this work was to evaluate loco-regional disease control and overall survival (OAS) in a relatively large OCC patient cohort treated in the IMRT era. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between October 2002 and June 2011, 160 OCC patients were treated with curative intention IMRT at our department. 122 patients (76%) were referred with primary disease and 38 patients (24%) with a recurrent OCC at least 3 months after surgery alone. Definitive IMRT was performed in 44/160 patients (28%), whilst 116 patients underwent previous surgery. Simultaneous systemic therapy was administered in 72%. RESULTS: Patients with postoperative IMRT (+/−systemic therapy) with R0-1 status (n = 99) reached significantly higher LRC/OAS rates than patients following IMRT for macroscopic disease (n = 61), with 84%/80% versus 38%/33% at 3 years, respectively (p < 0.0001). This was found in patients treated for initial, as well as recurrent, disease. Less than 2% persisting grade 3/4 late effects were observed. CONCLUSIONS: IMRT for R0-1 situations translated into a highly significant superior LRC and OAS compared to the IMRT cohort treated for macroscopic disease. Treatment was well tolerated. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3488022 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2012 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-34880222012-11-03 Follow up after IMRT in oral cavity cancer: update Studer, Gabriela Brown, Michelle Bredell, Marius Graetz, Klaus W Huber, Gerhard Linsenmeier, Claudia Najafi, Yousef Riesterer, Oliver Rordorf, Tamara Schmid, Stephan Glanzmann, Christoph Radiat Oncol Research PURPOSE: Except for early stages (T1/2 N0), the prognosis for patients with oral cavity cancer (OCC) is known to be worse than for those with pharyngeal carcinoma. While definitive intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT)-chemotherapy affords loco-regional control rates (LRC) of approximately 80% in advanced pharyngeal cancer, corresponding rates are reported to be much lower for OCC. The aim of this work was to evaluate loco-regional disease control and overall survival (OAS) in a relatively large OCC patient cohort treated in the IMRT era. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between October 2002 and June 2011, 160 OCC patients were treated with curative intention IMRT at our department. 122 patients (76%) were referred with primary disease and 38 patients (24%) with a recurrent OCC at least 3 months after surgery alone. Definitive IMRT was performed in 44/160 patients (28%), whilst 116 patients underwent previous surgery. Simultaneous systemic therapy was administered in 72%. RESULTS: Patients with postoperative IMRT (+/−systemic therapy) with R0-1 status (n = 99) reached significantly higher LRC/OAS rates than patients following IMRT for macroscopic disease (n = 61), with 84%/80% versus 38%/33% at 3 years, respectively (p < 0.0001). This was found in patients treated for initial, as well as recurrent, disease. Less than 2% persisting grade 3/4 late effects were observed. CONCLUSIONS: IMRT for R0-1 situations translated into a highly significant superior LRC and OAS compared to the IMRT cohort treated for macroscopic disease. Treatment was well tolerated. BioMed Central 2012-06-11 /pmc/articles/PMC3488022/ /pubmed/22686297 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-7-84 Text en Copyright ©2012 Studer et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Studer, Gabriela Brown, Michelle Bredell, Marius Graetz, Klaus W Huber, Gerhard Linsenmeier, Claudia Najafi, Yousef Riesterer, Oliver Rordorf, Tamara Schmid, Stephan Glanzmann, Christoph Follow up after IMRT in oral cavity cancer: update |
title | Follow up after IMRT in oral cavity cancer: update |
title_full | Follow up after IMRT in oral cavity cancer: update |
title_fullStr | Follow up after IMRT in oral cavity cancer: update |
title_full_unstemmed | Follow up after IMRT in oral cavity cancer: update |
title_short | Follow up after IMRT in oral cavity cancer: update |
title_sort | follow up after imrt in oral cavity cancer: update |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3488022/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22686297 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-7-84 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT studergabriela followupafterimrtinoralcavitycancerupdate AT brownmichelle followupafterimrtinoralcavitycancerupdate AT bredellmarius followupafterimrtinoralcavitycancerupdate AT graetzklausw followupafterimrtinoralcavitycancerupdate AT hubergerhard followupafterimrtinoralcavitycancerupdate AT linsenmeierclaudia followupafterimrtinoralcavitycancerupdate AT najafiyousef followupafterimrtinoralcavitycancerupdate AT riestereroliver followupafterimrtinoralcavitycancerupdate AT rordorftamara followupafterimrtinoralcavitycancerupdate AT schmidstephan followupafterimrtinoralcavitycancerupdate AT glanzmannchristoph followupafterimrtinoralcavitycancerupdate |