Cargando…

Intensity-modulated versus 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy in the definitive treatment of esophageal cancer: comparison of outcomes and acute toxicity

BACKGROUND: Though the vast majority of seminal trials for locally advanced esophageal cancer (EC) utilized three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT), the advanced and highly conformal technology known as intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) can decrease doses to critical cardiopulmonary o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Haefner, Matthias Felix, Lang, Kristin, Verma, Vivek, Koerber, Stefan Alexander, Uhlmann, Lorenz, Debus, Juergen, Sterzing, Florian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5558777/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28810885
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-017-0863-3
_version_ 1783257448519303168
author Haefner, Matthias Felix
Lang, Kristin
Verma, Vivek
Koerber, Stefan Alexander
Uhlmann, Lorenz
Debus, Juergen
Sterzing, Florian
author_facet Haefner, Matthias Felix
Lang, Kristin
Verma, Vivek
Koerber, Stefan Alexander
Uhlmann, Lorenz
Debus, Juergen
Sterzing, Florian
author_sort Haefner, Matthias Felix
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Though the vast majority of seminal trials for locally advanced esophageal cancer (EC) utilized three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT), the advanced and highly conformal technology known as intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) can decrease doses to critical cardiopulmonary organs. To date, there have been no studies comparing both modalities as part of definitive chemoradiation (dCRT) for EC. Herein, we investigated local control and survival and evaluated clinical factors associated with these endpoints between cohorts. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 93 patients (3DCRT n = 49, IMRT n = 44) who received dCRT at our institution between 2000 and 2012 with the histologic diagnosis of nonmetastatic EC, a Karnofsky performance status of ≥70, curative treatment intent, and receipt of concomitant CRT. Patients were excluded if receiving <50 Gy. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to evaluate the endpoints of local relapse rate (LR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Cox proportional hazards modeling addressed factors associated with outcomes with univariate and multivariate approaches. Rates of acute toxicities and basic dosimetric parameters were compared between 3DCRT and IMRT patients. RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 34.7 months. The 3-year LR was 28.6% in the 3DCRT group and 22.7% in the IMRT group (p = 0.620). Median PFS were 13.8 and 16.6 months, respectively (p = 0.448). Median OS were 18.4 and 42.0 months, respectively (p = 0.198). On univariate analysis, only cumulative radiation dose was associated with superior LR (hazard ratio (HR) 0.736; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.635 – 0.916, p = 0.004). Factors clearly affecting survival were not observed. CONCLUSIONS: When comparing 3DCRT- versus IMRT-based dCRT, no survival benefits were observed. However, we found a lower local recurrence rate in the IMRT group potentially owing to dose-escalation. Prospective data are needed to verify the presented results herein.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5558777
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55587772017-08-18 Intensity-modulated versus 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy in the definitive treatment of esophageal cancer: comparison of outcomes and acute toxicity Haefner, Matthias Felix Lang, Kristin Verma, Vivek Koerber, Stefan Alexander Uhlmann, Lorenz Debus, Juergen Sterzing, Florian Radiat Oncol Research BACKGROUND: Though the vast majority of seminal trials for locally advanced esophageal cancer (EC) utilized three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT), the advanced and highly conformal technology known as intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) can decrease doses to critical cardiopulmonary organs. To date, there have been no studies comparing both modalities as part of definitive chemoradiation (dCRT) for EC. Herein, we investigated local control and survival and evaluated clinical factors associated with these endpoints between cohorts. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 93 patients (3DCRT n = 49, IMRT n = 44) who received dCRT at our institution between 2000 and 2012 with the histologic diagnosis of nonmetastatic EC, a Karnofsky performance status of ≥70, curative treatment intent, and receipt of concomitant CRT. Patients were excluded if receiving <50 Gy. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to evaluate the endpoints of local relapse rate (LR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Cox proportional hazards modeling addressed factors associated with outcomes with univariate and multivariate approaches. Rates of acute toxicities and basic dosimetric parameters were compared between 3DCRT and IMRT patients. RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 34.7 months. The 3-year LR was 28.6% in the 3DCRT group and 22.7% in the IMRT group (p = 0.620). Median PFS were 13.8 and 16.6 months, respectively (p = 0.448). Median OS were 18.4 and 42.0 months, respectively (p = 0.198). On univariate analysis, only cumulative radiation dose was associated with superior LR (hazard ratio (HR) 0.736; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.635 – 0.916, p = 0.004). Factors clearly affecting survival were not observed. CONCLUSIONS: When comparing 3DCRT- versus IMRT-based dCRT, no survival benefits were observed. However, we found a lower local recurrence rate in the IMRT group potentially owing to dose-escalation. Prospective data are needed to verify the presented results herein. BioMed Central 2017-08-15 /pmc/articles/PMC5558777/ /pubmed/28810885 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-017-0863-3 Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Haefner, Matthias Felix
Lang, Kristin
Verma, Vivek
Koerber, Stefan Alexander
Uhlmann, Lorenz
Debus, Juergen
Sterzing, Florian
Intensity-modulated versus 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy in the definitive treatment of esophageal cancer: comparison of outcomes and acute toxicity
title Intensity-modulated versus 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy in the definitive treatment of esophageal cancer: comparison of outcomes and acute toxicity
title_full Intensity-modulated versus 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy in the definitive treatment of esophageal cancer: comparison of outcomes and acute toxicity
title_fullStr Intensity-modulated versus 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy in the definitive treatment of esophageal cancer: comparison of outcomes and acute toxicity
title_full_unstemmed Intensity-modulated versus 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy in the definitive treatment of esophageal cancer: comparison of outcomes and acute toxicity
title_short Intensity-modulated versus 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy in the definitive treatment of esophageal cancer: comparison of outcomes and acute toxicity
title_sort intensity-modulated versus 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy in the definitive treatment of esophageal cancer: comparison of outcomes and acute toxicity
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5558777/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28810885
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-017-0863-3
work_keys_str_mv AT haefnermatthiasfelix intensitymodulatedversus3dimensionalconformalradiotherapyinthedefinitivetreatmentofesophagealcancercomparisonofoutcomesandacutetoxicity
AT langkristin intensitymodulatedversus3dimensionalconformalradiotherapyinthedefinitivetreatmentofesophagealcancercomparisonofoutcomesandacutetoxicity
AT vermavivek intensitymodulatedversus3dimensionalconformalradiotherapyinthedefinitivetreatmentofesophagealcancercomparisonofoutcomesandacutetoxicity
AT koerberstefanalexander intensitymodulatedversus3dimensionalconformalradiotherapyinthedefinitivetreatmentofesophagealcancercomparisonofoutcomesandacutetoxicity
AT uhlmannlorenz intensitymodulatedversus3dimensionalconformalradiotherapyinthedefinitivetreatmentofesophagealcancercomparisonofoutcomesandacutetoxicity
AT debusjuergen intensitymodulatedversus3dimensionalconformalradiotherapyinthedefinitivetreatmentofesophagealcancercomparisonofoutcomesandacutetoxicity
AT sterzingflorian intensitymodulatedversus3dimensionalconformalradiotherapyinthedefinitivetreatmentofesophagealcancercomparisonofoutcomesandacutetoxicity