Phase II Study of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Radiation Therapy in the Management of High-Risk, High-Grade, Soft Tissue Sarcomas of the Extremities and Body Wall: Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Trial 9514

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 619-625 ◽  
Author(s):  
William G. Kraybill ◽  
Jonathon Harris ◽  
Ira J. Spiro ◽  
David S. Ettinger ◽  
Thomas F. DeLaney ◽  
...  

Purpose On the basis of a positive reported single-institution pilot study, the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group initiated phase II trial 9514 to evaluate its neoadjuvant regimen in a multi-institutional Intergroup setting. Patients and Methods Eligibility included a high-grade soft tissue sarcoma ≥ 8 cm in diameter of the extremities and body wall. Patients received three cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CT; modified mesna, doxorubicin, ifosfamide, and dacarbazine [MAID]), interdigitated preoperative radiation therapy (RT; 44 Gy administered in split courses), and three cycles of postoperative CT (modified MAID). Results Sixty-six patients were enrolled, of whom 64 were analyzed. Seventy-nine percent of patients completed their preoperative CT and 59% completed all planned CT. Three patients (5%) experienced fatal grade 5 toxicities (myelodysplasias, two patients; infection, one patient). Another 53 patients (83%) experienced grade 4 toxicities; 78% experienced grade 4 hematologic toxicity and 19% experienced grade 4 nonhematologic toxicity. Sixty-one patients underwent surgery. Fifty-eight of these were R0 resections, of which five were amputations. There were three R1 resections. The estimated 3-year rate for local-regional failure is 17.6% if amputation is considered a failure and 10.1% if not. Estimated 3-year rates for disease-free, distant–disease-free, and overall survival are 56.6%, 64.5%, and 75.1%, respectively. Conclusion This combined-modality treatment can be delivered successfully in a multi-institutional setting. Efficacy results are consistent with previous single-institution results.


1997 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 1013-1021 ◽  
Author(s):  
M V Pilepich ◽  
R Caplan ◽  
R W Byhardt ◽  
C A Lawton ◽  
M J Gallagher ◽  
...  

PURPOSE Although androgen suppression results in a tumor response/remission in the majority of patients with carcinoma of the prostate, its potential value as an adjuvant has not been substantiated. MATERIALS AND METHODS In 1987, the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) initiated a randomized phase III trial of adjuvant goserelin in definitively irradiated patients with carcinoma of the prostate. A total of 977 patients had been accessioned to the study. Of these, 945 remained analyzable: 477 on the adjuvant arm and 468 on the observation arm. RESULTS Actuarial projections show that at 5 years, 84% of patients on the adjuvant goserelin arm and 71% on the observation arm remain without evidence of local recurrence (P < .0001). The corresponding figures for freedom from distant metastases and disease-free survival are 83% versus 70% (P < .001) and 60% and 44% (P < .0001). If prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level greater than 1.5 ng is included as a failure (after > or = 1 year), the 5-year disease-free survival rate on the adjuvant goserelin arm is 53% versus 20% on the observation arm (P < .0001). The 5-year survival rate (for the entire population) is 75% on the adjuvant arm versus 71% on the observation arm (P = .52). However, in patients with centrally reviewed tumors with a Gleason score of 8 to 10, the difference in actuarial 5-year survival (66% on the adjuvant goserelin arm v 55% on the observation arm) reaches statistical significance (P = .03). CONCLUSION Application of androgen suppression as an adjuvant to definitive radiotherapy has been associated with a highly significant improvement in local control and freedom from disease progression. At this point, with a median follow-up time of 4.5 years, a significant improvement in survival has been observed only in patients with centrally reviewed tumors with a Gleason score of 8 to 10.





2012 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 123-131 ◽  
Author(s):  
Akila N. Viswanathan ◽  
Jennifer Moughan ◽  
William Small ◽  
Charles Levenback ◽  
Revathy Iyer ◽  
...  

PurposeThe objective of the study was to determine the impact of brachytherapy implant quality on outcome among cervical cancer patients treated on Radiation Therapy Oncology Group prospective trials 0116 and 0128.MethodsAll enrolled patients received concurrent chemoradiation followed by brachytherapy. Individual brachytherapy parameters, including the symmetry of ovoids in relation to the tandem, displacement of ovoids in relation to the cervical os, tandem bisecting the ovoids, tandem in the midpelvis, and appropriateness of packing, were scored for each implant. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were constructed for each parameter for local recurrence (LR), regional recurrence, distant recurrence, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival.ResultsRecords for 103 patients were analyzed. The median follow-up time was 24.5 months. Patients with unacceptable symmetry of ovoids to the tandem had a significantly higher risk of LR than patients in the acceptable group (hazard ratio [HR], 2.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11–6.45;P= 0.03). Patients with displacement of ovoids in relation to the cervical os had a significantly increased risk of LR (HR, 2.50; 95% CI, 1.05–5.93;P= 0.04) and a lower DFS rate (HR, 2.28; 95% CI, 1.18–4.41;P= 0.01). Inappropriate placement of packing resulted in a lower DFS rate (HR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.08–3.92;P= 0.03).ConclusionsAssessment of the quality of a brachytherapy implant is imperative, as proper placement has an impact on patient DFS. If feasible, inappropriate placements should be corrected before treatment initiation. Brachytherapy applicators for cervical cancer should preferably be placed and assessed by experienced practitioners.



Cancer ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (19) ◽  
pp. 4613-4621 ◽  
Author(s):  
William G. Kraybill ◽  
Jonathan Harris ◽  
Ira J. Spiro ◽  
David S. Ettinger ◽  
Thomas F. DeLaney ◽  
...  


2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (20) ◽  
pp. 2231-2238 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dian Wang ◽  
Qiang Zhang ◽  
Burton L. Eisenberg ◽  
John M. Kane ◽  
X. Allen Li ◽  
...  

Purpose We performed a multi-institutional prospective phase II trial to assess late toxicities in patients with extremity soft tissue sarcoma (STS) treated with preoperative image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT) to a reduced target volume. Patients and Methods Patients with extremity STS received IGRT with (cohort A) or without (cohort B) chemotherapy followed by limb-sparing resection. Daily pretreatment images were coregistered with digitally reconstructed radiographs so that the patient position could be adjusted before each treatment. All patients received IGRT to reduced tumor volumes according to strict protocol guidelines. Late toxicities were assessed at 2 years. Results In all, 98 patients were accrued (cohort A, 12; cohort B, 86). Cohort A was closed prematurely because of poor accrual and is not reported. Seventy-nine eligible patients from cohort B form the basis of this report. At a median follow-up of 3.6 years, five patients did not have surgery because of disease progression. There were five local treatment failures, all of which were in field. Of the 57 patients assessed for late toxicities at 2 years, 10.5% experienced at least one grade ≥ 2 toxicity as compared with 37% of patients in the National Cancer Institute of Canada SR2 (CAN-NCIC-SR2: Phase III Randomized Study of Pre- vs Postoperative Radiotherapy in Curable Extremity Soft Tissue Sarcoma) trial receiving preoperative radiation therapy without IGRT (P < .001). Conclusion The significant reduction of late toxicities in patients with extremity STS who were treated with preoperative IGRT and absence of marginal-field recurrences suggest that the target volumes used in the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group RTOG-0630 (A Phase II Trial of Image-Guided Preoperative Radiotherapy for Primary Soft Tissue Sarcomas of the Extremity) study are appropriate for preoperative IGRT for extremity STS.



Author(s):  
Steven Mann ◽  
William Caldwell ◽  
Thomas Griffin ◽  
Homer Russ ◽  
JoAnn Stetz


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document