scholarly journals Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy With or Without Chemotherapy for Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Phase II Trial 0225

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (22) ◽  
pp. 3684-3690 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nancy Lee ◽  
Jonathan Harris ◽  
Adam S. Garden ◽  
William Straube ◽  
Bonnie Glisson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma ◽  
Clinical Status ◽  
Radiation Therapy Oncology Group ◽  
Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy ◽  
Institutional Setting ◽  
Failure Patterns ◽  
Intensity Modulated ◽  
Local Progression ◽  
Grade 3

Purpose To investigate the feasibility of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with or without chemotherapy, and to assess toxicities, failure patterns, and survivals in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). Patients and Methods Radiation consisted of 70 Gy given to the planning target volumes of primary tumor plus any N+ disease and 59.4 Gy given to subclinical disease, delivered over 33 treatment days. Patients with stage T2b or greater or with N+ disease also received concurrent cisplatin (100 mg/m2) on days 1, 22, and 43 followed by adjuvant cisplatin (80 mg/m2) on day 1; fluorouracil (1,000 mg/m2/d) on days 1 through 4 administered every 4 weeks for three cycles. Tumor, clinical status, and acute/late toxicities were assessed. The primary objective was to test the transportability of IMRT to a multi-institutional setting. Results Between February 2003 and November 2005, 68 patients with stages I through IVB NPC (of which 93.8% were WHO types 2 and 3) were enrolled. Prescribed IMRT (target delineation) was given to 83.8%, whereas 64.9% received chemotherapy per protocol. The estimated 2-year local progression-free (PF), regional PF, locoregional PF, and distant metastasis–free rates were 92.6%, 90.8%, 89.3%, and 84.7%, respectively. The estimated 2-year PF and overall survivals were 72.7% and 80.2%, respectively. Acute grade 4 mucositis occurred in 4.4%, and the worst late grade 3 toxicities were as follows: esophagus, 4.7%; mucous membranes, 3.1%; and xerostomia, 3.1%. The rate of grade 2 xerostomia at 1 year from start of IMRT was 13.5%. Only two patients complained of grade 3 xerostomia, and none had grade 4 xerostomia. Conclusion It was feasible to transport IMRT with or without chemotherapy in the treatment of NPC to a multi-institutional setting with 90% LRPF rate reproducing excellent reports from single institutions. Minimal grade 3 and lack of grade 4 xerostomia were encouraging.

NTENSITY-MODULATED RADIATION THERAPY WITH CONCURRENT CHEMOTHERAPY FOR NASOPHARYNGEAL CARCINOMA

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (6) ◽  
pp. 105-113
Author(s):  
Tin Vo Nguyen ◽  
Tuong Pham Nguyen ◽  
Thanh Dang
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma ◽  
Radiation Therapy Oncology Group ◽  
Nasopharyngeal Cancer ◽  
Tumour Response ◽  
Late Toxicity ◽  
Concurrent Chemotherapy ◽  
European Organization ◽  
Intensity Modulated ◽  
Grade 3

Purpose: To evaluate tumour response, acute and late toxicity in nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) patients treated with intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with cisplatin chemotherapy. Materials and Methods: 33 NPC patients, received IMRT concurrently with four to six cycles of cisplatin (30 mg/m2/day) every six weeks between May 2016 and July 2018, were evaluated prospectively. The doses to the planning target volumes of primary tumor and involved lymph nodes, uninvolved regional nodal areas were 70 Gy and 50 Gy respectively. All patients were evaluated for tumour and node response using response evaluation criteria in solid tumour (RECIST) criteri, acute and late toxicities according to CTCAE version 3.0 (common terminology criteria for adverse events), RTOG/EORTC (Toxicity criteria of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group/the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer). Results: At three months after chemoradiation, 81.8% and 18.2% of patients achieved complete and partial response, respectively. Grade 3 acute toxicities were oral mucositis (6.1%), dermatitis (3%). Grade 3 late toxicities were xerostomia 2/33(6.1%). There was no grade 3 to grade 4 neck fibrosis and trismus, none of the patients developed mandibular bone necrosis. Conclusion:Cisplatin concurrently with IMRT provided excellent tumour response, manageable toxicities and good compliance. Key words: intensity-modulated radiation therapy, Concurrent chemotherapy and radiation therapy, nasopharyngeal carcinoma

scholarly journals Early Clinical Outcomes of Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy/Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy Combination in Comparison with Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy Alone in Oropharynx Cancer Patients

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (7) ◽  
pp. 1549
Author(s):  
Han Gyul Yoon ◽  
Yong Chan Ahn ◽  
Dongryul Oh ◽  
Jae Myoung Noh ◽  
Seung Gyu Park ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
Proton Therapy ◽  
Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy ◽  
Combination Group ◽  
Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy ◽  
Oropharynx Cancer ◽  
Intensity Modulated ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Early Clinical Outcomes

Purpose: To report the early clinical outcomes of combining intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) in comparison with IMRT alone in treating oropharynx cancer (OPC) patients. Materials and Methods: The medical records of 148 OPC patients who underwent definitive radiotherapy (RT) with concurrent systemic therapy, from January 2016 till December 2019 at Samsung Medical Center, were retrospectively reviewed. During the 5.5 weeks’ RT course, the initial 16 (or 18) fractions were delivered by IMRT in all patients, and the subsequent 12 (or 10) fractions were either by IMRT in 81 patients (IMRT only) or by IMPT in 67 (IMRT/IMPT combination), respectively, based on comparison of adaptive re-plan profiles and availability of equipment. Propensity-score matching (PSM) was done on 76 patients (38 from each group) for comparative analyses. Results: With the median follow-up of 24.7 months, there was no significant difference in overall survival and progression free survival between groups, both before and after PSM. Before PSM, the IMRT/IMPT combination group experienced grade ≥ 3 acute toxicities less frequently: mucositis in 37.0% and 13.4% (p < 0.001); and analgesic quantification algorithm (AQA) in 37.0% and 19.4% (p = 0.019), respectively. The same trends were observed after PSM: mucositis in 39.5% and 15.8% (p = 0.021); and AQA in 47.4% and 21.1% (p = 0.016), respectively. In multivariate logistic regression, grade ≥ 3 mucositis was significantly less frequent in the IMRT/IMPT combination group, both before and after PSM (p = 0.027 and 0.024, respectively). AQA score ≥ 3 was also less frequent in the IMRT/IMPT combination group, both before and after PSM (p = 0.085 and 0.018, respectively). Conclusions: In treating the OPC patients, with comparable early oncologic outcomes, more favorable acute toxicity profiles were achieved following IMRT/IMPT combination than IMRT alone.

scholarly journals Dosimetric comparison between 3D conformal and intensity-modulated radiation therapy for prostate cancer

2010 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 77-85 ◽  
Author(s):  
Courtney Buckey ◽  
Gregory Swanson ◽  
Sotirios Stathakis ◽  
Nikos Papanikolaou
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
Organs At Risk ◽  
External Beam Radiotherapy ◽  
Radiation Therapy Oncology Group ◽  
Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Target Volume ◽  
Conformal Radiation Therapy ◽  
Intensity Modulated ◽  
3D Crt

AbstractBackground and Purpose: Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is considered by many to be the standard of care in the delivery of external-beam radiotherapy treatments to the prostate. The purpose of this study is to assess the validity of the purported benefits of IMRT.Materials and Methods: Treatment plans were produced for 10 patients using both 3D conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) and IMRT, utilising the dose constraints recommended by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0415 protocol. Three IMRT modalities used in this study were linear accelerator based IMRT, helical tomotherapy, and serial tomotherapy. The prescription to the target, 76 Gy, was the same for all plans.Results: In general the 3D-CRT plans satisfied the RTOG criteria for planning target volume (PTV) coverage, and met or bettered the dose criteria for the organs at risk. PTV coverage was more homogeneous for the IMRT plans than the 3D-CRT plans but not significantly improved.Conclusions: Technically, because the IMRT plans required greater effort for the optimisation, longer treatment times and higher monitor units, the use of IMRT for the fulfilment of the protocol’s dosimetric goals was not justified using these constraints.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document