Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in the treatment of esophageal cancer patients

Comparative Outcomes and Toxicity in Patients With Esophageal Cancer After Trimodality Therapy With Step-and-Shoot Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy Versus Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy: The MD Anderson Experience

AIMS

To evaluate outcomes and toxicity after intensity-modulated radiation therapy given as step-and-shoot (SS) or volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer treated with trimodality therapy (i.e. neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiation therapy followed by surgery).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients consecutively treated with trimodality therapy including IMRT in 2001-2022 (n = 449) were retrospectively reviewed, and 106 pairs of propensity-matched SS and VMAT patients were identified. Survival, recurrence, surgery-related prognostic factors, and chemoradiation-related toxicities were evaluated between groups.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were balanced between both groups except for body mass index, history of other cancer, clinical disease stage, and use of induction chemotherapy. Median follow-up time was 40 months. Relative to SS, VMAT led to higher 3-year overall survival (OS; P = 0.028, hazard ratio [HR] 0.645, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.436-0.954) but not progression-free, locoregional recurrence-free, or distant metastasis-free survival. No predictor of excellent OS by SS versus VMAT was identified in multivariable analyses. However, VMAT was associated with reduced odds of postoperative cardiac complications (P < 0.001, odds ratio [OR] 0.296, 95% CI 0.148-0.591), pulmonary complications (P = 0.048, OR 0.539, 95% CI 0.292-0.994), pathologic partial response or worse (≥10% viable cells; P = 0.003, OR 0.418, 95% CI 0.235-0.743), and positive/close margins (P = 0.023, OR 0.346, 95% CI 0.138-0.867) relative to SS. VMAT was also associated with reduced rates of chemoradiation therapy-related weight loss (33.0% versus 79.2%, P < 0.001), fatigue (40.6% versus 68.9%, P < 0.001), nausea (31.1% versus 58.5%, P < 0.001) and cardiac toxicity (0% versus 6.6%, P = 0.007) than SS.

CONCLUSION

Based on this single institution, retrospective study with a 40-month median follow-up, VMAT utilization in trimodality treatment for locally advanced esophageal cancer appears to be associated with improved OS and rates of concurrent chemoradiation therapy-related toxicity and reduced initial 12-month postoperative complications relative to SS IMRT. Multi-institutional prospective trials addressing the limitations of this study and with longer follow-ups are warranted to validate these findings.

Innovative regression model-based decision support tool for optimizing radiotherapy techniques in thoracic esophageal cancer

Background

Modern radiotherapy exemplified by intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), has transformed esophageal cancer treatment. Facing challenges in treating thoracic esophageal cancer near vital organs, this study introduces a regression model-based decision support tool for the optimal selection of radiotherapy techniques.

Methods

We enrolled 106 patients diagnosed with locally advanced thoracic esophageal cancer in this study and designed individualized IMRT and VMAT radiotherapy plans for each patient. Detailed dosimetric analysis was performed to evaluate the differences in dose distribution between the two radiotherapy techniques across various thoracic regions. Single-factor and multifactorial logistic regression analyses were employed to establish predictive models (P1 and P2) and factors such as TLV/PTV ratio. These models were used to predict the compliance and potential advantages of IMRT and VMAT plans. External validation was performed in a validation group of 30 patients.

Results

Using predictive models, we developed a data-driven decision support tool. For upper thoracic cases, VMAT plans were recommended; for middle/lower thoracic cases, the tool guided VMAT/IMRT choices based on TLV/PTV ratio. Models P1 and P2 assessed IMRT and VMAT compliance. In validation, the tool showed high specificity (90.91%) and sensitivity (78.95%), differentiating IMRT and VMAT plans. Balanced performance in compliance assessment demonstrated tool reliability.

Conclusion

In summary, our regression model-based decision support tool provides practical guidance for selecting optimal radiotherapy techniques for thoracic esophageal cancer patients. Despite a limited sample size, the tool demonstrates potential clinical benefits, alleviating manual planning burdens and ensuring precise, individualized treatment decisions for patients.

Assessment of Organ-at-risk Sparing in Esophageal Cancer: A Comparative Dosimetric Evaluation of Hybrid, Noncoplanar, and Coplanar RapidArc Plans

Aim

The purpose of this study is to improve the precision of radiation treatment and sparing of organ-at-risk (OAR) in patients with thoracic esophageal cancer (EC) affecting the heart, lung, and spinal cord. To improve and personalize cancer treatment plans, it assesses the dosimetric benefits of coplanar RapidArc (RAc), hybrid arc (RAHyb), and noncoplanar RapidArc (RAnc).

Materials and Methods

Fourteen patients with EC were chosen for our investigation from our hospital's database. RapidArc (RA) plan patients had already received treatment. Retrospectively, additional RAnc and RAHyb plans were made with a prescription dose of 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions for the planning target volume (PTV). A prescription dose of 95% of PTV was used, so that three different treatment planning procedures could be compared. The cumulative dose-volume histogram was used to analyze the plan quality indices homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI), conformation number (CN) as well as the OARs doses to the lung, heart, and spinal cord.

Results

In comparison to RAc and RAnc techniques, the study indicated that RAHyb plans significantly increased D95%, CI and HI; Dmax and CN did not differ substantially. In addition, compared to RAc (lung: 16.15 ± 0.03 Gy and heart: 23.91 ± 4.67 Gy) and RAnc (lung: 15.24 ± 0.03 Gy and heart 23.82 ± 5.10 Gy) plans, RAHyb resulted in significantly lower mean lung doses (15.10 ± 0.03 Gy) and heart doses (21.33 ± 6.99 Gy). Moreover, the RAHyb strategy showed a statistically significant (P < 0.05) lower average MU (452.7) than both the RAc (517.5) and RAnc (566.2) plans.

Conclusion

The D95%, conformity, and homogeneity indices were better for hybrid arc plans compared to RAc and RAnc plans. They also successfully managed to reduce the lung and heart doses as well as the mean MU per fraction.

Planning evaluation of a novel volume-based algorithm for personalized optimization of lung dose in VMAT for esophageal cancer

Radiotherapy treatment planning (RTP) is time-consuming and labor-intensive since medical physicists must devise treatment plans carefully to reduce damage to tissues and organs for patients. Previously, we proposed the volume-based algorithm (VBA) method, providing optimal partial arcs (OPA) angle to achieve the low-dose volume of lungs in dynamic arc radiotherapy. This study aimed to implement the VBA for esophageal cancer (EC) patients and compare the lung dose and delivery time between full arcs (FA) without using VBA and OPA angle using VBA in volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans. We retrospectively included 30 patients diagnosed with EC. RTP of each patient was replanned to 4 VMAT plans, including FA plans without (FA-C) and with (FA + C) dose constraints of OARs and OPA plans without (OPA-C) and with (OPA + C) dose constraints of OARs. The prescribed dose was 45 Gy. The OARs included the lungs, heart, and spinal cord. The dose distribution, dose-volume histogram, monitor units (MUs), delivery time, and gamma passing rates were analyzed. The results showed that the lung V₅ and V₁₀ in OPA + C plans were significantly lower than in FA + C plans (p < 0.05). No significant differences were noted in planning target volume (PTV) coverage, lung V₁₅, lung V₂₀, mean lung dose, heart V₃₀, heart V₄₀, mean heart dose, and maximal spinal cord dose between FA + C and OPA + C plans. The delivery time was significantly longer in FA + C plans than in OPA + C plans (237 vs. 192 s, p < 0.05). There were no significant differences between FA + C and OPA + C plans in gamma passing rates. We successfully applied the OPA angle based on the VBA to clinical EC patients and simplified the arc angle selection in RTP. The VBA could provide a personalized OPA angle for each patient and effectively reduce lung V₅, V_10, and delivery time in VMAT.

Preoperative Radiochemotherapy in Esophageal Squamous Cell Cancer with 5-Fluorouracil/Cisplatin or Carboplatin/Paclitaxel: Treatment Practice over a 20-Year Period and Implications for the Individual Treatment Modalities

Simple Summary

We retrospectively studied outcomes in patients treated with preoperative radiochemotherapy and surgery for esophageal squamous cell cancer. We put a special focus on the comparison of patients treated with 5-fluorouracil/cisplatin (‘Walsh’) or carboplatin/paclitaxel (‘CROSS’). First, the higher age and more comorbidities of ‘CROSS’ patients, along with a shorter intensive care/intermediate care unit stay, might reflect an improvement in supportive and surgical/perioperative procedures in the periods. Second, the ‘CROSS’ patients experienced more hematologic toxicity and were less likely to complete chemotherapy as per protocol. This indicates that efforts should be taken to guide patients through a toxic treatment regimen. Third, the negative prognostic impact of radiochemotherapy-related toxicities and the duration of the intensive care/intermediate care unit stay underlines that further optimization of treatment procedures remains an important goal. Toxicity profiles could be improved by tailoring the regimen to individual patients (e. g., careful use of the taxane-based regimen in elderly patients).

Abstract

We retrospectively studied outcomes in patients treated with preoperative radiochemotherapy and surgery for esophageal squamous cell cancer. We put special focus on the comparison of patients treated with 5-fluorouracil/cisplatin (‘Walsh’) or carboplatin/paclitaxel (‘CROSS’). We compared characteristics between patients treated according to ‘Walsh’ vs. ‘CROSS’. Cox regression was performed to test for an association of parameters with outcomes. Study eligibility was met by 90 patients. First, the higher age and more comorbidities of the ‘CROSS’ patients, along with a shorter intensive care/intermediate care stay, might reflect an improvement in supportive and surgical/perioperative procedures over the periods. Second, the ‘CROSS’ patients experienced more hematologic toxicity and were less likely to complete chemotherapy as per protocol. This indicates that efforts should be taken to guide patients through a toxic treatment regimen by supportive measures. Third, the negative prognostic impact of radiochemotherapy-related toxicities (i.e., dysphagia and hematologic toxicities) and the duration of the intensive care/intermediate care unit stay underlines that further optimization of treatment procedures remains an important goal. We found no differences in tumor downstaging and survival between treatment regimen. Toxicity profiles could be improved by tailoring the regimen to individual patients (e.g., careful use of the taxane-based regimen in elderly patients).

Hypofractionated volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for fragile patients with oesophageal cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the feasibility, safety, and dosimetric results of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) to deliver hypofractionated radiotherapy (RT) in oesophageal cancer patients, unfit for a multimodality curative strategy.

PATIENTS/METHODS

From 2010 to 2017, 22 patients were treated with hypofractionated VMAT for palliative/symptomatic setting. The prescription dose was 40 Gy in 16 fractions (EQD2 41.7 Gy considering an α/β ratio of 10 Gy, and 44 Gy considering an α/β ratio of 3 Gy).

RESULTS

Eight patients (36%) were symptomatic for grade 3 baseline dysphagia. RT was generally well tolerated, and no patient interrupted the daily treatment. Acute toxicity was generally mild; no G3 acute toxicities were reported. At the end of treatment, 5 patients (22.7%) experienced a stable dysphagia and 14 (63.6%) an improvement of baseline dysphagia, while 3 patients (13.7%) reported a worsening of oesophagitis. At a mean follow-up of 8.7 months, 15 patients (79%) had a complete clinical recovery (G0-1) of the symptomatic moderate/severe dysphagia. At 3 months after the end of RT, seven patients (31.8%) achieved a partial or complete response. Two coplanar arcs were employed for VMAT delivery. Dosimetric results were consistent in terms of both target coverage and normal tissue sparing. Finally, 1-year progression-free and overall survival was 20% and 27.3%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Hypofractionated VMAT was feasible, safe, and effective to deliver symptomatic radiation in locally advanced oesophageal cancer patients, non-suitable for a standard curative treatment.

Predictive value of lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR) and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) in patients with oesophageal cancer undergoing concurrent chemoradiotherapy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The survival rate of patients with advanced oesophageal cancer is very low and can vary significantly, even among patients with the same TNM stage. It is important to look for indicators that are economical and readily available to predict overall survival. The aim of this study was to determine whether lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR) and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) could be potential predictors of survival in patients with advanced oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) undergoing concurrent chemoradiotherapy.

METHODS

Differences in survival among 204 patients with advanced oesophageal cancer who underwent concurrent chemoradiotherapy were collected and analysed. Univariate and multivariate COX regression analyses were used to investigate the association between blood inflammatory markers and patient survival before treatment.

RESULTS

Univariate COX regression analyses showed that a history of alcohol use, neutrophil count, LMR, NLR, tumour length, and N stage were significantly associated with the survival of tumour patients receiving concurrent chemoradiotherapy. Multivariate COX regression analysis showed that NLR and LMR were predictors of outcome in tumour patients receiving chemoradiotherapy. According to receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, the AUC of LMR and NLR was 0.734 and 0.749, and the best cutoff point for LMR and NLR was 3.03 and 2.64, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

LMR and NLR can be used to predict the survival of patients with advanced oesophageal cancer receiving concurrent chemoradiotherapy, thereby providing clinicians with suggestions for further treatment options.