1
|
Ladbury C, Sueyoshi MH, Brovold NM, Kumar R, Andraos TY, Gogineni E, Kim M, Klopp A, Albuquerque K, Kunos C, Leung E, Mantz C, Biswas T, Beriwal S, Small W, Erickson B, Gaffney D, Lo SS, Viswanathan AN. Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Gynecologic Malignancies: A Case-Based Radiosurgery Society Practice Review. Pract Radiat Oncol 2024; 14:252-266. [PMID: 37875223 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2023.09.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/13/2023] [Revised: 09/20/2023] [Accepted: 09/22/2023] [Indexed: 10/26/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE The use of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for gynecologic malignancies is controversial. We discuss certain circumstances when highly precise SBRT may be a useful tool to consider in the management of selected patients. METHODS AND MATERIALS Case selection included the following scenarios, the first 2 with palliative intent, para-aortic nodal oligorecurrence of ovarian cancer, pelvic sidewall oligorecurrence of cervical cancer, and inoperable endometrial cancer boost after intensity modulated radiation to the pelvis treated with curative intent. Patient characteristics, fractionation, prescription dose, treatment technique, and dose constraints were discussed. Relevant literature to these cases was summarized to provide a framework for treatment of similar patients. RESULTS Treatment of gynecologic malignancies with SBRT requires many considerations, including treatment intent, optimal patient selection, fractionation selection, tumor localization, and plan optimization. Although other treatment paradigms including conventionally fractionated radiation therapy and brachytherapy remain the standard-of-care for definitive treatment of gynecologic malignancies, SBRT may have a role in palliative cases or those where high doses are not required due to the unacceptable toxicity that may occur with SBRT. CONCLUSIONS A case-based practice review was developed by the Radiosurgery Society to provide a practical guide to the common scenarios noted above affecting patients with gynecologic malignancies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Colton Ladbury
- Department of Radiation Oncology, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, California.
| | - Mark H Sueyoshi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Nellie M Brovold
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Ritesh Kumar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey
| | - Therese Y Andraos
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University James Cancer Hospital, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Emile Gogineni
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University James Cancer Hospital, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Minsun Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
| | - Ann Klopp
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Kevin Albuquerque
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, Texas
| | - Charles Kunos
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky
| | - Eric Leung
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Center, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | | | - Tithi Biswas
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Case Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Sushil Beriwal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Allegheny Health Network Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
| | - William Small
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Loyola University Cardinal Bernardin Cancer Center, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Beth Erickson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin
| | - David Gaffney
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Utah Huntsman Cancer Institute, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Simon S Lo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
| | - Akila N Viswanathan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Johns Hopkins Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Ito K, Nakajima Y, Ogawa H, Furusawa A, Murofushi KN, Kito S, Kino N, Yasugi T, Uno T, Karasawa K. Phase I/II study of stereotactic body radiotherapy boost in patients with cervical cancer ineligible for intracavitary brachytherapy. Jpn J Radiol 2024:10.1007/s11604-024-01566-8. [PMID: 38625476 DOI: 10.1007/s11604-024-01566-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/26/2023] [Accepted: 03/25/2024] [Indexed: 04/17/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) boost is a promising treatment for cervical cancer patients who are ineligible for intracavitary brachytherapy (ICBT). The aim of this multicenter, single-arm, phase I/II study was to prospectively evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of SBRT boost. MATERIALS AND METHODS ICBT-ineligible patients with untreated cervical cancer were enrolled. Patients underwent whole-pelvic radiotherapy (45 Gy in 25 fractions) with SBRT boost to the primary lesion. In the phase I dose-escalation cohort (3 + 3 design), patients were treated with SBRT boost of 21 or 22.5 Gy in three fractions. Although dose-limiting toxicity was not confirmed, a dose of 21 Gy was selected for the phase II cohort because it was difficult to reproduce the pelvic organs position in two patients during the phase I trial. The primary endpoint was 2-year progression-free survival. RESULTS Twenty-one patients (phase I, n = 3; phase II, n = 18) were enrolled between April 2016 and October 2020; 17 (81%) had clinical stage III-IV (with para-aortic lymph node metastases) disease. The median (range) follow-up was 40 (10-84) months. The initial response was complete response in 20 patients and partial response in one patient. The 2-year locoregional control, progression-free survival, and overall survival rates were 84%, 67%, and 81%, respectively. Grade ≥ 3 toxicity was confirmed in one patient each in the acute (diarrhea) and late (urinary tract obstruction) phases. CONCLUSION These findings suggested that a SBRT boost is more effective than the conventional EBRT boost and can be an important treatment option for ICBT-ineligible patients with cervical cancer. STUDY REGISTRATION This study was registered at the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000036845).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kei Ito
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Diseases Center Komagome Hospital, 3-18-22 Honkomagome, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8677, Japan.
| | - Yujiro Nakajima
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Diseases Center Komagome Hospital, 3-18-22 Honkomagome, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8677, Japan
- Department of Radiological Sciences, Komazawa University, 1-23-1 Komazawa, Setagaya-ku, Tokyo, 154-8525, Japan
| | - Hiroaki Ogawa
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Diseases Center Komagome Hospital, 3-18-22 Honkomagome, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8677, Japan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, 1-1 Seiryo-machi, Aoba-ku, Sendai, 980-8574, Japan
| | - Akiko Furusawa
- Department of Gynecology, Shizuoka Cancer Center Hospital, 1007, Shimonagakubo, Nagaizumi-cho, Sunto-gun, Shizuoka, 411-8777, Japan
| | - Keiko Nemoto Murofushi
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Diseases Center Komagome Hospital, 3-18-22 Honkomagome, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8677, Japan
| | - Satoshi Kito
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Diseases Center Komagome Hospital, 3-18-22 Honkomagome, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8677, Japan
| | - Nao Kino
- Department of Gynecology, Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Diseases Center Komagome Hospital, 3-18-22 Honkomagome, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8677, Japan
| | - Toshiharu Yasugi
- Department of Gynecology, Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Diseases Center Komagome Hospital, 3-18-22 Honkomagome, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8677, Japan
| | - Takashi Uno
- Diagnostic Radiology and Radiation Oncology, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, 1-8-1 Inohana, Chou-ku, Chiba, 260-8677, Japan
| | - Katsuyuki Karasawa
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Diseases Center Komagome Hospital, 3-18-22 Honkomagome, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8677, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Cilla S, Campitelli M, Antonietta Gambacorta M, Michela Rinaldi R, Deodato F, Pezzulla D, Romano C, Fodor A, Laliscia C, Trippa F, De Sanctis V, Ippolito E, Ferioli M, Titone F, Russo D, Balcet V, Vicenzi L, Di Cataldo V, Raguso A, Giuseppe Morganti A, Ferrandina G, Macchia G. Machine-learning prediction of treatment response to stereotactic body radiation therapy in oligometastatic gynecological cancer: A multi-institutional study. Radiother Oncol 2024; 191:110072. [PMID: 38142932 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2023.110072] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/27/2023] [Revised: 12/06/2023] [Accepted: 12/19/2023] [Indexed: 12/26/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE We aimed to develop and validate different machine-learning (ML) prediction models for the complete response of oligometastatic gynecological cancer after SBRT. MATERIAL AND METHODS One hundred fifty-seven patients with 272 lesions from 14 different institutions and treated with SBRT with radical intent were included. Thirteen datasets including 222 lesions were combined for model training and internal validation purposes, with an 80:20 ratio. The external testing dataset was selected as the fourteenth Institution with 50 lesions. Lesions that achieved complete response (CR) were defined as responders. Prognostic clinical and dosimetric variables were selected using the LASSO algorithm. Six supervised ML models, including logistic regression (LR), classification and regression tree analysis (CART) and support vector machine (SVM) using four different kernels, were trained and tested to predict the complete response of uterine lesions after SBRT. The performance of models was assessed by receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC), area under the curve (AUC) and calibration curves. An explainable approach based on SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) method was deployed to generate individual explanations of the model's decisions. RESULTS 63.6% of lesions had a complete response and were used as ground truth for the supervised models. LASSO strongly associated complete response with three variables, namely the lesion volume (PTV), the type of lesions (lymph-nodal versus parenchymal), and the biological effective dose (BED10), that were used as input for ML modeling. In the training set, the AUCs for complete response were 0.751 (95% CI: 0.716-0.786), 0.766 (95% CI: 0.729-0.802) and 0.800 (95% CI: 0.742-0.857) for the LR, CART and SVM with a radial basis function kernel, respectively. These models achieve AUC values of 0.727 (95% CI: 0.669-0.795), 0.734 (95% CI: 0.649-0.815) and 0.771 (95% CI: 0.717-0.824) in the external testing set, demonstrating excellent generalizability. CONCLUSION ML models enable a reliable prediction of the treatment response of oligometastatic lesions receiving SBRT. This approach may assist radiation oncologists to tailor more individualized treatment plans for oligometastatic patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Savino Cilla
- Medical Physics Unit, Responsible Research Hospital, Campobasso, Italy.
| | - Maura Campitelli
- Radiation Oncology Department, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, Roma, Italy
| | | | | | - Francesco Deodato
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Responsible Research Hospital, Campobasso, Italy
| | - Donato Pezzulla
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Responsible Research Hospital, Campobasso, Italy
| | - Carmela Romano
- Medical Physics Unit, Responsible Research Hospital, Campobasso, Italy
| | - Andrei Fodor
- Department of Radiation Oncology, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Concetta Laliscia
- Department of Translational Medicine, Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Fabio Trippa
- Radiation Oncology Center, S Maria Hospital, Terni, Italy
| | | | - Edy Ippolito
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Campus Bio-Medico University, Roma, Italy
| | - Martina Ferioli
- Department of Experimental, Diagnostic and Specialty Medicine - DIMES, University of Bologna, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Bologna, Italy
| | - Francesca Titone
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Udine, Udine, Italy
| | | | - Vittoria Balcet
- Radiation Oncology Department, Ospedale degli Infermi, Biella, Italy
| | - Lisa Vicenzi
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Ospedali Riuniti, Ancona, Italy
| | - Vanessa Di Cataldo
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Oncology Department, University of Florence, Firenze, Italy
| | - Arcangela Raguso
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Fondazione "Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza", IRCCS, S. Giovanni Rotondo, Italy
| | - Alessio Giuseppe Morganti
- Department of Experimental, Diagnostic and Specialty Medicine - DIMES, University of Bologna, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Bologna, Italy
| | - Gabriella Ferrandina
- Gynecologic Oncology Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, Roma, Italy
| | - Gabriella Macchia
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Responsible Research Hospital, Campobasso, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Macchia G, Pezzulla D, Campitelli M, Laliscia C, Fodor A, Bonome P, Draghini L, Ippolito E, De Sanctis V, Ferioli M, Titone F, Balcet V, Di Cataldo V, Russo D, Vicenzi L, Cossa S, Lucci S, Cilla S, Deodato F, Gambacorta MA, Scambia G, Morganti AG, Ferrandina G. Efficacy and Safety of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy in Oligometastatic Uterine Cancer (MITO-RT2/RAD): A Large, Real-World Study in Collaboration With Italian Association of Radiation Oncology, Multicenter Italian Trials in Ovarian Cancer, and Mario Negri Gynecologic Oncology Group Groups. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023; 117:321-332. [PMID: 37150261 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.04.025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/22/2023] [Revised: 04/04/2023] [Accepted: 04/25/2023] [Indexed: 05/09/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE This retrospective, multicenter study analyzes the efficacy and safety of stereotactic body radiation therapy in a large cohort of patients with oligometastatic/persistent/recurrent uterine cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS Clinical and radiation therapy data from several radiation therapy centers treating patients by stereotactic body radiation therapy between March 2006 and October 2021 were collected. Objective response rate was defined as complete and partial response, and clinical benefit included objective response rate plus stable disease. Radiation Therapy Oncology Group/European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer and Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events scales were used to grade toxicities. Primary endpoints were the rate of complete response to stereotactic body radiation therapy, and the 2-year actuarial local control rate "per-lesion" basis. Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival and overall survival, as well as toxicity. RESULTS In the study, 157 patients with oligometastatic/persistent/recurrent uterine cancer bearing 272 lesions treated by stereotactic body radiation therapy at 14 centers were analyzed. Lymph node metastases (137, 50.4%) were prevalent, followed by parenchyma lesions (135, 49.6%). Median total dose was 35 Gy (10-75.2), in 5 fractions (range, 1-10). Complete and partial responses were 174 (64.0%), and 54 (19.9%), respectively. Stable disease was registered in 29 (10.6%), and 15 (5.5%) lesions progressed. Type of lesion (lymph node), volume (≤13.7 cc) and total dose (BED10 >59.5 Gy) were significantly associated with a higher probability of achieving complete response. Patients achieving complete response (CR) "per-lesion" basis experienced a 2-year actuarial local control rate of 92.4% versus 33.5% in lesions not achieving complete response (NCR; P < .001). Moreover, the 2-year actuarial progression-free survival rate in patients with CR was 45.4%, and patients with NCR had a 2-year rate of 17.6% (P < .001). Finally, patients who had a CR had a 2-year overall survival rate of 82.7%, compared with 56.5% for NCR patients (P <.001). Severe acute toxicity was around 2%, including one toxic death due to gastric perforation, and severe late toxicity around 4%. CONCLUSIONS The efficacy of stereotactic body radiation therapy in this setting was confirmed. The low toxicity profile and the high local control rate in complete responder patients encourage the wider use of this approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gabriella Macchia
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Gemelli Molise Hospital, Campobasso, Italy.
| | - Donato Pezzulla
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Gemelli Molise Hospital, Campobasso, Italy
| | - Maura Campitelli
- UOC di Radioterapia, Dipartimento di Scienze Radiologiche, Radioterapiche ed Ematologiche, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Roma, Italy
| | - Concetta Laliscia
- Department of Translational Medicine, Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Andrei Fodor
- Department of Radiation Oncology, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Paolo Bonome
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Gemelli Molise Hospital, Campobasso, Italy
| | | | - Edy Ippolito
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Campus Bio-Medico University, Roma, Italy
| | - Vitaliana De Sanctis
- Radiotherapy Oncology, Department of Medicine and Surgery and Translational Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, S. Andrea Hospital, Roma, Italy
| | - Martina Ferioli
- Department of Experimental, Diagnostic and Specialty Medicine-DIMES, Alma Mater Studiorum. Bologna University, Bologna, Italy
| | - Francesca Titone
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Udine, Udine, Italy
| | - Vittoria Balcet
- Radiation Oncology Department, Ospedale degli Infermi, Biella
| | - Vanessa Di Cataldo
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Oncology Department, University of Florence, Firenze, Italy
| | | | - Lisa Vicenzi
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Ospedali Riuniti, Ancona, Italy
| | - Sabrina Cossa
- UOC Radioterapia, Fondazione "Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza," IRCCS, S. Giovanni Rotondo, Foggia, Italy
| | - Simona Lucci
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Udine, Udine, Italy
| | - Savino Cilla
- Medical Physics Unit, Gemelli Molise, Campobasso, Molise, Italy
| | - Francesco Deodato
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Gemelli Molise Hospital, Campobasso, Italy; Istituto di Radiologia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore Roma, Italy
| | - Maria Antonietta Gambacorta
- UOC di Radioterapia, Dipartimento di Scienze Radiologiche, Radioterapiche ed Ematologiche, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Roma, Italy; Istituto di Radiologia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore Roma, Italy
| | - Giovanni Scambia
- UOC Ginecologia Oncologica, Dipartimento Scienze della Salute della Donna e del Bambino, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Roma, Italy
| | - Alessio Giuseppe Morganti
- Department of Experimental, Diagnostic and Specialty Medicine-DIMES, Alma Mater Studiorum. Bologna University, Bologna, Italy
| | - Gabriella Ferrandina
- UOC Ginecologia Oncologica, Dipartimento Scienze della Salute della Donna e del Bambino, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Roma, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Facondo G, Vullo G, De Sanctis V, Rotondi M, Sigillo RC, Valeriani M, Osti MF. Clinical Outcomes of Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) for Oligometastatic Patients with Lymph Node Metastases from Gynecological Cancers. J Pers Med 2023; 13:jpm13020229. [PMID: 36836463 PMCID: PMC9965700 DOI: 10.3390/jpm13020229] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/02/2023] [Revised: 01/22/2023] [Accepted: 01/26/2023] [Indexed: 01/31/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND To evaluate clinical outcomes of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) as a local treatment for lymph node metastases from gynecological cancers. METHODS Between November 2007 and October 2021, we retrospectively analyzed 29 lymph node metastases in 22 oligometastatic/oligoprogressive patients treated with SBRT. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the rates survival. Univariate analysis for prognostic factors were performed with the log-rank test, and Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HR). RESULTS Median age was 62 years (IQR, 50-80 years). Median follow-up was 17 months (IQR 10.5-31 months). The median survival was 22 months (CI 95%: 4.2-39.7, IQR: 12.5-34.5 months). Six months, one year and two year overall survival (OS) were 96.6%, 85.2%, and 48.7%, respectively. Median local control (LC) was not reached. Six months, 1one year and 2 year were 93.1%, 87.9%, and 79.9%, respectively. Distant metastasis free survival (DMFS) at one year, and two year was 53% and 37.1%, respectively Four patients (18%) experienced acute G1-G2 toxicities. No G3-4 acute toxicity was reported, and no late toxicity was observed. CONCLUSIONS SBRT for lymph node recurrence offers excellent in-field tumor control with safe profile and low toxicities. Size, number of oligometastases, and time primary tumor to RT seem to be significant prognostic factors.
Collapse
|
6
|
Shen Z, Qu A, Jiang P, Jiang Y, Sun H, Wang J. Re-Irradiation for Recurrent Cervical Cancer: A State-of-the-Art Review. Curr Oncol 2022; 29:5262-5277. [PMID: 35892987 PMCID: PMC9331513 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol29080418] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/30/2022] [Revised: 07/21/2022] [Accepted: 07/21/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
The recurrence rate of cervical cancer after primary treatment can reach 60%, and a poor prognosis is reported in most cases. Treatment options for the recurrence of cervical cancer mainly depend on the prior treatment regimen and the location of recurrent lesions. Re-irradiation is still considered as a clinical challenge, owing to a high incidence of toxicity, especially in in-field recurrence within a short period of time. Recent advances in radiotherapy have preliminarily revealed encouraging outcomes of re-irradiation. Several centers have concentrasted on stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for the treatment of well-selected cases. Meanwhile, as the image-guiding techniques become more precise, a better dose profile can also be achieved in brachytherapy, including high-dose-rate interstitial brachytherapy (HDR-ISBT) and permanent radioactive seed implantation (PRSI). These treatment modalities have shown promising efficacy with a tolerable toxicity, providing further treatment options for recurrent cervical cancer. However, it is highly unlikely to draw a definite conclusion from all of those studies due to the large heterogeneity among them and the lack of large-scale prospective studies. This study mainly reviews and summarizes the progress of re-irradiation for recurrent cervical cancer in recent years, in order to provide potential treatment regimens for the management of re-irradiation.
Collapse
|
7
|
Crosbie EJ, Kitson SJ, McAlpine JN, Mukhopadhyay A, Powell ME, Singh N. Endometrial cancer. Lancet 2022; 399:1412-1428. [PMID: 35397864 DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(22)00323-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 307] [Impact Index Per Article: 153.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/15/2021] [Revised: 01/26/2022] [Accepted: 02/03/2022] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
Endometrial cancer is the most common gynaecological cancer in high income countries and its incidence is rising globally. Although an ageing population and fewer benign hysterectomies have contributed to this trend, the growing prevalence of obesity is the major underlying cause. Obesity poses challenges for diagnosis and treatment and more research is needed to offer primary prevention to high-risk women and to optimise endometrial cancer survivorship. Early presentation with postmenopausal bleeding ensures most endometrial cancers are cured by hysterectomy but those with advanced disease have a poor prognosis. Minimally invasive surgical staging and sentinel-lymph-node biopsy provides a low morbidity alternative to historical surgical management without compromising oncological outcomes. Adjuvant radiotherapy reduces loco-regional recurrence in intermediate-risk and high-risk cases. Advances in our understanding of the molecular biology of endometrial cancer have paved the way for targeted chemotherapeutic strategies, and clinical trials will establish their benefit in adjuvant, advanced, and recurrent disease settings in the coming years.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emma J Crosbie
- Gynaecological Oncology Research Group, Division of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, St Mary's Hospital, Manchester, UK; Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, St Mary's Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK.
| | - Sarah J Kitson
- Gynaecological Oncology Research Group, Division of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, St Mary's Hospital, Manchester, UK
| | - Jessica N McAlpine
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University of British Columbia and BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Asima Mukhopadhyay
- Kolkata Gynecological Oncology Trials and Translational Research Group, Chittaranjan National Cancer Institute, Kolkata, India; Department of Gynaecological Oncology, James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, UK; Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Melanie E Powell
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Barts and The London NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Naveena Singh
- Department of Anatomic Pathology, Vancouver General Hospital, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Shenker R, Stephens SJ, Davidson B, Chino J. Role of stereotactic body radiotherapy in gynecologic radiation oncology. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2022; 32:372-379. [DOI: 10.1136/ijgc-2021-002466] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/03/2021] [Accepted: 10/15/2021] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT, also referred to as stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR)) has been used in the treatment of primary and metastatic solid tumors, and increasingly so in gynecologic oncology. This review article aims to summarize the current literature describing the utility of SBRT in the primary, recurrent, and limited metastatic settings for gynecologic malignancies. The use of SBRT in both retrospective and prospective reports has been associated with adequate control of the treated site, particularly in the setting of oligometastatic disease. It is not, however, recommended as an alternative to brachytherapy for intact disease unless all efforts to use brachytherapy are exhausted. While phase I and II trials have established the relative safety and potential toxicities of SBRT, there remains a dearth of phase III randomized evidence, including the use of immunotherapy, in order to better establish the role of this technique as a method of improving more global outcomes for our patients with gynecologic cancers.
Collapse
|
9
|
Kataria T, Naga P, Banerjee S, Gupta D, Narang K, Tayal M, Bisht SS. CyberKnife Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy for Recurrent or Oligometastatic Gynecological Cancers. South Asian J Cancer 2021; 10:107-111. [PMID: 34568224 PMCID: PMC8460339 DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1731576] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Use of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) in the treatment of recurrent or metastatic lesions from a primary gynecologic cancer is a relatively new concept. The present study aims to assess the safety, efficacy, and possible toxicity profile of CyberKnife SABR, recurrent or metastatic disease. Materials/Methods CyberKnife VSI-based SABR was offered to 20 oligometastatic/recurrent gynecological cancer patients between 2013 and 2019. Patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics including radiotherapy details, clinical outcome in terms of local control rates, and toxicities are reported in this study. Results Twenty-five recurrent or oligometastatic lesions for 20 primary gynecologic cancer patients including cervical ( n = 8), ovarian ( n = 6), endometrial ( n = 5), and vulvar ( n = 1) cancers were analyzed. Of these, 4 (16%) were intracranial lesions and remaining 21 (84%) were extracranial, consisting of 14 (67%) extrapelvic and 7 (33%) pelvic lesions. The median SABR dose delivered was 60 Gy biologically effective dose (range 42-133 Gy) in an average of four fractions (range 1-6). The mean follow-up was 18 (range 2-70) months. Local tumor control was achieved in 82% of patients. There was no grade ≥ 3 toxicity recorded. Conclusion Our study results suggest that CyberKnife SABR is an effective treatment modality with no major morbidity in patients with recurrent or oligometastatic gynecological cancers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tejinder Kataria
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Medanta - The Medicity, Gurgaon, Haryana, India
| | - Pushpa Naga
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Medanta - The Medicity, Gurgaon, Haryana, India
| | - Susovan Banerjee
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Medanta - The Medicity, Gurgaon, Haryana, India
| | - Deepak Gupta
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Medanta - The Medicity, Gurgaon, Haryana, India
| | - Kushal Narang
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Medanta - The Medicity, Gurgaon, Haryana, India
| | - Manoj Tayal
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Medanta - The Medicity, Gurgaon, Haryana, India
| | - Shyam Singh Bisht
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Medanta - The Medicity, Gurgaon, Haryana, India
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Concin N, Matias-Guiu X, Vergote I, Cibula D, Mirza MR, Marnitz S, Ledermann J, Bosse T, Chargari C, Fagotti A, Fotopoulou C, Martin AG, Lax S, Lorusso D, Marth C, Morice P, Nout RA, O'Donnell D, Querleu D, Raspollini MR, Sehouli J, Sturdza A, Taylor A, Westermann A, Wimberger P, Colombo N, Planchamp F, Creutzberg CL. ESGO/ESTRO/ESP guidelines for the management of patients with endometrial carcinoma. Radiother Oncol 2021; 154:327-353. [PMID: 33712263 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2020.11.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 76] [Impact Index Per Article: 25.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
A European consensus conference on endometrial carcinoma was held in 2014 to produce multidisciplinary evidence-based guidelines on selected questions. Given the large body of literature on the management of endometrial carcinoma published since 2014, the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the European SocieTy for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO) and the European Society of Pathology (ESP) jointly decided to update these evidence-based guidelines and to cover new topics in order to improve the quality of care for women with endometrial carcinoma across Europe and worldwide. ESGO/ESTRO/ESP nominated an international multidisciplinary development group consisting of practicing clinicians and researchers who have demonstrated leadership and expertise in the care and research of endometrial carcinoma (27 experts across Europe). To ensure that the guidelines are evidence-based, the literature published since 2014, identified from a systematic search was reviewed and critically appraised. In the absence of any clear scientific evidence, judgment was based on the professional experience and consensus of the development group. The guidelines are thus based on the best available evidence and expert agreement. Prior to publication, the guidelines were reviewed by 191 independent international practitioners in cancer care delivery and patient representatives. The guidelines comprehensively cover endometrial carcinoma staging, definition of prognostic risk groups integrating molecular markers, pre- and intra-operative work-up, fertility preservation, management for early, advanced, metastatic, and recurrent disease and palliative treatment. Principles of radiotherapy and pathological evaluation are also defined.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicole Concin
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Innsbruck Medical University, Austria; Evangelische Kliniken Essen-Mitte, Germany.
| | - Xavier Matias-Guiu
- Department of Pathology, Hospital Universitari Arnau de Vilanova, University of Lleida, CIBERONC, Irblleida, Spain; Department of Pathology, Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, University of Barcelona, Idibell, Spain
| | - Ignace Vergote
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Gynecologic Oncology, Leuven Cancer Institute, Catholic University Leuven, Belgium
| | - David Cibula
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, General University Hospital in Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Mansoor Raza Mirza
- Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Denmark
| | - Simone Marnitz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Faculty of the University of Cologne, Germany
| | | | - Tjalling Bosse
- Department of Pathology, Leids Universitair Medisch Centrum, Leiden, Netherlands
| | - Cyrus Chargari
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - Anna Fagotti
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Christina Fotopoulou
- Department of Gynaecologic Oncology, Imperial College London Faculty of Medicine, UK
| | | | - Sigurd Lax
- Department of Pathology, Hospital Graz II, Austria; School of Medicine, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria
| | - Domenica Lorusso
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Christian Marth
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Innsbruck Medical University, Austria
| | - Philippe Morice
- Department of Surgery, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - Remi A Nout
- Department of Radiotherapy, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - Denis Querleu
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecologic Oncology, University Hospital, Strasbourg, France
| | - Maria Rosaria Raspollini
- Histopathology and Molecular Diagnostics, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy
| | - Jalid Sehouli
- Department of Gynecology with Center for Oncological Surgery, Campus Virchow Klinikum, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin and Berlin Institute of Health, Germany
| | - Alina Sturdza
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Christian Doppler Laboratory for Medical Radiation Research for Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, Austria
| | | | - Anneke Westermann
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Noord-Holland, Netherlands
| | - Pauline Wimberger
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, TU Dresden Medizinische Fakultat Carl Gustav Carus, Germany
| | - Nicoletta Colombo
- Gynecologic Oncology Program, European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan and University of Milan-Bicocca, Italy
| | | | - Carien L Creutzberg
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Cohen JG, Chang AJ. Use of stereotactic body radiotherapy in gynecologic cancers: Local control with systemic treatment implications. Gynecol Oncol 2021; 159:599-600. [PMID: 33279016 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.11.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Joshua G Cohen
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA
| | - Albert J Chang
- Division of Brachytherapy, Department of Radiation Oncology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Stereotactic body radiotherapy for the treatment of gynecologic malignancies: Passing fancy or here to stay? Gynecol Oncol 2021; 161:642-644. [PMID: 33867142 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2021.04.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
|
13
|
Concin N, Creutzberg CL, Vergote I, Cibula D, Mirza MR, Marnitz S, Ledermann JA, Bosse T, Chargari C, Fagotti A, Fotopoulou C, González-Martín A, Lax SF, Lorusso D, Marth C, Morice P, Nout RA, O'Donnell DE, Querleu D, Raspollini MR, Sehouli J, Sturdza AE, Taylor A, Westermann AM, Wimberger P, Colombo N, Planchamp F, Matias-Guiu X. ESGO/ESTRO/ESP Guidelines for the management of patients with endometrial carcinoma. Virchows Arch 2021; 478:153-190. [PMID: 33604759 DOI: 10.1007/s00428-020-03007-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 81] [Impact Index Per Article: 27.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
A European consensus conference on endometrial carcinoma was held in 2014 to produce multidisciplinary evidence-based guidelines on selected questions. Given the large body of literature on the management of endometrial carcinoma published since 2014, the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the European SocieTy for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO) and the European Society of Pathology (ESP) jointly decided to update these evidence-based guidelines and to cover new topics in order to improve the quality of care for women with endometrial carcinoma across Europe and worldwide. ESGO/ESTRO/ESP nominated an international multidisciplinary development group consisting of practicing clinicians and researchers who have demonstrated leadership and expertise in the care and research of endometrial carcinoma (27 experts across Europe). To ensure that the guidelines are evidence-based, the literature published since 2014, identified from a systematic search was reviewed and critically appraised. In the absence of any clear scientific evidence, judgment was based on the professional experience and consensus of the development group. The guidelines are thus based on the best available evidence and expert agreement. Prior to publication, the guidelines were reviewed by 191 independent international practitioners in cancer care delivery and patient representatives. The guidelines comprehensively cover endometrial carcinoma staging, definition of prognostic risk groups integrating molecular markers, pre- and intra-operative work-up, fertility preservation, management for early, advanced, metastatic, and recurrent disease and palliative treatment. Principles of radiotherapy and pathological evaluation are also defined.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicole Concin
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Innsbruck Medical University, Innsbruck, Austria. .,Evangelische Kliniken Essen-Mitte, Essen, Germany.
| | - Carien L Creutzberg
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Ignace Vergote
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Gynecologic Oncology, Leuven Cancer Institute, Catholic University Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - David Cibula
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, General University Hospital in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Mansoor Raza Mirza
- Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Simone Marnitz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Faculty of the University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | | | - Tjalling Bosse
- Department of Pathology, Leids Universitair Medisch Centrum, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Cyrus Chargari
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - Anna Fagotti
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A Gemelli IRCCS, Roma, Italy
| | - Christina Fotopoulou
- Department of Gynaecologic Oncology, Imperial College London Faculty of Medicine, London, UK
| | | | - Sigurd F Lax
- Department of Pathology, Hospital Graz II, Graz, Austria.,School of Medicine, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Linz, Austria
| | - Domenica Lorusso
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A Gemelli IRCCS, Roma, Italy
| | - Christian Marth
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Innsbruck Medical University, Innsbruck, Austria
| | - Philippe Morice
- Department of Surgery, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - Remi A Nout
- Department of Radiotherapy, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Denis Querleu
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A Gemelli IRCCS, Roma, Italy.,Department of Obstetrics and Gynecologic Oncology, University Hospital, Strasbourg, France
| | - Maria Rosaria Raspollini
- Histopathology and Molecular Diagnostics, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy
| | - Jalid Sehouli
- Department of Gynecology with Center for Oncological Surgery, Campus Virchow Klinikum, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.,Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
| | - Alina E Sturdza
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Christian Doppler Laboratory for Medical Radiation Research for Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | | | - Anneke M Westermann
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, The Netherlands
| | - Pauline Wimberger
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, TU Dresden Medizinische Fakultat Carl Gustav Carus, Dresden, Germany
| | - Nicoletta Colombo
- Gynecologic Oncology Program, European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan and University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Xavier Matias-Guiu
- Department of Pathology, Hospital Universitari Arnau de Vilanova, University of Lleida, CIBERONC, Irblleida, Spain.,Department of Pathology, Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, University of Barcelona, Idibell, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Concin N, Matias-Guiu X, Vergote I, Cibula D, Mirza MR, Marnitz S, Ledermann J, Bosse T, Chargari C, Fagotti A, Fotopoulou C, Gonzalez Martin A, Lax S, Lorusso D, Marth C, Morice P, Nout RA, O'Donnell D, Querleu D, Raspollini MR, Sehouli J, Sturdza A, Taylor A, Westermann A, Wimberger P, Colombo N, Planchamp F, Creutzberg CL. ESGO/ESTRO/ESP guidelines for the management of patients with endometrial carcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2020; 31:12-39. [PMID: 33397713 DOI: 10.1136/ijgc-2020-002230] [Citation(s) in RCA: 766] [Impact Index Per Article: 191.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/07/2020] [Accepted: 11/16/2020] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
A European consensus conference on endometrial carcinoma was held in 2014 to produce multi-disciplinary evidence-based guidelines on selected questions. Given the large body of literature on the management of endometrial carcinoma published since 2014, the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the European SocieTy for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO), and the European Society of Pathology (ESP) jointly decided to update these evidence-based guidelines and to cover new topics in order to improve the quality of care for women with endometrial carcinoma across Europe and worldwide.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicole Concin
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Innsbruck Medical University, Innsbruck, Austria .,Evangelische Kliniken Essen-Mitte, Essen, Germany
| | - Xavier Matias-Guiu
- Department of Pathology, Hospital Universitari Arnau de Vilanova, University of Lleida, CIBERONC, Irblleida, Spain.,Department of Pathology, Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, University of Barcelona, Idibell, Spain
| | - Ignace Vergote
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Gynecologic Oncology, Leuven Cancer Institute, Catholic University Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - David Cibula
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, General University Hospital in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Mansoor Raza Mirza
- Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Simone Marnitz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Faculty of the University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | | | - Tjalling Bosse
- Department of Pathology, Leids Universitair Medisch Centrum, Leiden, Netherlands
| | - Cyrus Chargari
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - Anna Fagotti
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Christina Fotopoulou
- Department of Gynaecologic Oncology, Imperial College London Faculty of Medicine, London, UK
| | | | - Sigurd Lax
- Department of Pathology, Hospital Graz II, Graz, Austria.,School of Medicine, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Linz, Austria
| | - Domenica Lorusso
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Christian Marth
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Innsbruck Medical University, Innsbruck, Austria
| | - Philippe Morice
- Department of Surgery, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - Remi A Nout
- Department of Radiotherapy, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - Denis Querleu
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.,Department of Obstetrics and Gynecologic Oncology, University Hospital, Strasbourg, France
| | - Maria Rosaria Raspollini
- Histopathology and Molecular Diagnostics, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy
| | - Jalid Sehouli
- Department of Gynecology with Center for Oncological Surgery, Campus Virchow Klinikum, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
| | - Alina Sturdza
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Christian Doppler Laboratory for Medical Radiation Research for Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | | | - Anneke Westermann
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, Netherlands
| | - Pauline Wimberger
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, TU Dresden Medizinische Fakultat Carl Gustav Carus, Dresden, Germany
| | - Nicoletta Colombo
- Gynecologic Oncology Program, European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan and University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Carien L Creutzberg
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Ingle M, Lalondrelle S. Current Status of Anatomical Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Brachytherapy and External Beam Radiotherapy Planning and Delivery. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2020; 32:817-827. [PMID: 33169690 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2020.10.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/24/2020] [Revised: 10/06/2020] [Accepted: 10/08/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
Radiotherapy planning and delivery have dramatically improved in recent times. Imaging is key to a successful three-dimensional and increasingly four-dimensional based pathway with computed tomography embedded as the backbone modality. Computed tomography has significant limitations for many tumour sites where soft-tissue discrimination is suboptimal, and where magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has largely superseded in the diagnostic arena. MRI is increasingly used together with computed tomography in the radiotherapy planning pathway and is now established as a prerequisite for several tumours. With the advent of combined MRI and linear accelerator (MR-linac) systems, a transition to MRI-based radiotherapy planning is becoming reality, with increasing experience and research involving these new platforms. In this overview, we aim to highlight how magnetic resonance-guided imaging has improved radiotherapy, using gynaecological malignancies to illustrate, in both external beam radiotherapy and image-guided brachytherapy, and will assess the early evidence for magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy using combined MR-linac systems.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Ingle
- Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, Surrey, UK; Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - S Lalondrelle
- Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, Surrey, UK; Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Yegya-Raman N, Cao CD, Hathout L, Girda E, Richard SD, Rosenblum NG, Taunk NK, Jabbour SK. Stereotactic body radiation therapy for oligometastatic gynecologic malignancies: A systematic review. Gynecol Oncol 2020; 159:573-580. [PMID: 32917412 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.08.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/04/2020] [Accepted: 08/08/2020] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To assess the efficacy and safety of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for oligometastatic gynecologic malignancies. METHOD A comprehensive search of the PubMed, Medline, and EMBASE databases was conducted using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. "Oligometastatic" was defined as a limited number of uncontrolled/untreated metastatic lesions (typically ≤ 5), including regional nodal metastases. Primary outcomes were response rate (complete response or partial response), local control of oligometastatic lesions, and toxicity. RESULTS Of 716 screened records, 17 studies (13 full length articles, 4 conference abstracts) were selected and analyzed as 16 unique studies. A total of 667 patients were treated with ~1071 metastatic lesions identified. Primary sites included ovarian (57.6%), cervical (27.1%), uterine (11.1%), vaginal (0.4%), vulvar (0.3%), and other/unspecified (3.4%). Most patients (65.4%) presented with a single metastatic lesion. Metastatic lesion sites included the abdomen (44.2%), pelvis (18.8%), thorax (15.5%), neck (4.6%), central nervous system (4.3%), bone (1.6%), and other/unspecified (11%). Of the lesions, 64% were nodal. Response rate (among 8 studies) ranged from 49% to 97%, with 7/8 studies reporting > 75% response rate. Local control ranged from 71% to 100%, with 14/16 studies reporting ≥ 80% local control. No grade ≥ 3 toxicities were observed in 9/16 (56%) studies. Median progression-free survival (PFS) (among 10 studies) ranged from 3.3 months to 21.7 months. Disease progression most commonly occurred outside of the SBRT radiation field (79% to 100% of failures). CONCLUSIONS SBRT for oligometastatic gynecologic malignancies is associated with favorable response and local control rates but a high rate of out-of-field progression and heterogeneous PFS. Additional study into rational combinations of SBRT and systemic therapy appears warranted to further improve patient outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nikhil Yegya-Raman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Connie D Cao
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Lara Hathout
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA
| | - Eugenia Girda
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA
| | - Scott D Richard
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Norman G Rosenblum
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Neil K Taunk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Salma K Jabbour
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Reed N, Balega J, Barwick T, Buckley L, Burton K, Eminowicz G, Forrest J, Ganesan R, Harrand R, Holland C, Howe T, Ind T, Iyer R, Kaushik S, Music R, Sadozye A, Shanbhag S, Siddiqui N, Syed S, Percival N, Whitham NL, Nordin A, Fotopoulou C. British Gynaecological Cancer Society (BGCS) cervical cancer guidelines: Recommendations for practice. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2020; 256:433-465. [PMID: 33143928 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2020.08.020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/30/2020] [Revised: 08/05/2020] [Accepted: 08/21/2020] [Indexed: 01/20/2023]
Abstract
Cervix cancer in many countries is declining and screening programmes and immunisation will reduce the incidence in the next few decades. This guideline attempts to cover management of invasive disease reflecting diagnosis and imaging including new imaging and sentinel lymph node biopsies. Smaller volume disease is usually managed surgically whereas advanced disease is treated with (chemo)- radiation. It also includes discussion of fertility sparing procedures. Practices are changing frequently for all aspects of care usually in attempts to reduce complications and improve quality of life. The management of advanced disease is treated by chemotherapy and the use of newer agents is also discussed. Other sections discuss specialist situations such as cancer in pregnancy, rare cervical tumours, late effects and supportive measures and fertility preserving approaches.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nick Reed
- Beatson Oncology Centre, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
| | | | | | - Lynn Buckley
- Clinical Nurse Specialist, Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, United Kingdom
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Thomas Ind
- Royal Marsden Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| | - Rema Iyer
- East Kent Hospitals University Foundation NHS Trust, United Kingdom
| | | | - Robert Music
- Jo's Cervical Cancer Trustt, London, United Kingdom
| | | | - Smruta Shanbhag
- University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust, United Kingdom
| | | | - Sheeba Syed
- Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, United Kingdom
| | | | - Natasha Lauren Whitham
- Lancashire Teaching Hospitals (Royal Preston Hospital, Fulwood, Lancashire), United Kingdom
| | - Andy Nordin
- East Kent Gynaecological Oncology Centre, East Kent Hospitals University Foundation Nhs Trust, Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother Hospital, Margate, United Kingdom
| | | |
Collapse
|
18
|
Gadducci A, Cosio S. Pharmacological Treatment of Patients with Metastatic, Recurrent or Persistent Cervical Cancer Not Amenable by Surgery or Radiotherapy: State of Art and Perspectives of Clinical Research. Cancers (Basel) 2020; 12:E2678. [PMID: 32961781 PMCID: PMC7565040 DOI: 10.3390/cancers12092678] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/24/2020] [Revised: 09/04/2020] [Accepted: 09/16/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Cervical cancer patients with distant or loco-regional recurrences not amenable by surgery or radiotherapy have limited treatment options, and their 5-year overall survival (OS) rates range from 5% to 16%. The purpose of this paper is to assess the results obtained with chemotherapy and biological agents in this clinical setting. Several phase II trials of different cisplatin (CDDP)-based doublets and a phase III randomized trial showing a trend in response rate, progression-free survival, and OS in favor of CDDP + paclitaxel (PTX) compared with other CDDP-based doublets have been reviewed. The factors predictive of response to chemotherapy as well as the benefits and risks of the addition of bevacizumab to CDDP + PTX have been analyzed. The FDA has recently approved pembrolizumab for patients with recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer in progression on or after chemotherapy whose tumors were PD-L1 positive. Interesting perspectives of clinical research are represented by the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors alone or in addition to chemotherapy, whereas PARP inhibitors and PI3K inhibitors are still at the basic research phase, but promising.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Angiolo Gadducci
- Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Division of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Pisa, 56127 Pisa, Italy;
| | | |
Collapse
|
19
|
Results of a Phase I-II Study on Laser Therapy for Vaginal Side Effects after Radiotherapy for Cancer of Uterine Cervix or Endometrium. Cancers (Basel) 2020; 12:cancers12061639. [PMID: 32575821 PMCID: PMC7352893 DOI: 10.3390/cancers12061639] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/29/2020] [Revised: 06/16/2020] [Accepted: 06/19/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Women who have previously received radiotherapy (RT) for gynecologic cancer often suffer from vaginal fibrosis and stenosis. The success of “non-ablative” laser therapy for postmenopausal vaginal atrophy has led to the idea of testing the laser in patients submitted to RT. In this prospective observational study, we selected patients who underwent pelvic RT followed by vaginal laser treatment. We scheduled three treatment sessions (at T0–T1–T2) and three controls (at T1–T2–T3) one month apart. The follow-up (at T4) was carried out six months after the last treatment. Vaginal Health Index (VHI) and vaginal length were evaluated. Sexual function was assessed through Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI). Overall, 43 patients with severe vaginal shortening, atrophy and stenosis was enrolled and treated with intravaginal non-ablative CO2 laser. We observed a progressive increase in vaginal length of 9% (p = 0.03) at T2 and 28% (p < 0.0001) at T3; effects were maintained at T4 (p < 0.0001). After the first application VHI showed a significant improvement of 57% at T3 (p < 0.0001). The results were maintained at T4 (p < 0.0001). No changes were found in FSFI. All procedures were well tolerated. In conclusion, laser therapy improved vaginal length and VHI in women undergoing pelvic RT; prospective studies are needed.
Collapse
|
20
|
Zhang TW, Palma D, D'Souza D, Velker V, Mendez LC. Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy for Recurrent or Metastatic Gynecological Cancer: Extending Lives? Curr Treat Options Oncol 2020; 21:58. [PMID: 32533272 DOI: 10.1007/s11864-020-00748-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/24/2022]
Abstract
OPINION STATEMENT Recent phase II clinical trials suggest that stereotactic ablative radiation therapy (SABR) can potentially improve survival for patients with oligometastatic cancer. However, these studies have mostly enrolled primaries other than gynecologic malignancies. While level I evidence is limited, recent publications exploring the use of SABR for oligometastatic gynecologic cancers have indicated a potential role for this treatment in para-aortic lymph node recurrences, and in visceral and brain metastases. The use of SABR for recurrences in the pelvis presents a number of challenges as these patients have often received previous radiation treatment. In these settings, care must be taken to avoid trespassing normal tissue tolerance with SABR leading to toxicity, especially as the potential benefit of SABR in this setting is not based on high-level evidence. Although SABR is feasible and in general safe for oligometastatic gynecologic malignancies, insufficient data are available to indicate whether it is associated with improved survival. Clinical judgment that incorporates patient and tumor factors is needed to determine if SABR is appropriate for selecting patients. Future directions include combining SABR with novel systemic therapies, determining optimal sequencing of treatments, and generating more robust randomized data pertaining to the use of SABR for oligometastatic gynecologic cancers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tina W Zhang
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Oncology, London Health Sciences Centre, 800 Commissioners Rd East, London, Ontario, N6A 5W9, Canada
| | - David Palma
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Oncology, London Health Sciences Centre, 800 Commissioners Rd East, London, Ontario, N6A 5W9, Canada
| | - David D'Souza
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Oncology, London Health Sciences Centre, 800 Commissioners Rd East, London, Ontario, N6A 5W9, Canada
| | - Vikram Velker
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Oncology, London Health Sciences Centre, 800 Commissioners Rd East, London, Ontario, N6A 5W9, Canada
| | - Lucas C Mendez
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Oncology, London Health Sciences Centre, 800 Commissioners Rd East, London, Ontario, N6A 5W9, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Leung E, Gladwish A, Sahgal A, Lo SS, Kunos CA, Lanciano RM, Mantz CA, Guckenberger M, Zagar TM, Mayr NA, Chang AR, Jorcano S, Biswas T, Pontoriero A, Albuquerque KV. Survey of current practices from an international task force for gynecological stereotactic ablative radiotherapy. Radiat Oncol 2020; 15:24. [PMID: 32000833 PMCID: PMC6993370 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-020-1469-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/30/2019] [Accepted: 01/15/2020] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy (SABR) is an effective treatment that improves local control for many tumours. However, the role of SABR in gynecological cancers (GYN) has not been well-established. We hypothesize that there exists considerable variation in GYN-SABR practice and technique. The goal of this study is to describe clinical and technical factors in utilization of GYN-SABR among 11 experienced radiation oncologists. Materials and methods A 63 question survey on GYN-SABR was sent to 11 radiation oncologists (5 countries) who have published original research, conducted trials or have an established program at their institutions. Responses were combined and analyzed at a central institution. Results Most respondents indicated that salvage therapy (non-irradiated or re-irradiated field) for nodal (81%) and primary recurrent disease (91%) could be considered standard options for SABR in the setting of inability to administer brachytherapy. All other indications should be considered on clinical trials. Most would not offer SABR as a boost in primary treatment off-trial without absolute contraindications to brachytherapy. Multi-modality imaging is often (91%) used for planning including PET, CT contrast and MRI. There is a wide variation for OAR tolerances however small bowel is considered the dose-limiting structure for most experts (91%). Fractionation schedules range from 3 to 6 fractions for nodal/primary definitive and boost SABR. Conclusions Although SABR has become increasingly standard in other oncology disease sites, there remains a wide variation in both clinical and technical factors when treating GYN cancers. Nodal and recurrent disease is considered a potential indication for SABR whereas other indications should be offered on clinical trials. This study summarizes SABR practices among GYN radiation oncologists while further studies are needed to establish consensus guidelines for GYN-SABR treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E Leung
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
| | - A Gladwish
- Royal Victoria Hospital, Barrie, ON, Canada
| | - A Sahgal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - S S Lo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - C A Kunos
- National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, USA
| | - R M Lanciano
- Delaware County Memorial Hospital/Philadelphia Cyberknife, Drexel Hill, PA, USA
| | - C A Mantz
- 21st Century Oncology, Fort Myers, FL, USA
| | | | - T M Zagar
- Northeastern Radiation Oncology, Glen Falls, NY, USA
| | - N A Mayr
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - A R Chang
- Soonchunhyang University Seoul Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
| | - S Jorcano
- Instituto Oncologico Teknon, Barcelona, Spain
| | - T Biswas
- Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | | | - K V Albuquerque
- University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Sturdza A, Viswanathan AN, Erickson B, Yashar C, Bruggeman A, Feddock J, Klopp A, Beriwal S, Gaffney D, Han K, Kamrava M. American Brachytherapy Society working group report on the patterns of care and a literature review of reirradiation for gynecologic cancers. Brachytherapy 2020; 19:127-138. [PMID: 31917178 DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2019.11.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/04/2019] [Revised: 11/22/2019] [Accepted: 11/27/2019] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Recurrences of previously irradiated gynecological malignancies are uncommon. Standardized management of these cases is not well established. We aim to provide an in-depth literature review and present current practice patterns among an international group of experienced practitioners in the reirradiation setting of gynecologic cancers. METHODS AND MATERIALS An extensive literature search was performed and 35 articles were selected based on preset criteria. A 20-question online survey of 10 experts regarding their retreatment practices was also conducted. RESULTS The reviewed publications include a diverse group of patients, multiple treatment techniques, a range of total doses, local control, overall survival, and toxicity outcomes. Overall, local control ranged from 44% to 88% over 1-5 years with OS in the range of 39.5-82% at 2-5 years. Late G3-4 toxicity varied very broadly from 0% to 42.9%, with most papers reporting serious toxicities greater than 15%. The most common reirradiation technique utilized was brachytherapy. Some low-dose-rate data suggest improved outcomes with doses >50 Gy. The high-dose-rate data are more varied with some studies suggesting improved local control with doses >40 Gy. In general, a longer time interval between the first and second course of radiation as well as recurrences <2-4 cm tend to have improved outcomes. CONCLUSIONS Reirradiation with brachytherapy results in relatively reasonable local control and toxicities for women with recurrent gynecologic cancers. The appropriate dose for each case needs to be individualized given the heterogeneity of cases. Multidisciplinary management is critical to develop individualized plans and to clearly communicate potential side effects and expected treatment outcomes. TAKE HOME MESSAGE Reirradiation with brachytherapy is an acceptable effective organ preserving approach for recurrent gynecologic cancers with a reasonable local control and toxicity profile. Each case requires multidisciplinary management to develop an individualized approach. Monitoring for potential long-term toxicities is essential.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alina Sturdza
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Radiation Biology, Medical University of Vienna, Comprehensive Cancer Center Vienna, Austria.
| | - Akila N Viswanathan
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| | - Beth Erickson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin
| | - Catheryn Yashar
- Department of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego
| | - Andrew Bruggeman
- Department of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego
| | | | - Ann Klopp
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center
| | - Sushil Beriwal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, UPMC Hillman cancer center
| | - David Gaffney
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Utah
| | - Kathy Han
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto
| | | |
Collapse
|
23
|
Ito K, Kito S, Nakajima Y, Shimizuguchi T, Ogawa H, Nihei K, Tanaka H, Kino N, Yasugi T, Karasawa K. Determining the recommended dose of stereotactic body radiotherapy boost in patients with cervical cancer who are unsuitable for intracavitary brachytherapy: a phase I dose-escalation study. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2019; 49:856-861. [PMID: 31112278 DOI: 10.1093/jjco/hyz074] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/04/2019] [Revised: 04/25/2019] [Accepted: 05/07/2019] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Some patients are ineligible for intracavitary brachytherapy (ICBT) for locally advanced cervical cancer. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) could be a good treatment option for such patients. This phase I clinical trial aimed to determine the recommended SBRT boost dose for ICBT-ineligible cervical cancer patients. METHODS Patients with untreated uterine cervical cancer (clinical stages IB1-IIIB) who were ineligible for ICBT were enrolled. Radiotherapy consisted of whole-pelvis radiotherapy (45 Gy in 25 fractions) followed by SBRT. Three dose levels of SBRT (19.5/21/22.5 Gy in three fractions) were set; the treatment protocol began at 21 Gy (level 2). The 'rolling-six' design study was used to establish the recommended dose of SBRT. Each dose level covered three or six patients. The primary endpoint included dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), defined as the occurrence of grade 3 (or worse) non-hematologic adverse effects within 6 months after SBRT. RESULTS The median follow-up after registration was 17 (range, 8-32) months. Three patients were enrolled in study level 2 (SBRT of 21 Gy); none of the patients exhibited DLT within 6 months after treatment completion. In study level 3 (SBRT of 22.5 Gy), three patients did not exhibit DLT. Although all six patients achieved locoregional control during follow-up, one patient treated with level 2 SBRT experienced distant metastases 14 months after registration. CONCLUSIONS The recommended dose of SBRT boost was 22.5 Gy in three fractions. We plan to conduct a phase II multi-center clinical trial using the methodology obtained from the current study.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kei Ito
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Diseases Center Komagome Hospital, Honkomagome, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Satoshi Kito
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Diseases Center Komagome Hospital, Honkomagome, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Yujiro Nakajima
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Diseases Center Komagome Hospital, Honkomagome, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Takuya Shimizuguchi
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Diseases Center Komagome Hospital, Honkomagome, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Hiroaki Ogawa
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Diseases Center Komagome Hospital, Honkomagome, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Keiji Nihei
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Diseases Center Komagome Hospital, Honkomagome, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Hiroshi Tanaka
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Aichi Cancer Center Hospital, Kanokoden, Chikusa-ku Nagoya, Aichi, Japan
| | - Nao Kino
- Department of Gynecology, Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Diseases Center Komagome Hospital, Japan
| | - Toshiharu Yasugi
- Department of Gynecology, Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Diseases Center Komagome Hospital, Japan
| | - Katsuyuki Karasawa
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Diseases Center Komagome Hospital, Honkomagome, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Moningi S, Ludmir EB, Polamraju P, Williamson T, Melkun MM, Herman JD, Krishnan S, Koay EJ, Koong AC, Minsky BD, Smith GL, Taniguchi C, Das P, Holliday EB. Definitive hyperfractionated, accelerated proton reirradiation for patients with pelvic malignancies. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2019; 19:59-65. [PMID: 31517071 PMCID: PMC6734102 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2019.08.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/24/2019] [Revised: 08/23/2019] [Accepted: 08/26/2019] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction Pelvic reirradiation (re-RT) presents challenges due to concerns for late toxicity to tissues-at-risk including pelvic bone marrow (PBM). We routinely utilize a hyperfractionated, accelerated re-RT for recurrent rectal or anal cancer in the setting of prior radiation. We hypothesized that proton beam radiation (PBR) is uniquely suited to limit doses to pelvic non-target tissues better than photon-based approaches. Materials and methods All patients who received hyperfractionated, accelerated PBR re-RT to the pelvis from 2007 to 2017 were identified. Re-RT was delivered twice daily with a 6 h minimum interfraction interval at 1.5 Gray Relative Biological Effectiveness (Gy(RBE)) per fraction to a total dose of 39-45 Gy(RBE). Concurrent chemotherapy was given to all patients. Comparison photon plans were generated for dosimetric analysis. Dosimetric parameters compared using a matched-pair analysis and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Survival analysis was performed Kaplan Meier curves. Results Fifteen patients were identified, with a median prior pelvic RT dose of 50.4 Gy (range 25-80 Gy). Median time between the initial RT and PBRT re-RT was 4.7 years (range 1.0-36.1 years). In comparison to corresponding photon re-RT plans, PBR re-RT plans had lower mean PBM dose, and lower volume of PBM getting 5 Gy, 10 Gy, 20 Gy, and 30 Gy (p < 0.001, p < 0.001, p < 0.001, and p = 0.033, respectively).With median 13.9 months follow-up after PBR re-RT, five patients had developed local recurrences, and four patients had developed distant metastases. One-year overall survival following PBR re-RT was 67.5% and one-year progression free survival was 58.7%. No patients developed acute or late Grade 4 toxicity. Conclusion PBR re-RT affords improved sparing of PBM compared with photon-based re-RT. Clinically, PBR re-RT is well-tolerated. However, given modest control rates with definitive re-RT without subsequent surgical resection, a multidisciplinary approach should be favored in this setting when feasible.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shalini Moningi
- Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Ethan B Ludmir
- Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Praveen Polamraju
- School of Medicine, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX, United States
| | - Tyler Williamson
- Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Marcella M Melkun
- Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Joseph D Herman
- Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Sunil Krishnan
- Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Eugene J Koay
- Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Albert C Koong
- Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Bruce D Minsky
- Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Grace L Smith
- Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Cullen Taniguchi
- Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Prajnan Das
- Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Emma B Holliday
- Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Cho O, Chun M. Management for locally advanced cervical cancer: new trends and controversial issues. Radiat Oncol J 2018; 36:254-264. [PMID: 30630264 PMCID: PMC6361251 DOI: 10.3857/roj.2018.00500] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/07/2018] [Accepted: 12/17/2018] [Indexed: 01/21/2023] Open
Abstract
This article reviewed new trends and controversial issues, including the intensification of chemotherapy and recent brachytherapy (BT) advances, and also reviewed recent consensuses from different societies on the management of locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC). Intensive chemotherapy during and after radiation therapy (RT) was not recommended as a standard treatment due to severe toxicities reported by several studies. The use of positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for pelvic RT planning has increased the clinical utilization of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for the evaluation of pelvic lymph node metastasis and pelvic bone marrow. Recent RT techniques for LACC patients mainly aim to minimize toxicities by sparing the normal bladder and rectum tissues and shortening the overall treatment time by administering a simultaneous integrated boost for metastatic pelvic lymph node in pelvic IMRT followed by MRI-based image guided adaptive BT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Oyeon Cho
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Korea
| | - Mison Chun
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Cree A, Livsey J, Barraclough L, Dubec M, Hambrock T, Van Herk M, Choudhury A, McWilliam A. The Potential Value of MRI in External-Beam Radiotherapy for Cervical Cancer. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2018; 30:737-750. [PMID: 30209010 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2018.08.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/17/2018] [Revised: 08/02/2018] [Accepted: 08/20/2018] [Indexed: 01/01/2023]
Abstract
The reference standard treatment for cervical cancer is concurrent chemoradiotherapy followed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided brachytherapy. Improvements in brachytherapy have increased local control rates, but late toxicity remains high with rates of 11% grade ≥3. The primary clinical target volume (CTV) for external-beam radiotherapy includes the cervix and uterus, which can show significant inter-fraction motion. This means that generous margins are required to cover the primary CTV, increasing the radiation dose to organs at risk and, therefore, toxicity. A number of image-guided radiotherapy techniques (IGRT) have been developed, but motion can be random and difficult to predict prior to treatment. In light of the development of integrated MRI linear accelerators, this review discusses the potential value of MRI in external-beam radiotherapy. Current solutions for managing pelvic organ motion are reviewed, including the potential for online adaptive radiotherapy. The impacts of the use of MRI in tumour delineation and in the delivery of stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) are highlighted. The potential role and challenges of using multi parametric MRI to guide radiotherapy are also discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Cree
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M20 4BX, UK; Department of Clinical Oncology, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust Christie Hospital, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
| | - J Livsey
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
| | - L Barraclough
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
| | - M Dubec
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
| | - T Hambrock
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
| | - M Van Herk
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M20 4BX, UK; Department of Clinical Oncology, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust Christie Hospital, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
| | - A Choudhury
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M20 4BX, UK; Department of Clinical Oncology, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust Christie Hospital, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
| | - A McWilliam
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M20 4BX, UK; Department of Clinical Oncology, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust Christie Hospital, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M20 4BX, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Mercier C, Dirix P, Meijnders P, Vermeulen P, Van Laere S, Debois H, Huget P, Verellen D. A phase I dose-escalation trial of stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy for non-spine bone and lymph node metastases (DESTROY-trial). Radiat Oncol 2018; 13:152. [PMID: 30126440 PMCID: PMC6102883 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-018-1096-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/07/2018] [Accepted: 08/10/2018] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
Background In an oligometastatic setting, metastasis-directed treatment could render patients disease free, possibly for a protracted interval. Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) is one of the treatment modalities that can be offered to these patients. In addition, the radiobiological qualities of SABR are promising for the use in perceived radioresistant tumours. There is also emerging evidence that SABR can stimulate the immune response, and a specific therapeutic window may exist for the optimal use of radiotherapy as an immune adjuvant. However, when SABR is considered for non-spine bone or lymph node metastases, the optimal fractionation schedule is not yet known. Methods The DESTROY-trial is a non-randomized prospective phase I trial determining a regimen of choice for patients with non-spine bone and lymph node metastases. A total of 90 patients will be included in three different treatment regimens. They will be offered stereotactic ablative radiotherapy in 5, 3 or 1 fractions. Dose-limiting toxicity will be recorded as primary endpoint. Acute and late toxicity, local response and local recurrence, and progression-free survival are secondary endpoints. Liquid biopsies will be collected throughout the course of this study from the second fractionation schedule on. Discussion Despite its almost universal use in (oligo-)metastatic patients, the level of evidence supporting radical local treatment in general, and stereotactic radiotherapy in particular, is low. This prospective phase I trial will evaluate different SABR regimens for metastases and the differences in immune-stimulatory effects. Trial registration The Ethics committee of the GZA Hospitals (B099201732915) approved this study on 05/07/2017. Amendment for translational research was approved on 06/02/2018. Trial registered on Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03486431) on 03/04/2018 – Retrospectively registered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carole Mercier
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Iridium Cancer Network, Wilrijk, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Piet Dirix
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Iridium Cancer Network, Wilrijk, Antwerp, Belgium. .,University of Antwerp, Molecular Imaging, Pathology, Radiotherapy & Oncology (MIPRO), Edegem, Antwerp, Belgium.
| | - Paul Meijnders
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Iridium Cancer Network, Wilrijk, Antwerp, Belgium.,University of Antwerp, Molecular Imaging, Pathology, Radiotherapy & Oncology (MIPRO), Edegem, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Peter Vermeulen
- Translational Cancer Research Unit, Oncologisch Centrum GZA, Wilrijk, Antwerp, Belgium.,University of Antwerp, Molecular Imaging, Pathology, Radiotherapy & Oncology (MIPRO), Edegem, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Steven Van Laere
- Translational Cancer Research Unit, Oncologisch Centrum GZA, Wilrijk, Antwerp, Belgium.,University of Antwerp, Molecular Imaging, Pathology, Radiotherapy & Oncology (MIPRO), Edegem, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Hilde Debois
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Iridium Cancer Network, Wilrijk, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Philippe Huget
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Iridium Cancer Network, Wilrijk, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Dirk Verellen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Iridium Cancer Network, Wilrijk, Antwerp, Belgium.,Departement of Radiotherapy, UZ Brussel, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Jette, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
An atlas to aid delineation of para-aortic lymph node region in cervical cancer: Design and validation of contouring guidelines. Radiother Oncol 2018. [PMID: 29523410 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2018.02.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Previous studies have investigated the anatomical distribution of para-aortic lymph nodes (PAN) in patients with cervical cancer. However, an atlas for accurate clinical target volume (CTV) delineation has yet to be defined. The purpose of this study was to design and verify a computerized tomography (CT) atlas to provide guidance for contouring the PAN CTV in patients with cervical cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS This prospective study included 21 cervical cancer patients (design cohort) with 39 pathological PAN identified on (18)F-FDG PET-CT. PAN [left lateral para-aortic (LLPA), aorto-caval (AC), right para-caval (RPC) nodes] were delineated on CT simulation scans. Measurements were taken from the volumetric centre of the nodes to the edge of aorta and inferior vena-cava (IVC). Initially the aorta and IVC were expanded by the mean distance to the lymph node centre to create a CTV. Expansion margins were then increased asymmetrically until the CTV resulted in a clinically acceptable number of PAN included. The CTV was validated on a further 10 patients (validation cohort) with 29 PAN. A detailed contouring guide and accompanying visual atlas for elective PAN CTV delineation was created based on the validated margins. RESULTS For the design cohort (n = 21 patients, 39 PAN), the mean distance from the centre of the node to the aorta was 8 mm (range 4-17) for both LLPA (range 4-17) and AC (range 4-15) regions. Mean distance from the IVC to the centre of the nodes was 5 mm (range 4-6) in the RPC region and 6 mm (range 3-15) in the AC region. No PAN was superior to the T12-L1 interspace or the left renal vein or inferior to the L5-S1 interspace. For validation cohort (n = 10 patients, 29 PAN), mean distance from centre of the node to the aorta was 9 mm (range 5-15) in the LLPA region, 7 mm (range 6.5-14) in the AC region. Mean distance from the ICV to the centre of the nodes was 3 mm (range 2.5-4) in the RPC region and 5 mm (range 3-10) in the AC region. A CTV expansion from the aorta of 10 mm circumferentially and 15 mm laterally, and from the IVC of 8 mm anteromedially and 6 mm posterolaterally resulted in coverage of 97% (38/39) of PAN in the design cohort. On prospective validation, the described CTV included 97% (28/29) of PAN in the validation cohort. CONCLUSION We propose the following PAN CTV; expansion from aorta of 10 mm circumferentially except 15 mm laterally, expansion from the IVC of 8 mm anteromedial and 6 mm posterolaterally. The suggested CTV includes 97% (28/29) PAN in a validated patient cohort. A detailed guide and accompanying visual atlas is provided to aid delineation of the PAN CTV in patients with cervical cancer.
Collapse
|
29
|
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW Re-irradiation historically has been associated with unacceptable toxicity and limited benefit. Recent advances in radiotherapy can change the treatment paradigm to provide new salvage treatments for recurrences of cervical and endometrial cancer. RECENT FINDINGS Image-guided brachytherapy is an effective method for salvaging central pelvic recurrence, although it has resulted in 20-25% severe late toxicity. Pelvic sidewall disease is not accessible to brachytherapy, so a combined modality approach with radical surgery and intraoperative radiotherapy is an alternative approach. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) now provides the option of radical re-irradiation with local control rates of 50-80% and a low incidence of severe late complications. SUMMARY Initial outcomes using SBRT and image-guided brachytherapy for re-irradiation of gynaecological cancer are encouraging. There has been good local control and acceptable toxicity. Further, large-scale studies are required to define optimal target doses and OAR limits.
Collapse
|