Continuous hyperfractionated accelerated radiotherapy - Escalated dose (CHART-ED): A phase I study

Swallowing disorders and mortality in adults with advanced cancer outside the head and neck and upper gastrointestinal tract: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Although oncological palliative care is increasingly being offered by multidisciplinary teams, there is still a lack of data about some symptoms handled by these teams, such as dysphagia, in patients with advanced cancer outside swallow regions. This study aimed to estimate the occurrence of dysphagia in prognosis studies of adults with advanced cancer outside the head, neck, and upper gastrointestinal tract, and to determine if there is an association with mortality.

METHODS

A systematic review of studies that evaluated dysphagia and mortality was conducted (PROSPERO: CRD42021257172).

DATA SOURCES

BVS, PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Scopus. Data between 2011 and 2023 were selected.

RESULTS

Among the 608 articles screened, only 14 were included, which covered different types of cancer, primarily Lung, and Genitourinary, Skin, Hematological, and Central Nervous System as well. Dysphagia demonstrated a variable frequency, and almost half of the studies found a percentage of dysphagia above 60%, appearing most as a symptom that affects health-related quality of life and prove to be a toxicity of treatment. The association between dysphagia and mortality was only evaluated in three articles that studied advanced lung cancer, in which, after controlling for covariates, swallowing disorders were associated with worse survival, with prevalences of dysphagia and hazard ratios of 78.5% (1.12 [1.04-1.20]), 4% (1.34 [1.28-1.35]), and 3% (1.40 [1.07-1.81]), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The occurrence of dysphagia in advanced cancer outside the head, neck, and upper GI tract is common, and there seems to be an association with significantly decreased survival in patients with advanced lung cancer.

Dyspnea in Patients Receiving Radical Radiotherapy for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Prospective Study

Background and Purpose

Dyspnea is an important symptomatic endpoint for assessment of radiation-induced lung injury (RILI) following radical radiotherapy in locally advanced disease, which remains the mainstay of treatment at the time of significant advances in therapy including combination treatments with immunotherapy and chemotherapy and the use of local ablative radiotherapy techniques. We investigated the relationship between dose-volume parameters and subjective changes in dyspnea as a measure of RILI and the relationship to spirometry.

Material and Methods

Eighty patients receiving radical radiotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer were prospectively assessed for dyspnea using two patient-completed tools: EORTC QLQ-LC13 dyspnea quality of life assessment and dyspnea visual analogue scale (VAS). Global quality of life, spirometry and radiation pneumonitis grade were also assessed. Comparisons were made with lung dose-volume parameters.

Results

The median survival of the cohort was 26 months. In the evaluable group of 59 patients there were positive correlations between lung dose-volume parameters and a change in dyspnea quality of life scale at 3 months (V₃₀ p=0.017; V₄₀ p=0.026; V₅₀ p=0.049; mean lung dose p=0.05), and a change in dyspnea VAS at 6 months (V₃₀ p=0.05; V₄₀ p=0.026; V₅₀ p=0.028) after radiotherapy. Lung dose-volume parameters predicted a 10% increase in dyspnea quality of life score at 3 months (V₄₀; p=0.041, V₅₀; p=0.037) and dyspnea VAS score at 6 months (V₄₀; p=0.027) post-treatment.

Conclusions

Worsening of dyspnea is an important symptom of RILI. We demonstrate a relationship between lung dose-volume parameters and a 10% worsening of subjective dyspnea scores. Our findings support the use of subjective dyspnea tools in future studies on radiation-induced lung toxicity, particularly at doses below conventional lung radiation tolerance limits.

Rationale for concurrent chemoradiotherapy for patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer

When treating patients with unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), those with a good performance status and disease measured within a radical treatment volume should be considered for definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy (cCRT). This guidance is based on key scientific rationale from two large Phase 3 randomised studies and meta-analyses demonstrating the superiority of cCRT over sequential (sCRT). However, the efficacy of cCRT comes at the cost of increased acute toxicity versus sequential treatment. Currently, there are several documented approaches that are addressing this drawback, which this paper outlines. At the point of diagnosis, a multidisciplinary team (MDT) approach can enable accurate assessment of patients, to determine the optimal treatment strategy to minimise risks. In addition, reviewing the Advisory Committee on Radiation Oncology Practice (ACROP) guidelines can provide clinical oncologists with additional recommendations for outlining target volume and organ-at-risk delineation for standard clinical scenarios in definitive cCRT (and adjuvant radiotherapy). Furthermore, modern advances in radiotherapy treatment planning software and treatment delivery mean that radiation oncologists can safely treat substantially larger lung tumours with higher radiotherapy doses, with greater accuracy, whilst minimising the radiotherapy dose to the surrounding healthy tissues. The combination of these advances in cCRT may assist in creating comprehensive strategies to allow patients to receive potentially curative benefits from treatments such as immunotherapy, as well as minimising treatment-related risks.

Isotoxic Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy in Stage III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Feasibility Study

PURPOSE

Not all patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are suitable for concurrent chemoradiation therapy (CRT). Local failure rate is high for sequential concurrent CRT. As such, there is a rationale for treatment intensification.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Isotoxic intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is a multicenter feasibility study that combines different intensification strategies including hyperfractionation, acceleration, and dose escalation facilitated by IMRT. Patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) of 0 to 2, and unsuitable for concurrent CRT were recruited. A minimum of 2 cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy was compulsory before starting radiation therapy (RT). Radiation dose was increased until a maximum dose of 79.2 Gy was reached or 1 or more of the organs at risk met predefined constraints. RT was delivered in 1.8-Gy fractions twice daily, and an RT quality assurance program was implemented. The primary objective was the delivery of isotoxic IMRT to a dose >60 Gy equivalent dose in 2-Gy fractions (EQD2 assuming an α/β ratio of 10 Gy for acute reacting tissues).

RESULTS

Thirty-seven patients were recruited from 7 UK centers. Median age was 69.9 years (range, 46-86 years). The male-to-female ratio was 17:18. ECOG PS was 0 to 5 in 14.2% of patients; PS was 1 to 27 in 77.1% of patients; PS was 2 to 3 in 8.6% of patients. Stage IIIA:IIIB ratio was 22:13 (62.9%:37.1%). Of 37 patients, 2 (5.4%) failed to achieve EQD2 > 60 Gy. Median prescribed tumor dose was 77.4 Gy (range, 61.2-79.2 Gy). A maximum dose of 79.2Gy was achieved in 14 patients (37.8%). Grade 3 esophagitis was reported in 2 patients, and no patients developed grade 3 to 4 pneumonitis. There were 3 grade 5 events: acute radiation pneumonitis, bronchopulmonary hemorrhage, and acute lung infection. Median follow-up at time of analysis was 25.4 months (range, 8.0-44.2) months for 11 of 35 survivors. The median survival was 18.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 13.9-30.6), 2-year overall survival was 33.6% (95% CI, 17.9-50.1), and progression-free survival was 23.9% (95% CI, 11.3-39.1).

CONCLUSIONS

Isotoxic IMRT is a well-tolerated and feasible approach to treatment intensification.

Radical accelerated radiotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): A 5-year retrospective review of two dose fractionation schedules

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Numerous fractionation regimes are used for inoperable NSCLC patients not suitable for stereotactic ablative radiotherapy. Continuous hyperfractionated accelerated radiotherapy (CHART, 54 Gy, 36 fractions over 12 days) and hypofractionated accelerated radiotherapy (55 Gy, 20 fractions over 4 weeks) are recommended UK schedules. In this single-centre retrospective analysis, we compare both fractionation schemes for patients treated at our institution from 2010 to 15.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Clinical demographic, tumour and survival data were collected alongside radiotherapy dosimetric data from the Varian Eclipse Scripting application programming interface. Differences were assessed using independent samples t-tests. Multivariate survival analysis was performed using Cox regression.

RESULTS

We identified 563 eligible patients; 43% received CHART and 57% hypofractionated radiotherapy. Median age was 71 years, 56% were male, 95% PET staged with 53% WHO performance status 0-1. 30%, 14%, 50% and 6% were stage I, II, III and IV, respectively. 38% of patients underwent induction chemotherapy. 99% completed their prescribed radiotherapy treatment. Overall response rate was 50% with a 6.5% 90-day mortality rate. Median disease-free survival was 19 months, 50% recurred locally. Median overall survival was 22.5 months with 48% alive at 2 years. Multivariate analysis identified histology, stage, performance status, chemotherapy and radiotherapy response as independent predictors of survival; no significant differences between radiotherapy regimes were observed.

CONCLUSION

In our centre, CHART and hypofractionated accelerated radiotherapy produce similar outcomes. Dose escalation studies are in progress to develop these schedules to match outcomes reported in concurrent chemo-radiation studies.

Accelerated, Dose escalated, Sequential Chemoradiotherapy in Non-small-cell lung cancer (ADSCaN): a protocol for a randomised phase II study

INTRODUCTION

Lung cancer is the most common cause of cancer mortality in the UK, and non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) accounts for approximately 85% of all lung cancers. Most patients present with inoperable disease; therefore, radiotherapy plays a major role in treatment. However, the majority of patients are not suitable for the gold standard treatment (concurrent chemoradiotherapy) due to performance status and comorbidities. Novel strategies integrating radiotherapy advances and radiobiological knowledge need to be evaluated in patients treated with sequential chemoradiotherapy. Four separate dose escalation accelerated radiotherapy schedules have been completed in UK (CHART-ED, IDEAL-CRT, I-START and Isotoxic IMRT). This study will compare these schedules with a UK standard sequential chemoradiotherapy schedule of 55 Gy in 20 fractions over 4 weeks. As it would be impossible to test all schedules in a phase III study, the aim is to use a combined randomised phase II screening/'pick the winner' approach to identify the best schedule to take into a randomised phase III study against conventionally fractionated radiotherapy.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Suitable patients will have histologically/cytologically confirmed, stage III NSCLC and are able to undergo chemoradiotherapy treatment. The study will recruit 360 patients; 120 on the standard arm and 60 on each experimental arm. Patients will complete 2-4 cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy before being randomised to one of the radiotherapy schedules. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival, with overall survival, time to local-regional failure, toxicity and cost-effectiveness as secondary objectives.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study has received ethical approval (research ethics committee (REC) reference: 16/WS/0165) from the West of Scotland REC 1. The trial is conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and Good Clinical Practice. Trial results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented internationally.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN47674500.

Continuous hyperfractionated accelerated radiotherapy using modern radiotherapy techniques for nonsmall cell lung cancer patients unsuitable for chemoradiation

INTRODUCTION

The continuous hyperfractionated and accelerated radiotherapy (CHART) regimen of radiotherapy (RT) for nonsmall cell lung cancer is underused outside the UK. We present the first Indian experience of using CHART for patients, who were not suitable for chemotherapy or concurrent chemo-RT.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the data of patients treated using CHART at our institution between January 2014 and December 2015.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven patients were treated using CHART. Planning methods and dosimetry parameters are described. Three-dimensional conformal RT was used for treatment planning and delivery in 23 patients and volumetric modulated arc RT was necessary for 14 patients. Patients in our series had a median age of 70 years (interquartile range 65.50-74.00) and 86.5% had Stage III disease. Median follow-up was short at 13.0 months. Actuarial rates of 1-year progression-free survival, 1-year overall survival (OS), and 2-year OS were 31.9%, 59.5%, and 28.5%, respectively. This treatment was well tolerated with manageable and some reversible acute esophageal toxicity (91.9% CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that CHART is feasible, safe, and well tolerated in Indian patients who are clinically found to be not suitable for either sequential or concurrent chemo- RT.

Continuous Hyperfractionated Accelerated Radiotherapy (CHART) for Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC): 7 Years' Experience From Nine UK Centres

AIM

Continuous hyperfractionated accelerated radiotherapy (CHART) remains an option to treat non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC; NICE, 2011). We have previously published treatment outcomes from 1998-2003 across five UK centres. Here we update the UK CHART experience, reporting outcomes and toxicities for patients treated between 2003 and 2009.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

UK CHART centres were invited to participate in a retrospective data analysis of NSCLC patients treated with CHART from 2003 to 2009. Nine (of 14) centres were able to submit their data into a standard database. The Kaplan-Meier method estimated survival and the Log-rank test analysed the significance.

RESULTS

In total, 849 patients had CHART treatment, with a median age of 71 years (range 31-91), 534 (63%) were men, 55% had undergone positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) and 26% had prior chemotherapy; 839 (99%) patients received all the prescribed treatment. The median overall survival was 22 months with 2 and 3 year survival of 47% and 32%, respectively. Statistically significant differences in survival were noted for stage IA versus IB (33.2 months versus 25 months; P = 0.032) and IIIA versus IIIB (20 months versus 16 months; P = 0.018). Response at 3 months and outcomes were significantly linked; complete response showing survival of 34 months against 19 months, 15 months and 8 months for partial response, stable and progressive disease, respectively (P < 0.001). Age, gender, performance status, prior chemotherapy and PET-CT did not affect the survival outcomes. Treatment was well tolerated with <5% reporting ≥grade 3 toxicity.

CONCLUSION

In routine practice, CHART results for NSCLC remain encouraging and we have been able to show an improvement in survival compared with the original trial cohort. We have confirmed that CHART remains deliverable with low toxicity rates and we are taking a dose-escalated CHART regimen forward in a randomised phase II study of sequential chemoradiotherapy against other accelerated dose-escalated schedules.

Therapeutic management options for stage III non-small cell lung cancer

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death worldwide. Majority of newly diagnosed lung cancers are non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), of which up to half are considered locally advanced at the time of diagnosis. Patients with locally advanced stage III NSCLC consists of a heterogeneous population, making management for these patients complex. Surgery has long been the preferred local treatment for patients with resectable disease. For select patients, multi-modality therapy involving systemic and radiation therapies in addition to surgery improves treatment outcomes compared to surgery alone. For patients with unresectable disease, concurrent chemoradiation is the preferred treatment. More recently, research into different chemotherapy agents, targeted therapies, radiation fractionation schedules, intensity-modulated radiotherapy, and proton therapy have shown promise to improve treatment outcomes and quality of life. The array of treatment approaches for locally advanced NSCLC is large and constantly evolving. An updated review of past and current literature for the roles of surgery, chemotherapeutic agents, radiation therapy, and targeted therapy for stage III NSCLC patients are presented.