Treatment Outcomes of Proton Beam Therapy for Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma at a Single Institute
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Oh E
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10705605 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Nov
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Radiation therapy (RT) plays an essential role in the management of esophageal cancer. Because the esophagus is a centrally located thoracic structure there is a need to balance the delivery of appropriately high dose to the target while minimizing dose to nearby critical structures. Radiation dose received by these critical structures, especially the heart and lungs, may lead to clinically significant toxicities, including pneumonitis, pericarditis, and myocardial infarction. Although technological advancements in photon RT delivery like intensity modulated RT have decreased the risk of such toxicities, a growing body of evidence indicates that further risk reductions are achieved with proton beam therapy (PBT). Herein we review the published dosimetric and clinical PBT literature for esophageal cancer, including motion management considerations, the potential for reirradiation, radiation dose escalation, and ongoing esophageal PBT clinical trials. We also consider the potential cost-effectiveness of PBT relative to photon RT.
| S-EPMC10862360 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Early-stage esophageal cancer is often primarily managed surgically, with the addition of radiotherapy for locally advanced disease. However, current photon-based radiotherapy regimens and surgery results in a high incidence of treatment-related cardiac and pulmonary complications due to the involvement of proximal organs at risk. In addition, the anatomic location of the esophagus raises challenges for radiotherapy due to the anatomical changes associated with diaphragmatic motion, weight loss, tumor changes, and set-up variability. These challenges propelled the interest in proton beam therapy (PBT), which theoretically offers a reduction in the radiation exposure to healthy neighboring tissues with improvements in the therapeutic ratio. Several dosimetric studies support the potential advantages of PBT for esophageal cancer treatment however, translation of these results to improved clinical outcomes remains unclear with limited clinical data, especially in large populations. Studies on the effect on quality of life are likewise lacking. Here, we review the existing and emerging role of PBT for esophageal cancer, including treatment planning, early clinical comparisons of PBT with photon-based techniques, recently concluded and ongoing clinical trials, challenges and toxicities, effects on quality of life, and global inequities in the treatment of esophageal cancer.
| S-EPMC9407004 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo compare the dosimetric performances of intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) plans generated with two different beam angle configurations (the Right-Left oblique posterior beams and the Superior-Inferior oblique posterior beams) for the treatment of distal esophageal carcinoma in the presence of uncertainties and interplay effect.Methods and materialsTwenty patients' IMPT plans were retrospectively selected, with 10 patients treated with the R-L oblique posterior beams (Group R-L) and the other 10 patients treated with the S-I oblique posterior beams (Group S-I). Patients in both groups were matched by their clinical target volumes (CTVs-high and low dose levels) and respiratory motion amplitudes. Dose-volume-histogram (DVH) indices were used to assess plan quality. DVH bandwidth was calculated to evaluate plan robustness. Interplay effect was quantified using four-dimensional (4D) dynamic dose calculation with random respiratory starting phase of each fraction. Normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) for heart, liver, and lung was calculated, respectively, to estimate the clinical outcomes. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used for statistical comparison between the two groups.ResultsCompared with plans in Group R-L, plans in Group S-I resulted in significantly lower liver Dmean and lung V30Gy[RBE] with slightly higher but clinically acceptable spinal cord Dmax . Similar plan robustness was observed between the two groups. When interplay effect was considered, plans in Group S-I performed statistically better for heart Dmean and V30Gy[RBE] , lung Dmean and V5Gy[RBE] , and liver Dmean , with slightly increased but clinically acceptable spinal cord Dmax . NTCP for liver was significantly better in Group S-I.ConclusionsIMPT plans in Group S-I have better sparing of liver, heart, and lungs at the slight cost of spinal cord maximum dose protection, and are more interplay-effect resilient compared to IMPT plans in Group R-L. Our study supports the routine use of the S-I oblique posterior beams for the treatments of distal esophageal carcinoma.
| S-EPMC7700921 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeProton beam therapy (PBT) is a promising modality for the management of thoracic malignancies. We report our preliminary experience of treating esophageal cancer patients with concurrent chemotherapy (CChT) and PBT (CChT/PBT) at MD Anderson Cancer Center.Methods and materialsThis is an analysis of 62 esophageal cancer patients enrolled on a prospective study evaluating normal tissue toxicity from CChT/PBT from 2006 to 2010. Patients were treated with passive scattering PBT with two- or three-field beam arrangement using 180 to 250 MV protons. We used the Kaplan-Meier method to assess time-to-event outcomes and compared the distributions between groups using the log-rank test.ResultsThe median follow-up time was 20.1 months for survivors. The median age was 68 years (range, 38-86). Most patients were males (82%) who had adenocarcinomas (76%) and Stage II-III disease (84%). The median radiation dose was 50.4 Gy (RBE [relative biologic equivalence]) (range, 36-57.6). The most common grade 2 to 3 acute toxicities from CChT/PBT were esophagitis (46.8%), fatigue (43.6%), nausea (33.9%), anorexia (30.1%), and radiation dermatitis (16.1%). There were two cases of grade 2 and 3 radiation pneumonitis and two cases of grade 5 toxicities. A total of 29 patients (46.8%) received preoperative CChT/PBT, with one postoperative death. The pathologic complete response (pCR) rate for the surgical cohort was 28%, and the pCR and near CR rates (0%-1% residual cells) were 50%. While there were significantly fewer local-regional recurrences in the preoperative group (3/29) than in the definitive CChT/PBT group (16/33) (log-rank test, p = 0.005), there were no differences in distant metastatic (DM)-free interval or overall survival (OS) between the two groups.ConclusionsThis is the first report of patients treated with PBT/CChT for esophageal cancer. Our data suggest that this modality is associated with a few severe toxicities, but the pathologic response and clinical outcomes are encouraging. Prospective comparison with more traditional approach is warranted.
| S-EPMC3923631 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTo evaluate proton beam therapy (PBT) in multimodal treatment for locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the nasal cavity and paranasal sinus (NPSCC).MethodsThe cases in this study included T3 and T4 NPSCC without distant metastases that were treated at our center using PBT between July 2003 and December 2020. These cases were classified into 3 groups based on resectability and treatment strategy: surgery followed by postoperative PBT (group A); those indicated to be resectable, but the patient refused surgery and received radical PBT (group B); and those declared unresectable based on the extent of the tumor and treated with radical PBT (group C).ResultsThe study included 37 cases, with 10, 9 and 18 in groups A, B and C, respectively. The median follow-up period in surviving patients was 4.4 years (range 1.0-12.3 years). The 4-year overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and local control (LC) rates were 58%, 43% and 58% for all patients; 90%, 70% and 80% in group A, 89%, 78% and 89% in group B; and 24%, 11% and 24% in group C. There were significant differences in OS (p = 0.0028) and PFS (p = 0.009) between groups A and C; and in OS (p = 0.0027), PFS (p = 0.0045) and LC (p = 0.0075) between groups B and C.ConclusionsPBT gave favorable outcomes in multimodal treatment for resectable locally advanced NPSCC, including surgery followed by postoperative PBT and radical PBT with concurrent chemotherapy. The prognosis for unresectable NPSCC was extremely poor, and reconsideration of treatment strategies, such as more active use of induction chemotherapy, may improve outcomes.
| S-EPMC10311771 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionProton beam therapy (PBT) is known to be an effective locoregional treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, few comparative studies in treatment-naïve cases have been reported. The aim of this study was to compare the survival outcomes of PBT with those of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in patients with treatment-naïve solitary HCC.MethodsNinety-five consecutive patients with treatment-naïve HCC, a single nodule measuring ≤5 cm in diameter, and a Child-Pugh score of ≤8 who were treated with PBT at the University of Tsukuba Hospital between 2001 and 2013 were enrolled in the study. In addition, 836 patients with treatment-naïve HCC treated by RFA at the University of Tokyo Hospital during the same period were analyzed as controls. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared in 83 patient pairs after propensity score matching.ResultsThe 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year RFS rates were 86.6%, 49.5%, and 35.5%, respectively, in the PBT group and 59.5%, 34.0%, and 20.9% in the RFA group (p = 0.058); the respective OS rates were 97.6%, 77.8%, and 57.1% in the PBT group and 95.1%, 81.7%, and 67.7% in the RFA group (p = 0.16). Regarding adverse effects, no grade 3 or higher adverse events were noted in the PBT; however, two grade 3 adverse events occurred within 30 days of RFA in the RFA group: one hemoperitoneum and one hemothorax.DiscussionAfter propensity score matching, PBT showed no significant difference in RFS and OS compared to RFA. PBT can be an alternative for patients with solitary treatment-naïve HCC.
| S-EPMC10561322 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeIntensity modulated proton beam radiation therapy (IMPT) has a clinically significant dosimetric advantage over intensity modulated photon radiation therapy (IMRT) for the treatment of patients with esophageal cancer, particularly for sparing the heart and lungs. We compared acute radiation therapy-related toxicities and short-term clinical outcomes of patients with esophageal cancer who received treatment with IMPT or IMRT.Methods and materialsWe retrospectively reviewed the electronic health records of consecutive adult patients with esophageal cancer who underwent concurrent chemoradiotherapy with IMPT or IMRT in the definitive or neoadjuvant setting from January 1, 2014, through June 30, 2018, with additional follow-up data collected through January 31, 2019. Treatment-related toxicities were evaluated per the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4. Survival outcomes were estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method.ResultsA total of 64 patients (32 per group) were included (median follow-up time: 10 months for IMPT patients vs 14 months for IMRT patients). The most common radiation therapy regimen was 45 Gy in 25 fractions, and 80% of patients received a simultaneous integrated boost to a median cumulative dose of 50 Gy. Similar numbers of IMPT patients (n = 15; 47%) and IMRT patients (n = 18; 56%) underwent surgery (P = .07), with no difference in pathologic complete response rates (IMPT: n = 5; 33% vs IMRT: n = 7; 39%; P = .14). At 1 year, the clinical outcomes also were similar for IMPT and IMRT patients, respectively. Local control was 92% versus 84% (P = .87), locoregional control 92% versus 80% (P = .76), distant metastasis-free survival 87% versus 65% (P = .08), progression-free survival 71% versus 45% (P = .15), and overall survival 74% versus 71% (P = .62). The rate of acute treatment-related grade 3 toxicity was similar between the groups (P = .71).ConclusionsIn our early experience, IMPT is a safe and effective treatment when administered as part of definitive or trimodality therapy. Longer follow-up is required to evaluate the effectiveness of IMPT.
| S-EPMC7557123 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The effect of proton beam therapy (PBT) on various cancers is controversial. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of PBT with alternating chemoradiotherapy (ACRT) for patients with stage I-III esophageal cancer. Two cycles of systemic chemotherapy with a continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) on days 1-5 and a 5h infusion of nedaplatin (NDP) on day 6 were accompanied by thoracic irradiation using X-ray therapy and PBT. During the first half of the treatment, X-rays were delivered to the prophylactic area. During the second half of the treatment, proton beams were used to irradiate the involved field. To reduce the dose of cardiac irradiation, proton beams were delivered with posterior and posterior oblique angles. Between January 2009 and December 2012, 47 patients were enrolled in this study. The median follow-up duration was 29 months for all patients and 40 months for survivors. The 3 year overall survival rate, progression-free survival rate, and local control rate were 59.2%, 56.3%, and 69.8%, respectively. With respect to grade 3-4 late toxicities, there were no pleural or pericardial effusions, but two patients (4.3%) had esophageal stenosis, one patient (2.1%) had fistula, and two patients (4.3%) developed radiation pneumonitis. PBT with ACRT might have the potential to reduce the risk of cardiac damage and might become one of the primary methods of esophageal cancer treatment.
| S-EPMC4799947 | biostudies-other
Project description:PurposeThis study aimed to evaluate the initial outcomes of proton beam therapy (PBT) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in terms of tumor response and safety.Materials and methodsHCC patients who were not indicated for standard curative local modalities and who were treated with PBT at Samsung Medical Center from January 2016 to February 2017 were enrolled. Toxicity was scored using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0. Tumor response was evaluated using modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST).ResultsA total of 101 HCC patients treated with PBT were included. Patients were treated with an equivalent dose of 62-92 GyE10. Liver function status was not significantly affected after PBT. Greater than 80% of patients had Child-Pugh class A and albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grade 1 up to 3-months after PBT. Of 78 patients followed for three months after PBT, infield complete and partial responses were achieved in 54 (69.2%) and 14 (17.9%) patients, respectively.ConclusionPBT treatment of HCC patients showed a favorable infield complete response rate of 69.2% with acceptable acute toxicity. An additional follow-up study of these patients will be conducted.
| S-EPMC5903361 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and purposeSpecific proton-beam configurations are needed to spare organs at risk (OARs), including lungs, heart, and spinal cord, when treating esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) in the thoracic region. This study aimed to propose new intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) beam configurations and to demonstrate the benefit of IMPT compared with intensity-modulated x-ray therapy (IMXT) for treating ESCC.Material and methodsIMPT plans with three different beam angle configurations were generated on CT datasets of 25 ESCC patients that were treated with IMXT. The IMPT beam designs were two commonly-used beam configurations (anteroposterior and posterior oblique) and a recently proposed beam configuration (anterosuperior with posteroinferior). The target doses were 50-54 Gy(RBE) and 60-64 Gy(RBE) to the low-risk and high-risk target volumes, respectively. Robust optimization was applied for the IMPT plans. The differences in the dose-volume parameters between the IMXT and IMPT plans were compared.ResultsWith target coverage comparable to standard IMXT, IMPT had significantly lower mean doses to the OARs. IMPT with an anteroposterior opposing beam generated the lowest lung dose (mean = 7.1 Gy(RBE), V20 = 14.1%) and the anterosuperior with posteroinferior beam resulted in the lowest heart dose (mean = 12.8 Gy(RBE), V30 = 15.7%) and liver dose (mean = 3.9 Gy(RBE), V30 = 5.9%). For the subgroup of patients with an inferior tumor location (PTVs overlapping a part of the contoured heart), the novel beam demonstrated the optimal OARs sparing.ConclusionCompared with IMXT, the IMPT plans significantly reduced the radiation dose to the surrounding organs when treating ESCC. IMPT beam configuration selection depends on the tumor location relative to the heart.
| S-EPMC9065423 | biostudies-literature