Dataset Information

Effect of Pelvic Bone Marrow Sparing Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy on Acute Hematologic Toxicity in Rectal Cancer Patients Undergoing Chemo-Radiotherapy.

ABSTRACT:

Background

While chemo-radiotherapy improves local control in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer, it can also increase acute hematological toxicity (HT), which leads to poor outcomes. Patients receiving bone marrow radiation have been shown to develop acute HT. However, the safety and efficacy of bone marrow sparing is undetermined. The aim of our study was to explore the feasible dosimetric constraints for pelvic bone marrow (PBM) that can be widely used in rectal cancer patients undergoing chemo-radiotherapy.

Methods

112 rectal cancer patients were selected and divided into the PBM sparing IMRT group (60 cases) and the non-PBM sparing IMRT group (52 cases). All patients underwent pelvic radiotherapy with concurrent capecitabine-based chemotherapy. The PBM dosimetric constraints in the PBM sparing IMRT group were set to:V₁₀ ≤ 85%, V₂₀ ≤ 65% and V₃₀ ≤ 45%. An independent sample t test was applied for the dose-volume parameters, and Chi-squared analysis was applied for clinical parameters and adverse events.

Results

The radiation dose to PBM (V₅~V₄₅, D_mean, P<0.05), PBM sub-regions (V₁₀~V₃₅, D_mean, P<0.05) and both femoral heads (V₅~V₄₀, D_mean, P<0.05) decreased significantly in the PBM sparing IMRT group compared with that of the non-PBM sparing IMRT group (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in any dose-volume parameters of the bladder and small bowel in either groups, and none in the planning target volume (PTV) dose homogeneity and conformity (P>0.05). For acute HT observation, the incidence of grade 3 acute HT (χ² = 7.094, P=0.008) was significantly reduced in patients treated with PBM sparing IMRT compared with patients treated with non-PBM sparing IMRT. There was no statistical difference in the incidence of vomiting, diarrhea, fatigue, anorexia, nausea, hand-foot syndrome, cystitis, perianal pain and perianal dermatitis in patients of both groups (P >0.05).

Conclusions

Applying PBM dosimetric constraints (V₁₀ ≤ 85%, V₂₀ ≤ 65% and V₃₀ ≤ 45%) can significantly reduce the radiation dose to PBM. The patients treated with PBM sparing IMRT had a lower incidence of acute HT compared with those treated with non-PBM sparing IMRT. Applying the PBM dosimetric constraints proposed by our study can benefits the patients with rectal cancer undergoing capecitabine-based chemo-radiotherapy.

SUBMITTER: Huang W

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8101329 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo test the efficacy and feasibility of pelvic bone marrow sparing intensity modulated radiotherapy (PBMS-IMRT) in reducing grade 2 or higher hematological toxicity (HT2+) for patients with cervical cancer treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy.Methods and materialsA total of 164 patients with Stage Ib2-IIIb cervical cancer were prospectively enrolled from March 2018 to March 2019 at a single center and were randomly allocated into the PBMS group or the control group. The control group received weekly cisplatin concurrently with IMRT, followed by intracavitary brachytherapy. The PBMS group additionally received PBM dose constraint. The dosimetric parameters of the pelvic bone (PB) and the subsites including hip bone (HIP) and lumbosacral spine (LSS) and the corresponding bone marrow were recorded. The endpoint of the trial was acute hematologic or gastrointestinal toxicity. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to derive optimal dosimetric planning constraints.ResultsEighty-two patients in the PBMS group and 82 in the control group were enrolled for statistical analysis. The incidence of HT2+ in the PBMS group was 50.0%, significantly lower than the 69.5% incidence in the control group (P = 0.02). Patients with PB V40 ≥ 28% were more likely to experience HT2+ (OR = 2.85, P = 0.006), while the incidence of grade 2 or higher gastrointestinal toxicity (GT2+) events did not differ significantly between the two groups (P > 0.05). Dosimetric parameters of LSS showed stronger associations with HT2+ than other subsites. The patients with LSS V10 ≥ 87% and LSS mean ≥ 39 Gy were more likely to experience HT2+ (OR = 3.13, P = 0.001;OR = 3.03, P = 0.002, respectively).ConclusionPBMS-IMRT reduced HT compared with IMRT alone. Efforts to maintain LSS V10 < 87%, LSS mean < 39 Gy and PB V40 < 28% simultaneously may reduce the risk of HT2 +.Trial registrationThe trial was registered with Chinese clinical trial registry ( ChiCTR1800015069 ).

Project description:AimsPreoperative (chemo)radiotherapy followed by total mesorectal excision is the current standard of care for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. The use of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for rectal cancer is increasing in the UK. However, the extent of IMRT implementation and current practice was not previously known. A national survey was commissioned to investigate the landscape of IMRT use for rectal cancer and to inform the development of national rectal cancer IMRT guidance.Materials and methodsA web-based survey was developed by the National Rectal Cancer IMRT Guidance working group in collaboration with the Royal College of Radiologists and disseminated to all UK radiotherapy centres. The survey enquired about the implementation of IMRT with a focus on the following aspects of the workflow: dose fractionation schedules and use of a boost; pre-treatment preparation and simulation; target volume/organ at risk definition; treatment planning and treatment verification. A descriptive statistical analysis was carried out.ResultsIn total, 44 of 63 centres (70%) responded to the survey; 30/44 (68%) and 36/44 (82%) centres currently use IMRT to treat all patients and selected patients with rectal cancer, respectively. There was general agreement concerning several aspects of the IMRT workflow, including patient positioning, use of intravenous contrast and bladder protocols. Greater variation in practice was identified regarding rectal protocols; use of a boost to primary/nodal disease; target volume delineation; organ at risk delineation and dose constraints and treatment verification. Delineation of individual small bowel loops and daily volumetric treatment verification were considered potentially feasible by most centres.ConclusionThis survey identified that IMRT is already used to treat rectal cancer in many UK radiotherapy centres, but there is heterogeneity between centres in its implementation and practice. These results have been a valuable aid in framing the recommendations within the new National Rectal Cancer IMRT Guidance.

Project description:Coplanar extended-field intensity-modulated radiation therapy (EF-IMRT) targeting the whole-pelvic and para-aortic lymph nodes in patients with advanced cervical cancer results in impaired creatinine clearance. An improvement in renal function cannot be expected unless low-dose (approximately 10 Gy) kidney exposure is reduced. The dosimetric method should be considered during EF-IMRT planning to further reduce low-dose exposure to the kidneys. To assess the usefulness of non-coplanar EF-IMRT with kidney-avoiding beams to spare the kidneys during cervical carcinoma treatment in dosimetric analysis between non-coplanar and coplanar EF-IMRT, we compared the doses of the target organ and organs at risk, including the kidney, in 10 consecutive patients. To estimate the influence of EFRT on renal dysfunction, creatinine clearance values after treatment were also examined in 18 consecutive patients. Of these 18 patients, 10 patients who were included in the dosimetric analysis underwent extended field radiation therapy (EFRT) with concurrent chemotherapy, and eight patients underwent whole-pelvis radiation therapy with concurrent chemotherapy to treat cervical carcinoma between April 2012 and March 2015 at our institution. In the dosimetric analysis, non-coplanar EF-IMRT was effective at reducing low-dose (approximately 10 Gy) exposure to the kidneys, thus maintaining target coverage and sparing other organs at risk, such as the small bowel, rectum, and bladder, compared with coplanar EF-IMRT. Renal function in all 10 patients who underwent EFRT, including coplanar EF-IMRT (with kidney irradiation), was low after treatment, and differed significantly from that of the eight patients who underwent WPRT (no kidney irradiation) 6 months after the first day of treatment (P = 0.005). In conclusion, non-coplanar EF-IMRT should be considered in patients with advanced cervical cancer, particularly in patients with a long life expectancy or with pre-existing renal dysfunction.