Dataset Information

Incidence and Dosimetric Predictors of Radiation-Induced Gastric Bleeding After Chemoradiation for Esophageal and Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

To determine the incidence and predictors of gastric bleeding after chemoradiation for esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer.

Methods and materials

We reviewed patients receiving chemoradiation to at least 41.4 Gy for localized esophageal cancer whose fields included the stomach and who did not undergo surgical resection. The primary endpoint was grade ≥3 gastric hemorrhage (GB3+). Comprehensive stomach dose-volume parameters were collected, and stomach dose-volume histograms were generated for analysis.

Results

A total of 145 patients met our inclusion criteria. Median prescribed dose was 50.4 Gy (range, 41.4-56 Gy). Median stomach Dmax was 53.0 Gy (1.0-62.7 Gy), and median stomach V40, V45, and V50 Gy were 112 cm³ (0-667 cm³), 84 cm³ (0-632 cm³), and 50 cm³ (0-565 cm³), respectively. Two patients (1.4%) developed radiation-induced GB3+. The only dosimetric factor that was significantly different for these patients was a higher stomach Dmax (58.1 and 58.3 Gy) than the cohort median (53 Gy). One of these patients also had cirrhosis, and the other had a history of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use. Five other patients had GB3+ events associated with documented tumor progression. A Cox proportional hazards model based on stomach Dmax with respect to the development of GB3+ was found to be statistically significant. Time-to-event curves and dose-volume atlases were generated, demonstrating an increased risk of GB3+ only when stomach Dmax was >58 Gy (P < .05).

Conclusions

We observed a low rate of GB3+ events in patients who received chemoradiation to a median dose of 50.4 Gy to volumes that included a significant portion of the stomach. These results suggest that when prescribing 50.4 Gy for esophageal cancer, there is no need to minimize the irradiated gastric volume or dose for the sake of preventing bleeding complications. Limiting stomach maximum doses to <58 Gy may also avoid bleeding, and particular caution should be taken in patients with other risk factors for bleeding, such as cirrhosis.

SUBMITTER: Montovano M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8233466 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeAccounting for interfractional changes in tumor location improves the accuracy of radiation treatment delivery. The purpose of this study was to quantify the interfractional displacement of the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) based on standard treatment setup in patients with esophageal cancer undergoing radiation therapy.Methods and materialsFree-breathing four-dimensional computed tomography (4D-CT) datasets were acquired weekly from 22 patients during treatment for esophageal adenocarcinoma. Scans were registered to baseline (simulation) 4D-CT scans by using bony landmarks. The distance between the center of the GEJ contour on the simulation scan and the mean location of GEJ centers on subsequent scans was used to assess changes in GEJ location between fractions; displacement was also correlated with clinical and respiratory variables.ResultsThe mean absolute random error was 1.69 mm (range, 0.11-4.11 mm) in the lateral direction, 1.87 mm (range, 0.51-4.09 mm) in the anterior-posterior (AP) direction, and 3.09 mm (range, 0.99-6.16 mm) in the superior-inferior (SI) direction. The mean absolute systemic GEJ displacement between fractions was 2.88 mm lateral (≥ 5 mm in 14%), mostly leftward; 2.90 mm (≥ 5 mm in 14%) AP, mostly anterior; and 6.77 mm (≥ 1 cm in 18%) SI, mostly inferior. Variations in tidal volume and diaphragmatic excursion during treatment correlated strongly with systematic SI GEJ displacement (r = 0.964, p < 0.0001; and r = 0.944, p < 0.0001, respectively) and moderately with systematic AP GEJ displacement (r = 0.678, p = 0.0005; r = 0.758, p < 0.0001, respectively). Systematic displacement in the inferior direction resulted in higher-than-intended doses (≥ 60 Gy) to the GEJ, with increased hot-spot to the adjacent stomach and lung base.ConclusionWe found large (>1-cm) interfractional displacements in the GEJ in the SI (especially inferior) direction that was not accounted for when skeletal alignment alone was used for patient positioning. Because systematic displacement in the SI direction had dosimetric impact and correlated with tidal volume, better accounting for depth of breathing is needed to reduce interfractional variability.

Project description:PurposeEsophageal, gastroesophageal junction, and gastric adenocarcinoma (herein gastroesophageal adenocarcinomas) are associated with poor prognosis and limited systemic treatment options. To further understand the genomic landscape of gastroesophageal cancers and its clinical correlations, circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) from patients' plasma was evaluated using next-generation sequencing (NGS).Experimental designWe analyzed genomic alterations of 55 patients (mostly advanced disease; 9, surgically resectable) with gastroesophageal adenocarcinomas using clinical-grade NGS performed on plasma-derived ctDNA (54-73 gene panel). The test detects single-nucleotide variants, as well as copy number amplifications, fusions, and indels in selected genes.ResultsSeventy-six percent of patients (42/55) had ≥1 genomic alteration [including variants of unknown significance (VUS)] and 69.1% (38/55) had ≥1 characterized alteration (excluding VUSs). The median number of alterations per patient was 2 (range, 0-15). TP53 (50.9%, 28/55), PIK3CA (16.4%, 9/55), ERBB2 (14.5%, 8/55), and KRAS (14.5%, 8/55) genes were most frequently affected characterized alterations. Thirty-one patients also had tissue NGS. Concordance between tissue and ctDNA ranged from 61.3% (TP53 alterations) to 87.1% (KRAS alterations). ERBB2 alterations were significantly associated with poor overall survival (HR, 14.06; 95% confidence interval, 2.44-81.03; P = 0.003 multivariate analysis). Among patients with ≥1 alteration, no 2 patients had identical molecular portfolios. All patients with ≥1 characterized alteration had theoretically targetable alterations by an FDA-approved agent (on- or off-label). Illustrative case treated with cognate agent is presented.ConclusionsEvaluation of ctDNA by NGS among patients with gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma is feasible. Patients harbored heterogeneous patterns of genomics, with most having alterations that are potentially pharmacologically tractable.