Dataset Information

Toxicity of Proton Therapy versus Photon Therapy on Salvage Re-Irradiation for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

ABSTRACT: This study evaluated the toxicity associated with radiation techniques on curative re-irradiation (re-RT) in patients with thoracic recurrence of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). From 2011 to 2019, we retrospectively reviewed the data of 63 patients with salvage re-RT for in-field or marginal recurrence of NSCLC at two independent institutions. Re-RT techniques using X-ray beams and proton beam therapy (PBT) were also included. Re-RT had a 2-year overall survival (OS) and local progression-free survival of 48.0% and 52.0%, respectively. Fifteen patients experienced grade 3 or higher toxicity after re-RT. The complication rates were 18.2% (4/22) and 26.8% (11/41) in PBT patients and X-ray patients, respectively. Airway or esophageal fistulas occurred in seven patients (11.1%). Fistulas or severe airway obstruction occurred in patients with tumors adjacent to the proximal bronchial tree and esophagus, who underwent hypofractionated radiotherapy (RT) or concurrent chemotherapy, and with a higher dose exposure to the esophagus. In conclusion, salvage re-RT was feasible even in patients with local recurrence within the previous RT field. PBT showed similar survival outcomes and toxicity to those of other techniques. However, thoracic re-RT should be performed carefully considering tumor location and RT regimens such as the fraction size and concurrent chemotherapy.

SUBMITTER: Yang K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8876714 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Toxicity of Proton Therapy versus Photon Therapy on Salvage Re-Irradiation for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

Yang Kyungmi K Suh Yang-Gun YG Shin Hyunju H Pyo Hongryull H Moon Sung Ho SH Ahn Yong Chan YC Oh Dongryul D Chung Eunah E Jo Kwanghyun K Noh Jae Myoung JM

Life (Basel, Switzerland) 20220216 2

This study evaluated the toxicity associated with radiation techniques on curative re-irradiation (re-RT) in patients with thoracic recurrence of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). From 2011 to 2019, we retrospectively reviewed the data of 63 patients with salvage re-RT for in-field or marginal recurrence of NSCLC at two independent institutions. Re-RT techniques using X-ray beams and proton beam therapy (PBT) were also included. Re-RT had a 2-year overall survival (OS) and local progression-fr ...[more]

PMID: 35207579

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeAdvanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is still a challenging indication for conventional photon radiotherapy. Proton therapy has the potential to improve outcomes, but proton treatment slots remain a limited resource despite an increasing number of proton therapy facilities. This work investigates the potential benefits of optimally combined proton-photon therapy delivered using a fixed horizontal proton beam line in combination with a photon Linac, which could increase accessibility to proton therapy for such a patient cohort.Materials and methodsA treatment planning study has been conducted on a patient cohort of seven advanced NSCLC patients. Each patient had a planning computed tomography scan (CT) and multiple repeated CTs from three different days and for different breath-holds on each day. Treatment plans for combined proton-photon therapy (CPPT) were calculated for individual patients by optimizing the combined cumulative dose on the initial planning CT only (non-adapted) as well as on each daily CT respectively (adapted). The impact of inter-fractional changes and/or breath-hold variability was then assessed on the repeat breath-hold CTs. Results were compared to plans for IMRT or IMPT alone, as well as against combined treatments assuming a proton gantry. Plan quality was assessed in terms of dosimetric, robustness and NTCP metrics.ResultsCombined treatment plans improved plan quality compared to IMRT treatments, especially in regard to reductions of low and medium doses to organs at risk (OARs), which translated into lower NTCP estimates for three side effects. For most patients, combined treatments achieved results close to IMPT-only plans. Inter-fractional changes impact mainly the target coverage of combined and IMPT treatments, while OARs doses were less affected by these changes. With plan adaptation however, target coverage of combined treatments remained high even when taking variability between breath-holds into account.ConclusionsOptimally combined proton-photon plans improve treatment plan quality compared to IMRT only, potentially reducing the risk of toxicity while also allowing to potentially increase accessibility to proton therapy for NSCLC patients.

Project description:PurposeThere are limited clinical data on scanning-beam proton therapy (SPT) in treating locally advanced lung cancer, as most published studies have used passive-scatter technology. There is increasing interest in whether the dosimetric advantages of SPT compared with photon therapy can translate into superior clinical outcomes. We present our experience of SPT and photon intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with clinical dosimetry and outcomes in patients with stage III lung cancer.Methods and materialsPatients with stage III lung cancer treated at our center between 2013 and May 2018 were identified in compliance with our institutional review board (64 patients = 34 SPT + 30 IMRT). Most proton patients were treated with pencil beam scanning (28 of 34), and 6 of 34 were treated with uniform scanning. Fisher exact test, χ2 test, and Mann-Whitney test were used to compare groups. All tests were 2-sided.ResultsPatient characteristics were similar between the IMRT and SPT patients, except for worse lung function in the IMRT group. Mean dose to lung, heart, and esophagus was lower in the SPT group, with most benefit in the low-dose region (lungs, 9.7 Gy vs 15.7 Gy for SPT vs IMRT, respectively [P = .004]; heart, 7 Gy vs 14 Gy [P = .001]; esophagus, 28.2 Gy vs 30.9 Gy [P = .023]). Esophagitis and dermatitis grades were not different between the 2 groups. Grade 2+ pneumonitis was 21% in the SPT group and 40% in the IMRT group (P = .107). Changes in blood counts were not different between the 2 groups. Overall survival and progression-free survival were not different between SPT and IMRT (median overall survival, 41.6 vs 30.7 months, respectively [P = .52]; median progression-free survival, 19.5 vs 14.6 months [P = .50]).ConclusionsWe report our experience with SPT and IMRT in stage III lung cancer. Our cohort of patients treated with SPT had lower doses to normal organs (lungs, heart, esophagus) than our IMRT cohort. There was no statistically significant difference in toxicity rates or survival, although there may have been a trend toward lower rates of pneumonitis.

Project description:PurposeThe study aims to perform joint estimation of the risk of recurrence caused by inadequate radiation dose coverage of lymph node targets and the risk of cardiac toxicity caused by radiation exposure to the heart. Delivered photon plans are compared with realistic proton plans, thereby providing evidence-based estimates of the heterogeneity of treatment effects in consecutive cases for the 2 radiation treatment modalities.Methods and materialsForty-one patients referred for postlumpectomy comprehensive nodal photon irradiation for left-sided breast cancer were included. Comparative proton plans were optimized by a spot scanning technique with single-field optimization from 2 en face beams. Cardiotoxicity risk was estimated with the model of Darby et al, and risk of recurrence following a compromise of lymph node coverage was estimated by a linear dose-response model fitted to the recurrence data from the recently published EORTC (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer) 22922/10925 and NCIC-CTG (National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group) MA.20 randomized controlled trials.ResultsExcess absolute risk of cardiac morbidity was small with photon therapy at an attained age of 80 years, with median values of 1.0% (range, 0.2%-2.9%) and 0.5% (range, 0.03%-1.0%) with and without cardiac risk factors, respectively, but even lower with proton therapy (0.13% [range, 0.02%-0.5%] and 0.06% [range, 0.004%-0.3%], respectively). The median estimated excess absolute risk of breast cancer recurrence after 10 years was 0.10% (range, 0.0%-0.9%) with photons and 0.02% (range, 0.0%-0.07%) with protons. The association between age of the patient and benefit from proton therapy was weak, almost non-existing (Spearman rank correlations of -0.15 and -0.30 with and without cardiac risk factors, respectively).ConclusionsModern photon therapy yields limited risk of cardiac toxicity in most patients, but proton therapy can reduce the predicted risk of cardiac toxicity by up to 2.9% and the risk of breast cancer recurrence by 0.9% in individual patients. Predicted benefit correlates weakly with age. Combined assessment of the risk from cardiac exposure and inadequate target coverage is desirable for rational consideration of competing photon and proton therapy plans.

Project description:PurposeWe propose and simulate a model-based methodology to incorporate heterogeneous treatment benefit of proton therapy (PrT) versus photon therapy into randomized trial designs. We use radiation-induced pneumonitis (RP) as an exemplar. The aim is to obtain an unbiased estimate of how predicted difference in normal tissue complications probability (ΔNTCP) converts into clinical outcome on the patient level.Materials and methodsΔNTCP data from in silico treatment plans for photon therapy and PrT for patients with locally advanced lung cancer as well as randomly sampled clinical risk factors were included in simulations of trial outcomes. The model used at point of analysis of the trials was an iQUANTEC model. Trial outcomes were examined with Cox proportional hazards models, both in case of a correctly specified model and in a scenario where there is discrepancy between the dose metric used for ΔNTCP and the dose metric associated with the "true" clinical outcome, that is, when the model is misspecified. We investigated how outcomes from such a randomized trial may feed into a model-based estimate of the patient-level benefit from PrT, by creating patient-specific predicted benefit probability distributions.ResultsSimulated trials showed benefit in accordance with that expected when the NTCP model was equal to the model for simulating outcome. When the model was misspecified, the benefit changed and we observed a reversal when the driver of outcome was high-dose dependent while the NTCP model was mean-dose dependent. By converting trial results into probability distributions, we demonstrated large heterogeneity in predicted benefit, and provided a randomized measure of the precision of individual benefit estimates.ConclusionsThe design allows for quantifying the benefit of PrT referral, based on the combination of NTCP models, clinical risk factors, and traditional randomization. A misspecified model can be detected through a lower-than-expected hazard ratio per predicted ΔNTCP.

Project description:ObjectiveAlthough intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMPT) is dosimetrically superior to passive scattering proton therapy (PSPT) for locally advanced NSCLC (LA-NSCLC), direct comparisons of clinical outcomes are lacking. Here, we compare toxicity profiles and clinical outcomes after IMPT versus PSPT for LA-NSCLC.MethodsThis is a nonrandomized, comparative study of two independent cohorts with LA-NSCLC (stage II-IIIB, stage IV with solitary brain metastasis) treated with concurrent chemotherapy and proton beam therapy. Toxicity (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0) and outcomes were prospectively collected as part of a clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00915005) or prospective registry (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00991094).ResultsOf 139 patients, 86 (62%) received PSPT and 53 (38%) IMPT; median follow-up times were 23.9 and 29.0 months, respectively. IMPT delivered lower mean radiation doses to the lungs (PSPT 16.0 Gy versus IMPT 13.0 Gy, p < 0.001), heart (10.7 Gy versus 6.6 Gy, p = 0.004), and esophagus (27.4 Gy versus 21.8 Gy, p = 0.005). Consequently, the IMPT cohort had lower rates of grade 3 or higher pulmonary (17% versus 2%, p = 0.005) and cardiac (11% versus 0%, p = 0.01) toxicities. Six patients (7%) with PSPT and zero patients (0%) with IMPT experienced grade 4 or 5 toxicity. Lower rates of pulmonary (28% versus 3%, p = 0.006) and cardiac (14% versus 0%, p = 0.05) toxicities were observed in the IMPT cohort even after propensity score matching for baseline imbalances. There was also a trend toward longer median overall survival in the IMPT group (23.9 mo versus 36.2 mo, p = 0.09). No difference was found in the 3-year rates of local (25% versus 20%, p = 0.44), local-regional (29% versus 36%, p = 0.56) and distant (52% versus 51%, p = 0.71) recurrences.ConclusionsIMPT is associated with lower radiation doses to the lung, heart, and esophagus, and lower rates of grade 3 or higher cardiopulmonary toxicity; additional clinical studies will be needed to assess the potential differences in survival between the two techniques.

Project description:PurposeRecent single institution, phase II evidence has demonstrated the feasibility and efficacy of ultra-hypofractionated, preoperative photon therapy in 5 fractions for the treatment of soft tissue sarcoma (STS). Our purpose was to evaluate the dosimetric benefits of modern scanning beam proton therapy compared with conventional photon radiation therapy (RT) for the neoadjuvant treatment of adult extremity STS.Materials and methodsExisting proton and photon plans for 11 adult patients with STS of the lower extremities previously treated preoperatively with neoadjuvant RT at our center were used to create proton therapy plans using Raystation Treatment Planning System v10.A. Volumes were delineated, and doses reported consistent with International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements reports 50, 62, and 78. Target volumes were optimized such that 100% clinical target volume (CTV) was covered by 99% of the prescription dose. The prescribed dose was 30 Gy for PT and RT delivered in 5 fractions. For proton therapy, doses are reported in GyRBE = 1.1 Gy. The constraints for adjacent organs at risk (OARs) within 1 cm of the CTV were the following: femur V30Gy ≤ 50%, joint V30Gy < 50%, femoral head V30Gy ≤ 5 cm3, strip V12 ≤ 10%, and skin V12 < 50%. Target coverage goals, OAR constraints, and integral dose were compared by Student t test with P < .05 significance.ResultsA minimum 99% CTV coverage was achieved for all plans. OAR dose constraints were achieved for all proton and photon plans; however, mean doses to the femur (10.7 ± 8.5 vs 16.1 ± 7.7 GyRBE), femoral head (2.0 ± 4.4 vs 3.6 ± 6.4 GyRBE), and proximal joint (1.8 ± 2.4 vs 3.5 ± 4.4 GyRBE) were all significantly lower with PT vs intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) (all P < .05). Integral dose was significantly reduced for proton vs photon plans. Conformity and heterogeneity indices were significantly better for proton therapy.ConclusionProton therapy maintained target coverage while significantly reducing integral and mean doses to the proximal organs at risk compared with RT. Further prospective investigation is warranted to validate these findings and potential benefit in the management of adult STS.

Dataset Information

Toxicity of Proton Therapy versus Photon Therapy on Salvage Re-Irradiation for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

Publications

Toxicity of Proton Therapy versus Photon Therapy on Salvage Re-Irradiation for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets