Effectiveness of several external beam radiotherapy schedules for palliation of esophageal cancer.

Effectiveness Esophageal cancer External beam radiotherapy Palliation Second intervention Survival

Journal

Clinical and translational radiation oncology
ISSN: 2405-6308
Titre abrégé: Clin Transl Radiat Oncol
Pays: Ireland
ID NLM: 101713416

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Jul 2019
Historique:
received: 27 12 2018
revised: 21 04 2019
accepted: 22 04 2019
entrez: 14 6 2019
pubmed: 14 6 2019
medline: 14 6 2019
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Although external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) is frequently used for palliative treatment of patients with incurable esophageal cancer, the optimal schedule for symptom control is unknown. This retrospective study evaluated three EBRT schedules for symptom control and investigated possible prognostic factors associated with second intervention and overall survival (OS). Patients with esophageal cancer treated with EBRT with palliative intent between January 2009 and December 2015 were evaluated. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression models estimated the effect of treatment schedule (20 Gy in 5 fractions, 30 Gy in 10 fractions or 39 Gy in 13 fractions) on OS. To study the effect of prognostic factors on time to second intervention (repeat EBRT, intraluminal brachytherapy or stent placement) a competing risk model with death as competing event was used. 205 patients received 20 Gy (31%), 30 Gy (38%) or 39 Gy (32%). Improvement of symptoms was observed in 72% with no differences between schedules. Median OS after 20 Gy, 30 Gy and 39 Gy was 4.6 months (95%CI 2.6-6.6), 5.2 months (95%CI 3.7-6.7) and 9.7 months (95%CI 6.9-12.5), respectively. Poor performance status (HR 2.25 (95%CI 1.53-3.29)), recurrent esophageal cancer (HR 1.69 (95%CI 1.15-2.47)) and distant metastasis (HR 1.73 (95%CI 1.27-2.35)) were significantly related to worse OS. Treatment with 30 Gy and 39 Gy was related to longer time to second intervention compared to 20 Gy (adjusted cause specific HR 0.50 (95%CI 0.25-0.99) and 0.27 (95%CI 0.13-0.56), respectively). Palliative EBRT provides good symptom control in patients with symptomatic esophageal cancer. A higher dose schedule was related to a longer time to second intervention. Hence, selection based on life expectancy is vital to prevent unnecessary long treatment schedules in patients with expected short survival, and limit the chance of second intervention when life expectancy is longer.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE OBJECTIVE
Although external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) is frequently used for palliative treatment of patients with incurable esophageal cancer, the optimal schedule for symptom control is unknown. This retrospective study evaluated three EBRT schedules for symptom control and investigated possible prognostic factors associated with second intervention and overall survival (OS).
MATERIAL AND METHODS METHODS
Patients with esophageal cancer treated with EBRT with palliative intent between January 2009 and December 2015 were evaluated. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression models estimated the effect of treatment schedule (20 Gy in 5 fractions, 30 Gy in 10 fractions or 39 Gy in 13 fractions) on OS. To study the effect of prognostic factors on time to second intervention (repeat EBRT, intraluminal brachytherapy or stent placement) a competing risk model with death as competing event was used.
RESULTS RESULTS
205 patients received 20 Gy (31%), 30 Gy (38%) or 39 Gy (32%). Improvement of symptoms was observed in 72% with no differences between schedules. Median OS after 20 Gy, 30 Gy and 39 Gy was 4.6 months (95%CI 2.6-6.6), 5.2 months (95%CI 3.7-6.7) and 9.7 months (95%CI 6.9-12.5), respectively. Poor performance status (HR 2.25 (95%CI 1.53-3.29)), recurrent esophageal cancer (HR 1.69 (95%CI 1.15-2.47)) and distant metastasis (HR 1.73 (95%CI 1.27-2.35)) were significantly related to worse OS. Treatment with 30 Gy and 39 Gy was related to longer time to second intervention compared to 20 Gy (adjusted cause specific HR 0.50 (95%CI 0.25-0.99) and 0.27 (95%CI 0.13-0.56), respectively).
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
Palliative EBRT provides good symptom control in patients with symptomatic esophageal cancer. A higher dose schedule was related to a longer time to second intervention. Hence, selection based on life expectancy is vital to prevent unnecessary long treatment schedules in patients with expected short survival, and limit the chance of second intervention when life expectancy is longer.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31193091
doi: 10.1016/j.ctro.2019.04.017
pii: S2405-6308(18)30121-6
pmc: PMC6517531
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

24-31

Références

Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002 Feb 1;52(2):310-5
pubmed: 11872275
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004 Jun 1;59(2):528-37
pubmed: 15145173
JAMA. 2004 May 26;291(20):2441-7
pubmed: 15161894
Dis Esophagus. 2004;17(3):260-5
pubmed: 15361102
Lancet. 2004 Oct 23-29;364(9444):1497-504
pubmed: 15500894
Brachytherapy. 2004;3(4):191-5
pubmed: 15607150
Gastrointest Endosc. 2005 Sep;62(3):333-40
pubmed: 16111947
Brachytherapy. 2006 Jan-Mar;5(1):41-8
pubmed: 16563996
Stat Med. 2007 May 20;26(11):2389-430
pubmed: 17031868
J Clin Oncol. 2007 Apr 10;25(11):1423-36
pubmed: 17416863
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2008 Mar 1;27(5):385-95
pubmed: 18081735
Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2008 Feb;20(1):53-60
pubmed: 18345545
Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2010 Sep;99(3):261-74
pubmed: 20227129
Ann Surg Oncol. 2010 Jul;17(7):1721-4
pubmed: 20369299
Radiother Oncol. 2010 Dec;97(3):488-94
pubmed: 20950882
Acta Oncol. 1990;29(2):175-8
pubmed: 2334570
Pract Radiat Oncol. 2012 Oct-Dec;2(4):257-264
pubmed: 24674161
Acta Oncol. 1989;28(2):267-70
pubmed: 2472161
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014 Nov 15;90(4):739-47
pubmed: 25260489
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Oct 30;(10):CD005048
pubmed: 25354795
Indian J Surg. 2015 Feb;77(1):34-8
pubmed: 25829709
Brachytherapy. 2015 Jul-Aug;14(4):531-6
pubmed: 25906950
J Contemp Brachytherapy. 2015 Dec;7(6):453-61
pubmed: 26816502
J Cancer. 2016 Jan 01;7(2):125-30
pubmed: 26819634
Dis Esophagus. 2017 Feb 1;30(2):1-7
pubmed: 26919349
Radiother Oncol. 2017 Mar;122(3):332-339
pubmed: 28104297
Dis Esophagus. 2017 Apr 1;30(4):1-9
pubmed: 28375477
Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018 Feb;3(2):114-124
pubmed: 29248399
Radiother Oncol. 2018 Mar;126(3):547-557
pubmed: 29397209
N Engl J Med. 1993 Oct 28;329(18):1302-7
pubmed: 7692297

Auteurs

Natasja R Walterbos (NR)

Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Postzone K0-P, P.O. Box 9600, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands.

Marta Fiocco (M)

Department of Biomedical Data Science, Section Medical Statistics, Leiden University Medical Center, Postzone S5-P, P.O. Box 9600, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands.
Mathematical Institute, Leiden University, P.O. Box 9512, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands.

Karen J Neelis (KJ)

Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Postzone K0-P, P.O. Box 9600, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands.

Yvette M van der Linden (YM)

Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Postzone K0-P, P.O. Box 9600, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands.
Center of Expertise Palliative Care, Leiden University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9600, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands.

Alexandra M J Langers (AMJ)

Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Leiden University Medical Center, Postzone C4-P, P.O. Box 9600, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands.

Marije Slingerland (M)

Department of Medical Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Postzone B3-P, P.O. Box 9600, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands.

Wobbe O de Steur (WO)

Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Postzone K6-R, P.O. Box 9600, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands.

Femke P Peters (FP)

Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Postzone K0-P, P.O. Box 9600, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands.

Irene M Lips (IM)

Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Postzone K0-P, P.O. Box 9600, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands.

Classifications MeSH