Improved treatment outcome and lower skin toxicity with intensity-modulated radiotherapy vs. 3D conventional radiotherapy in anal cancer.
Verbessertes Behandlungsergebnis und geringere Hauttoxizität mit der intensitätsmodulierten Strahlentherapie im Vergleich zur dreidimensionalen konventionellen Strahlentherapie beim Analkarzinom.
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Anus Neoplasms
/ drug therapy
Chemotherapy, Adjuvant
Combined Modality Therapy
Female
Fluorouracil
/ therapeutic use
Humans
Infusions, Intravenous
Length of Stay
Male
Middle Aged
Neoplasm Staging
Radiation Injuries
/ etiology
Radiodermatitis
/ prevention & control
Radiotherapy, Conformal
/ adverse effects
Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated
/ adverse effects
Remission Induction
Retrospective Studies
Treatment Outcome
Anal carcinoma
IMRT
Legth of hospitalization
Radiotherapy
Side effects
Journal
Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al]
ISSN: 1439-099X
Titre abrégé: Strahlenther Onkol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8603469
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2020
Apr 2020
Historique:
received:
27
05
2019
accepted:
17
10
2019
pubmed:
26
1
2020
medline:
22
10
2020
entrez:
26
1
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Radiochemotherapy is the standard treatment for anal carcinoma (ACa). Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) has been introduced, allowing focused irradiation of the tumor area. Whether physical benefits of IMRT translate to clinical benefits has not been sufficiently demonstrated. We retrospectively reviewed data from 82 patients with newly diagnosed ACa. Patients treated with IMRT were compared with previous patients treated with conventional three-dimensional computational radiotherapy (3D-CRT). The influence of IMRT on complete remission and acute and chronic side effects was analyzed in univariate and multivariate analyses. 39/40 patients treated with IMRT were in complete remission after 1 year compared to 31/39 patients treated with 3D-CRT (p = 0.014). Multivariate analysis confirmed tumor T stage as well as lack of IMRT treatment as risk factors for persistent tumor at 6 months. No significant benefits of IMRT were apparent at later timepoints (median follow up 52 months, IQR: 31.5-71.8 months). Patients treated with IMRT had a significantly lower degree of skin toxicity (median 2 vs. 3 in a scale ranging from 0 to 3, p = 0.00092). Rates of hematological toxicity/proctitis were not reduced and rates of acute diarrhea increased (p = 0.034). Median length of hospitalization tended to be shorter in patients treated with IMRT (n. s.). We present a real-world experience of shifting radiation technique from conventional 3D-CRT to IMRT. IMRT patients had better tumor control at 1 year and lower degrees of skin toxicity. Our data indicate that IMRT can enable therapies with lower side effects with equal or better oncological results for patients with ACa.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31980834
doi: 10.1007/s00066-019-01534-6
pii: 10.1007/s00066-019-01534-6
doi:
Substances chimiques
Fluorouracil
U3P01618RT
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
356-367Références
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005 Oct 1;63(2):354-61
pubmed: 16168830
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012 Jan 1;82(1):153-8
pubmed: 21095071
Am J Clin Oncol. 2005 Feb;28(1):91-9
pubmed: 15685041
J Clin Oncol. 1996 Sep;14(9):2527-39
pubmed: 8823332
Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2017 Mar;29(3):188-197
pubmed: 27810119
Ecancermedicalscience. 2014 Oct 06;8:469
pubmed: 25374617
World J Surg. 2003 Jul;27(7):832-7
pubmed: 14509515
Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2016 Aug;30(4):641-53
pubmed: 27644911
Cancer. 2018 Nov 15;124(22):4383-4392
pubmed: 30329160
BMC Gastroenterol. 2016 Apr 06;16:46
pubmed: 27048435
N Engl J Med. 2013 Jul 11;369(2):134-44
pubmed: 23724846
Radiother Oncol. 2013 May;107(2):189-94
pubmed: 23692961
N Engl J Med. 2016 Nov 10;375(19):1856-1867
pubmed: 27718784
Cancer. 2011 Aug 1;117(15):3342-51
pubmed: 21287530
J Radiat Oncol. 2017;6(4):413-421
pubmed: 29213359
Lancet. 1996 Oct 19;348(9034):1049-54
pubmed: 8874455
Ann Oncol. 2014 Sep;25 Suppl 3:iii10-20
pubmed: 25001200
Strahlenther Onkol. 2017 Aug;193(8):639-647
pubmed: 28653119
Dis Colon Rectum. 1974 May-Jun;17(3):354-6
pubmed: 4830803
J Clin Oncol. 2012 Jun 1;30(16):1941-8
pubmed: 22529257
Gastrointest Cancer Res. 2013 Mar;6(2):39-45
pubmed: 23745158
Cancer. 2004 Jul 15;101(2):281-8
pubmed: 15241824
J Clin Oncol. 2014 May 20;32(15):1521-30
pubmed: 24752046
Cancer Manag Res. 2019 Jul 08;11:6285-6297
pubmed: 31372035
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013 May 1;86(1):27-33
pubmed: 23154075
Radiat Oncol. 2012 Nov 29;7:201
pubmed: 23190693
Radiat Oncol. 2014 May 13;9:113
pubmed: 24886574
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007 Apr 1;67(5):1394-400
pubmed: 17276620
Eur J Cancer. 2015 Dec;51(18):2740-6
pubmed: 26597443
Semin Radiat Oncol. 2002 Jul;12(3):229-37
pubmed: 12118388
Lancet Oncol. 2017 Apr;18(4):446-453
pubmed: 28223062
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017 May 1;98(1):177-185
pubmed: 28258896
J Clin Oncol. 2017 Mar;35(7):718-726
pubmed: 28068178
Cancer. 2003 Jul 1;98(1):204-11
pubmed: 12833473
Am J Med. 1985 Feb;78(2):211-5
pubmed: 3918441
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2016 May;26(4):770-6
pubmed: 26844613
Strahlenther Onkol. 2019 Jul;195(7):607-614
pubmed: 30390114
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005 May 1;62(1):3-19
pubmed: 15850897
JAMA. 2008 Apr 23;299(16):1914-21
pubmed: 18430910
J Clin Oncol. 1997 May;15(5):2040-9
pubmed: 9164216
Strahlenther Onkol. 2019 May;195(5):369-373
pubmed: 30937508
Oncology (Williston Park). 2016 Apr;30 Suppl:
pubmed: 27083636
J Clin Oncol. 2012 Dec 10;30(35):4344-51
pubmed: 23150707
Strahlenther Onkol. 2018 Apr;194(4):356-357
pubmed: 29392353