16
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Dosimetric predictors of temporal lobe injury after intensity-modulated radiotherapy for T4 nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a competing risk study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          In patients with T4 nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC), death may occur prior to the occurrence of temporal lobe injury (TLI). Because such competing risk death precludes the occurrence of TLI and thus the competing risk analysis should be applied to TLI research. The aim was to investigate the incidence and predictive factors of TLI after intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) among T4 NPC patients.

          Methods

          From March 2008 to December 2014, T4 NPC patients treated with full-course radical IMRT at our center were reviewed retrospectively. A nested case-control study was designed for this cohort of patients. The cases were patients with TLI diagnosed by MRI during the follow-up period, and the controls were patients without TLI after IMRT matched 1:1 to each case by gender, age at diagnosis, intercranial involvement, and follow-up time. The end point was time to TLI or death without prior TLI. We analyzed the cumulative incidence function (CIF) and performed a competing risk regression model to identify the predictors of TLI.

          Results

          With a median follow-up of 40.1 months, 63 patients (63/506, 12.5%) developed TLI as diagnosed by MRI, and 136 deaths occurred during the period. The cumulative incidence of TLI at 5 years was 13.2%, while 26.7% died without prior TLI. The univariate analysis showed that all selected dosimetric parameters were associated with the occurrence of TLI. On multivariate analysis, D1cc and V20 remained statistically significant. Based on the area-under-the-curve (AUC) values, D1cc was considered the most predictive. The patients with D1cc > 71.14 Gy had a 7.920-fold increased risk of TLI compared with those with D1cc ≤71.14 Gy ( P < 0.05). Similarly, V20 > 42.22 cc was found to result in a statistically significant higher risk of TLI (subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR] =3.123, P < 0.05).

          Conclusions

          TL D1cc and V20 were predictive of TLI after IMRT for T4 NPC. They should be considered as first and second priorities of dose constraints of the TL. D1cc ≤71.14 Gy and V20 ≤ 42.22 cc could be useful dose-volume constraints for reducing the occurrence of TLI during IMRT treatment planning without obviously compromising the tumor coverage.

          Related collections

          Most cited references28

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Tolerance of normal tissue to therapeutic irradiation

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma with intensity-modulated radiotherapy: the Hong Kong experience.

            To evaluate the efficacy of using intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in the primary treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC), including the role of dose escalation above 66 Gy level. Between July 2000 and September 2002, 63 newly diagnosed NPC patients were treated with IMRT. The disease was Stage I in 9 (14%), Stage II in 18 (29%), Stage III in 22 (35%), and Stage IV in 14 (22%). The prescribed dose was 66 Gy to the gross tumor volume (GTV) and positive neck nodes, 60 Gy to the planning target volume (PTV), and 54-60 Gy to the clinically negative neck. All 20 (100%) patients with T1-2a tumors received intracavitary brachytherapy (ICB) boost, and 15/42 (36%) patients with T2b-T4 tumors received conformal boost (8 Gy/4 fractions). Nineteen patients with advanced stage disease also received either neoadjuvant or concurrent chemotherapy. Acute and late normal tissue effects were graded according to the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) radiation morbidity scoring criteria. Local relapse-free survival (LRFS), nodal relapse-free survival (NRFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. With a median follow-up of 29 months (range 8-45 months), 4 patients developed local in-field failure, 1 patient developed regional relapse, and 13 patients developed distant metastases. All 4 patients with local failure had either T3 or T4 disease before primary treatment and did not have ICB or conformal boost. The 3-year actuarial LRFS, NRFS, DMFS, and OS were 92%, 98%, 79%, and 90%, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that dose escalation above 66 Gy was significantly associated with better PFS and DMFS, whereas GTV size was a significant adverse factor for OS. The worst acute mucositis was Grade 1 or 2 in 36 (59%), and Grade 3 in 25 (41%) patients. Acute dysphagia requiring tube feeding occurred in 5 (8%) patients. The proportion of patients with Grade 2-3 xerostomia was 57% at 3 months, and 23% at 2 years after IMRT. Within the subset of patients with a mean parotid dose of <31 Gy, the proportions with Grade 2-3 xerostomia were 30% and 17% at 3 months and 2 years, respectively. Our experience of using IMRT in the primary treatment of NPC showed a very high rate of locoregional control and favorable toxicity profile. Furthermore, we found that dose escalation above 66 Gy of IMRT-based therapy was a significant determinant of progression-free survival and distant metastasis-free survival for advanced T-stage tumors. Distant metastases represent the predominant mode of treatment failure.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Local control, survival, and late toxicities of locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma treated by simultaneous modulated accelerated radiotherapy combined with cisplatin concurrent chemotherapy: long-term results of a phase 2 study.

              The aim of this phase 2 study was to determine the long-term local control, survival, and late toxicities among patients with locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with the simultaneous modulated accelerated radiation therapy (SMART) boost technique and concurrent chemotherapy. Eighty-one patients with pathologically diagnosed locally advanced NPC were enrolled in this study. IMRT was delivered with the SMART boost technique at prescribed doses of 68 grays (Gy)/30 fraction to the nasopharynx gross target volume. Concurrent cisplatin chemotherapy (80 mg/m(2) /d on Days 1 and 22) was administered. The mean actual physical dose delivered to the nasopharynx gross target volume was 73.8 Gy, and the mean biologically effective dose (BED) for the nasopharynx gross target volume was 84.8 Gy. With a median follow-up of 54 months, 4 (4.9%) patients experienced local recurrence. The 5-year local control rate was 94.9%. Eighteen patients died. Among them, 66.7% died of distant metastasis. The 5-year disease-free and overall survivals were 76.7% and 74.5%, respectively. The most common late toxicities among 68 patients with ≥4 years follow-up were grade 1-2 xerostomia, hearing loss, skin dystrophy, and subcutaneous fibrosis. No grade 4 late toxicities were noted. IMRT with SMART to enhance BED and concurrent chemotherapy is feasible in patients with locally advanced NPC. Long-term results showed excellent local control with fewer late toxicities, although no further improvement was noted in overall survival, and the major cause of death was distant metastasis. Exploration of more effective combined chemoradiation strategies is warranted. Copyright © 2010 American Cancer Society.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                769460877@qq.com
                kongff2011@163.com
                ronaldhuang2015@126.com
                zhairp2013@sina.com
                hucs62@sina.com
                yinghm2014@sina.com
                Journal
                Radiat Oncol
                Radiat Oncol
                Radiation Oncology (London, England)
                BioMed Central (London )
                1748-717X
                8 February 2019
                8 February 2019
                2019
                : 14
                : 31
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1808 0942, GRID grid.452404.3, Department of Radiation Oncology, , Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, ; Shanghai, China
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0619 8943, GRID grid.11841.3d, Department of Oncology, , Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, ; Shanghai, China
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8692-5746
                Article
                1229
                10.1186/s13014-019-1229-9
                6368802
                30736809
                1d16a420-b11b-4015-b6a8-2cce47eda881
                © The Author(s). 2019

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 12 September 2018
                : 23 January 2019
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2019

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                Oncology & Radiotherapy

                Comments

                Comment on this article