8
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Locally Progressive and Recurrent Pancreatic Cancer after Prior Radiation

      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

          Introduction

          Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is an aggressive malignancy that has consistently demonstrated poor outcomes despite aggressive treatments. Despite multimodal treatment, local disease progression and local recurrence are common. Management of recurrent or progressive pancreatic carcinomas proves a further challenge. In patients previously treated with radiation therapy, stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is a promising modality capable of delivering high dose to the tumor while limiting dose to critical structures. We aimed to determine the feasibility and tolerability of SBRT for recurrent or local pancreatic cancer in patients previously treated with external beam radiation therapy (EBRT).

          Materials and methods

          Patients treated with EBRT who developed recurrent or local pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma treated with SBRT reirradiation at our institution, from 2004 to 2014 were reviewed. Our primary endpoints included overall survival (OS), local control, regional control, and late grade 3+ radiation toxicity. Endpoints were analyzed with the Kaplan–Meier method. The association of these survival endpoints with risk factors was studied with univariate Cox proportional hazards models.

          Results

          We identified 38 patients with recurrent/progressive pancreatic cancer treated with SBRT following prior radiation therapy. Prior radiation was delivered to a median dose of 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions. SBRT was delivered to a median dose of 24.5 Gy in 1–3 fractions. Surgical resection was performed on 55.3% of all patients. Within a median follow-up of 24.4 months (inter-quartile range, 14.9–32.7 months), the median OS from diagnosis for the entire cohort was 26.6 months (95% CI: 20.3–29.8) with 2-year OS of 53.0%. Median survival from SBRT was 9.7 months (95% CI, 5.5–13.8). The 2-year freedom from local progression and regional progression was 58 and 82%, respectively. For the entire cohort, 18.4 and 10.5% experienced late grade 2+ and grade 3+ toxicity, respectively.

          Conclusion

          This single institution retrospective review identified SBRT reirradiation to be a feasible and tolerable treatment strategy for patients with previous locally progressive or recurrent pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 22

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

          Fluorouracil vs gemcitabine chemotherapy before and after fluorouracil-based chemoradiation following resection of pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a randomized controlled trial.

          Among patients with locally advanced metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, gemcitabine has been shown to improve outcomes compared with fluorouracil. To determine if the addition of gemcitabine to adjuvant fluorouracil chemoradiation (chemotherapy plus radiation) improves survival for patients with resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Randomized controlled phase 3 trial of patients with complete gross total resection of pancreatic adenocarcinoma and no prior radiation or chemotherapy enrolled between July 1998 and July 2002 with follow-up through August 18, 2006, at 164 US and Canadian institutions. Chemotherapy with either fluorouracil (continuous infusion of 250 mg/m2 per day; n = 230) or gemcitabine (30-minute infusion of 1000 mg/m2 once per week; n = 221) for 3 weeks prior to chemoradiation therapy and for 12 weeks after chemoradiation therapy. Chemoradiation with a continuous infusion of fluorouracil (250 mg/m2 per day) was the same for all patients (50.4 Gy). Survival for all patients and survival for patients with pancreatic head tumors were the primary end points. Secondary end points included toxicity. A total of 451 patients were randomized, eligible, and analyzable. Patients with pancreatic head tumors (n = 388) had a median survival of 20.5 months and a 3-year survival of 31% in the gemcitabine group vs a median survival of 16.9 months and a 3-year survival of 22% in the fluorouracil group (hazard ratio, 0.82 [95% confidence interval, 0.65-1.03]; P = .09). The treatment effect was strengthened on multivariate analysis (hazard ratio, 0.80 [95% confidence interval, 0.63-1.00]; P = .05). Grade 4 hematologic toxicity was 1% in the fluorouracil group and 14% in the gemcitabine group (P 85%). The addition of gemcitabine to adjuvant fluorouracil-based chemoradiation was associated with a survival benefit for patients with resected pancreatic cancer, although this improvement was not statistically significant. clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00003216.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Adjuvant radiotherapy and 5-fluorouracil after curative resection of cancer of the pancreas and periampullary region: phase III trial of the EORTC gastrointestinal tract cancer cooperative group.

            The survival benefit of adjuvant radiotherapy and 5-fluorouracil versus observation alone after surgery was investigated in patients with pancreatic head and periampullary cancers. A previous study of adjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy in these cancers by the Gastrointestinal Tract Cancer Cooperative Group of EORTC has been followed by other studies with conflicting results. Eligible patients with T1-2N0-1aM0 pancreatic head or T1-3N0-1aM0 periampullary cancer and histologically proven adenocarcinoma were randomized after resection. Between 1987 and 1995, 218 patients were randomized (108 patients in the observation group, 110 patients in the treatment group). Eleven patients were ineligible (five in the observation group and six in the treatment group). Baseline characteristics were comparable between the two groups. One hundred fourteen patients (55%) had pancreatic cancer (54 in the observation group and 60 in the treatment group). In the treatment arm, 21 patients (20%) received no treatment because of postoperative complications or patient refusal. In the treatment group, only minor toxicity was observed. The median duration of survival was 19.0 months for the observation group and 24.5 months in the treatment group (log-rank, p = 0.208). The 2-year survival estimates were 41% and 51 %, respectively. The results when stratifying for tumor location showed a 2-year survival rate of 26% in the observation group and 34% in the treatment group (log-rank, p = 0.099) in pancreatic head cancer; in periampullary cancer, the 2-year survival rate was 63% in the observation group and 67% in the treatment group (log-rank, p = 0.737). No reduction of locoregional recurrence rates was apparent in the groups. Adjuvant radiotherapy in combination with 5-fluorouracil is safe and well tolerated. However, the benefit in this study was small; routine use of adjuvant chemoradiotherapy is not warranted as standard treatment in cancer of the head of the pancreas or periampullary region.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Phase 2 Multi-institutional Trial Evaluating Gemcitabine and Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Patients With Locally Advanced Unresectable Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

              BACKGROUND This phase 2 multi-institutional study was designed to determine whether gemcitabine (GEM) with fractionated stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) results in acceptable late grade 2 to 4 gastrointestinal toxicity when compared with a prior trial of GEM with single-fraction SBRT in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). METHODS A total of 49 patients with LAPC received up to 3 doses of GEM (1000 mg/m2) followed by a 1-week break and SBRT (33.0 gray [Gy] in 5 fractions). After SBRT, patients continued to receive GEM until disease progression or toxicity. Toxicity was assessed using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [version 4.0] and the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group radiation morbidity scoring criteria. Patients completed the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) and pancreatic cancer-specific QLQ-PAN26 module before SBRT and at 4 weeks and 4 months after SBRT. RESULTS The median follow-up was 13.9 months (range, 3.9–45.2 months). The median age of the patients was 67 years and 84% had tumors of the pancreatic head. Rates of acute and late (primary endpoint) grade ≥2 gastritis, fistula, enteritis, or ulcer toxicities were 2% and 11%, respectively. QLQ-C30 global quality of life scores remained stable from baseline to after SBRT (67 at baseline, median change of 0 at both follow-ups; P>.05 for both). Patients reported a significant improvement in pancreatic pain (P =.001) 4 weeks after SBRT on the QLQ-PAN26 questionnaire. The median plasma carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA 19-9) level was reduced after SBRT (median time after SBRT, 4.2 weeks; 220 U/mL vs 62 U/mL [P<.001]). The median overall survival was 13.9 months (95% confidence interval, 10.2 months-16.7 months). Freedom from local disease progression at 1 year was 78%. Four patients (8%) underwent margin-negative and lymph node-negative surgical resections. CONCLUSIONS Fractionated SBRT with GEM results in minimal acute and late gastrointestinal toxicity. Future studies should incorporate SBRT with more aggressive multiagent chemotherapy.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Oncol
                Front Oncol
                Front. Oncol.
                Frontiers in Oncology
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                2234-943X
                07 March 2018
                2018
                : 8
                Affiliations
                1UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine , Pittsburgh, PA, United States
                2Department of Radiation Medicine, University of Kentucky , Lexington, KY, United States
                3Department of Biostatics, University of Pittsburgh , Pittsburgh, PA, United States
                4Department of Medical Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute , Pittsburgh, PA, United States
                5Department of Surgical Oncology, University of Pittsburgh , Pittsburgh, PA, United States
                Author notes

                Edited by: Brian Timothy Collins, Georgetown University, United States

                Reviewed by: Michael Chuong, Baptist Health South Florida, United States; Shahed Nicolas Badiyan, University of Maryland Medical Center, United States

                *Correspondence: Dwight E. Heron, herond2@ 123456upmc.edu

                Specialty section: This article was submitted to Radiation Oncology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Oncology

                Article
                10.3389/fonc.2018.00052
                5845878
                Copyright © 2018 Sutera, Bernard, Wang, Bahary, Burton, Zeh and Heron.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 4, Equations: 0, References: 26, Pages: 7, Words: 4839
                Categories
                Oncology
                Original Research

                Comments

                Comment on this article