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

      Cancer Control, Toxicity, and Secondary Malignancy Risks of Proton Radiation Therapy for Stage I-IIB Testicular Seminoma

      research-article
      , MD a , * , , PhD a , , CMD a , , MD b , , MD, MPH a
      Advances in Radiation Oncology
      Elsevier

      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

          Purpose

          This study's objective was to report cancer control and toxicity outcomes after proton radiation therapy (RT) in testicular seminoma and to compare secondary malignancy (SMN) risks with photon-based treatment alternatives.

          Methods and Materials

          Consecutive patients with stage I-IIB testicular seminoma treated with proton RT at a single institution were retrospectively analyzed. Kaplan-Meier estimates for disease-free and overall survival were computed. Toxicities were scored using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0. Photon comparison plans, including 3-dimensional conformal RT (3D-CRT) and intensity modulated RT (IMRT)/volumetric arc therapy (VMAT), were created for each patient. Dosimetric parameters and SMN risk predictions for different in-field organs-at-risk were compared between the techniques. Excess absolute SMN risks were estimated with organ equivalent dose modeling.

          Results

          Twenty-four patients were included (median age, 38.5 years). The majority of patients had stage II disease (IIA, 12 [50.0%]; IIB, 11 [45.8%]; IA, 1 [4.2%]). Seven (29.2%) and 17 (70.8%) patients had de novo and recurrent disease, respectively (de novo/recurrent: IA, 1/0; IIA, 4/8; IIB, 2/9). Most acute toxicities were mild (grade 1 [G1], 79.2%; G2, 12.5%) with G1 nausea being most common (70.8%). No serious events (G3-5) occurred. With a median follow-up time of 3 years (interquartile range, 2.1-3.6 years), 3-year disease-free and overall survival rates were 90.9% (95% confidence interval, 68.1%-97.6%) and 100% (95% confidence interval, 100%-100%), respectively. There were no documented late toxicities in the follow-up period, including worsening serial creatinine levels suggestive of early nephrotoxicity. Proton RT had significant reductions in mean organ-at-risk doses to the kidneys, stomach, colon, liver, bladder, and body compared with both 3D-CRT and IMRT/VMAT. Proton RT had significantly lower SMN risk predictions compared with 3D-CRT and IMRT/VMAT.

          Conclusions

          Cancer control and toxicity outcomes using proton RT in stage I-IIB testicular seminoma are consistent with existing photon-based RT literature. However, proton RT may be associated with significantly lower SMN risks.

          Related collections

          Most cited references21

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

          Second cancers among 40,576 testicular cancer patients: focus on long-term survivors.

          Although second primary cancers are a leading cause of death among men with testicular cancer, few studies have quantified risks among long-term survivors. Within 14 population-based tumor registries in Europe and North America (1943-2001), we identified 40,576 1-year survivors of testicular cancer and ascertained data on any new incident solid tumors among these patients. We used Poisson regression analysis to model relative risks (RRs) and excess absolute risks (EARs) of second solid cancers. All statistical tests were two-sided. A total of 2,285 second solid cancers were reported in the cohort. The relative risk and EAR decreased with increasing age at testicular cancer diagnosis (P < .001); the EAR increased with attained age (P < .001) but the excess RR decreased. Among 10-year survivors diagnosed with testicular cancer at age 35 years, the risk of developing a second solid tumor was increased (RR = 1.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.8 to 2.1). Risk remained statistically significantly elevated for 35 years (RR = 1.7, 95% CI = 1.5 to 2.0; P < .001). We observed statistically significantly elevated risks, for the first time, for cancers of the pleura (malignant mesothelioma; RR = 3.4, 95% CI = 1.7 to 5.9) and esophagus (RR = 1.7, 95% CI = 1.0 to 2.6). Cancers of the lung (RR = 1.5, 95% CI = 1.2 to 1.7), colon (RR = 2.0, 95% CI = 1.7 to 2.5), bladder (RR = 2.7, 95% CI = 2.2 to 3.1), pancreas (RR = 3.6, 95% CI = 2.8 to 4.6), and stomach (RR = 4.0, 95% CI = 3.2 to 4.8) accounted for almost 60% of the total excess. Overall patterns were similar for seminoma and nonseminoma patients, with lower risks observed for nonseminoma patients treated after 1975. Statistically significantly increased risks of solid cancers were observed among patients treated with radiotherapy alone (RR = 2.0, 95% CI = 1.9 to 2.2), chemotherapy alone (RR = 1.8, 95% CI = 1.3 to 2.5), and both (RR = 2.9, 95% CI = 1.9 to 4.2). For patients diagnosed with seminomas or nonseminomatous tumors at age 35 years, cumulative risks of solid cancer 40 years later (i.e., to age 75 years) were 36% and 31%, respectively, compared with 23% for the general population. Testicular cancer survivors are at statistically significantly increased risk of solid tumors for at least 35 years after treatment. Young patients may experience high levels of risk as they reach older ages. The statistically significantly increased risk of malignant mesothelioma in testicular cancer survivors has, to our knowledge, not been observed previously in a cohort of patients treated with radiotherapy.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Testicular cancer

            Testicular cancer is the most common malignancy among men between 14 and 44 years of age, and its incidence has risen over the past two decades in Western countries. Both genetic and environmental factors contribute to the development of testicular cancer, for which cryptorchidism is the most common risk factor. Progress has been made in our understanding of the disease since the initial description of carcinoma in situ of the testis in 1972 (now referred to as germ cell neoplasia in situ), which has led to improved treatment options. The combination of surgery and cisplatin-based chemotherapy has resulted in a cure rate of >90% in patients with testicular cancer, although some patients become refractory to chemotherapy or have a late relapse; an improved understanding of the molecular determinants underlying tumour sensitivity and resistance may lead to the development of novel therapies for these patients. This Primer provides an overview of the biology, epidemiology, diagnosis and current treatment guidelines for testicular cancer, with a focus on germ cell tumours. We also outline areas for future research and what to expect in the next decade for testicular cancer.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Radiotherapy versus single-dose carboplatin in adjuvant treatment of stage I seminoma: a randomised trial.

              Adjuvant radiotherapy is effective treatment for stage I seminoma, but is associated with a risk of late non-germ-cell cancer and cardiovascular events. After good results in initial studies with one injection of carboplatin, we undertook a large randomised trial to compare the approaches of radiotherapy with chemotherapy in seminoma treatment. Between 1996 and 2001, 1477 patients from 70 hospitals in 14 countries were randomly assigned to receive radiotherapy (para-aortic strip or dog-leg field; n=904) or one injection of carboplatin (n=573; dose based on the formula 7x[glomerular filtration rate+25] mg), at two trial centres in the UK and Belgium. The primary outcome measure was the relapse-free rate, with the trial powered to exclude absolute differences in 2-year rates of more than 3%. Analysis was by intention to treat and per protocol. This trial has been assigned the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number ISRCTN27163214. 885 and 560 patients received radiotherapy and carboplatin, respectively. With a median follow-up of 4 years (IQR 3.0-4.9), relapse-free survival rates for radiotherapy and carboplatin were similar (96.7% [95% CI 95.3-97.7] vs 97.7% [96.0-98.6] at 2 years; 95.9% [94.4-97.1] vs 94.8% [92.5-96.4] at 3 years, respectively; hazard ratio 1.28 [90% CI 0.85-1.93], p=0.32). At 2 years' follow-up, the absolute differences in relapse-free rates (radiotherapy-chemotherapy) were -1.0% (90% CI -2.5 to 0.5) by direct comparison of proportions, and 0.9% (-0.5 to 3.0) by a hazard-ratio-based approach. Patients given carboplatin were less lethargic and less likely to take time off work than those given radiotherapy. New, second primary testicular germ-cell tumours were reported in ten patients allocated irradiation (all after para-aortic strip field) and two allocated carboplatin (5-year event rate 1.96% [95% CI 1.0-3.8] vs 0.54% [0.1-2.1], p=0.04). One seminoma-related death occurred after radiotherapy and none after carboplatin. This trial has shown the non-inferiority of carboplatin to radiotherapy in the treatment of stage I seminoma. Although the absence of disease-related deaths and preliminary data indicating fewer second primary testicular germ-cell tumours favour carboplatin use, these findings need to be confirmed beyond 4 years' follow-up.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Adv Radiat Oncol
                Adv Radiat Oncol
                Advances in Radiation Oncology
                Elsevier
                2452-1094
                02 May 2023
                Sep-Oct 2023
                02 May 2023
                : 8
                : 5
                : 101259
                Affiliations
                [a ]Department of Radiation Oncology
                [b ]Department of Hematology/Oncology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author: Russell Maxwell, MD russell.maxwell@ 123456pennmedicine.upenn.edu
                Article
                S2452-1094(23)00088-X 101259
                10.1016/j.adro.2023.101259
                10318216
                d3a70dc7-129d-4138-af0f-f9fe29b6707e
                © 2023 The Authors

                This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

                History
                : 24 September 2022
                : 24 April 2023
                Categories
                Scientific Article

                Comments

                Comment on this article