AIM: To evaluate the dosimetry, efficacy and toxicity of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and concurrent chemotherapy for patients with locally advanced cervical and upper thoracic esophageal cancer. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed on 7 patients who were definitively treated with IMRT and concurrent chemotherapy. Patients who did not receive IMRT radiation and concurrent chemotherapy were not included in this analysis. IMRT plans were evaluated to assess the tumor coverage and normal tissue avoidance. Treatment response was evaluated and toxicities were assessed. RESULTS: Five- to nine-beam IMRT were used to deliver a total dose of 59.4-66 Gy (median: 64.8 Gy) to the primary tumor with 6-MV photons. The minimum dose received by the planning tumor volume (PTV) of the gross tumor volume boost was 91.2%-98.2% of the prescription dose (standard deviation [SD]: 3.7%-5.7%). The minimum dose received by the PTV of the clinical tumor volume was 93.8%-104.8% (SD: 4.3%-11.1%) of the prescribed dose. With a median follow-up of 15 mo (range: 3-21 mo), all 6 evaluable patients achieved complete response. Of them, 2 developed local recurrences and 2 had distant metastases, 3 survived with no evidence of disease. After treatment, 2 patients developed esophageal stricture requiring frequent dilation and 1 patient developed tracheal-esophageal fistula. CONCLUSION: Concurrent IMRT and chemotherapy resulted in an excellent early response in patients with locally advanced cervical and upper thoracic esophageal cancer. However, local and distant recurrence and toxicity remain to be a problem. Innovative approaches are needed to improve the outcome.
AIM: To evaluate the dosimetry, efficacy and toxicity of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and concurrent chemotherapy for patients with locally advanced cervical and upper thoracic esophageal cancer. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed on 7 patients who were definitively treated with IMRT and concurrent chemotherapy. Patients who did not receive IMRT radiation and concurrent chemotherapy were not included in this analysis. IMRT plans were evaluated to assess the tumor coverage and normal tissue avoidance. Treatment response was evaluated and toxicities were assessed. RESULTS: Five- to nine-beam IMRT were used to deliver a total dose of 59.4-66 Gy (median: 64.8 Gy) to the primary tumor with 6-MV photons. The minimum dose received by the planning tumor volume (PTV) of the gross tumor volume boost was 91.2%-98.2% of the prescription dose (standard deviation [SD]: 3.7%-5.7%). The minimum dose received by the PTV of the clinical tumor volume was 93.8%-104.8% (SD: 4.3%-11.1%) of the prescribed dose. With a median follow-up of 15 mo (range: 3-21 mo), all 6 evaluable patients achieved complete response. Of them, 2 developed local recurrences and 2 had distant metastases, 3 survived with no evidence of disease. After treatment, 2 patients developed esophageal stricture requiring frequent dilation and 1 patient developed tracheal-esophageal fistula. CONCLUSION: Concurrent IMRT and chemotherapy resulted in an excellent early response in patients with locally advanced cervical and upper thoracic esophageal cancer. However, local and distant recurrence and toxicity remain to be a problem. Innovative approaches are needed to improve the outcome.
Authors: P Tai; J Van Dyk; E Yu; J Battista; M Schmid; L Stitt; J Tonita; T Coad Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2000-06-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Patrick A Kupelian; Chandana A Reddy; Thomas P Carlson; Kimberley A Altsman; Twyla R Willoughby Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2002-07-15 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Bruce D Minsky; Thomas F Pajak; Robert J Ginsberg; Thomas M Pisansky; James Martenson; Ritsuko Komaki; Gordon Okawara; Seth A Rosenthal; David P Kelsen Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2002-03-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Nathan W Uy; Shiao Y Woo; Bin S Teh; Wei Yuan Mai; L Steven Carpenter; Joseph K Chiu; Hsin H Lu; Phillip Gildenberg; Todd Trask; Walter H Grant; E Brian Butler Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2002-08-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Michael J Zelefsky; Zvi Fuks; Margie Hunt; Yoshiya Yamada; Christine Marion; C Clifton Ling; Howard Amols; E S Venkatraman; Steven A Leibel Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2002-08-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Milan Vosmik; Jiri Petera; Igor Sirak; Miroslav Hodek; Petr Paluska; Jiri Dolezal; Marcela Kopacova Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2010-11-28 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: S E Combs; D Habermehl; K Kessel; F Bergmann; J Werner; I Brecht; P Schirmacher; D Jäger; M W Büchler; J Debus Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2013-07-31 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: J J Tonison; S G Fischer; M Viehrig; S Welz; S Boeke; K Zwirner; B Klumpp; L H Braun; D Zips; C Gani Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2019-02-19 Impact factor: 4.379