Literature DB >> 22014950

Consolidative involved-node proton therapy for Stage IA-IIIB mediastinal Hodgkin lymphoma: preliminary dosimetric outcomes from a Phase II study.

Bradford S Hoppe1, Stella Flampouri, Zhong Su, Christopher G Morris, Naeem Latif, Nam H Dang, James Lynch, Zuofeng Li, Nancy P Mendenhall.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the dose reduction to organs at risk (OARs) with proton therapy (PT) versus three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in patients with mediastinal Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) enrolled on a Phase II study of involved-node radiotherapy (INRT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between June 2009 and October 2010, 10 patients were enrolled on a University of Florida institutional review board-approved protocol for de novo "classical" Stage IA-IIIB HL with mediastinal (bulky or nonbulky) involvement after chemotherapy. INRT was planned per European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer guidelines. Three separate optimized plans were developed for each patient: 3D-CRT, IMRT, and PT. The primary end point was a 50% reduction in the body V4 with PT compared with 3D-CRT or IMRT.
RESULTS: The median relative reduction with PT in the primary end point, body V4, was 51% compared with 3D-CRT (p = 0.0098) and 59% compared with IMRT (p = 0.0020), thus all patients were offered treatment with PT. PT provided the lowest mean dose to the heart, lungs, and breasts for all 10 patients compared with either 3D-CRT or IMRT. The median difference in the OAR mean dose reduction with PT compared with 3D-CRT were 10.4 Gy/CGE for heart; 5.5 Gy/CGE for lung; 0.9 Gy/CGE for breast; 8.3 Gy/CGE for esophagus; and 4.1 Gy/CGE for thyroid. The median differences for mean OAR dose reduction for PT compared with IMRT were 4.3 Gy/CGE for heart, 3.1 Gy/CGE for lung, 1.4 Gy/CGE for breast, 2.8 Gy/CGE for esophagus, and 2.7 Gy/CGE for thyroid.
CONCLUSIONS: All 10 patients benefitted from dose reductions to OARs with PT compared with either 3D-CRT or IMRT. It is anticipated that these reductions in dose to OAR will translate into lower rates of late complications, but long-term follow-up on this Phase II INRT study is needed.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22014950     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2011.06.1959

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys        ISSN: 0360-3016            Impact factor:   7.038


  20 in total

Review 1.  The concept and evolution of involved site radiation therapy for lymphoma.

Authors:  Lena Specht; Joachim Yahalom
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-07-07       Impact factor: 3.402

Review 2.  Proton therapy for Hodgkin lymphoma.

Authors:  Michael S Rutenberg; Stella Flampouri; Bradford S Hoppe
Journal:  Curr Hematol Malig Rep       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 3.952

Review 3.  Optimal Therapy for Early-Stage Hodgkin's Lymphoma: Risk Adapting, Response Adapting, and Role of Radiotherapy.

Authors:  Andrea Riccardo Filippi; Mario Levis; Rahul Parikh; Bradford Hoppe
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 5.075

Review 4.  New Agents, Emerging Late Effects, and the Development of Precision Survivorship.

Authors:  Eric J Chow; Zoltan Antal; Louis S Constine; Rebecca Gardner; W Hamish Wallace; Brent R Weil; Jennifer M Yeh; Elizabeth Fox
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2018-06-06       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  A dosimetric comparison of proton and intensity modulated radiation therapy in pediatric rhabdomyosarcoma patients enrolled on a prospective phase II proton study.

Authors:  Matthew M Ladra; Samantha K Edgington; Anita Mahajan; David Grosshans; Jackie Szymonifka; Fazal Khan; Maryam Moteabbed; Alison M Friedmann; Shannon M MacDonald; Nancy J Tarbell; Torunn I Yock
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2014-10-16       Impact factor: 6.280

6.  Radiotherapy for patients with stage IV classical Hodgkin lymphoma: a propensity-matched analysis of the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results database.

Authors:  Shijie Wang; Mingfang Jia; Jianglong Han; Rui Zhang; Kejie Huang; Ping Li; Qin Li; Yunfeng Qiao; Qibin Song; Zhenming Fu
Journal:  Cancer Biol Ther       Date:  2020-08-23       Impact factor: 4.742

Review 7.  Novel radiotherapy techniques for involved-field and involved-node treatment of mediastinal Hodgkin lymphoma: when should they be considered and which questions remain open?

Authors:  Frank Lohr; Dietmar Georg; Luca Cozzi; Hans Theodor Eich; Damien C Weber; Julia Koeck; Barbara Knäusl; Karin Dieckmann; Yasser Abo-Madyan; Christian Fiandra; Rolf-Peter Mueller; Andreas Engert; Umberto Ricardi
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2014-09-11       Impact factor: 3.621

Review 8.  Evolution of the techniques of radiation therapy in the management of lymphoma.

Authors:  Richard T Hoppe
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-04-11       Impact factor: 3.402

Review 9.  Proton radiotherapy for pediatric tumors: review of first clinical results.

Authors:  Barbara Rombi; Sabina Vennarini; Lorenzo Vinante; Daniele Ravanelli; Maurizio Amichetti
Journal:  Ital J Pediatr       Date:  2014-09-26       Impact factor: 2.638

Review 10.  Cardiotoxicity of mediastinal radiotherapy.

Authors:  Ivica Ratosa; Maja Ivanetic Pantar
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2019-10-30
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.