C Zamboglou1, M-B Messmer, G Becker, F Momm. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Freiburg, Robert-Koch-Str. 3, 79106, Freiburg, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A basis for future trials with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for tumors of the liver hilum should be established. Thus, dosage concepts, planning processes, and dose constraints as well as technical innovations are summarized in this contribution. METHODS: On the background of our own data, the current literature was reviewed. The use of SBRT in the most common tumors of the liver hilum (pancreatic cancer and Klatskin tumors) was investigated. Dose constraints were calculated in 2 Gy standard fractionation doses. RESULTS: A total of 8 pilot or phase I/II studies about SBRT in the liver hilum were identified. In recent years, the SBRT technique has developed very quickly from classical stereotactic body frame radiotherapy to IGRT techniques including gating and tracking systems. In the studies using classical body frame technique, patients experienced considerable toxicities (duodenal ulcer/perforation) as compared to tolerable side effects in IGRT studies (<10% grade 3 and 4 toxicities). Dose constraints for duodenum, liver, kidneys, colon, and spinal cord were derived from the investigated studies. Survival and local tumor control data are very heterogeneous: median survival in these patients with locally advanced pancreatic or Klatskin tumors ranges between 5 and 32 months. Excellent local tumor control rates of about 80% over 24 months were achieved using SBRT. CONCLUSION: Despite a few negative results, SBRT seems to be a promising technique in the treatment of tumors of the liver hilum. Highest precision in diagnostics, positioning, and irradiation as well as strict dose constraints should be applied to keep target volumes as small as possible and side effects tolerable.
BACKGROUND: A basis for future trials with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for tumors of the liver hilum should be established. Thus, dosage concepts, planning processes, and dose constraints as well as technical innovations are summarized in this contribution. METHODS: On the background of our own data, the current literature was reviewed. The use of SBRT in the most common tumors of the liver hilum (pancreatic cancer and Klatskin tumors) was investigated. Dose constraints were calculated in 2 Gy standard fractionation doses. RESULTS: A total of 8 pilot or phase I/II studies about SBRT in the liver hilum were identified. In recent years, the SBRT technique has developed very quickly from classical stereotactic body frame radiotherapy to IGRT techniques including gating and tracking systems. In the studies using classical body frame technique, patients experienced considerable toxicities (duodenal ulcer/perforation) as compared to tolerable side effects in IGRT studies (<10% grade 3 and 4 toxicities). Dose constraints for duodenum, liver, kidneys, colon, and spinal cord were derived from the investigated studies. Survival and local tumor control data are very heterogeneous: median survival in these patients with locally advanced pancreatic or Klatskin tumors ranges between 5 and 32 months. Excellent local tumor control rates of about 80% over 24 months were achieved using SBRT. CONCLUSION: Despite a few negative results, SBRT seems to be a promising technique in the treatment of tumors of the liver hilum. Highest precision in diagnostics, positioning, and irradiation as well as strict dose constraints should be applied to keep target volumes as small as possible and side effects tolerable.
Authors: Morten Hoyer; Henrik Roed; Lisa Sengelov; Anders Traberg; Lars Ohlhuis; Jorgen Pedersen; Hanne Nellemann; Anne Kiil Berthelsen; Frey Eberholst; Svend Aage Engelholm; Hans von der Maase Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Devin Schellenberg; Andy Quon; A Yuriko Minn; Edward E Graves; Pamela Kunz; James M Ford; George A Fisher; Karyn A Goodman; Albert C Koong; Daniel T Chang Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-01-07 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Martin Fuss; Bill J Salter; Sean X Cavanaugh; Cristina Fuss; Amir Sadeghi; Clifton D Fuller; Ardow Ameduri; James M Hevezi; Terence S Herman; Charles R Thomas Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2004-07-15 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Regina V Tse; Maria Hawkins; Gina Lockwood; John J Kim; Bernard Cummings; Jennifer Knox; Morris Sherman; Laura A Dawson Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-01-02 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: D Habermehl; K Lindel; S Rieken; K Haase; B Goeppert; M W Büchler; P Schirmacher; T Welzel; J Debus; S E Combs Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2012-04-13 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: M Essler; J Wantke; B Mayer; K Scheidhauer; R A Bundschuh; B Haller; S T Astner; M Molls; N Andratschke Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2013-04-24 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Ivan Veronese; Elena De Martin; Anna Stefania Martinotti; Maria Luisa Fumagalli; Cristina Vite; Irene Redaelli; Tiziana Malatesta; Pietro Mancosu; Giancarlo Beltramo; Laura Fariselli; Marie Claire Cantone Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2015-06-13 Impact factor: 3.481