E van der Steen-Banasik1, M Christiaens2, E Shash3, C Coens4, A Casado5, F G Herrera6, P B Ottevanger7. 1. Radiation Oncology Department, Radiotherapiegroep, Wagnerlaan 47, 6815 AD Arnhem, The Netherlands. Electronic address: E.vanderSteen-Banasik@radiotherapiegroep.nl. 2. EORTC HQ, Avenue Emmanuel Mounier 83/11, 1200 Brussels, Belgium; Clinic for Particle Therapy, West German Proton Therapy Center Essen, West German Cancer Center, University Hospital Essen, Am Mühlenbach 1, 45147 Essen, Germany. Electronic address: Melissa.Christiaens@uk-essen.de. 3. EORTC HQ, Avenue Emmanuel Mounier 83/11, 1200 Brussels, Belgium; Medical Oncology Department, National Cancer Institute Cairo University, Kasr Al Eini Street, Fom el Khalig, Cairo, Egypt. Electronic address: emad.shash@nci.cu.edu.eg. 4. EORTC HQ, Avenue Emmanuel Mounier 83/11, 1200 Brussels, Belgium. Electronic address: Corneel.Coens@eortc.be. 5. Medical Oncology Department, University Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid 28040, Spain. Electronic address: AntonioCasado@telefonica.net. 6. Radiation Oncology Department, University Hospital of Lausanne, Rue du Bugnon 46, 1011 Lausanne, Switzerland. Electronic address: Fernanda.Herrara@chuv.ch. 7. Medical Oncology Department, Radboudumc, Comeniuslaan 4, 6525 HP Nijmegen, The Netherlands. Electronic address: Nelleke.Ottevanger@radboudumc.nl.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Radiotherapy is a good option for inoperable and frail patients diagnosed with endometrial cancer. Because of the lack of large multicentre trials, a systematic review was performed in an attempt to get an overview on the feasibility and efficacy of this specific approach. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a bibliographic search for articles in English or French which were published in PubMed from the start of this database in January 1969 to identify publications on radiation therapy (RT) as single treatment for localised non-operable carcinoma of the endometrium. The review was completed following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. RESULTS: Twenty-five reports containing 2694 patients treated with RT as single treatment were identified that fulfilled the selection criteria. Disease-specific survival (DSS) at 5 years was reported for a cohort of 1322 (49.1%) patients. The combined DSS for this group of patients was 78.5% (range: 68.4-92%; 95% confidence interval: 74.5-82.5). External beam radiation therapy (EBRT) combined with brachytherapy (BT) was used in 1278 patients (47.4%), BT alone in 1383 patients (51.3%), and EBRT alone in 33 patients (1.2%). The average occurrence of grade III or worse late toxicity was 3.7% for EBRT + BT, 2.8% for BT alone, and 1.2% for EBRT alone. CONCLUSIONS: RT is in terms of disease control and toxicity, an acceptable option for non-surgical candidate patients. Prospective multicentre randomised or observational trials are needed to validate these results.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Radiotherapy is a good option for inoperable and frail patients diagnosed with endometrial cancer. Because of the lack of large multicentre trials, a systematic review was performed in an attempt to get an overview on the feasibility and efficacy of this specific approach. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a bibliographic search for articles in English or French which were published in PubMed from the start of this database in January 1969 to identify publications on radiation therapy (RT) as single treatment for localised non-operable carcinoma of the endometrium. The review was completed following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. RESULTS: Twenty-five reports containing 2694 patients treated with RT as single treatment were identified that fulfilled the selection criteria. Disease-specific survival (DSS) at 5 years was reported for a cohort of 1322 (49.1%) patients. The combined DSS for this group of patients was 78.5% (range: 68.4-92%; 95% confidence interval: 74.5-82.5). External beam radiation therapy (EBRT) combined with brachytherapy (BT) was used in 1278 patients (47.4%), BT alone in 1383 patients (51.3%), and EBRT alone in 33 patients (1.2%). The average occurrence of grade III or worse late toxicity was 3.7% for EBRT + BT, 2.8% for BT alone, and 1.2% for EBRT alone. CONCLUSIONS: RT is in terms of disease control and toxicity, an acceptable option for non-surgical candidate patients. Prospective multicentre randomised or observational trials are needed to validate these results.
Authors: Youngran Park; M Herman Chui; Yohan Suryo Rahmanto; Zheng-Cheng Yu; Raghavendra A Shamanna; Marina A Bellani; Stephanie Gaillard; Ayse Ayhan; Akila Viswanathan; Michael M Seidman; Sonia Franco; Anthony K L Leung; Vilhelm A Bohr; Ie-Ming Shih; Tian-Li Wang Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2019-06-13 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Nicole Concin; Carien L Creutzberg; Ignace Vergote; David Cibula; Mansoor Raza Mirza; Simone Marnitz; Jonathan A Ledermann; Tjalling Bosse; Cyrus Chargari; Anna Fagotti; Christina Fotopoulou; Antonio González-Martín; Sigurd F Lax; Domenica Lorusso; Christian Marth; Philippe Morice; Remi A Nout; Dearbhaile E O'Donnell; Denis Querleu; Maria Rosaria Raspollini; Jalid Sehouli; Alina E Sturdza; Alexandra Taylor; Anneke M Westermann; Pauline Wimberger; Nicoletta Colombo; François Planchamp; Xavier Matias-Guiu Journal: Virchows Arch Date: 2021-02 Impact factor: 4.064