| Literature DB >> 27877195 |
Bengt Johansson1, Leif Karlsson2, Johan Reizenstein1, Mathias von Beckerath3, Lennart Hardell4, Jan Persliden2.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate long time outcome with regard to local tumour control, side effects and quality of life of combined pulsed dose rate (PDR) boost and hyperfractionated accelerated external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for primary base of tongue (BOT) cancers.Entities:
Keywords: base of tongue cancer; brachytherapy; pulsed dose rate; radiotherapy
Year: 2011 PMID: 27877195 PMCID: PMC5108831 DOI: 10.5114/jcb.2011.21037
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Contemp Brachytherapy ISSN: 2081-2841
Clinical data for 83 patients treated for base of tongue cancer
| Patient characteristics |
| % |
|---|---|---|
| Age | median 60 | (38-82) years |
| Male | 64 | 77 |
| Female | 19 | 23 |
| TN-stage: | ||
| T1N0 | 1 | 1 |
| T1N1-2 | 7 | 8 |
| T2N0 | 6 | 7 |
| T2N1-3 | 35 | 42 |
| T3N0 | 4 | 5 |
| T3N1-2 | 10 | 12 |
| T4N0 | 4 | 5 |
| T4N1-3 | 16 | 19 |
| UICC stage | ||
| I-II | 7 | 8 |
| III-IV | 76 | 92 |
| Histology: | ||
| squamous cell carcinoma | 81 | 98 |
| adenoidcystic carcinoma | 2 | 2 |
| Grade: | ||
| low | 9 | 11 |
| medium | 35 | 42 |
| high | 39 | 47 |
Fig. 1The implantation with a slightly modified technique that was described by Vikram. A) Lateral view, B) tongue
Dosimetric and volumetric data for treated base of tongue (BOT) cancers
| Variable | Mean | Range |
|---|---|---|
| Estimated BOT tumour volume (cm3) | 15 | 1-75 |
| Treated volume (cm3) | 58 | 17-134 |
| 150% isodose volume (cm3) | 17 | 5-36 |
| 200% isodose volume (cm3) | 7 | 2-15 |
| DNR (= V150%/V100%) [ | 0.3 | 0.2-0.4 |
| Quality index (QI) [ | 1.7 | 1.3-2.3 |
| Uniformity index (UI) [ | 1.5 | 1.3-1.8 |
| Instantaneoues dose rate (Gy/h) | 6.0 | 1.0-16.1 |
| Pulse average dose rate (Gy/h) | 0.417 | |
| RAKR, reference air kerma rate (mGym2/h) | 2.3 | 0.7-5.5 |
| TRAK, total reference air kerma (mGy) | 0.34 | 0.15-0.63 |
Biological effective dose (BED) and equivalent dose in 2 Gy (EQD2) for: a) EBRT 40.8 Gy (2 × 1.7 Gy/d) + PDR 35 Gy, b) EBRT 25 × 2 Gy + PDR 30 Gy, for early and late reacting tissue
| EBRT | PDR | Total | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BED | EQD2 | BED | EQD2 | BED | EQD2 | |
| a) α/β = 3 | 64.3 | 38.6 | 50.7 | 30.4 | 115.0 | 69.0 |
| b) α/ β = 3 | 83.3 | 50.0 | 43.4 | 26.0 | 126.7 | 76.0 |
| a) α/ β = 10 | 47.8 | 39.9 | 39.7 | 33.1 | 87.5 | 73.0 |
| b) α/ β = 10 | 60.0 | 50.0 | 34.0 | 28.3 | 94.0 | 78.3 |
Fig. 2Graphical Kaplan-Meier summary of the outcome of the material
Patient ratings of subjective SOMA-issues (oral/pharyngeal mucosa, salivary gland, mandible), WHO-performance and global Quality of Life. Weight changes. Measured at last follow up
| Issue | Median | Range | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pain | grade 0 | 0-3 | 44 |
| Dysphagia | grade 1 | 0-3 | 44 |
| Taste alteration | grade 1 | 0-3 | 44 |
| Xerostomia | grade 2 | 0-4 | 43 |
| Trismus | grade 0 | 0-2 | 44 |
| Weight before treatment | 81 kg | 43-130 | 43 |
| Weight after treatment | 69 kg | 38-90 | 43 |
| Weight last follow up | 75 kg | 42-106 | 44 |
| WHO performance | 0 | 0-3 | 44 |
| Quality of life (VAS) | 8 | 3-10 | 43 |
Clinical outcome data from 10 different institutions on base of tongue cancer treatment
| Institution | Local control (%) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| nM | %T4 | T1 | T2 | T3 | T4 | All | 5yS | ||
| Gainesville FL [ | 217 | E | 19 | 96 | 91 | 81 | 38 | 79 | 50 |
| Curie Inst, Paris, France [ | 166 | E | 20 | 96 | 57 | 45 | 23 | 44 | 27 |
| IGR, Paris France [ | 108 | E+L | 0 | 85 | 50 | 69 | nd | 64 | 26 |
| Present series | 83 | E+P | 24 | 100 | 98 | 93 | 65 | 89 | 65 |
| Mayo Clin, Rochester, MN [ | 79 | S+E | 0 | 84 | 87 | 76 | nd | 82 | 51 |
| Long Beach, CA [ | 70 | E+L | 17 | 100 | 88 | 75 | 67 | 83 | 35 |
| MSKCC, NY [ | 68 | E+L | 3 | 87 | 93 | 82 | 100 | 89 | 87 |
| MDA, Houston TX [ | 54 | E | 2 | 100 | 96 | 67 | nd | 85 | 59 |
| Stanford, CA [ | 42 | E+L | 24 | 83 | 85 | 89 | 70 | 82 | 66 |
| NIO, Budapest, Hungary [ | 30 | E+H | 53 | – | 100 | 83 | 50 | 68 | 56 |
N – number of patients, M – method of treatment, E – external beam, L/P/H – LDR/PDR/HDR-brachytherapy boost, S – surgery
%T4 – percentage of T4 in study population, 5yS – overall five-year survival