INTRODUCTION: Anatomical change of tumor during radiotherapy contributes to target missing. However, in the case of tumor shrinkage, adaptation of volume could result in an increased incidence of recurrence in the area of target reduction. This study aims to investigate the incidence of failure of the adaptive approach and, in particular, the risk for local recurrence in the area excluded after replanning. METHODS: In this prospective study, patients with locally advanced NSCLC treated with concomitant chemoradiation underwent weekly chest computed tomography simulation during treatment. In the case of tumor shrinkage, a new tumor volume was delineated and a new treatment plan outlined (replanning). Toxicity was evaluated with the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group/European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer scale. Patterns of failures were classified as in field (dimensional and/or metabolic progression within the replanning planning target volume [PTV]), marginal (recurrence in initial the PTV excluded from the replanning PTV), and out of field (recurrence outside the initial PTV). RESULTS: Replanning was outlined in 50 patients selected from a total of 217 patients subjected to weekly simulation computed tomography in our center from 2012 to 2014. With a median follow-up of 20.5 months, acute grade 3 or higher pulmonary and esophageal toxicity were reported in 2% and 4% of cases and late toxicity in 4% and 2%, respectively. Marginal relapse was recorded in 6% of patients, and 20% and 4% of patients experienced in-field and out-of-field local failure, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The reduced toxicity and the documented low rate of marginal failures make the adaptive approach a modern option for future randomized studies. The best scenario to confirm its application is probably in neoadjuvant chemoradiation trials.
INTRODUCTION: Anatomical change of tumor during radiotherapy contributes to target missing. However, in the case of tumor shrinkage, adaptation of volume could result in an increased incidence of recurrence in the area of target reduction. This study aims to investigate the incidence of failure of the adaptive approach and, in particular, the risk for local recurrence in the area excluded after replanning. METHODS: In this prospective study, patients with locally advanced NSCLC treated with concomitant chemoradiation underwent weekly chest computed tomography simulation during treatment. In the case of tumor shrinkage, a new tumor volume was delineated and a new treatment plan outlined (replanning). Toxicity was evaluated with the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group/European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer scale. Patterns of failures were classified as in field (dimensional and/or metabolic progression within the replanning planning target volume [PTV]), marginal (recurrence in initial the PTV excluded from the replanning PTV), and out of field (recurrence outside the initial PTV). RESULTS: Replanning was outlined in 50 patients selected from a total of 217 patients subjected to weekly simulation computed tomography in our center from 2012 to 2014. With a median follow-up of 20.5 months, acute grade 3 or higher pulmonary and esophageal toxicity were reported in 2% and 4% of cases and late toxicity in 4% and 2%, respectively. Marginal relapse was recorded in 6% of patients, and 20% and 4% of patients experienced in-field and out-of-field local failure, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The reduced toxicity and the documented low rate of marginal failures make the adaptive approach a modern option for future randomized studies. The best scenario to confirm its application is probably in neoadjuvant chemoradiation trials.
Authors: Hannah Bainbridge; Ahmed Salem; Rob H N Tijssen; Michael Dubec; Andreas Wetscherek; Corinne Van Es; Jose Belderbos; Corinne Faivre-Finn; Fiona McDonald Journal: Transl Lung Cancer Res Date: 2017-12
Authors: Massimo Osvaldo Jaus; Annarita Forcione; Alessandro Gonfiotti; Francesco Carleo; Alessia Raffaella De Massimi; Luigi Carbone; Marco Di Martino; Giuseppe Cardillo Journal: J Vis Surg Date: 2018-02-08
Authors: Chunyan Duan; W Art Chaovalitwongse; Fangyun Bai; Daniel S Hippe; Shouyi Wang; Phawis Thammasorn; Larry A Pierce; Xiao Liu; Jianxin You; Robert S Miyaoka; Hubert J Vesselle; Paul E Kinahan; Ramesh Rengan; Jing Zeng; Stephen R Bowen Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2020-10-07 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Sara Ramella; Michele Fiore; Carlo Greco; Ermanno Cordelli; Rosa Sicilia; Mario Merone; Elisabetta Molfese; Marianna Miele; Patrizia Cornacchione; Edy Ippolito; Giulio Iannello; Rolando Maria D'Angelillo; Paolo Soda Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-11-21 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Vincent Grégoire; Matthias Guckenberger; Karin Haustermans; Jan J W Lagendijk; Cynthia Ménard; Richard Pötter; Ben J Slotman; Kari Tanderup; Daniela Thorwarth; Marcel van Herk; Daniel Zips Journal: Mol Oncol Date: 2020-06-29 Impact factor: 6.603