Abdullah Alsuhaibani1, Ahmed Elashwah2,3, Abdullah Alkafi2, Camelia Constantinescus2, Faisal ALzorkany2. 1. Oncology Center, University Medical City, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. asuhaibani@gmail.com. 2. Radiation oncology department King Faisal specialized hospital and research center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. 3. Kasr Aleini center of clinical oncology and nuclear medicine (NEMROCK), Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We retrospectively evaluate local control rate at 6 months and 1 year in oligometastatic cancer patients treated with SBRT using CyberKnife. METHODS: Total of 21 patients with 24 treatment sites from February 2014 till June 2017 who were treated with SBRT in our institution were included in this study. RESULTS: Eleven patients were males, 10 patients were females, median age at diagnosis was 63 years, and colorectal cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in 18 patients. The abdomino-pelvic lymph nodes were the commonest treatment site in 11 (45.8%), average PTV volume of 46.4 cc. All the patients received SBRT with average (BED) of 97 GY, 7 treatment sites received BED of < 100GYgroup 1, and 17 received BED ≥ 100GY group 2. No reported G3 or G4 acute or chronic toxicity. The 6 months and 1 year local control (LC) were 95.8 and 88.2%, respectively. After a median follow-up of 16.8 months, 19(90.5%) patients were alive; among them, local progression was observed in 1 (4.1%) treatment site, while systemic progression in 4 (16.6%), and two (9.5%) patients died; they had both local and systemic failures. The 1-year local PFS rate was 82%. In univariate analysis, PTV volume was significantly correlated with LC rate at 6 months (p = 0.001), while the site of metastasis appeared to significantly correlate with PFS (p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: SBRT using CyberKnife is feasible, safe, and effective treatment for oligometastatic sites. Six months and 1 year local control rate is 95.8 and 88.2% respectively in our patients cohort, treatment regimens with higher BED resulting in better 1-year local PFS, although it was not statistically significant. A larger cohort of patients and longer follow up is required for better evaluation.
OBJECTIVES: We retrospectively evaluate local control rate at 6 months and 1 year in oligometastatic cancerpatients treated with SBRT using CyberKnife. METHODS: Total of 21 patients with 24 treatment sites from February 2014 till June 2017 who were treated with SBRT in our institution were included in this study. RESULTS: Eleven patients were males, 10 patients were females, median age at diagnosis was 63 years, and colorectal cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in 18 patients. The abdomino-pelvic lymph nodes were the commonest treatment site in 11 (45.8%), average PTV volume of 46.4 cc. All the patients received SBRT with average (BED) of 97 GY, 7 treatment sites received BED of < 100GYgroup 1, and 17 received BED ≥ 100GY group 2. No reported G3 or G4 acute or chronic toxicity. The 6 months and 1 year local control (LC) were 95.8 and 88.2%, respectively. After a median follow-up of 16.8 months, 19(90.5%) patients were alive; among them, local progression was observed in 1 (4.1%) treatment site, while systemic progression in 4 (16.6%), and two (9.5%) patients died; they had both local and systemic failures. The 1-year local PFS rate was 82%. In univariate analysis, PTV volume was significantly correlated with LC rate at 6 months (p = 0.001), while the site of metastasis appeared to significantly correlate with PFS (p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: SBRT using CyberKnife is feasible, safe, and effective treatment for oligometastatic sites. Six months and 1 year local control rate is 95.8 and 88.2% respectively in our patients cohort, treatment regimens with higher BED resulting in better 1-year local PFS, although it was not statistically significant. A larger cohort of patients and longer follow up is required for better evaluation.
Authors: Louis Potters; Brian Kavanagh; James M Galvin; James M Hevezi; Nora A Janjan; David A Larson; Minesh P Mehta; Samuel Ryu; Michael Steinberg; Robert Timmerman; James S Welsh; Seth A Rosenthal Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-02-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: E Shaw; C Scott; L Souhami; R Dinapoli; R Kline; J Loeffler; N Farnan Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2000-05-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Richard M Gewanter; Kenneth E Rosenzweig; Joe Yujiao Chang; Roy Decker; Sarita Dubey; Feng-Ming Kong; Brian E Lally; Corey J Langer; Hoon Ku Lee; Benjamin Movsas Journal: Curr Probl Cancer Date: 2010 May-Jun Impact factor: 3.187
Authors: Kamran A Ahmed; Michael C Stauder; Robert C Miller; Heather J Bauer; Peter S Rose; Kenneth R Olivier; Paul D Brown; Debra H Brinkmann; Nadia N Laack Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2012-02-11 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: John H Heinzerling; John F Anderson; Lech Papiez; Thomas Boike; Stanley Chien; Geoffrey Zhang; Ramzi Abdulrahman; Robert Timmerman Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2008-04-01 Impact factor: 7.038