Nishant K Shah1,2, Muhammad M Qureshi1,3, Michael A Dyer1,3, Minh Tam Truong1,3, Kimberley S Mak4,5. 1. Boston University School of Medicine, 72 East Concord Street, Boston, MA, 02118, USA. 2. University of Pennsylvania Radiation Oncology Residency Program, 3400 Civic Center Boulevard, Concourse Level, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Boston Medical Center, 830 Harrison Ave, Moakley Building LL 237, Boston, MA, 02118, USA. 4. Boston University School of Medicine, 72 East Concord Street, Boston, MA, 02118, USA. kimberley.mak@bmc.org. 5. Department of Radiation Oncology, Boston Medical Center, 830 Harrison Ave, Moakley Building LL 237, Boston, MA, 02118, USA. kimberley.mak@bmc.org.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Definitive chemoradiotherapy represents a standard of care treatment for localized anal cancer. National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines recommend radiotherapy (RT) doses of ≥ 45 Gy and escalation to 50.4-59 Gy for advanced disease. Per RTOG 0529, 50.4 Gy was prescribed for early-stage disease (cT1-2N0), and 54 Gy for locally advanced cancers (cT3-T4 and/or node positive). We assessed patterns of care and overall survival (OS) with respect to the RT dose. METHODS: The National Cancer Database identified patients with non-metastatic anal squamous cell carcinoma from 2004 to 2015 treated with chemoradiotherapy. Patients were stratified by RT dose: 40-< 45, 45-< 50, 50-54, and > 54-60 Gy. Crude and adjusted hazard ratios (HR) were computed using Cox regression modeling. RESULTS: A total of 10,524 patients were identified with a median follow-up of 40.7 months. The most commonly prescribed RT dose was 54 Gy. On multivariate analysis, RT doses of 40-< 45 Gy were associated with worse OS vs. 50-54 Gy (HR 1.68 [1.40-2.03], P < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in OS for patients who received 45-< 50 or > 54-60 Gy compared with 50-54 Gy. For early-stage disease, there was no significant association between RT dose and OS. For locally advanced disease, 45-< 54 Gy was associated with worse survival vs. 54 Gy (HR 1.18 [1.04-1.34], P = 0.009), but no significant difference was detected comparing > 54-60 Gy vs. 54 Gy (HR 1.08 [0.97-1.22], P = 0.166). CONCLUSIONS: For patients with localized anal cancer, RT doses of ≥ 45 Gy were associated with improved OS. For locally advanced disease, 54 Gy but not > 54 Gy was associated with improved OS.
PURPOSE: Definitive chemoradiotherapy represents a standard of care treatment for localized anal cancer. National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines recommend radiotherapy (RT) doses of ≥ 45 Gy and escalation to 50.4-59 Gy for advanced disease. Per RTOG 0529, 50.4 Gy was prescribed for early-stage disease (cT1-2N0), and 54 Gy for locally advanced cancers (cT3-T4 and/or node positive). We assessed patterns of care and overall survival (OS) with respect to the RT dose. METHODS: The National Cancer Database identified patients with non-metastatic anal squamous cell carcinoma from 2004 to 2015 treated with chemoradiotherapy. Patients were stratified by RT dose: 40-< 45, 45-< 50, 50-54, and > 54-60 Gy. Crude and adjusted hazard ratios (HR) were computed using Cox regression modeling. RESULTS: A total of 10,524 patients were identified with a median follow-up of 40.7 months. The most commonly prescribed RT dose was 54 Gy. On multivariate analysis, RT doses of 40-< 45 Gy were associated with worse OS vs. 50-54 Gy (HR 1.68 [1.40-2.03], P < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in OS for patients who received 45-< 50 or > 54-60 Gy compared with 50-54 Gy. For early-stage disease, there was no significant association between RT dose and OS. For locally advanced disease, 45-< 54 Gy was associated with worse survival vs. 54 Gy (HR 1.18 [1.04-1.34], P = 0.009), but no significant difference was detected comparing > 54-60 Gy vs. 54 Gy (HR 1.08 [0.97-1.22], P = 0.166). CONCLUSIONS: For patients with localized anal cancer, RT doses of ≥ 45 Gy were associated with improved OS. For locally advanced disease, 54 Gy but not > 54 Gy was associated with improved OS.
Authors: H Bartelink; F Roelofsen; F Eschwege; P Rougier; J F Bosset; D G Gonzalez; D Peiffert; M van Glabbeke; M Pierart Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1997-05 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: J Northover; R Glynne-Jones; D Sebag-Montefiore; R James; H Meadows; S Wan; M Jitlal; J Ledermann Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2010-03-16 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Lisa A Kachnic; Kathryn Winter; Robert J Myerson; Michael D Goodyear; John Willins; Jacqueline Esthappan; Michael G Haddock; Marvin Rotman; Parag J Parikh; Howard Safran; Christopher G Willett Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2012-11-12 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: M Flam; M John; T F Pajak; N Petrelli; R Myerson; S Doggett; J Quivey; M Rotman; H Kerman; L Coia; K Murray Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1996-09 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: B Sischy; R L Doggett; J M Krall; D G Taylor; W T Sause; J A Lipsett; H G Seydel Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1989-06-07 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Andre Konski; Miguel Garcia; Madhu John; Richard Krieg; Wayne Pinover; Robert Myerson; Christopher Willett Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2008-05-09 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Jaffer A Ajani; Kathryn A Winter; Leonard L Gunderson; John Pedersen; Al B Benson; Charles R Thomas; Robert J Mayer; Michael G Haddock; Tyvin A Rich; Christopher Willett Journal: JAMA Date: 2008-04-23 Impact factor: 56.272