Carbon ion radiotherapy for basal cell adenocarcinoma of the head and neck: preliminary report of six cases and review of the literature

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Basal cell adenocarcinoma accounts for approximately 1.6% of all salivary gland neoplasms. In this report, we describe our experiences of treatment for BCAC with carbon ion radiotherapy in our institution.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Case records of 6 patients with diagnosis of basal cell adenocarcinoma of the head and neck, who were treated by carbon ion radiotherapy with 64.0 GyE/16 fractions in our institution, were retrospectively reviewed.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In a mean follow-up period of 32.1 months (14.0-51.3 months), overall survival and local control rates of 100% were achieved. Only one grade 4 (CTCAE v3.0) late complication occurred. There was no other grade 3 or higher toxicity.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Carbon ion radiotherapy should be considered as an appropriate curative approach for treatment of basal cell adenocarcinoma in certain cases, particularly in cases of unresectable disease and postoperative gross residual or recurrent disease.</p

Phase II study evaluating consolidation whole abdominal intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in patients with advanced ovarian cancer stage FIGO III - The OVAR-IMRT-02 Study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The prognosis for patients with advanced FIGO stage III epithelial ovarian cancer remains poor despite the aggressive standard treatment, consisting of maximal cytoreductive surgery and platinum-based chemotherapy. The median time to recurrence is less than 2 years, with a 5-years survival rate of -20-25%. Recurrences of the disease occur mostly intraperitoneally.</p> <p>Ovarian cancer is a radiosensitive tumor, so that the use of whole abdominal radiotherapy (WAR) as a consolidation therapy would appear to be a logical strategy. WAR used to be the standard treatment after surgery before the chemotherapy era; however, it has been almost totally excluded from the treatment of ovarian cancer during the past decade because of its high toxicity. Modern intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) has the potential of sparing organs at risk like kidneys, liver, and bone marrow while still adequately covering the peritoneal cavity with a homogenous dose.</p> <p>Our previous phase I study showed for the first time the clinical feasibility of intensity-modulated WAR and pointed out promising results concerning treatment tolerance. The current phase-II study succeeds to the phase-I study to further evaluate the toxicity of this new treatment.</p> <p>Methods/design</p> <p>The OVAR-IMRT-02 study is a single-center one arm phase-II trial. Thirty seven patients with optimally debulked ovarian cancer stage FIGO III having a complete remission after chemotherapy will be treated with intensity-modulated WAR as a consolidation therapy.</p> <p>A total dose of 30 Gy in 20 fractions of 1.5 Gy will be applied to the entire peritoneal cavity including the liver surface and the pelvic and para-aortic node regions. Organ at risk are kidneys, liver (except the 1 cm-outer border), heart, vertebral bodies and pelvic bones.</p> <p>Primary endpoint is tolerability; secondary objectives are toxicity, quality of life, progression-free and overall survival.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Intensity-modulated WAR provides a new promising option in the consolidation treatment of ovarian carcinoma in patients with a complete pathologic remission after adjuvant chemotherapy. Further consequent studies will be needed to enable firm conclusions regarding the value of consolidation radiotherapy within the multimodal treatment of advanced ovarian cancer.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>Clinicaltrials.gov: <a href="http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01180504">NCT01180504</a></p

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) vs. 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC): dosimetric comparison and clinical implications

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Purpose</p> <p>To compare target dose distribution, comformality, normal tissue avoidance, and irradiated body volume (IBV) in 3DCRT using classic anatomical landmarks (c3DCRT), 3DCRT fitting the PTV (f3DCRT), and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC).</p> <p>Materials and methods</p> <p>Fifteen patients with LARC underwent c3DCRT, f3DCRT, and IMRT planning. Target definition followed the recommendations of the ICRU reports No. 50 and 62. OAR (SB and bladder) constraints were D5 ≤ 50 Gy and Dmax < 55 Gy. PTV dose prescription was defined as PTV95 ≥ 45 Gy and PTVmin ≥ 35 Gy. Target coverage was evaluated with the D95, Dmin, and Dmax. Target dose distribution and comformality was evaluated with the homogeneity indices (HI) and Conformity Index (CI). Normal tissue avoidance of OAR was evaluated with the D5 and V40. IBV at 5 Gy (V5), 10 Gy (V10), and 20 Gy (V20) were calculated.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The mean GTV95, CTV95, and PTV95 doses were significantly lower for IMRT plans. Target dose distribution was more inhomogeneous after IMRT planning and 3DCRTplans had significantly lower CI. The V40 and D5 values for OAR were significantly reduced in the IMRT plans .V5 was greater for IMRT than for f3DCRT planning (p < 0.05) and V20 was smaller for IMRT plans(p < 0.05).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>IMRT planning improves target conformity and decreases irradiation of the OAR at the expense of increased target heterogeneity. IMRT planning increases the IBV at 5 Gy or less but decreases the IBV at 20 Gy or more.</p

Intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in patients with carcinomas of the paranasal sinuses: clinical benefit for complex shaped target volumes

INTRODUCTION: The aim of the study was to evaluate the clinical outcome of intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in 46 patients with paranasal sinus tumors with special respect to treatment-related toxicity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We treated 46 patients with histologically proven tumors of the paranasal sinuses with IMRT. Histological classification included squamous cell carcinoma in 6, adenocarcinoma in 8, adenoidcystic carcinoma in 20 and melanoma in 8 patients, respectively. Six patients had been treated with RT during initial therapy after primary diagnosis, and IMRT was performed for the treatment of tumor progression as re-irradiation. RESULTS: Overall survival rates were 96% at 1 year, 90% at 3 years. Calculated from the initiation of IMRT as primary radiotherapy, survival rates at 1 and 3 years were 95% and 80%. In six patients IMRT was performed as re-irradiation, and survival rate calculated from re-irradiation was 63% at 1 year. Local control rates were 85% at 1, 81% at 2 and 49% at 3 years after primary RT and 50% at 1 year after re-irradiation. Distant metastases-free survival in patients treated with IMRT as primary RT was 83% after 1 and 64% after 3 years. For patients treated as primary irradiation with IMRT, the distant control rate was 83% at 1 year and 0% at 2 years. No severe radiation-induced side-effects could be observed. CONCLUSION: IMRT for tumors of the paranasal sinuses is associated with very good tumor control rates. Treatment-related acute and long-term toxicity can be minimized as compared to historical results with conventional RT

Apparent biliary pseudolithiasis during ceftriaxone therapy.

Biliary pseudolithiasis has been reported in patients who received ceftriaxone therapy. To examine this phenomenon further, serial gallbladder sonograms were evaluated in 44 adult patients who received intravenous ceftriaxone at 2 g or a placebo daily for 14 days in a double-blind controlled study. Ultrasound examinations of gallbladders were performed on days 1 and 14 of therapy and 2 weeks posttherapy if abnormalities were observed on day 14. Eight patients were unevaluable because of abnormal base-line gallbladder sonograms. Thirty-six patients (ceftriaxone, n = 28; placebo, n = 8) demonstrated normal baseline gallbladder sonograms and were evaluated for the development of change. A total of 6 of 28 (21.4%) ceftriaxone-treated patients and 1 of 8 (12.5%) patients who received the placebo demonstrated abnormal gallbladder sonograms on day 14 (P = 0.491). Four of the six ceftriaxone-treated patients demonstrating abnormal sonograms were clinically asymptomatic, while two patients reported vomiting. The abnormal sonograms of gallbladders of patients treated with ceftriaxone returned to normal between 9 and 26 days posttherapy. These data suggest an association between ceftriaxone treatment and the development of gallbladder abnormalities on ultrasound examination which resolve spontaneously on discontinuation of ceftriaxone therapy