Clinical comparison of two linear-quadratic model-based isoeffect fractionation schemes of high-dose-rate intracavitary brachytherapy for cervical cancer.

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Two linear-quadratic model-based isoeffect fractionation schemes of high-dose-rate intracavitary brachytherapy (HDR-IC) were used to treat cervical cancer in two consecutive periods. Patient outcomes and complications were analyzed and compared. METHODS AND MATERIALS Between November 1987 and December 1996, a total of 541 women diagnosed with cervical cancer were treated with curative-intent radiotherapy. Patients were categorized into two groups according to the two isoeffect schemes used. Group 1 consisted of 254 patients treated with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) plus 7.2 Gy HDR-IC to Point A for three fractions in the first period. Group 2 consisted of 284 patients treated with EBRT plus 4.8 Gy HDR-IC for five fractions in the second period. The goal of the new scheme for the latter group was to deliver an isoeffect dose that maintained similar tumor control but reduced normal tissue complications. The calculated biologically effective dose (BED(10), assuming an alpha/beta ratio = 10) of EBRT plus HDR-IC for tumor and acute responding tissue in Groups 1 and 2 was 90 Gy(10) (52.8 + 37.2 Gy) and 88.6 Gy(10) (53.1 + 35.5 Gy), respectively. The corresponding BED(3) for late responding tissue (assuming an alpha/beta ratio = 3) in Groups 1 and 2 was 146.7 Gy(3) (73.3 + 73.4 Gy) and 134.4 Gy(3) (72 + 62.4 Gy), respectively. Patients were followed for 6.1-15.2 years (median, 9.8 years). RESULTS: Overall, 66 patients (12.2%) developed pelvic recurrence. Of these, 53 patients had central recurrence. Of the 53 patients with central recurrence, 24 (9.4%) were in Group 1 and 29 (10.1%) in Group 2 (p = 0.722). The actuarial pelvic control rate for Groups 1 and 2 was 88.2% and 86.3% at 5 years and 87.3% and 85.5% at 10 years, respectively (p = 0.504). The actuarial overall survival rate for Groups 1 and 2 was 63.5% and 56.1% at 5 years and 47.8% and 49.3% at 10 years, respectively (p = 0.734). The actuarial proctitis rate for Groups 1 and 2 was 49.7% and 32.7% at 5 years and 50.5% and 32.7% at 10 years, respectively (p <0.001). Most of the decrease in the rate of proctitis was a result of a decrease in the incidence of low-grade proctitis (38% vs. 22%). The incidence of high-grade complications remained unchanged, 8% vs. 7%. The actuarial cystitis rate for Groups 1 and 2 was 14.3% vs. 11.4% at 5 years and 24.1% vs. 15% at 10 years, respectively (p = 0.134). Multivariate analysis revealed that the fractionation scheme (three fractions vs. five fractions) was a significant factor influencing the proctitis rate (p = 0.004, hazard ratio = 0.807; 95% confidence interval, 0.697-0.934), but not the local pelvic control rate, overall survival rate, or cystitis rate. CONCLUSION: The treatment results of the two groups maintained similar outcomes, while the complications decreased. The linear-quadratic model correctly predicted this outcome. Biologically, the manipulation of the fraction size in our study suggested that the sensitivity of the late responding tissue to the fractional change from 7.2 Gy to 4.8 Gy in HDR-IC is high and detectable clinically. The success, however, had its limitations, and the improvement was confined to low-grade complications.