Comparative evaluation of hypofractionated radiotherapy versus conventionally fractionated radiotherapy for patients with intermediate and high risk prostate cancer.

Background: The purpose of this study was to comparatively evaluate an efficacy and toxicity profile of hypofractionated radiotherapy (67.5 Gy in 25 fractions) to conventionally fractionated radiotherapy (78 Gy in 39 fractions) in prostate cancer patients with intermediate and high-risk disease. Materials and methods: From January 2015 to December 2018, 168 patients were randomized to hypofractionated radiation treatment and conventional fractionated radiation treatment schedules of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) to the prostate and seminal vesicles. All the patients also received androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and radiation therapy started after ADT. Results: The median (range) follow-up was 51 (31-63) and 53 (33-64) months in the hypofractionated and conventionally fractionated regimes, respectively. The 3-year biochemical no evidence of disease (bNED) rates were 86.9% and 73.8% in the hypofractionated and conventionally fractionated groups, respectively (p = 0.032, significant). The 3-year bNED rates in patients at a high risk [i.e., pretreatment prostate-specific antigen (PSA) > 20 ng/mL, Gleason score ≥ 8, or T ≥ 2 c], were 87.9% and 73.5% (p = 0.007, significant) in the hypofractionated and conventionally fractionated radiotherapy groups, respectively. No statistically significant difference was found for late toxicity between the two groups, with 3-year grade 2 gastrointestinal toxicity rates of 19% and 16.7% and 3-year grade 2 genitourinary toxicity rates of 15.5% and 11.9% in the hypofractionated and conventionally fractionated radiotherapy groups, respectively. Conclusion: Hypofractionated schedule is superior to the conventional fractionation schedule of radiation treatment in terms of bNED in intermediate and high grade prostate cancer patients. Also, the late toxicity is found to be equivalent between the two treatment groups.

A retrospective study of outcomes in subjects of head and neck cancer treated with hyperbaric oxygen therapy for radiation induced osteoradionecrosis of mandible at a tertiary care centre: an Indian experience.

Osteoradionecrosis (ORN) of the mandible is a rare complication of radiation therapy for head and neck cancer. It manifests as an area of exposed necrotic bone failing to heal for at least 3 months. Our study aims to determine the effectiveness of HBO in management of radiation induced mandibular ORN. A retrospective study of 33 subjects of mandibular ORN treated with HBOT during period 2009-2011 was carried out. The mean patient age was 60 years (range 41-80).They were treated in a multiplace hyperbaric chamber at 2.4 ATA, for 90 min once a day for up to 30 sessions. Pre and post treatment improvement in relation to symptoms, healing of intraoral wound and overall wellbeing were evaluated. Out of 33 Subjects, 48 % (n = 16) cases showed complete healing of wound, 18 % (n = 6) had marked healing, slight healing in 24 % (n = 8) cases and 9 % (n = 3) cases had no change in healing. 70 % (23 of 33) cases had significant reduction in pain, 62 % (18 of 29) cases had improved jaw opening, 41 % (11 of 27) cases and 71 % (20 of 28) cases showed improvement in ability to talk and mouth dryness respectively. Overall 85 % (28 of 30) cases showed improvement. Our clinical experience supports the efficacy of HBO treatment for radiation induced mandibular ORN and we recommend additional multicentric, prospective studies to be carried out defining the role of HBOT using at least 30 sessions in such cases.

Comparison of sequential chemoradiation with radiation alone in the treatment of advanced head and neck cancers.

OBJECTIVES: To compare locoregional control with alternating chemo radiation and radiation alone in patients with locally advanced head and neck carcinoma. STUDY DESIGN: A prospective randomized study. SETTING: Tertiary academic referral center. PATIENTS: 50 patients of biopsy proven locally-advanced carcinoma of head and neck. INTERVENTION: 25 patients were kept in Group I or study group (i.e. alternating chemo-radiation) and 25 patients in Group II or control group (i.e. radiation alone). In the study group, patients were given 3 cycles of chemotherapy (Cisplatin 20 mg/m([2]) and Inj. 5-FU 200mg/m([2]) from day 1-5 of each week) during weeks 1,5 and 9 alternated with radiation dose of 10Gy/week was given during weeks 2,3,4 and 6,7,8. In the control group, patients were given a total dose of 60Gy in 6 weeks. OUTCOME MEASURES: The response rate at the primary site and nodal site was better in study group as compared to control group. RESULTS: On comparing the response at the primary and nodal site together, 72% (18/25) patients of group I and 44% (11/25) patients of group II showed CR. PR was seen in 28% (7/25) and 36% (9/25) patients in group I and II respectively. No response was seen in 5/25 (20%) of patients in Group II. CONCLUSION: Our study has revealed that alternating/ sequential chemoradiation is a promising and feasible approach for patients in advanced head and neck cancer.