Short course radiotherapy versus radiochemotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancers in the elderly (UNICANCER PRODIGE 42/GERICO 12 study): Quality of life and comprehensive geriatric assessment.

BACKGROUND: The results of the PRODIGE 42/GERICO 12 study showed that short course radiotherapy had a better tolerance profile than radiochemotherapy, with comparable oncological results. We have included Quality of Life analyses and oncogeriatric evaluations in this study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In all, 101 patients ≥75 years of age with resectable T3-T4 rectal adenocarcinoma less than 12 cm from the anal margin received short course radiotherapy (5X5 Gy in one week) or radiochemotherapy (50 Gy, 2 y/f and capecitabine 800 mg/m2, 5 days/week) with delayed surgery (7 weeks ± 1) in both groups. The Quality of Life analyses (EORTC QLQ C-30 et ELD14) were conducted upon inclusion, pre-operatively, at 3, 6 and 12 months post-op, together with the oncogeriatric evaluations, including an evaluation of the IADL and ADL scores, walking speed, GDS15, MMSE, MNA. RESULTS: We did not highlight any statistical difference for the global EORTC QLQ-C30 score; several factors are statistically in favor of the short course radiotherapy group at 3 months post-op (cognitive functions, fatigue, appetite). In the case of the ELD14 score, the disease burden is perceived as more negative at 3, 6 and 12 months postop in the radiochemotherapy group. The IADL score deteriorated in 44.8 % of the radiochemotherapy group and 14.8 % of the radiotherapy group (p = 0.032); similarly, the GDS15 depression score was better preserved in the short course radiotherapy group (p = 0.05). An analysis of the other scores: ADL, walking speed, MNA, MMSE did not highlight any statistical difference. CONCLUSION: Short course radiotherapy achieves better results in terms of Quality of Life and preservation of autonomy in patients aged ≥75 treated for locally advanced rectal cancer.

Comparison of short course radiotherapy with chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancers in the elderly: A multicentre, randomised, non-blinded, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: There is no specific guideline for the treatment of locally advanced rectal cancers in the elderly. Here we compared R0 resection rate and degradation of autonomy based on the instrumental activities of daily living score between neoadjuvant, short course radiotherapy and chemoradiotherapy in this specific population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients ≥75 years with resectable T3-T4 rectal adenocarcinoma within 12 cm of the anal verge or T2 of the very low rectum were randomised between short course radiotherapy (5 × 5 Gy in one week) and chemoradiotherapy (50 Gy, 2 Gy/f, 5 weeks with capecitabine: 800 mg/m2 twice daily, 5 days per week), with delayed surgery 7 ± 1 weeks for the two arms. RESULTS: One hundred and three eligible patients were enrolled between January 2016 and December 2019 when the trial was closed due to poor accrual. The R0 resection rate (first co-primary objective) was 84.3%; confidence interval 95% [73.26-94.18] in the short course group and 88%; confidence interval 95% [77.77-96.60] in the chemoradiotherapy group (non-inferiority p = 0.28). The deterioration of the instrumental activities of daily living score was not different during the pre-operative phase, it was significantly more deteriorated in the chemoradiotherapy group at 3 months post-operative (44.8% versus 14.8%; p = 0.032) but was not different at 12 months post-operative (second co-primary objective). During pre-operative phase, 9.8% of patients in short course group and 22% of patients in chemoradiotherapy group presented a serious adverse event, but we observed no difference during the post-operative phase between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Although the main objectives of the study were not achieved, the short course radiotherapy followed by delayed surgery could represent a preferred treatment option in patients ≥75 years with locally advanced rectal cancer; a new study must be performed to confirm the improvement in overall and specific survival results.

Stereotactic Body radiation therapy for liver tumors with or without rotational intensity modulated radiation therapy.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for primary liver lesions and liver metastases treated with linear accelerators with or without rotational Intensity Modulated RadioTherapy (IMRT). METHODS: Patients with either hepatocellular carcinoma, cholangiocarcinoma or metastatic liver lesions who had one to three lesions treated with SBRT in a single institution were retrospectively reviewed. Tumor response was evaluated according to EASL criteria 3 months after SBRT completion using MRI and/or abdominal CT scan. Responses were categorised as: Stable Disease (SD), Partial Response (PR), Complete Response (CR), Local Progression or Distant Progression in cases of new intra-hepatic lesions out-of-field or extra-hepatic metastases. Local Control (LC), Progression Free Survival (PFS), Overall Survival (OS) and treatment-related toxicities are reported. RESULTS: Between 2007 and 2012, 20 patients with a total of 24 lesions were treated with SBRT. Fourteen patients presented hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the others had either metastatic lesions from colorectal cancer (CRC) or cholangiocarcinoma. The median diameter of the lesions was 23 mm (5-98).The dose per fraction ranged from 6 to 20 Gy with a median total dose of 60 Gy (range: 36-60 Gy). The dose was prescribed to the 80% isodose line covering the PTV.The median follow-up was 24 months (15.7-29.7).The actuarial LC rate was 78% for patients with HCC and 83% for those with adenocarcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma. Median OS was 37 months and OS rates were 83% at 12 and 24 months for HCC and 100% for adenocarcinoma. PFS was 54% for HCC and 50% for other types of tumors at 24 months.Acute grade 3-4 toxicities occurred in 2 patients; a small proportion of the other patients experienced grade 1 or 2 toxicities. CONCLUSIONS: SBRT provides excellent local control with minimal side effects in selected patients.