The predictive value of treatment response using FDG PET performed on day 21 of chemoradiotherapy in patients with oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma. A prospective, multicentre study (RTEP3).

PURPOSE: FDG PET has been suggested to have predictive value in the prognosis of oesophageal carcinoma. However, the retrospective studies reported in the literature have shown discordant results. Additionally, only four studies have evaluated FDG PET during chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in patients with different histological lesions. The purpose of this study was to investigate the predictive value of FDG PET performed early during CRT (on day 21) in a population of patients with oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma. METHODS: Included in this prospective study were 57 patients with a histological diagnosis of squamous cell carcinoma of the oesophagus. Of these 57 patients, 48 (84%) were evaluated (aged 63 ± 11 years; 44 men, 4 women). Each patient underwent FDG PET (4.5 MBq/kg) before CRT, according to the Herskovic protocol (t0; PET1) and on day 21 ± 3 from the start of CRT (d21; PET2). The response assessment included a clinical examination, CT scan or FDG PET and histological analysis 3 months and 1 year after PET1. The patients were classified as showing a complete response (CR) or a noncomplete response. A quantitative analysis was carried out for PET1 and PET2 using the following parameters: SUVmax, SUVmean (with SUVmean40 as the 3-D volume at an SUVmax threshold of 40% and SUVmeanp as that defined by a physician), tumour volume (TV, with TV40 defined as the TV at 40% of SUVmax, and TVp as that defined by a physician); and the total lesion glycolysis (TLG, SUVmean × TV, with TLG40 defined as the TLG at 40% of SUVmax, and TLGp as that defined by a physician). The differences in responses at 3 months and 1 year between PET1 (t0) and PET2 (d21) were assessed in terms of variations in SUV, TV and TLG using a repeated measures of variance (ANOVA). RESULTS: SUVmax, SUVmean and TLG decreased significantly between PET1 (t0) and PET2 (d21; p < 0.0001). The TV significantly decreased only when assessed as TVp (p = 0.02); TV40 did not decrease significantly. With respect to the predictive value of PET1, only TV40_1 and TVp_1 values, and therefore TLG40_1 and TLGp_1, but not the SUV values, were significantly lower in patients with CR at 3 months. SUVmax1, TVp_1 and TLGp_1 were significantly lower in patients with CR at 1 year. With respect to the predictive value of PET2, only TV40_2 and TVp_2 values, and therefore TLG40_2 and TLGp_2, but not the SUV values, were significantly lower in patients with CR at 3 months. None of the PET2 parameters had significant value in predicting patient outcome at 1 year. The changes in SUVmax, TV40, TVp, TLG40 and TLGp between PET1 and PET2 had no relationship to patient outcome at 3 months or 1 year. CONCLUSION: This prospective, multicentre study performed in a selected population of patients with oesophageal squamous cell cancer demonstrates that the parameters derived from baseline PET1 are good predictors of response to CRT. Specifically, a high TV and TLG are associated with a poor response to CRT at 3 months and 1 year, and a high SUVmax is associated with a poor response to CRT at 1 year. FDG PET performed during CRT on day 21 appears to have less clinical relevance. However, patients with a large functional TV on day 21 of CRT have a poor clinical outcome (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT 00934505).

Randomized clinical trial of post-operative radiotherapy versus concomitant carboplatin and radiotherapy for head and neck cancers with lymph node involvement.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Post-operative radiotherapy is indicated for the treatment of head and neck cancers. In vitro, chemotherapy potentiates the cytotoxic effects of radiation. We report the results of a randomized trial testing post-operative radiotherapy alone versus concomitant carboplatin and radiotherapy for head and neck cancers with lymph node involvement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study involved patients undergoing curative-intent surgery for head and neck cancers with histological evidence of lymph node involvement. Patients were randomly assigned to receive radiotherapy alone (54-72Gy, 30-40 fractions, 6-8 weeks) or identical treatment plus concomitant Carboplatin (50mg/m(2) administered by IV infusion twice weekly). RESULTS: Between February 1994 and June 2002, 144 patients were included. With a median follow-up of 106 months (95% confidence interval (CI) [92-119]), the 2-year rate of loco-regional control was 73% (95% CI: 0.61-0.84) in the combined treatment group and 68% (95% CI: 0.57-0.80) in the radiotherapy group (p=0.26). Overall survival did not differ significantly between groups (hazard ratio for death, 1.05; 95% CI: 0.69-1.60; p=0.81). CONCLUSIONS: Twice-weekly administration of carboplatin concomitant to post-operative radiotherapy did not improve local control or overall survival rates in this population of patients with node-positive head and neck cancers.

The Henri Mondor Procedure of Morbidity and Mortality Review Meetings: Prospective Registration of Clinical, Dosimetric, and Individual Radiosensitivity Data of Patients With Severe Radiation Toxicity.

PURPOSE: After radiation therapy (RT), various radiation-induced toxicities can develop in about one-fourth of patients. An international interest in using morbidity and mortality rates to monitor the quality of care and integrate morbidity and mortality review (MMR) meetings into organizations' governance processes has arisen. We report the first results of patients included in our MMR procedure that included biological assays for individual intrinsic radiosensitivity (IIRS). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty-three patients were prospectively included in the MMR database. Twenty-two were evaluable for IIRS. Prostate (n=10) and breast (n=8) cancers were the most frequent disease types. The total dose delivered, determined according to the type of disease, ranged from 30 to 74 Gy. Our MMR procedure requires strict criteria: patients with unresolved toxicity of grade 3 or higher with availability of clinical (photographic) data, IIRS results obtained from skin biopsy assays, treatment modalities, and follow-up data. The RT technique and dosimetry were reviewed. RESULTS: Our prospective registration of toxicities showed mainly rectitis, occurring in 7 cases, and skin toxicities, occurring in 9. Of the 7 patients with rectitis, 5 received 66 Gy of post-prostatectomy RT with V50 (rectum volume receiving 50 Gy) ranging from 45% to 75% and a mean maximal dose of 66.5 Gy. For dermatitis and cystitis, the mean maximal doses were in the range of classical constraints without any overdosage or dose heterogeneity. No errors were found in the review of treatment planning and positioning. Conversely, all the patients were considered biologically as radiosensitive with genomic instability and ATM (ataxia telangiectasia mutated)-dependent DNA double-strand break repair impairments. CONCLUSIONS: The MMR review of files allowed clear answers for patients on the relationship between clinical events and their IIRS. Our procedure has allowed education of all our staff to monitor, identify, and document clinical, physical, and biological aspects of radiation-induced toxicities. Thus we recommend the introduction of the MMR procedure in RT departments.