Radiosurgery for multiple brain metastases using volumetric modulated arc therapy: a single institutional series.

Background: Patients with brain metastases (BM) live longer due to improved diagnosis and oncologic treatments. The association of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT) with brain radiosurgery (SRS) allows complex dose distributions and faster treatment delivery to multiple lesions. Materials and methods: This study is a retrospective analysis of SRS for brain metastasis using VMAT. The primary endpoints were local disease-free survival (LDFS) and overall survival (OS). The secondary outcomes were intracranial disease-free survival (IDFS) and meningeal disease-free survival (MDFS). Results: The average number of treated lesions was 5.79 (range: 2-20) per treatment in a total of 113 patients. The mean prescribed dose was 18 Gy (range: 12-24 Gy). The median LDFS was 46 months. The LDFS in 6, 12, and 24 months was for 86%, 79%, and 63%, respectively. Moreover, brain progression occurred in 50 patients. The median overall survival was 47 months. The OS in 75%, 69%, and 61% patients was 6, 12, and 24 months, respectively. IDFS was 6 and 24 months in 35% and 14% patients, respectively. The mean MDFS was 62 months; it was 6 and 24 months for 87% and 83% of patients. Acute severe toxicity was relatively rare. During follow-up, the rates of radionecrosis and neurocognitive impairment were low (10%). Conclusion: The use of VMAT-SRS for multiple BM was feasible, effective, and associated with low treatment-related toxicity rates. Thus, treatment with VMAT is a safe technique to plan to achieve local control without toxicity.

Applying PET-CT for predicting the efficacy of SBRT to inoperable early-stage lung adenocarcinoma: A Brazilian case-series.

Background: Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is a treatment option for early-stage inoperable primary lung cancer. Here we report a thorough description of the prognostic value of pre-SBRT SUVmax for predicting the efficacy of SBRT in early-stage lung adenocarcinoma. Methods: This is a retrospective study of consecutive cases of early-stage inoperable lung adenocarcinoma, staged with PET-CT, treated with SBRT between 2007 and 17. Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves were used to assess overall survival and compare time to event between those with PET-CT SUVmax values ≤ 5.0 and those > 5. Fisher's Exact tests and the Mann-Whitney U were used to compare the patient and clinical data of those with SUVmax≤5.0 and >5.0, and those with and without any failure. Findings: Amongst 50 lung carcinoma lesions, from 47 patients (34 (68%)-T1a or 5 (p = 0.112). In addition, 5 experienced a regional failure and 4 a distant failure. Higher PET-CT SUVmax values before SBRT were associated with an increased risk of any failure (36% versus 0%, p = 0.0040 on Fisher's Exact test) and faster time to event (p = 0.010, log rank test). Both acute and late toxicities profile were acceptable. Interpretation: Patients with early-stage inoperable lung adenocarcinoma present good clinical outcomes when treated with SBRT. We raised the hypothesis that the value of PET-CT SUVmax before SBRT may be an important predictive factor in disease control. Funding: None.

Stereotactic ablative radiation therapy for spinal metastases: experience at a single Brazilian institution.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to assess the clinical outcomes of patients with spine metastases who underwent stereotactic ablative radiation therapy (SABR) as part of their treatment. SABR has arisen as a contemporary treatment option for spinal metastasis patients with good prognoses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between November 2010 and September 2018, Spinal SABR was performed in patients with metastatic disease in different settings: radical (SABR only), postoperative (after decompression and/or fixation surgery), and reirradiation. Local control (LC), pain control, overall survival (OS) and toxicities were reported. RESULTS: Eighty-five patients (corresponding to 96 treatments) with spine metastases were included. The median age was 59 years (range, 23-91). In most SA BR (82.3%, n = 79) was performed as the first local spine treatment, while in 12 settings (12.5%), fixation and/or decompression surgery was performed prior to SABR. Two-year overall survival rate was 74.1%, and median survival was 19 months. The LC rate at 2 years was 72.3%. With regard to pain control, among 67 patients presenting with pain before SA BR, 83.3% had a complete response, 12.1% had a partial response, and 4.6% had progression. Vertebral compression fractures occurred in 10 patients (11.7%), of which 5 cases occurred in the reirradiation setting. Radiculopathy and myelopathy were not observed. No grade III or IV toxicities were seen. CONCLUSION: This is the first study presenting a Brazilian experience with spinal SA BR, and the results confirm its feasibility and safety. SABR was shown to produce good local and pain control rates with low rates of adverse events.

Brazilian Validation of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Group (QLG) Computerised Adaptive Tests (CAT) Core.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to validate the Brazilian version of EORTC CAT Core and compare the Brazilian results with those from the original European EORTC CAT Core validation study. METHODS: After validated translation, 168 cancer patients from Brazil receiving radiation therapy with or without chemotherapy was assessed. Translated EORTC CAT Core and all QLQ-C30 items were administered to patients using CHES (Computer-Based Health Evaluation System) before (T0) and after (T1) treatment initiation. The association between QLQ-C30 and CAT scores and ceiling/floor effects were estimated. Based on estimates of relative validity (cross-sectional, known-group differences and changes over time), relative sample-size requirements for CAT compared to QLQ-C30 were estimated. RESULTS: Correlation coefficients between CAT and QLQ-C30 domains ranged from 0.63 to 0.93; except for dyspnoea, all coefficients were >0.82 (corresponding figures were 0.81-0.93 in the European study). On average across domains, floor/ceiling was reduced by 10% using CAT (9% in the European study) corresponding to a relative reduction of 32% (37% in the European study). Analyses of known-group validity and responsiveness indicated that, on average across domains, the sample-size requirements may be reduced by 17% using CAT rather than QLQ-C30, without loss of power (28% in the European study). The Brazilian sample had less symptom/quality of life impairment than the European sample, which likely explains the lower sample-size reduction using CAT when comparing with the European sample. CONCLUSIONS: The results in the Brazilian cohort were generally similar to those from the European sample and confirm the validity and usefulness of the EORTC CAT Core.

Treatment of Localized and Locally Advanced, High-Risk Prostate Cancer: A Report From the First Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference for Developing Countries.

PURPOSE: To generate and present survey results on important issues relevant to treatment and follow-up of localized and locally advanced, high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) focusing on developing countries. METHODS: A panel of 99 PCa experts developed more than 300 survey questions of which 67 questions concern the main areas of interest of this article: treatment and follow-up of localized and locally advanced, high-risk PCa in developing countries. A larger panel of 99 international multidisciplinary cancer experts voted on these questions to create the recommendations for treatment and follow-up of localized and locally advanced, high-risk PCa in areas of limited resources discussed in this article. RESULTS: The panel voted publicly but anonymously on the predefined questions. Each question was deemed consensus if 75% or more of the full panel had selected a particular answer. These answers are based on panelist opinion and not on a literature review or meta-analysis. For questions that refer to an area of limited resources, the recommendations considered cost-effectiveness as well as the possible therapies with easier and greater access. Each question had five to seven relevant answers including two nonanswers. Results were tabulated in real time. CONCLUSION: The voting results and recommendations presented in this article can guide physicians managing localized and locally advanced, high-risk PCa in areas of limited resources. Individual clinical decision making should be supported by available data; however, as guidelines for treatment of localized and locally advanced, high-risk PCa in developing countries have not been defined, this article will serve as a point of reference when confronted with this disease.

Consensus on Prostate Cancer Treatment of Localized Disease With Very Low, Low, and Intermediate Risk: A Report From the First Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference for Developing Countries (PCCCDC).

PURPOSE: A group of international urology and medical oncology experts developed and completed a survey on prostate cancer (PCa) in developing countries. The results are reviewed and summarized, and recommendations on consensus statements for very low-, low-, and intermediate-risk PCa focused on developing countries were developed. METHODS: A panel of experts developed more than 300 survey questions of which 66 questions concern the principal areas of interest of this paper: very low, low, and intermediate risk of PCa in developing countries. A larger panel of 99 international multidisciplinary cancer experts voted on these questions to create the recommendations for treatment and follow-up for very low-, low-, and intermediate-risk PCa in areas of limited resources discussed in this manuscript. RESULTS: The panel voted publicly but anonymously on the predefined questions. Each question was deemed consensus if 75% or more of the full panel had selected a particular answer. These answers are based on panelist opinion not a literature review or meta-analysis. For questions that refer to an area of limited resources, the recommendations consider cost-effectiveness and the possible therapies with easier and greater access. Each question had five to seven relevant answers including two nonanswers. The results were tabulated in real time. CONCLUSION: The voting results and recommendations presented in this document can be used by physicians to support management for very low, low, and intermediate risk of PCa in areas of limited resources. Individual clinical decision making should be supported by available data; however, as guidelines for treatment for very low, low, and intermediate risk of PCa in developing countries have not been developed, this document will serve as a point of reference when confronted with this disease.

Lung Cancer and the COVID-19 pandemic: Recommendations from the Brazilian Thoracic Oncology Group.

New cases of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), also known as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), continue to rise worldwide following the declaration of a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO). The current pandemic has completely altered the workflow of health services worldwide. However, even during this critical period, patients with other diseases, like cancer, need to be properly treated. A few reports have shown that mortality due to SARS-CoV-2 is higher in elderly patients and those with other active comorbidities, including cancer. Patients with lung cancer are at risk of pulmonary complications from COVID-19, and as such, the risk/benefit ratio of local and systemic anticancer treatment has to be considered. For each patient, several factors, including age, comorbidities, and immunosuppression, as well as the number of hospital visits for treatment, can influence this risk. The number of cases is rising exponentially in Brazil, and it is important to consider the local characteristics when approaching the pandemic. In this regard, the Brazilian Thoracic Oncology Group has developed recommendations to guide decisions in lung cancer treatment during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Due to the scarcity of relevant data, discussions based on disease stage, evaluation of surgical treatment, radiotherapy techniques, systemic therapy, follow-up, and supportive care were carried out, and specific suggestions issued. All recommendations seek to reduce contagion risk by decreasing the number of medical visits and hospitalization, and in the case of immunosuppression, by adapting treatment schemes when possible. This statement should be adjusted according to the reality of each service, and can be revised as new data become available.

Lung cancer and the COVID-19 pandemic: recommendations from the brazilian thoracic oncology group

New cases of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), also known as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), continue to rise worldwide following the declaration of a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO). The current pandemic has completely altered the workflow of health services worldwide. However, even during this critical period, patients with other diseases, like cancer, need to be properly treated. A few reports have shown that mortality due to SARS-CoV-2 is higher in elderly patients and those with other active comorbidities, including cancer. Patients with lung cancer are at risk of pulmonary complications from COVID-19, and as such, the risk/benefit ratio of local and systemic anticancer treatment has to be considered. For each patient, several factors, including age, comorbidities, and immunosuppression, as well as the number of hospital visits for treatment, can influence this risk. The number of cases is rising exponentially in Brazil, and it is important to consider the local characteristics when approaching the pandemic. In this regard, the Brazilian Thoracic Oncology Group has developed recommendations to guide decisions in lung cancer treatment during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Due to the scarcity of relevant data, discussions based on disease stage, evaluation of surgical treatment, radiotherapy techniques, systemic therapy, follow-up, and supportive care were carried out, and specific suggestions issued. All recommendations seek to reduce contagion risk by decreasing the number of medical visits and hospitalization, and in the case of immunosuppression, by adapting treatment schemes when possible. This statement should be adjusted according to the reality of each service, and can be revised as new data become available.

International Multicenter Validation of an Intermediate Risk Subclassification of Prostate Cancer Managed with Radical Treatment without Hormone Therapy.

PURPOSE: The NCCN Guidelines® recently endorsed a subclassification of intermediate risk prostate cancer into favorable and unfavorable subgroups. However, this subclassification was developed in a treatment heterogeneous cohort. Thus, to our knowledge the natural history of androgen deprivation treatment naïve favorable and unfavorable intermediate risk prostate cancer cases remains unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Groups at 3 academic centers pooled data on patients with intermediate risk prostate cancer treated with radical monotherapy (dose escalated external beam radiotherapy, brachytherapy or radical prostatectomy) without combined androgen deprivation treatment. We used the cumulative incidence with competing risk analysis to estimate biochemical recurrence, distant metastasis and prostate cancer specific mortality. RESULTS: A total of 2,550 men at intermediate risk were included in study, of whom 1,063 and 1,487 were at favorable and unfavorable risk, respectively. Of the men 1,149 underwent radical prostatectomy, 1,143 underwent dose escalated external beam radiotherapy and 258 underwent brachytherapy. Median followup after the different treatments ranged from 60.4 to 107.4 months. The 10-year cumulative incidence of distant metastasis in the favorable vs unfavorable risk groups was 0.2% (95% CI 0.2-0.2) vs 11.6% (95% CI 7.7-15.5) for radical prostatectomy (p <0.001), 2.8% (95% CI 0.8-4.8) vs 13.5% (95% CI 9.6-17.4) for dose escalated external beam radiotherapy (p <0.001) and 3.5% (95% CI 0-7.4) vs 10.2% (95% CI 4.3-16.1) for brachytherapy (p = 0.063). The 10-year rate of prostate cancer specific mortality in the favorable vs unfavorable risk groups was 0% (95% CI 0-0) vs 3.7% (95% CI 1.7-5.7) for radical prostatectomy (p = 0.016), 0.5% (95% CI 0.5-0.5) vs 5.6% (95% CI 3.6-7.6) for dose escalated external beam radiotherapy (p = 0.015) and 0% (95% CI 0-0) vs 2.5% (95% CI 0.5-4.5) for brachytherapy (p = 0.028). CONCLUSIONS: This multicenter international effort independently validates the prognostic value of the intermediate risk prostate cancer subclassification in androgen deprivation treatment naïve cases across all radical treatment modalities. It is unlikely that treatment intensification would meaningfully improve oncologic outcomes in men at favorable intermediate risk.

Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Biopsy-Proven Primary Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Experience of Patients With Inoperable Cancer at a Single Brazilian Institution.

Purpose Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has emerged as a treatment option for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We report the clinical outcomes and toxicity for patients with inoperable primary NSCLC treated with SBRT. Methods Between 2007 and 2015, 102 consecutive lung lesions were treated with SBRT at our center, of which 59 primary NSCLC lesions (from 54 patients with inoperable disease) were retrospectively reviewed (43 lesions were excluded because of metastases or because there was no biopsy specimen). We report infield local control (LC) per SBRT target, regional or distant failure-free survival, and overall survival (OS) per patient, using Kaplan-Meier estimates. Serious toxicity was retrospectively scored using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4. Results Most of the 54 patients were men (n = 41; 76%), median age was 75 years; stage IA (n = 36; 66%) and adenocarcinoma (n = 43; 80%) were the most common stage and histologic diagnosis, respectively. Five patients had two lung lesions. A median of three fractions (range, 3 to 5 fractions) and a total median dose of 54 Gy (range, 45 to 60 Gy) per lesion were prescribed. The median follow-up was 17.8 months (range, 4 to 56.4 months). The 2-year rates of LC, regional or distant failure-free survival, and OS were 89.1% (95% CI, 72.2% to 96%), 79% (95% CI, 59.8% to 89.8%), and 80% (95% CI, 64% to 89.8%), respectively. Grade 3 to 4 toxicities were observed in two patients (3%): grade 3 pneumonitis (n = 1) and grade 4 skin toxicity (n = 1). Conclusion SBRT results in high rates of 2-year LC, regional or distant failure-free survival, and OS with low rates of severe toxicity in patients with inoperable primary NSCLC disease.

Use of stereotactic body radiation therapy for oligometastatic recurrent prostate cancer: A systematic review.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in the management of oligometastatic recurrent prostate cancer (PCa) by means of a systematic review. Six databases were searched (CENTRAL, Embase, LILACS, PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science). Additionally, hand-searching and grey literature search were performed. The main outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and toxicity rates. Androgen deprivation therapy-free survival (ADT-FS), local control, pattern of recurrence, cancer-specific survival and overall survival were also assessed. Risk of bias and quality of evidence were judged with the aid of specific tools. Fourteen studies were included, involving 661 patients and 899 lesions (561 nodal, 336 bone, 2 liver). Median PFS and ADT-FS were around 1 to 3 years. Local control rates varied from 82 to 100% among researches with low risk of bias. Acute and late grade 2 toxicity was observed in 2.4% and 1.1% of the patients, respectively. One case of acute and two cases of late grade 3 toxicity were registered. Only one randomized study addresses this topic. Although it does not meet all the eligibility criteria, it is useful for the discussion. A quantitative analysis was not possible, nor were subgroup analyses, due to the significant heterogeneity of the interventions and outcomes reported. Longer follow-up period is required. SBRT seems to be a safe approach to metastatic lesions that might provide disease control and defer androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Local control is better when higher radiation doses are employed.

Self-reported Conflicts of Interest and Trial Sponsorship of Clinical Trials in Prostate Cancer Involving Radiotherapy.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the association between trial sponsorship and conflicts of interest (COI) with clinical trial conclusions for prostate cancer trials related to radiotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The MEDLINE database was searched for all prostate cancer clinical trials published between 2004 and 2013 and identified 1396 studies. Two investigators independently identified trials published in the English language of ≥30 patients, and extracted relevant data. Clinical trials were classified according to trial characteristics, sponsorship source and type, COI, and study conclusion, and analyzed by univariable and multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 240 eligible trials, 160 (67.5%) evaluated drugs without radiotherapy, 60 (25%) involved radiotherapy, and 18 (7.5%) involved procedures without radiotherapy. Of the 60 radiotherapy trials eligible for analysis, positive sponsorship and potential COI were present in 58.3% and 20% of trials, respectively. Study conclusions were positive, negative, or neutral in 78.3%, 5%, and 16.7% of trials, respectively. No association was found between positive conclusions and either industry support of potential COI. Positive conclusions were reported in 86.7% and 83.3% of trials with sponsorship and COI, respectively, as compared with 75.6% and 77.1% of those without sponsorship (P=0.37) and COI (P=0.64). Sponsorship was significantly associated with radiotherapy trials combined with drugs (odds ratio 5.5, P=0.01) and higher-risk disease (odds ratio 4.71, P=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The presence of sponsorship was associated with radiotherapy trials involving drugs or studying higher-risk prostate cancer. However, there were no identified associations between study conclusion and sponsorship type or COI.

Topical interventions to prevent acute radiation dermatitis in head and neck cancer patients: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the study is to evaluate the effects of pharmacological and non-pharmacological topical controls in the prevention of radiation dermatitis. METHODS: Relevant clinical trials were identified through electronic searching databases CINAHL, CENTRAL, LILACS, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Handsearching and gray literature searches were also performed to find additional references. Primary outcomes of interest were the development of radiation dermatitis and the time of occurrence of radiation dermatitis. RESULTS: Thirteen randomized clinical trials were included in this review. The trials were published in Chinese, English, or French, from 1980 to 2015. Pharmacological interventions used in the trials were trolamine, aloe vera, allantoin, Lianbai liquid, sucralfate, Na-sucrose octasulfate, olive oil, hialuronic acid, and dexpanthenol. Non-pharmacological topical controls were usual care/institution routine, aqueous cream, mild soap, water thermal gel, placebo, and no intervention. CONCLUSIONS: There was no strong evidence that indicates differences between topical pharmacological interventions or non-pharmacological topical controls in the prevention of acute radiation dermatitis among patients with head and neck cancer undergoing radiotherapy.

Long-term outcomes of dose-escalated intensity modulated radiation therapy alone without androgen deprivation therapy for patients with intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The addition of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) to conventional radiation therapy improves overall survival (OS) in intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer. The benefit of ADT to added to dose-escalated radiotherapy is less clear. The aim of this study was to report disease control outcomes and to identify prognostic variables associated with favorable outcomes in patients with intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer treated with dose-escalated radiation therapy without ADT. METHODS AND MATERIALS: From September 2001 to March 2010, 127 patients with intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer were treated with dose-escalated radiation otherapy without ADT. Biochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS), distant metastases-free survival (DMFS), prostate cancer-specific mortality, and OS were assessed. Univariate and multivariate analyses using Cox regression modeling were performed. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 6.5 years, and the 5-year estimated bRFS, DMFS, prostate cancer-specific mortality, and OS for all patients was 89%, 96.1%, 98.4%, and 96.9% respectively. On multivariate analysis, factors that predict bRFS include risk group and PSA nadir, and factors that predict DMFS include perineural invasion, risk group, and PSA nadir. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with favorable intermediate-risk cancer could likely be treated with dose-escalated radiation therapy without ADT. Patients with high-risk and unfavorable intermediate-risk cancer, perineural invasion, and PSA nadir ≥1ng/dL had worse outcomes and likely need distinct therapeutic approaches.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy in lung cancer: an update.

For early-stage lung cancer, the treatment of choice is surgery. In patients who are not surgical candidates or are unwilling to undergo surgery, radiotherapy is the principal treatment option. Here, we review stereotactic body radiotherapy, a technique that has produced quite promising results in such patients and should be the treatment of choice, if available. We also present the major indications, technical aspects, results, and special situations related to the technique.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy in lung cancer: an update / Radioterapia estereotáxica extracraniana em câncer de pulmão: atualização

AbstractFor early-stage lung cancer, the treatment of choice is surgery. In patients who are not surgical candidates or are unwilling to undergo surgery, radiotherapy is the principal treatment option. Here, we review stereotactic body radiotherapy, a technique that has produced quite promising results in such patients and should be the treatment of choice, if available. We also present the major indications, technical aspects, results, and special situations related to the technique.

ResumoO tratamento de escolha para o câncer de pulmão em estádio inicial é a cirurgia. Para os pacientes sem condições clínicas ou que recusam a cirurgia, a radioterapia é a principal opção terapêutica. Apresentamos uma revisão sobre radioterapia estereotáxica extracraniana, uma técnica que vem apresentando resultados bastante promissores nesse grupo de pacientes e que, se disponível, deve ser o tratamento de escolha. Também são apresentados as principais indicações, os aspectos técnicos, resultados e situações especiais relacionados à técnica.

Hypofractioned radiotherapy in prostate cancer: is it the next step?

There are many available options for prostate cancer treatment, including active surveillance, surgery, brachytherapy and external beam radiotherapy. Based on a radiobiological rationale, which considers the prostate tumor as a low α/ß tumor, the use of higher and fewer fractions to prostate cancer external beam radiotherapy treatment has been proposed. Instead of the traditional fractions of 1.8-2.0 Gy per day, fractions higher than 2 Gy per day were the subject of a number of studies. In addition, new technologies such as intensity-modulated radiation therapy, image-guided radiation therapy, volumetric-modulated arch therapy and others have emerged as background for changing paradigms. Meanwhile, moderate and ultra-hypofractionation have been the subject of studies in recent years. Some moderate hypofractionation data from randomized controlled trials are ready to use, though other non-inferiority data are still lacking. The data on ultra-hypofractionation are still very new and require further evaluation to determine its long-term safety and efficacy.

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy for head and neck cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) provides the possibility of dose-escalation with better normal tissue sparing. This study was performed to assess whether IMRT can improve clinical outcomes when compared with two-dimensional (2D-RT) or three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) in patients with head and neck cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Only prospective phase III randomized trials comparing IMRT with 2D-RT or 3D-CRT were eligible. Combined surgery and/or chemotherapy were allowed. Two authors independently selected and assessed the studies regarding eligibility criteria and risk of bias. RESULTS: Five studies were selected. A total of 871 patients were randomly assigned for 2D-RT or 3D-CRT (437), versus IMRT (434). Most patients presented with nasopharyngeal cancers (82%), and stages III/IV (62.1%). Three studies were classified as having unclear risk and two as high risk of bias. A significant overall benefit in favor of IMRT was found (hazard ratio - HR=0.76; 95% CI: 0.66, 0.87; p<0.0001) regarding xerostomia scores grade 2-4, with similar loco-regional control and overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: IMRT reduces the incidence of grade 2-4 xerostomia in patients with head and neck cancers without compromising loco-regional control and overall survival.