Radiation dermatitis: implicated factors, clinical aspects, possible prevention, and medical care.

The increasing incidence of cancer is due to many factors. Among them quite significant is considered the rising proportion of older people in the population and the modern methods of early diagnosis. Radiotherapy (RT), along with surgery and chemotherapy, is a major therapeutic modality in the management of cancer. In the context of current treatment methods and practice, approximately half of the patients with cancer will receive RT at some stage of their illness. RT can lead to cure some kinds of cancer but it can also be delivered for palliation. Unfortunately, skin damage is a complication affecting by and large all patients receiving external beam RT. In order to minimize the risk of this damage it would be helpful to know the complex underlying molecular mechanisms and evaluate the related clinical symptoms, not only for medical but also for psychological reasons related to the patient. The purpose of this article was to review the current approaches to this particular clinical condition, in order to realize an effective patient-oriented clinical practice and keep this radiation-induced complication as low as possible.

Leucovorin and fluorouracil vs levamisole and fluorouracil as adjuvant chemotherapy in rectal cancer.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of 6-month therapy with leucovorin (LV) + 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) vs 12 months of therapy with levamisole (LVZ) + 5-FU, as adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with completely resected Dukes' stage B2 or C rectal cancer. One hundred and fifty patients with surgically resected rectal carcinoma, were enrolled in the present study; Dukes' stage B2 (n=70) or C (n=80), were randomly assigned to chemotherapy with 5-FU + LV x 6 months or 5-FU + LVZ x 12 months. Patient characteristics were equally balanced between the examined groups. Adjuvant CT consisted of LV 20 mg/m(2) intravenously (i.v.) plus 5-FU 450 mg/m(2) i.v., on days 1-5 every 4 weeks for 6 cycles or 5-FU 450 mg/m(2) i.v. every week plus LVZ 50 mg t.i.d x 3 days for 1 year. All patients received radiotherapy with a three-field technique to a total dose of 45 Gy, over 5 weeks. After a median follow-up of 7.4 years there were no significant differences between the two treatment groups with respect to the recurrence rates (P=0.821). Moreover, there was no difference in disease-free survival for patients stage Dukes' B2 (log-rank p=0.73); median for LV group 90 (8-131) months, and for LVZ group 86.5 (3-129) months. No difference was noted in disease-free survival for patients stage Dukes' C (log-rank p=0.73); median for LV group 60 (17-128) months, and for LVZ group 64 (2-123) months. There was no difference in overall survival for patients stage Dukes' B2 (log-rank p=0.75); median for LV group 90 (22-131) months, and for LVZ group 86 (10-129) months. For stage Dukes' C (log-rank p=0.73); median for LV group 67 (17-128) months, and for LVZ group 64 (5-123) months. Toxicities were as follows in the 5-FU + LVZ vs 5-FU + LV group; myelosuppression (leucopenia grade 3, 12% vs 4%, p<0.04), diarrhea (grade 0, 60% vs 76%, p<0.02), and liver toxicity (increase of transaminases >3-fold, 12 patients vs 2, p<0.03), were more frequent in LVZ group. None of the patients stopped chemotherapy because of the toxicity, and there were no toxicity-related deaths. In conclusion, adjuvant chemotherapy in RC with LV + 5-FU for 6 months is equally effective and less toxic than LVZ + 5-FU for 12 months.

Phase II randomized trial of temozolomide and concurrent radiotherapy in patients with brain metastases.

PURPOSE: To determine the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of concurrent temozolomide and radiotherapy in patients with previously untreated brain metastases. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty-two patients with brain metastases from solid tumors were randomized to oral temozolomide (75 mg/m(2)/d) concurrent with 40-Gy fractionated conventional external-beam radiotherapy (2 Gy, 5 d/wk) for 4 weeks versus 40-Gy radiotherapy alone. The group receiving temozolomide and radiotherapy continued temozolomide therapy (200 mg/m(2)/d) for 5 days every 28 days for an additional six cycles. The primary end points were radiologic response and neurologic symptom evaluation. RESULTS: The objective response rate was significantly (P =.017) improved in patients receiving temozolomide and radiotherapy versus radiotherapy alone. Among 24 patients assessable for response in the temozolomide group, 23 (96%) of 24 responded, including nine (38%) patients with a complete response and 14 (58%) patients with a partial response. With radiotherapy alone, 14 (67%) of 21 assessable patients responded, including seven (33%) complete responses and seven (33%) partial responses. There was marked neurologic improvement in the group receiving temozolomide, and the proportion of patients requiring corticosteroids 2 months after treatment was lower in the temozolomide group compared with radiotherapy alone (67% v 91%, respectively). Daily temozolomide concurrent with radiotherapy was generally well tolerated; however, grade >or= 2 nausea (48% v 13%, P =.13) and vomiting (32% v 0%, P =.004) were significantly increased in the temozolomide group. Hematologic toxicity was predictable and reversible. CONCLUSION: Temozolomide is safe, and a significant improvement in response rate was observed when administered in combination with radiotherapy in patients with previously untreated brain metastases. A larger randomized trial is warranted to verify these results.