Salvage Pulmonary Operations Following Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Small Primary and Metastatic Lung Tumors: Evaluation of the Operative Procedures.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy is an alternative treatment option for small-sized, primary lung cancers and pulmonary metastatic diseases. In the case of local relapse after stereotactic body radiotherapy, salvage pulmonary resection is considered cautiously. However, no study has described the difficulty of the salvage operations. This study aimed to assess the difficulty associated with salvage operative procedures. Eight patients who developed local relapse after stereotactic body radiotherapy and had undergone salvage pulmonary operations were enrolled in this study (stereotactic body radiotherapy group). Additionally, 439 patients who underwent video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy without previous stereotactic body radiotherapy were enrolled as the standard operative control group (non-stereotactic body radiotherapy group). In the stereotactic body radiotherapy group, 1 of the 8 patients had undergone lobectomy with composite resection of the third and fourth ribs. Of the 8 patients, 6 had undergone video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy and 1 had been inoperable because of rapid tumor progression. The operation time and the incision length of the utility port were apt to be longer in the stereotactic body radiotherapy group than in the non-stereotactic body radiotherapy group. On the contrary, the duration of drain placement and the length of hospital stay after the operation were not different. Thus, the salvage pulmonary operations were performed in the usual video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy approach, but slightly complicated than the standard video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy. Although to decide the indication of salvage operation might be difficult, it could be a feasible treatment option in local relapse after stereotactic body radiotherapy.

[Contribution to survival rate improvement].

For patients with locally advanced HNSCC, where the outcome with conventional radiotherapy is poor, meta-analysis and collective data showed a high level of evidence of loco-regional control improvement by altered fractionated radiotherapy, chemo-radiotherapy with a concomitant approach. For these patients, much evidence indicates overall survival may be improved by concomitant chemo-radiotherapy or hyper-fractionated radiotherapy delivered with increased total dose. There was a significant survival benefit with altered fractionated radiotherapy, corresponding to an absolute benefit of 3.4% at 5 years. The benefit was significantly higher with hyper-fractionated radiotherapy (8% at 5 years)than with accelerated radiotherapy (2% with accelerated fractionation without total dose reduction and 1.7% with total dose reduction at 5 years). The effect was greater for the primary tumor than for nodal disease. The effect was also more pronounced in younger patients and in those with good performance status. Hyper-fractionation seemed to yield a more consistent advantage for survival than accelerated fractionated radiotherapy. However, accelerated radiotherapy might be associated with higher non-cancer-related death. Despite hundreds of clinical trials in patients with advanced disease, there is no absolute consensus about patient selection for altered fractionation regimens, type of chemo-radiotherapy association, and radiation of chemotherapy dose schedule. We have to evaluate whether the benefit of hyper-fractionated radiotherapy versus standard radiotherapy persists when combined with concomitant chemotherapy and the benefit of IMRT compared with altered fractionation.

Patterns of care study of breast-conserving therapy in Japan: comparison of the treatment process between 1995 1997 and 1999 2001 surveys.

BACKGROUND: The Japan Patterns of Care Study (JPCS) conducted two national surveys to identify changes associated with the treatment process of care for patients undergoing breast-conserving therapy (BCT). Between the two national surveys, the Japanese Breast Cancer Society published its treatment guideline for BCT. METHOD: The first survey collected data on 865 patients treated between 1995 and 1997 (JPCS-1), and the second on 746 patients treated between1999 and 2001 (JPCS-2) by extramural audits. RESULTS: There was a shift to an older age distribution in JPCS-2 compared with JPCS-1. In JPCS-2, the average patient age was 53.9 compared with 51.5 in JPCS-1 (P < 0.001). There was a reduction in the extent of breast surgery and the proportion of the patients who received quadrantectomy was 57.0% in JPCS-1 and 30.3% in JPCS-2 (P < 0.001). In JPCS-2, a cast or shell for immobilization was used at a significantly higher rate of 52.9% compared with 32.6% for JPCS-1 (P < 0.001). The rate of boost irradiation was increased in JPCS-2, especially for patients with a positive surgical margin; it was significantly increased to 83.5% in JPCS-2 compared with 53.9% in JPCS-1 (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The second survey revealed a rapid change in the trend of the treatment of BCT in Japan and represented high compliance of the treatment guideline for BCT published by the Japanese Breast Cancer Society (JBCS) in 1999.