Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 45
Filter
1.
Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd ; 83(8): 919-962, 2023 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37588260

ABSTRACT

Summary The S3-guideline on endometrial cancer, first published in April 2018, was reviewed in its entirety between April 2020 and January 2022 and updated. The review was carried out at the request of German Cancer Aid as part of the Oncology Guidelines Program and the lead coordinators were the German Society for Gynecology and Obstetrics (DGGG), the Gynecology Oncology Working Group (AGO) of the German Cancer Society (DKG) and the German Cancer Aid (DKH). The guideline update was based on a systematic search and assessment of the literature published between 2016 and 2020. All statements, recommendations and background texts were reviewed and either confirmed or amended. New statements and recommendations were included where necessary. Aim The use of evidence-based risk-adapted therapies to treat women with endometrial cancer of low risk prevents unnecessarily radical surgery and avoids non-beneficial adjuvant radiation therapy and/or chemotherapy. For women with endometrial cancer and a high risk of recurrence, the guideline defines the optimum level of radical surgery and indicates whether chemotherapy and/or adjuvant radiation therapy is necessary. This should improve the survival rates and quality of life of these patients. The S3-guideline on endometrial cancer and the quality indicators based on the guideline aim to provide the basis for the work of certified gynecological cancer centers. Methods The guideline was first compiled in 2018 in accordance with the requirements for S3-level guidelines and was updated in 2022. The update included an adaptation of the source guidelines identified using the German Instrument for Methodological Guideline Appraisal (DELBI). The update also used evidence reviews which were created based on selected literature obtained from systematic searches in selected literature databases using the PICO process. The Clinical Guidelines Service Group was tasked with carrying out a systematic search and assessment of the literature. Their results were used by interdisciplinary working groups as a basis for developing suggestions for recommendations and statements which were then modified during structured online consensus conferences and/or additionally amended online using the DELPHI process to achieve a consensus. Recommendations Part 1 of this short version of the guideline provides recommendations on epidemiology, screening, diagnosis, and hereditary factors. The epidemiology of endometrial cancer and the risk factors for developing endometrial cancer are presented. The options for screening and the methods used to diagnose endometrial cancer are outlined. Recommendations are given for the prevention, diagnosis, and therapy of hereditary forms of endometrial cancer. The use of geriatric assessment is considered and existing structures of care are presented.

3.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys ; 116(3): 503-520, 2023 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36596346

ABSTRACT

Current risk-stratification systems for prostate cancer (PCa) do not sufficiently reflect the disease heterogeneity. Genomic classifiers (GC) enable improved risk stratification after surgery, but less data exist for patients treated with definitive radiation therapy (RT) or RT in oligo-/metastatic disease stages. To guide future perspectives of GCs for RT, we conducted (1) a systematic review on the evidence of GCs for patients treated with RT and (2) a survey of experts using the Delphi method, addressing the role of GCs in personalized treatments to identify relevant fields of future clinical and translational research. We performed a systematic review and screened ongoing clinical trials on ClinicalTrials.gov. Based on these results, a multidisciplinary international team of experts received an adapted Delphi method survey. Thirty-one and 30 experts answered round 1 and round 2, respectively. Questions with ≥75% agreement were considered relevant and included in the qualitative synthesis. Evidence for GCs as predictive biomarkers is mainly available to the postoperative RT setting. Validation of GCs as prognostic markers in the definitive RT setting is emerging. Experts used GCs in patients with PCa with extensive metastases (30%), in postoperative settings (27%), and in newly diagnosed PCa (23%). Forty-seven percent of experts do not currently use GCs in clinical practice. Expert consensus demonstrates that GCs are promising tools to improve risk-stratification in primary and oligo-/metastatic patients in addition to existing classifications. Experts were convinced that GCs might guide treatment decisions in terms of RT-field definition and intensification/deintensification in various disease stages. This work confirms the value of GCs and the promising evidence of GC utility in the setting of RT. Additional studies of GCs as prognostic biomarkers are anticipated and form the basis for future studies addressing predictive capabilities of GCs to optimize RT and systemic therapy. The expert consensus points out future directions for GC research in the management of PCa.


Subject(s)
Prostatic Neoplasms , Male , Humans , Consensus , Prostatic Neoplasms/genetics , Prostatic Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Prostatic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Genomics
6.
Strahlenther Onkol ; 198(8): 683-689, 2022 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35704054

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The DEGRO Expert Commission on Prostate Cancer has revised the indication for radiation therapy of the primary prostate tumor in patients with synchronous distant metastases with low metastatic burden. METHODS: The current literature in the PubMed database was reviewed regarding randomized evidence on radiotherapy of the primary prostate tumor with synchronous low metastatic burden. RESULTS: In total, two randomized trials were identified. The larger study, the STAMPEDE trial, demonstrated an absolute survival benefit of 8% after 3 years for patients with low metastatic burden treated with standard of care (SOC) and additional radiotherapy (RT) (EQD2 ≤ 72 Gy) of the primary tumor. Differences in the smaller Horrad trial were not statistically significant, although risk reduction in the subgroup (< 5 bone metastases) was equal to STAMPEDE. The STOPCAP meta-analysis of both trials demonstrated the benefit of local radiotherapy for up to 4 bone lesions and an additional subanalysis of STAMPEDE also substantiated this finding in cases with M1a-only metastases. CONCLUSION: Therefore, due to the survival benefit after 3 years, current practice is changing. New palliative SOC is radiotherapy of the primary tumor in synchronously metastasized prostate cancer with low metastatic burden (defined as ≤ 4 bone metastases, with or without distant nodes) or in case of distant nodes only detected by conventional imaging.


Subject(s)
Bone Neoplasms , Prostatic Neoplasms , Bone Neoplasms/secondary , Hormones , Humans , Male , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology
7.
Urol Int ; 106(5): 431-439, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35144260

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Focal therapy (FT) is an option to treat localized prostate cancer (PCa) and preserve healthy prostate tissue in order to reduce known side effects from primary whole-gland treatment. The available FT modalities are manifold. Until now, national and international PCa guidelines have been cautious to propose recommendations regarding FT treatment since data from prospective controlled trials are lacking for most FT modalities. Moreover, none of the international guidelines provides a separate section on FT. In this purpose, we provide a synopsis of the consensus-based German S3 guidelines for a possible international use. SUMMARY: The recently published update of the German S3 guidelines, an evidence- and consensus-based guideline, provides a section on FT with recommendations for diagnostic work-up, indications, modalities, and follow-up. This section consists of 12 statements and recommendations for FT in the treatment of localized PCa. KEY MESSAGE: The German S3 guidelines on PCa are the first to incorporate recommendations for FT based on evidence and expert consensus including indication criteria for FT, pretreatment, and follow-up diagnostic pathways as well as an extended overview of FT techniques and the current supportive evidence.


Subject(s)
Prostatic Neoplasms , Cryotherapy , Humans , Male , Prospective Studies , Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnosis , Prostatic Neoplasms/therapy
9.
Strahlenther Onkol ; 197(11): 993-1000, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34463814

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Various randomized phase III clinical trials have compared moderately hypofractionated to normofractionated radiotherapy (RT). These modalities showed similar effectiveness without major differences in toxicity. This project was conducted by the Prostate Cancer Expert Panel of the German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO) and the Working Party on Radiation Oncology of the German Cancer Society. We aimed to investigate expert opinions on the use of moderately hypofractionated RT as a definitive treatment for localized prostate cancer in German-speaking countries. METHODS: A 25-item, web-based questionnaire on moderate-hypofractionation RT was prepared by an internal committee. The experts of the DEGRO were asked to complete the questionnaire. RESULTS: Fourteen active members of DEGRO completed the questionnaire. The questions described indications for selecting patients eligible to receive moderate hypofractionation based on clinical and pathological factors such as age, urinary symptoms, and risk-group. The questions also collected information on the technical aspects of selection criteria, including the definition of a clinical target volume, the use of imaging, protocols for bladder and rectal filling, the choice of a fractionation schedule, and the use of image guidance. Moreover, the questionnaire collected information on post-treatment surveillance after applying moderately hypofractionated RT. CONCLUSION: Although opinions varied on the use of moderate-hypofractionation RT, the current survey reflected broad agreement on the notion that moderately hypofractionated RT could be considered a standard treatment for localized prostate cancer in German-speaking countries.


Subject(s)
Prostatic Neoplasms , Radiation Oncology , Dose Fractionation, Radiation , Humans , Male , Prostatic Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Radiation Dose Hypofractionation , Surveys and Questionnaires
11.
Strahlenther Onkol ; 197(7): 575-580, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33914101

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The current article encompasses a literature review and recommendations for radiotherapy in nodal oligorecurrent prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature review focused on studies comparing metastasis-directed stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) vs. external elective nodal radiotherapy (ENRT) and studies analyzing recurrence patterns after local nodal treatment was performed. The DEGRO Prostate Cancer Expert Panel discussed the results and developed treatment recommendations. RESULTS: Metastasis-directed radiotherapy results in high local control (often > 90% within a follow-up of 1-2 years) and can be used to improve progression-free survival or defer androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) according to prospective randomized phase II data. Distant progression after involved-node SABR only occurs within a few months in the majority of patients. ENRT improves metastases-free survival rates with increased toxicity in comparison to SABR according to retrospective comparative studies. The majority of nodal recurrences after initial local treatment of pelvic nodal metastasis are detected within the true pelvis and common iliac vessels. CONCLUSION: ENRT with or without a boost should be preferred to SABR in pelvic nodal recurrences. In oligometastatic prostate cancer with distant (extrapelvic) nodal recurrences, SABR alone can be performed in selected cases. Application of additional systemic treatments should be based on current guidelines, with ADT as first-line treatment for hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. Only in carefully selected patients can radiotherapy be initially used without additional ADT outside of the current standard recommendations. Results of (randomized) prospective studies are needed for definitive recommendations.


Subject(s)
Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/radiotherapy , Prostatic Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Humans , Lymph Nodes/pathology , Lymph Nodes/radiation effects , Lymphatic Metastasis/pathology , Lymphatic Metastasis/radiotherapy , Male , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/pathology , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology , Radiosurgery
13.
Strahlenther Onkol ; 197(5): 405-415, 2021 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33725133

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Integrating moderate hypofractionation to the macroscopic tumor with elective nodal irradiation while sparing the organs at risk (OAR) in chemoradiotherapy of locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. METHODS: From 2010-2018, treatment, patient and tumor characteristics of 138 patients from two radiation therapy centers were assessed. Chemoradiotherapy by intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) to the primary tumor and macroscopic lymph node metastases was used. RESULTS: A total of 124 (90%) patients received concurrent chemotherapy. 106 (76%) patients had UICC (Union for International Cancer Control) stage ≥IIIB and 21 (15%) patients had an oligometastatic disease (UICC stage IV). Median SIB and elective total dose was 61.6 and 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions, respectively. Furthermore, 64 patients (46%) had an additional sequential boost to the primary tumor after the SIB-IMRT main series: median 6.6 Gy in median 3 fractions. The median cumulative mean lung dose was 15.6 Gy (range 6.2-29.5 Gy). Median follow-up and radiological follow-up for all patients was 18.0 months (range 0.6-86.9) and 16.0 months (range 0.2-86.9), respectively. Actuarial local control rates at 1, 2 and 3 years were 80.4, 68.4 and 57.8%. Median overall survival and progression-free survival was 30.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 23.5-36.4) and 12.1 months (95% CI 8.2-16.0), respectively. Treatment-related toxicity was moderate. Radiation-induced pneumonitis grade 2 and grade 3 occurred in 13 (9.8%) and 3 (2.3%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: Chemoradiotherapy using SIB-IMRT showed promising local tumor control rates and acceptable toxicity in patients with locally advanced and in part oligometastatic lung cancer. The SIB concept, resulting in a relatively low mean lung dose, was associated with low numbers of clinically relevant pneumonitis. The overall survival appears promising in the presence of a majority of patients with UICC stage ≥IIIB disease.


Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/therapy , Chemoradiotherapy/methods , Lung Neoplasms/therapy , Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated/methods , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Carboplatin/administration & dosage , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/secondary , Cisplatin/administration & dosage , Cone-Beam Computed Tomography , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Four-Dimensional Computed Tomography , Hematologic Diseases/etiology , Humans , Lung Neoplasms/pathology , Lung Neoplasms/secondary , Lymphatic Irradiation , Lymphatic Metastasis , Male , Middle Aged , Paclitaxel/administration & dosage , Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography , Progression-Free Survival , Radiation Injuries/etiology , Radiation Pneumonitis/etiology , Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted , Radiotherapy, Image-Guided , Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated/adverse effects , Retrospective Studies , Tumor Burden , Vinorelbine/administration & dosage
14.
Strahlenther Onkol ; 197(2): 89-96, 2021 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33301049

ABSTRACT

Due to its low fractionation sensitivity, also known as "alpha/beta ratio," in relation to its surrounding organs at risk, prostate cancer is predestined for hypofractionated radiation schedules assuming an increased therapeutic ratio compared to normofractionated regimens. While moderate hypofractionation (2.2-4 Gy) has been proven to be non-inferior to normal fractionation in several large randomized trials for localized prostate cancer, level I evidence for ultrahypofractionation (>4 Gy) was lacking until recently. An accumulating body of non-randomized evidence has recently been strengthened by the publication of two randomized studies comparing ultrahypofractionation with a normofractionated schedule, i.e., the Scandinavian HYPO-RT trial by Widmark et al. and the first toxicity results of the PACE­B trial. In this review, we aim to give a brief overview of the current evidence of ultrahypofractionation, make an overall assessment of the level of evidence, and provide recommendations and requirements that should be followed before introducing ultrahypofractionation into routine clinical use.


Subject(s)
Prostatic Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Radiation Dose Hypofractionation , Clinical Trials as Topic , Humans , Male , Prostate/radiation effects , Treatment Outcome
17.
Strahlenther Onkol ; 196(7): 589-597, 2020 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32166452

ABSTRACT

AIM: To provide an overview on the available treatments to prevent and reduce gynecomastia and/or breast pain caused by antiandrogen therapy for prostate cancer. METHODS: The German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO) expert panel summarized available evidence published and assessed the validity of the information on efficacy and treatment-related toxicity. RESULTS: Eight randomized controlled trials and one meta-analysis were identified. Two randomized trials demonstrated that prophylactic radiation therapy (RT) using 1â€¯× 10 Gy or 2â€¯× 6 Gy significantly reduced the rate of gynecomastia but not breast pain, as compared to observation. A randomized dose-finding trial identified the daily dose of 20 mg tamoxifen (TMX) as the most effective prophylactic dose and another randomized trial described that daily TMX use was superior to weekly use. Another randomized trial showed that prophylactic daily TMX is more effective than TMX given at the onset of gynecomastia. Two other randomized trials described that TMX was clearly superior to anastrozole in reducing the risk for gynecomastia and/or breast pain. One comparative randomized trial between prophylactic RT using 1â€¯× 12 Gy and TMX concluded that prophylactic TMX is more effective compared to prophylactic RT and furthermore that TMX appears to be more effective to treat gynecomastia and/or breast pain when symptoms are already present. A meta-analysis confirmed that both prophylactic RT and TMX can reduce the risk of gynecomastia and/or breast pain with TMX being more effective; however, the rate of side effects after TMX including dizziness and hot flushes might be higher than after RT and must be taken into account. Less is known regarding the comparative effectiveness of different radiation fractionation schedules and more modern RT techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic RT as well as daily TMX can significantly reduce the incidence of gynecomastia and/or breast pain. TMX appears to be an effective alternative to RT also as a therapeutic treatment in the presence of gynecomastia but its side effects and off-label use must be considered.


Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma/drug therapy , Androgen Antagonists/adverse effects , Androgens , Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal/adverse effects , Estrogen Receptor Modulators/therapeutic use , Gynecomastia/chemically induced , Mastodynia/chemically induced , Neoplasms, Hormone-Dependent/drug therapy , Prostatic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Tamoxifen/therapeutic use , Anastrozole/therapeutic use , Androgen Antagonists/therapeutic use , Anilides/adverse effects , Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal/therapeutic use , Dizziness/chemically induced , Dose Fractionation, Radiation , Drug Administration Schedule , Estrogen Receptor Modulators/administration & dosage , Estrogen Receptor Modulators/adverse effects , Flushing/chemically induced , Gynecomastia/drug therapy , Gynecomastia/prevention & control , Gynecomastia/radiotherapy , Humans , Male , Mastodynia/drug therapy , Mastodynia/prevention & control , Mastodynia/radiotherapy , Meta-Analysis as Topic , Nitriles/adverse effects , Off-Label Use , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Tamoxifen/administration & dosage , Tamoxifen/adverse effects , Tosyl Compounds/adverse effects
18.
Strahlenther Onkol ; 196(2): 109-116, 2020 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31784804

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This article aims to provide an overview of the role of combined radiation and androgen deprivation (ADT) therapy in patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The current German, European, and NCCN (National Comprehensive Cancer Network) guidelines as well as relevant literature in the PubMed database which provide information on sub-classification within the intermediate-risk group and the use of ADT in terms of oncological outcome were reviewed. RESULTS: Different recommendations for risk-group assessment of patients with localized prostate cancer are available. Subdivision of intermediate risk into a favorable and an unfavorable group seems to be justified to allow for a more individualized therapy in a quite heterogenous group of patients. So far, multiple randomized trials have shown a benefit when radiation therapy (RT) is combined with ADT. The use of dose-escalated RT without ADT also appears to be an adequate therapy associated with a very low rate of cancer-specific deaths. Therefore, taking into account the increased rate of toxicity associated with ADT, dose-escalated RT alone might be justified, especially in favorable intermediate-risk patients. CONCLUSION: Dose-escalated RT alone appears to be an appropriate treatment in favorable intermediate-risk patients. Addition of short course ADT (4-6 months) might improve outcomes in unfavorable intermediate-risk patients.


Subject(s)
Androgen Antagonists/therapeutic use , Chemoradiotherapy , Prostatic Neoplasms/therapy , Humans , Male , Precision Medicine , Radiotherapy Dosage , Risk Assessment
20.
Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd ; 78(11): 1089-1109, 2018 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30581199

ABSTRACT

Summary The first German interdisciplinary S3-guideline on the diagnosis, therapy and follow-up of patients with endometrial cancer was published in April 2018. Funded by German Cancer Aid as part of an Oncology Guidelines Program, the lead coordinators of the guideline were the German Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics (DGGG) and the Gynecological Oncology Working Group (AGO) of the German Cancer Society (DKG). Purpose Using evidence-based, risk-adapted therapy to treat low-risk women with endometrial cancer avoids unnecessarily radical surgery and non-useful adjuvant radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy. This can significantly reduce therapy-induced morbidity and improve the patient's quality of life as well as avoiding unnecessary costs. For women with endometrial cancer and a high risk of recurrence, the guideline defines the optimal extent of surgical radicality together with the appropriate chemotherapy and/or adjuvant radiotherapy if required. An evidence-based optimal use of different therapeutic modalities should improve the survival rates and quality of life of these patients. This S3-guideline on endometrial cancer is intended as a basis for certified gynecological cancer centers. The aim is that the quality indicators established in this guideline will be incorporated in the certification processes of these centers. Methods The guideline was compiled in accordance with the requirements for S3-level guidelines. This includes, in the first instance, the adaptation of source guidelines selected using the DELBI instrument for appraising guidelines. Other consulted sources included reviews of evidence, which were compiled from literature selected during systematic searches of literature databases using the PICO scheme. In addition, an external biostatistics institute was commissioned to carry out a systematic search and assessment of the literature for one part of the guideline. Identified materials were used by the interdisciplinary working groups to develop suggestions for Recommendations and Statements, which were then subsequently modified during structured consensus conferences and/or additionally amended online using the DELPHI method, with consent between members achieved online. The guideline report is freely available online. Recommendations Part 2 of this short version of the guideline presents recommendations for the therapy of endometrial cancer including precancers and early endometrial cancer as well as recommendations on palliative medicine, psycho-oncology, rehabilitation, patient information and healthcare facilities to treat endometrial cancer. The management of precancers of early endometrial precancerous conditions including fertility-preserving strategies is presented. The concept used for surgical primary therapy of endometrial cancer is described. Radiotherapy and adjuvant medical therapy to treat endometrial cancer and uterine carcinosarcomas are described. Recommendations are given for the follow-up care of endometrial cancer, recurrence and metastasis. Palliative medicine, psycho-oncology including psychosocial care, and patient information and rehabilitation are presented. Finally, the care algorithm and quality assurance steps for the diagnosis, therapy and follow-up of patients with endometrial cancer are outlined.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...