Postoperative radiotherapy for adenocarcinoma of the ethmoid sinuses: treatment results for 47 patients.

PURPOSE: Ethmoid sinus cancer is a rare malignancy. Treatment results are mostly reported together with other sinonasal tumors, grouping a wide range of different histologies and treatment approaches. This study reports on the treatment outcome of 47 patients diagnosed with adenocarcinoma of the ethmoid sinuses and treated with surgery and high-dose postoperative radiation therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between September 1985 and October 2001, 51 patients with adenocarcinoma of the ethmoid sinuses were referred to the Ghent University Hospital. Four patients were treated with low-dose palliative radiation because of very extended inoperable disease or distant metastasis at the time of diagnosis. They were not included in this analysis. The other 47 patients, all staged as N0M0, were treated with surgery and postoperative high-dose radiation therapy. The median follow-up was 32 months. The T-stages were T1 for 2, T2 for 17, T3 for 11, and T4 for 17 patients. All 47 patients were staged as N0M0. RESULTS: The 3-year, 5-year, and 7-year overall survival are respectively 71%, 60%, and 38%. The 3-year and 5-year disease-free survival are respectively 62% and 36%. The 3-year and 5-year disease-free survival for T1-T2 stages are respectively 87% and 55%, for T3 stages 57% and 28%, and for T4 stages 41% and 25%. The locoregional tumor control was 70% and 59% at respectively 3 and 5 years. Patients presenting with intracranial tumor invasion at the time of diagnosis relapsed within 7 months after the end of radiotherapy. Radiation-induced severe dry eye syndrome and optic neuropathy was observed in respectively 7 and 2 of the 47 cases. CONCLUSION: Postoperative radiotherapy for adenocarcinoma of the ethmoid sinuses is associated with good local control rates. Crucial for a favorable prognosis is the absence of intracranial invasion. The rarity of these tumors makes it difficult to evaluate new therapeutic advances.

Intensity modulated radiation therapy for oropharyngeal and oral cavity tumors: clinical use and experience.

Background and purpose. Intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) offers an opportunity to generate dose distributions highly conformal to the target volume. Head and neck cancer patients, referred for radiotherapy, may be good candidates to benefit from IMRT. This paper discusses the clinical implementation of IMRT for oropharyngeal and oral cavity tumors, and reports the clinical results of the 14 patients treated with this technique at Ghent University Hospital (GUH). Patients and Methods. Between May 1999 and May 2001, 14 patients were treated with IMRT at GUH for oropharyngeal or oral cavity tumors. Two groups of patients can be distinguished. The first group consists of eight patients re-irradiated with IMRT for a locoregional relapse. The second group of six patients were treated with IMRT for a primary tumor. For the first group, IMRT was used to treat the relapse by generating a concave dose distribution, i.e. to combine a homogeneous target re-irradiation with a dose to the spinal cord as low as possible. For the second group, IMRT was applied in order to achieve a more homogeneous dose distribution inside the PTV and to preserve parotid gland function. Results. The majority of the patients of group 1 (6/8) relapsed in field within four months after the end of the re-irradiation, with a median overall survival of 7 months. For group 2, two patients died shortly after the end of the IMRT treatment, the other four patients are free of tumor relapse with a median follow-up of 5 months (1-13 months). The acute toxicity due to radiation was acceptable for both patient groups. Dysphagia and pain was more present in group 1. Regarding late complications for the group of re-irradiations (group 1), no myelitis, carotid rupture or cranial nerve palsy was observed. One patient of group 1 developed osteoradionecrosis of the mandible and feeding tube dependency was present for another patient. No fatal late complications were observed in this group. For the first two patients of group 2, sparing of the parotid function was not a treatment objective. For the other patients of group 2, the mean dose to the contralateral parotid gland ranged from 17 to 25 Gy, which resulted in a decrease of subjective symptoms of xerostomia compared to patients treated with conventional radiotherapy. Conclusions. The implementation of IMRT for oropharyngeal and oral cavity tumors results in a homogeneous target irradiation and allows to re-irradiate locoregional relapses with acceptable adverse effects. Sparing of the parotid gland by IMRT is feasible, although this may be significantly influenced by the delineation method of the elective lymph node regions.