Radiotherapy for Head and Neck Cancer: Evaluation of Triggered Adaptive Replanning in Routine Practice.

PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVE: A proportion of patients receiving radiotherapy for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) require ad hoc treatment re-planning. The aim of this retrospective study is to analyze the patients who required ad hoc re-planning and to identify factors, which may predict need for re-planning. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A single center evaluation of all patients receiving radical or adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy (CRT) for HNSCC between January and December 2016 was undertaken. Patients who underwent ad hoc re-planning during the treatment were identified in electronic records. Reasons for re-planning were categorized as: weight loss, tumor shrinkage, changes in patient position and immobilization-related factors. Potential trigger factors for adaptive radiotherapy such as patient characteristics, primary tumor site, stage, concomitant chemotherapy, weight loss ratios, radical/adjuvant treatment, and nutritional interventions were investigated. RESULTS: 31/290 (10.6%) HNSCC patients who underwent radical/adjuvant radiotherapy required re-planning. The adaptive radiotherapy (ART) was performed at a mean fraction of 15. The most common documented reasons for re-planning were tumor shrinkage (35.5%) and weight loss (35.5%). Among the patient/tumor/treatment factors, nasopharyngeal primary site (p = 0.013) and use of concurrent chemotherapy with radiotherapy (p = 0.034) were found to be significantly correlated with the need for re-planning. CONCLUSION: Effective on-treatment verification schedules and close follow up of patients especially with NPC primary and/or treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy are crucial to identify patients requiring ART. We suggest an individualized triggered approach to ART rather than scheduled strategies as it is likely to be more feasible in terms of utilization of workload and resources.

Impact of choice of feeding tubes on long-term swallow function following chemoradiotherapy for oropharyngeal carcinoma.

Background: Prior reports have raised concerns that a prophylactic gastrostomy may be detrimental to long-term swallow function. This study evaluates patient-reported swallow function following chemoradiotherapy for oropharyngeal carcinoma in relation to the use of a prophylactic gastrostomy or nasogastric (NG) tube as required. Material and methods: The MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI) was posted to 204 disease-free patients at least 2 years following chemoradiotherapy for oropharyngeal carcinoma between 2010 and 2014. Results: Overall, 181/204 (89%) patients returned questionnaire at a median of 34 months post-treatment. 97/181 (54%) and 84/181 (46%) were managed with an approach of a prophylactic gastrostomy or NG tube as required, respectively. A prophylactic gastrostomy was associated with higher rates of enteral feeding (92% vs. 58%, p < .001), lower median percentage weight loss (7.0% vs. 9.4%, p < .001), increased duration of enteral feed (median 3.3 vs. 1.1 months, p < .001). There was no significant difference in patient-reported swallow function measured by MDADI summary scores and subscales for patients managed with an approach of prophylactic gastrostomy or NG as required. Duration of enteral feed correlated negatively with composite MDADI scores. A subgroup of 116/181 (64%) patients were documented as having been offered a choice of enteral feeding approach and therefore can be considered to represent clinical equipoise; there were no significant differences in MDADI scores according to route. Conclusions: Despite concern regarding the use of a prophylactic gastrostomy in prior studies, the approaches of using a prophylactic gastrostomy or an NG tube as required to support patients during/after chemoradiotherapy for oropharyngeal carcinoma were associated with similar long-term swallow outcomes.

Long term patient reported swallowing function following chemoradiotherapy for oropharyngeal carcinoma.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Limited data are available to inform on long term swallowing outcomes following concurrent chemoradiotherapy for oropharyngeal carcinoma. The aims of this study are to determine long term patient-reported swallowing outcomes across two large UK centres in routine clinical practice and identify associated factors. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All patients treated for oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma with concurrent chemoradiotherapy, and irradiation of the bilateral neck, between 2011 and 2013 were identified. Those requiring therapeutic enteral feeding prior to treatment, or having subsequent disease relapse, were excluded from the study. Patients were sent postal invitations to complete the MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI), at least two years following completion of treatment. RESULTS: Completed MDADI were received from 201/242 eligible patients (83%) at a median of 3.4 years (range 2-5) post treatment. Median composite MDADI score was 68.4. 64 (32%) had composite MDADI <60 classed as 'poor' function, 76 (38%) scores ≥60-<80 classed as adequate function, and 61 (31%) had scores ≥80 classed as optimal function. Patients with normal and abnormal pre-treatment diet had median composite MDADI scores of 70.5 versus 47.4 respectively. Patients who did not require enteral feeding during treatment and those who did had median composite MDADI scores of 76.3 versus 65.3 respectively. On multivariate analysis poorer performance status, abnormal pre-treatment diet, and use of enteral feeding during radiotherapy were all significantly associated with lower composite, global and subscale MDADI scores. CONCLUSIONS: Patient reported swallowing dysfunction remains common in the long term post-chemoradiotherapy. Impaired pre-treatment diet and use of enteral feeding during treatment are key factors associated with poorer swallowing outcomes.

Lung stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR): dosimetric considerations for chest wall toxicity.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate chest wall pain in patients with peripheral early stage lung cancer treated with stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR), and to identify factors predictive of Common Terminology Criteria of Adverse Events Grade 2 + chest wall pain. METHODS: Patients who received 55 Gy in five fractions were included. A chest wall structure was retrospectively defined on planning scans, and chest wall dosimetry and tumour-related factors recorded. Logistic regression was performed to identify factors predictive of ≥Grade 2 chest wall pain. RESULTS: 182 patients and 187 tumours were included. There were 20 (10.9%) episodes of ≥Grade 2 chest wall pain. Multivariate logistic regression demonstrated that the maximum dose received by 1 cm(3) of chest wall (Dmax1 cm(3)) and tumour size were significant predictors of ≥Grade 2 chest wall pain [Dmax1 cm(3) odds ratio : 1.104, 95% confidence interval : 1.012-1.204, p = 0.025; tumour size (mm) odds ratio : 1.080, 95% confidence interval : 1.026-1.136, p = 0.003]. This model was an adequate fit to the data (Hosmer and Lemeshow test non-significant) and a fair discriminator for chest wall pain (area under receiver-operating characteristic curve: 0.74). Using the multivariate logistic regression model, parameters for Dmax1 cm(3) are provided, which predict <10% and <20% risks of ≥Grade 2 chest wall pain for different tumour sizes. CONCLUSION: Grade 2+ chest wall pain is an uncommon side effect of lung SABR. Larger tumour size and increasing Dmax1 cm(3) are significant predictors of ≥Grade 2 chest wall pain. When planning lung SABR, it is prudent to try to avoid hot volumes in the chest wall, particularly for larger tumours. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This article demonstrates that Grade 2 or greater chest wall pain following lung SABR is more common when the tumour is larger in size and the Dmax1 cm(3) of the chest wall is higher. When planning lung SABR, the risk of chest wall pain may be reduced if maximum doses are minimized, particularly for larger tumours.

Multimodality imaging with CT, MR and FDG-PET for radiotherapy target volume delineation in oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to quantify the variation in oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma gross tumour volume (GTV) delineation between CT, MR and FDG PET-CT imaging. METHODS: A prospective, single centre, pilot study was undertaken where 11 patients with locally advanced oropharyngeal cancers (2 tonsil, 9 base of tongue primaries) underwent pre-treatment, contrast enhanced, FDG PET-CT and MR imaging, all performed in a radiotherapy treatment mask. CT, MR and CT-MR GTVs were contoured by 5 clinicians (2 radiologists and 3 radiation oncologists). A semi-automated segmentation algorithm was used to contour PET GTVs. Volume and positional analyses were undertaken, accounting for inter-observer variation, using linear mixed effects models and contour comparison metrics respectively. RESULTS: Significant differences in mean GTV volume were found between CT (11.9 cm(3)) and CT-MR (14.1 cm(3)), p < 0.006, CT-MR and PET (9.5 cm(3)), p < 0.0009, and MR (12.7 cm(3)) and PET, p < 0.016. Substantial differences in GTV position were found between all modalities with the exception of CT-MR and MR GTVs. A mean of 64 %, 74 % and 77 % of the PET GTVs were included within the CT, MR and CT-MR GTVs respectively. A mean of 57 % of the MR GTVs were included within the CT GTV; conversely a mean of 63 % of the CT GTVs were included within the MR GTV. CT inter-observer variability was found to be significantly higher in terms of position and/or volume than both MR and CT-MR (p < 0.05). Significant differences in GTV volume were found between GTV volumes delineated by radiologists (9.7 cm(3)) and oncologists (14.6 cm(3)) for all modalities (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The use of different imaging modalities produced significantly different GTVs, with no single imaging technique encompassing all potential GTV regions. The use of MR reduced inter-observer variability. These data suggest delineation based on multimodality imaging has the potential to improve accuracy of GTV definition. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry: ISRCTN34165059 . Registered 2nd February 2015.