Back to Search Start Over

Comparing simultaneous integrated boost vs sequential boost in anal cancer patients: results of a retrospective observational study

Authors :
Manuela Ceccarelli
Giuseppe Carlo Iorio
Massimiliano Mistrangelo
Francesca Arcadipane
Umberto Ricardi
Pierfrancesco Franco
G. Furfaro
Alessandro Passardi
Alexis Lepinoy
Berardino De Bari
Stefania Martini
Andrea Casadei Gardini
Martina Valgiusti
Gilles Créhange
Elisabetta Trino
Andrea Evangelista
Paola Cassoni
Oncologia Medica, Dipartimento di Scienze Cliniche e Biologiche Università di Torino
Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria San Luigi di Orbassano
Interactions hôte-greffon-tumeur, ingénierie cellulaire et génique - UFC (UMR INSERM 1098) (RIGHT)
Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM)-Université de Franche-Comté (UFC)
Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté [COMUE] (UBFC)-Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté [COMUE] (UBFC)-Etablissement français du sang [Bourgogne-Franche-Comté] (EFS [Bourgogne-Franche-Comté])
Service d'Oncologie Médicale [CHRU Besançon]
Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire de Besançon (CHRU Besançon)-Université de Franche-Comté (UFC)
Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté [COMUE] (UBFC)-Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté [COMUE] (UBFC)
Centre Paul Strauss de Lutte contre le Cancer (Strasbourg)
University of Torino and CPO-Piemonte
Università degli studi di Torino (UNITO)
Department of Pathology
Università degli studi di Torino (UNITO)-San Luigi Hospital
IRCCS Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori (Meldola)
Istituto Nazionale per la Ricerca sul Cancro, Genova
Immunologia
Department of Oncology [University of Turin]
University of Turin
Centre Régional de Lutte contre le cancer Georges-François Leclerc [Dijon] (UNICANCER/CRLCC-CGFL)
UNICANCER
Département de Radiation oncologie, CGFL
UNICANCER-UNICANCER
Franco, Pierfrancesco
De Bari, Berardino
Arcadipane, Francesca
Lepinoy, Alexi
Ceccarelli, Manuela
Furfaro, Gabriella
Mistrangelo, Massimiliano
Cassoni, Paola
Valgiusti, Martina
Passardi, Alessandro
Casadei Gardini, Andrea
Trino, Elisabetta
Martini, Stefania
Iorio, Giuseppe Carlo
Evangelista, Andrea
Ricardi, Umberto
Créhange, Gilles
Source :
Radiation Oncology (London, England), Radiation Oncology, Radiation Oncology, BioMed Central, 2018, 13 (1), pp.172. ⟨10.1186/s13014-018-1124-9⟩, Radiation Oncology, Vol 13, Iss 1, Pp 1-8 (2018)
Publication Year :
2018
Publisher :
BioMed Central, 2018.

Abstract

International audience; BackgroundTo evaluate clinical outcomes of simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) - intensity modulated radiotherapy (RT) in patients with non metastatic anal cancer compared to those of a set of patients treated with 3-dimensional conformal RT and sequential boost (SeqB).MethodsA retrospective cohort of 190 anal cancer patients treated at 3 academic centers with concurrent chemo-RT employing either SIB or SeqB was analysed. The SIB-group consisted of 87 patients, treated with 2 cycles of Mitomycin (MMC) and 5-Fluorouracil (5FU) using SIB-IMRT delivering 42-45Gy/28–30 fractions to the elective pelvic lymph nodes and 50.4-54Gy/28-30fractions to the primary tumor and involved nodes, based on pre-treatment staging. The SeqB group comprised 103 patients, treated with MMC associated to either 5FU or Capecitabine concurrent to RT with 36 Gy/20 fractions to a single volume including gross tumor, clinical nodes and elective nodal volumes and a SeqB to primary tumor and involved nodes of 23.4 Gy/13 fractions. We compared colostomy-free survival (CFS), overall survival (OS) and the cumulative incidence of colostomy for each radiation modality. Cox proportional-hazards model addressed factors influencing OS and CFS.ResultsMedian follow up was 34 (range 9–102) and 31 months (range 2–101) in the SIB and SeqB groups. The 1- and 2-year cumulative incidences of colostomy were 8.2% (95%CI:3.6–15.2) and 15.0% (95%CI:8.1–23.9) in the SIB group and 13.9% (95%CI: 7.8–21.8) and 18.1% (95%CI:10.8–27.0) in the SeqB group. Two-year CFS and OS were 78.1% (95%CI:67.0–85.8) and 87.5% (95%CI:77.3–93.3) in the SIB group and 73.5% (95%CI:62.6–81.7) and 85.4% (95%CI:75.5–91.6) in the SeqB, respectively. A Cox proportional hazards regression model highlighted an adjusted hazard ratio (AdjHR) of 1.18 (95%CI: 0.67–2.09;p = 0.560), although AdjHR for the first 24 months was 0.95 (95%CI: 0.49–1.84;p = 0.877) for the SIB approach.ConclusionsSIB-based RT provides similar clinical outcomes compared to SeqB-based in the treatment of patients affected with non metastatic anal cancer.

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1748717X
Volume :
13
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Radiation Oncology (London, England)
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....63d5541fcda02c970ba96d5befce8dd6
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13014-018-1124-9⟩