Faculty Bibliography

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To report the use of high-dose-rate intraoperative radiation therapy (HDR-IORT) for recurrent head-and-neck cancer (HNC) at a single institution. METHODS AND MATERIALS/METHODS:Between July 1998 and February 2007, 34 patients with recurrent HNC received 38 HDR-IORT treatments using a Harrison-Anderson-Mick applicator with Iridium-192. A single fraction (median, 15 Gy; range, 10-20 Gy) was delivered intraoperatively after surgical resection to the region considered at risk for close or positive margins. In all patients, the target region was previously treated with external beam radiation therapy (median dose, 63 Gy; range, 24-74 Gy). The 1- and 2-year estimates for in-field local progression-free survival (LPFS), locoregional progression-free survival (LRPFS), distant metastases-free survival (DMFS), and overall survival (OS) were calculated. RESULTS:With a median follow-up for surviving patients of 23 months (range, 6-54 months), 8 patients (24%) are alive and without evidence of disease. The 1- and 2-year LPFS rates are 66% and 56%, respectively, with 13 (34%) in-field recurrences. The 1- and 2-year DMFS rates are 81% and 62%, respectively, with 10 patients (29%) developing distant failure. The 1- and 2-year OS rates are 73% and 55%, respectively, with a median time to OS of 24 months. Severe complications included cellulitis (5 patients), fistula or wound complications (3 patients), osteoradionecrosis (1 patient), and radiation-induced trigeminal neuralgia (1 patient). CONCLUSIONS:HDR-IORT has shown encouraging local control outcomes in patients with recurrent HNC with acceptable rates of treatment-related morbidity. Longer follow-up with a larger cohort of patients is needed to fully assess the benefit of this procedure.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To report a multi-institutional outcomes study on permanent prostate brachytherapy (PPB) to 9 years that includes postimplant dosimetry, to develop a postimplant nomogram predicting biochemical freedom from recurrence. METHODS AND MATERIALS/METHODS:Cox regression analysis was used to model the clinical information for 5,931 patients who underwent PPB for clinically localized prostate cancer from six centers. The model was validated against the dataset using bootstrapping. Disease progression was determined using the Phoenix definition. The biological equivalent dose was calculated from the minimum dose to 90% of the prostate volume (D90) and external-beam radiotherapy dose using an alpha/beta of 2. RESULTS:The 9-year biochemical freedom from recurrence probability for the modeling set was 77% (95% confidence interval, 73-81%). In the model, prostate-specific antigen, Gleason sum, isotope, external beam radiation, year of treatment, and D90 were associated with recurrence (each p < 0.05), whereas clinical stage was not. The concordance index of the model was 0.710. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:A predictive model for a postimplant nomogram for prostate cancer recurrence at 9-years after PPB has been developed and validated from a large multi-institutional database. This study also demonstrates the significance of implant dosimetry for predicting outcome. Unique to predictive models, these nomograms may be used a priori to calculate a D90 that likely achieves a desired outcome with further validation. Thus, a personalized dose prescription can potentially be calculated for each patient.

BACKGROUND:The 2 primary therapeutic interventions for localized prostate cancer are delivered by different types of physicians, urologists, and radiation oncologists. We evaluated how visits to specialists and primary care physicians (PCPs) by men with localized prostate cancer are related to treatment choice. METHODS:Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked database, we identified 85 088 men with clinically localized prostate cancer diagnosed at age 65 years or older, between 1994 and 2002. Men were categorized by primary treatment received within 9 months of diagnosis: radical prostatectomy (n = 18 201 [21%]), radiotherapy (n = 35 925 [42%]), androgen deprivation (n = 14 021 [17%]), or expectant management (n = 16 941 [20%]). Visits to specialists and PCPs were analyzed by patient characteristics and primary therapies received and were identified using Medicare claims and the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile. RESULTS:Overall, 42 309 men (50%) were seen exclusively by urologists, 37 540 (44%) by urologists and radiation oncologists, 2329 (3%) by urologists and medical oncologists, and 2910 (3%) by all 3 specialists. There was a strong association between the type of specialist seen and primary therapy received. Visits to PCPs were infrequent between diagnosis and receipt of therapy (22% of patients visited any PCP and 17% visited an established PCP) and were not associated with a greater likelihood of specialist visits. Irrespective of age, comorbidity status, or specialist visits, men seen by PCPs were more likely to be treated expectantly. CONCLUSIONS:Specialist visits relate strongly to prostate cancer treatment choices. In light of these findings, prior evidence that specialists prefer the modality they themselves deliver and the lack of conclusive comparative studies demonstrating superiority of one modality over another, it is essential to ensure that men have access to balanced information before choosing a particular therapy for prostate cancer.

Most advice currently available with regard to fluoroscopic skin reactions is based on a table published in 1994. Many caveats in that report were not included in later reproductions, and subsequent research has yielded additional insights. This review is a consensus report of current scientific data. Expected skin reactions for an average patient are presented in tabular form as a function of peak skin dose and time after irradiation. The text and table indicate the variability of reactions in different patients. Images of injuries to skin and underlying tissues in patients and animals are provided and are categorized according to the National Cancer Institute skin toxicity scale, offering a basis for describing cutaneous radiation reactions in interventional fluoroscopy and quantifying their clinical severity. For a single procedure performed in most individuals, noticeable skin changes are observed approximately 1 month after a peak skin dose exceeding several grays. The degree of injury to skin and subcutaneous tissue increases with dose. Specialized wound care may be needed when irradiation exceeds 10 Gy. Residual effects from radiation therapy and from previous procedures influence the response of skin and subcutaneous tissues to subsequent procedures. Skin irradiated to a dose higher than 3-5 Gy often looks normal but reacts abnormally when irradiation is repeated. If the same area of skin is likely to be exposed to levels higher than a few grays, the effects of previous irradiation should be included when estimating the expected tissue reaction from the additional procedure.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To determine survival rates of patients with locally recurrent nasopharynx cancer (LRNPC) treated with modern therapeutic modalities. METHODS AND MATERIALS/METHODS:From July 1996 to March 2008, 29 patients were reirradiated for LRNPC. Thirteen patients received combined-modality treatment (CMT), consisting of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) followed by intracavitary brachytherapy, whereas 16 received EBRT alone. The median age was 50 years, 59% were male, 38% were Asian, 69% had World Health Organization Class III histology, and 86% were treated for their first recurrence. Nine, 6, 8, and 6 patients had recurrent Stage I, II, III, and IV disease, respectively. Patients in the EBRT-alone group had more advanced disease. Median time to reirradiation was 3.9 years. In total, 93% underwent imaging with positron emission tomography and/or magnetic resonance imaging before reirradiation, 83% received intensity-modulated radiotherapy, and 93% received chemotherapy, which was platinum-based in 85% of cases. RESULTS:The median follow-up for all patients was 45 months and for surviving patients was 54 months. Five-year actuarial local control, event-free survival, and overall survival rates were 52%, 44%, and 60%, respectively. No difference was observed between patients treated with EBRT or CMT. Overall survival was superior in patients who achieved local control (p = 0.0003). The incidence of late Grade > or =3 events in patients re-treated with EBRT alone was significantly increased compared with those receiving CMT (73% vs. 8%; p = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS:In this modern reirradiation series of patients with LRNPC, favorable overall survival compared with historical series was achieved. Patients treated with CMT experienced significantly fewer severe late effects compared with those treated with EBRT.