No abstract

BackgroundThe aim of the retrospective study was to evaluate the effectiveness and toxicity of radiochemotherapy in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the anal canal treated at a single institution.Patients and methodsBetween 1/2003 and 9/2010, 84 patients were treated with radical radiochemotherapy at the Institute of Oncology Ljubljana, Slovenia. The treatment consisted of 3-dimensional conformal external beam radiotherapy with concurrent chemotherapy (5-fluorouracil and mytomycin C), followed by brachytherapy or external beam boost. The toxicity of therapy and its effectiveness were assessed.ResultsThe treatment was completed according to the protocol in 79.8% of patients. The median follow-up time of 55 survivors was 53 months (range: 16–105 months). The 5-year locoregional control (LRC), disease-free survival (DFS), disease-specific survival (DSS), overall survival (OS) and colostomy-free survival (CFS) rates were 71%, 68%, 81%, 67% and 85%, respectively. No treatment-related mortality was observed. The most frequent acute side-effect of the treatment was radiodermatitis (grade 3–4 in 58.2% of patients). LENT-SOMA grade 3–4 late radiation side effects were observed in 15 (18%) patients. In patients with brachytherapy boost a trend of less late side effects was observed compared to patients with external beam boost (P=0.066). On multivariate analysis, complete clinical disease response was identified as an independent prognostic factor for LRC, DFS and DSS, the salvage surgery for LRC and DFS, whereas Hb below 120 g/l retained its independent prognostic value for OS.ConclusionsRadiochemotherapy provides an excellent disease control and the survival with preserving anal sphincter function in majority of patients. Surgical salvage with abdominoperineal resection for persistent or recurrent disease has curative potential.

No abstract

BackgroundDuring radiotherapy of left-sided breast cancer, parts of the heart are irradiated, which may lead to late toxicity. We report on the experience of single institution with cardiac-sparing radiotherapy using voluntary deep inspiration breath hold (V-DIBH) and compare its dosimetric outcome with free breathing (FB) technique.Patients and methodsLeft-sided breast cancer patients, treated at our department with postoperative radiotherapy of breast/chest wall +/– regional lymph nodes between May 2015 and January 2017, were considered for inclusion. FB-computed tomography (CT) was obtained and dose-planning performed. Cases with cardiac V25Gy ≥ 5% or risk factors for heart disease were coached for V-DIBH. Compliant patients were included. They underwent additional CT in V-DIBH for planning, followed by V-DIBH radiotherapy. Dose volume histogram parameters for heart, lung and optimized planning target volume (OPTV) were compared between FB and BH. Treatment setup shifts and systematic and random errors for V-DIBH technique were compared with FB historic control.ResultsSixty-three patients were considered for V-DIBH. Nine (14.3%) were non-compliant at coaching, leaving 54 cases for analysis. When compared with FB, V-DIBH resulted in a significant reduction of mean cardiac dose from 6.1 +/– 2.5 to 3.2 +/– 1.4 Gy (p < 0.001), maximum cardiac dose from 51.1 +/– 1.4 to 48.5 +/– 6.8 Gy (p = 0.005) and cardiac V25Gy from 8.5 +/– 4.2 to 3.2 +/– 2.5% (p < 0.001). Heart volumes receiving low (10–20 Gy) and high (30–50 Gy) doses were also significantly reduced. Mean dose to the left anterior coronary artery was 23.0 (+/– 6.7) Gy and 14.8 (+/– 7.6) Gy on FB and V-DIBH, respectively (p < 0.001). Differences between FB- and V-DIBH-derived mean lung dose (11.3 +/– 3.2 vs. 10.6 +/– 2.6 Gy), lung V20Gy (20.5 +/– 7 vs. 19.5 +/– 5.1 Gy) and V95% for the OPTV (95.6 +/– 4.1 vs. 95.2 +/– 6.3%) were non-significant. V-DIBH-derived mean shifts for initial patient setup were ≤ 2.7 mm. Random and systematic errors were ≤ 2.1 mm. These results did not differ significantly from historic FB controls.ConclusionsWhen compared with FB, V-DIBH demonstrated high setup accuracy and enabled significant reduction of cardiac doses without compromising the target volume coverage. Differences in lung doses were non-significant.