Despite greater toxicity, the use of MMC in a definitive CR regimen for anal cancer is justified, particularly in patients with large primary tumors. Salvage CR should be attempted in patients with residual disease following definitive CR before resorting to radical surgery.
Purpose
A multi-institutional phase II trial assessed the utility of dose-painted IMRT (DP-IMRT) in reducing grade 2+ combined acute gastrointestinal and genitourinary adverse events (AEs) of 5-fluorouracil (5FU) and mitomycin-C (MMC) chemoradiation for anal cancer by at least 15% as compared to the conventional radiation/5FU/MMC arm from RTOG 9811.
Methods and Materials
T2-4N0-3M0 anal cancer patients received 5FU and MMC days 1 and 29 of DP-IMRT, prescribed per stage - T2N0: 42Gy elective nodal and 50.4Gy anal tumor planning target volumes (PTVs) in 28 fractions; T3-4N0-3: 45Gy elective nodal, 50.4Gy ≤ 3cm or 54Gy > 3cm metastatic nodal and 54Gy anal tumor PTVs in 30 fractions. The primary endpoint is described above. Planned secondary endpoints assessed all AEs and the investigator’s ability to perform DP-IMRT.
Results
Of 63 accrued patients, 52 were evaluable. Tumor stage included: 54% II, 25% IIIA, 21% IIIB. In primary endpoint analysis, 77% experienced grade 2+ gastrointestinal/genitourinary acute AEs (9811 77%). There was, however, a significant reduction in acute grade 2+ hematologic, 73% (9811 85%, P=0.032), grade 3+ gastrointestinal, 21% (9811 36%, P=0.0082), and grade 3+ dermatologic AEs 23% (9811 49%, P<0.0001) with DP-IMRT. On initial pre-treatment review, 81% required DP-IMRT re-planning, while final review revealed only three cases with normal tissue major deviations.
Conclusions
Although the primary endpoint was not met, DP-IMRT was associated with significant sparing of acute grade 2+ hematologic, and grade 3+ dermatologic and gastrointestinal toxicity. While DP-IMRT proved feasible, the high pre-treatment planning revision rate emphasizes the importance of real-time radiation quality assurance for IMRT trials.
Purpose
To define a male and female pelvic normal tissue contouring atlas for Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) trials.
Methods and Materials
One male pelvis computed tomography (CT) data set and one female pelvis CT data set were shared via the Image-Guided Therapy QA Center. A total of 16 radiation oncologists participated. The following organs at risk were contoured in both CT sets: anus, anorectum, rectum (gastrointestinal and genitourinary definitions), bowel NOS (not otherwise specified), small bowel, large bowel, and proximal femurs. The following were contoured in the male set only: bladder, prostate, seminal vesicles, and penile bulb. The following were contoured in the female set only: uterus, cervix, and ovaries. A computer program used the binomial distribution to generate 95% group consensus contours. These contours and definitions were then reviewed by the group and modified.
Results
The panel achieved consensus definitions for pelvic normal tissue contouring in RTOG trials with these standardized names: Rectum, AnoRectum, SmallBowel, Colon, BowelBag, Bladder, UteroCervix, Adnexa_R, Adnexa_L, Prostate, SeminalVesc, PenileBulb, Femur_R, and Femur_L. Two additional normal structures whose purpose is to serve as targets in anal and rectal cancer were defined: AnoRectumSig and Mesorectum. Detailed target volume contouring guidelines and images are discussed.
Conclusions
Consensus guidelines for pelvic normal tissue contouring were reached and are available as a CT image atlas on the RTOG Web site. This will allow uniformity in defining normal tissues for clinical trials delivering pelvic radiation and will facilitate future normal tissue complication research.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.