A case of radiation recall mucositis associated with docetaxel

Culp, Laura; Pou, Anna M.; Jones, Dennie V.; Bayouth, John E.; Sanguineti, Giuseppe

doi:10.1002/hed.10352

Cited by 19 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Mostly previous studies have reported that RRD occurs with lower energy photon beams, [ 13 , 14 ] and RRD with 10-MV photon beam, as observed in our patient, is relatively rare. Radiation doses at the skin surface with the 10-MV photon beam were less than 6-MV photon beams.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 65%

Docetaxel-induced radiation recall dermatitis with atypical features

Sakaguchi

Maebayashi²,

Aizawa³

et al. 2018

Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction:Radiation recall dermatitis (RRD) associated with actinomycin D was first described by in 1959, followed by the reporting of several RRD-inducing drugs. In 1994, a study demonstrated docetaxel-induced RRD for the first time; however, despite some case studies reporting RRD, a little has been reported on it since then. Here we present a rare case of atypical docetaxel-induced RRD.Case presentation:The patient in his 60s was administered radiotherapy for high-risk prostate cancer. He continued receiving hormonal therapy for 2 years because of being in a high-risk group and became nadir. Six months since the completion of hormonal therapy, his prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level increased again. Based on the radiological examination, he was diagnosed with multiple lung, bone, and lymph node metastases. Accordingly, we started docetaxel (75 mg/m2) every 5 weeks in consideration of myelosuppression for hormone-resistant multiple metastases. Although lung metastasis shrunk by one cycle docetaxel, radiotherapy for the thoracic and lumbar vertebrae was performed for back pain and lumbago. On day 21, at the end of radiotherapy, the same dose of docetaxel was administrated for the third time. On day 7, after third docetaxel administration, erythema appeared in a irradiated field of the thoracic and lumbar vertebra. Erythema primarily appeared on the anterior side of the body, and no skin reaction was noted on the posterior part of the thoracic irradiated area. Notably, no skin reaction was observed in the previously irradiated field for prostate cancer.Conclusions:This case report draws attention to the development of atypical RRD after administration of docetaxel and advises careful follow-up even if RRD does not appear after the first docetaxel administration.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 65%

Docetaxel-induced radiation recall dermatitis with atypical features

Sakaguchi

Maebayashi²,

Aizawa³

et al. 2018

Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A third reason for the toxicity could be the second-line chemotherapy started 1 month before the esophageal fistula, which may have caused a recall phenomenon in the esophageal mucosa. (11) After accounting for all possible factors, it is most likely that the high esophageal PBT dose is the main reason for this late esophageal toxicity. In fact, the esophageal dose in other patients without esophageal late toxicities did not exceed 74 Gy (RBE).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dose escalation study of proton beam therapy with concurrent chemotherapy for stage III non‐small cell lung cancer

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study is to determine the recommended dose (RD) of proton beam therapy (PBT) for inoperable stage III non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We tested two prescribed doses of PBT: 66 Gy (relative biological effectiveness [RBE]) in 33 fractions and 74 Gy (RBE) in 37 fractions in arms 1 and 2, respectively. The planning target volume (PTV) included the primary tumor and metastatic lymph nodes with adequate margins. Concurrent chemotherapy included intravenous cisplatin (60 mg/m2, day 1) and oral S‐1 (80, 100 or 120 mg based on body surface area, days 1–14), repeated as four cycles every 4 weeks. Dose‐limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined as grade 3 or severe toxicities related to PBT during days 1–90. Each dose level was performed in three patients, and then escalated to the next level if no DLT occurred. When one patient developed a DLT, three additional patients were enrolled. Overall, nine patients (five men, four women; median age, 72 years) were enrolled, including six in arm 1 and three in arm 2. The median follow‐up time was 43 months, and the median progression‐free survival was 15 months. In arm 1, grade 3 infection occurred in one of six patients, but no other DLT was reported. Similarly, no DLT occurred in arm 2. However, one patient in arm 2 developed grade 3 esophageal fistula at 9 months after the initiation of PBT. Therefore, we determined that 66 Gy (RBE) is the RD from a clinical viewpoints. (Clinical trial registration no. UMIN000005585)

show abstract

“…Radiation recall myositis is most commonly associated with gemcitabine, [8][9][10] which is also Practical Radiation Oncology: January-February 2020 Radiation recall myositis in the thigh known to induce a myositis syndrome by itself. 11 Docetaxel has been identified as the offending agent in other types of radiation recall reactions [12][13][14][15][16][17][18] but has not been seen to cause radiation recall myositis. Radiation recall myositis has been observed in 1 case in a patient treated with carboplatin/paclitaxel 19 but has not been seen with the combination of a platinum agent with docetaxel.…”

Section: Radiation Recall Myositismentioning

confidence: 99%