Protective effect of amifostine during fractionated radiotherapy in patients with pelvic carcinomas: results of a randomized trial

PURPOSE: To evaluate whether pretreatment with amifostine can reduce treatment-induced toxicity in patients with pelvic malignancies undergoing radiotherapy (RT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 205 patients with pelvic malignancies (rectal, 32; bladder, 47; prostate, 40; gynecologic, 86) were randomized to receive RT (Group 1, n = 95) or RT plus amifostine (Group 2, n = 110). The patient characteristics for both treatment groups were well balanced. Amifostine was administered at 340 mg/m(2) i.v., 15 min before RT, with standard antiemetics 30 min before. All patients received conventional RT, radical (65-70 Gy) or postoperative (50 Gy), with 45 Gy given to the whole pelvis at daily fractions of 1.8-2.0 Gy, 5 d/wk. Skin, bowel, bladder, and hematologic toxicities were evaluated according to the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group/European Organization Research and Treatment of Cancer scoring system. RESULTS: A significant reduction occurred in acute Grade 2-3 bladder and lower GI tract toxicities in the amifostine group (p <0.05, Weeks 3-7). With a median follow-up of 12 months, few late Grade 2-3 effects were observed in either group. No statistically significant difference between the two groups was observed in terms of response 6 weeks after RT completion (complete response plus partial response, 96.8% in the control and 98.3% in the amifostine arm). Amifostine was well tolerated, with only moderate hypotension occurring in 2 patients and moderate nausea in 1 patient. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this randomized trial support the role of amifostine in reducing acute radiation-related toxicity of the bladder and lower GI tract in patients with pelvic malignancies, without evidence of tumor protection.     

Serious adverse effects of amifostine during radiotherapy in head and neck cancer patients

Background and purpose: Amifostine has been shown to protect against xerostomia induced by radiotherapy for head and neck cancer, but its impact on the therapeutic index is unknown. This is the first report focusing on amifostine related adverse effects leading to discontinuation of amifostine treatment.

Patients and methods: Thirty-nine patients from two centers irradiated for head and neck cancer received i.v.-infusions of amifostine prior to each radiation fraction. In a phase III study, two daily amifostine doses, 200 mg/m² (n=21) and 340 mg/m² (n=18), were compared for protection against radiation induced toxicity. Total radiation dose was 60–70 Gy (2 Gy per fraction), nine patients received concurrent chemotherapy with cisplatin/5-FU. amifostine was usually discontinued after >1 episode of serious toxicity during subsequent treatment sessions.

Results: In 16/39 patients (41%) amifostine was discontinued due to severe adverse effects, which led to discontinuation of the phase III study. In four of 16 patients radiotherapy was delayed due to amifostine related adverse effects for 1–3 days. Discontinuation occurred more often in patients receiving chemotherapy. The results led to a literature review for amifostine treatment during radiotherapy in head and neck cancer patients. Regarding our series and published series using an amifostine schedule comparable to ours, total discontinuation rate was 27% (57/214). Discontinuation was significantly influenced by chemotherapy (P=0.007), but not by amifostine dose (P=0.156).

Conclusion: Daily i.v. administration of amifostine during radiotherapy in head and neck cancer is associated with a high rate of serious adverse effects leading to discontinuation of amifostine treatment and sometimes delay of radiotherapy.     

Fractionation in medium dose rate brachytherapy of cancer of the cervix

: To established an optimum fractionation for medium dose rate (MDR) brachytherapy from retrospective data of patients treated with different MDR schedules in comparison with a low dose rate (LDR) schedule.

: The study population consists of consecutive Stage IB-IIA-IIB patients who received radiotherapy alone with full dose brachytherapy plus external beam pelvic and parametrial irradiation from 1986–1993. Patients also receiving surgery or chemotherapy were excluded. The LDR group (n = 102, median follow-up: 80 months) received a median dose to Point A of 32.5 Gy fractions at 0.44 Gy/h plus 18 Gy of external whole pelvic irradiation. The MDR1 group (n = 30, median follow-up: 45 months) received a mean dose of two 32 Gy fractions at 1.68 Gy/h. An individual dose reduction of 12.5% was planned for this group according to the Manchester experience, but only a 4.8% dose reduction was achieved. The MDR2 group (n = 10, median follow-up: 36 months) received a dose of two 24 Gy fractions at 1.65 Gy/h. The MDR3 group (n = 10, median follow-up 33 months_ received a mean dose of three 15.3 Gy fractions at 1.64 Gy/h. And finally, the MDR4 group (n = 38, median follow-up: 24 months)_received six six 7.7 Gy fractions from two pulses 6 h apart in each of three insertions at 1.61 Gy/h/ The median external pelvic dose to MDR schedules was between 12 and 20 Gy. The linear quadratic (LQ) formula was used to calculate the biologically effective dose (BED) to tumor (BED) to tumor (Gy₁₀) and rectum (Gy₃), assuming T1/2 for REPAIR = 1.5 h.

: The crude central recurrence rate was 6% for LDR (mean BED - 95.4 Gy₁₀) and 10% for MDR4 (mean BED = 77.0 Gy₁₀ (p = NS). The remaining MDR groups had no recurrences. Grade 2 and 3 rectal or bladder complications were 0% for LDR (rectal BED = 109 Gy₃), 83% for MDR1 (BED = 206 Gy₃), and 30% for MDR3 (BED = 127 Gy₃). The MDR2 and MDR4 groups presented no complications (BED, 123 Gy₃, and 105 Gy₃, respectively). The LQ formula appears to correlate with late complications of the different MDR regimens. A BED above 125 Gy₃ was associated with Grade 2+3 rectal complications. Adequate central tumor control may be compromised with a tumor BED below 90–95 Gy₁₀.

: Medium dose rate brachytherapy at 1.6 Gy/h to point A has a marked dose ratre effect. Increased fractionation is the cost of overcoming the less favorable therapeutic ratio for MDR than for LDR. A larger (25%) reduction of brachytherapy dose than previously reported is also necessary. Our most recently developed schedule for Stage I–II patients is three insertions on three treatment days with six 8.0 Gy brachytherapy fractions, two on each treatment day, following or preceding an external whole pelvis dose of 18 Gy, and followed by additional external parametrial dose.     

High-dose intensity modulated radiation therapy for prostate cancer: early toxicity and biochemical outcome in 772 patients

To report the acute and late toxicity and preliminary biochemical outcomes in 772 patients with clinically localized prostate cancer treated with high-dose intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT).

Between April 1996 and January 2001, 772 patients with clinically localized prostate cancer were treated with IMRT. Treatment was planned using an inverse-planning approach, and the desired beam intensity profiles were delivered by dynamic multileaf collimation. A total of 698 patients (90%) were treated to 81.0 Gy, and 74 patients (10%) were treated to 86.4 Gy. Acute and late toxicities were scored by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group morbidity grading scales. PSA relapse was defined according to The American Society of Therapeutic Radiation Oncology Consensus Statement. The median follow-up time was 24 months (range: 6–60 months).

Thirty-five patients (4.5%) developed acute Grade 2 rectal toxicity, and no patient experienced acute Grade 3 or higher rectal symptoms. Two hundred seventeen patients (28%) developed acute Grade 2 urinary symptoms, and one experienced urinary retention (Grade 3). Eleven patients (1.5%) developed late Grade 2 rectal bleeding. Four patients (0.1%) experienced Grade 3 rectal toxicity requiring either one or more transfusions or a laser cauterization procedure. No Grade 4 rectal complications have been observed. The 3-year actuarial likelihood of ≥ late Grade 2 rectal toxicity was 4%. Seventy-two patients (9%) experienced late Grade 2 urinary toxicity, and five (0.5%) developed Grade 3 urinary toxicity (urethral stricture). The 3-year actuarial likelihood of ≥ late Grade 2 urinary toxicity was 15%. The 3-year actuarial PSA relapse-free survival rates for favorable, intermediate, and unfavorable risk group patients were 92%, 86%, and 81%, respectively.

These data demonstrate the feasibility of high-dose IMRT in a large number of patients. Acute and late rectal toxicities seem to be significantly reduced compared with what has been observed with conventional three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy techniques. Short-term PSA control rates seem to be at least comparable to those achieved with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy at similar dose levels. Based on this favorable risk:benefit ratio, IMRT has become the standard mode of conformal treatment delivery for localized prostate cancer at our institution.     

Five-year biochemical outcome and toxicity with transperineal CT-planned permanent I-125 prostate implantation for patients with localized prostate cancer

Purpose: To report the 5-year prostate-specific antigen (PSA) relapse-free survival outcome and incidence of long-term morbidity for patients with localized prostate cancer treated with CT-planned permanent I-125 prostate implantation using a transperineal technique (TPI).

Methods and Materials: Between 1989–1996, 248 patients with clinically localized prostate cancer were treated with TPI. The median age was 65 years (range: 45–80 years). The clinical stage was T1c in 143 patients (58%), Stage T2a in 102 (41%), and T2b in 3 (1%). Thirty patients (12%) had Gleason scores <6, 158 patients (64%) had Gleason scores of 6, and 60 (24%) had scores ≥7. The median pretreatment PSA was 7 ng/mL (range: 1–58 ng/mL). The median prescribed implant dose was 150 Gy. Patients were characterized as having favorable risk disease if their pretreatment PSA level was ≤10.0 ng/mL and Gleason score ≤6; those with one and two adverse prognostic features (PSA > 10 ng/mL and Gleason score >6) were classified as having intermediate and unfavorable risk disease, respectively. PSA relapse was defined according to the American Society of Therapeutic Radiation Oncology Consensus Statement, and toxicity was scored according to the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group morbidity scoring scale. The median follow-up was 48 months (range: 12–126 months).

Results: Thirty-eight patients (15%) developed a PSA relapse, and the overall 5-year PSA relapse-free survival (PRFS) rate was 71%. The 5-year PRFS rates for favorable-risk (n = 146), intermediate-risk (n = 85), and unfavorable-risk (n = 17) patients were 88%, 77%, and 38%, respectively (p < 0.0001). The 5-year PRFS rates among patients treated with a 2-month course of neoadjuvant androgen deprivation (NAAD) prior to TPI compared to patients treated with TPI only were 100% and 77%, respectively (p = 0.03). Multivariate analysis identified pretreatment PSA > 10 ng/mL and Gleason score >6 as independent predictors for biochemical relapse after TPI. The 5-year actuarial likelihood of late Grade 2 urinary toxicity was 41%. The 5-year likelihood of urethral stricture development was 10%, and the median time to stricture development was 18 months. One patient (0.4%) in the early phase of this clinical experience developed a Grade 4 urethral complication. The actuarial incidence of late Grade 2 rectal bleeding was 9%. One patient (0.4%) developed a Grade 4 rectal complication.

Conclusions: Especially for favorable risk disease, the 5-year biochemical outcome with this approach was excellent and appears to be comparable to other therapeutic interventions. Grade 2 urinary symptoms were common in these patients but gradually resolved in most. Improved treatment planning approaches that further constrain the urethral dose without compromising the target volume dose will likely decrease the incidence of Grade 2 and 3 urinary symptoms after TPI.     

Effective palliative radiation therapy in advanced and recurrent ovarian carcinoma

Purpose: To retrospectively review our experience using radiation therapy as a palliative treatment in ovarian carcinoma.

Methods and Materials: Eighty patients who received radiation therapy for ovarian carcinoma between 1983 and 1998 were reviewed. The indications for radiation therapy, radiation therapy techniques, details, tolerance, and response were recorded. A complete response required complete resolution of the patient’s symptoms, radiographic findings, palpable mass, or CA-125 level. A partial response required at least 50% resolution of these parameters. The actuarial survival rates from initial diagnosis and from the completion of radiation therapy were calculated.

Results: The median age of the patients was 67 years (range 26 to 90 years). A median of one laparotomy was performed before irradiation. Zero to 20 cycles of a platinum-based chemotherapy regimen were delivered before irradiation (median = 6 cycles). The reasons for palliative treatment were: pain (n = 22), mass (n = 23), obstruction of ureter, rectum, esophagus, or stomach (n = 12), a positive second-look laparotomy (n = 9), ascites (n = 8), vaginal bleeding (n = 6), rectal bleeding (n = 1), lymphedema (n = 3), skin involvement (n = 1), or brain metastases with symptoms (n = 11). Some patients received treatment for more than one indication. Treatment was directed to the abdomen or pelvis in 64 patients, to the brain in 11, and to other sites in 5. The overall response rate was 73%. Twenty-eight percent of the patients experienced a complete response of their symptoms, palpable mass, and/or CA-125 level. Forty-five percent had a partial response. Only 11% suffered progressive disease during therapy that required discontinuation of the treatment. Sixteen percent had stable disease. The duration of the responses and stable disease lasted until death except in 10 patients who experienced recurrence of their symptoms between 1 and 21 months (median = 9 months). The 1-, 2-, 3-, and 5-year actuarial survival rates from diagnosis were 89%, 73%, 42%, and 33%, respectively. The survival rates calculated from the completion of radiotherapy were 39%, 27%, 13%, and 10%, respectively. Five percent of patients experienced Grade 3 diarrhea, vomiting, myelosuppression, or fatigue. Fourteen percent of patients experienced Grade 1 or 2 diarrhea, 19% experienced Grade 1 or 2 nausea and vomiting, and 11% had Grade 1 or 2 myelosuppression.

Conclusions: In this series of radiation therapy for advanced ovarian carcinoma, the response, survival, and tolerance rates compare favorably to those reported for current second- and third-line chemotherapy regimens. Cooperative groups should consider evaluating prospectively the use of radiation therapy before nonplatinum and/or nonpaclitaxel chemotherapy in these patients.     

Prophylactic use of amifostine to prevent radiochemotherapy-induced mucositis and xerostomia in head-and-neck cancer

PURPOSE: To determine the prophylactic properties of amifostine against acute and late toxicities from radiochemotherapy in patients with head-and-neck cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Fifty patients were randomized to receive conventional radiotherapy (RT) (2-Gy fractions, 5 days weekly, to a total of 60-74 Gy, depending on the tumor localization and TNM classification) and carboplatin (90 mg/m(2) infusion once per week before RT). Amifostine (300 mg/m(2)) was administered in the study group only 15-30 min before RT for 6-7.5 weeks. The primary study end point was the grading of acute and late nonhematologic toxicities (mucositis, dysphagia, xerostomia) induced by radiochemotherapy. Secondary end points included treatment duration, hematologic toxicity, and clinical outcome. RESULTS: The treatment duration was significantly shorter in the amifostine-treated group (p = 0.013), because treatment interruptions were more frequent in the control group. Acute toxicities (mucositis and dysphagia) were less severe in the amifostine-treated group. By Week 3, all in the control group experienced Grade 2 mucositis compared with only 9% in the amifostine-treated group (p <0.0001). By Week 5, 52.2% of the patients in the control group experienced Grade 4 mucositis compared with 4.5% in the amifostine-treated group (p = 0.0006). Similar results were obtained for dysphagia. At 3 months of follow-up, only 27% of patients in the study group experienced Grade 2 xerostomia compared with 73.9% in the control group (p = 0.0001). Eighteen months after cessation of therapy, the proportion of patients with Grade 2 xerostomia was 4.5% vs. 30.4% for each respective treatment group (p = 0.047). Cytoprotection with amifostine did not affect treatment outcome, with 90.9% complete responses in the amifostine-treated group compared with 78.3% in the control group (p = 0.414). CONCLUSION: Amifostine was effective in reducing mucositis and dysphagia resulting from radiochemotherapy in patients with head-and-neck cancer. Furthermore, amifostine reduced the severity of late xerostomia, a side effect of RT with long-lasting consequences. Amifostine treatment did not affect the clinical outcome.     

Late rectal toxicity: dose-volume effects of conformal radiotherapy for prostate cancer

: To identify dosimetric, anatomic, and clinical factors that correlate with late rectal toxicity after three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) for prostate cancer.

: We retrospectively analyzed the dose-volume histograms and clinical records of 163 Stage T1b-T3c prostate cancer patients treated between 1992 and 1999 with 3D-CRT, to a total isocenter dose of 74–78 Gy at The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center. The median follow-up was 62 months (range 24–102). All late rectal complications were scored using modified Radiation Therapy Oncology Group and Late Effects Normal Tissue Task Force criteria. The 6-year toxicity rate was assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis and the log-rank test. A univariate proportional hazards regression model was used to test the correlation between Grade 2 or higher toxicity and the dosimetric, anatomic, and clinical factors. In a multivariate regression model, clinical factors were added to the dosimetric and anatomic variables to determine whether they significantly altered the risk of developing late toxicity.

: At 6 years, the rate of developing Grade 2 or higher late rectal toxicity was 25%. A significant volume effect was observed at rectal doses of 60, 70, 75.6, and 78 Gy, and the risk of developing rectal complications increased exponentially as greater volumes were irradiated. Although the percentage of rectal volume treated correlated significantly with the incidence of rectal complications at all dose levels (p <0.0001 for all comparisons), the absolute rectal volume appeared to be a factor only at the higher doses of 70, 75.6, and 78 Gy (p = 0.0514, 0.0016, and 0.0021, respectively). The following variables also correlated with toxicity on the univariate analysis: maximal dose to the clinical target volume, maximal dose to rectum, maximal dose to the rectum as a percentage of the prescribed dose, and maximal dose delivered to 10 cm³ of the rectum. Of the clinical variables tested, only a history of hemorrhoids correlated with rectal toxicity (p = 0.003). Multivariate analysis showed that the addition of hemorrhoids increased the risk of toxicity for each dosimetric variable found to be significant on univariate analysis (p <0.05 for all comparisons).

: Dose-volume histogram analyses clearly indicated a volume effect on the probability of developing late rectal complications. Therefore, dose escalation may be safely achieved by adherence to dose-volume histogram constraints during treatment planning and organ localization at the time of treatment to ensure consistent patient setup.     

Prostate cancer radiation dose response: results of the M. D. Anderson phase III randomized trial

A randomized radiotherapy dose escalation trial was undertaken between 1993 and 1998 to compare the efficacy of 70 vs. 78 Gy in controlling prostate cancer.

A total of 305 Stage T1–T3 patients were entered into the trial and, of these, 301 with a median follow-up of 60 months, were assessable. Of the 301 patients, 150 were in the 70 Gy arm and 151 were in the 78 Gy arm. The primary end point was freedom from failure (FFF), including biochemical failure, which was defined as 3 rises in the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level. Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were calculated from the completion of radiotherapy. The log-rank test was used to compare the groups. Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was used to examine the independence of study randomization in multivariate analysis.

There was an even distribution of patients by randomization arm and stage, Gleason score, and pretreatment PSA level. The FFF rates for the 70- and 78 Gy arms at 6 years were 64% and 70%, respectively (p = 0.03). Dose escalation to 78 Gy preferentially benefited those with a pretreatment PSA >10 ng/mL; the FFF rate was 62% for the 78 Gy arm vs. 43% for those who received 70 Gy (p = 0.01). For patients with a pretreatment PSA ≤10 ng/mL, no significant dose response was found, with an average 6-year FFF rate of about 75%. Although no difference occurred in overall survival, the freedom from distant metastasis rate was higher for those with PSA levels >10 ng/mL who were treated to 78 Gy (98% vs. 88% at 6 years, p = 0.056). Rectal side effects were also significantly greater in the 78 Gy group. Grade 2 or higher toxicity rates at 6 years were 12% and 26% for the 70 Gy and 78 Gy arms, respectively (p = 0.001). Grade 2 or higher bladder complications were similar at 10%. For patients in the 78 Gy arm, Grade 2 or higher rectal toxicity correlated highly with the proportion of the rectum treated to >70 Gy.

An increase of 8 Gy resulted in a highly significant improvement in FFF for patients at intermediate-to-high risk, although the rectal reactions were also increased. Dose escalation techniques that limit the rectal volume that receives ≥70 Gy to <25% should be used.     

Influence of intravenous amifostine on xerostomia, tumor control, and survival after radiotherapy for head-and- neck cancer: 2-year follow-up of a prospective, randomized, phase III trial

PURPOSE: To evaluate chronic xerostomia and tumor control 18 and 24 months after initial treatment with amifostine in a randomized controlled trial of patients with head-and-neck cancer; at 12 months after radiotherapy (RT), amifostine had been shown to reduce xerostomia without changing tumor control. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Adults with head-and-neck cancer who underwent once-daily RT for 5-7 weeks (total dose, 50-70 Gy) received either open-label amifostine (200 mg/m2 i.v.) 15-30 min before each fraction of radiation (n = 150) or RT alone (control; n = 153). RESULTS: Amifostine administration was associated with a reduced incidence of Grade > or =2 xerostomia over 2 years of follow-up (p = 0.002), an increase in the proportion of patients with meaningful (>0.1 g) unstimulated saliva production at 24 months (p = 0.011), and reduced mouth dryness scores on a patient benefit questionnaire at 24 months (p < 0.001). Locoregional control rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival were not significantly different between the amifostine group and the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Amifostine administration during head-and-neck RT reduces the severity and duration of xerostomia 2 years after treatment and does not seem to compromise locoregional control rates, progression-free survival, or overall survival.     

Intrarectal amifostine suspension may protect against acute proctitis during radiation therapy for prostate cancer: a pilot study

PURPOSE: Our goal was to test the ability of intrarectal amifostine to limit symptoms of radiation proctitis. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The first 18 patients received 1 g of intrarectal amifostine suspension placed 30-45 min before each radiation treatment. The following 12 patients received 2 g of amifostine. Total dose prescribed ranged from 66 to 76 Gy. All patients were treated with three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy. The suspension remained intrarectal during treatment and was expelled after treatment. For gastrointestinal symptoms, during treatment and follow-up, all patients had a Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) grade recorded. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 18 months (range, 6-24 months). With 2 g vs. 1 g amifostine, there was a nearly significant decrease in RTOG Grade 2 acute rectal toxicity. Seven weeks after the start of radiation therapy, the incidence of Grade 2 toxicity was 33% in the 1-g group (6/18) compared with 0% (0/12) in the 2-g group (p=0.06). No Grade 3 toxicity or greater occurred in this study. CONCLUSION: This trial suggests greater rectal radioprotection from acute effects with 2 g vs. 1 g amifostine suspension. Further studies should be conducted in populations at higher risk for developing symptomatic acute and late proctitis.     

A predictive model for survival in metastatic cancer patients attending an outpatient palliative radiotherapy clinic

: To develop a predictive model for survival from the time of presentation in an outpatient palliative radiotherapy clinic.

: Sixteen factors were analyzed prospectively in 395 patients seen in a dedicated palliative radiotherapy clinic in a large tertiary cancer center using Cox’s proportional hazards regression model.

: Six prognostic factors had a statistically significant impact on survival, as follows: primary cancer site, site of metastases, Karnofsky performance score (KPS), and fatigue, appetite, and shortness of breath scores from the modified Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale. Risk group stratification was performed (1) by assigning weights to the prognostic factors based on their levels of significance, and (2) by the number of risk factors present. The weighting method provided a Survival Prediction Score (SPS), ranging from 0 to 32. The survival probability at 3, 6, and 12 months was 83%, 70%, and 51%, respectively, for patients with SPS ≤13 (n = 133); 67%, 41%, and 20% for patients with SPS 14–19 (n = 129); and 36%, 18%, and 4% for patients with SPS ≥20 (n = 133) (p < 0.0001). Corresponding survival probabilities based on number of risk factors were as follows: 85%, 72%, and 52% (≤3 risk factors)(n = 98); 68%, 47%, and 24% (4 risk factors)(n = 117); and 46%, 24%, and 11% (≥5 factors)(n = 180)(p < 0.0001).

: Clinical prognostic factors can be used to predict prognosis among patients attending a palliative radiotherapy clinic. If validated in an independent series of patients, the model can be used to guide clinical decisions, plan supportive services, and allocate resource use.     

A phase III comparison of radiation therapy with or without recombinant β-interferon for poor-risk patients with locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (RTOG 93-04)

: The results of Phase I/II data testing β-interferon with radiation therapy in a non-small-cell lung cancer population were promising. Based on these data, the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) initiated a Phase III trial to test the efficacy of β-interferon in poor-risk patients with Stages IIIA and IIIB non-small-cell lung carcinoma.

: Between September 1994 and March 1998, 123 patients were accrued to this trial. Enrolled patients were not eligible for other chemoradiation studies within the RTOG. Eligibility criteria included histologically confirmed Stage IIIA or IIIB non-small-cell lung cancer (according to American Joint Committee on Cancer) considered clinically inoperable or unresectable at the time of surgery. Patients were required to have a Karnofsky performance status 50–70 or >70 and at least 5% weight loss over the preceding 3 months. Betaseron (recombinant human interferon beta_ser, rHuIFN-β_ser,) was the chosen preparation of β-interferon. The patients randomized to the investigational arm received 16 × 10⁶ IU of Betaseron by i.v. bolus given 3 days a week (Monday–Wednesday) on Weeks 1, 3, and 5. The Betaseron was given 30 minutes before radiation therapy for a total of nine doses. Irradiation was delivered at 2 Gy per fraction, 5 days a week, for a total of 60 Gy over 6 weeks and was identical for both arms. The primary end point of the trial was overall survival with local control as a secondary end point. Toxicities occurring within 90 days of therapy completion were defined as acute.

: The median follow-up was 4 years (range: 2.5–6 years) for surviving patients. Seventy-six percent of all patients completed β-interferon. Toxicity was the primary reason for noncompliance. Radiotherapy (RT) compliance was excellent in the RT-alone arm, with 94% completing therapy, compared to 82% in the β-interferon arm (p = 0.0475). Grade 3 and 4 acute toxicities were higher on the β-interferon arm (p = 0.0249). Grade 3 and 4 acute toxicities were primarily related to lung (n = 8) and esophagus (n = 7). No Grade 4 or 5 late toxicities were seen for patients in the radiation-alone arm. However, three patients on the β-interferon arm experienced Grade 4 toxicity, and one patient died. The 1-year survival rate for the RT-alone arm was 44% with a median survival time of 9.5 months. The 1-year survival on the β-interferon arm was 42% with a median survival of 10.3 months. There was no statistical difference in survival times (p = 0.66).

: This multicenter, controlled Phase III trial failed to confirm the efficacy of Betaseron in patients receiving definitive radiotherapy for locally advanced, nonmetastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. The use of β-interferon led to greater rates of both acute and late treatment-related toxicity. The RTOG continues to investigate other biologic modifiers that may provide a nontoxic alternative for this poor-risk population.     

Radiotherapy after high-dose chemotherapy and peripheral blood stem cell support in high-risk breast cancer

To assess the toxicity and efficacy of radiotherapy with respect to locoregional control after adjuvant high-dose chemotherapy for patients with breast cancer. At first, radiotherapy was withheld because of toxicity concerns, but it was introduced in 1995 because of reported high locoregional relapse rates.

Between 1992 and 1998, 40 patients with Stage II–III high-risk breast cancer received adjuvant high-dose chemotherapy consisting of thiotepa, mitoxantrone, and cyclophosphamide and peripheral blood stem cell support after four cycles of induction chemotherapy. The chest wall or breast, as well as the supraclavicular nodes, were irradiated with electrons and photons to a median dose of 50.4 Gy in 20 patients. Six additional patients received only supraclavicular irradiation to a median dose of 50.4 Gy. Acute toxicity was scored clinically. Pulmonary function tests were performed in 14 irradiated patients before high-dose chemotherapy and 1.1–4.4 years (median 1.6) after irradiation. The median follow-up time of living patients was 33 vs. 67 months in irradiated (n = 26) and nonirradiated (n = 14) patients, respectively.

G2 and G3 hematologic toxicity occurred in 1 patient each. No clinical pneumonitis or clinical impairment of lung function was observed. After 1–2 years, the lung function tests showed only minor changes in 4 patients. The 3-year locoregional control rate was 92% in the irradiated patients vs. 58% in the nonirradiated patients (p = 0.049, actuarial analysis).

In this series, adjuvant radiotherapy after adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer appeared well tolerated, with improved local regional control and without significant side effects. Longer follow-up and more patient accrual, as well as Phase III trials, are necessary for confirmation.     

Protective effect of amifostine on dental health after radiotherapy of the head and neck

Purpose: The cytoprotective agent amifostine has been shown to reduce the radiation-induced acute and chronic xerostomia in head and neck cancer patients. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether or not amifostine also reduces the incidence of dental caries associated with the radiation-induced xerostomia.

Methods and Materials: The dental status before and 1 year after radiotherapy was retrospectively compared in 35 unselected patients treated as part of the prospective randomized and multicenter open-label Phase III study (WR-38) at the University Hospitals of Heidelberg, Freiburg, and Erlangen. The WR-38 study compared radiotherapy in head and neck cancer with and without concomitant administration of amifostine.

Results: Patient and treatment characteristics (particularly the radiation dose and percentage of parotids included in the treatment volume) were equally distributed between the patients who received (n = 17) or did not receive (n = 18) amifostine. Fifteen patients of the amifostine group showed no deterioration of the dental status 1 year after radiotherapy as compared to 7 patients who did not receive the cytoprotector (p = 0.015, two-tailed Fisher exact test).

Conclusion: Our data suggest a protective effect of amifostine on the dental health after radiotherapy of the head and neck. The dental status should be used as a primary endpoint in future studies on amifostine.     

Effects of amifostine on acute toxicity from concurrent chemotherapy and radiotherapy for inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer: report of a randomized comparative trial

PURPOSE: To determine the ability of amifostine to reduce the severity and/or incidence of the acute toxicities of concurrent chemotherapy and radiotherapy (RT) for non-small-cell lung cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with inoperable, nonmetastatic non-small-cell lung cancer receiving concurrent chemoradiotherapy were randomized to one of two treatment groups. Arm 1 patients received thoracic RT (total dose, 69.6 Gy in 58 fractions of 1.2 Gy b.i.d. 5 d/wk), plus oral etoposide (50 mg b.i.d. 30 min before thoracic RT for 10 days, repeated on Day 29) and cisplatin (50 mg/m2 i.v. on Days 1, 8, 29, and 36). Arm 2 patients received the same treatment plus amifostine (500 mg i.v. 20-30 min before any treatment the first 2 days of each week). Acute effects were assessed using the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients were enrolled between November 1998 and January 2001. The minimal follow-up was 24 months, and the median follow-up of living patients was 31 months. The patient and tumor characteristics were equally distributed between the patients in the two arms. The median survival time was 20 months in Arm 1 patients and 19 months in Arm 2 patients. The maximal esophageal toxicity was mild (Grade 1) in 23%, moderate (Grade 2) in 42%, and severe (Grade 3-4) in 35% of patients in Arm 1; the corresponding rates for the Arm 2 patients were 48%, 35%, and 16% (p = 0.021). Severe pneumonitis occurred in 16% of the Arm 1 and none of the Arm 2 patients (p = 0.020, chi-square test). Neutropenic fever occurred in 39% of Arm 1 and 16% of Arm 2 patients (p = 0.046, chi-square test). Mild hypotension, dysgeusia, and sneezing were significantly more frequent among the patients in Arm 2. CONCLUSION: Amifostine reduced the severity and incidence of acute esophageal, pulmonary, and hematologic toxicity resulting from concurrent cisplatin-based chemotherapy and RT. Amifostine had no apparent effect on survival in these patients with unresectable non-small-cell lung cancer, suggesting that it does not have a tumor-protective effect.     

Intrarectal amifostine during external beam radiation therapy for prostate cancer produces significant improvements in Quality of Life measured by EPIC score

PURPOSE: To test whether intrarectal amifostine limits symptoms of radiation proctitis, measured by using the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity score and the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) score. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with localized prostate cancer received amifostine as a rectal suspension 30-45 minutes before daily three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy. The first 18 patients received 1 g of amifostine, and the next 12 patients received 2 g. Toxicity was assessed at baseline, during treatment, and at follow-up visits by using RTOG grading and the EPIC Quality of Life (QoL) 50-item questionnaire. The Bowel Function subset of the bowel domain (EPIC-BF), which targets symptom severity, and the Bowel Bother subset of the bowel domain (EPIC-BB), which assesses QoL, were evaluated and compared with the RTOG GI toxicity score. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 30 months (range, 18-36 months). Overall, EPIC-BF and EPIC-BB scores both tracked closely with the RTOG GI toxicity score. Seven weeks after the start of radiation therapy, the incidence of RTOG Grade 2 toxicity was 33% in the 1-g group (6/18 patients) compared with 0% (0/12 patients) in the 2-g group and tended toward statistical significance (p = 0.06). A significant difference between amifostine groups was observed using the EPIC-BF score at 7 weeks (p = 0.04). A difference in EPIC-BB scores between dose groups was evident at 7 weeks (p = 0.07) and was significant at 12 months (p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Higher doses of amifostine produced significant improvements in acute and late bowel QoL (up to 1 year after therapy), measured using the EPIC score.     

Phase II trial of irinotecan in combination with amifostine in patients with advanced colorectal carcinoma

BACKGROUND: Irinotecan is effective in patients with advanced colorectal carcinoma in both first-line and salvage settings but its use can be limited by serious side effects. Amifostine has been shown to reduce the incidence of cisplatin-induced cumulative renal toxicity in patients with advanced ovarian carcinoma and nonsmall cell lung carcinoma. In the current pilot Phase II trial, the authors examined the potential role of amifostine as a protective agent against irinotecan-induced diarrhea and myelosuppression and evaluated an every-2-weeks regimen as an alternative schedule for the administration of irinotecan in patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal carcinoma. METHODS: All patients received amifostine, 740 mg/m2, followed by irinotecan, 250 mg/m2, every 2 weeks. A 6-week cycle of chemotherapy (every 2 weeks for 3 treatments) was chosen to assess toxicity and response. The main objective of the current study was to evaluate the impact of amifostine on gastrointestinal and hematologic toxicity. RESULTS: A total of 22 patients entered the current study. Six of these 22 patients (27%) had WHO Common Toxicity Criteria Grade 3 or 4 diarrhea, including 2 patients (9%) with Grade 4 diarrhea. Eight of 22 patients (36.3%) developed Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia (Grade 4 in 4 of the 22 patients [18%]). Dose reduction was required in 25% of the treatment cycles. Five of the 22 patients (23%) withdrew from the trial due to amifostine toxicity. Of the 15 patients who were evaluable for response, 4 patients (26.6%) had achieved a partial response and 9 (60%) had stable disease as their best response.CONCLUSIONS: The combination of irinotecan with amifostine in patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal carcinoma did not appear to reduce irinotecan toxicity. Amifostine did not appear to interfere with the cytotoxic effect of irinotecan. The results of the current study did demonstrate efficacy and safety of the every-2-weeks irinotecan schedule that was comparable to other established regimens and these results support its feasibility as a reasonable alternative in this disease setting.     

Phase II dose escalation study of image-guided adaptive radiotherapy for prostate cancer: use of dose-volume constraints to achieve rectal isotoxicity

PURPOSE: In our Phase II prostate cancer Adaptive Radiation Therapy (ART) study, the highest possible dose was selected on the basis of normal tissue tolerance constraints. We analyzed rectal toxicity rates in different dose levels and treatment groups to determine whether equivalent toxicity rates were achieved as hypothesized when the protocol was started. METHODS AND MATERIALS: From 1999 to 2002, 331 patients with clinical stage T1 to T3, node-negative prostate cancer were prospectively treated with three-dimensional conformal adaptive RT. A patient-specific confidence-limited planning target volume was constructed on the basis of 5 CT scans and 4 sets of electronic portal images after the first 4 days of treatment. For each case, the rectum (rectal solid) was contoured in its entirety. The rectal wall was defined by use of a 3-mm wall thickness (median volume: 29.8 cc). The prescribed dose level was chosen using the following rectal wall dose constraints: (1) Less than 30% of the rectal wall volume can receive more than 75.6 Gy. (2) Less than 5% of the rectal wall can receive more than 82 Gy. Low-risk patients (PSA < 10, Stage < or = T2a, Gleason score < 7) were treated to the prostate alone (Group 1). All other patients, intermediate and high risk, where treated to the prostate and seminal vesicles (Group 2). The risk of chronic toxicity (NCI Common Toxicity Criteria 2.0) was assessed for the different dose levels prescribed. HIC approval was acquired for all patients. Median follow-up was 1.6 years. RESULTS: Grade 2 chronic rectal toxicity was experienced by 34 patients (10%) (9% experienced rectal bleeding, 6% experienced proctitis, 3% experienced diarrhea, and 1% experienced rectal pain) at a median interval of 1.1 year. Nine patients (3%) experienced grade 3 or higher chronic rectal toxicity (1 Grade 4) at a median interval of 1.2 years. The 2-year rates of Grade 2 or higher and Grade 3 or higher chronic rectal toxicity were 17% and 3%, respectively. No significant difference by dose level was seen in the 2-year rate of Grade 2 or higher chronic rectal toxicity. These rates were 27%, 15%, 14%, 17%, and 24% for dose levels equal to or less than 72, 73.8, 75.6, 77.4, and 79.2 Gy, respectively (p = 0.3). Grade 2 or higher chronic rectal bleeding was significantly greater for Group 2 than for Group 1, 17% vs. 8% (p = 0.035). CONCLUSIONS: High doses (79.2 Gy) were safely delivered in selected patients by our adaptive radiotherapy process. Under the rectal dose-volume histogram constraints for the dose level selection, the risk of chronic rectal toxicity is similar among patients treated to different dose levels. Therefore, rectal chronic toxicity rates reflect the dose-volume cutoff used and are independent of the actual dose levels. On the other hand, a larger PTV will increase the rectal wall dose and chronic rectal toxicity rates. PTV volume and dose constraints should be defined, considering their potential benefit.     

A randomized study of very accelerated radiotherapy with and without amifostine in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma

Purpose: The aim of this study was to assess whether amifostine could minimize acute mucositis induced by a very accelerated irradiation regimen in patients with advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC).

Methods and Materials: Between May 1996 and February 1998, 26 patients with an inoperable nonmetastatic Stage IV HNSCC were entered in this study. The treatment consisted of very accelerated radiotherapy given 64 Gy in 3.5 weeks. The patients were randomized to receive or not 150 mg/m², amifostine (Ethyol, U.S. Bioscience) 15–30 min prior to each radiation session.

Results: Of the 13 patients who received amifostine, definitive interruption of amifostine occurred in 5 cases (38%), due to tolerance problems (vomiting, liver enzyme elevation, generalized erythema). The distribution of Grade 4 mucositis (WHO) was 1 case versus 8 cases, with and without amifostine, respectively. The mean duration of “at least Grade 3” mucositis (WHO) was 25.1 days versus 49.2 days with and without amifostine (p = 0.03). In the amifostine group, 11/13 of the patients required a feeding tube (nasogastric tube or medical gastrostomy), because of acute mucositis, whereas in the control group a feeding tube was necessary in all cases. The mean duration of the use of this feeding tube was 1 month versus 2.5 months with and without amifostine respectively (p < 0.01). Local-regional control was not different between both arms with a median follow-up of 15 months.

Conclusion: Despite the limited number of patients, this pilot randomized study suggests that amifostine was able to markedly reduce the severity and duration of mucositis induced by very accelerated radiotherapy. However, the tolerance of this twice daily amifostine schedule was relatively poor.