Search

Purpose Although intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is increasingly used to treat locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), IMRT and three-dimensional conformal external beam radiation therapy (3D-CRT) have not been compared prospectively. This study compares 3D-CRT and IMRT outcomes for locally advanced NSCLC in a large prospective clinical trial. Patients and Methods A secondary analysis was performed to compare IMRT with 3D-CRT in NRG Oncology clinical trial RTOG 0617, in which patients received concurrent chemotherapy of carboplatin and paclitaxel with or without cetuximab, and 60- versus 74-Gy radiation doses. Comparisons included 2-year overall survival (OS), progression-free survival, local failure, distant metastasis, and selected Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 3) ≥ grade 3 toxicities. Results The median follow-up was 21.3 months. Of 482 patients, 53% were treated with 3D-CRT and 47% with IMRT. The IMRT group had larger planning treatment volumes (median, 427 v 486 mL; P = .005); a larger planning treatment volume/volume of lung ratio (median, 0.13 v 0.15; P = .013); and more stage IIIB disease (30.3% v 38.6%, P = .056). Two-year OS, progression-free survival, local failure, and distant metastasis-free survival were not different between IMRT and 3D-CRT. IMRT was associated with less ≥ grade 3 pneumonitis (7.9% v 3.5%, P = .039) and a reduced risk in adjusted analyses (odds ratio, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.171 to 0.986; P = .046). IMRT also produced lower heart doses ( P < .05), and the volume of heart receiving 40 Gy (V40) was significantly associated with OS on adjusted analysis ( P < .05). The lung V5 was not associated with any ≥ grade 3 toxicity, whereas the lung V20 was associated with increased ≥ grade 3 pneumonitis risk on multivariable analysis ( P = .026). Conclusion IMRT was associated with lower rates of severe pneumonitis and cardiac doses in NRG Oncology clinical trial RTOG 0617, which supports routine use of IMRT for locally advanced NSCLC.

Purpose: National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines recommend patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) receive treatment at centers with expertise, but whether provider experience affects survival is unknown., Patients and Methods: The effect of institutional experience on overall survival (OS) in patients with stage III or IV HNC was investigated within a randomized trial of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG 0129), which compared cisplatin concurrent with standard versus accelerated fractionation radiotherapy. As a surrogate for experience, institutions were classified as historically low- (HLACs) or high-accruing centers (HHACs) based on accrual to 21 RTOG HNC trials (1997 to 2002). The effect of accrual volume on OS was estimated by Cox proportional hazards models., Results: Median RTOG accrual (1997 to 2002) at HLACs was four versus 65 patients at HHACs. Analysis included 471 patients in RTOG 0129 (2002 to 2005) with known human papillomavirus and smoking status. Patients at HLACs versus HHACs had better performance status (0: 62% v 52%; P = .04) and lower T stage (T4: 26.5% v 35.3%; P = .002) but were otherwise similar. Radiotherapy protocol deviations were higher at HLACs versus HHACs (18% v 6%; P < .001). When compared with HHACs, patients at HLACs had worse OS (5 years: 51.0% v 69.1%; P = .002). Treatment at HLACs was associated with increased death risk of 91% (hazard ratio [HR], 1.91; 95% CI, 1.37 to 2.65) after adjustment for prognostic factors and 72% (HR, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.23 to 2.40) after radiotherapy compliance adjustment., Conclusion: OS is worse for patients with HNC treated at HLACs versus HHACs to cooperative group trials after accounting for radiotherapy protocol deviations. Institutional experience substantially influences survival in locally advanced HNC., (© 2014 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Purpose: We tested the efficacy and toxicity of cisplatin plus accelerated fractionation with a concomitant boost (AFX-C) versus standard fractionation (SFX) in locally advanced head and neck carcinoma (LA-HNC)., Patients and Methods: Patients had stage III to IV carcinoma of the oral cavity, oropharynx, hypopharynx, or larynx. Radiation therapy schedules were 70 Gy in 35 fractions over 7 weeks (SFX) or 72 Gy in 42 fractions over 6 weeks (AFX-C). Cisplatin doses were 100 mg/m(2) once every 3 weeks for two (AFX-C) or three (SFX) cycles. Toxicities were scored by using National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria 2.0 and the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group/European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer criteria. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) rates were estimated by using the Kaplan-Meier method and were compared by using the one-sided log-rank test. Locoregional failure (LRF) and distant metastasis (DM) rates were estimated by using the cumulative incidence method and Gray's test., Results: In all, 721 of 743 patients were analyzable (361, SFX; 360, AFX-C). At a median follow-up of 7.9 years (range, 0.3 to 10.1 years) for 355 surviving patients, no differences were observed in OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.96; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.18; P = .37; 8-year survival, 48% v 48%), PFS (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.84 to 1.24; P = .52; 8-year estimate, 42% v 41%), LRF (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.84 to 1.38; P = .78; 8-year estimate, 37% v 39%), or DM (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.56 to 1.24; P = .16; 8-year estimate, 15% v 13%). For oropharyngeal cancer, p16-positive patients had better OS than p16-negative patients (HR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.42; P < .001; 8-year survival, 70.9% v 30.2%). There were no statistically significant differences in the grade 3 to 5 acute or late toxicities between the two arms and p-16 status., Conclusion: When combined with cisplatin, AFX-C neither improved outcome nor increased late toxicity in patients with LA-HNC. Long-term high survival rates in p16-positive patients with oropharyngeal cancer support the ongoing efforts to explore deintensification., (© 2014 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)