Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Asian Journal of Oncology 2022; 08(03): 119-126
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1745730
Original Article

Simultaneous Modulated Accelerated Radiotherapy (SMART) with Dysphagia Aspiration-Related Structures (DARS) Sparing: Do We Have a Role for Dose Condensation in Locally Advanced Head and Neck Cancer

Bindhu Joseph 
1   Department of Radiation Oncology, Kidwai Memorial Institute of Oncology, Bangalore, Karnataka, India
,
Muralikrishnan Ramachandran 
1   Department of Radiation Oncology, Kidwai Memorial Institute of Oncology, Bangalore, Karnataka, India
,
Nithin Bhaskar Valuvil
1   Department of Radiation Oncology, Kidwai Memorial Institute of Oncology, Bangalore, Karnataka, India
,
Lokesh Vishwanath
1   Department of Radiation Oncology, Kidwai Memorial Institute of Oncology, Bangalore, Karnataka, India
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Introduction Concurrent chemotherapy integrated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) is the standard of care for locally advanced head and neck cancer. Simultaneous integrated boost technique has allowed differential doses to primary and normal structures permitting significant toxicity reduction. The current study explores the feasibility of the simultaneous modulated accelerated radiotherapy (SMART) technique to enhance cytoreduction and explore the possibility of dose intensification with radiobiologically targeted treatment condensation.

Methods Thirty patients were randomized in an open-labeled study to receive concurrent chemoradiation of 60 Gy in 25 fractions with “SMART” technique or 70 Gy in 35 fractions using conventional intensity-modulated radiotherapy simultaneous integrated boost “IMRT SIB.” The primary endpoints included comparative volumetric cytoreduction between the study and control arm assessed during the course of treatment and final response evaluation. Secondary endpoints involved the assessment of acute toxicity parameters for xerostomia, mucositis, dysphagia, and fatigue.

Results The “SMART” study arm showed comparable volumetric cytoreduction to the conventional “IMRT SIB” arm at midtreatment (p-value = 0.225) as well as toward completion (p-value = 0.476). The study arm did observe 94.4% cytoreduction of tumor volume compared with 88.05% in the conventional arm at the time of response evaluation. In spite of treatment condensation, there was no significant increase in toxicity with “SMART.” There was no difference in the frequency or duration of grade 3 mucositis in the “SMART” arm in spite of intensification (p-value = 0.728). In the “SMART” arm, there was a favorable reduction in the duration of grade ⅔ dysphagia; 2.8 weeks versus 4.6 weeks (p-value = 0.002). Even though the xerostomia was comparable in frequency and intensity, the total duration of xerostomia was 50% less (p-value = 0.001).

Conclusions The “SMART” technique provides a radiobiologically sound, effective, and safe protocol that has the potential to improve the treatment of locally advanced head and neck cancer. The good tolerability and toxicity profile in the study arm is encouraging and facilitates further research.

Keywords

simultaneous modulated accelerated radiotherapy - intensity-modulated radiotherapy - simultaneous integrated boost - chemoradiation - locally advanced head and neck cancer


Publication History

Article published online:
22 June 2022

© 2022. Spring Hope Cancer Foundation & Young Oncologist Group of Asia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Blanchard P, Landais C, Petit C. et al. Meta-analysis of chemotherapy in head and neck cancer (MACH-NC): an update on 100 randomized trials and 19,248 patients, on behalf of MACH-NC group. Ann Oncol 2016; 27 DOI: 10.1016/J.IJROBP.2007.04.088.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 2018; 68 (06) 394-424
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Nutting C, Ahern R, Rogers M. et al. First results of a phase III multicenter randomized controlled trial of intensity modulated (IMRT) versus conventional radiotherapy (RT) in head and neck cancer (PARSPORT: ISRCTN48243537; CRUK/03/005). J Clin Oncol 2009; 27 (18S): LBA6006
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Pignon J-P, le Maître A, Maillard E, Bourhis J. MACH-NC Collaborative Group. Meta-analysis of chemotherapy in head and neck cancer (MACH-NC): an update on 93 randomised trials and 17,346 patients. Radiother Oncol 2009; 92 (01) 4-14 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167814009001881 Accessed2009
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Pignon JP, le Maître A, Bourhis J. MACH-NC Collaborative Group. Meta-analyses of chemotherapy in head and neck cancer (MACH-NC): an update. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007; 69 (2, Suppl): S112-S114
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Gómez-Millán J, Toledo MD, Lupiañez Y. et al. Competing causes of death in patients with locoregionally advanced head and neck cancer treated with concomitant boost radiation plus concurrent weekly cisplatin. Clin Transl Oncol 2013; 15 (04) 321-326
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Nutting CM, Morden JP, Harrington KJ. et al; PARSPORT trial management group. Parotid-sparing intensity modulated versus conventional radiotherapy in head and neck cancer (PARSPORT): a phase 3 multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 2011; 12 (02) 127-136
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Wang X, Eisbruch A. IMRT for head and neck cancer: reducing xerostomia and dysphagia. J Radiat Res (Tokyo) 2016; 57 (1, Suppl 1): i69-i75
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Withers HR, Taylor JM, Maciejewski B. The hazard of accelerated tumor clonogen repopulation during radiotherapy. Acta Oncol 1988; 27 (02) 131-146
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Kim JJ, Tannock IF. Repopulation of cancer cells during therapy: an important cause of treatment failure. Nat Rev Cancer 2005; 5 (07) 516-525
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Fowler JF. Brief summary of radiobiological principles in fractionated radiotherapy. Semin Radiat Oncol 1992; 2 (01) DOI: 10.1016/S1053-4296(05)80045-1.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Marcu GL, Yeoh E. Tumour repopulation during treatment for head and neck cancer: clinical evidence, mechanisms and minimizing strategies. InHead and Neck Cancer 2012 Mar 14. IntechOpen;
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Wu S, Xie C, Jin X, Zhang P. Simultaneous modulated accelerated radiation therapy in the treatment of nasopharyngeal cancer: a local center’s experience. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006; 66 (04) 40-46
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Butler EB, Teh BS, Grant III WH. et al. Smart (simultaneous modulated accelerated radiation therapy) boost: a new accelerated fractionation schedule for the treatment of head and neck cancer with intensity modulated radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1999; 45 (01) 21-32
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Tandon S, Gairola M, Ahlawat P. et al. Randomized controlled study comparing simultaneous modulated accelerated radiotherapy versus simultaneous integrated boost intensity modulated radiotherapy in the treatment of locally advanced head and neck cancer. J Egypt Natl Canc Inst 2018; 30 (03) 107-115 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1110036218300402 Accessed2018
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Grégoire V, Grau C, Lapeyre M, Maingon P. Target volume selection and delineation (T and N) for primary radiation treatment of oral cavity, oropharyngeal, hypopharyngeal and laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma. Oral Oncol 2018; 87: 131-137
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Biau J, Lapeyre M, Troussier I. et al. Selection of lymph node target volumes for definitive head and neck radiation therapy: a 2019 Update. Radiother Oncol 2019; 134: 1-9 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167814019300234 . Accessed March 4, 2022
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Christianen MEMC, Langendijk JA, Westerlaan HE, van de Water TA, Bijl HP. Delineation of organs at risk involved in swallowing for radiotherapy treatment planning. Radiother Oncol 2011; 101 (03) 394-402
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Brouwer CL, Steenbakkers RJH, Bourhis J. et al. CT-based delineation of organs at risk in the head and neck region: DAHANCA, EORTC, GORTEC, HKNPCSG, NCIC CTG, NCRI, NRG Oncology and TROG consensus guidelines. Radiother Oncol 2015; 117 (01) 83-90
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Prameela C, Ravind R, Nair MH, Mon PSR, Sheejamol V, Makuny D. P0107 Dose to dysphagia aspiration-related structures and its effect on swallowing: comparison of 3D CRT and IMRT plans. Eur J Cancer 2014; 50: e38-e39
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Gay AH, Dyk P, Deasy OJ, Mullen D, Eschen L, Pope H, DeWees T, Thorstad W. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v4.0 Based Hybrid Patient and Physician questionnaire for Head and Neck (HN) Radiotherapy Symptom Reporting. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics 2011 Oct 1 2011; 81 (02) S673
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Sanguineti G, Ricchetti F, Wu B, McNutt T, Fiorino C. Parotid gland shrinkage during IMRT predicts the time to Xerostomia resolution. Radiat Oncol 2015; 10: 19 DOI: 10.1038/NRC1650.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Ho KF, Swindell R, Brammer CV. Dose intensity comparison between weekly and 3-weekly Cisplatin delivered concurrently with radical radiotherapy for head and neck cancer: a retrospective comparison from New Cross Hospital, Wolverhampton, UK. Acta Oncol 2008; 47 (08) 1513-1518
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Gupta T, Agarwal JP, Ghosh-Laskar S, Parikh PM, D'Cruz AK, Dinshaw KA. Radical radiotherapy with concurrent weekly cisplatin in loco-regionally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: a single-institution experience. Head Neck Oncol 2009; 1 (01) 17 DOI: 10.1186/1758-3284-1-17.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Nguyen NP, Sallah S, Karlsson U, Antoine JE. Combined chemotherapy and radiation therapy for head and neck malignancies: quality of life issues. Cancer 2002; 94 (04) 1131-1141
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Bourhis J. SP-030: GORTEC 99–02 randomised trial. Radiother Oncol 2013; 106 DOI: 10.1002/CNCR.10257.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Bourhis J, Sire C, Graff P. et al. Concomitant chemoradiotherapy versus acceleration of radiotherapy with or without concomitant chemotherapy in locally advanced head and neck carcinoma (GORTEC 99-02): an open-label phase 3 randomised trial. Lancet Oncol 2012; 13 (02) 145-153
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Ferris MJ, Zhong J, Switchenko JM. et al. Brainstem dose is associated with patient-reported acute fatigue in head and neck cancer radiation therapy. Radiother Oncol 2018; 126 (01) 100-106
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar