The use of intensity-modulated radiation therapy in the treatment of oropharyngeal carcinoma

Current Opinion in Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery

Volumn 13, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 226-232

  Narayan, Samir ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Intensity modulated radiation therapy; Oropharyngeal cancer; Radiation therapy; Treatment

Indexed keywords

ANTIINFECTIVE AGENT; RADIOPROTECTIVE AGENT;

ADVANCED CANCER; CANCER CONTROL; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; COLLIMATOR; HEAD AND NECK CANCER; HUMAN; INTENSITY MODULATED RADIATION THERAPY; LINEAR ACCELERATOR; ORGAN PRESERVATION; OROPHARYNX CARCINOMA; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA; TECHNIQUE;

CARCINOMA, SQUAMOUS CELL; CHEMOTHERAPY, ADJUVANT; HUMANS; NEOPLASM RECURRENCE, LOCAL; NEOPLASM STAGING; OROPHARYNGEAL NEOPLASMS; RADIOTHERAPY DOSAGE; RADIOTHERAPY, ADJUVANT; RADIOTHERAPY, CONFORMAL; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 22344457982     PISSN: 10689508     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.moo.0000170528.97134.20     Document Type: Review

References (37)

1. Jemal A, Tiwari RC, Murray T, et al. American Cancer Society. Cancer statistics, 2004. CA Cancer J Clin 2004; 54:8-29.
2. Parsons JT, Mendenhall WM, Stringer SP, et al. Squamous cell carcinoma of the oropharynx: surgery, radiation therapy, or both. Cancer 2002; 94:2967-2980.
3. Horiot JC, Le Fur R, N'Guyen T, et al. Hyperfractionation versus conventional fractionation in oropharyngeal carcinoma: final analysis of a randomized trial of the EORTC Cooperative Group of Radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol 1992; 25:231-241.
4. Selek U, Garden AS, Morrison WH, et al. Radiation therapy for early-stage carcinoma of the oropharynx. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004; 59:743-751. MD Anderson experience of treating early-stage oropharynx cancers with radiation alone shows comparable control and survival rates to other surgery-only series.
5. Foote RL, Schild SE, Thompson WM, et al. Tonsil cancer: patterns of failure after surgery alone and surgery combined with postoperative radiation therapy. Cancer 1994; 73:2638-2647.
6. Hicks WL, Kuriakose MA, Loree TR, et al. Surgery versus radiation therapy as single-modality treatment of tonsillar fossa carcinoma: the Roswell Park Cancer Institute experience (1971-1991). Laryngoscope 1998; 108:1014-1019.
7. Calais G, Alfonsi M, Bardet E, et al. Randomized trial of radiation therapy versus concomitant chemotherapy and radiation therapy for advanced-stage oropharynx carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst 1999; 91:2081-2086.
8. Denis F, Garaud P, Bardet E, et al. Final results of the 94-01 French Head and Neck Oncology and Radiotherapy Group randomized trial comparing radiotherapy alone with concomitant radiochemotherapy in advanced-stage oropharynx carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 2004; 22:69-76. Final results of a phase III randomized trial confirming a survival benefit of the addition of chemotherapy to radiation for stage III/IV oropharynx cancer; thus reinforcing chemoradiation as the standard of care for organ preservation.
9. Calais G, Bardet E, Sire C, et al. Radiotherapy with concomitant weekly docetaxel for Stages III/IV oropharynx carcinoma: results of the 98-02 GORTEC Phase II trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004; 58:161-166. The use of docetaxel with radiation did not improve the locoregional or toxicity profile compared with the carboplatin/5-fluorouracil regimen used in GORTEC 94-01.
10. Bernier J, Domenge C, Ozsahin M, et al. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Trial 22931. Postoperative irradiation with or without concomitant chemotherapy for locally advanced head and neck cancer. N Engl J Med 2004; 350:1945-1952. Together with the Intergroup study (Cooper et al., N Engl J Med 2004; 350:1937-1944), these landmark phase III trials demonstrate a locoregional control and survival benefit to the addition of cisplatin to postoperative radiation therapy for high-risk patients with head and neck cancer who have undergone resection.
11. Cooper JS, Pajak TF, Forastiere AA, et al. Postoperative concurrent radiotherapy and chemotherapy for high-risk squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck. N Engl J Med 2004; 350:1937-1944. Together with the EORTC study (Bernier et al., N Engl J Med 2004; 350:1945-1952), these landmark phase III trials demonstrate a locoregional control and survival benefit to the addition of cisplatin to postoperative radiation therapy for high-risk patients with head and neck cancer who have undergone resection.
12. Eisbruch A, Schwartz M, Rasch C, et al. Dysphagia and aspiration after chemoradiotherapy for head-and-neck cancer; which anatomic structures are affected and can they be spared by IMRT? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004; 60:1425-1439. One of the first studies to attempt to determine the structural abnormalities accounting for dysphagia after radiation therapy and possible structures to avoid in IMRT planning.
13. Amdur RJ, Li JG, Liu C, et al. Unnecessary laryngeal irradiation in the IMRT era. Head Neck 2004; 26:257-253; discussion 263-264. Authors advocate limiting laryngeal dose during IMRT planning.
14. Smith RV, Goldman SY, Meitler JJ, et al. Decreased short- and long-term swallowing problems with altered radiotherapy dosing used in an organ-sparing protocol for advanced pharyngeal carcinoma. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2004; 130:831-836.
15. Moeller P, Perrier M, Ozashin M, et al. A prospective study of salivary gland function in patients undergoing radiotherapy for squamous cell carcinoma of the oropharynx. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2004; 97:173-189. This study helps quantitate xerostomia following standard radiation therapy.
16. Eisbruch A, Ship JA, Kim HM, Ten Haken RK. Partial irradiation of the parotid gland. Semin Radiat Oncol 2001; 11:234-239.
17. Munter MW, Karger CP, Hoffner SG, et al. Evaluation of salivary gland function after treatment of head-and-neck tumors with intensity-modulated radiotherapy by quantitative pertechnetate scintigraphy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004; 58:175-184. A dose-response effect was seen as measured by scintigraphy, with parotid doses of less than 26-30 Gy significantly preserving salivary gland function.
18. Parliament MB, Scrimger RA, Anderson SG, et al. Preservation of oral health-related quality of life and salivary flow rates after inverse-planned intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for head-and-neck cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004; 58:663-673. A phase I-II trial showing that use of parotid-sparing IMRT preserves salivary flow and xerostomia-related quality of life.
19. Thorstad WL, Chao KS, Haughey B. Toxicity and compliance of subcutaneous amifostine in patients undergoing postoperative intensity-modulated radiation therapy for head and neck cancer. Semin Oncol 2004; 6(Suppl 18):8-12. Prospective evaluation of salivary flow and quality of life study using IMRT with amifostine is ongoing.
20. Rosenthal DI, Chambers MS, Weber RS, et al. A phase II study to assess the efficacy of amifostine for submandibular/sublingual salivary sparing during the treatment of head and neck cancer with intensity modulated radiation therapy for parotid salivary sparing. Semin Oncol 2004; 6(Suppl 18):25-28. Prospective evaluation of salivary flow and quality-of-life study using IMRT with amifostine is ongoing.
21. Chao KS, Ozyigit G, Blanco AI, et al. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy for oropharyngeal carcinoma: impact of tumor volume. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004; 59:43-50. An update of 74 patients treated with IMRT for oropharyngeal cancer demonstrating an acceptable number of locoregional failures and a 4-year estimated locoregional control of 87%. Authors also provide their guidelines for treating oropharyngeal cancer with IMRT.
22. Eisbruch A, Marsh LH, Dawson LA, et al. Recurrences near base of skull after IMRT for head-and-neck cancer: implications for target delineation in high neck and for parotid gland sparing. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004; 59:28-42. Low locoregional failure rate using parotid-sparing IMRT in carefully selected patients and careful delineation of target volumes, especially in the contralateral, node-negative neck. The radiation oncologist practicing head and neck IMRT must understand this article.
23. Bussels B, Maes A, Herman R, et al. Recurrences after conformal parotid-sparing radiotherapy for head and neck cancer. Radiother Oncol 2004; 72:119-127. Low locoreglonal failure rate using parotid-sparing IMRT in carefully selected patients, similar to Eisbruch et al. (Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004; 59:28-42). The extent of upper level II nodes treated in the contralateral, node-negative neck differed, however, calling into question the appropriate delineation of target volumes.
24. Prins-Braam PM, Raaijmakers CP, Terhaard CH. Location of cervical lymph node metastases in oropharyngeal and hypopharyngeal carcinoma: implications for cranial border of elective nodal target volumes. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004; 58:132-138. Authors measure the distance of actual grossly enlarged nodes on CT in the upper level II from the base of skull to provide additional data on the appropriate delineation of target volumes.
25. Astrenidou E, Dehnad H, Terhaard CH, et al. Level II lymph nodes and radiation-induced xerostomia. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004; 58:124-131. Parotid sparing can be improved if the most appropriate cranial target in the contralateral, node-negative neck is at the bottom of C2 vertebral body, rather than the bottom of C1. The cranial-most delineation of target volumes remains controversial.
26. Gregoire V, Levendag P, Ang KK, et al. CT-based delineation of lymph node levels and related CTVs in the node-negative neck: DAHANCA, EORTC, GORTEC, NCIC, RTOG consensus guidelines. Radiother Oncol 2003; 69:227-236.
27. Heron DE, Andrade RS, Flickinger J, et al. Hybrid PET-CT simulation for radiation treatment planning in head-and-neck cancers: a brief technical report. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004; 60:1419-1424. Prospective study of the use of PET in tumor volume definition for radiation therapy treatment planning in 21 patients.
28. Scarfone C, Lavely WC, Cmelak AJ, et al. Prospective feasibility trial of radiotherapy target definition for head and neck cancer using 3-dimensional PET and CT imaging. J Nucl Med 2004; 45:543-552. The use of PET changed the CT-defined tumor volume.
29. Solberg TD, Agazaryan N, Goss BW, et al. A feasibility study of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography targeting and simultaneous integrated boost for intensity-modulated radiosurgery and radiotherapy. J Neurosurg 2004; 101(Suppl 3):381-389.
30. Yao M, Graham MM, Smith RB, et al. Value of FDG PET in assessment of treatment response and surveillance in head-and-neck cancer patients after intensity modulated radiation treatment: a preliminary report. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004; 60:1410-1418. This study provides further evidence that a positive posttreatment PET finding is an indicator of residual disease.
31. Vieira SC, Dirkx ML, Heijmen BJ, et al. SIFT: a method to verify the IMRT fluence delivered during patient treatment using an electronic portal imaging device. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004; 60:981-993.
32. Siebers JV, Kim JO, Ko L, et al. Monte Carlo computation of dosimetric amorphous silicon electronic portal images. Med Phys 2004; 31:2135-2146.
33. Kim S, Akpati HC, Li JG, et al. An immobilization system for claustrophobic patients in head-and-neck intensity-modulated radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004; 59:1531-1539. The University of Florida publishes their clinic-specific measures of daily setup and organ motion.
34. van Asselen B, Dehnad H, Terhaard CH, et al. Segmental IMRT for oropharyngeal cancer in a clinical setting. Radiother Oncol 2003; 9:259-266.
35. Bednarz G, Michalski D, Anne PR, et al. Inverse treatment planning using volume-based objective functions. Phys Med Biol 2004; 49:2503-2514.
36. Xiao Y, Michalski D, Censor Y, et al. Inherent smoothness of intensity patterns for intensity modulated radiation therapy generated by simultaneous projection algorithms. Phys Med Biol 2004; 49:3227-3245.
37. Lauve A, Morris M, Schmidt-Ullrich R, et al. Simultaneous integrated boost intensity-modulated radiotherapy for locally advanced head-and-neck squamous cell carcinomas: II-clinical results. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004; 60:374-387. This phase I radiation dose escalation trial determined 2.36 Gy to be the maximal tolerable daily dose deliverable to the gross tumor volume using simultaneous integrated boost IMRT without chemotherapy.