A comparison of two modalities of stereotactic body radiation therapy for peripheral early-stage non-small cell lung cancer: results of a prospective French study

Claude, L.; Morelle, Magali; Mahé, M.‐A.; Pasquier, David; Boisselier, P.; Bondiau, P.-Y.; Touboul, E.; Peignaux-Casasnovas, K.; Gassa, F.; Perrier, Lionel; Dussart, Sophie; Beckendorf, V.

doi:10.1259/bjr.20200256

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This retrospective study describes factors associated with outcome, toxicity, and dosimetric parameters after lung SBRT, depending on the chosen delivery device. Our results revealed excellent local control rates of 96.8% and 94.8% at 2 and 3 years after SBRT, and a low rate of moderate-severe toxicity, values that are comparable with the literature(11)(12)(13). We have not obtained a signi cant difference in terms of local control rate after SBRT depending on the technique choice.Claude et al, prospectively analyzed the e ciency and toxicity of SBRT with CK compared to linear accelerator SBRT treatments for peripheral early stage NSCLC.…”

supporting

confidence: 88%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Lung Stereotactic Radiation Therapy: Intercomparison of Several Irradiation Devices in Terms of Outcome and Predictive Factors

Reun

Casutt

Durham

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is recommended for the treatment of inoperable early stage non-small-cell lung cancer and lung oligometastases. The radiation oncology department of the Lausanne University Hospital (CHUV) gathers three different radiotherapy devices able to treat pulmonary lesions in SBRT conditions: CyberKnife® (CK), Helical Tomotherapy® (HT), and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). The aim of this study is to define the patients’ outcome in terms of irradiation efficacy and toxicities after lung SBRT depending of the choice of the SBRT technique.Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical, radiological, and dosimetric data of patients with primary lung tumor or pulmonary oligometastases treated with SBRT between January 2016 and February 2020. We analyzed descriptive data using the Chi-2 test for proportions and the T-test for means comparisons, survival data by the Kaplan-Meier method and comparisons between groups by the Log-rank test and Cox-regression.Results: We identified 111 patients mostly in good condition (82.9% PS 0-1) with a median age of 71.4 years. One hundred forty-two lesions were treated with a typical fractionation of 55 Gy in 5 fractions, delivered by CK (59.9%), VMAT (38.0%), or HT (2.1%). Compared to other techniques, CK technique allowed to treat comparable gross tumor volume (GTV; 2.1 vs 1.4cc, p = 0.84) with smaller planning treatment volume (PTV; 12.3 vs 21.9 cc, p = 0.013), and was associated with a lower mean lung dose (MLD; 2.6 vs 4.1 Gy, p < 0.001), a lower V5 (13.5 vs 19.9 cc, p = 0.002) and a lower V20 (2.3 vs 5.4 cc, p < 0.001). Local control rates at 2 years were not different depending on the irradiation device, respectively of 96.2% (range, 90.8-100) and 98.1% (range, 94.4-100), p = 0.68. Toxicity incidence was significantly increased with V5 value > 17.2% (56.0 vs 77.4%, p = 0.021). Conclusions: Compared to other SBRT techniques, CK treatments permitted to treat comparable GTV with reduced PTV, MLD, V20, and V5. The dosimetric benefit of CK SBRT was not associated with a clear clinical benefit, with comparable outcome in terms of control rates and toxicity. Toxicity incidence was less frequent when reducing the V5. The use of CK is particularly attractive in case of multiple courses of lung SBRT or in case of local relapse requiring lung re-irradiation.Trial registration: Registered on February 24th 2021, ID 2021-00267, with the authorization of the CER-VD ethics committee (Switzerland).

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 88%

“…Toxicity is described in Table 4. (13). Even retrospective, our study represents the rst one directly comparing the outcomes of patients receiving lung SBRT using three different modalities in the same radiotherapy department.…”

Section: Toxicitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Lung Stereotactic Radiation Therapy: Intercomparison of Several Irradiation Devices in Terms of Outcome and Predictive Factors

Reun

Casutt

Durham

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…No randomised prospective data comparing the clinical outcome of different tracking techniques has been published (and such trials are virtually impossible: few institutions have this choice in terms of equipment). However, Claude et al, in an observational prospective multicentric study, found no differences in terms of local control, progressionfree survival, overall survival and toxicity in two cohorts treated either with a Linac-or a Cyberknife-delivered SBRT (39).…”

Section: Trackingmentioning

confidence: 97%

Tumour motion management in lung cancer: a narrative review

Botticella

Lévy

Auzac

et al. 2021

Transl Lung Cancer Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Respiratory motion is one of the geometrical uncertainties that may affect the accuracy of thoracic radiotherapy in the treatment of lung cancer. Accounting for tumour motion may allow reducing treatment volumes, irradiated healthy tissue and possibly toxicity, and finally enabling dose escalation.Historically, large population-based margins were used to encompass tumour motion. A paradigmatic change happened in the last decades led to the development of modern imaging techniques during the simulation and the delivery, such as the 4-dimensional (4D) computed tomography (CT) or the 4D-cone beam CT scan, has contributed to a better understanding of lung tumour motion and to the widespread use of individualised margins (with either an internal tumour volume approach or a mid-position/ventilation approach). Moreover, recent technological advances in the delivery of radiotherapy treatments (with a variety of commercial solution allowing tumour tracking, gating or treatments in deep-inspiration breathhold) conjugate the necessity of minimising treatment volumes while maximizing the patient comfort with less invasive techniques. In this narrative review, we provided an introduction on the intra-fraction tumour motion (in both lung tumours and mediastinal lymph-nodes), and summarized the principal motion management strategies (in both the imaging and the treatment delivery) in thoracic radiotherapy for lung cancer, with an eye on the clinical outcomes.

show abstract

“…For patients with lung cancer, HRQOL is usually measured by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Core Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) in conjunction with the speci c module for lung cancer (QLQ-LC13) [7][8][9]. However, the EORTC QLQ-LC13 was developed 27 years ago and does not include items that adequately assess the adverse effects of newly developed treatments [10][11][12]. For example, the EORTC QLQ-LC13 does not assess skin rash, which is the most common side effect of targeted therapy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Translation and Adaptation of The EORTC QLQ-LC 29 for Use in Chinese Patients with Lung Cancer

Dai

Wang

Liu

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The latest European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire-Lung Cancer 29 (QLQ-LC29) has been translated and validated in several languages but not yet in simplified Chinese. This study aimed to translate this questionnaire into simplified Chinese and adapt it for use in Chinese patients with lung cancer. Methods The translation and adaptation process followed the EORTC translation procedure, and consisted of eight steps, namely, translation consent, forward translations, reconciliation, back translations, a back translation report, proofreading, pilot testing, and finalisation. The pilot testing included 10 patients with lung cancer. Results We obtained the permission to perform the EORTC QLQ-LC29 translation work on November 17, 2020. Thereafter, it took 3 weeks to complete the forward translations, reconciled translation, and back translations. After several rounds of discussion with the EORTC Translation Unit, 19 items used the existing translations from the EORTC item library and 10 items were translated from scratch. The 10 patients included in the pilot testing phase had a median age of 64 years (range, 31–69 years); five were male; five had an educational level of high school or above, and six had undergone surgery. Eight items received comments from patients (six items by one patient alone and the other two items by three patients). No patient commented on the instructions or the format used for responses. After discussion with the EORTC Translation Unit, we modified the Chinese wording in item 50 to ensure that the meaning of “lifeless” was clear. No changes were made to the remaining items. Conclusions The simplified Chinese version of the EORTC QLQ-LC29 is now available on the EORTC website. This translation may contribute to the application of the EORTC QLQ-LC29 scale in both research and clinical practice in the Chinese population with lung cancer. Further evaluation of the psychometric properties of the translated EORTC QLQ-LC29 is warranted.

show abstract

A comparison of two modalities of stereotactic body radiation therapy for peripheral early-stage non-small cell lung cancer: results of a prospective French study

Cited by 7 publications

References 32 publications

Lung Stereotactic Radiation Therapy: Intercomparison of Several Irradiation Devices in Terms of Outcome and Predictive Factors

Lung Stereotactic Radiation Therapy: Intercomparison of Several Irradiation Devices in Terms of Outcome and Predictive Factors

Tumour motion management in lung cancer: a narrative review

Translation and Adaptation of The EORTC QLQ-LC 29 for Use in Chinese Patients with Lung Cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About