Department of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
Ann Palliat Med. 2022 Feb;11(2):423-430. doi: 10.21037/apm-21-1589. Epub 2021 Oct 22.
Durable palliation of advanced lung cancer is a common objective for radiation oncologists. However, there is no consensus on how to deliver the radiation course. Herein we report our experience of using split course radiotherapy and our assessment of outcomes based on planning from three-dimensional (3D) simulation before each treatment course.
All lung cancer patients from 2006-2020 were identified. Of these, 52 patients received a split course treatment of 50-60 Gy in 18-25 fractions intended to provide durable palliation for disease not amenable to curative therapy. Treatment involved 3D planning with repeat computed tomography (CT) simulation prior to the second course. Survival and symptomatic response were analyzed via chart review. We categorized rapid responders versus non-rapid responders from the initial radiation course based on ≥30% gross tumor volume (GTV) reduction at the second CT simulation. We evaluated the impact of response on overall survival and palliative response.
Among our cohort treated with split course palliative radiotherapy, 33 (63%) had a rapid response to initial treatment. There was no difference in survival between groups [hazard ratio (HR) =1.30, P=0.47]. There was no significant difference in palliative response rates between rapid and non-rapid responders. On multivariable analysis, only female sex (HR =0.26, P<0.01) and receipt of systemic therapy following radiotherapy (HR =0.19, P<0.01) were associated with improved survival.
There is currently significant practice pattern variability for palliative lung radiotherapy. Split course palliative radiation of 50-60 Gy in 18-25 fractions represents an option to consider for patients with advanced lung cancer who do not undergo definitive therapy and may benefit from a higher dose regimen. Our retrospective review suggests that rapid tumor response in a split course model does not predict survival or symptomatic response. Prospective studies are needed to further define which lung cancer patients may benefit from higher dose regimens.
晚期肺癌的持久缓解是放射肿瘤学家的常见目标。然而,如何实施放射疗程尚无共识。在此,我们报告使用分割疗程放射治疗的经验,并根据每次治疗前三维(3D)模拟的计划评估结果。
确定了 2006 年至 2020 年的所有肺癌患者。其中,52 例患者接受了 50-60Gy 的分割疗程治疗,共 18-25 个分次,旨在为不能进行根治性治疗的疾病提供持久缓解。治疗涉及 3D 计划,并在第二疗程前进行重复计算机断层扫描(CT)模拟。通过病历回顾分析生存和症状反应。我们根据第二次 CT 模拟时 GTV 减少≥30%将初始放射疗程中的快速反应者与非快速反应者进行分类。我们评估了反应对总生存和姑息治疗反应的影响。
在接受分割疗程姑息性放射治疗的患者中,33 例(63%)对初始治疗有快速反应。两组之间的生存无差异[风险比(HR)=1.30,P=0.47]。快速反应者和非快速反应者之间的姑息治疗反应率无显著差异。多变量分析显示,仅女性(HR=0.26,P<0.01)和放疗后接受系统治疗(HR=0.19,P<0.01)与生存改善相关。
目前,姑息性肺放疗的实践模式存在显著差异。50-60Gy 的分割疗程治疗,共 18-25 个分次,代表了一种选择,适用于未接受根治性治疗且可能从更高剂量方案中获益的晚期肺癌患者。我们的回顾性研究表明,分割疗程模型中的快速肿瘤反应不能预测生存或症状反应。需要前瞻性研究进一步确定哪些肺癌患者可能受益于更高剂量方案。