Does Treatment Duration Affect Outcome After Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer?Page 1402
D. J. D'Ambrosio, T. Li, E. M. Horwitz, D. Y. T. Chen, A. Pollack, and M. K. Buyyounouski
This article revisits the question of whether treatment breaks during external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer is detrimental. Results of prior studies of the treatment break effect have been mixed, with the majority showing no disadvantage to treatment breaks. In the current study, a detrimental effect on biochemical failure was seen for favorable-risk patients when the number of nontreatment days during a course of radiotherapy was one third or more. More favorable patient characteristics, more effective higher radiation doses, and long-term follow-up may explain why the relative importance of treatment interruptions is significant.
Outcomes and Effect of Radiotherapy in Patients With Stage I or II Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma: A Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results AnalysisPage 1465
A. Ballonoff, K. E. Rusthoven, A. Schwer, R. McCammon, B. Kavanagh, M. Bassetti, F. Newman, and R. Rabinovitch
In this Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database study of 13,420 patients with Stage I or II diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, the authors observed that radiotherapy was associated with a significant disease-specific survival and an overall survival benefit that persisted during the 15-year follow-up period. This benefit of radiotherapy was particularly evident in elderly patients (i.e., those >60 years old). However, outcomes for discrete patient subsets varied greatly, indicating that therapy needs to be tailored according to the risk of relapse.
Prognostic Significance of Tumor Hypoxia Inducible Factor-1α Expression for Outcome After Radiotherapy in Oropharyngeal CancerPage 1551
P. Silva, N. J. Slevin, P. Sloan, H. Valentine, J. Cresswell, D. Ryder, P. Price, J. J. Homer, and C. M. L. West
Studies of molecular marker expression in tumors as prognostic factors for radiation therapy outcome often yield conflicting data, and few markers have made it into routine clinical use. Head and neck cancers are a heterogeneous group of tumors, and the various subsites are associated with different etiologies and prognoses. This study showed significant differences in outcome related to marker expression, even within a homogeneous subsite of oropharyngeal carcinoma (tonsil vs. tongue base), thus highlighting the importance of studying homogeneous groups and the complex relationships between tumor biology and clinicopathologic factors.
Dose Coverage Beyond the Gross Tumor Volume for Various Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy Planning Techniques Reporting Similar Control Rates for Stage I Non-Small-Cell Lung CancerPage 1597
N. B. Arvidson, M. P. Mehta, and W. A. Tomé
The authors of this article attempted to answer the question: Why is it that, in spite of very different doses and schedules, various stereotactic body radiotherapy techniques for lung cancer yield similar control rates? The authors propose that the limiting factor is an adequate dose to the tumor microscopic extension (ME). To determine the potential coverage of ME of the various regimens, the authors calculated the minimal peripheral NTD (NTD-MP100). At the edge of the GTV, the regimens differed on average by 174 Gy, but coalesced to a difference of only 10 Gy at 14 mm, suggesting that the dose to the ME might play a role in the observed similarity in the local control rate.
FULL TEXT
Page 1402