Article

Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for stage I NSCLC: Recent advances and controversies.

Department of Radiation Oncology, VU University medical center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands;
Journal of thoracic disease 09/2011; 3(3):189-96. DOI:10.3978/j.issn.2072-1439.2011.05.03 pp.189-96
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) is a technique that has rapidly entered routine care for early-stage peripheral non-small cell lung cancer in many countries in the last decade. The adoption of SABR was partly stimulated by advances in the so-called 'image guided' radiotherapy delivery. In the last 2 years, a growing body of publications has reported on clinical outcomes, acute and late radiological changes after SABR, and sub-acute and late toxicity. The local control rates in many publications have exceeded 90% when tumors of up to 5 cm have been treated, with corresponding regional nodal failure rates of approximately 10%. However, these results are not universal: lower control rates reported by some authors serve to emphasize the importance of quality assurance in all steps of SABR treatment planning and delivery. High-grade toxicity is uncommon when so-called 'risk-adapted' fractionation schemes are applied; an approach which involves the use of lower daily doses and more fractions when critical normal organs are in the proximity of the tumor volume. This review will address the new data available on a number of controversial topics such as the treatment of patients without a tissue diagnosis of malignancy, data on SABR outcomes in patients with severe chronic obstructive airways disease, use of a classification system for late radiological changes post-SABR, late treatment-related toxicity, and the evidence to support a need for expert multi-disciplinary teams in the follow-up of such patients.

0 0
 · 
0 Bookmarks
 · 
23 Views
  • Article: Treatment of non-small cell lung cancer stage I and stage II: ACCP evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (2nd edition).
    Walter J Scott, John Howington, Steven Feigenberg, Benjamin Movsas, Katherine Pisters
    [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The surgical treatment of stage I and II non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) continues to evolve in the areas of intraoperative lymph node staging (specifically the issue of lymph node dissection vs sampling), the role of sublobar resections instead of lobectomy for treatment of smaller tumors, and the use of video-assisted techniques to perform anatomic lobectomy. Adjuvant therapy (both chemotherapy and radiation therapy) and the use of larger fractions of radiotherapy delivered to a smaller area for nonoperative treatment of early stage NSCLC have shown promising results. The panel selected the following areas for review based on clinical relevance and the amount and quality of data available for analysis: surgical approaches to resecting early stage NSCLC, methods of lymph node staging at the time of surgical resection, adjuvant chemotherapy in the treatment of early stage NSCLC, and the use of radiation therapy for primary treatment of early stage NSCLC as well as in the adjuvant setting. Recommendations by the multidisciplinary writing committee were based on literature review using established methods. Surgical resection remains the treatment of choice for stage I and II NSCLC, although surgical methods continue to evolve. Adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with stage II, but not stage I, NSCLC is well established. Radiotherapy remains an important treatment for either cases of early stage NSCLC that are medically inoperable or patients who refuse surgery.
    Chest 10/2007; 132(3 Suppl):234S-242S. · 5.25 Impact Factor
  • Article: Complete video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery lobectomy and its learning curve. A single center study introducing the technique in The Netherlands.
    Eric H J Belgers, Jan Siebenga, Anne Marie Bosch, Eric H J van Haren, Ewald C M Bollen
    [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Data regarding the benefits for the complete video-assisted thoracic surgery (c-VATS) lobectomy over the open lobectomy are numerous. This article describes the experience of introducing this technique in a training hospital, the first reported cohort in The Netherlands. From March 2006 to November 2008, all patients operated on for proven or suspected lung cancer were analyzed. Prospective data from these patients were evaluated. A subgroup analysis for the c-VATS lobectomy is presented. A total of 184 operations were performed on 172 patients. In 122 (66.3%) of the operations the resection ended in a lobectomy of which 70 were done by complete thoracoscopic procedure. For the c-VATS lobectomy the mean operating time was 179 min, with a mean blood loss of 444 ml. The median hospital stay was four days. Complications were present in 10% of c-VATS lobectomies. No mortality was seen in the c-VATS group. After thorough evaluation and training, c-VATS lobectomy is a safe procedure that can be performed in a relatively low volume hospital. It has exceptional short-term benefits. For training purposes all operations must start thoracoscopically. All patients must be operated according the intention to treat method.
    Interactive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery 10/2009; 10(2):176-80.
  • Source
    Article: A survey of stereotactic body radiotherapy use in the United States.
    Hubert Pan, Daniel R Simpson, Loren K Mell, Arno J Mundt, Joshua D Lawson
    [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is a technique used to deliver high, ablative doses of radiation in a limited number of fractions to ≥ 1 extracranial target(s). To the authors' knowledge, the prevalence of SBRT use among radiation oncologists in the United States is unknown. A random sample of 1600 American radiation oncologists was surveyed via e-mail and facsimile (fax) regarding SBRT usage, including year of adoption, motivations, disease sites treated, and common prescriptions used. Of 1373 contactable physicians, 551 responses (40.1%) were received. The percentage of physicians using SBRT was 63.9% (95% confidence interval, 60%-68%), of whom nearly half adopted it in 2008 or later. The most commonly cited reasons for adopting SBRT were to allow the delivery of higher than conventional radiation doses (90.3%) and to allow retreatment (73.9%) in select patients. Academic physicians were more likely to report research as a motivation for SBRT adoption, whereas physicians in private practice were more likely to list competitive reasons. Among SBRT users, the most common disease sites treated were lung (89.3%), spine (67.5%), and liver (54.5%) tumors. Overall, 76.0% of current SBRT users planned to increase their use, whereas 66.5% of nonusers planned to adopt the technology in the future. SBRT has rapidly become a widely adopted treatment approach among American radiation oncologists. Further research and prospective trials are necessary to assess the benefits and risks of this novel technology.
    Cancer 03/2011; 117(19):4566-72. · 4.77 Impact Factor

Show more

Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.

Keywords

classification system
 
controversial topics
 
critical normal organs
 
early-stage peripheral non-small cell lung cancer
 
expert multi-disciplinary teams
 
growing body
 
High-grade toxicity
 
last 2 years
 
last decade
 
local control rates
 
lower control rates
 
new data available
 
radiological changes
 
radiological changes post-SABR
 
routine care
 
SABR treatment planning
 
severe chronic obstructive airways disease
 
so-called 'image guided' radiotherapy delivery
 
Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy
 
treatment-related toxicity