Hypofractionation vs. conventional radiotherapy fractionation in the conservative treatment of T1 glottic cancer: a prospective cohort study
Background Definitive radiotherapy is an effective single-modality in T1 glottic cancer. Hypofractionated schemes could offer excellent results in a shorter treatment period. We aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes and toxicity comparing conventional vs. hypofractionated radiotherapy treatment in...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Clinical & translational oncology 2020, Vol.22 (1), p.151-157 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 157 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 151 |
| container_title | Clinical & translational oncology |
| container_volume | 22 |
| creator | Salas-Salas, B. G. Domínguez-Nuez, D. J. Cabrera, R. Ferrera-Alayón, L. Lloret, M. Lara, P. C. |
| description | Background
Definitive radiotherapy is an effective single-modality in T1 glottic cancer. Hypofractionated schemes could offer excellent results in a shorter treatment period. We aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes and toxicity comparing conventional vs. hypofractionated radiotherapy treatment in T1N0M0-glottic cancer.
Patients and Methods
Between Jan-1st, 2005 and August-1st, 2017, in a prospective cohort study, with 10-year follow-up, 138 patients were treated with conventional schedule 2 Gy/day, total dose 70 Gy/7 weeks (
N
= 71) or hypofractionated schedule 2, 2–2, 25 Gy/day, total dose 63, 8–63 Gy/5, 5 weeks (
N
= 67). Endpoints were clinical-response rate, local relapse-free survival (LRFS), laryngectomy-free survival (LFS), toxicity rates, relapse-free survival (RFS), metastasis-free survival (MFS), second tumour-free survival (2TFS), and overall survival (OS).
Results
All patients showed a complete clinical response. No differences were found for LRFS (
p
= 0.869), LFS (
p
= 0.975), RFS (
p
= 0.767), MFS (
p
= 0.601), 2TFS (
p
= 0.293), or OS (
p
= 0.685). Acute toxicity for skin and mucosae was similar (
p
= 0.550 and
p
= 0.698). Acute laryngeal toxicity was higher in the hypofractionation group (
p
= 0.004), due to an increase in slight moderate grade. No differences in late laryngeal edema were found (
p
= 0.989).
Conclusion
Radiotherapy offers high rate survival, local control, and larynx preservation after 5–10-year follow-up. A hypofractionation could be preferable, since it offers the same results as conventional with fewer treatment sessions. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s12094-019-02118-7 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2233850914</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2233850914</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c347t-3109f8720f419a9f94411d9004b1aa38e8c85c843b8b6180dc1e3b922fbfee823</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kctq3TAQhkVoya19gS6Klt040UjysZRdCblBoJsUuhOyPEocfCxHkg-cd8hDR-eSQDfZaMQ_3_wM8xPyA9gZMNacJ-BMy4qBrhgHUFVzQI5hoXUlWF1_2f-ZVP-OyElKz6yoC4BDciQAai7Y4pi83q6n4KN1uQ-j3Tx0lc6oC-MKx6020Gi7PuQnjHZa0__ZfqSlscETxlXRVkhzRJuXZZoGTx-APg4h595RZ0eH8YJaOsWQJnRb2oWnEDNNee7W38hXb4eE3_f1lPy9vnq4vK3u_9zcXf6-r5yQTa4EMO1Vw5mXoK32WkqATjMmW7BWKFRO1U5J0ap2AYp1DlC0mnPfekTFxSn5tfMti7zMmLJZ9snhMNgRw5wM50KommmQBeU71JWdU0RvptgvbVwbYGaTgtmlYEoKZpuCacrQz73_3C6x-xh5P3sBxA5IpTU-YjTPYY7l1ukz2zciYJX_</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2233850914</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Hypofractionation vs. conventional radiotherapy fractionation in the conservative treatment of T1 glottic cancer: a prospective cohort study</title><source>Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals</source><creator>Salas-Salas, B. G. ; Domínguez-Nuez, D. J. ; Cabrera, R. ; Ferrera-Alayón, L. ; Lloret, M. ; Lara, P. C.</creator><creatorcontrib>Salas-Salas, B. G. ; Domínguez-Nuez, D. J. ; Cabrera, R. ; Ferrera-Alayón, L. ; Lloret, M. ; Lara, P. C.</creatorcontrib><description>Background
Definitive radiotherapy is an effective single-modality in T1 glottic cancer. Hypofractionated schemes could offer excellent results in a shorter treatment period. We aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes and toxicity comparing conventional vs. hypofractionated radiotherapy treatment in T1N0M0-glottic cancer.
Patients and Methods
Between Jan-1st, 2005 and August-1st, 2017, in a prospective cohort study, with 10-year follow-up, 138 patients were treated with conventional schedule 2 Gy/day, total dose 70 Gy/7 weeks (
N
= 71) or hypofractionated schedule 2, 2–2, 25 Gy/day, total dose 63, 8–63 Gy/5, 5 weeks (
N
= 67). Endpoints were clinical-response rate, local relapse-free survival (LRFS), laryngectomy-free survival (LFS), toxicity rates, relapse-free survival (RFS), metastasis-free survival (MFS), second tumour-free survival (2TFS), and overall survival (OS).
Results
All patients showed a complete clinical response. No differences were found for LRFS (
p
= 0.869), LFS (
p
= 0.975), RFS (
p
= 0.767), MFS (
p
= 0.601), 2TFS (
p
= 0.293), or OS (
p
= 0.685). Acute toxicity for skin and mucosae was similar (
p
= 0.550 and
p
= 0.698). Acute laryngeal toxicity was higher in the hypofractionation group (
p
= 0.004), due to an increase in slight moderate grade. No differences in late laryngeal edema were found (
p
= 0.989).
Conclusion
Radiotherapy offers high rate survival, local control, and larynx preservation after 5–10-year follow-up. A hypofractionation could be preferable, since it offers the same results as conventional with fewer treatment sessions.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1699-048X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1699-3055</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s12094-019-02118-7</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31152306</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cham: Springer International Publishing</publisher><subject>Brief Research Article ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Oncology</subject><ispartof>Clinical & translational oncology, 2020, Vol.22 (1), p.151-157</ispartof><rights>Federación de Sociedades Españolas de Oncología (FESEO) 2019</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c347t-3109f8720f419a9f94411d9004b1aa38e8c85c843b8b6180dc1e3b922fbfee823</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c347t-3109f8720f419a9f94411d9004b1aa38e8c85c843b8b6180dc1e3b922fbfee823</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-4336-4045</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s12094-019-02118-7$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12094-019-02118-7$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27903,27904,41467,42536,51297</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31152306$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Salas-Salas, B. G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Domínguez-Nuez, D. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cabrera, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ferrera-Alayón, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lloret, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lara, P. C.</creatorcontrib><title>Hypofractionation vs. conventional radiotherapy fractionation in the conservative treatment of T1 glottic cancer: a prospective cohort study</title><title>Clinical & translational oncology</title><addtitle>Clin Transl Oncol</addtitle><addtitle>Clin Transl Oncol</addtitle><description>Background
Definitive radiotherapy is an effective single-modality in T1 glottic cancer. Hypofractionated schemes could offer excellent results in a shorter treatment period. We aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes and toxicity comparing conventional vs. hypofractionated radiotherapy treatment in T1N0M0-glottic cancer.
Patients and Methods
Between Jan-1st, 2005 and August-1st, 2017, in a prospective cohort study, with 10-year follow-up, 138 patients were treated with conventional schedule 2 Gy/day, total dose 70 Gy/7 weeks (
N
= 71) or hypofractionated schedule 2, 2–2, 25 Gy/day, total dose 63, 8–63 Gy/5, 5 weeks (
N
= 67). Endpoints were clinical-response rate, local relapse-free survival (LRFS), laryngectomy-free survival (LFS), toxicity rates, relapse-free survival (RFS), metastasis-free survival (MFS), second tumour-free survival (2TFS), and overall survival (OS).
Results
All patients showed a complete clinical response. No differences were found for LRFS (
p
= 0.869), LFS (
p
= 0.975), RFS (
p
= 0.767), MFS (
p
= 0.601), 2TFS (
p
= 0.293), or OS (
p
= 0.685). Acute toxicity for skin and mucosae was similar (
p
= 0.550 and
p
= 0.698). Acute laryngeal toxicity was higher in the hypofractionation group (
p
= 0.004), due to an increase in slight moderate grade. No differences in late laryngeal edema were found (
p
= 0.989).
Conclusion
Radiotherapy offers high rate survival, local control, and larynx preservation after 5–10-year follow-up. A hypofractionation could be preferable, since it offers the same results as conventional with fewer treatment sessions.</description><subject>Brief Research Article</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Oncology</subject><issn>1699-048X</issn><issn>1699-3055</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kctq3TAQhkVoya19gS6Klt040UjysZRdCblBoJsUuhOyPEocfCxHkg-cd8hDR-eSQDfZaMQ_3_wM8xPyA9gZMNacJ-BMy4qBrhgHUFVzQI5hoXUlWF1_2f-ZVP-OyElKz6yoC4BDciQAai7Y4pi83q6n4KN1uQ-j3Tx0lc6oC-MKx6020Gi7PuQnjHZa0__ZfqSlscETxlXRVkhzRJuXZZoGTx-APg4h595RZ0eH8YJaOsWQJnRb2oWnEDNNee7W38hXb4eE3_f1lPy9vnq4vK3u_9zcXf6-r5yQTa4EMO1Vw5mXoK32WkqATjMmW7BWKFRO1U5J0ap2AYp1DlC0mnPfekTFxSn5tfMti7zMmLJZ9snhMNgRw5wM50KommmQBeU71JWdU0RvptgvbVwbYGaTgtmlYEoKZpuCacrQz73_3C6x-xh5P3sBxA5IpTU-YjTPYY7l1ukz2zciYJX_</recordid><startdate>2020</startdate><enddate>2020</enddate><creator>Salas-Salas, B. G.</creator><creator>Domínguez-Nuez, D. J.</creator><creator>Cabrera, R.</creator><creator>Ferrera-Alayón, L.</creator><creator>Lloret, M.</creator><creator>Lara, P. C.</creator><general>Springer International Publishing</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4336-4045</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>2020</creationdate><title>Hypofractionation vs. conventional radiotherapy fractionation in the conservative treatment of T1 glottic cancer: a prospective cohort study</title><author>Salas-Salas, B. G. ; Domínguez-Nuez, D. J. ; Cabrera, R. ; Ferrera-Alayón, L. ; Lloret, M. ; Lara, P. C.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c347t-3109f8720f419a9f94411d9004b1aa38e8c85c843b8b6180dc1e3b922fbfee823</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Brief Research Article</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Oncology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Salas-Salas, B. G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Domínguez-Nuez, D. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cabrera, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ferrera-Alayón, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lloret, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lara, P. C.</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Clinical & translational oncology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Salas-Salas, B. G.</au><au>Domínguez-Nuez, D. J.</au><au>Cabrera, R.</au><au>Ferrera-Alayón, L.</au><au>Lloret, M.</au><au>Lara, P. C.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Hypofractionation vs. conventional radiotherapy fractionation in the conservative treatment of T1 glottic cancer: a prospective cohort study</atitle><jtitle>Clinical & translational oncology</jtitle><stitle>Clin Transl Oncol</stitle><addtitle>Clin Transl Oncol</addtitle><date>2020</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>22</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>151</spage><epage>157</epage><pages>151-157</pages><issn>1699-048X</issn><eissn>1699-3055</eissn><abstract>Background
Definitive radiotherapy is an effective single-modality in T1 glottic cancer. Hypofractionated schemes could offer excellent results in a shorter treatment period. We aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes and toxicity comparing conventional vs. hypofractionated radiotherapy treatment in T1N0M0-glottic cancer.
Patients and Methods
Between Jan-1st, 2005 and August-1st, 2017, in a prospective cohort study, with 10-year follow-up, 138 patients were treated with conventional schedule 2 Gy/day, total dose 70 Gy/7 weeks (
N
= 71) or hypofractionated schedule 2, 2–2, 25 Gy/day, total dose 63, 8–63 Gy/5, 5 weeks (
N
= 67). Endpoints were clinical-response rate, local relapse-free survival (LRFS), laryngectomy-free survival (LFS), toxicity rates, relapse-free survival (RFS), metastasis-free survival (MFS), second tumour-free survival (2TFS), and overall survival (OS).
Results
All patients showed a complete clinical response. No differences were found for LRFS (
p
= 0.869), LFS (
p
= 0.975), RFS (
p
= 0.767), MFS (
p
= 0.601), 2TFS (
p
= 0.293), or OS (
p
= 0.685). Acute toxicity for skin and mucosae was similar (
p
= 0.550 and
p
= 0.698). Acute laryngeal toxicity was higher in the hypofractionation group (
p
= 0.004), due to an increase in slight moderate grade. No differences in late laryngeal edema were found (
p
= 0.989).
Conclusion
Radiotherapy offers high rate survival, local control, and larynx preservation after 5–10-year follow-up. A hypofractionation could be preferable, since it offers the same results as conventional with fewer treatment sessions.</abstract><cop>Cham</cop><pub>Springer International Publishing</pub><pmid>31152306</pmid><doi>10.1007/s12094-019-02118-7</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4336-4045</orcidid></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1699-048X |
| ispartof | Clinical & translational oncology, 2020, Vol.22 (1), p.151-157 |
| issn | 1699-048X 1699-3055 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2233850914 |
| source | Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals |
| subjects | Brief Research Article Medicine Medicine & Public Health Oncology |
| title | Hypofractionation vs. conventional radiotherapy fractionation in the conservative treatment of T1 glottic cancer: a prospective cohort study |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-23T19%3A38%3A01IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Hypofractionation%20vs.%20conventional%20radiotherapy%20fractionation%20in%20the%20conservative%20treatment%20of%20T1%20glottic%20cancer:%20a%20prospective%20cohort%20study&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20&%20translational%20oncology&rft.au=Salas-Salas,%20B.%20G.&rft.date=2020&rft.volume=22&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=151&rft.epage=157&rft.pages=151-157&rft.issn=1699-048X&rft.eissn=1699-3055&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s12094-019-02118-7&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2233850914%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2233850914&rft_id=info:pmid/31152306&rfr_iscdi=true |