Long-term Prospective Comparative Analysis of Ototoxic and Survival Outcomes of Sequential Boost and Simultaneous Integrated Boost of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy for Head-Neck Carcinomas.

Nidhin Das, Sri Harsha Kombathula, Vidhu Sharma, Puneet Pareek, Kapil Soni, Amit Goyal
Author Information
  1. Nidhin Das: All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India. ORCID
  2. Sri Harsha Kombathula: Consultant Clinical Oncologist Ipswich Hospital, Ipswich, United Kingdom. ORCID
  3. Vidhu Sharma: All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India. ORCID
  4. Puneet Pareek: All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Department of Radiation Oncology, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India. ORCID
  5. Kapil Soni: All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India. ORCID
  6. Amit Goyal: All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India. ORCID

Abstract

Objective: To compare the ototoxicity and survival in head and neck carcinoma patients treated with sequential (SEQ) and simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT).
Methods: This long-term prospective study enrolled patients with histologically confirmed head and neck carcinoma, all receiving VMAT treatment. Audiological assessments were done using various tests at baseline, two weeks, treatment completion, six months, and 12 months. The changes in bone conduction pure tone thresholds were correlated with cochlear dose, comparing SEQ and SIB plans. We also investigated other significant late toxicities that led to dysphagia, voice changes, and xerostomia. Survival was assessed with the Kaplan-Meier analysis.
Results: The study included 93 patients (186 ears), 40 receiving radiation alone and 53 undergoing chemoradiation. Baseline hearing levels for the right and left ears were 13.3��2.3 dB and 14.2��1.5 dB. After 12 months of radiation, levels were 18.5��2.4 dB and 19.11��1.9 dB, respectively. No significant changes were observed between SEQ and SIB plans, but high-frequency shifts occurred. The cochlea tolerated up to 28 Gy without hearing loss in the radiation-alone group but showed loss at 9 Gy when combined with cisplatin chemotherapy. The maximum dose (Dmax) and the mean dose (Dmean) of pharyngeal constrictor muscles predicted dysphagia. No significant SEQ vs. SIB differences were found in late toxicity or survival outcomes.
Conclusion: Modern radiotherapy techniques like VMAT adhere to cochlear dose limits. No significant differences were found between SEQ and SIB plans in sensorineural hearing loss, late toxicity, or survival, making both suitable for head and neck carcinoma treatment.

Keywords

References

  1. Cancers Head Neck. 2020 Jan 09;5:1 [PMID: 31938572]
  2. Cancer Treat Res Commun. 2023;36:100721 [PMID: 37301126]
  3. J Cancer Res Ther. 2022 Oct-Dec;18(6):1461-1468 [PMID: 36412395]
  4. Cancer Control. 2020 Jan-Dec;27(1):1073274820904702 [PMID: 33047615]
  5. Radiat Oncol. 2017 Jan 13;12(1):13 [PMID: 28086954]
  6. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005 Apr 1;61(5):1393-402 [PMID: 15817342]
  7. J Clin Med. 2023 Mar 21;12(6): [PMID: 36983413]
  8. Mol Cancer Ther. 2017 Apr;16(4):591-600 [PMID: 28138028]
  9. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009 Mar 1;73(3):779-88 [PMID: 18707819]
  10. South Asian J Cancer. 2019 Apr-Jun;8(2):120-123 [PMID: 31069194]
  11. J Cancer Res Ther. 2023 Jan-Mar;19(2):283-288 [PMID: 37006066]
  12. J Cancer Res Ther. 2022 Dec;18(Supplement):S455-S459 [PMID: 36511003]
  13. Strahlenther Onkol. 2016 Aug;192(8):526-36 [PMID: 27306747]
  14. J Laryngol Otol. 2018 Feb;132(2):111-116 [PMID: 29343305]
  15. Oral Oncol. 2018 Nov;86:8-18 [PMID: 30409324]
  16. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003 Dec 1;57(5):1480-91 [PMID: 14630288]
  17. Radiat Oncol. 2021 Apr 1;16(1):64 [PMID: 33794949]
  18. PLoS One. 2019 Jul 10;14(7):e0219611 [PMID: 31291379]
  19. Strahlenther Onkol. 2018 May;194(5):375-385 [PMID: 29302704]
  20. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018 Nov;68(6):394-424 [PMID: 30207593]
  21. Radiother Oncol. 2014 Mar;110(3):390-7 [PMID: 24721546]
  22. Radiat Oncol. 2006 Mar 31;1:7 [PMID: 16722599]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0SEQSIBdosesurvivalnecksignificanthearingdBlossheadcarcinomapatientsVMATtreatmentmonthschangesplanslateototoxicityarctherapystudyreceiving12cochleardysphagiaSurvivalanalysisearsradiationlevels9GydifferencesfoundtoxicityradiotherapysensorineuralBoostObjective:comparetreatedsequentialsimultaneousintegratedboostvolumetricmodulatedMethods:long-termprospectiveenrolledhistologicallyconfirmedAudiologicalassessmentsdoneusingvarioustestsbaselinetwoweekscompletionsixboneconductionpuretonethresholdscorrelatedcomparingalsoinvestigatedtoxicitiesledvoicexerostomiaassessedKaplan-MeierResults:included9318640alone53undergoingchemoradiationBaselinerightleft133��23142��15185��241911��1respectivelyobservedhigh-frequencyshiftsoccurredcochleatolerated28withoutradiation-alonegroupshowedcombinedcisplatinchemotherapymaximumDmaxmeanDmeanpharyngealconstrictormusclespredictedvsoutcomesConclusion:ModerntechniqueslikeadherelimitsmakingsuitableLong-termProspectiveComparativeAnalysisOtotoxicOutcomesSequentialSimultaneousIntegratedVolumetricModulatedArcTherapyHead-NeckCarcinomasHeadcancerfractionationvolumetric-modulated

Similar Articles

Cited By

No available data.