1

Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV 3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    9

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

1

Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: Management of localised disease

Dr Joseph Wee FRCRNational Cancer Centre SingaporeDuke-NUS Medical School, Singapore

Page 2: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

2

• “I have no conflicts of interest to disclose.”

Disclosure

Page 3: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

3

• Diagnostic work up• Staging• Radiotherapy• Follow up• Role of chemotherapy

Lecture Outline

Page 4: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

4

• Naso-endoscope and Biopsy• Staging

– MRI– CT PNS, thorax, abdomen and Bone Scan or PET-CT

• Bloods– FBC, u/e/Cr, LFT– EBV DNA– Hepatitis B screening– ? LDH, CRP

• Planning CT

Diagnostic Workup

Page 5: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

5

Staging – 7th edition

Page 6: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

6

Staging – 8th edition

Page 7: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

7

Staging – 8th edition

Lydiatt et al, CA 2017

Pan et al, Cancer 2016

Page 8: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

8

Staging – 8th edition

Page 9: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

9

Staging – 8th edition

Pan et al, Cancer 2016

Lydiatt et al, CA 2017

Page 10: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

10

• Diagnostic work up• Staging• Radiotherapy• Follow up• Role of chemotherapy

Lecture Outline

Page 11: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

11

RT - Planning CT

Lee et al, R&O 2018

Page 12: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

12

IMRT

Page 13: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

13

IMRT – Target Delineation - CTVp

Page 14: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

IMRT – Target Delineation - CTVp

Page 15: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

15

IMRT – Target Delineation - CTVn

Page 16: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

16

IMRT – Target Delineation - CTVn

Page 17: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

17

IMRT – Target Delineation - CTVn

Page 18: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

18

IMRT – Target Delineation - OAR

Page 19: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

19

IMRT – Target Delineation - OAR

Page 20: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

20

• 70Gy in 33-35 fractions– Boost

• ?improve local control in 2D era (9% per Gy)• Brachytherapy, stereotactic boost• Risks of neurovascular complications

– IMRT era • Simultaneous integrated boost (SIB)

Total dose of RT

Page 21: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

21

IMRT Outcomes

Page 22: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

22

T4 failures

Page 23: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

23

GTV underdosing

GTV <66.5Gy > 3.4cc

Page 24: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

24

Marginal failures

70Gy to post NACT GTV64Gy to disappeared GTV

No survival detrimentBetter toxicity profile

Page 25: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

25

GTVp

GTVp > 48cc

Page 26: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

26

Late Toxicities

Page 27: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

27

NACT to reduce late toxicities

Page 28: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

28

How to avoid TLN

Two dosimetric features (D0.5cc and D10), is significantlyassociated with TLN status (P < .001)

rV40 < 10% or aV40 < 5cc

Page 29: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

29

TLN – genetic susceptibility

Page 30: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

30

Dysphagia

Page 31: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

31

Hippocampus sparing RT

RTOG Atlas

Radiation-induced neurocognitive function decline

Page 32: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

32

• Proton therapy– Kills less circulating T cells

Proton Therapy

Page 33: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

33

Follow up EBV DNA

Page 34: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

34

Salvage Surgery

Page 35: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

35

Endoscopic Nasopharyngectomy

Page 36: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

36

OS LRFS DMFS Gr 5 toxicity5 year 41% 72% 85% 33%

Salvage Re-RT

Page 37: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

37

Selecting patients for re-RT

https://prancis.medlever.com/

Page 38: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

38

Carbon ion for recurrent NPC

Page 39: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

39

• Diagnostic work up• Staging• Radiotherapy• Follow up• Role of chemotherapy

Lecture Outline

Page 40: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

40

• Early Stage – Stage 1, 2

Role of Chemotherapy : Can we individualize?

Page 41: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

41

T1 – Good local and Distant control

Oral Oncology 2018

Page 42: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

42

T2 - distant control

Page 43: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

43

T2 - distant control

Limited to those with N1 disease

Page 44: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

44

Benefit is Distant Control and not Loco-regional Control

Page 45: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

45

LN > 3 cmEBV > 4000 copies

Page 46: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

Summary (1) – Early Stage Tumours

• T1N0-1 (LN<3cm) - IMRT• T2N0-1 (LN<3cm) - IMRT• T1-2N1 (LN>3cm, EBV>4000) - ddp-IMRT

Page 47: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

47

Standard of Care: Stage 3, 4

Page 48: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

48

2 trials – results expected very soon

• HK 0501– Al-Sarraf vs Reverse Al-Sarraf

• SYSUCC– Induction Cis-Gem Cis-IMRT vs Cis-IMRT

Food for thought #2

Page 49: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

49

• HK 0501– Induction is superior to Adjuvant

• SYSUCC– Induction is superior to CCRT

• When than can you omit Induction?

• Cis-Gem; Cis-Xeloda; Cis-5FU or TPF

• ?? Must it be ddp-RT – or should we be doing trials looking at ?5FU-RT or ?cyclo-RT

Scenario : If both trials are positive

Page 50: Concomitant CCRT vs RT€¦ · T4 failures. 23 GTV underdosing GTV  3.4cc. 24 Marginal failures 70Gy to post NACT GTV. 64Gy to disappeared GTV. No survival detriment

50

Thank you