Rectal cancer delivery of radiotherapy in adequate time and with adequate dose is influenced by treatment center, treatment schedule, and gender and is prognostic parameter for local control: Results of study CAO/ARO/AIO-94
- Department of Radiation Therapy, University of Rostock, Rostock (Germany)
- Departments of Radiation Therapy and Surgery, University of Erlangen, Erlangen (Germany)
- Department of Surgery, Klinikum Oldenburg, Oldenburg (Germany)
- Departments of Radiation Therapy and General Surgery, University of Goettingen, Goettingen (Germany)
- Institute of Pathology, University of Leipzig, Leipzig (Germany)
- Department of Radiation Therapy, Krankenhaus Nordwest Frankfurt, Frankfurt (Germany)
- Department of Radiation Therapy, Krankenhaus Klagenfurt, Klagenfurt (Austria)
- Department of Radiation Therapy, University of Hannover, Hannover (Germany)
- Department of Radiation Therapy, University of Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel (Germany)
- Department of Radiation Therapy, Krankenhaus Dresden-Friedrichstadt, Dresden (Germany)
- Department of Surgery, Klinikum St. Veit, St. Veit (Austria)
- Institute of Biostatistics and Clinical Epidemiology, Charite Universitary Medicine Berlin, Berlin (Germany)
Purpose: The impact of the delivery of radiotherapy (RT) on treatment results in rectal cancer patients is unknown. Methods and Materials: The data from 788 patients with rectal cancer treated within the German CAO/AIO/ARO-94 phase III trial were analyzed concerning the impact of the delivery of RT (adequate RT: minimal radiation RT dose delivered, 4300 cGy for neoadjuvant RT or 4700 cGy for adjuvant RT; completion of RT in <44 days for neoadjuvant RT or <49 days for adjuvant RT) in different centers on the locoregional recurrence rate (LRR) and disease-free survival (DFS) at 5 years. The LRR, DFS, and delivery of RT were analyzed as endpoints in multivariate analysis. Results: A significant difference was found between the centers and the delivery of RT. The overall delivery of RT was a prognostic factor for the LRR (no RT, 29.6% {+-} 7.8%; inadequate RT, 21.2% {+-} 5.6%; adequate RT, 6.8% {+-} 1.4%; p = 0.0001) and DFS (no RT, 55.1% {+-} 9.1%; inadequate RT, 57.4% {+-} 6.3%; adequate RT, 69.1% {+-} 2.3%; p = 0.02). Postoperatively, delivery of RT was a prognostic factor for LRR on multivariate analysis (together with pathologic stage) but not for DFS (independent parameters, pathologic stage and age). Preoperatively, on multivariate analysis, pathologic stage, but not delivery of RT, was an independent prognostic parameter for LRR and DFS (together with adequate chemotherapy). On multivariate analysis, the treatment center, treatment schedule (neoadjuvant vs. adjuvant RT), and gender were prognostic parameters for adequate RT. Conclusion: Delivery of RT should be regarded as a prognostic factor for LRR in rectal cancer and is influenced by the treatment center, treatment schedule, and patient gender.
- OSTI ID:
- 20944757
- Journal Information:
- International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology and Physics, Vol. 67, Issue 4; Other Information: DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.10.020; PII: S0360-3016(06)03349-9; Copyright (c) 2007 Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, Netherlands, All rights reserved; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA); ISSN 0360-3016
- Country of Publication:
- United States
- Language:
- English
Similar Records
Analysis of Prognostic Factors and Patterns of Recurrence in Patients With Pathologic Stage III Endometrial Cancer
Chest Wall Radiotherapy: Middle Ground for Treatment of Patients With One to Three Positive Lymph Nodes After Mastectomy