Affiliation:
1. SeniorresidentDepartmentof RadiotherapyRaiganjGovt.MedicalCollege AndHospital.
2. Senior resident Department of Radiotherapy Nrs Medical College And Hospital.
3. Medical Ofcer Department of Oncology Raiganj Govt. Medical College And Hospital.
4. Junior Resident Department of Radiotherapy, Nrs Medical College And Hospital.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: There is considerable debate over ideal treatment approach for inoperable stage III non-small cell lung carcinoma.
Accelerated radiotherapy is an emerging modality based on it's radio-biological advantage of inhibiting accelerated repopulation and negate the
development of radioresistance. .Our study was aimed at comparing the response rate and toxicity pattern between concurrent chemoradiotherapy and accelerated radiotherapy in non-resectable stage III NSCLC patient who have already received induction chemotherapy.
MATERIALAND METHODS: Patients with histologically proven non-metastatic, inoperable stage III Non-small cell carcinoma of lung were
2 2
randomized into two groups and was given three cycles of induction chemotherapy with paclitxel (175mg/m ) and cisplatin (80mg/m ). After that
2
patients of control arm received EBRT at a dose of 66Gy (2Gy/fraction/day, 5 days in a week) with concurrent cisplatin (40mg/m ) weekly and
patients of study arm received EBRT alone at a dose of 66 Gy (2 Gy /fraction/day, 6 days in a week).Patients were evaluated weekly for acute
toxicity during radiation therapy, then six weeks after completion of treatment for response assessment and thereafter every three months for at
least twelve months .
RESULTS: Overall response rate (Complete response+ Partial response) was higher in study arm (62.5% VS 69.5%,p-value 0.963). Signicantly
less higher grade of acute pharyngeal and esophageal toxicity was seen in accelerated radiotherapy arm(45.8% vs 13%,p-value 0.033) than
concurrent chemoradiotherapy arm. DFS,PFS were comparable between two arms.
CONCLUSION: In the treatment of inoperable stage III NSCLC, after induction chemotherapy both the Accelerated radiotherapy and concurrent
chemoradiotherapy were comparable in terms of loco-regional control, toxicity prole, disease free survival and progression free survival.
Reference21 articles.
1. Sung H,Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A,Bray F. Global Cancer Statistics 2020:GLOBOCAN Estimates of incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries.CA Cancer J Clin.2021 May;71(3):209-249.
2. Chapter 69: John DM. Neoplasm of lung. In: Anthony S. Fauci, Eugene Braunwald, K.J. Isselbacher, J.D. Wilson, J.B. Martin, D. L. Kasper, S.L. Hauser, D.L. Longo, editors, Principals of Internal Medicine. 14th ed. Mcgraw-Hill:1998. P. 552-61.
3. Downey RJ, Martin N, Rusch VW. Extent of chest wall invasion and survival in patients of lung cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 1996;68:188-202.
4. Mattson K, Holsti LR, Holsti P, et al. Inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer: radiation with or without chemotherapy. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 1988; 24(3):477.
5. Curran W, Scott C, Langer C, et al. Long term benefit is observed in a phase III comparison of sequential vs concurrent chemo-radiation for patients with unresectable NSCLC:RTOG 9410. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2003;61(abstr)