Vol 4, No 2 (1999)
Original papers
Published online: 1999-01-01

open access

Page views 163
Article views/downloads 201
Get Citation

Connect on Social Media

Connect on Social Media

Escalated hyperfractionation in radiotherapy for head and neck cancer – 5-year results

A. Wygoda1, K. Składowski1, A. Mucha1, W. Sąsiadek1, B. Pilecki1, A. Zajusz2, B. Maciejewski3
DOI: 10.1016/S1507-1367(99)70313-5
Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 1999;4(2):39-44.

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate 5-year results of escalated hyperfractionation schedule in aspect of local tumour control (LTC) and late radiation toxicity.

Material and methods

Forty eight patients with squamous cell carcinoma of oral cavity (34 pts), oropharynx (11 pts) and larynx (3) in stage T1-4N0-1 have been treated at Centre of Oncology in Gliwice, between the years 1988–92. There were four patients with T1 primary tumour, 27 with T2, 11 with T3 and 2 with T4; in 4 patients the tumour stage remains unknown (TX). All the patients were treated by radiation therapy alone, using the technique of two opposed parallel fields and hyperfractionation with escalation of the dose per fraction during the second part of the treatment schedule. The total dose ranged between 62,2 and 74 Gy. The median follow-up was 62 months.

Results

Despite of the relative high proportion of complete local regressions (75%), the 5-year LTC rate of 54% was noted in the whole group of patients. Stage-related LTC rates were as follows: 100% for TX tumours, 50% for T1, 55% for T2, 45% for T3 and 0% for T4. Acute radiation reactions were more intensive than those usually observed during conventional radiotherapy; all patients experienced a confluent mucositis and two waves of acute mucosal reaction because of treatment gap were observed during the radiation course. Severe late radiation toxicity (grade IV) was noted in two patients (4%).

Conclusions

Long-term tumour control results of escalated hyperfractionation radiotherapy may suggest that there is no benefit of a such regimen. However, in the majority of patients the treatment course differed markedly from protocol assumptions.

Article available in PDF format

View PDF Download PDF file