High-dose Spatially Fractionated GRID Radiation Therapy (SFGRT)

A comparison of treatment outcomes with Cerrobend vs. MLC SFGRT

Geoffrey Neuner, Majid M. Mohiuddin, Noam Vanderwalde, Olga Goloubeva, Jonathan Ha, Cedric X. Yu, William F. Regine

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

24 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: Spatially fractionated GRID radiotherapy (SFGRT) using a customized Cerrobend block has been used to improve response rates in patients with bulky tumors. The clinical efficacy of our own multileaf collimator (MLC) technique is unknown. We undertook a retrospective analysis to compare clinical response rates attained using these two techniques. Methods and Materials: Seventy-nine patients with bulky tumors (median diameter, 7.6 cm; range, 4-30 cm) treated with SFGRT were reviewed. Between 2003 and late 2005, the Cerrobend block technique (n = 39) was used. Between late 2005 and 2008, SFGRT was delivered using MLC-shaped fields (n = 40). Dose was prescribed to dmax (depth of maximum dose) and was typically 15 Gy. Eighty percent of patients in both groups received external beam radiotherapy in addition to SFGRT. The two-sided Fisher-Freeman-Halton test was used to compare pain and mass effect response rates between the two groups. Results: Sixty-one patients (77%) were treated for palliative intent and 18 (23%) for curative intent. The majority of patients had either lung or head-and-neck primaries in both groups; the most frequent site of SFGRT application was the neck. The majority of patients complained of either pain (65%) or mass effect (58%) at intake. Overall response rates for pain and mass response were no different between the Cerrobend and MLC groups: pain, 75% and 74%, respectively (p = 0.50), and mass effect, 67% and 73%, respectively (p = 0.85). The majority of toxicities were Grade 1 or 2, and only 3 patients had late Grade 3-4 toxicities. Conclusions: MLC-based and Cerrobend-based SFGRT have comparable and encouraging response rates when used either in the palliative or curative setting. MLC-based SGFRT should allow clinics to more easily adopt this novel treatment approach for the treatment of bulky tumors.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1642-1649
Number of pages8
JournalInternational Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics
Volume82
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1 2012

Fingerprint

collimators
radiation therapy
Radiotherapy
pain
dosage
Pain
tumors
toxicity
grade
Neck
Neoplasms
lungs
Head
Lung
Therapeutics

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Radiation
  • Oncology
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Cancer Research

Cite this

High-dose Spatially Fractionated GRID Radiation Therapy (SFGRT) : A comparison of treatment outcomes with Cerrobend vs. MLC SFGRT. / Neuner, Geoffrey; Mohiuddin, Majid M.; Vanderwalde, Noam; Goloubeva, Olga; Ha, Jonathan; Yu, Cedric X.; Regine, William F.

In: International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics, Vol. 82, No. 5, 01.04.2012, p. 1642-1649.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Neuner, Geoffrey ; Mohiuddin, Majid M. ; Vanderwalde, Noam ; Goloubeva, Olga ; Ha, Jonathan ; Yu, Cedric X. ; Regine, William F. / High-dose Spatially Fractionated GRID Radiation Therapy (SFGRT) : A comparison of treatment outcomes with Cerrobend vs. MLC SFGRT. In: International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics. 2012 ; Vol. 82, No. 5. pp. 1642-1649.
@article{1089416e35224b75a80a0ae1c8f24aa9,
title = "High-dose Spatially Fractionated GRID Radiation Therapy (SFGRT): A comparison of treatment outcomes with Cerrobend vs. MLC SFGRT",
abstract = "Purpose: Spatially fractionated GRID radiotherapy (SFGRT) using a customized Cerrobend block has been used to improve response rates in patients with bulky tumors. The clinical efficacy of our own multileaf collimator (MLC) technique is unknown. We undertook a retrospective analysis to compare clinical response rates attained using these two techniques. Methods and Materials: Seventy-nine patients with bulky tumors (median diameter, 7.6 cm; range, 4-30 cm) treated with SFGRT were reviewed. Between 2003 and late 2005, the Cerrobend block technique (n = 39) was used. Between late 2005 and 2008, SFGRT was delivered using MLC-shaped fields (n = 40). Dose was prescribed to dmax (depth of maximum dose) and was typically 15 Gy. Eighty percent of patients in both groups received external beam radiotherapy in addition to SFGRT. The two-sided Fisher-Freeman-Halton test was used to compare pain and mass effect response rates between the two groups. Results: Sixty-one patients (77{\%}) were treated for palliative intent and 18 (23{\%}) for curative intent. The majority of patients had either lung or head-and-neck primaries in both groups; the most frequent site of SFGRT application was the neck. The majority of patients complained of either pain (65{\%}) or mass effect (58{\%}) at intake. Overall response rates for pain and mass response were no different between the Cerrobend and MLC groups: pain, 75{\%} and 74{\%}, respectively (p = 0.50), and mass effect, 67{\%} and 73{\%}, respectively (p = 0.85). The majority of toxicities were Grade 1 or 2, and only 3 patients had late Grade 3-4 toxicities. Conclusions: MLC-based and Cerrobend-based SFGRT have comparable and encouraging response rates when used either in the palliative or curative setting. MLC-based SGFRT should allow clinics to more easily adopt this novel treatment approach for the treatment of bulky tumors.",
author = "Geoffrey Neuner and Mohiuddin, {Majid M.} and Noam Vanderwalde and Olga Goloubeva and Jonathan Ha and Yu, {Cedric X.} and Regine, {William F.}",
year = "2012",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.ijrobp.2011.01.065",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "82",
pages = "1642--1649",
journal = "International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics",
issn = "0360-3016",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - High-dose Spatially Fractionated GRID Radiation Therapy (SFGRT)

T2 - A comparison of treatment outcomes with Cerrobend vs. MLC SFGRT

AU - Neuner, Geoffrey

AU - Mohiuddin, Majid M.

AU - Vanderwalde, Noam

AU - Goloubeva, Olga

AU - Ha, Jonathan

AU - Yu, Cedric X.

AU - Regine, William F.

PY - 2012/4/1

Y1 - 2012/4/1

N2 - Purpose: Spatially fractionated GRID radiotherapy (SFGRT) using a customized Cerrobend block has been used to improve response rates in patients with bulky tumors. The clinical efficacy of our own multileaf collimator (MLC) technique is unknown. We undertook a retrospective analysis to compare clinical response rates attained using these two techniques. Methods and Materials: Seventy-nine patients with bulky tumors (median diameter, 7.6 cm; range, 4-30 cm) treated with SFGRT were reviewed. Between 2003 and late 2005, the Cerrobend block technique (n = 39) was used. Between late 2005 and 2008, SFGRT was delivered using MLC-shaped fields (n = 40). Dose was prescribed to dmax (depth of maximum dose) and was typically 15 Gy. Eighty percent of patients in both groups received external beam radiotherapy in addition to SFGRT. The two-sided Fisher-Freeman-Halton test was used to compare pain and mass effect response rates between the two groups. Results: Sixty-one patients (77%) were treated for palliative intent and 18 (23%) for curative intent. The majority of patients had either lung or head-and-neck primaries in both groups; the most frequent site of SFGRT application was the neck. The majority of patients complained of either pain (65%) or mass effect (58%) at intake. Overall response rates for pain and mass response were no different between the Cerrobend and MLC groups: pain, 75% and 74%, respectively (p = 0.50), and mass effect, 67% and 73%, respectively (p = 0.85). The majority of toxicities were Grade 1 or 2, and only 3 patients had late Grade 3-4 toxicities. Conclusions: MLC-based and Cerrobend-based SFGRT have comparable and encouraging response rates when used either in the palliative or curative setting. MLC-based SGFRT should allow clinics to more easily adopt this novel treatment approach for the treatment of bulky tumors.

AB - Purpose: Spatially fractionated GRID radiotherapy (SFGRT) using a customized Cerrobend block has been used to improve response rates in patients with bulky tumors. The clinical efficacy of our own multileaf collimator (MLC) technique is unknown. We undertook a retrospective analysis to compare clinical response rates attained using these two techniques. Methods and Materials: Seventy-nine patients with bulky tumors (median diameter, 7.6 cm; range, 4-30 cm) treated with SFGRT were reviewed. Between 2003 and late 2005, the Cerrobend block technique (n = 39) was used. Between late 2005 and 2008, SFGRT was delivered using MLC-shaped fields (n = 40). Dose was prescribed to dmax (depth of maximum dose) and was typically 15 Gy. Eighty percent of patients in both groups received external beam radiotherapy in addition to SFGRT. The two-sided Fisher-Freeman-Halton test was used to compare pain and mass effect response rates between the two groups. Results: Sixty-one patients (77%) were treated for palliative intent and 18 (23%) for curative intent. The majority of patients had either lung or head-and-neck primaries in both groups; the most frequent site of SFGRT application was the neck. The majority of patients complained of either pain (65%) or mass effect (58%) at intake. Overall response rates for pain and mass response were no different between the Cerrobend and MLC groups: pain, 75% and 74%, respectively (p = 0.50), and mass effect, 67% and 73%, respectively (p = 0.85). The majority of toxicities were Grade 1 or 2, and only 3 patients had late Grade 3-4 toxicities. Conclusions: MLC-based and Cerrobend-based SFGRT have comparable and encouraging response rates when used either in the palliative or curative setting. MLC-based SGFRT should allow clinics to more easily adopt this novel treatment approach for the treatment of bulky tumors.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84858706256&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84858706256&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2011.01.065

DO - 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2011.01.065

M3 - Article

VL - 82

SP - 1642

EP - 1649

JO - International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics

JF - International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics

SN - 0360-3016

IS - 5

ER -