Interstitial thermoradiotherapy with ferromagnetic implants for locally advanced and recurrent neoplasms

Curtis F. Mack, Baldassare Stea, John M. Kittelson, David S. Shimm, Penny K. Sneed, Theodore L. Phillips, Patrick S. Swift, Ken Luk, Paul R. Stauffer, Kwok W. Chan, Richard Steeves, J. Robert Cassady, Thomas C. Cetas

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

20 Scopus citations

Abstract

Purpose: The University of Arizona, University of California at San Francisco, City of Hope Medical Center, and University of Wisconsin participated in a Phase I/II protocol to assess the heating ability and the toxicity of interstitial thermoradiotherapy using ferromagnetic implantation. Methods and Materials: Forty-four patients with advanced primary or recurrent extra-cranial solid malignancies were enrolled in this study. Fourteen gauge catheters were implanted into tumors and, once in the department of Radiation Oncology, loaded with ferromagnetic seeds to deliver a 60 min hyperthermia treatment. Multi-point thermometry was continuously used throughout the heating sessions for all patients, sampling the periphery as well as the core of the tumor. After 192Iridium brachytherapy, 18 patients then had an additional treatment. The mean radiation dose while on protocol was 50.0 Gy, with total doses (including prior radiotherapy) ranging from 20.3-151.8 Gy (median = 88.7 Gy). Response and toxicity were assessed by inspection, palpation, and/or radiologic studies. Forty-one patients were evaluable for response, and there were 55 analyzable hyperthermia treatment sessions. Results: The complete response rate was 61% (25/41). The partial response rate was 31.7% and only 7.3% failed to respond. Median duration of local control has not yet been reached. The mean maximum, minimum, and mean time-averaged temperatures for all in-tissue sensors were 43.7°C, and 41.0°C, respectively. Tumor size was the only factor significantly correlated with temperatures or with complete response rate; larger tumors attained higher temperatures but smaller tumors had a higher response probability. Nineteen patients (43%) experienced toxicities, however there was only a 7% (3/44) rate of serious complications (Grade 3 or 4). Prior treatment with hyperthermia was the only factor significantly correlated with serious toxicity. Conclusion: These results, a 93% total response with only 7% serious toxicity, are encouraging especially in the context of the patient population treated. Phase II/III studies involving ferromagnetic implantation are warranted.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)109-115
Number of pages7
JournalInternational Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics
Volume27
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 1993

    Fingerprint

Keywords

  • Ferromagnetic
  • Hyperthermia
  • Interstitial thermoradiotherapy
  • Radiation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

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

Cite this

Mack, C. F., Stea, B., Kittelson, J. M., Shimm, D. S., Sneed, P. K., Phillips, T. L., Swift, P. S., Luk, K., Stauffer, P. R., Chan, K. W., Steeves, R., Robert Cassady, J., & Cetas, T. C. (1993). Interstitial thermoradiotherapy with ferromagnetic implants for locally advanced and recurrent neoplasms. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics, 27(1), 109-115. https://doi.org/10.1016/0360-3016(93)90427-W