4.7 Article

Randomized trial of hyperthermia and radiation for superficial tumors

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 23, Issue 13, Pages 3079-3085

Publisher

AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2005.05.520

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. NCI NIH HHS [P01 CA42745] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose Randomized clinical trials have demonstrated hyperthermia (HT) enhances radiation response. These trials however generally lacked rigorous thermal dose prescription and,, administration. We report the final results of a prospective randomized trial of superficial tumors (<= 3 cm depth) comparing radiotherapy versus HT combined with radiotherapy using, the parameter describing the number of cumulative equivalent minutes at 43 degrees C exceeded by 90% of monitored points within the tumor (CEM 43 degrees C T-90) as a measure of thermal dose. Methods This trial was designed to test whether a thermal dose of more than 10 CEM 43 degrees C T-90 results in improved complete response and duration of local control compared with a thermal dose of <= 1 CEM 43 degrees C T-90. Patients received a test dose of HT <= 1 CEM 43 degrees C T-90 and tumors deemed heatable were randomly assigned to additional HT versus no additional HT. HT was given using microwave spiral strip applicators operating at 433 MHz. Results One hundred twenty-two patients were enrolled; 109 (89%) were deemed heatable and were randomly assigned. The complete response rate was 66.1% in the HT arm and 42.3% in the no-HT arm. The odds ratio for complete response was 2.7 (95% CI, 1.2 to 5.8; P = .02). Previously irradiated patients had the greatest incremental gain in complete response: 23.5% in the no-HT arm versus 68.2% in the HT arm. No overall survival benefit was seen. Conclusion Adjuvant hyperthermia with a thermal dose more than 10 CEM 43 degrees C T-90 confers a significant local control benefit in patients with superficial tumors receiving radiation therapy.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available