title: Quality assurance problems in clinical hyperthermia and their impact on therapeutic outcome: a Report by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group.
abstract: Since February 1981, 300 patients with superficial measurable tumors were randomized on an RTOG protocol (81-04) involving fractionated radiation therapy (4.00 Gy twice weekly for a total of 32.00 Gy), either alone or followed immediately by hyperthermia (42.5 degrees C, 60 min). This is a report of 218 eligible patients with single lesions: 107 treated with radiotherapy alone (RT), 111 with radiotherapy plus hyperthermia (RT + HT). Only 56% of the 24 tumors less than 3 cm and 36% of the 53 lesions larger than 3 cm received what was felt to be "adequate" therapy (greater than or equal to 29 Gy and 8 heating sessions). Overall complete response (CR) was observed in 28% of the patients treated with RT, and 32% of the patients receiving RT and heat. Response has been found in previous analyses of this and other RTOG studies to be significantly related to both maximum tumor diameter (less than 3 or greater than or equal to 3 cm) and site/histology (breast/adenocarcinoma, head and neck/squamous, or other site/histologies). In the head and neck tumors less than 3 cm in diameter there was no difference in CR with irradiation alone or combined with hyperthermia (46% vs 43%). However, in the breast, and trunk and extremities a better CR rate was noted with irradiation and heat (55% and 67%) than with irradiation alone (33% and 0). In lesions less than 3 cm treated with irradiation and heat the probability of remaining in response was 80% compared with 15% with irradiation alone. In lesions larger than 3 cm no difference in CR was observed in either treatment group. It has been hypothesized that the response rate is higher in patients with smaller lesions (less than 3 cm) and in breast/chest wall, trunk/extremity lesions because these tumors and anatomical sites are easier to heat adequately. Problems encountered in correlating tumor response with quality of heating include less than optimal heating in larger lesions and the limited ability of current thermometry to accurately represent the temperature distribution in a tumor. Furthermore, differences in equipment and treatment practices among institutions add to the variability in heat administration data collected. In addition, tumor response may be difficult to judge because of short survival of some patients and occasionally rapid tumor regression that may cause necrosis which may be misinterpreted as persistent tumor.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
authors.affiliation: Radiation Oncology Center, Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO 63108.
authors.forename: C A
authors.initials: CA
authors.lastname: Perez
authors.forename: B
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Gillespie
authors.forename: T
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Pajak
authors.forename: N B
authors.initials: NB
authors.lastname: Hornback
authors.forename: B
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Emami
authors.forename: P
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Rubin
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D006979:Hyperthermia, Induced; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D015337:Multicenter Studies as Topic; D009369:Neoplasms / Q000532:radiotherapy / Q000628:therapy*; D011379:Prognosis; D011785:Quality Assurance, Health Care; D011897:Random Allocation