Abstract

e14507 Background: Serious gastrointestinal injury (SGI) is a rare but documented side effect that can occur independently with agents that affect the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptor or with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). The risk of SGI in patients treated with the combination of SBRT sequentially followed by a VEGF inhibitor (VEGF-i) is not yet quantified. We explored the incidence of SGI in patients treated with SBRT with or without VEGF-i therapy at a single institution. Methods: From May 2008 to August 2011, 76 patients with 84 primary or metastatic intraabdominal lesions underwent SBRT (median dose, 50 Gy in 5 fractions). Twenty of these patients (26%) received a VEGF-i within two years of completing SBRT (bevacizumab, n=14; sorafenib, n=4; pazopanib, n=1; sunitinib, n=1). The most common site treated with SBRT was the liver (n=43, 57%), and the most common histology was colorectal adenocarcinoma (n=18, 24%). Other common histologies included melanoma of the skin (n=14, 18%) and non-small cell lung cancer (n=10, 13%). The incidence of SGI (CTCAE v4.0 grade 3 to 5 ulceration or perforation) after SBRT was obtained, and the relationship between SGI and VEGF-i was examined. Other factors that could potentially contribute to SGI, such as radiotherapy dose to bowel, were also analyzed. Results: Seven patients (9%) experienced SGI at a median 4.6 months (range, 3-17 months) after SBRT. All seven had received a VEGF-i prior to SGI and within 13 months of completing SBRT, and five received the VEGF-i within three months of SBRT. The six-month estimate of SGI in patients receiving a VEGF-i within three months of SBRT was 38%. No SGI was noted in the 63 patients not receiving VEGF-i therapy after SBRT. The Log-Rank test showed a significant correlation between SGI and VEGF-i therapy within three months of SBRT (p=0.0006) but not between SGI and maximum radiotherapy bowel dose (p=0.20). Conclusions: The combination of SBRT and VEGF-i therapy results in a much higher risk of SGI than would be expected with either treatment given independently. Local therapies other than SBRT should be considered if a patient is likely to be treated with a VEGF-i in the future.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.