Abstract
BackgroundThis study aimed to compare the results of irradiation with protons versus irradiation with carbon ions in a raster scan technique in patients with skull base chordomas and to identify risk factors that may compromise treatment results.MethodsA total of 147 patients (85 men, 62 women) were irradiated with carbon ions (111 patients) or protons (36 patients) with a median dose of 66 Gy (RBE (Relative biological effectiveness); carbon ions) in 4 weeks or 74 Gy (RBE; protons) in 7 weeks at the Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT) in Heidelberg, Germany. The median follow-up time was 49.3 months. All patients had gross residual disease at the beginning of RT. Compression of the brainstem was present in 38%, contact without compression in 18%, and no contact but less than 3 mm distance in 16%. Local control and overall survival were evaluated using the Kaplan–Meier Method based on scheduled treatment (protons vs. carbon ions) and compared via the log rank test. Subgroup analyses were performed to identify possible prognostic factors.ResultsDuring the follow-up, 41 patients (27.9%) developed a local recurrence. The median follow-up time was 49.3 months (95% CI: 40.8–53.8; reverse Kaplan–Meier median follow-up time 56.3 months, 95% CI: 51.9–60.7). No significant differences between protons and carbon ions were observed regarding LC, OS, or overall toxicity. The 1‑year, 3‑year, and 5‑year LC rates were 97%, 80%, and 61% (protons) and 96%, 80%, and 65% (carbon ions), respectively. The corresponding OS rates were 100%, 92%, and 92% (protons) and 99%, 91%, and 83% (carbon ions). No significant prognostic factors for LC or OS could be determined regarding the whole cohort; however, a significantly improved LC could be observed if the tumor was > 3 mm distant from the brainstem in patients presenting in a primary situation.ConclusionOutcomes of proton and carbon ion treatment of skull base chordomas seem similar regarding tumor control, survival, and toxicity. Close proximity to the brainstem might be a negative prognostic factor, at least in patients presenting in a primary situation.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
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.