EBRT was delivered at our institution for 27 patients and at outs

EBRT was delivered at our institution for 27 patients and at outside institutions for 4 patients. Treatments were designed using high energy photons and either 3-D conformal, multi-field techniques (27 patients) or intensity modulated radiation therapy (4 patients). Treatment fields included both the primary tumor and nodal areas at risk. Techniques used

in our institution have been described in detail in prior publications and will only be summarized (1,6,9,11). The EBRT dose was 45-50.4 Gy in 25-28 fractions (Fx) of 1.8 Gy in 27 patients. A boost field was carried to 54-56 Gy in 28-30 Fx in 2 patients. The EBRT Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical dose was <45 Gy in 2 patients because of intolerance to the treatment (39.6 Gy/22 Fx; 43.2 Gy/24 Fx). Surgical

resection was feasible in 17 of 31 patients after preop CRT (R0 in 11 patients; R1 in 5; R2 in 1) and the Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical lesion was unresectable in 14 patients. Whipple resection was performed in 9 patients with primary lesions in the head of pancreas, and the other 8 patients had a distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy for primary lesions in the body of the pancreas. A vascular sleeve resection and reconstruction was selleck chem inhibitor necessary in 2 patients (superior mesenteric vein – 1; left renal vein – 1). IOERT was given as a component of treatment in 28 of 31 patients. IOERT was delivered with a mobile electron accelerator (Mobetron┬«; Sunnyvale, Ca). The IOERT Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical dose was based on both the extent of resection and the dose of preop EBRT: R0 resection, 12.5 Gy; R1, median 12.5 Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical Gy (range, 10-15 Gy); R2, 15 Gy; unresectable 17.5 Gy (n=2) or 20 Gy (n=12). IOERT energy was based on the depth of the tumor bed or unresected tumor, and IOERT applicator size included the tumor bed or unresected tumor Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical with a 1-cm margin (e.g., 4 cm

tumor/tumor bed =6 cm applicator). Systemic maintenance chemotherapy was preferred in all patients but given in only 16 of 31 (unknown in 3). Maintenance chemotherapy was gemcitabine-based in all patients who received additional therapy. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was given prior to preop CRT in 7 patients consisting of several cycles of gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel. Outcomes Outcomes evaluated include survival [overall Batimastat (OS) and disease-free (DFS)], disease relapse [local failure in the EBRT field (LF), central failure in the IOERT field (CF) and Navitoclax side effects distant metastases (DM)] and treatment tolerance (during preop CRT, the peri-operative period, and the 30-day post-operative period). OS and DFS were calculated with the Kaplan-Meier method (13). Differences between Kaplan-Meier curves were calculated with the log-rank test (univariate analyses). Both survival and time to relapse were calculated from initiation of treatment. Results Patient status was evaluated at time of analysis with median follow-up of 19 months for all patients and 31 months for survivors.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>