Evidence Hub

Clinical outcomes of carbon ion radiotherapy with concurrent chemotherapy for locally advanced uterine cervical adenocarcinoma in a phase 1/2 clinical trial (Protocol 1001)

Okonogi N, Wakatsuki M, Kato S, Karasawa K, Kiyohara H, Shiba S, Kobayashi D, Nakano T et al.

Cancer medicine, 2018

31 participants · 25 citations

Abstract

We conducted a phase 1/2 study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of carbon ion radiotherapy (C-ion RT) with concurrent chemotherapy for locally advanced uterine cervical adenocarcinoma. Thirty-three patients were enrolled between April 2010 and March 2014. Treatment consisted of C-ion RT with concurrent weekly cisplatin at a dose of 40 mg/m2 . In the phase 1 component, the total dose was escalated from 68.0 Gy (relative biological effectiveness [RBE]) to 74.4 Gy (RBE) to determine the maximum tolerated dose of C-ion RT. In the phase 2 component, the efficacy and safety of C-ion RT with concurrent chemotherapy were evaluated using the dose determined in the phase 1 component. The median follow-up duration was 30 months. Two patients did not receive chemotherapy because of anemia or leukocytopenia immediately prior to commencing treatment; 31 patients were analyzed. None of the patients developed dose-limiting toxicities. The recommended dose (RD) was determined to be 74.4 Gy (RBE). In the phase 2 component, two patients developed Grade 3-4 toxicities in the gastrointestinal tract, due to repeated laser coagulation or peritonitis caused by appendicitis. In the patients treated with the RD, the 2-year local control, progression-free survival, and overall survival rates were 71%, 56%, and 88%, respectively. C-ion RT with concurrent weekly cisplatin was well tolerated in patients with locally advanced uterine cervical adenocarcinoma. Our findings support further investigations…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a clinical trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 31 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free