Article Text

Download PDFPDF

933 A large, multicenter, retrospective study on efficacy and safety of stereotactic body radiotherapy in oligometastatic cervical cancer (MITO-RT2/RAD)
  1. G Macchia1,
  2. M Campitelli2,
  3. P Bonome1,
  4. C Laliscia3,
  5. A Fodor4,
  6. L Draghini5,
  7. P Gentile6,
  8. GR D’agostino7,
  9. V Balcet8,
  10. A Raguso9,
  11. E Ippolito10,
  12. M Ferioli11;12,
  13. L Vicenzi13,
  14. S Borghesi14,
  15. P Mitidieri2,
  16. VDI Cataldo15,
  17. E Perrucci16,
  18. S Pignata17,
  19. G Scambia18 and
  20. G Ferrandina19
  1. 1Gemelli Molise Hospital – Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Radiation Oncology Unit, Campobasso, Italy
  2. 2Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, UOC di Radioterapia, Dipartimento di Scienze Radiologiche, Radioterapiche ed Ematologiche,, Rome, Italy
  3. 3University of Pisa, Department of Translational Medicine, Division of Radiation Oncology, Pisa, Italy
  4. 4IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Department of Radiation Oncology, Milan, Italy
  5. 5S. Maria Hospital, Radiation Oncology Centre, Terni, Italy
  6. 6UPMC Hillman Cancer Center San Pietro FBF, Radiation Oncology Unit, Rome, Italy
  7. 7Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital, IRCSS, Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, Rozzano, Italy
  8. 8Nuovo Ospedale degli Infermi, UOC Radioterapia, Biella, Italy
  9. 9Fondazione ‘Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza’, IRCCS, UOC Radioterapia, S. Giovanni Rotondo (FG)
  10. 10Campus Bio-Medico University, Department of Radiation Oncology, Rome, Italy
  11. 11Radiation Oncology, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna
  12. 12Department of Experimental, Diagnostic and Specialty Medicine – DIMES, Alma Mater Studiorum University of Bologna
  13. 13Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Ospedali Riuniti, Radiation Oncology Unit, , Ancona, Italy
  14. 14Azienda USL Toscana Sud Est, Radiation Oncology Unit of Arezzo-Valdarno, Arezzo, Italy
  15. 15University of Florence, Radiation Oncology Unit, Oncology Department, Firenze, Italy
  16. 16Perugia General Hospital, Italy, Radiation Oncology Section, Perugia, Italy
  17. 17Istituto Nazionale Tumori di Napoli, Fondazione Pascale IRCCS, Naples, Italy
  18. 18Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, UOC Ginecologia Oncologica, Dipartimento per la salute della Donna e del Bambino e della Salute Pubblica, Roma, Italy
  19. 19Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, UOC Ginecologia Oncologica, Dipartimento per la salute della Donna e del Bambino e della Salute Pubblica, Roma, Italy


Introduction/Background*Data supporting stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for oligometastatic gynecological cancer patients are increasing, but stereotactic treatments have not yet been fully explored. The aim of this retrospective, multicenter study (MITO RT-02) was to define efficacy and safety of SBRT in a very large, real life dataset of metastatic/persistent/recurrent cervical cancer (MPR-CC) patients.

Methodology Clinical and SBRT parameters have been collected in order to fulfill primary endpoints, i.e. the rate of complete response (CR) to SBRT, and the 24-month actuarial local control (LC) rate on ‘per lesion’ basis. The secondary end-points were acute and late toxicities. Objective response rate (ORR) included CR and partial response (PR). Clinical benefit (CB) included ORR and stable disease (SD). Toxicity was evaluated by RTOG/EORTC and CTC-AE scales, according to center policy.

Result(s)*Fifteen centers participated to the study; after evaluation of inclusion/exclusion criteria, 84 CC patients, carrying a total of 126 lesions treated by SBRT between March 2006 and February 2021, were selected for the analysis. Patient characteristics and treatment data are summarized in table 1. Complete and partial response, as well as stable disease were observed in 73 (57.9%), 30 (23.8%), and 16 (12.7%) lesions, respectively, reaching about 94% CB rate. With a median follow-up of 14 months (range: 3-130), the 24-month actuarial LC, DFS and OS rate were 61.8%, 22.3%, 52.9%, respectively. Mild acute toxicity was experienced in 14 (16.6%) patients; late toxicity was documented in 4 patients (4.7%).

Abstract 933 Table 1

Patients and treatments characteristics

Conclusion*This study confirms the efficacy and safety of SBRT in MPR-CC patients. The low toxicity profile suggests a wider use of this treatment in this setting, however combinations with new drugs are needed to improve outcomes.

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.