| Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology | Pages |
Radiation-Induced Esophageal Carcinoma 30 Years after Mediastinal Irradiation: Case Report and Review of the Literature
Introduction
Case Report
Clinical History
Retrospective Dose Analysis
Retrospective Case Analysis
Discussion
Clinical History
Retrospective Dose Analysis
Retrospective Case Analysis
Conclusions
References
Radiation-Induced Esophageal Carcinoma 30 Years after Mediastinal Irradiation: Case Report and Review of the Literature
INTRODUCTION
The carcinogenic effect of ionizing radiation is well-documented (1-4). As early as six years after the discovery of X-rays the first malignancy induced by ionizing radiation was described. It was a spinocellular carcinoma of the skin of the hand of a 33-year-old technician who regularly worked with X-rays (3,4).
A characteristic of radiation-induced secondary malignancies is the long latency (mostly 10 to 20 years) between radiation exposure and the development of cancer in the irradiated area (3, 5, 6).
With the recent advances in surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy significantly more long-term remissions can be achieved. Therefore the rate of secondary malignancies has also increased (7-9).
The exact incidence of radiation-induced malignancies is not well-defined because of their rarity and their long latency before appearance (10). There are some studies about secondary malignancies after the radiation treatment of Hodgkin's disease. Soft tissue sarcomas and osteosarcomas are the most frequently described solid radiation-induced tumors after radiotherapy of Hodgkin's lymphoma (7-9). On the other hand hematological malignancies, especially acute leukemias, have been observed after radiation exposure. These disorders were particularly found in the atomic bomb survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (1).
The esophagus belongs to the organs of risk of an irradiation of the mediastinal or the sternal region (1,5,6,11). In most patients different degrees of esophagitis occur (11-13) immediately after mediastinal irradiation. In contrast esophageal carcinomas have been rarely reported in the literature as secondary solid tumors long periods of time after ionizing therapeutic irradiation (10). The majority of cases were diagnosed quite late and are difficult to treat for the radiooncologist (14).
A case of a radiation-induced esophageal carcinoma is now described and discussed in the context of the available literature.
CASE REPORT
Clinical History
A 54-year-old man was referred to our radiooncological clinic with hoarseness and progredient complaints of dysphagia in December 1994.
In March 1964 the patient was diagnosed to have a Hodgkin's disease stage I with left cervical involvement. He was treated with definitive radiotherapy using a single-field technique at a Cobalt-60 machine with a focus-skin distance of 50 cm. Doses of 50 Gy were applied over a left neck field (specified to 4 cm tissue depth), 35 Gy over a mediastinal field (specified to 6 cm) and 25 Gy over a left axillary field (specified to 4 cm). A single dose of 3.0 Gy surface dose was delivered five times a week.
Figure 1. Esophagoendoscopy showing an irregular wall shapening of esophagus between 21 and 25 cm. The irradiation set-up was done clinically. Simulation and verifications were not performed. The patient tolerated the radiation therapy without significant early side effects. Nine years later subcutaneous indurations developed in the previously irradiated left supraclavicular region. The patient complained of severe pain extending from the left shoulder to the left arm. In 1976 for the first time he showed impairments of arm movements and increasing parasthesia as a sign of radiation-induced plexus injury. Further the left cervical fibrosis got more pronounced. In 1983 a microsurgical neurolysis of the left plexus brachialis was performed. But no clear success in pain reduction could be achieved. Because of dysphagic complaints esophagoscopy with biopsy was carried out in January 1995 (Fig. 1). A poorly differentiated squamous cell carcinoma (G3) of the upper thoracic esophagus (21 to 25 cm) could be proven (Fig. 2). An infiltration of the trachea was suspected by CT-scan. Additionally paraesophageal lymph nodes have been detected. There were no distant metastasis. According to the TNM-classification of the UICC (1992) a clinical stage T4 N1 M0 resulted. Figure 2. Histology of the biopsy (HE-staining): poorly differentiated squamous cell carcinoma. The patient had no evidence for typical risk factors (abuse of nicotine or alcohol) for developing esophageal carcinoma. Surgical resection was not possible, because of the tumor localization. An MRI of the chest was carried out for determination of tumor extent and radiation therapy treatment planning (Fig. 3). Figure 3. T1-weighted sagittal MRI-sequence with gadolinium-DTPA showing an irregular shaped tumorous thickening of the wall of the proximal esophagus corresponding to the endoscopic proven esophageal carcinoma. There was no further option for percutaneous irradiation due to the preirradiation and the marked subcutaneous fibrosis. For palliation of the pronounced dysphagia endoesophageal High-Dose-Rate-brachytherapy with Iridium-192-afterloading was performed using an bougie-applicator with a diameter of 1 cm. During radiation therapy the tumor locally progressed two weeks after the beginning of therapy and two applications of 5 Gy two tumorous tracheoesophagocutaneous fistulas arose (Fig. 4). The radiation treatment was then discontinued. The tumor stenosis of the esophagus was endoscopically bridged by a tube which closed the fistulas. One month later the patient died from aspiration pneumonia. Figure 4. Computed tomography of the upper mediastinum showing one of the two tracheoesophagocutaneous fistulas. Having no sufficient documentation of the former irradiation, we tried to reconstruct the set-up using an actual CT-scan of the neck and mediastinum aided by a modern computer assisted treatment planning system (Cadplan®, Varian). We assumed that the diameter and the contours of the patients body have not significantly changed. Doses of 35 Gy specified to 6 cm tissue depth were applied over an anterior mediastinal field in which the radiation-induced esophageal carcinoma developed. The retrospective dose analysis resulted in a cumulative dose of 34 to 35 Gy at the upper thoracic esophagus (Fig. 5). Possible field overlaps resulting from the historically used single field irradiation technique could retrospectively not be evaluated. Of course it could not be excluded that areas of inadequate field matches could have caused considerable overdosage zones. One can speculate that from overlapping portals cumulative doses from over 65 Gy could result. Figure 5. 3D-dose distribution of the reconstructed field arrangement showing the 36 Gy-isodose (white lines). A review of the literature of the cases describing radiation-induced esophageal cancer will be presented (Table 1). They will be analysed concerning the relationship between applied dose and latent interval. So far 66 patients including the patient in this study have been reported. Most patients were female. The reported patients received doses between 18.6 and 68 Gy (median dose: 40 Gy) as primary treatment. The interval between radiation exposure and occurrence of the secondary esophageal carcinoma had a median of 15 years (ranging from 2 to 63 years). Most cases were moderately or poorly differentiated squamous cell carcinomas. We statistically analysed the data of applied doses and latent interval from the literature overview including our own results using a linear regression model. The result of the analysis was statistically tendentially significant with P = 0.0738 (Fig. 6). Figure 6. Linear regression of latency in correlation to the applied radiation doses (significance level = 0.0738). In 43 of the 66 retrospectively analysed patients details about treatment of the radiation-induced esophageal carcinoma and the final outcome were available. Most patients (n = 26) received a surgical resection, 14 patients were treated with radiotherapy, two with chemotherapy and one patient received hyperthermic chemotherapy. Eleven of the 26 surgically treated patients (42.3%) achieved a long-term curation from surgical intervention. None of the patients treated with radiotherapy or chemotherapy could be cured. Only the patient who received hyperthermic chemotherapy had a long-term remission. Table 1. The reported case fits the criteria for radiation-induced malignancies of the esophagus known from literature reported by Chudecki in 1972 (5): There is a close correlation between the spontaneous development of esophageal carcinoma and special nutritional factors as well as the abuse of nicotine and alcohol. Therefore the absence of these risk factors connected with a marked radiation exposure of the esophagus is a clear indication for a radiation-induced esophageal carcinoma (15). Of course one is not able to confirm the diagnosis of a radiation-induced esophageal carcinoma unequivocally, because radiation-induced carcinomas do not differ histologically from spontaneously developed carcinomas (5,10,16). The esophagus belongs to the less radiation-sensitive organs (2,11,13). The most important acute side effect is esophagitis of different degrees (13). Fibroses and scarred esophageal strictures are found as chronic radiation reactions (2,11,13). Radiation-induced esophageal carcinomas have been seldom described in the literature. The first scientific report is from the late 1950s (17). Radiation-induced tumors account for less than 1% of all carcinomas of the esophagus (18). The development of radiation-induced esophageal carcinomas after the therapeutic application of ionizing radiation could be proven by experimental data in animal models (19). In a population-based retrospective cohort study Ahsan et al. (20) described a 5.42-fold increased risk for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in women who had received radiation therapy for breast cancer compared to unirradiated breast cancer patients. According to the literature, the therapy of choice in radiation-induced esophageal carcinomas is complete surgical resection (16,21,22). Frequently, a radical surgical approach is not possible because of tumor extension, the radiation damage or a reduced performance status of the patient. In these cases reirradiation alone or palliative chemotherapy can be carried out (21), because radiation-induced malignancies are not less sensitive to radio- and chemotherapy than their spontaneously developed counterparts (14). External beam reirradiation is seldom possible because of overlapping with the former portals. Endoluminal brachytherapy can provide an alternative (21). The treatment with the highest curative potential according to literature is radical surgical intervention (16,22). Patients without radical resection died within a few months (22). The retrospective dose analysis resulted in a cumulative dose of 34 to 35 Gy at the upper thoracic esophagus. This is a dose which is in the range of doses reported in the literature. Using a single field irradiation technique it could not be concluded that areas of inadequate field matches could have resulted in marked overdosage zones with doses of above 65 Gy. Whether this phenomenon supported the induction of a secondary malignancy must remain unclear. The marked plexus injury the patient consecutively developed could have resulted from those incalculable overdosage zones. Emami et al. (2) reported a TD5/5 of 60 Gy and a TD50/5 of 75 Gy for developing brachial plexopathy. The speculated overdosage zones may be in this range, that the plexus injury can be assumed to be radiation-induced. Further it should be taken into account that an increased daily dose had been applied with a surface dose of 3 Gy corresponding to a treatment target volume dose of about 2.5 Gy. It is well known from the literature that the incidence of radiation-induced plexus injuries is higher after increased single doses (23,24). The relationship between applied dose and time interval between treatment and the occurrence of the secondary malignancy has been controversially discussed in literature. Some authors stated that higher doses shortened the latent interval (3,4,25,26). Experimental data from animal models could prove a time-dose relationship (26). Other authors could not find this correlation (10,27). Therefore we statistically analysed the data from the overview of literature including our own results using a linear regression model. The result of the analysis was statistically tendentially significant with P = 0.0738 (Fig. 6) supporting a time-dose relationship. As shown above the treatment with the highest curative potential is radical surgical resection (16,22). None of the patients treated with radiotherapy could be cured. Taal et al. (22) reported the largest series of eight patients with radiation-induced esophageal carcinomas treated with reirradiation. As in our case report not all patients were eligible for full dose radiotherapy. The reported survival in this series ranged between 2 and 13 months. Our reported patient survived only one month after the end of radiation treatment. The use of endoesophageal HDR-brachytherapy as a palliative treatment of radiation-induced esophageal carcinoma has not been described in the literature so far. Esophageal carcinomas belong to the rare secondary malignancies after the therapeutic use of ionizing radiation. Nevertheless, they should be suspected in patients with dysphagia as a differential diagnosis even many years after mediastinal irradiation (28). The treatment of these tumors seems to be difficult and their overall prognosis is poor.
Retrospective Dose Analysis
Retrospective Case Analysis
Author
Primary diseases
Dose
Latency
Histology
Slaughter et al. 1957 (17)
Swollen glands
?
27 years
Adenocarcinoma
Goolden 1957 (29)
Thyreotoxicosis
?
37 years
SCC
Garret 1959 (30)
Thyreotoxicosis
?
25 years
SCC
Thyreotoxicosis
?
?
SCC
Fabrikant et al. 1964 (6)
Laryngeal carcinoma
49 Gy
8 years
SCC
McGraw et al. 1965 (31)
Tuberculous adenitis
?
31 years
SCC
Goolden et al. 1965 (32)
Thyreotoxicosis
?
45 years
SCC
Kobayashi et al. 1969 (33)
Tuberculous adenitis
23.4 Gy
43 years
SCC
Chudecki 1972 (5)
Lymphosarcoma
26 Gy
10 years
SCC
Rigaud et al. 1975 (34)
Esophageal carcinoma
60 Gy
10 years
Small cell cancer
Ito et al. 1978 (35)
Breast cancer
41,8 Gy
12 years
SCC
Breast cancer
18,6 Gy
16 years
SCC
Charles et al. 1979 (36)
Goiter
?
52 years
?
Goiter
40 Gy
50 years
?
Mullen et al. 1979 (37)
Hodgkin's disease
40 Gy
10 years
SCC
Yoshida 1979 (38)
Laryngeal carcinoma
?
17 years
?
Laryngeal carcinoma
45 Gy
10 years
SCC
Goffman et al. 1983 (39)
Breast cancer
50 Gy
9 years
SCC
Sherrill et al. 1984 (40)
Embryonal testicular carcinoma
60 Gy
12 years
SCC
Malignant teratoma
40 Gy
28 years
SCC
OConnel et al. 1984 (25)
Bronchial carcinoma
50 Gy
11 years
SCC
Thyreotoxicosis
32 Gy
30 years
SCC
Jones et al. 1985 (41)
Hodgkin's disease
38 Gy
11 years
SCC
Kai et al. 1985 (14)
Mediastinal neoplasm
60 Gy
31 years
SCC
Grosser et al. 1986 (10)
Malignant thymoma
60 Gy
14 years
SCC
Hodgkin's disease
36 Gy
21 years
SCC
Marchese et al. 1986 (18)
Thyreotoxicosis
32 Gy
40 years
SCC
Renard et al. 1989 (42)
Hodgkin's disease
32 Gy
19 years
SCC
Davidson et al. 1990 (43)
Breast cancer
29 Gy
12 years
SCC
Breast cancer
30 Gy
7 years
Small cell cancer
Breast cancer
24 Gy
17 years
SCC
Breast cancer
30 Gy
14 years
SCC
Breast cancer
24 Gy
34 years
SCC
Breast cancer
31 Gy
8 years
SCC
Shimizu et al. 1990 (28)
Thyroid carcinoma
48 Gy
27 years
SCC
Vanagunas et al. 1990 (13)
Hodgkin's disease
39 Gy
21 years
SCC
Thymus hyperplasia
?
24 years
SCC
Ogino et al. 1992 (27)
Goiter
?
44 years
SCC
Thyroid carcinoma
40 Gy
30 years
SCC
Breast cancer
53 Gy
20 years
SCC
Breast cancer
36 Gy
23 years
SCC
Taal et al. 1993 (22)
Hodgkin's disease
40 Gy
11 years
SCC
Breast cancer
35 Gy
2 years
SCC
Breast cancer
?
5 years
SCC
Laryngeal carcinoma
47 Gy
17 years
SCC
Goiter
?
40 years
SCC
Thyreotoxicosis
?
36 years
SCC
Tuberculosis
?
63 years
SCC
Breast cancer
50 Gy
6 years
SCC
Hodgkin's disease
?
44 years
SCC
Laryngeal carcinoma
40 Gy
9 years
SCC
NHL
40 Gy
4 years
SCC
Laryngeal carcinoma
?
36 years
SCC
Bronchial carcinoma
53 Gy
8 years
SCC
Bronchial carcinoma
?
9 years
SCC
Hodgkin's disease
42 Gy
15 years
SCC
NHL
40 Gy
6 years
SCC
Fékété et al. 1993 (16)
Hodgkin's disease
40 Gy
9 years
SCC
Breast cancer
55 Gy
8 years
SCC
Breast cancer
45 Gy
8 years
SCC
Breast cancer
?
11 years
SCC
Brink et al. 1994 (21)
Bronchial carcinoma
68 Gy
9 years
SCC
Bronchial carcinoma
40 Gy
9 years
SCC
Hodgkin's disease
20 Gy
11 years
SCC
Glanzmann et al. 1994 (7)
Hodgkin's disease
40 Gy
15 years
SCC
Own case
Hodgkin's disease
35 Gy
30 years
SCC
Total
66 patients
18.6 to 68 Gy
(Median: 40 Gy)2 to 63 years
(Median: 15 years)Mostly SCC
DISCUSSION
Clinical History
Retrospective Dose Analysis
Retrospective Case Analysis
CONCLUSIONS
References
This article has been cited by other articles:
This page is run by Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, as part of the OUP Journals
Comments and feedback: www-admin{at}oup.co.uk
Last modification: 19 Mar 1999
Copyright© 1999 Foundation for Promotion of Cancer Research.
![]()
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us What's this?
![]()
![]()

![]()
![]()
![]()
F. Levi, L. Randimbison, V.-C. Te, and C. La Vecchia
Increased risk of esophageal cancer after breast cancer
Ann. Onc.,
November 1, 2005;
16(11):
1829 - 1831.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
![]()
![]()
![]()

![]()
![]()
![]()
L. B. Zablotska, A. Chak, A. Das, and A. I. Neugut
Increased Risk of Squamous Cell Esophageal Cancer after Adjuvant Radiation Therapy for Primary Breast Cancer
Am. J. Epidemiol.,
February 15, 2005;
161(4):
330 - 337.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
![]()
This Article ![]()
![]()
Abstract
![]()
Alert me when this article is cited
![]()
Alert me if a correction is posted
![]()
Services ![]()
![]()
Email this article to a friend
![]()
Similar articles in this journal
![]()
Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
![]()
Similar articles in PubMed
![]()
Alert me to new issues of the journal
![]()
Add to My Personal Archive
![]()
Download to citation manager
![]()
Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (5)
![]()
Request Permissions
![]()
Google Scholar ![]()
![]()
Articles by Micke, O
![]()
Articles by Willich, N
![]()
Search for Related Content
![]()
PubMed ![]()
![]()
PubMed Citation
![]()
Articles by Micke, O
![]()
Articles by Willich, N
![]()
Social Bookmarking ![]()
![]()
What's this?