Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The role of hyperthermia (HT) in cancer therapy and palliative care has been discussed for years in the literature. There are plenty of articles that show good feasibility of HT and its efficacy in terms of tumor response and survival improvements. Nevertheless, HT has never gained enough interest among oncologists to become a standard therapy in clinical practice. The main advantage of HT is the enhancement of chemotherapy (CHT), radiotherapy (RT), chemoradiotherapy (CRT), and immunotherapy benefits. This effect has been confirmed in several types of tumors: esophageal, gastrointestinal, pancreas, breast, cervix, head and neck, and bladder cancers, and soft tissue sarcoma. HT effects include oxygenation and perfusion changes, DNA repair inhibition and immune system activation as a consequence of new antigen exposure. The literature shows a wide variety of randomized, nonrandomized, and observational studies and both prospective and retrospective data to confirm the advantage of HT association to CHT and RT. There are still many ongoing trials on this subject. This article summarizes the available literature on HT in order to update the current knowledge on HT use in association with RT and/or CHT from 2010 up to 2019.

Keywords

regional hyperthermia radiotherapy chemotherapy health technology assessment gastrointestinal tumors integrative cancer therapy

Introduction

Regional hyperthermia (HT) is defined as an external, supraphysiological increase of tissue/body temperature using external electromagnetic fields with rapid field alternations.¹ HT is currently used for local/locoregional heat application alone or complementary to radiotherapy (RT) and/or chemotherapy (CHT), increasing their efficacy in terms of both tumor response and survival, while keeping toxicity at comparable levels to the single therapies.¹ Another advantage of HT association to RT increases its effects, and in cases of re-irradiation, where standard dose or dose escalation is not possible, HT can augment the radiation treatment.¹

Multimodal therapies involving HT are applied to several types of tumors: colorectal, pancreas, breast, and bladder cancers, and soft tissue sarcoma (STS) with significant clinical benefits.^1,2

The complementary application of HT with CHT or RT is successful in several types of tumors such as pancreatic, brain, and breast cancers.^3-5 The use of HT to increase the sensitivity of tumor cells to ionizing radiation or chemotherapeutic agents is reported in several clinical trials.^3-6 HT influences perfusion and oxygenation of tumor tissues resulting in increased blood flow and oxygenation enhancing radiosensitivity of the tumor. HT induces apoptosis and inhibits DNA repair. HT enhances the effects of immunotherapy and induces immune stimulation.

The present article is a literature-based review, based on a search in the PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases of the term “hyperthermia” in combination with CHT and RT in gastrointestinal, esophageal, pancreas, colorectal, breast, cervical, head and neck, and bladder cancers, and soft tissue sarcoma lesions. This review aims to update the current knowledge on HT use in association with RT and/or CHT from 2010 up to 2019.

Heating techniques are classified according to the size, penetration depth, and region of energy release. Local or regional HT is generally associated with RT or CHT. Whole-body HT can be performed alone or in combination with CHT in cases of metastatic cancer. Different methods are used for HT: capacitive, radiative, infrared-A, or ultrasound are among the most used techniques.¹

Capacitive local heating requires the positioning of 2 electrodes on both sites of the body with direct body contact using a water bolus, and the heat is obtained by the electric current flow between the 2 electrodes.¹ Radiative heating uses frequencies of 75 to 915 MHz and a water bolus for electromagnetic coupling.¹ This method allows obtaining a better temperature distribution leading to homogeneous target coverage by heat than capacitive coupling. Walter-filtered infrared-A-based HT is used for superficial tumors (15-20 mm depth), using a halogen lamp, passing through a water filter.¹

Modulated electro-hyperthermia (mEHT) is a type of HT that can be performed using the EHY-2000+ device (OncoTherm Ltd). It is a safe form of HT, resulting only in mild adverse events, such as skin burn or pain, and heat-related injuries are observed in 5% of cases.⁶ mEHT has comparable benefits as those obtained with other types of HT, improving local control and survival rates in several types of tumors, such as cervical, brain, and pancreatic cancer.⁶ mEHT targets the malignant cells selectively, heating and sensitizing them to subsequent oncological therapies (CHT and/or RT). A recent review of mEHT effects in different types of cancer shows promising results concerning both local disease control and survival.⁶

Methods

The article search was performed using the following terms: regional hyperthermia, efficacy, toxicity, in PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases. The search retrieved 1662 articles. A further selection was made to include only observational or experimental trial that were published from 2010 through December 2019 without language limitation. Review articles were discarded from tables and were used for the introduction and general considerations. This review included 42 articles that were divided according to tumor type. Efficacy and toxicity of HT were described for each tumor type separately.

Esophageal Cancer

Phase II trials report the feasibility of chemoradiotherapy (CRT) + HT as neoadjuvant treatment.^7-10 A study on esophageal squamous cell carcinoma treated with CRT + HT shows 27% of complete response (CR) and 45% of stable disease (SD) with overall survival rates at 1, 2, and 5 years after CRT of 72.7%, 54.5%, and 9.1%, respectively (Table 1).¹¹ The data from a retrospective study on metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma report that 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate and overall survival (OS) rate were 34.9% and 42.5%, respectively, after CRT + HT therapy, and HT-related pain (38.0%) and fatigue (40.0%) were of mild intensity, grade (G) 1 to 2 (Table 1).¹¹

Table 1.

Esophageal Cancer.

Reference	Type of study	Site	n	Treatment	Tumor response	Survival	HT-associated adverse events
Nishimura et al¹¹	ND	Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma	11	HT-CRT	27% CR 45% SD	Overall survival rates at 1, 2, and 5 years after CRT were 72.7%, 54.5%, and 9.1%, respectively	ND
Sheng et al¹²	Respective, observational	Metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma	50	HT-CRT	ND	3-year PFS rate and OS rate were 34.9% and 42.5%, respectively	HT-related pain (38.0%) and fatigue (40.0%). G1-G2

Abbreviations: HT, hyperthermia; ND, not reported; CRT, chemoradiotherapy; CR, complete response; SD, stable disease; PFS, progression-free survival; OS, overall survival; G, grade.

The available literature reports evidence of CRT + HT benefits in esophageal cancer therapy; nevertheless, further randomized clinical trials are required to compare CRT + HT versus CRT alone to confirm the above-mentioned data.

Colorectal Cancer

Surgery is the standard treatment for patients with colorectal cancer; however, the results are very poor for locally advanced cancer, in terms of both survival and recurrence.¹³ The main aim of the treatments for locally advanced rectal cancer is the achievement of high resectability; for this reason, neoadjuvant CRT is often used to obtain high percentages of pathologic CR (pCR).¹⁴

The introduction of CRT improves locoregional control for locally advanced colorectal cancer. This improvement is further achieved when CRT is associated to HT, resulting in long-term tumor control and survival in locally advanced nonmetastatic rectal cancer.¹⁵ CRT + HT allows achievement of promising rates of pCR, ranging from 22.5% to 69% (Table 2). This association is safe, showing comparable toxicity with CRT alone and 6.5% of G >3 adverse events, such as skin reaction, diarrhea, stomatitis, and nausea/emesis, which were not increased with the additional use of HT; moreover, subcutaneous burns in 5.2% disappeared spontaneously within 2 weeks.^16-21 Other HT-related adverse events were of G0 to G2 and included general or local discomfort in 15% of cases.¹⁷ Concerning survival, CRT + HT allows longer OS with 5-year OS significantly higher than CRT alone (88% vs 76% P < .08).¹⁶

Table 2.

Colorectal Cancer.

Reference	Type of study	Site	n	Treatment	Tumor response	Survival	HT-associated adverse events
Ott et al²¹		Squamous rectal cancer	112	CRT vs CRT + HT		5-year follow-up, overall (95.8% vs 74.5%, P = .045), disease-free (89.1% vs 70.4%, P = .027), local recurrence-free (97.7% vs 78.7%, P = .006), and colostomy-free survival rates (87.7% vs 69.0%, P = .016)	Comparable toxicity: skin reaction, diarrhea, stomatitis, and nausea/emesis were not increased with the additional use of HT.
Zwirner et al¹⁵	Nonrandomized prospective study	Locally advanced rectal cancer	86	Preoperative CRT + HT		5-year OS = 87.3%, DFS = 79.9%, and LRFS = 95.8%, respectively	ND
Gani et al¹⁴	Nonrandomized retrospective study	Adenocarcinoma of the middle or lower rectum	103	Neoadjuvant43 CRT60 CRT + HT		5-year CRT: OS = 76%, DFS = 73%, and LRFS = 77%, 5-year CRT − HT: OS = 88% (P < .08), DFS = 78%, and LRFS = 75%, respectively	ND
Shoji et al¹⁶	Nonrandomized prospective study	Rectal cancer	49	PreoperativeCRT + HT	CR + pCR = 29%		One case of G3 perianal dermatitis
Kato et al¹⁸	Nonrandomized prospective study	Locally advanced rectal cancer	48	PreoperativeCRT − HT	pCR = 69%		No hematological toxicity
Schroeder et al¹⁹	Nonrandomized prospective study	Locally advanced rectal cancer	106	Neoadjuvant 45 CRT vs 61 CRT + HT	pCR rate: CRT + HT = 22.5% (P = .043)		ND
Maluta et al¹⁷	Nonrandomized prospective study	Locally advanced adenocarcinoma of middle and lower rectum	76	Preoperative CRT − HT	CR = 23.6%Disease control = 94.8%	5-year OS = 86.5%, DFS = 74.5%, and LRFS = 73.2%, respectively	G0-G2 general or local discomfort in 15%, no G3, G4 subcutaneous burns in 5.2%

Abbreviations: HT, hyperthermia; CRT, chemoradiotherapy; OS, overall survival; DFS, disease-free survival; LRFS, local relapse-free survival; ND, not specified; CR, complete response; G, grade; pCR, pathologic complete response.

RT + HT is effective and well tolerated also in chemorefractory liver metastases from colorectal cancer, resulting in mild/moderate toxicity and the objective response of 30%.²⁰

In conclusion, preoperative CRT and HT association yields to acceptable toxicity, improved response rate, and survival; however, further studies are required to confirm the long-term benefit of CRT + HT in locally advanced colorectal cancer and liver metastases.

Pancreatic Cancer

The incidence of pancreatic cancer is constantly increasing, and pancreatic cancer reaches the fourth place among the most frequent causes of cancer deaths.²² Advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer is diagnosed in >80% of patients, and standard first-line treatment is still missing for this population that develops recurrence in an average of 6 months with a very low OS of 1.9 months. Gemcitabine-based CHT is the most common treatment for unresectable pancreatic cancer, whereas FOLFIRINOX (leucovorin, fluorouracil, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) is more indicated for fit patients because of the high toxicity.²³ mEHT is feasible for both palliative care and therapeutic purposes also in advanced pancreatic cancer,^24-30 increasing OS and improving quality of life. These advantages of mEHT and HT are observed when it is used alone or in association with CRT for locally advanced pancreas carcinoma.^24-30 Median OS increases from 10% to 11% of CRT alone to 15% to 18% of CRT + HT (Table 3). The disease control (DC) rate increases from 66% to 92% after mEHT.²⁴ Regional HT also shows encouraging DC rate (50%). As concerning the safety, no grade III to IV toxicity is observed, suggesting the good tolerability of HT in pancreatic cancer treatment.

Table 3.

Pancreas.

Reference	Type of study	Site	n	Treatment	Tumor response	Survival	HT-associated adverse events
Fiorentini et al²⁴	Retrospective multicentric study	Advanced pancreatic cancer	106	mEHT + RT or CHT vs RT or CHT (no-mEHT)	mEHT vs no-mEHTDC = 92% vs 66%	mEHT vs no-mEHTOS = 18.0 vs 10.9 months	No grade III-IV toxicity
Tschoep-Lechner et al²⁵	Retrospective study	Advanced pancreatic cancer	27	CHT + HT	DC = 50%	PFS = 5.9 monthsOS = 12.9 months	No grade III-IV toxicity
Maluta et al²⁶	Prospective, nonrandomized controlled study	Locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer	68	CRTCRT + HT		CRT + HT median OS = 15 vs 11 months
Volovat et al³⁰	Prospective study	Locally advanced pancreatic cancer	26	CHT + HT	DC = 71%	Median PFS = 3.9 monthsMedian OS = 8.9 months	No grade III-IV toxicity
Ohguri et al²⁸	Retrospective study	Locally advanced pancreatic cancer	29	CRT + HTCRT		Median OS = 8.8 vs 4.9 months, P = .02Median PFS = 18.6 vs 9.6 months, P = .01	5% grade III-IV toxicity

Abbreviations: HT, hyperthermia; mEHT, modulated electro-HT; RT, radiotherapy; CHT, chemotherapy; DC, disease control; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival; CRT, chemoradiotherapy.

Further studies that will investigate the effects of HT include the HEATPAC trial, a phase II randomized trial, in unresectable locally advanced pancreatic cancer that will explore the feasibility and efficacy of HT associated with CRT versus CRT alone, with pre- and postintervention FOLFIRINOX.²⁹

In conclusion, longer median OS and better tumor response can be obtained in correlation with HT treatment, suggesting a beneficial effect of HT in association with CHT and/or in locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer with a low toxicity profile.

Breast Cancer

As concerning breast cancer therapy, surgery and CRT are very effective; however, there is a 30% local recurrence.^1,2 HT is among the oldest methods of cancer therapy, and since 2013, it has been included in the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of recurrent breast cancer.^31,32 HT increases the temperature of the tumor up to 42 °C to 45 °C using different methods, inducing tumor death. HT is often used in association with CHT or RT and immunotherapy, increasing their efficacy and prolonging their clinical benefits.^5,33-35

This beneficial effect is due to heat-induced improvement of CHT delivery, increase of blood flow, and oxygen radical production, while inhibiting hypoxia, angiogenesis, and DNA repair, resulting in enhanced apoptosis of tumor cells.^5,33,34

The analysis of the literature shows 9 clinical trials (Table 4) on advanced or recurrent breast cancer treatment with HT combined therapy from 2010 up to 2019.^36-44 The association of HT to RT resulted in CR in a range of 52.7% to 76% with local control rates of 53% to 76% at 1 year, 25% to 78% at 3 years, and 39% to 65% at 5 years.^36-44

Table 4.

Breast Cancer.

Reference	Type of study	Site	n	Treatment	Tumor response	Survival	HT-associated adverse events
De-Colle et al⁴²	Prospective observational study	Recurrent breast cancer	20	RT + HT	Clinical benefit = 90%	2 years: OS = 90% and DFS = 90%5 years: OS = 50%	>G3 toxicity in 15%
Klimanov et al³⁷		Metastatic breast cancer	103	53 CHT + HT50 CHT	Clinical benefit = 76% (CHT + HT) vs 42% (CHT), P < .05
Linthorst et al³⁹		Recurrent breast cancer	248	RT + HT	CR rate 70%1-, 3-, and 5-year LC was 53%, 40%, and 39%, respectively	SR at 1, 3, and 5 years = 66%, 32%, and 18%, respectively
Oldenborg et al⁴⁰		Recurrent breast cancer	404	RT + HT	CR = 86%ORR was 86%.3-year LC rate was 25%	Median = 17 months and SR at 3 year = 37%	>G3 toxicity in 24%
Refaat et al⁴³		Recurrent or advanced breast cancer	127	RT + HT	CR =52.7%LC = 55.1%	SR at 1, 3, and 5 years = 58.3%, 29.5%, and 22.5%, respectively
Linthorst et al⁴¹		Recurrent breast cancer	198	RT + HT		Median = 82 monthsSR at 3, 5, and 10 years = 75%, 60%, and 36%, respectively	G3-G4 toxicity in 10%
Takeda et al³⁶		Recurrent or advanced breast cancer	172	Immunotherapy + HT	Clinical benefit = 17.6% effective rate of immunotherapy increased from 7.7% to 26.0% using HT
Varma et al⁴⁴		Advanced breast carcinoma	59	RT + HT	LC = 70%		>G3 toxicity in 14%
Oldenborg et al³⁸		Recurrent breast cancer	78	RT + HT	3- and 5-year LC rates were 78% and 65%	3-year survival 66%	G3 toxicity in 32%

Abbreviations: HT, hyperthermia; RT, radiotherapy; clinical benefit, complete response + partial response + stable disease; OS, overall survival; DFS, disease-free survival; G, grade; CHT, chemotherapy; CR, complete response; SR, survival rate; ORR, overall response rate; LC, local control.

Five studies report the results of survival analysis and show survival rates of 58.3% to 75% at 1 year, 29.5% to 66% at 3 years, 18% to 36% at 5 years, and one study showed also a 10% survival at 10 years.⁴¹

As concerning the toxicity, adverse events (>G3 intensity, according to CTCAE [Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events] criteria) are observed in a small portion of patients (10% to 31%) and include thermal burns, ulceration, and osteoradionecrosis.^36-41

The combination of re-irradiation and HT results in high tumor response and local control rates that are maintained for up to 10 years in advanced or recurrent breast cancer. This combination, moreover, offers long survival and is well tolerated. For this reason, this combined treatment should be suggested to all patients with advanced or recurrent or at high risk of local recurrence.

The HT in association with CHT is compared with CHT treatment alone in one study.³⁷ This combination improves the therapeutic efficacy in patients with metastatic breast cancer, resulting in a clinical benefit of 76% versus 42% of CHT alone (P < .05).³⁷

These data confirm the safety and efficacy of the combination therapy HT/CHT and RT for advanced or recurrent breast cancer in both tumor response and survival; these trials, however, are nonrandomized.^36-44

Cervical Cancer

Concomitant cisplatin-based CHT and RT (CRT) improve OS of locally advanced cervical cancer more than RT alone as reported by a review⁴⁵ and clinical trials,^46-48 even if the prognosis is still poor.⁴⁸ HT improves tumor response of CHT-RT in locally advanced cervical cancer.^47-52 Several randomized reports HT benefit for locally advanced cervical cancer suggest, including survival improvement and good tolerability (Table 5).^47-52

Table 5.

Cervical Cancer.

Reference	Type of study	FIGO stage	n	Treatment	Tumor response	Survival	HT-associated adverse events
Minaar et al⁵²	Single-center, phase III, randomized controlled, parallel-group study trial	IIB to IIIB	202	101 CRT-mEHT101 CRT	CRT-mEHT group: CR = 45.5%CRT group: CR = 24.1%	CRT-mEHT group: 6-month DFS = 87.1%CRT group: 6-month DFS = 82.2%	10.6% mEHT related: G1-G2 adipose tissue burns (9.5%); G1 surface burns (2.0%)
Ohguri et al⁴⁷	Prospective, multicentric, randomized, parallel-group study	IB bulky (>4 cm), IIA, IIB, IIIA, IIIB, or IVA	47	CRT-HT	CR = 87%	5-year OS = 65%, DFS = 73%, and LRFS = 81%, respectively	>G3 toxicity none related to HT
Harima et al⁴⁹	Prospective, multicentric, randomized, parallel-group study conducted	IB bulky (>4 cm), IIA, IIB, IIIA, IIIB or IVA	101	CRT-HTCRT	CRT-HT group: CR = 88%CRT group: CR = 77.6%	CRT-HT group: 5-year OS = 77.8%, DFS = 70.8%, and LRFS = 80.1%CRT group: 5-year OS = 64.8%, DFS = 60.6%, and LRFS = 71.0%	CRT-HT was well tolerated and caused no additional acute or long-term toxicity compared with CRT alone
Lutgens et al⁴⁶	Phase III randomized	FIGO stage IIIB, IVA,	87	43 RT + CHT44 RT + HT		DFS: HR = 1.15, nsOS: HR = 1.04, nsLRFS: HR = 0.94, ns
Heijkoop et al⁵⁰	Prospective nonrandomized	All FIGO	43	CRT + HT	Clinical benefit = 49%	Median DFS = 15 monthsOS 23% at 12 months and 4% at 24 months	>G3 = 10%
Westermann et al⁵¹	Prospective phase I-II studies, multicentric	FIGO stage IIB, IIIB, IVA, unresectable IB	68	CRT-HT	Clinical benefit = 59%	5-year RFS = 57.5%, OS = 66.1%	No
Heijkoop et al⁵³	Single-center, prospective nonrandomized	FIGO stage IB2,IIB, IIIB, IIIA, IVA	43	Neoadjuvant CHT + RT + HT	Response rate = 81.4%	1-year OS = 79%	>G3 toxicity = 10%

Abbreviations: HT, hyperthermia; CRT, chemoradiotherapy; mEHT, modulated electro-HT; CR, complete response; DFS, disease-free survival; G, grade; OS, overall survival; LRFS, local relapse-free survival; clinical benefit, complete response + partial response + stable disease; RT, radiotherapy; HR, hazard ratio; ns, not significant; CHT, chemotherapy.

All recent studies on CRT and CRT-HT reported possible advantages of HT and mEHT association to CRT.^{46,47,49-52,53} Two of them show better 5-year OS, disease-free survival (DFS), and local relapse-free survival (LRFS) in the CRT-HT group than those in the CRT group^47,49; however, the difference is not statistically significant. CR is significantly higher in the CRT-HT group than that in the CRT group. As concerning safety, the addition of HT is well tolerated, and no additional acute or long-term toxicity is observed than CRT alone.^47,49

One of the above-mentioned studies measures the intrarectal temperature with a 4-point micro-thermocouple sensor during regional whole-pelvis HT of locally advanced cervical cancer patients associated to CRT.⁴⁷ It shows that higher thermal dose parameter of HT significantly increases LRFS in both univariate (P = .024) and multivariate (P = .0097) analyses.⁴⁷ The same result is observed for DFS (P = .071) and tumor response (P = .056). DFS, LRFS, and CR are significantly improved after CRT-HT at higher temperature than CRT alone (P = .036, P = .036, and P = .048).⁴⁷ These data suggest a dose-effect correlation between thermal dose parameters and clinical outcomes in locally advanced cervical cancer patients.⁴⁷ This correlation is confirmed also in another previous study on 420 patients.⁵⁴

The latter study on CRT-HT differentiates the analysis according to nationality and reports 5-year RFS rates of 65.8% for the Dutch patients, 57.4% for Norwegian, and 38.5% for US patients. However, the difference in RFS is significant only between the Netherlands and the United States (P < .01, hazard ratio [HR] = 3.096, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.2495-7.671).⁵¹ This may suggest a correlation of HT response to patient characteristics of different countries.

A further study reports the results of CRT associated with mEHT compared with CRT alone for the treatment of FIGO stages IIB to IIIB locally advanced cervical cancer.⁵² It reports a higher tumor response for the CRT- mEHT group, CR = 45.5% versus 24.1% of the CRT-alone group (Pearson’s χ²: P = .003) and an improvement in quality of life, in particular as concerning the social functioning (P = .049) and emotional functioning (P = .017) seen in the mEHT group.⁵² This difference was observed in both HIV-positive and HIV-negative women.⁵² The HT is not associated with an increased toxicity or RT delays and shows reduced posttreatment fatigue and pain at 3 months after therapy.⁴⁹

Bladder Cancer

The beneficial effects of HT associated with CHT or RT have been shown also for bladder cancer (Table 6).^53,55-57 The induction of regional HT in bladder cancer can be attained with 3 different techniques: 70 to 120 MHz antennas, intracavitary radiofrequency HT using a 916 MHz antenna, and intravesical conductive therapy using a heated perfusate.⁵⁶ The use of 70 MHz had higher recurrence-free survival rate than the use of heated perfusate (78% vs 33%).⁵⁶

Table 6.

Bladder.

Reference	Type of study	Site	n	Treatment	Tumor response	Survival	HT-associated adverse events
Datta et al⁵⁷	Prospective, nonrandomized	Muscle invasive bladder cancer	16	RT + HT	Local control rate = 93.7%; distant control rate = 31.3%	5-year OS = 67.5%, DFS = 51.6%, and LRSF = 64.3%, respectively	No >G3 toxicity
Geijsen et al⁵⁹	Phase I/II, prospective, nonrandomized	Nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer	18	Intravesical mitomycin C–HT	CR = 23%; PR = 15%	2-year DFS = 78%	G1 = 43%, G2 = 14%, no >G3 toxicity
Inman et al⁵⁸	Prospective, nonrandomized	Nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer	15	Intravesical mitomycin C–HT		3-year DFS = 33%	No >G3 toxicity

Abbreviations: HT, hyperthermia; RT, radiotherapy; OS, overall survival; DFS, disease-free survival; LRFS, local relapse-free survival; G, grade; CR, complete response; PR, partial response,

Intravesical mitomycin C associated with HT (70 MHz) at mean temperatures of 40.6 °C to 41.6 °C was reported in 2 studies that treated intermediate-/high-risk nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer. The first study showed a CR in 23% and partial response in 15%, and 2-year recurrence-free survival rate was 78%.⁵⁸ As concerning the toxicity, adverse event intensity was G1 in 43% of cases and G2 in 14%.⁵⁸ The second study showed a 3-year recurrence-free survival rate of 33%.⁵⁹ These data suggested that the treatment with mitomycin C and HT in patients with intermediate-/high-risk nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer was effective and safe.^58,59

Soft Tissue Sarcoma

Soft tissue sarcoma includes a wide and heterogeneous group of tumors that are derived from connective tissues. Most patients (>80%) present a high-grade histologic type at diagnosis.⁵⁵ STS treatment involves a combination of CHT, RT, and resection.⁶⁰ In this scenario, regional HT is used to improve CHT and RT efficacy, in terms of PFS, DFS, and tumor response (Table 7).⁶¹ CHT-HT significantly improves local PFS (56% vs 45%, P = .044) and DFS (56% vs 45%, P = 0.044) at 5 years with regard to CHT alone, whereas OS and toxicity do not change significantly between groups.⁶¹ These results suggest an important role of HT in association with CHT for the treatment of abdominal and retroperitoneal high-risk sarcomas after radical surgery.⁶¹

Table 7.

Soft Tissue Sarcoma.

Reference	Type of study	Site	n	Treatment	Tumor response	Survival	HT-associated adverse events
Issels et al⁶²	Randomized phase 3 multicentric study	Soft tissue sarcoma	329	Neoadjuvant162 CHT-HT167 CHT	Response rate CHT-HT =3 8%CHT = 29%	CHT-HT group: OS median = 15.4 years (P = .04), 5-year OS = 62.7%, 10-year OS = 51.3%CHT group: OS median = 6.2 years, 5-year OS = 52.6%, 10-year OS = 42.7%	HT-related adverse events were G1 and G2: pain, bolus pressure, and skin burn
Fendler et al⁶⁰	Retrospective observational	Soft tissue sarcoma	66	NeoadjuvantCHT-HT	Response rate = 60%	OS median = 22.2 months
Angele et al⁶¹	Randomized phase-III multicenter study	Soft tissue sarcoma	149	73 CHT-HT66 CHT	Soft tissue sarcoma CHT-HT = 34.7% vs CHT = 15.6%	CHT-HT group: 5-year OS = 57%, DFS = 34% (P = .04), and LRFS = 56% (P = .044)CHT group: 5-year OS = 55%, DFS = 27%, and LRFS = 45%
Schlemmer et al⁶³	Phase II, nonrandomized	High-risk soft tissue sarcoma	47	Neoadjuvant HT + surgery + CHT + RT	Soft tissue sarcoma = 21%	Median OS = 105 months5-year OS = 57%, DFS = 55%, and LRFS = 48%

Abbreviations: HT, hyperthermia; CHT, chemotherapy; OS, overall survival; G, grade; DFS, disease-free survival; LRFS, local relapse-free survival.

Hyperthermia has a potential role also in association with neoadjuvant CHT for STS, increasing survival, tumor response, and local PFS.^60,62-64 A phase III randomized study shows a 27% OS improvement as a consequence of neoadjuvant CHT + HT versus neoadjuvant CHT alone.⁶⁴ Neoadjuvant CHT + HT, in particular, results in a statistically significant improvement of 11.4% and 9.9% in the 5-year and 10-year survival rate, respectively (62.7% vs 51.3% and 52.6% vs 42.7%).⁶⁴

Brain Tumors

Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is an aggressive brain tumor, representing 45% to 54% of gliomas.^65,66 GBM prognosis is still poor, notwithstanding the advances in brain tumor treatment, and median OS ranges between 15 and 18 months.⁶⁶ Actually, a standard therapy for recurrent GBM is not yet available; however, emerging results show an advantage of mEHT as an integrative therapy for treatment and not only palliative care of recurrent GBM and astrocytomas (AST; Table 8).^67-73

Table 8.

Brain Tumors.

Reference	Type of study	Site	n	Treatment	Tumor response	Survival	HT-associated adverse events
Fiorentini et al⁷⁰	Retrospective observational 2-arm comparative, multicentric study	Recurrent GBM and AST	164: 114 GBM and 50 AST	mEHT: 29 GBM and 28 ASTBSC: 85 GBM and 32 AST	DC mEHT vs BSC: GBM = 62% vs 24%AST = 77% vs 69%P < .05	Median mEHT OS: GBM = 12 months and AST = 17 months	No grade III-IV toxicity
Fiorentini et al⁶⁹	Retrospective observational 2-arm comparative, multicentric study	Recurrent GBM and AST	149: 111 GBM and 38 AST	mEHT: 28 GBM and 24 ASTBSC: 83 GBM and 14 AST	DC mEHT vs BSC: GBM = 54% vs 19%AST = 72% vs 37%P < .05	Median mEHT OS: GBM = 14 months and AST = 16.5 months1-year OS HT: AST = 77.3% and GBM = 61%2-year OS HT: AST = 40.9% and GBM = 29%5-year OS HT vs BSC: AST = 83% vs 25% and GBM = 3.5% vs 1.2%	No grade III-IV toxicity
Roussakow et al⁶⁸	Prospective cohort study	Recurrent GBM	54	TMZ + mEHT		Median OS = 10.10 months	No grade III-IV toxicity
Fiorentini et al⁷²	Retrospective study	Recurrent GBM and AST	24	mEHT	DC = 62%The median duration of response = 16 months	Median OS = 19.5 months1-year OS = 55%2-year OS = 15%	No grade III-IV toxicity
Heo et al⁷¹	Cohort study	Recurrent GBM	20	RT + HT		Median OS = 8.4 months6-month OS= 67%1-year OS = 30%median PFS = 4.1 months	No grade III-IV toxicity
Wismeth et al⁷³	Phase I study	Recurrent GBM	15	CHT + HT			No grade III-IV toxicity

Abbreviations: HT, hyperthermia; GBM, glioblastoma multiforme; AST, astrocytomas; mEHT, modulated electro-HT; BSC, best supportive care; DC, disease control; OS, overall survival; TMX = temozolomide; PFS, progression-free survival; RT, radiotherapy; CHT, chemotherapy.

Available data report a tumor response rate of 24% to 29% for GBM and 43% to 48% for AST 3 months after mEHT, whereas it is 4% for GBM and 10% to 37% for AST in control group.^69,70 HT also improves the survival of GBM and AST with a median OS of 12 months (range = 5-108) for GBM, and 17 months for AST. Five-year OS is 83% for AST after mEHT versus 25% after best supportive care and 3.5% for GBM after HT versus 1.2% after best supportive care for GBM.⁶⁸ HT also has a low toxicity profile, resulting in no G3 and G4 adverse events.

In conclusion, mEHT may have a beneficial effect on both the treatment and palliation of relapsed GBM and AST in integrative cancer therapy.

Head and Neck Tumors

Radiotherapy + HT is also used in the treatment of head and neck carcinomas, resulting in better CR than RT alone (62.5% vs 39.6%) with comparable toxicity also (Table 9).⁷⁴ As concerning nasopharyngeal carcinomas, 3 studies report improved CR, PFS, DFS, and OS for CRT + HT treatment.^75-77 This response is temperature-dependent; indeed, patients treated with higher temperatures have a better outcome.⁷⁵ In these studies, no difference in toxicity is observed; moreover, patients receiving HT reported a better quality of life after the treatment.⁷⁷ Also, re-irradiations combined with HT result in promising tumor response (CR = 46%).⁷⁸ These data suggest that the association of HT to CRT is a safe and effective choice of therapy for head and neck tumors. For this reason, HT may be suggested for the treatment of elderly or poorly fit patients to spare the toxicity of more aggressive therapies.

Table 9.

Head and Neck.

Reference	Type of study	Site	n	Treatment	Tumor Response	Survival
Zhao et al⁷⁷	Phase III randomized, prospective	Nasopharyngeal cancer	83	40 CRT43 CRT + HT		3 years:OS = 53.5% (CRT) vs 73% (CRT + HT), P = .041PFS = 37.5 (CRT) vs 48 (CRT + HT) months, P = .05
Kang et al⁷⁵	Phase III randomized, prospective	Nasopharyngeal cancer	154	78 CRT76 CRT + HT	CR: 62.8% (CRT) vs 81.6% (CRT + HT)	5 years:DFS = 25.5% (CRT) vs 51.3% (CRT + HT), P < .005OS = 50% (CRT) vs 68.4% (CRT + HT), P < .005
Hua et al⁷⁶	Phase III randomized, prospective	Nasopharyngeal cancer	180	90 CRT90 CRT + HT	CR: 81.1% (CRT) vs 95.6% (CRT + HT)	5 years:DFS = 63.1% (CRT) vs 72.7% (CRT + HT), P < .005OS = 70.3% (CRT) vs 78.2% (CRT + HT), ns

Abbreviations: HT, hyperthermia; CRT, chemoradiotherapy; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival; DFS, disease-free survival; ns, not significant.

Discussion

The available literature includes both retrospective and prospective studies on the benefits of HT association to RT or CRT in several types of tumors, resulting in confirmation of efficacy for the majority of them.¹ These data, however, do not bring the HT to the level of the standard care in many countries. This may be due to different issues, such as reimbursement, technical difficulties and poor proofs of homogenous heating, difficulties in temperature measurements, and a low number of centers performing HT around the world.

There is a need for standardized protocols to be applied in a single tumor type to avoid the current heterogeneity of HT treatments that creates difficulties in comparing the results of different studies. The frequency of HT treatments reviewed varied from once a week to daily and the mean temperature obtained in each treatment varied widely in the range 39 °C to 43 °C. The use of HT at higher temperatures or applied frequencies is correlated with better outcome,^47,54 further underlying the need to establish standardized protocols for HT treatments and larger randomized studies on HT variables.

Modulated electro-HT is a modification of conventional HT that targets tumor cell membranes to increase the temperature inside cancer tissue and sensitize it to cancer therapies: RT, CHT, and immunotherapy.⁶ Combination therapies of mEHT and CHT or RT are reported by preclinical and clinical studies.^{6,24,52,68-70} mEHT induces moderate rises in tissue temperatures, improving tumor perfusion, increasing drug absorption and sensitivity to radiation therapy. mEHT is safely used in several types of cancers, such as cervical, brain, and pancreatic tumors, improving local control and survival rates and seems to induce an abscopal (systemic) response to ionizing radiation.^24,52,68-70

Applying of HT alone or complementary to other treatments (CHT and/or RT) is assessed in terms of efficacy and tolerability for several types of tumors: esophageal, colorectal, pancreatic, breast, cervix, bladder, and brain tumors, and STS. The data presented confirm the benefits of HT, such as increased tumor response rates, local and distant control rates, and survival in each type of cancer examined. HT was also well tolerated, resulting in a low number and intensity (G1-G2 mainly) adverse events. No cardiac toxicity is reported in any observed study.

CRT + HT, when compared with CRT alone, improves both OS and DC in esophageal cancer with low toxicity.^10-12 HT is often used in association with preoperative and neoadjuvant CRT also in locally advanced both nonmetastatic and metastatic colorectal cancer, improving OS and long-term tumor control, resulting in mild toxicity, comparable to that or CRT alone.^14,15,20 The same advantages are observed for advanced pancreatic cancer. HT alone or complementary to CRT is, indeed, feasible for both palliative care and therapeutic purposes, increasing OS and improving quality of life for locally advanced pancreas carcinoma.^70-73

This HTA reports the available literature to show that there is wide evidence that HT associated with CHT, RT, and immunotherapy for advanced or recurrent breast cancer brings about improvements in both tumor response and OS that are maintained for a long time (up to 10 years).^36-44

Successful use of HT is also shown for cervical cancer, improving tumor response rates and quality of life in both social and emotional functioning.⁵² It is observed, moreover, that there is a dose-effect correlation between thermal dose parameters and clinical outcomes and that HT response may be modified by patient characteristics in different countries.^47,51,54

Fewer studies are available on the use of HT for bladder cancer treatment. Their data, nevertheless, confirm the positive effects of HT associated with intravesical mitomycin C in terms of CR and PFS in bladder cancer.^57-59

As concerning STS, the association of HT with RT or CHT improves local PFS and DFS after radical surgery.⁶¹ The same benefits are observed when HT is used in the neoadjuvant setting, resulting also in higher response rates.^60,62-65

Available literature shows that HT may have a beneficial effect for both treatment and palliation of relapsed GBM and AST and is a valid option for integrative cancer therapy.^68-73 Improvements of CR, PFS, DFS, and OS are observed also for head and neck tumor treatment for HT associated with CRT and re-irradiation.^75-77 In these studies, no difference in toxicity is observed and patients receiving HT reported a better quality of life, suggesting that the association of HT to CRT is a safe and effective choice of therapy for head and neck tumors.

Constant improvement of HT includes heat delivery, treatment planning, and monitoring of efficacy and toxicity. HT associated with new targeted therapies, immunotherapy, nanomedicine, or particle therapy may represent new fields of future research and clinical application.

The main limitation of this review is that the quality of the articles was not assessed as it would be in systematic review or meta-analysis.

Conclusion

There are numerous clinical studies that show good feasibility and efficacy of HT and mEHT in terms of tumor response and survival improvements in several tumor types, such as gastrointestinal and other malignancies. HT and mEHT can be successfully applied in association with CHT, RT, and CRT for the treatment of recurrent disease.

In conclusion, HT in combination with other therapeutic modalities results in better outcomes concerning both tumor response and survival and is associated with low-grade toxicity.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Giammaria Fiorentini

References

Peeken

Vaupel

Combs

SE.

Integrating hyperthermia into modern radiation oncology: what evidence is necessary?

Front Oncol. 2017;7:132. doi:10.3389/fonc.2017.00132

Sauer

Creeze

Hulshof

Issels

Ott

; Interdisciplinary Working Group for Clinical Hyperthermia (Atzelsberg Circle) of the German Cancer Society and the German Society of Radiooncology. Concerning the final report “Hyperthermia: a systematic review” of the Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Health Technology Assessment, Vienna, March 2010. Strahlenther Onkol. 2012;188:209-213. doi:10.1007/s00066-012-0072-9

Gonzalez-Angulo

Morales-Vasquez

Hortobagyi

GN.

Overview of resistance to systemic therapy in patients with breast cancer. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2007;608:1-22. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-74039-3_1

, et al. Chemoradiation combined with regional hyperthermia for advanced oesophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2017;42:155-164. doi:10.1111/jcpt.12498

Datta

Puric

Klingbiel

Gomez

Bodis

Hyperthermia and radiation therapy in locoregional recurrent breast cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016;94:1073-1087. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2015.12.361

Szasz

Minnaar

Szentmártoni

Szigeti

Dank

Review of the Clinical Evidences of Modulated Electro-Hyperthermia (mEHT) method: an update for the practicing oncologist. Front Oncol. 2019;9:1012. doi:10.3389/fonc.2019.01012

Suzuki

Masuda

Fukuchi

Kuwano

Planned esophagectomy after neoadjuvant hyperthermo-chemoradiotherapy using weekly low-dose docetaxel and hyperthermia for advanced esophageal carcinomas. Hepatogastroenterology. 2015;62:887-891.

Hulshof

MCCM

Van Haaren

PMA

Van Lanschot

JJB

, et al. Preoperative chemoradiation combined with regional hyperthermia for patients with resectable esophageal cancer. Int J Hyperthermia. 2009;25:79-85. doi:10.1080/02656730802464078

Sakamoto

Katoh

Shimizu

, et al. Clinical results of treatment of advanced esophageal carcinoma with hyperthermia in combination with chemoradiotherapy. Chest. 1997;112:1487-1493.

10.

Kuwano

Sumiyoshi

Watanabe

, et al. Preoperative hyperthermia combined with chemotherapy and irradiation for the treatment of patients with esophageal carcinoma. Tumori. 1995;81:18-22.

11.

Nishimura

Saeki

Nakanoko

, et al. Hyperthermia combined with chemotherapy for patients with residual or recurrent oesophageal cancer after definitive chemoradiotherapy. Anticancer Res. 2015;35:2299-2303.

12.

Sheng

Regional hyperthermia combined with radiotherapy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma with supraclavicular lymph node metastasis. Oncotarget. 2017;8:5339-5348. doi:10.18632/oncotarget.14148

13.

De Haas-Kock

DFM

Buijsen

Pijls-Johannesma

, et al. Concomitant hyperthermia and radiation therapy for treating locally advanced rectal cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009;(3):CD006269. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD006269.pub2

14.

Gani

Schroeder

Heinrich

, et al. Long-term local control and survival after preoperative radiochemotherapy in combination with deep regional hyperthermia in locally advanced rectal cancer. Int J Hyperthermia. 2016;32:187-192. doi:10.3109/02656736.2015.1117661

15.

Zwirner

Bonomo

Lamprecht

Zips

Gani

External validation of a rectal cancer outcome prediction model with a cohort of patients treated with preoperative radiochemotherapy and deep regional hyperthermia. Int J Hyperthermia. 2018;34:455-460. doi:10.1080/02656736.2017.1338364

16.

Shoji

Motegi

Osawa

, et al. A novel strategy of radiofrequency hyperthermia (neothermia) in combination with preoperative chemoradiotherapy for the treatment of advanced rectal cancer: a pilot study. Cancer Med. 2015;4:834-843. doi:10.1002/cam4.431

17.

Maluta

Romano

Dall’oglio

, et al. Regional hyperthermia added to intensified preoperative chemo-radiation in locally advanced adenocarcinoma of middle and lower rectum. Int J Hyperthermia. 2010;26:108-117. doi:10.3109/02656730903333958

18.

Kato

Fujii

Ide

, et al. Effect of long interval between hyperthermochemoradiation therapy and surgery for rectal cancer on apoptosis, proliferation and tumor response. Anticancer Res. 2014;34:3141-3146.

19.

Schroeder

Gani

Lamprecht

, et al. Pathological complete response and sphincter-sparing surgery after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy with regional hyperthermia for locally advanced rectal cancer compared with radiochemotherapy alone. Int J Hyperthermia. 2012;28:707-714. doi:10.3109/02656736.2012.722263

20.

Park

Choi

, et al. Prospective phase II trial of regional hyperthermia and whole liver irradiation for numerous chemorefractory liver metastases from colorectal cancer. Radiat Oncol J. 2016;34:34-44. doi:10.3857/roj.2016.34.1.34

21.

Ott

Schmidt

Semrau

, et al. Chemoradiotherapy with and without deep regional hyperthermia for squamous cell carcinoma of the anus. Strahlenther Onkol. 2019;195:607-614. doi:10.1007/s00066-018-1396-x

22.

Liu

Yang

Zhou

Chen

Wang

Gemcitabine based regional intra-arterial infusion chemotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016;95:e3098. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000003098

23.

Suker

Beumer

Sadot

, et al. A patient-level meta analysis of FOLFIRINOX for locally advanced pancreatic cancer. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17:801-810. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(16)00172-8

24.

Fiorentini

Sarti

Casadei

, et al. Modulated electro-hyperthermia as palliative treatment for pancreatic cancer: a retrospective observational study on 106 patients. Integr Cancer Ther. Published online September 27, 2019. doi:10.1177/1534735419878505

25.

Tschoep-Lechner

Milani

Berger

, et al. Gemcitabine and cisplatin combined with regional hyperthermia as second-line treatment in patients with gemcitabine-refractory advanced pancreatic cancer. Int J Hyperthermia. 2013;29:8-16. doi:10.3109/02656736.2012.740764

26.

Maluta

Schaffer

Pioli

, et al. Regional hyperthermia combined with chemoradiotherapy in primary or recurrent locally advanced pancreatic cancer: an open-label comparative cohort trial. Strahlenther Onkol. 2011;187:619-625. doi:10.1007/s00066-011-2226-6

27.

van der Horst

Versteijne

Besselink

MGH

, et al. The clinical benefit of hyperthermia in pancreatic cancer: a systematic review. Int J Hyperthermia. 2018;34:969-979. doi:10.1080/02656736.2017.1401126

28.

Ohguri

Imada

Yahara

Morioka

Nakano

Korogi

. Concurrent chemoradiotherapy with gemcitabine plus regional hyperthermia for locally advanced pancreatic carcinoma: initial experience. Radiat Med. 2008;26:587-596. doi:10.1007/s11604-008-0279-y

29.

Datta

Pestalozzi

Clavien

, et al; Members of the HEATPAC Trial Group. “HEATPAC”—a phase II randomized study of concurrent thermochemoradiotherapy versus chemoradiotherapy alone in locally advanced pancreatic cancer. Radiat Oncol. 2017;12:183. doi:10.1186/s13014-017-0923-8

30.

Volovat

Scripcaru

Miron

Second-line chemotherapy with gemcitabine and oxaliplatin in combination with loco-regional hyperthermia (EHY-2000) in patients with refractory metastatic pancreatic cancer—preliminary results of a prospective trial. Rom Rep Phys. 2014;66:166-174. http://rrp.infim.ro/2014_66_1/A18.pdf

31.

NCCN Guidelines. www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/breast.pdf

32.

Kouloulias

Triantopoulou

Uzunoglou

, et al; Greek Society of Hyperthermic Oncology. Hyperthermia is now included in the NCCN clinical practice guidelines for breast cancer recurrences: an analysis of existing data. Breast Care (Basel). 2015;10:109-116. doi:10.1159/000376594

33.

Lee

Cho

Kim

JS.

Treatment outcome analysis of chemotherapy combined with modulated modulated electrohyperthermia compared with chemotherapy alone for recurrent cervical cancer, following irradiation. Oncol Lett. 2017;14:73-78. doi:10.3892/ol.2017.6117

34.

Brüningk

Ijaz

Rivens

Nill

Ter Haar

Oelfke

A comprehensive model for heat-induced radio-sensitisation. Int J Hyperthermia. 2018;34:392-402. doi:10.1080/02656736.2017.1341059

35.

Baronzio

Gramaglia

Fiorentini

Hyperthermia and immunity. A brief overview. In Vivo. 2006;20(6A):689-695.

36.

Takeda

Etani

Kobayashi

Takeda

The effect of immunotherapy and hyperthermia on patients with advanced or recurrent breast cancer [in Japanese]. Gan To Kagaku Ryoho. 2013;40:1596-1599.

37.

Klimanov

Syvak

Orel

, et al. Efficacy of combined regional inductive moderate hyperthermia and chemotherapy in patients with multiple liver metastases from breast cancer. Technol Cancer Res Treat. Published online October 18, 2018. doi:10.1177/1533033818806003

38.

Oldenborg

Van Os

Van rij

, et al. Elective re-irradiation and hyperthermia following resection of persistent locoregional recurrent breast cancer: a retrospective study. Int J Hyperthermia. 2010;26:136-144. doi:10.3109/02656730903341340

39.

Linthorst

Baaijens

Wiggenraad

, et al. Local control rate after the combination of re-irradiation and hyperthermia for irresectable recurrent breast cancer: results in 248 patients. Radiother Oncol. 2015;117:217-222. doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2013.05.010

40.

Oldenborg

Griesdoorn

, et al. Re-irradiation and hyperthermia for irresectable locoregional recurrent breast cancer in previously irradiated area: size matters. Radiother Oncol. 2015;117:223-228. doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2015.10.017

41.

Linthorst

van Geel

Baaijens

, et al. Re-irradiation and hyperthermia after surgery for recurrent breast cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2013;109:188-193. doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2013.05.010

42.

De-Colle

Weidner

Heinrich

, et al. Hyperthermic chest wall re-irradiation in recurrent breast cancer: a prospective observational study. Strahlenther Onkol. 2019;195:318-326. doi:10.1007/s00066-018-1414-z

43.

Refaat

Sachdey

Sathiaseelan

, et al. Hyperthermia and radiation therapy for locally advanced or recurrent breast cancer. Breast. 2015;24:418-425. doi:10.1016/j.breast.2015.03.008

44.

Varma

Myerson

Moros

Taylor

Straube

Zoberi

Simultaneous radiotherapy and superficial hyperthermia for high-risk breast carcinoma: a randomised comparison of treatment sequelae in heated versus non-heated sectors of the chest wall hyperthermia. Int J Hyperthermia. 2012,28:583-590. doi:10.3109/02656736.2012.705216

45.

Burchardt

Roszak

Hyperthermia in cervical cancer—current status. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother. 2018;23:595-603. doi:10.1016/j.rpor.2018.05.006

46.

Lutgens

Koper

Jobsen

, et al. Radiation therapy combined with hyperthermia versus cisplatin for locally advanced cervical cancer: results of the randomized RADCHOC trial. Radiother Oncol. 2016;120:378-382. doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2016.02.010

47.

Ohguri

Harima

Imada

, et al. Relationships between thermal dose parameters and the efficacy of definitive chemoradiotherapy plus regional hyperthermia in the treatment of locally advanced cervical cancer: data from a multicentre randomised clinical trial. Int J Hyperthermia. 2018;34:461-468. doi:10.1080/02656736.2017.1352105

48.

Datta

Rogers

Klingbiel

Gómez

Puric

Bodis

Hyperthermia and radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer: a systematic review with conventional and network meta-analyses. Int J Hyperthermia. 2016;32:809-821. doi:10.1080/02656736.2016.1195924

49.

Harima

Ohguri

Imada

, et al. A multicentre randomised clinical trial of chemoradiotherapy plus hyperthermia versus chemoradiotherapy alone in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. Int J Hyperthermia. 2016;32:801-808. doi:10.1080/02656736.2016.1213430

50.

Heijkoop

van Doorn

Stalpers

, et al. Results of concurrent chemotherapy and hyperthermia in patients with recurrent cervical cancer after previous chemoradiation. Int J Hyperthermia. 2014;30:6-10. doi:10.3109/02656736.2013.844366

51.

Westermann

Mella

Van Der Zee

, et al. Long-term survival data of triple modality treatment of stage IIB-III-IVA cervical cancer with the combination of radiotherapy, chemotherapy and hyperthermia—an update. Int J Hyperthermia. 2012;28:549-553. doi:10.3109/02656736.2012.673047

52.

Minnaar

Kotzen

Ayeni

, et al. The effect of modulated electro-hyperthermia on local disease control in HIV-positive and -negative cervical cancer women in South Africa: early results from a phase III randomised controlled trial. PLoS One. 2019;14:e0217894. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0217894

53.

Heijkoop

Franckena

Thomeer

Boere

Van Montfort

Van Doorn

HC.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radiotherapy and concurrent hyperthermia in patients with advanced-stage cervical cancer: a retrospective study. Int J Hyperthermia. 2012;28:554-561. doi:10.3109/02656736.2012.674622

54.

Franckena

Fatehi

de Bruijne

, et al. Hyperthermia dose-effect relationship in 420 patients with cervical cancer treated with combined radiotherapy and hyperthermia. Eur J Cancer. 2009;45:1969-1978. doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2009.03.009

55.

Lassche

Crezee

Van Herpen

CML

. Whole-body hyperthermia in combination with systemic therapy in advanced solid malignancies. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2019;139:67-74. doi:10.1016/j.critrevonc.2019.04.023

56.

Longo

Gopalakrishna

Tsivian

, et al. A systematic review of regional hyperthermia therapy in bladder cancer. Int J Hyperthermia. 2016;32:381-389. doi:10.3109/02656736.2016.1157903

57.

Datta

Stutz

Puric

, et al. A pilot study of radiotherapy and local hyperthermia in elderly patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancers unfit for definitive surgery or chemoradiotherapy. Front Oncol. 2019;9:889. doi:10.3389/fonc.2019.00889

58.

Inman

Stauffer

Craciunescu

Maccarini

Dewhirst

Vujaskovic

A pilot clinical trial of intravesical mitomycin-C and external deep pelvic hyperthermia for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Int J Hyperthermia. 2014;30:171-175. doi:10.3109/02656736.2014.882021

59.

Geijsen

de Reijke

Koning

, et al. Combining mitomycin C and regional 70 MHz hyperthermia in patients with non muscle invasive bladder cancer: a pilot study. J Urol. 2015;194:1202-1208. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2015.05.102

60.

Fendler

Lehmann

Todica

, et al. PET response criteria in solid tumors predicts progression-free survival and time to local or distant progression after chemotherapy with regional hyperthermia for soft-tissue sarcoma. J Nucl Med. 2015;56:530-537. doi:10.2967/jnumed.114.152462

61.

Angele

Albertsmeier

Prix

, et al. Effectiveness of regional hyperthermia with chemotherapy for high-risk retroperitoneal and abdominal soft-tissue sarcoma after complete surgical resection: a subgroup analysis of a randomized phase-III multicenter study. Ann Surg. 2014;260:749-756. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000000978

62.

Issels

Lindner

Verweij

, et al; European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer-Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group and the European Society for Hyperthermic Oncology. Effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus regional hyperthermia on long-term outcomes among patients with localized high-risk soft tissue sarcoma: the EORTC 62961-ESHO 95 randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 2018;4:483-492. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2017.4996

63.

Schlemmer

Wendtner

Lindner

Abdel-Rahman

Hiddemann

Issels

RD.

Thermochemotherapy in patients with extremity high-risk soft tissue sarcomas (HR-STS). Int J Hyperthermia. 2010;26:127-135. doi:10.3109/02656730903335995

64.

Issels

Lindner

Verweij

, et al. Neo-adjuvant chemotherapy alone or with regional hyperthermia for localised high-risk soft tissue sarcoma: a randomised phase 3 multicentre study. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11:561-570.

65.

Ostrom

Bauchet

Davis

, et al. The epidemiology of glioma in adults: a “state of the science” review. Neuro Oncol. 2014;16:896-913. doi:10.1093/neuonc/nou087

66.

Dolecek

Propp

Stroup

Kruchko

CBTRUS statistical report: primary brain and central nervous system tumors diagnosed in the United States in 2005-2009. Neuro Oncol. 2012;14(suppl 5):v1-v49. doi:10.1093/neuonc/nos218

67.

Venur

Peereboom

Ahluwalia

MS.

Current medical treatment of glioblastoma. Cancer Treat Res. 2015;163:103-115. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-12048-5_7

68.

Roussakow

SV.

Clinical and economic evaluation of modulated electrohyperthermia concurrent to dose-dense temozolomide 21/28 days regimen in the treatment of recurrent glioblastoma: a retrospective analysis of a two-centre German cohort trial with systematic comparison and effect-to-treatment analysis. BMJ Open. 2017;7:e017387. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017387

69.

Fiorentini

Sarti

Milandri

, et al. Modulated electrohyperthermia in integrative cancer treatment for relapsed malignant glioblastoma and astrocytoma: retrospective multicenter controlled study. Integr Cancer Ther. Published online December 22, 2018. doi:10.1177/1534735418812691

70.

Fiorentini

Sarti

Milandri

, et al. Modulated Electrohyperthermia for the Treatment of Relapsed Brain Gliomas. In: Andras S, ed. Challenges and Solutions of Oncological Hyperthermia. Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2020.

71.

Heo

Kim

Chun

Noh

OK.

Concurrent hyperthermia and re-irradiation for recurrent high-grade gliomas. Neoplasma. 2017;64:803-808. doi:10.4149/neo_2017_520

72.

Fiorentini

Sarti

Milandri

Dentico

Mambrini

Guadagni

Retrospective observational clinical study on relapsed malignant gliomas treated with electro-hyperthermia. Int J Neurooncol Brain Tumor. 2017;1:9-13. https://www.scireslit.com/Neurooncology/IJNBT-ID12.pdf

73.

Wismeth

Dudel

Pascher

, et al. Transcranial electrohyperthermia combined with alkylating chemotherapy in patients with relapsed high-grade gliomas: phase I clinical results. J Neurooncol. 2010;98:395-405. doi:10.1007/s11060-009-0093-0

74.

Datta

Rogers

Ordonez

Puric

Bodis

Hyperthermia and radiotherapy in the management of head and neck cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Hyperthermia. 2016;32:31-40. doi:10.3109/02656736.2015.1099746

75.

Kang

Liu

Qin

Wei

Wang

RS.

Long-term efficacy of microwave hyperthermia combined with chemoradiotherapy in treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma with cervical lymph node metastases. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2013;14:7395-7400. doi:10.7314/APJCP.2013.14.12.7395

76.

Hua

Wang

Piao

Intracavity hyperthermia in nasopharyngeal cancer: a phase III clinical study. Int J Hyperthermia. 2011;27:180-186. doi:10.3109/02656736.2010.503982

77.

Zhao

Chen

Improvement in quality of life in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma treated with non-invasive extracorporeal radiofrequency in combination with chemoradiotherapy. Int J Radiat Biol. 2014;90:853-858. doi:10.3109/09553002.2014.916579

78.

De Wee

Verduijn

Rijnen

, et al. OC-0335: feasibility of deep head and neck hyperthermia. Radiother Oncol. 2015;115(suppl 1):S165-S166. doi:10.1016/S0167-8140(15)40333-0

A Narrative Review of Regional Hyperthermia: Updates From 2010 to 2019

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Methods

Esophageal Cancer

Colorectal Cancer

Pancreatic Cancer

Breast Cancer

Cervical Cancer

Bladder Cancer

Soft Tissue Sarcoma

Brain Tumors

Head and Neck Tumors

Discussion

Conclusion

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

ORCID iD

References