Back to Authors

Vargas, Carlos

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1614-3562

Mayo Clinic

Mayo Clinic

Citations 43

Mucosal Sparing Radiation Therapy in Resected Oropharyngeal Cancer
Gamez, Mauricio E. , Halyard, Michele Y. , Hinni, Michael L., Hayden, Richard E. , Nagel, Thomas H. , Vargas, Carlos , Wong, William W. , Curtis, Kelly K., Zarka, Matthew A., Patel, Samir H. , Ma, Daniel, Daniel, J.

Annals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology | January 7, 2017 | Volume: 126 | Issue: 3 | Pages: 185-191

10.1177/0003489416681580 Get It

Purpose: To report the outcomes of patients with favorable risk oropharyngeal cancer that underwent adjuvant radiation therapy with omission of the primary site from the clinical target volume (CTV). Material/Methods: A retrospective study of 40 patients treated with transoral surgery (TOS) followed by neck only radiation using intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with exclusion of the primary site. For all patients, a CTV of the primary surgical bed was contoured to obtain the estimated incidental dose to the primary site. Results: Median follow-up was 51 months (range, 13-155 months). The median radiation therapy (RT) dose to the neck was 6000 cGy (range, 5400-6400 cGy). The mean incidental dose to the primary tonsillar site was 4320 cGy (SD ± 480 cGy) and to the primary base of tongue site was 4060 cGy (SD ± 420 cGy). There were no local failures and only 1 regional failure, resulting in 97.5% locoregional control rate at 4 years. Two patients developed distant metastases, without evidence of locoregional recurrence, for a 4-year overall survival rate of 97%. Conclusions: Our analysis suggests that mucosal sparing RT after TOS in favorable risk oropharyngeal cancer patients may provide comparable oncologic and improved functional outcomes compared to conventional treatment in selected patients.
Proton therapy patterns-of-care and early outcomes for Hodgkin lymphoma: results from the Proton Collaborative Group Registry
Hoppe, Bradford S. , Larson, Gary, Laramore, George E. , Vargas, Carlos , Dunn, Megan, McGee, L.A. , Cahlon, Oren, Hartsell, William F. , Tsai, Henry K. , Tseng, Yolanda D. , Dunn, Megan, Hoppe, Bradford S

Acta Oncologica | August 31, 2016 | Volume: 55 | Issue: 11 | Pages: 1378-1380

10.1080/0284186x.2016.1197422 Get It

Hypofractionated Versus Standard Fractionated Proton-beam Therapy for Low-risk Prostate Cancer
Vargas, Carlos , Hartsell, William F. , Dunn, Megan, Keole, Sameer R., Doh, Lucius, Eisenbeisz, Elaine, Larson, Gary, Dunn, Megan

American Journal of Clinical Oncology | October 31, 2015 | Volume: 41 | Issue: 2 | Pages: 115-120

10.1097/coc.0000000000000241 Get It

Objective: To identify differences in terms of quality of life, the American Urological Association Symptom Index (AUA), or adverse events (AEs) among patients with prostate cancer treated with either standard fractionation or hypofractionation proton-beam therapy. Materials and Methods: Patients were prospectively randomized to receive 38 Gy relative biological effectiveness (RBE) in 5 treatments (n=49) or 79.2 Gy RBE in 44 treatments (n=33). All patients had low-risk prostate cancer and were treated with proton therapy using fiducial markers and daily image guidance. Results: Median follow-up for both groups was 18 months; 33 patients had follow-up of 2 years or longer. Baseline median (range) AUA was 4.7 (0 to 13) for the 38 Gy RBE arm and 4.8 (0 to 17) for the 79.2 Gy RBE arm. We observed no difference between the groups regarding the Expanded Prostate Index Composite urinary, bowel, or sexual function scores at 3, 6, 12, 18, or 24 months after treatment. The only significant difference was the AUA score at 12 months (8 for the 38 Gy RBE arm vs. 5 for the 79.2 Gy RBE arm; P=0.04); AUA scores otherwise were similar between groups. No grade 3 or higher AEs occurred in either arm. Conclusions: Patients treated with proton therapy in this randomized trial tolerated treatment well, with excellent quality-of-life scores, persistent low AUA, and no grade 3 or higher AEs on either arm. We showed no apparent clinical difference in outcomes with hypofractionated proton-beam therapy compared with standard fractionation on the basis of this interim analysis.