PURPOSE: To assess the importance of the information obtained from MRI for adaptive cervix cancer radiotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 49 patients with cervix cancer, treated by external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and MRI-assisted high-dose-rate brachytherapy +/- concomitant cisplatin, underwent MRI at diagnosis and at the time of brachytherapy fractions. 190 MRI examinations were performed. Pretreatment scans were correlated with clinical examination (CE) findings. Measurements in 3-D of the tumor extension and also of the distance from the tumor to the pelvic side wall were performed using both MRI and CE. The tumor volume regression induced initially by EBRT and the subsequent regression after each brachytherapy fraction were assessed. RESULTS: MRI and CE showed 92% agreement in overall parametrial staging and 73% agreement in terms of vaginal involvement. There was, however, disagreement in parametrial side (right/left) classification in 25% of the parametria examined. These were patients with unilateral displacement of the cervix and contralateral invasion of the parametrium. The mean tumor volume on the pretreatment MRI scan (GTVD) was 61 cm(3). At the time of the four brachytherapy fractions the mean was 16 cm(3), 10 cm(3), 9 cm(3), and 8 cm(3), defined as the GTVBT plus the gray zones in the parametria. CONCLUSION: CE and MRI findings agree well in terms of overall staging. The clinical assessment of side-specific parametrial invasion improved when having access to the additional knowledge obtained from MRI. The greatest decrease in tumor volume occurs during EBRT, whereas tumor regression between the first and subsequent brachytherapy fractions is minor.
PURPOSE: To assess the importance of the information obtained from MRI for adaptive cervix cancer radiotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 49 patients with cervix cancer, treated by external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and MRI-assisted high-dose-rate brachytherapy +/- concomitant cisplatin, underwent MRI at diagnosis and at the time of brachytherapy fractions. 190 MRI examinations were performed. Pretreatment scans were correlated with clinical examination (CE) findings. Measurements in 3-D of the tumor extension and also of the distance from the tumor to the pelvic side wall were performed using both MRI and CE. The tumor volume regression induced initially by EBRT and the subsequent regression after each brachytherapy fraction were assessed. RESULTS: MRI and CE showed 92% agreement in overall parametrial staging and 73% agreement in terms of vaginal involvement. There was, however, disagreement in parametrial side (right/left) classification in 25% of the parametria examined. These were patients with unilateral displacement of the cervix and contralateral invasion of the parametrium. The mean tumor volume on the pretreatment MRI scan (GTVD) was 61 cm(3). At the time of the four brachytherapy fractions the mean was 16 cm(3), 10 cm(3), 9 cm(3), and 8 cm(3), defined as the GTVBT plus the gray zones in the parametria. CONCLUSION: CE and MRI findings agree well in terms of overall staging. The clinical assessment of side-specific parametrial invasion improved when having access to the additional knowledge obtained from MRI. The greatest decrease in tumor volume occurs during EBRT, whereas tumor regression between the first and subsequent brachytherapy fractions is minor.
Authors: Dietmar Georg; Bernhard Kroupa; Petra Georg; Peter Winkler; Joachim Bogner; Karin Dieckmann; Richard Pötter Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Christian Kirisits; Stefan Lang; Johannes Dimopoulos; Karin Oechs; Dietmar Georg; Richard Pötter Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2006-11-28 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Linda van de Bunt; Uulke A van der Heide; Martijn Ketelaars; Gerard A P de Kort; Ina M Jürgenliemk-Schulz Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2005-06-22 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Clark J Brixey; John C Roeske; Anthony E Lujan; S Diane Yamada; Jacob Rotmensch; Arno J Mundt Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2002-12-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Johannes C A Dimopoulos; Gerdi Schard; Daniel Berger; Stefan Lang; Gregor Goldner; Thomas Helbich; Richard Pötter Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2006-04-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Patricia J Eifel; Kathryn Winter; Mitchell Morris; Charles Levenback; Perry W Grigsby; Jay Cooper; Marvin Rotman; David Gershenson; David G Mutch Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2004-03-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: M Dolezel; K Odrazka; J Vanasek; T Kohlova; T Kroulik; K Kudelka; D Spitzer; M Mrklovsky; M Tichy; J Zizka; L Jalcova Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2011-09 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: M P Schmid; R Pötter; P Brader; A Kratochwil; G Goldner; K Kirchheiner; A Sturdza; C Kirisits Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2012-12-21 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Katrien Vandecasteele; Wilfried De Neve; Werner De Gersem; Louke Delrue; Leen Paelinck; Amin Makar; Valérie Fonteyne; Carlos De Wagter; Geert Villeirs; Gert De Meerleer Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: M P Schmid; B Mansmann; M Federico; J C A Dimopoulous; P Georg; E Fidarova; W Dörr; R Pötter Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2013-01-25 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Primoz Petric; Robert Hudej; Peter Rogelj; Mateja Blas; Barbara Segedin; Helena Barbara Zobec Logar; Johannes Carl Athanasios Dimopoulos Journal: Radiol Oncol Date: 2012-04-11 Impact factor: 2.991