PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess radiation dermatitis, especially exploring the influence of neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined maximum toxicity using the Common Toxicity Criteria version 3 score (CTC v3) following radiotherapy between 40 patients treated with NST and 59 patients without NST. In addition, objective skin color (L*, a*, b* values) and moisture analyses were applied in 13 NST and 25 control patients, and the ratio of the values for the irradiated side to the nonirradiated side was calculated. RESULTS: For the CTC v3 assessment, 27 grade 1 (68%) and 13 grade 2 (32%) reactions occurred in the NST group and 44 grade 1 (75%) and 15 grade 2 (25%) reactions in the control group. All ratios except the b* ratio showed significant alterations when radiotherapy was added. The ratio of the a* value peaked at the completion of radiotherapy, whereas the L* ratio bottomed out 1 month later. Furthermore, moisture change remained even 1 year after treatment. Boost irradiation doses caused enhanced alterations in the L* and a* ratios. Furthermore, the L* and a* ratios had good agreement with the CTC v3 assessment. NST did not enhance alterations. CONCLUSION: Objective analysis is useful for detailed assessment of radiation dermatitis. NST did not worsen skin reactions.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess radiation dermatitis, especially exploring the influence of neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined maximum toxicity using the Common Toxicity Criteria version 3 score (CTC v3) following radiotherapy between 40 patients treated with NST and 59 patients without NST. In addition, objective skin color (L*, a*, b* values) and moisture analyses were applied in 13 NST and 25 control patients, and the ratio of the values for the irradiated side to the nonirradiated side was calculated. RESULTS: For the CTC v3 assessment, 27 grade 1 (68%) and 13 grade 2 (32%) reactions occurred in the NST group and 44 grade 1 (75%) and 15 grade 2 (25%) reactions in the control group. All ratios except the b* ratio showed significant alterations when radiotherapy was added. The ratio of the a* value peaked at the completion of radiotherapy, whereas the L* ratio bottomed out 1 month later. Furthermore, moisture change remained even 1 year after treatment. Boost irradiation doses caused enhanced alterations in the L* and a* ratios. Furthermore, the L* and a* ratios had good agreement with the CTC v3 assessment. NST did not enhance alterations. CONCLUSION: Objective analysis is useful for detailed assessment of radiation dermatitis. NST did not worsen skin reactions.
Authors: U Heinrich; U Koop; M-C Leneveu-Duchemin; K Osterrieder; S Bielfeldt; C Chkarnat; J Degwert; D Häntschel; S Jaspers; H-P Nissen; M Rohr; G Schneider; H Tronnier Journal: Int J Cosmet Sci Date: 2003-04 Impact factor: 2.970
Authors: B Fisher; A Brown; E Mamounas; S Wieand; A Robidoux; R G Margolese; A B Cruz; E R Fisher; D L Wickerham; N Wolmark; A DeCillis; J L Hoehn; A W Lees; N V Dimitrov Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1997-07 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: J A van der Hage; C J van de Velde; J P Julien; M Tubiana-Hulin; C Vandervelden; L Duchateau Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2001-11-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: B Fisher; J Bryant; N Wolmark; E Mamounas; A Brown; E R Fisher; D L Wickerham; M Begovic; A DeCillis; A Robidoux; R G Margolese; A B Cruz; J L Hoehn; A W Lees; N V Dimitrov; H D Bear Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1998-08 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Jolien Robijns; Sandrine Censabella; Stefan Claes; Luc Pannekoeke; Lore Bussé; Dora Colson; Iris Kaminski; Joy Lodewijckx; Paul Bulens; Annelies Maes; Leen Noé; Marc Brosens; An Timmermans; Ivo Lambrichts; Veerle Somers; Jeroen Mebis Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2018-10-01 Impact factor: 3.603