Literature DB >> 22198339

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy for advanced cervical cancer: a comparison of dosimetric and clinical outcomes with conventional radiotherapy.

Xue-lian Du1, Jiang Tao, Xiu-gui Sheng, Chun-hua Lu, Hao Yu, Cong Wang, Qu-qing Song, Qing-shui Li, Chun-xia Pan.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to evaluate the dosimetry, efficacy and toxicity of reduced field intensity-modulated radiation therapy (RF-IMRT) for patients with advanced cervical cancer.
METHODS: From August 2005 to August 2010, 60 patients with stage IIB-IIIB cervical cancer underwent reduced field IMRT (RF-IMRT group) and 62 patients treated with conventional radiotherapy (c-RT group) were enrolled. The RF-IMRT plans were as follows: whole pelvic IMRT plan was performed to deliver a dose of 30Gy firstly, then the irradiated volume was reduced to lymphatic drainage region as well as paracervix and parametrium for an additional 30Gy boost. Intracavitary brachytherapy and concurrent chemotherapy were performed during external irradiation. The tumor coverage and normal tissue avoidance were evaluated. Treatment response, toxicities and survival were assessed.
RESULTS: The mean dose delivered to the planning target volume was significantly higher in RF-IMRT group than in c-RT group (61.5 vs. 50.8Gy, P=0.046). IMRT plans yielded better dose conformity to the target and better sparing of the rectal, bladder and small intestine. The RF-IMRT patients experienced significantly lower acute and chronic toxicities with comparable short-term effects than did those treated with conventional RT (CR: 87.7% vs. 88.3%, P=0.496; PR: 7.0% vs. 6.7%, P=0.440). No significant differences were found between treatment groups for 1year, 3year, and 5year overall survival (OS) levels, although the latter approached statistical significance in favor of IMRT, while a significantly higher progression-free survival (PFS; P=0.031) was seen for IMRT.
CONCLUSIONS: RF-IMRT yields improved dose distributions, with lower toxicities, while providing comparable clinical outcomes. The increased PFS may be an advantage. Copyright Â
© 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22198339     DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2011.12.432

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gynecol Oncol        ISSN: 0090-8258            Impact factor:   5.482


  25 in total

Review 1.  A Practical Approach to the Management of Radiation-Induced Hemorrhagic Cystitis.

Authors:  Xavier Liem; Fred Saad; Guila Delouya
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 9.546

2.  Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer in Patients With Uterine Prolapse.

Authors:  Nicolae Bacalbasa; Ioana Halmaciu; Dragos Cretoiu; Cristian Balalau; Camelia Diaconu; Laura Iliescu; Gabriel Gorecki; Ciprian Bolca; Adrian Neacsu; Irina Balescu
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2020 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.155

Review 3.  Treatment patterns and survival outcomes in patients with cervical cancer complicated by complete uterine prolapse: a systematic review of literature.

Authors:  Koji Matsuo; Morgan E Fullerton; Aida Moeini
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2015-05-14       Impact factor: 2.894

4.  The Diagnosis, Treatment, and Aftercare of Cervical Carcinoma.

Authors:  Matthias W Beckmann; Frederik A Stuebs; Dirk Vordermark; Martin Christoph Koch; Lars-Christian Horn; Tanja Fehm
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2021-11-26       Impact factor: 8.251

Review 5.  Radiotherapy for cervical cancer: Chilean consensus of the Society of Radiation Oncology.

Authors:  Felipe Carvajal; Claudia Carvajal; Tomás Merino; Verónica López; Javier Retamales; Evelyn San Martín; Freddy Alarcón; Mónica Cuevas; Francisca Barahona; Ignacio Véliz; Juvenal A Ríos; Sergio Becerra
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2021-04-14

6.  Early morbidity and dose-volume effects in definitive radiochemotherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer: a prospective cohort study covering modern treatment techniques.

Authors:  Yvette Seppenwoolde; Katarina Majercakova; Martin Buschmann; Elke Dörr; Alina E Sturdza; Maximilian P Schmid; Richard Pötter; Dietmar Georg
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2021-04-30       Impact factor: 3.621

7.  Radiation Therapy for Cervical Cancer: Executive Summary of an ASTRO Clinical Practice Guideline.

Authors:  Junzo Chino; Christina M Annunziata; Sushil Beriwal; Lisa Bradfield; Beth A Erickson; Emma C Fields; KathrynJane Fitch; Matthew M Harkenrider; Christine H Holschneider; Mitchell Kamrava; Eric Leung; Lilie L Lin; Jyoti S Mayadev; Marc Morcos; Chika Nwachukwu; Daniel Petereit; Akila N Viswanathan
Journal:  Pract Radiat Oncol       Date:  2020-05-18

8.  Dosimetric evaluation of Tomotherapy and four-box field conformal radiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer.

Authors:  Mina Yu; Hong Seok Jang; Dong Min Jeon; Geum Seong Cheon; Hyo Chun Lee; Mi Joo Chung; Sung Hwan Kim; Jong Hoon Lee
Journal:  Radiat Oncol J       Date:  2013-12-31

9.  Conventional external beam volumes for cervical cancer: Are they adequate?

Authors:  Umesh Mahantshetty; Rahul Krishnatry
Journal:  South Asian J Cancer       Date:  2013-07

10.  Radical hysterectomy with adjuvant radiotherapy versus radical radiotherapy for FIGO stage IIB cervical cancer.

Authors:  Yanlan Chai; Tao Wang; Juan Wang; Yunyi Yang; Ying Gao; Jiyong Gao; Shangfeng Gao; Yueling Wang; Xi Zhou; Zi Liu
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2014-02-04       Impact factor: 4.430

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.