Literature DB >> 24183870

Delineation of the neck node levels for head and neck tumors: a 2013 update. DAHANCA, EORTC, HKNPCSG, NCIC CTG, NCRI, RTOG, TROG consensus guidelines.

Vincent Grégoire1, Kian Ang2, Wilfried Budach3, Cai Grau4, Marc Hamoir5, Johannes A Langendijk6, Anne Lee7, Quynh-Thu Le8, Philippe Maingon9, Chris Nutting10, Brian O'Sullivan11, Sandro V Porceddu12, Benoit Lengele13.   

Abstract

In 2003, a panel of experts published a set of consensus guidelines for the delineation of the neck node levels in node negative patients (Radiother Oncol, 69: 227-36, 2003). In 2006, these guidelines were extended to include the characteristics of the node positive and the post-operative neck (Radiother Oncol, 79: 15-20, 2006). These guidelines did not fully address all nodal regions and some of the anatomic descriptions were ambiguous, thereby limiting consistent use of the recommendations. In this framework, a task force comprising opinion leaders in the field of head and neck radiation oncology from European, Asian, Australia/New Zealand and North American clinical research organizations was formed to review and update the previously published guidelines on nodal level delineation. Based on the nomenclature proposed by the American Head and Neck Society and the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, and in alignment with the TNM atlas for lymph nodes in the neck, 10 node groups (some being divided into several levels) were defined with a concise description of their main anatomic boundaries, the normal structures juxtaposed to these nodes, and the main tumor sites at risk for harboring metastases in those levels. Emphasis was placed on those levels not adequately considered previously (or not addressed at all); these included the lower neck (e.g. supraclavicular nodes), the scalp (e.g. retroauricular and occipital nodes), and the face (e.g. buccal and parotid nodes). Lastly, peculiarities pertaining to the node-positive and the post-operative clinical scenarios were also discussed. In conclusion, implementation of these guidelines in the daily practice of radiation oncology should contribute to the reduction of treatment variations from clinician to clinician and facilitate the conduct of multi-institutional clinical trials.
Copyright © 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Head and neck tumors; IMRT; Lymph node levels; Neck nodes; Worldwide consensus

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24183870     DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2013.10.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiother Oncol        ISSN: 0167-8140            Impact factor:   6.280


  143 in total

1.  Omitting the lower neck and sparing the glottic larynx in node-negative nasopharyngeal carcinoma was safe and feasible, and improved patient-reported voice outcomes.

Authors:  F Xiao; S Dou; Y Li; W Qian; F Liang; L Kong; X Wang; K Wu; C Hu; G Zhu
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2018-12-04       Impact factor: 3.405

2.  Shifting cervical lymphadenopathy in Hashimoto's disease.

Authors:  Dillon Medlock; Ellen Chaljub; Meredith Gavin; Alan N Peiris
Journal:  Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent)       Date:  2019-03-26

Review 3.  The evolution of nasopharyngeal carcinoma staging.

Authors:  Rui Guo; Yan-Ping Mao; Ling-Long Tang; Lei Chen; Ying Sun; Jun Ma
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2019-07-12       Impact factor: 3.039

4.  Multimodality oncologic evaluation of superficial neck and facial lymph nodes.

Authors:  Reza Assadsangabi; Rosa Babaei; Catherine Songco; Vladimir Ivanovic; Matthew Bobinski; Yin J Chen; Seyed Ali Nabavizadeh
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2021-05-16       Impact factor: 3.469

5.  Patterns of failure in anaplastic and differentiated thyroid carcinoma treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy.

Authors:  H Vulpe; J Y Y Kwan; A McNiven; J D Brierley; R Tsang; B Chan; D P Goldstein; L W Le; A Hope; M Giuliani
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2017-06-27       Impact factor: 3.677

Review 6.  [Clinical target volume : Principles and limits].

Authors:  T B Brunner; M Walke; P Hass
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 0.635

7.  NRG brain tumor specialists consensus guidelines for glioblastoma contouring.

Authors:  Tim J Kruser; Walter R Bosch; Shahed N Badiyan; Joseph A Bovi; Amol J Ghia; Michelle M Kim; Abhishek A Solanki; Sean Sachdev; Christina Tsien; Tony J C Wang; Minesh P Mehta; Kevin P McMullen
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2019-03-19       Impact factor: 4.130

8.  Integrating Tumor and Nodal Imaging Characteristics at Baseline and Mid-Treatment Computed Tomography Scans to Predict Distant Metastasis in Oropharyngeal Cancer Treated With Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy.

Authors:  Jia Wu; Micheal F Gensheimer; Nasha Zhang; Fei Han; Rachel Liang; Yushen Qian; Carrie Zhang; Nancy Fischbein; Erqi L Pollom; Beth Beadle; Quynh-Thu Le; Ruijiang Li
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2019-03-30       Impact factor: 7.038

Review 9.  Nanotechnology in radiation oncology.

Authors:  Andrew Z Wang; Joel E Tepper
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-08-11       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  Quantitative assessment of target delineation variability for thymic cancers: Agreement evaluation of a prospective segmentation challenge.

Authors:  Emma Holliday; Clifton D Fuller; Jayashree Kalpathy-Cramer; Daniel Gomez; Andreas Rimner; Ying Li; Suresh Senan; Lynn D Wilson; Jehee Choi; Ritsuko Komaki; Charles R Thomas
Journal:  J Radiat Oncol       Date:  2015-11-03
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.