A Rabinovich1, L Bernard2, A V Ramanakumar3, G Stroian2, W H Gotlieb1, S Lau1, B Bahoric2. 1. Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Segal Cancer Centre, Jewish General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, QC; 2. Division of Radiation Oncology, Segal Cancer Centre, Jewish General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, QC; 3. Department of Oncology, Division of Cancer Epidemiology, McGill University, Montreal, QC.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In patients with advanced-stage endometrial carcinoma (eca), extended-field radiotherapy (efrt) is traditionally delivered by the 3-dimensional conformal (3d-crt) 4-field box technique. In recent years, the use of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (imrt) in gynecologic cancers has increased. We compared the delivery of efrt by the 3d-crt and contemporary imrt techniques. METHODS: After surgical staging and adjuvant chemotherapy in 38 eca patients, efrt was delivered by either imrt or 3d-crt. Doses to the organs at risk, side effects, and outcomes were compared between the techniques. RESULTS: Of the 38 eca patients, 33 were stage iiic, and 5 were stage ivb. In the imrt group, maximal doses to rectum, small intestine, and bladder were significantly higher, and mean dose to bladder was lower (p < 0.0001). Most acute gastrointestinal, genitourinary, and hematologic side effects were grade i or ii and were comparable between the groups. In long-term follow-up, only grade 1 cystitis at 3 months was statistically higher in the imrt patients. No grade iii or iv gastrointestinal or genitourinary toxicities were observed. No statistically significant differences in overall and disease-free survival or recurrence rates were observed between the techniques. CONCLUSIONS: In advanced eca patients, imrt is a safe and effective technique for delivering efrt to the pelvis and para-aortic region, and it is comparable to the 3d-crt 4-field box technique in both side effects and efficacy. For centres in which imrt is not readily available, 3d-crt is a valid alternative.
BACKGROUND: In patients with advanced-stage endometrial carcinoma (eca), extended-field radiotherapy (efrt) is traditionally delivered by the 3-dimensional conformal (3d-crt) 4-field box technique. In recent years, the use of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (imrt) in gynecologic cancers has increased. We compared the delivery of efrt by the 3d-crt and contemporary imrt techniques. METHODS: After surgical staging and adjuvant chemotherapy in 38 eca patients, efrt was delivered by either imrt or 3d-crt. Doses to the organs at risk, side effects, and outcomes were compared between the techniques. RESULTS: Of the 38 eca patients, 33 were stage iiic, and 5 were stage ivb. In the imrt group, maximal doses to rectum, small intestine, and bladder were significantly higher, and mean dose to bladder was lower (p < 0.0001). Most acute gastrointestinal, genitourinary, and hematologic side effects were grade i or ii and were comparable between the groups. In long-term follow-up, only grade 1 cystitis at 3 months was statistically higher in the imrt patients. No grade iii or iv gastrointestinal or genitourinary toxicities were observed. No statistically significant differences in overall and disease-free survival or recurrence rates were observed between the techniques. CONCLUSIONS: In advanced eca patients, imrt is a safe and effective technique for delivering efrt to the pelvis and para-aortic region, and it is comparable to the 3d-crt 4-field box technique in both side effects and efficacy. For centres in which imrt is not readily available, 3d-crt is a valid alternative.
Authors: Sushil Beriwal; Sheena K Jain; Dwight E Heron; Hayeon Kim; Kristina Gerszten; Robert P Edwards; Joseph L Kelley Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2006-05-02 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Arno J Mundt; Anthony E Lujan; Jacob Rotmensch; Steven E Waggoner; S Diane Yamada; Gini Fleming; John C Roeske Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2002-04-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Daniel R Zwahlen; Jeremy D Ruben; Phillip Jones; Frank Gagliardi; Jeremy L Millar; Uwe Schneider Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2009-06-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Karin K Shih; Sarah A Milgrom; Nadeem R Abu-Rustum; Marisa A Kollmeier; Ginger J Gardner; William P Tew; Richard R Barakat; Kaled M Alektiar Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2012-11-20 Impact factor: 5.482