| Literature DB >> 27895671 |
Bengt Johansson1, Leif Karlsson2, Lennart Hardell2, Jan Persliden2.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the long time outcome with regard to local tumour control and side effects of a pulsed dose rate (PDR) monobrachytherapy of primary or recurrent cancer of the lip.Entities:
Keywords: PDR; brachytherapy; lip cancer
Year: 2011 PMID: 27895671 PMCID: PMC5117532 DOI: 10.5114/jcb.2011.23199
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Contemp Brachytherapy ISSN: 2081-2841
Clinical data for 43 patients treated for lip cancer
| Patient characteristics |
| % |
|---|---|---|
| Age median 74 (37-92) years: | ||
| male | 26 | 60 |
| female | 17 | 40 |
| TN-stage: | ||
| T1N0 | 22 | 51 |
| T2N0 | 16 | 37 |
| T3N0 | 5 | 12 |
| Histology: | ||
| squamous cell carcinoma | 38 | 89 |
| adenoidcystic carcinoma | 4 | 9 |
| basal cell carcinoma | 1 | 2 |
| Grade (squamous cell carcinoma): | ||
| low | 23 | 60 |
| medium | 12 | 32 |
| high | 3 | 8 |
| Treatment set-up: | ||
| primary macroscopical appearant | 23 | 53 |
| primary microscopical appearant | 11 | 26 |
| recurrent macroscopical appearant | 7 | 16 |
| recurrent microscopical appearant | 2 | 5 |
| Localisation: | ||
| lower lip | 34 | 79 |
| upper lip | 7 | 16 |
| lip commisure | 2 | 5 |
Fig. 1Coronar and sagital view of the most common implant technique in the present serie
Dosimetric and volumetric data for treated lip cancers
| Variable | Mean | Range |
|---|---|---|
| Treated volume (cm3) | 14.9 | 3.0-56.2 |
| 150% isodose volume (cm3) | 4.4 | 0.9-13.6 |
| 200% isodose volume (cm3) | 1.8 | 0.4-5.7 |
| DNR (= V150%/V100%) [ | 0.3 | 0.2-0.5 |
| UI [ | 1.5 | 1.2-1.8 |
| QI [ | 1.6 | 1.2-2.0 |
| Instantaneoues dose rate (Gy/h) | 12.8 | 3.2-35.6 |
| Pulse average dose rate (Gy/h) | 0.417 | |
| RAKR, reference air kerma rate (mGym2/h) | 1.8 | 0.7-4.3 |
| TRAK, total reference air kerma (mGy) | 0.15 | 0.05-0.35 |
Fig. 2Kaplan-Meier plot of local control, disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival
Five years local control rate (%) of lip cancer in published series
| Studie | BT |
| FU (m) | T1 | T2 | T3 | All |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GEC-ESTRO 1983 [ | LDR | 1267 | 60 | 98.4 | 96.6 | 90 | 96.6 |
| GEC-ESTRO 1993 [ | LDR | 2794 | 60 | 95 | 91.8 | 81 | 94 |
| Present study | PDR | 43 | 54 | 95 | 94 | 100 | 95 |
| Valencia [ | HDR | 39 | 18 | 100 | 83 | 75 (T4) | 87 |
At median follow-up. 12 patients classified as T4 due to skin extension. No T3 cases in this study