Rohith Singareddy1, Harjot Kaur Bajwa1, Mahendra M Reddy2, Alluri Krishnam Raju1. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Basavatarakam Indo American Cancer Hospital and Research Institute, Hyderabad, Telangana, India. 2. Department of Community Medicine, Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College, Kolar, Karnataka, India.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was To determine the dose volume parameters predicting acute haematological toxicity in carcinoma cervix patients undergoing concurrent chemoradiotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients that presented to the hospital between Jan 2019 and Dec 2019 were prospectively analyzed. Patients diagnosed to have Carcinoma Cervix and planned for concurrent chemoradiation by volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) were included for analysis. Patients were assessed at baseline and every week during treatment for acute haematological toxicities. Dose volume parameters from treatment plans were correlated with RTOG grade of haematological toxicities. RESULTS: A total of 34 patients diagnosed to have squamous cell carcinoma of cervix were treated by radical radiotherapy by VMAT technique and concurrent chemotherapy. The most common stage of presentation was stage IIB (61.7%). 29 patients (85.2%) completed five cycles of weekly cisplatin. Statistical analysis for sensitivity and specificity of dosimetric parameters was performed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. The probability of developing bone marrow toxicity was analyzed using T test. Mean dose to bone marrow exceeding 28.5 Gy was significantly associated with bone marrow toxicity (sensitivity - 82.4%, specificity - 70.6%). On analyzing dose volume parameters, volume of bone marrow receiving 20 Gy, 30 Gy and 40 Gy (V20, V30 and V40) more than 71.75%, and 49.75% and 22.85%, respectively, was significantly associated with bone marrow toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Our study concludes that mean dose to bone marrow exceeding 28.5 Gy has high sensitivity and specificity for predicting bone marrow toxicity in patients receiving IMRT. Volume of bone marrow receiving 20 Gy, 30 Gy and 40 Gy significantly correlated with acute haematological toxicity.
BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was To determine the dose volume parameters predicting acute haematological toxicity in carcinoma cervix patients undergoing concurrent chemoradiotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients that presented to the hospital between Jan 2019 and Dec 2019 were prospectively analyzed. Patients diagnosed to have Carcinoma Cervix and planned for concurrent chemoradiation by volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) were included for analysis. Patients were assessed at baseline and every week during treatment for acute haematological toxicities. Dose volume parameters from treatment plans were correlated with RTOG grade of haematological toxicities. RESULTS: A total of 34 patients diagnosed to have squamous cell carcinoma of cervix were treated by radical radiotherapy by VMAT technique and concurrent chemotherapy. The most common stage of presentation was stage IIB (61.7%). 29 patients (85.2%) completed five cycles of weekly cisplatin. Statistical analysis for sensitivity and specificity of dosimetric parameters was performed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. The probability of developing bone marrow toxicity was analyzed using T test. Mean dose to bone marrow exceeding 28.5 Gy was significantly associated with bone marrow toxicity (sensitivity - 82.4%, specificity - 70.6%). On analyzing dose volume parameters, volume of bone marrow receiving 20 Gy, 30 Gy and 40 Gy (V20, V30 and V40) more than 71.75%, and 49.75% and 22.85%, respectively, was significantly associated with bone marrow toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Our study concludes that mean dose to bone marrow exceeding 28.5 Gy has high sensitivity and specificity for predicting bone marrow toxicity in patients receiving IMRT. Volume of bone marrow receiving 20 Gy, 30 Gy and 40 Gy significantly correlated with acute haematological toxicity.
Authors: Loren K Mell; Joel D Kochanski; John C Roeske; Josh J Haslam; Neil Mehta; S Diane Yamada; Jean A Hurteau; Yvonne C Collins; Ernst Lengyel; Arno J Mundt Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2006-06-06 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Yun Liang; Mark Bydder; Catheryn M Yashar; Brent S Rose; Mariel Cornell; Carl K Hoh; Joshua D Lawson; John Einck; Cheryl Saenz; Paul Fanta; Arno J Mundt; Graeme M Bydder; Loren K Mell Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2012-06-09 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Clark J Brixey; John C Roeske; Anthony E Lujan; S Diane Yamada; Jacob Rotmensch; Arno J Mundt Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2002-12-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Loren K Mell; Igor Sirák; Lichun Wei; Rafal Tarnawski; Umesh Mahantshetty; Catheryn M Yashar; Michael T McHale; Ronghui Xu; Gordon Honerkamp-Smith; Ruben Carmona; Mary Wright; Casey W Williamson; Linda Kasaová; Nan Li; Stephen Kry; Jeff Michalski; Walter Bosch; William Straube; Julie Schwarz; Jessica Lowenstein; Steve B Jiang; Cheryl C Saenz; Steve Plaxe; John Einck; Chonlakiet Khorprasert; Paul Koonings; Terry Harrison; Mei Shi; A J Mundt Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2016-11-23 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: J C Roeske; A Lujan; J Rotmensch; S E Waggoner; D Yamada; A J Mundt Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2000-12-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Beina Hui; Yingbing Zhang; Fan Shi; Juan Wang; Tao Wang; Jiquan Wang; Wei Yuan; Yi Li; Zi Liu Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer Date: 2014-11 Impact factor: 3.437
Authors: T Kumar; A Schernberg; F Busato; M Laurans; I Fumagalli; I Dumas; E Deutsch; C Haie-Meder; C Chargari Journal: Cancer Manag Res Date: 2019-07-08 Impact factor: 3.989