scholarly journals Evaluation of sociodemographic and baseline patient characteristic differences in cervical cancer patients treated with either external beam or brachytherapy boost

Brachytherapy ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diana J. Lu ◽  
Katelyn M. Atkins ◽  
William Small Jr ◽  
Mitchell Kamrava
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
External Beam ◽  
Baseline Patient Characteristic ◽  
Brachytherapy Boost

scholarly journals EP-1798: Highly conformal external beam modalities vs. brachytherapy boost for rectal cancer patients

2017 ◽  
Vol 123 ◽  
pp. S987-S988
Author(s):  
S. Devic ◽  
U. Mwidu ◽  
A. Alkafi ◽  
B. Moftah ◽  
S. Shakir ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
External Beam ◽  
Brachytherapy Boost

External beam radiation and brachytherapy boost at different facilities is associated with increased treatment delays in cervical cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (10) ◽  
pp. 1505-1512
Author(s):  
Richard Li ◽  
Elizabeth Germino ◽  
Zachary D Horne ◽  
John A Vargo ◽  
Yi-Jen Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
External Beam Radiation Therapy ◽  
External Beam Radiation ◽  
External Beam ◽  
Beam Radiation ◽  
Treatment Delays ◽  
Exact Test ◽  
Cancer Management ◽  
Brachytherapy Boost

IntroductionDue to variation in facility expertise and capabilities, patients commonly complete external beam radiation therapy at one facility and brachytherapy boost at another. We evaluated the association of external beam radiation therapy and brachytherapy at the same facility versus different facilities with treatment delays and survival.MethodsPatients receiving definitive external beam radiation therapy and brachytherapy for non-metastatic cervical cancer from 2004 to 2015 were identified in the National Cancer Database. Treatment delays were classified based on published thresholds: a course of >56 days was considered delayed, >65 days moderately delayed, and >77 days severely delayed. Fisher’s exact test and logistic regression were used to evaluate the association of same facility versus different facilities with treatment delays and predictors of same facility versus different facility treatment.ResultsWe identified 23 911 patients meeting the inclusion criteria at a median follow-up of 39.7 months (IQR 21.0–72.6 months), with 17 391 patients (72.7%) receiving same facility treatment and 6520 patients (27.3%) receiving different facility treatment. Any treatment delay was found in 49.3% of same facility treatments versus 51.9% of different facility treatments (p<0.001); moderate or worse delays in 24.8% of same facility versus 29.4% of different facility treatments (p<0.001); severe treatment delays in 11.3% of same facility versus 15.5% of different facility treatments (p<0.001). Receipt of same facility versus different facility treatment was independently associated with treatment delays (OR 1.28, 95% CI 1.20 to 1.37; p<0.001). Both treatment delays, particularly moderate delays (HR 1.20, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.28; p<0.001) and severe delays (HR 1.32, 95% CI 1.24 to 1.41; p<0.001), and different facility treatments (HR 1.11, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.16; p<0.001) were associated with worse survival.ConclusionsDelivery of external beam radiation therapy and brachytherapy at different facilities was associated with treatment delays and worse survival. Our findings underscore the importance of care coordination in cervical cancer management.

Impact of Brachytherapy Boost and Dose-escalated External Beam Radiotherapy in Margin Positive Cervical Cancer Treated With Chemotherapy and Radiation

2020 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-42
Author(s):  
Bryan J. Ager ◽  
Anna Torgeson ◽  
Samual R. Francis ◽  
Lindsay M. Burt ◽  
David K. Gaffney ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
External Beam Radiotherapy ◽  
External Beam ◽  
Brachytherapy Boost ◽  
Margin Positive

Disparities in the Use of Adjuvant External Beam Radiation Therapy in Node-positive Cervical Cancer Patients Following Hysterectomy

2020 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-46
Author(s):  
Dimitrios Nasioudis ◽  
Kelsey Musselman ◽  
Sushmita Gordhandas ◽  
Eloise Chapman-Davis ◽  
Melissa K. Frey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
External Beam Radiation Therapy ◽  
External Beam Radiation ◽  
External Beam ◽  
Beam Radiation ◽  
Node Positive

scholarly journals Effects of HIV status on non-metastatic cervical cancer progression among patients in Lusaka, Zambia

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (5) ◽  
pp. 613-618
Author(s):  
Mario Jesus Trejo ◽  
Kennedy Lishimpi ◽  
Mulele Kalima ◽  
Catherine K Mwaba ◽  
Lewis Banda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Cancer Progression ◽  
Stage I ◽  
External Beam Radiation ◽  
Hiv Positive ◽  
External Beam ◽  
Hiv Status ◽  
Beam Radiation ◽  
Hiv Negative

IntroductionSub-Saharan Africa has the highest global incidence of cervical cancer. Cervical cancer is the most common cause of cancer morbidity and mortality among women in Zambia. HIV increases the risk for cervical cancer and with a national Zambian adult HIV prevalence of 16%, it is important to investigate the impact of HIV on the progression of cervical cancer. We measured differences in cervical cancer progression between HIV-positive and HIV-negative patients in Zambia.MethodsThis study included 577 stage I and II cervical cancer patients seen between January 2008 and December 2012 at the Cancer Diseases Hospital in Lusaka, Zambia. The inclusion criteria for records during the study period included known HIV status and FIGO stage I and II cervical cancer at initial date of registration in the Cancer Diseases Hospital. Medical records were abstracted for clinical and epidemiological data. Cancer databases were linked to the national HIV database to assess HIV status among cervical cancer patients. Logistic regression examined the association between HIV and progression, which was defined as metastatic or residual tumor after 3 months of initial treatment.ResultsA total of 2451 cervical cancer cases were identified, and after exclusion criteria were performed the final analysis population totaled 537 patients with stage I and II cervical cancer with known HIV status (224 HIV-positive and 313 HIV-negative). HIV-positive women were, on average, 10 years younger than HIV-negative women who had a median age of 42, ranging between 25 and 72. A total of 416 (77.5%) patients received external beam radiation, and only 249 (46.4%) patients received the recommended treatment of chemotherapy, external beam radiation, and brachytherapy. Most patients were stage II (85.7%) and had squamous cell carcinoma (74.7%). HIV-positive patients were more likely to receive lower doses of external beam radiation than HIV-negative patients (47% vs 37%; P<0.05, respectively). The median total dose of external beam radiation for HIV-positive and HIV-negative patients was 46 Gy and 50 Gy, respectively. HIV positivity did not lead to tumor progression (25.4% in HIV-positive vs 23.9% in HIV-negative, OR 1.04, 95% CI [0.57, 1.92]). However, among a subset of HIV-positive patients, longer duration of infection was associated with lower odds of progression.ConclusionThere was no significant impact on non-metastatic cervical cancer progression by HIV status among patients in Lusaka, Zambia. The high prevalence of HIV among cervical cancer patients suggest that HIV-positive patients should be a primary target group for HPV vaccinations, screening, and early detection.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document