Extended-Field Irradiation and Intracavitary Brachytherapy Combined With Cisplatin and Amifostine for Cervical Cancer With Positive Para-Aortic or High Common Iliac Lymph Nodes

Author(s):  
William Small ◽  
Kathryn Winter ◽  
Charles Levenback ◽  
Revathy Iyer ◽  
Sharon R. Hymes ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuhua Zhao ◽  
Gong Li ◽  
Lei Gao

Abstract Background: This study aimed to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of extended-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy (EF-IMRT) and dosage boost for positive lymph nodes, prognostic factors, treatment failure, and toxicity for Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IIICr and IVA cervical cancer patients with positive regional lymph nodes.Methods: We retrospectively evaluated 34 patients with stage IIICr and IVA who had received treatment in our institute between 2013 and 2016. Patients with stage IVA cervical cancer who had been enrolled in the analysis all had positive regional lymph nodes (pelvic or/and para-aortic). All 34 patients were treated with EF-IMRT and simultaneously integrated boost-IMRT (SIB-IMRT) for lymph node metastasis with concurrent chemotherapy and brachytherapy. Positive regional lymph nodes (short-axis diameter ≥5 mm in computed tomography [CT] or magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]) remaining after SIB-IMRT were then treated with sequential boost-IMRT (SeB-IMRT). The prognostic factors for overall survival (OS); disease-free survival (DFS); local control rate (LCR); regional control rate (RCR); distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), including age, FIGO stage, pretreatment hemoglobin (HB) level, tumor size, para-aortic lymph node (PALN) metastasis, point A equivalent dose in 2-Gy fractions (EQD2 dose), concurrent chemotherapy, and adjuvant chemotherapy cycles, were analyzed.Results: Complete response (CR) was achieved in 31 (91.2%) patients with acceptable adverse effects. Notably, the three-year OS, DFS, LCR, RCR, DMFS for these patients were 73.5%, 70.6%, 88.1%, 87.9%, and 81.6%, respectively. In particular, the three-year OS, DFS, LCR, RCR, and DMFS of patients with positive PALNs was 41.7%, 33.3%, 65.6%, 72.2%, and 60.2%, respectively. The corresponding values in patients without positive PALNs were 90.9%, 90.9%, 100%, 95.5%, and 90.9%, respectively.Conclusions: Our study suggested that the EF-IMRT and nodal dosage boost decreased regional node failure and that patients with stage IIIC1r and IVA cervical cancer without PALN metastasis who received EF-IMRT and SIB-IMRT with or without SeB-IMRT had a significant survival advantage in terms of the DFS and OS.


Author(s):  
Praveen Kumar Marimuthu ◽  
◽  
Sasipriya Ponniah ◽  
Govindaraj Ganesan ◽  
Prabhu Ramamoorthy ◽  
...  

Purpose: To compare plans of 3DCRT, IMRT and VMAT (RapidArc) and evaluate them in different dosimetric aspects along with dose to organs at risk with each technique to determine the best treatment technique for Extended field RT in cervical cancer patients Material & Methods: We evaluated External Beam radiotherapy plans of 10 patients of FIGO 2018 stage rIIIC2 who received Extended Field Radiotherapy (EFRT) to primary site along with regional nodes-bilateral external, internal iliac lymph nodes, presacral and para-aortic lymph nodes. The dose prescribed for all patients was 50.4Gy/28 fractions at 180cGy/fraction. Few patients had received gross nodal boost following this, but for better comparison only the initial phase of 50.4Gy/28 fractions was considered. All patients were planned with 3DCRT, IMRT and RapidArc. We evaluated and compared these plans dosimetrically in terms of Homogeneity Index, Conformity Index, Target Volume Coverage, Gradient Index, Unified Dosimetry Index, Integral dose, Monitor units and Doses to Organs at risk such as Anorectum, Bladder, Bowel Bag, Bilateral Femoral Heads, Bilateral Kidneys and Bone Marrow. Results: Intensity modulated techniques RapidArc and IMRT significantly spared critical organs compared to 3DCRT. Between RapidArc and IMRT, the critical organ sparing was comparable, but RapidArc had better target coverage, lesser MU and lesser treatment time. All techniques had acceptable HI, CI, GI, UDI and whole body Integral dose. Conclusion: Intensity modulated techniques should be the standard for EFRT in cervical cancer. Both RapidArc and IMRT are acceptable techniques of treatment delivery although the former may be preferred if and when available.


2017 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 345-353 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gail Wan Ying Chua ◽  
Yong Wee Foo ◽  
Guan Heng Tay ◽  
David Boon Harn Tan

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document