scholarly journals Radiotherapy for uterine cancer

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 103-128
Author(s):  
V. S. Gruzdev

Usually, it is customary to take any broad, general questions of medicine as topics for speeches delivered at the Annual Meetings of our Society. In deviation from this rule, the subject of my speech will be only a private medical method, and, moreover, applied to a particular disease of one organ. If, however, I add that such a disease is uterine cancer, and the therapeutic method, which I will talk about in my speech, is radiation therapy, then the indicated digression will become completely understandable for you.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (8-9) ◽  
pp. 522-530 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abhinav V. Reddy ◽  
Matthew N. Mills ◽  
Leonid B. Reshko ◽  
K. Martin Richardson ◽  
Charles R. Kersh

2003 ◽  
Vol 42 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 557-561 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nina Einhorn† ◽  
Claes Tropé ◽  
Mona Ridderheim ◽  
Karin Boman ◽  
Bengt Sorbe ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3578-3578 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chaitali Singh Nangia ◽  
Thomas H. Taylor ◽  
Walter Tsang ◽  
Jason Wong ◽  
Joseph Carmichael ◽  
...  

3578 Background: The risk of second primary colorectal cancers among rectal cancer patients has been described, but little is known about the risk of non-colorectal malignancies that may occur in the field of radiation. We attempted to quantify the risk, using data from the large population-based California Cancer Registry (CCR). Methods: We analyzed the CCR data for surgically-treated locoregional rectal cancer cases, diagnosed during the period 1988–2009. We excluded cases with second primary tumor (SPT) diagnosed within 12 months of initial diagnosis . Radiation treatment used was external beam radiation therapy. Standardized incidence ratios (SIR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated to evaluate risk as compared to the underlying population after matching for age, sex, ethnicity, and time. Results: Of the study cohort of 13,418 rectal cancer cases, 1572 cases of SPTs were observed . The SIR was increased for small intestine cancer among cases receiving radiation treatment (4 cases observed vs. 1.01 cases expected; SIR=3.94, 95% CI 1.07-10.10) but not among cases lacking radiation treatment (4 observed vs. 4.45 expected; SIR=0.90, 5% CI 0.24-2.30). Among females treated with radiation, the SIR was increased for uterine cancer (12 observed vs. 5.59 expected; SIR=2.15, 95% CI 1.11 to 3.75) but not among cases lacking radiation therapy (23 observed vs. 26.17 expected; SIR=0.88, 95% CI 0.56-1.32). Among males receiving radiation treatment, the SIR for prostate cancer was decreased (23 observed vs. 69.78 expected; SIR=0.33; 95% CI 0.21 to 0.49) but of borderline significance among males lacking radiation therapy (243 observed vs. 276.97 expected; SIR=0.88, 95% CI 0.77-0.99). No significant differences were observed for cancers of the vagina, cervix, ovary, kidney, bladder, penis, testes, or leukemia based on prior radiation treatment for rectal cancer. Conclusions: Patients receiving pelvic radiation for treatment of rectal cancer have a subsequently higher than expected incidence of small intestine and uterine cancer. The incidence of prostate cancer appears to fall after pelvic radiation. These unexpected findings suggest complex relationships associated with radiation treatment for rectal cancer and SPT risk.


2009 ◽  
Vol 115 (2) ◽  
pp. 239-243 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seraina Schmid ◽  
I-Chow Hsu ◽  
Jessica M. Hu ◽  
Alexander E. Sherman ◽  
Kathryn Osann ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Csaba Pinter ◽  
Andras Lasso ◽  
An Wang ◽  
Greg Sharp ◽  
David Jaffray ◽  
...  

Purpose: Recent years have seen growing interest in adaptive radiation therapy (RT), but the existing software tools are not ideal for research use, as they are either expensive and closed proprietary applications or free open-source packages with limited scope, extensibility, reliability, or user support. To address these limitations, we have developed SlicerRT, an open-source toolkit for RT research, providing fast computations and user-friendly interface for researchers. It is a medium for RT researchers to integrate their workflows in, assists clinical translation of experimental approaches, and enables comparative testing.Methods: SlicerRT builds on the widely used medical image visualization and analysis platform, 3D Slicer (www.slicer.org). In addition to the tools that 3D Slicer offers for visualization, registration and segmentation, the toolkit provides functions specifically designed for RT research. Established development processes as well as testing and validation environment ensure software quality. Standardized software development mechanisms of 3D Slicer were applied for documentation, distribution, and user support. The design and architecture of the toolkit was outlined in [1]. SlicerRT has evolved to contain the most widely used features in the field (see www.slicerrt.org), which have been defined through consensus discussions with a large pool of RT researchers.Results: Numerous modules have been developed for RT-specific features such as DICOM-RT data import and export, as well as dose analysis tools including dose volume histogram, dose accumulation, dose comparison, and isodose line and surface generation. The toolkit also includes contour analysis modules for handling various contour representations, contour morphology, and contour comparison. Advanced registration tools are provided by the included Plastimatch library [2]. The main new features developed in the last year are RT plan and RT image import and the subject hierarchy module, which arranges the loaded data to a structure familiar to clinicians, while providing advanced automation features through the underlying extendible mechanism. The toolkit is being used by several research groups to support and evaluate adaptive radiation therapy workflows. SlicerRT is available for download through the Extension Manager component of 3D Slicer 4.3 or later (see instructions on our website).Future work: As SlicerRT has matured to contain most of the planned functions, our focus has shifted from feature development to usability and stability. The subject hierarchy module, and its features such as bulk deformation of studies embodies our efforts toward usability, while the integration of the subject hierarchy and the advanced contour handling mechanism into the 3D Slicer core points towards stability, also benefiting the whole 3D Slicer community. There is ongoing work to evaluate and potentially standardize the way the 2D contours are rasterized into 3D volumes, thus mitigating the great variability between the different solutions for this problem. Current funding ensures continuous development for several years, so SlicerRT is expected to develop further.Acknowledgement: This work was in part funded by Cancer Care Ontario through Applied Cancer Research Unit and Research Chair in Cancer Imaging grants, and the Ontario Consortium for Adaptive Invention in Radiation Oncology (OCAIRO).


2013 ◽  
Vol 189 (4S) ◽  
Author(s):  
Janet Baack Kukreja ◽  
Emelian Scosyrev ◽  
Edward Messing ◽  
Guan Wu

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document