Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
2.
J Med Phys ; 49(1): 6-11, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38828066

ABSTRACT

Introduction: This study aimed to investigate whether there is a dosimetric difference of implementing single instead of multi-computed tomography (CT) simulation treatment planning for high-dose-rate postoperative gynecological intracavitary brachytherapy (BT). Materials and Methods: Eighty patients were registered in the study. They received three BT fractions of 7 Gy/week (three CTs, three original plans). The organs at risk (OAR), the rectal wall, and the clinical target volume (CTV) were delineated. The delivered doses for the 2cc of OARs (D2cc), 1cc of rectal wall (D1cc), as well as for the 90% and 100% of CTV volume (DCTV90%, DCTV100%) were evaluated. To evaluate the values of the above parameters if the single-CT-simulation method has been chosen, the time of the first treatment plan was corrected for the decay and applied as the second and third CT, retrospectively, creating the next fractions (two revised plans). Results: No statistically significant (P > 0.05) differences were found between the original and revised plans for the OARs and CTV. However, for the single-CT-simulation method, it was noted that the dose constraints for the total rectal dose were exceeded in some cases (36.3%). Conclusion: The fact that rectal dose constraints were exceeded in 1/3 of patients with the single-CT-simulation method is dosimetrically significant.

3.
Breast Care (Basel) ; 11(5): 328-332, 2016 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27920625

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this analysis was a retrospective evaluation of the efficacy and toxicity of 2 hypofractionated irradiation schedules compared to conventional therapy in post-mastectomy patients. METHODS: 3 irradiation schedules were analyzed: 48.30 Gy in 21 fractions (group A, n = 60), 42.56 Gy in 16 fractions (group B, n = 27) and 50 Gy in 25 fractions (group C, n = 30) of the front chest wall. All groups were also treated with a supraclavicular field, with 39.10 Gy in 17 fractions (group A), 37.24 Gy in 14 fractions (group B) or 45 Gy in 25 fractions (group C). RESULTS: No local recurrences were noted in any group during 36 months of follow-up. Acute skin toxicity presented in all groups, with 58.3%, 70.4% and 60% of grade I; 35%, 25.9% and 40% of grade II; 6.7%, 3.7% and 0% of grade III being seen in groups A, B and C, respectively. Late skin toxicity was noted only as grade I in 16.7%, 25.9% and 26.7% of groups A, B and C, respectively. No significant difference was noted among all groups for either acute or late skin toxicity, or for radio-pneumonitis (chi2 test, p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: All schedules were equally effective with equivalent toxicity. A prospective randomized study is needed to confirm our results.

4.
World J Clin Cases ; 2(11): 705-10, 2014 Nov 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25405195

ABSTRACT

AIM: To evaluate the effect of chemotherapy to the acute toxicity of a hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT) schedule for breast cancer. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 116 breast cancer patients with T1, 2N0Mx. The patients received 3-D conformal radiotherapy with a total physical dose of 50.54 Gy or 53.2 Gy in 19 or 20 fractions according to stage, over 23-24 d. The last three to four fractions were delivered as a sequential tumor boost. All patients were monitored for acute skin toxicity according to the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group criteria. The maximum monitored value was taken as the final grading score. Multivariate analysis was performed for the contribution of age, chemotherapy and 19 vs 20 fractions to the radiation acute skin toxicity. RESULTS: The acute radiation induced skin toxicity was as following: grade I 27.6%, grade II 7.8% and grade III 2.6%. No significant correlation was noted between toxicity grading and chemotherapy (P = 0.154, χ(2) test). The mean values of acute toxicity score in terms of chemotherapy or not, were 0.64 and 0.46 respectively (P = 0.109, Mann Whitney test). No significant correlation was also noted between acute skin toxicity and radiotherapy fractions (P = 0.47, χ(2) test). According to univariate analysis, only chemotherapy contributed significantly to the development of acute skin toxicity but with a critical value of P = 0.05. However, in multivariate analysis, chemotherapy lost its statistical significance. None of the patients during the 2-years of follow-up presented any locoregional relapse. CONCLUSION: There is no clear evidence that chemotherapy has an impact to acute skin toxicity after an HFRT schedule. A randomized trial is needed for definite conclusions.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...