Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
Oral Oncol ; 82: 1-7, 2018 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29909882

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to (a) assess the differences in the delineation of target volumes and organs-at-risk (OARs) by different physicians designing an intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) and (b) analyze the impact of these differences on the treatment plan optimization. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The planning target volumes (PTVs) and OARs for radiotherapy were manually delineated from computed tomography images of a patient with NPC, and a standard delineation was determined using the STAPLE algorithm of ABAS software. IMRT was designed using one standard plan and 10 individual plans based on the same constraints and field conditions. The maximum/minimum ratio (MMR) of the PTV and OAR volumes and the coefficient of variation (CV) for the different groups were evaluated and compared to the volume of the standard contour. RESULTS: Significant differences were seen in the PTVs of the nasopharynx (PTVnx), neck lymph node (PTVnd) and the OARs manually delineated by different physicians. Compared to the standard plan, the mean dose-related parameters of various OARs in different individual plans were not significantly different, while that of most organs in different individual plans were reduced. However, a significant difference in the dose at each organ was noted in different individual plans. CONCLUSION: Significant differences were noted in the PTV and OAR delineations by different physicians in radiotherapy of NPC, and their dosimetric parameters were significantly different from the standard planned parameters. Therefore, multicenter trials should pay attention to the impact of these differences on the clinical evaluation.


Subject(s)
Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma/radiotherapy , Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Observer Variation , Radiotherapy Dosage , Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated/methods , Aged , Humans , Male , Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma/diagnostic imaging , Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated/adverse effects , Tomography, X-Ray Computed
2.
J Cancer Res Clin Oncol ; 143(8): 1563-1572, 2017 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28342002

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To compare the clinical outcomes and toxicities of two-dimensional conventional radiotherapy (2D-CRT) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for the treatment of children and adolescent nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). METHODS: A total of 176 children with non-metastatic NPC treated at Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center between October 2003 and September 2013 were included in this study. Of the 176 patients, 74 received 2D-CRT and 102 were treated with IMRT. The clinical outcomes and acute and late toxicities were determined and compared. RESULTS: The IMRT group achieved significantly higher overall survival (OS) (90.4% vs. 76.1% at 5 year, P = 0.007) and disease-free survival (DFS) (85.7% vs. 71.2%, P = 0.029) mainly due to an improvement in locoregional relapse-free survival (LRRFS) (97.9 vs. 88.3%, P = 0.049). After stratification by disease stage, IMRT provided significant benefits for patients with stage III-IV disease in terms of OS, LRRFS and DFS. Multivariate analyses indicated that the treatment group (2D-CRT vs. IMRT) was a prognostic factor for OS, LRRFS and DFS. A significant reduction in Grade 2-4 xerostomia (52.7 vs. 34.3%, P = 0.015) and hearing loss (40.5 vs. 22.5%, P = 0.010) was observed in patients treated by IMRT. CONCLUSION: IMRT provides better locoregional relapse-free survival and overall survival, especially in late-stage children and adolescent NPC patients, and is associated with a lower incidence of Grade 2-4 xerostomia as well as hearing loss compared with 2D-CRT. Distant metastasis remains a challenge in the treatment of children and adolescent NPC.


Subject(s)
Carcinoma/radiotherapy , Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/radiotherapy , Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated , Adolescent , Carcinoma/epidemiology , Carcinoma/pathology , Child , Disease-Free Survival , Female , Humans , Male , Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma , Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms/pathology , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/epidemiology , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/pathology , Neoplasm Staging , Retrospective Studies , Treatment Outcome
3.
Chin J Cancer ; 35: 2, 2016 Jan 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26739148

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In the era of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), the role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is under-evaluated. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of NAC plus IMRT and concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) plus adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) on locoregionally advanced NPC. METHODS: Between January 2004 and December 2008, 240 cases of locoregionally advanced NPC confirmed by pathologic assessment in Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center were reviewed. Of the 240 patients, 117 received NAC followed by IMRT, and 123 were treated with CCRT plus AC. The NAC + IMRT group received a regimen that included cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU). The CCRT + AC group received cisplatin concurrently with radiotherapy, and subsequently received adjuvant cisplatin and 5-FU. The survival rates were assessed by Kaplan-Meier analysis, and the survival curves were compared using a log-rank test. Multivariate analysis was conducted using the Cox proportional hazard regression model. RESULTS: The 5-year overall survival (OS), locoregional relapse-free survival (LRRFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and disease-free survival (DFS) were 78.0, 87.9, 79.0, and 69.8%, respectively, for the NAC + IMRT group and 78.7, 84.8, 76.2, and 65.6%, respectively, for the CCRT + AC group. There were no significant differences in survival between the two groups. In multivariate analysis, age (<50 years vs. ≥50 years) and overall stage (III vs. IV) were found to be independent predictors for OS and DFS; furthermore, the overall stage was a significant prognostic factor for DMFS. Compared with the CCRT + AC protocol, the NAC + IMRT protocol significantly reduced the occurrence rates of grade 3-4 nausea-vomiting (6.5 vs. 1.5%, P = 0.023) and leukopenia (9.7 vs. 0.8%, P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: The treatment outcomes of the NAC + IMRT and CCRT + AC groups were similar. Distant metastasis remained the predominant mode of treatment failure.


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/administration & dosage , Chemoradiotherapy/methods , Cisplatin/administration & dosage , Fluorouracil/administration & dosage , Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms/therapy , Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated/methods , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Carcinoma , Chemotherapy, Adjuvant/methods , Cisplatin/therapeutic use , Disease-Free Survival , Female , Fluorouracil/therapeutic use , Humans , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Male , Middle Aged , Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma , Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms/pathology , Neoadjuvant Therapy/methods , Retrospective Studies , Survival Rate , Treatment Outcome , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...