Dataset Information

Use of a conventional low neck field (LNF) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT): no clinical detriment of IMRT to an anterior LNF during the treatment of head-and neck-cancer.

ABSTRACT: To determine differences in clinical outcomes using intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) or a standard low neck field (LNF) to treat low neck.This is a retrospective, single-institution study. Ninety-one patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck were treated with curative intent. According to physician preference, some patients were treated with LNF (Planning Target Volume 3) field using a single anterior photon field matched to the IMRT field. Field junctions were not feathered. The endpoints were time to failure and use of a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube (as a surrogate of laryngeal edema causing aspiration), and analysis was done with ?(2) and log-rank tests.Median follow-up was 21 months (range, 2-89 months). Median age was 60 years. Thirty-seven patients (41%) were treated with LNF, 84% were Stage III or IV. A PEG tube was required in 30%, as opposed to 33% without the use of LNF. Node 2 or 3 neck disease was treated more commonly without LNF (38% vs. 24%, p = 0.009). Failures occurred in 12 patients (13%). Only 1 patient treated with LNF failed regionally, 4.5 cm above the match line. The 3-year disease-free survival rate was 87% and 79% with LNF and without LNF, respectively (p = 0.2), and the 3-year LR failure rate was 4% and 21%, respectively (p = 0.04).Using LNF to treat the low neck did not increase the risk of regional failure "in early T and early N diseases" or decrease PEG tube requirements.

SUBMITTER: Turaka A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3339153 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Use of a conventional low neck field (LNF) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT): no clinical detriment of IMRT to an anterior LNF during the treatment of head-and neck-cancer.

Turaka Aruna A Li Tianyu T Nicolaou Nicos N Lango Miriam N MN Burtness Barbara B Horwitz Eric M EM Ridge John A JA Feigenberg Steven J SJ

International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics 20100410 1

<h4>Purpose</h4>To determine differences in clinical outcomes using intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) or a standard low neck field (LNF) to treat low neck.<h4>Methods and materials</h4>This is a retrospective, single-institution study. Ninety-one patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck were treated with curative intent. According to physician preference, some patients were treated with LNF (Planning Target Volume 3) field using a single anterior photon field matched to t ...[more]

PMID: 20385457

Similar Datasets

Project description:Coplanar extended-field intensity-modulated radiation therapy (EF-IMRT) targeting the whole-pelvic and para-aortic lymph nodes in patients with advanced cervical cancer results in impaired creatinine clearance. An improvement in renal function cannot be expected unless low-dose (approximately 10 Gy) kidney exposure is reduced. The dosimetric method should be considered during EF-IMRT planning to further reduce low-dose exposure to the kidneys. To assess the usefulness of non-coplanar EF-IMRT with kidney-avoiding beams to spare the kidneys during cervical carcinoma treatment in dosimetric analysis between non-coplanar and coplanar EF-IMRT, we compared the doses of the target organ and organs at risk, including the kidney, in 10 consecutive patients. To estimate the influence of EFRT on renal dysfunction, creatinine clearance values after treatment were also examined in 18 consecutive patients. Of these 18 patients, 10 patients who were included in the dosimetric analysis underwent extended field radiation therapy (EFRT) with concurrent chemotherapy, and eight patients underwent whole-pelvis radiation therapy with concurrent chemotherapy to treat cervical carcinoma between April 2012 and March 2015 at our institution. In the dosimetric analysis, non-coplanar EF-IMRT was effective at reducing low-dose (approximately 10 Gy) exposure to the kidneys, thus maintaining target coverage and sparing other organs at risk, such as the small bowel, rectum, and bladder, compared with coplanar EF-IMRT. Renal function in all 10 patients who underwent EFRT, including coplanar EF-IMRT (with kidney irradiation), was low after treatment, and differed significantly from that of the eight patients who underwent WPRT (no kidney irradiation) 6 months after the first day of treatment (P = 0.005). In conclusion, non-coplanar EF-IMRT should be considered in patients with advanced cervical cancer, particularly in patients with a long life expectancy or with pre-existing renal dysfunction.

Project description:BackgroundXerostomia is the most common late side-effect of radiotherapy to the head and neck. Compared with conventional radiotherapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) can reduce irradiation of the parotid glands. We assessed the hypothesis that parotid-sparing IMRT reduces the incidence of severe xerostomia.MethodsWe undertook a randomised controlled trial between Jan 21, 2003, and Dec 7, 2007, that compared conventional radiotherapy (control) with parotid-sparing IMRT. We randomly assigned patients with histologically confirmed pharyngeal squamous-cell carcinoma (T1-4, N0-3, M0) at six UK radiotherapy centres between the two radiotherapy techniques (1:1 ratio). A dose of 60 or 65 Gy was prescribed in 30 daily fractions given Monday to Friday. Treatment was not masked. Randomisation was by computer-generated permuted blocks and was stratified by centre and tumour site. Our primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with grade 2 or worse xerostomia at 12 months, as assessed by the Late Effects of Normal Tissue (LENT SOMA) scale. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis, with all patients who had assessments included. Long-term follow-up of patients is ongoing. This study is registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial register, number ISRCTN48243537.Findings47 patients were assigned to each treatment arm. Median follow-up was 44·0 months (IQR 30·0-59·7). Six patients from each group died before 12 months and seven patients from the conventional radiotherapy and two from the IMRT group were not assessed at 12 months. At 12 months xerostomia side-effects were reported in 73 of 82 alive patients; grade 2 or worse xerostomia at 12 months was significantly lower in the IMRT group than in the conventional radiotherapy group (25 [74%; 95% CI 56-87] of 34 patients given conventional radiotherapy vs 15 [38%; 23-55] of 39 given IMRT, p=0·0027). The only recorded acute adverse event of grade 2 or worse that differed significantly between the treatment groups was fatigue, which was more prevalent in the IMRT group (18 [41%; 99% CI 23-61] of 44 patients given conventional radiotherapy vs 35 [74%; 55-89] of 47 given IMRT, p=0·0015). At 24 months, grade 2 or worse xerostomia was significantly less common with IMRT than with conventional radiotherapy (20 [83%; 95% CI 63-95] of 24 patients given conventional radiotherapy vs nine [29%; 14-48] of 31 given IMRT; p<0·0001). At 12 and 24 months, significant benefits were seen in recovery of saliva secretion with IMRT compared with conventional radiotherapy, as were clinically significant improvements in dry-mouth-specific and global quality of life scores. At 24 months, no significant differences were seen between randomised groups in non-xerostomia late toxicities, locoregional control, or overall survival.InterpretationSparing the parotid glands with IMRT significantly reduces the incidence of xerostomia and leads to recovery of saliva secretion and improvements in associated quality of life, and thus strongly supports a role for IMRT in squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck.FundingCancer Research UK (CRUK/03/005).

Project description:ImportanceThe majority of the patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) experience taste dysfunction (TD) during or after radiotherapy (RT). However, prospectively collected data for taste dysfunction have been limited, especially in the era of intensity-modulated RT (IMRT).ObjectiveTo evaluate the taste function in patients with HNC receiving IMRT by investigating the association between time course and recovery of TD in both acute and late phases.Design, setting, and participantsFrom August 2017 to November 2020, patients treated at the Chang Gung Memorial Hospital with curative or postoperative IMRT for HNC were enrolled in this prospective cohort study. The data analysis was performed from March 2021 to January 2022.ExposuresIMRT with and without concurrent chemotherapy.Main outcomes and measuresTaste function was measured using the whole-mouth solution method for 4 tastes (salt, sweet, sour, and bitter). Subjective evaluations (National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [version 4.03] and Subjective Total Taste Acuity scale) were used. Patient self-reported quality of life was evaluated using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Head and Neck Module (EORTC QLQ-H&N35).ResultsA total of 87 patients (78 [90%] men and 9 [10%] women; mean [range] age, 58 [31-80] years) were enrolled. Overall TD rates were 79 of 86 (91.9%), 63 of 83 (75.9%), 27 of 81 (33.3%), 5 of 56 (8.9%), and 2 of 30 (6.7%) during RT, and 1 week, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after RT, respectively. Positive correlation occurred between objectively measured taste loss for the 4 taste qualities and subjective perception of taste loss. Only oral cavity mean dose 4000 cGy or greater predicted TD 3 months after RT. The mean oral cavity doses to the predicted 15% (D15), 25% (D25), and 50% (D50) probabilities were 25, 38, and 60 Gy at 3 months and 57, 60, and 64 Gy at 6 months, respectively.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study, most patients still experienced TD during and at 3 months after RT. Only a few patients experienced long-term TD. A high oral cavity dose was associated with TD in patients with HNC receiving IMRT. Reducing oral cavity dose may promote early recovery of taste function after IMRT.

Dataset Information

Use of a conventional low neck field (LNF) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT): no clinical detriment of IMRT to an anterior LNF during the treatment of head-and neck-cancer.

Publications

Use of a conventional low neck field (LNF) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT): no clinical detriment of IMRT to an anterior LNF during the treatment of head-and neck-cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets