8 research outputs found

    Dysphagia in head and neck cancer patients following intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT)

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: To evaluate the objective and subjective long term swallowing function, and to relate dysphagia to the radiation dose delivered to the critical anatomical structures in head and neck cancer patients treated with intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT, +/- chemotherapy), using a midline protection contour (below hyoid, ~level of vertebra 2/3). METHODS: 82 patients with stage III/IV squamous cell carcinoma of the larynx, oropharynx, or hypopharynx, who underwent successful definitive (n = 63, mean dose 68.9Gy) or postoperative (n = 19, mean dose 64.2Gy) simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) -IMRT either alone or in combination with chemotherapy (85%) with curative intent between January 2002 and November 2005, were evaluated retrospectively. 13/63 definitively irradiated patients (21%) presented with a total gross tumor volume (tGTV) >70cc (82-173cc; mean 106cc). In all patients, a laryngo-pharyngeal midline sparing contour outside of the PTV was drawn. Dysphagia was graded according subjective patient-reported and objective observer-assessed instruments. All patients were re-assessed 12 months later. Dose distribution to the swallowing structures was calculated. RESULTS: At the re-assessment, 32-month mean post treatment follow-up (range 16-60), grade 3/4 objective toxicity was assessed in 10%. At the 32-month evaluation as well as at the last follow up assessment mean 50 months (16-85) post-treatment, persisting swallowing dysfunction grade 3 was subjectively and objectively observed in 1 patient (1%). The 5-year local control rate of the cohort was 75%; no medial marginal failures were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that sparing the swallowing structures by IMRT seems effective and relatively safe in terms of avoidance of persistent grade 3/4 late dysphagia and local disease control

    Simultaneous Integrated Boost Intensity‑Modulated Radiotherapy (SIB‑IMRT) in Nasopharyngeal Cancer

    Get PDF
    Abstract : Purpose: : To assess the efficacy and safety of using simultaneous integrated boost intensity-modulated radiotherapy (SIB-IMRT) to treat nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) in a Caucasian cohort. Outcome was analyzed with respect to dose-volume histogram (DVH) values. Patients and Methods: : Between 03/2002 and 01/2008, 39 NPC patients underwent SIB-IMRT (37 Caucasians; 31 males; mean age 53 years [16-78 years]). 41% presented with WHO (World Health Organization) type 1 unfavorable histology, 85% with stage III/IV disease. 19 patients had total gross tumor volume (GTV) 16-70 cm3 (mean 36 cm3), while 16 had GTV > 70 cm3 (73-217 cm3; mean 115 cm3). All patients with stage II-IV disease received concomitant cisplatin. The prescribed SIB dose delivered to the planning target volume (PTV) was 70 Gy (2.00 Gy/fraction) in 17, 69.6 Gy (2.11 Gy/fraction) in 19, and 66 Gy (2.20 Gy/fraction) in three patients. Results: : 3-year local relapse-free, nodal relapse-free, distant metastases-free, disease-free rates and overall survival were 86%, 89%, 85%, 72%, and 85% (median follow-up 30 months [8-71 months]). Histology was a significant prognostic factor concerning overall survival, with worst prognosis in WHO type 1 compared to type 2/3 (75% vs. 93%; p = 0.03). There was a trend in favor of WHO type 2/3 regarding local control (74% vs. 94%; p = 0.052). The PTV DVHs showed a slight left shift compared to reported series. Three patients developed grade 3 late effects (xerostomia [n = 2], dysphagia [n = 1], hearing loss [n = 1]). Conclusion: : In comparison with predominantly Asian NPC IMRT series in the literature, chemo-IMRT in the own Caucasian cohort, characterized by less radioresponsive WHO type 1, was equally effective. Treatment tolerance was excellen

    Pure Small Cell Carcinoma of the Prostate: A Case Report and Literature Review

    Get PDF
    Primary small cell carcinoma of the prostate (SCPCa) is a rare pathologic entity with unique clinical features and a poor prognosis. We present a case of a patient diagnosed with pure SCPCa treated with a combined chemo-radiotherapeutic approach. Pathological findings showed that the neoplastic cells exhibited positivity for pancytokeratin, synaptophysin, thyroid transcription factor-1 and CD56. Immunostaining for prostate-specific antigen was negative, while serum prostate-specific antigen was within normal limits. We review the available literature to gain additional information about diagnosis, treatment and prognosis of pure SCPCa

    Global coverage and consistency of guideline recommendations for cancer cachexia on the Web in 2011 and 2018

    No full text
    Introduction: Cancer cachexia is a common associate of cancer and has a negative impact on both patients' quality of life and overall survival. Nonetheless its management remains suboptimal in clinical practice. Provision of medical recommendations in websites is of extreme importance for medical decision making and translating evidence into clinical practice. Aim of the study: To scrutinize the magnitude, consistency and changes over time of cancer-cachexia recommendations for physicians on the Web among oncology related societies. Intercontinental, continental, national and socioeconomic variations were further analyzed. Material and methods: Web identification of oncology related societies and prospective analyses of relative Web guideline recommendations for physicians on cancer-cachexia at different time-points. Results: In June 2011, we scrutinized 144,000 Web pages. We identified 275 societies, of which 270 were eligible for analyses: 67 were international (African, American, Asian, European, Oceania and Intercontinental), 109 belonged to the top 10 countries with the highest development index and 94 pertained to 10 countries with a long lasting tradition in medical oncology. Conclusions: The magnitude of cancer cachexia recommendations for physicians on the Web at a global level was scant both for coverage and consistency, and at any time-point considered: 3.7% (10/270) in 2011 and 8.1% (22/270) in 2018. The proportion of societies giving evidence-based and updated recommendations for cancer cachexia for physicians was only 1.1% (3/270) in 2011 and 2.96% (8/270) in 2018. Continent, national highest developmental index, oncology tradition and economic-geographic areas were not found to influence Web guideline provision

    Cancer pain ... who cares? : International and national patterns of evidence-based global guide-lines recommendations for physicians on the Web (2011 vs. 2018)

    No full text
    Purpose: Although pain is a common event during treatment of cancer, its assessment and management remains suboptimal in everyday clinical practice at global level. Methods: Considering both the important role of Internet in daily life and that clinical guidelines are important for translating evidence in clinical practice, we performed a prospective study to scrutinize the magnitude of updated evidence-based cancer-pain guideline recommendation for physicians on the web. Changes over-time at a global level were scrutinized at two time points: 2011 for baseline and 2018 at first follow-up. Both anesthesiology and oncology societies were analyzed. Results: In 2011 we scrutinized 181,00 WebPages and 370 eligible societies were identified; 364 of these were eligible for analyses both in 2011 and 2018. The magnitude of cancer pain updated and evidence-based guideline recommendations on the web for health care providers was extremely low at global level and at any time point considered 1.1% (4/364) in 2011 and 4.7% (17364) in 2018. Continental and intercontinental patterns, National's highest developmental index, oncology tradition and economic-geographic areas were not found to influence cancer pain web-guideline provision. In 2018, pain & supportive care societies provided the highest rate of updated evidence-based cancer-pain guidelines for clinicians. Only 3/25 medical oncology societies and 1/34 radiation oncology societies, provided own or e-link (to other societies) evidence-based guidelines in their websites. Conclusions: Major medical oncology and radiation oncology societies - at global level - fail to produce updated cancer pain recommendations for their physicians, with most of these providing no or inconsistent or outdated guidelines

    Cancer pain ... who cares? : International and national patterns of evidence-based global guide-lines recommendations for physicians on the Web (2011 vs. 2018)

    No full text
    Purpose: Although pain is a common event during treatment of cancer, its assessment and management remains suboptimal in everyday clinical practice at global level. Methods: Considering both the important role of Internet in daily life and that clinical guidelines are important for translating evidence in clinical practice, we performed a prospective study to scrutinize the magnitude of updated evidence-based cancer-pain guideline recommendation for physicians on the web. Changes over-time at a global level were scrutinized at two time points: 2011 for baseline and 2018 at first follow-up. Both anesthesiology and oncology societies were analyzed. Results: In 2011 we scrutinized 181,00 WebPages and 370 eligible societies were identified; 364 of these were eligible for analyses both in 2011 and 2018. The magnitude of cancer pain updated and evidence-based guideline recommendations on the web for health care providers was extremely low at global level and at any time point considered 1.1% (4/364) in 2011 and 4.7% (17364) in 2018. Continental and intercontinental patterns, National's highest developmental index, oncology tradition and economic-geographic areas were not found to influence cancer pain web-guideline provision. In 2018, pain & supportive care societies provided the highest rate of updated evidence-based cancer-pain guidelines for clinicians. Only 3/25 medical oncology societies and 1/34 radiation oncology societies, provided own or e-link (to other societies) evidence-based guidelines in their websites. Conclusions: Major medical oncology and radiation oncology societies - at global level - fail to produce updated cancer pain recommendations for their physicians, with most of these providing no or inconsistent or outdated guidelines
    corecore