Role of clobetasol propionate 0.025% topical therapy in various dermatoses

The anti-inflammatory and vasoconstrictive properties of topical corticosteroids (TCs) contribute in providing therapeutic benefits in several skin conditions, including atopic eczema, localized vitiligo, psoriasis, and chronic hand eczema. Clobetasol propionate (CP) is the most common topical agent used for psoriasis management and demonstrates an efficacy superior to other TCs. A new CP 0.025% cream formulation has demonstrated hypoallergenic effects due to the absence of known contact allergens, such as propylene glycol, short-chain alcohols, and sorbitol-based emulsifiers. Lower CP serum levels and less hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis suppression with CP 0.025% cream formulation than with CP 0.05% ensure better safety. The present case series discusses the clinical experience of using CP 0.025% cream in various dermatological conditions

Head and Neck Lymphomas: Tip of the Iceberg?

ABSTRACT Background: Lymphomas comprise around 5% of all head and neck neoplasms and is the second most common extra nodal non hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL). However there is sporadic data on this entity from the subcontinent and hence we undertook this study. Methodology: This retrospective observational study was conducted at a tertiary care oncology center in India on diagnosed cases of NHL between January 2007 and December 2013. All patients were diagnosed based on histopathology and immunohistochemistry. Staging work up was done in all patients. Patients were considered as primary Head and Neck lymphomas if there was head and neck as the predominant site with or without regional lymph node involvement. Results: A total of 39 patients were studied. The age at presentation ranged from 29 to 78 years. The most common site of presentation was oral cavity (26%; n=10), followed by parotid and thyroid (18% each; n=7), eye (12%, n=5), maxilla (8%; n=3), paranasal sinuses (8%; n-=3) cheek (8%, n=3), and nasal cavity (2%, n=1). 41% (n=16) cases were in stage I, 43% (n=17) in stage II, 3% (n=1) in stage III, and 13% (n=5) were in stage IV. Most common histology was DLBCL (71%; n=28), followed by plasmablastic (10%; n=4), marginal zone (8%, n=3), mantle cell (3%; n=1), follicular lymphomas (5%; n=2), and NK/T cell lymphoma (3%; n=1). Most of the patients were of low risk (67%; n=26), followed by intermediate (23%; n=9), and high risk (10%; n=4). Patients were treated with anthracycline based chemotherapy +/-radiotherapy. In this study, stage I and stage II patients had a better prognosis and overall survival, median OS 28 months and 11 months, respectively. In stage III and IV, it was 7 and 3 months, respectively. According to site, the best median overall survival was seen with parotid (27 m), paranasal sinus (26m), and oral cavity (23 m), followed by thyroid (18 m) nasal cavity (17 m), maxilla (11 m), eye (8 m), and cheek (7 m)

Primary Diffuse large B-Cell lymphoma of testis: A single centre experience and review of literature

Background: Primary testicular lymphoma constitutes 1-2% of Non-Hodgkin′s lymphomas affecting elderly men >60 years of age. Most often it is a Diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and treatment involves multimodality approach involving surgery, chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Outcome remains poor in spite of aggressive therapy. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 286 registered cases of DLBCL (aged >14 years) from 2007 to 2011 and found nine primary testicular involvement patients. These cases were analyzed for baseline clinical features, investigations, staging, treatment and outcome. Results: Median age was 58 (46-76) years. All patients presented with testicular swelling, two had the presence of B symptoms, and three with abdominal lymphadenopathy. Six had stage IE disease and three patients had stage IIE. All patients underwent orchiectomy. Eight patients received combination chemotherapy and six completed three or more cycles. Four achieved complete response, among these three relapsed after 32, 42, 70 months and one was lost to follow up. Two had a progressive disease, among these one died of disease and one alive with disease. Complete follow up was available from five patients and median survival was 36 months (11-78 months). Conclusion: Primary testicular DLBCL is uncommon, needs multimodality treatment and central nervous system prophylaxis to improve the survival. The outcome needs to be further investigated using biological approaches (Rituximab based) and/or more aggressive management

Dosimetric comparison of manual forward planning with uniform dwell times versus volume-based inverse planning in interstitial brachytherapy of cervical malignancies

AimDosimetic comparison of manual forward planning(MFP) with inverse planning(IP) for interstitial brachytherapy(ISBT) in cervical carcinoma.BackgroundBrachytherapy planning by MFP is more reliable but time-consuming method, whereas IP has been explored more often for its ease and rapidness. The superiority of either is yet to be established.MethodologyTwo plans were created on data sets of 24 patients of cervical carcinoma who had undergone ISBT, one by MFP with uniform dwell times and another IP on BrachyVision 13.7 planning system with a dose prescription of 600 cGy. Isodose shaper was used for improving conformity & homogeneity. Dosimetric parameters for target and organs at risk (OARs) were recorded. Conformity index (COIN), dose homogeneity index (DHI), overdose index (OI), Coverage index (CI) and dose nonuniformity ratio (DNR) were calculated.ResultsMean high risk clinical target volume: 73.05(±20.7)cc, D90: 5.51 Gy vs. 5.6 Gy (p = 0.017), V100: 81.77 % vs. 83.74 % (p = 0.002), V150: 21.7 % vs. 24.93 % (p = 0.002), V200: 6.3 % vs. 6.4 % (p=0.75) for IP and MFP, respectively. CI: 0.81(IP) and 0.83(MFP) (p = 0.003); however, COIN was 0.79 for both plans. D2cc of OARs was statistically better with IP (bladder 54.7 % vs. 56.1 %, p = 0.03; rectum 63 % vs. 64.7 %, (p = 0.0008).ConclusionBoth MFP and IP are equally acceptable dosimetrically. With higher dose achieved to the target, for a similar OAR dose, MFP provides greater user flexibility of dwell positions within the target as well as better optimization. Isodose shaper may be carefully used for fine tuning. Larger sample sizes and clinical correlation will better answer the superiority of one over the other

Breast-conserving radiotherapy with simultaneous integrated boost; field-in-field three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy versus inverse intensity-modulated radiotherapy – A dosimetric comparison: Do we need intensity-modulated radiotherapy?

Background and Purpose: To examine the feasibility of improving breast-conserving radiotherapy with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) and analyzing the efficiency of forward versus inverse intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) techniques in providing the same. Materials and Methods: Three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) field-in-field (FIF) plans with simultaneous and sequential boost and IMRT SIB plans were generated for the datasets of 20 patients who had undergone breast-conserving surgery. The 3 plans were compared dosimetrically for efficiency in terms of planning target volume (PTV) coverage (PTV 95%), homogeneity and conformity, dose delivered to ipsilateral/contralateral lungs (I/L: V10, V20, C/L: Vmean, V5), heart and contralateral breast (Vmean, V30 for heart and Vmean, V1, V5 for C/L breast). Results: The FIF 3DCRT plan with SIB (PLAN B) was more homogeneous than the classical technique with sequential boost (PLAN A). There were less hot spots in terms of Dmax (63.7 ± 1.3) versus Dmax (68.9 ± 1), P < 0.001 and boost V107%, B (0.3 ± 0.7) versus A (3.5 ± 5.99), P = 0.001. The IMRT SIB (PLAN C) did not provide any significant dosimetric advantage over the 3DCRT SIB technique. IMRT SIB plan C was associated with increased dose to contralateral lung in-terms of V5 (10.35 +/- 18.23) vs. (1.13 +/- 4.24), P = 0.04 and Vmean (2.12 ± 2.18) versus Vmean (0.595 ± 0.89), P = 0.008. There was 3-fold greater exposure in terms of Monitor Unit (MU) (1024.9 ± 298.32 versus 281.05 ± 20.23, P < 0.001) and treatment delivery time. Conclusions: FIF 3DCRT SIB provides a dosimetrically acceptable and technically feasible alternative to the classical 3DCRT plan with sequential boost for breast-conserving radiotherapy. It reduces treatment time by 2 weeks. IMRT SIB does not appear to have any dosimetric advantage; it is associated with significantly higher doses to contralateral lung and heart and radiation exposure in terms of MU