We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
For patients with locally advanced laryngeal cancer, two main treatment options are either up-front surgery [total laryngectomy (TL)] followed by postoperative adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) or definitive concurrent chemoradiation (CCRT) with surgery retained as salvage. The objectives were to study the feasibility of CCRT using intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in locally advanced laryngeal cancer with respect to response, toxicities, and quality of life (QoL) and comparison with other modality—TL with post-operative RT.
Material and Methods:
The records of 48 patients with locally advanced laryngeal cancer (T3/T4aN0-2), registered between years 2014 and 2017, treated with IMRT (definitive or adjuvant postoperative IMRT) were analysed from the hospital database. The patients received RT either as definitive CCRT or as adjuvant treatment after TL. RT in all patients was delivered with IMRT-SIB(simultaneous integrated boost) technique and concurrent chemotherapy with weekly cisplatin. The response was assessed at 12 weeks. Toxicities and QoL were assessed and compared between patients receiving definitive CCRT and adjuvant RT.
Results:
92·3% patients who received definitive CCRT achieved complete response. Toxicities were of low grade in patients receiving both definitive and adjuvant treatments. All the patients (except two partial responders of CCRT) remained disease-free at the last follow-up. At 2 years of follow-up of each patient—Global QoL, emotional and social functioning were better in definitive CCRT patients. Laryngectomy patients had more dyspnoea, insomnia and financial difficulties. Although the problems of dry mouth, sticky saliva and swallowing were comparable, laryngectomy patients faced more problems with speech, senses, social eating, social contact and cough.
Conclusions:
Definitive CCRT using IMRT-SIB with weekly cisplatin is a feasible option for patients of locally advanced laryngeal cancer with acceptable response rate. IMRT yields better toxicity outcomes with sparing of organs at risk. CCRT patients have better QoL than laryngectomy patients in several parameters.
The head and neck cancers as a whole are the most common cancers among males in India. Technological advancements have led to an improvement in radiation therapy (RT) techniques with subsequent reduction in normal tissue complications. To correct patient set-up errors, an off-line correction method like no action level (NAL) protocol may be used as a preferred protocol particularly for a busy department. The objectives of the study were to measure the translational set-up errors using kV cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in patients undergoing intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in head and neck cancers and also to optimise clinical target volume (CTV) to planning target volume (PTV) margin using NAL protocol.
Material and methods:
On the first 5 days of RT, patient’s position was verified by kV-CBCT and then weekly during the course of treatment. The comparison between the reference and kV-CBCT images was performed, and the shifts measured and recorded. The mean error from the initial five consecutive fractions was corrected on the sixth daily fraction. Displacements in all the directions were measured. The population systematic and random errors were determined and used to estimate PTV margins according to the van Herk formula.
Results:
A total of 322 images were analysed. Before correction, 15, 12 and 9% patients had systematic error ≥3 mm on X, Y and Z axes, but after correction this was reduced to 9, 0 and 0%. The total percentage of patients whose set-up margin was ≥5 mm before correction was 5, 6·25, 3·75%, but after correction it reduced to 1·88, 0, and 0·63%. The margins of total population were reduced to 63, 65 and 56% after correction on X, Y and Z axes, respectively.
Conclusion:
A simple off-line NAL protocol can correct the set-up errors without daily on-line imaging in patients undergoing IMRT and hence acting as a resource sparing alternative. Five millimetre margin to CTVs was adequate and safe to overcome the problem of set-up errors in head and neck IMRT.
Radiation therapy (RT), in combination with chemotherapy, is the mainstay in the treatment for locally advanced oropharyngeal cancer. We analysed the tumour response and the toxicity profiles in patients having locally advanced oropharyngeal cancers receiving hypofractionated intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and concurrent chemotherapy with Cisplatin investigating the feasibility and radiobiological efficacy of the regimen, along with its use as a resource-sparing alternative for a high-volume centre.
Material and Methods:
The records of 41 eligible patients with locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of oropharynx, registered from September 2015 to April 2017, treated with hypofractionated IMRT with concurrent Cisplatin, were analysed from the hospital database. Patients received concurrent chemo-radiation with 2 cycles of 3-weekly cisplatin on day 1 and day 22 along with hypofractionated IMRT, 55 Gy delivered in 20 fractions over 4 weeks. Patients were observed for any radiation reaction or chemotherapy toxicity at least once a week during the course of radiation therapy.
Results:
Twenty-nine patients (70·7%) achieved complete response and remaining 12 showed partial response. Acute grade 3 toxicity was observed mostly in the form of oral mucositis and radiation dermatitis. Both grade 3 oral mucositis and radiation dermatitis were seen in 15 patients (36·6%) and 7 patients (17%), respectively. The most common late toxicities were dysphagia and dry mouth. Twenty-five patients (61%) completed the overall treatment within 4 weeks’ duration.
Conclusion:
This hypofractionated regimen is feasible and was associated with tolerable acute and late morbidity and satisfactory locoregional response. Larger prospective, multi- institutional studies examining similar schedules may be undertaken to establish this as a standard practice, particularly for a high-volume centre.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.