Head & neck · 2010
Misses and near-misses after postoperative radiation therapy for head and neck cancer: Comparison of IMRT and non-IMRT techniques in the CT-simulation era.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Chen Allen M, Farwell D Gregory, Luu Quang, Chen Leon M, Vijayakumar Srinivasan, Purdy James A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare the patterns of failure focusing on the distribution of local-regional recurrence among patients treated postoperatively with conventional radiotherapy (RT) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for head and neck cancer.
METHODS: The records of 130 patients treated by surgery and postoperative radiation therapy for squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck were reviewed. Seventy-eight patients (60%) were treated using conventional RT and 52 patients (40%) were treated using IMRT.
RESULTS: The 3-year estimates of local-regional control were 70% and 73% among patients treated by conventional RT and IMRT, respectively (p = .33). Among the local-regional recurrences in the IMRT group, 9 were in-field recurrences occurring within the physician-designated clinical target volume (CTV), and 4 were marginal recurrences involving the contralateral neck adjacent to the spared parotid gland (3 patients) and the retropharyngeal/retrostyloid lymph node region (1 patient).
CONCLUSION: Our study showed that conventional RT and IMRT result in similar rates of local-regional control. The implications for CTV design are discussed herein.
METHODS: The records of 130 patients treated by surgery and postoperative radiation therapy for squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck were reviewed. Seventy-eight patients (60%) were treated using conventional RT and 52 patients (40%) were treated using IMRT.
RESULTS: The 3-year estimates of local-regional control were 70% and 73% among patients treated by conventional RT and IMRT, respectively (p = .33). Among the local-regional recurrences in the IMRT group, 9 were in-field recurrences occurring within the physician-designated clinical target volume (CTV), and 4 were marginal recurrences involving the contralateral neck adjacent to the spared parotid gland (3 patients) and the retropharyngeal/retrostyloid lymph node region (1 patient).
CONCLUSION: Our study showed that conventional RT and IMRT result in similar rates of local-regional control. The implications for CTV design are discussed herein.