Toxicity Profile of Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy Vs. 3D-Conformal Radiotherapy in Head and neck cancer: A Retrospective study

Mahmoud Elsayed Abo Alazm, Hassan Khaled Hamdy, H. Al-Abady
{"title":"Toxicity Profile of Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy Vs. 3D-Conformal Radiotherapy in Head and neck cancer: A Retrospective study","authors":"Mahmoud Elsayed Abo Alazm, Hassan Khaled Hamdy, H. Al-Abady","doi":"10.58675/2682-339x.1687","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background : Most head and neck patients have historically been treated with photon-based radiation techniques, such as intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), there is a growing awareness of the potential clinical bene fi ts of proton therapy over IMRT in the de fi nitive, postoperative and reirradiation settings given the unique physical properties of protons. Aim of the work : To assess toxicity pro fi le of IMRT in comparison to 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) and to assess predictors for progression free survival and overall survival rates. Patients and methods : This retrospective cohort study included 131 head and neck cancer patients who were recruited from El Hussein University Hospital over 10 years then they were divided into 2 groups according to the type of radiotherapy. Results : Both groups were comparable regarding age, sex, and associated medical disorders except for ischemic heart disease and smoking. Sites of primary tumors were comparable except tongue and nasopharynx. Most of 3DCRT group received TPF as induction chemotherapy and most of IMRT group received concurrent chemotherapy. Dose of irradiation was higher signi fi cantly among IMRT group. Grades of early and late toxicity were higher among 3DCRT group. There was no statistically signi fi cant difference between both groups regarding response to treatment. Mortality cases were higher signi fi cantly among 3DCRT group. Cox regression analysis was performed to assess predictors for progression free survival and overall survival in each group. Conclusion : IMRT provide good choice as radiotherapy technique for head and neck cancers with adequate ef fi cacy similar to other techniques and better toxicity pro fi le.","PeriodicalId":256725,"journal":{"name":"Al-Azhar International Medical Journal","volume":"92 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Al-Azhar International Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.58675/2682-339x.1687","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background : Most head and neck patients have historically been treated with photon-based radiation techniques, such as intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), there is a growing awareness of the potential clinical bene fi ts of proton therapy over IMRT in the de fi nitive, postoperative and reirradiation settings given the unique physical properties of protons. Aim of the work : To assess toxicity pro fi le of IMRT in comparison to 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) and to assess predictors for progression free survival and overall survival rates. Patients and methods : This retrospective cohort study included 131 head and neck cancer patients who were recruited from El Hussein University Hospital over 10 years then they were divided into 2 groups according to the type of radiotherapy. Results : Both groups were comparable regarding age, sex, and associated medical disorders except for ischemic heart disease and smoking. Sites of primary tumors were comparable except tongue and nasopharynx. Most of 3DCRT group received TPF as induction chemotherapy and most of IMRT group received concurrent chemotherapy. Dose of irradiation was higher signi fi cantly among IMRT group. Grades of early and late toxicity were higher among 3DCRT group. There was no statistically signi fi cant difference between both groups regarding response to treatment. Mortality cases were higher signi fi cantly among 3DCRT group. Cox regression analysis was performed to assess predictors for progression free survival and overall survival in each group. Conclusion : IMRT provide good choice as radiotherapy technique for head and neck cancers with adequate ef fi cacy similar to other techniques and better toxicity pro fi le.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
调强放疗与3d适形放疗对头颈癌的毒性分析:回顾性研究
背景:大多数头颈部患者历来使用光子放射技术治疗,如强度调制放射治疗(IMRT),由于质子独特的物理性质,人们越来越意识到质子治疗在确定、术后和再照射环境中比IMRT有潜在的临床益处。研究目的:评估IMRT与3D适形放疗(3DCRT)相比的毒性,并评估无进展生存期和总生存率的预测因素。患者和方法:本研究回顾性队列研究纳入了131例来自El Hussein大学医院10年内的头颈癌患者,并根据放疗方式将其分为两组。结果:除了缺血性心脏病和吸烟外,两组在年龄、性别和相关疾病方面具有可比性。除舌部和鼻咽部外,原发肿瘤部位具有可比性。3DCRT组多采用TPF作为诱导化疗,IMRT组多采用同步化疗。IMRT组放疗剂量明显增高。3DCRT组早期和晚期毒性程度较高。两组患者对治疗的反应无统计学差异。3DCRT组死亡率明显高于对照组。采用Cox回归分析评估各组无进展生存期和总生存期的预测因素。结论:IMRT作为头颈部肿瘤放疗技术具有与其他技术相似的良好疗效和较好的毒副作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Correlation Between Left Ventricular Structural and Functional Changes and Coronary Artery Disease in Hypertensive Patients (Speckle Tracking Echocardiographic Study) Evaluation of the prognostic value of Rectus Abdominis muscle thickness and Rectus Femoris muscle thickness guided by ultrasound in intensive care patients. Observational study Incidence of Postprocedural Microembolic Events Following Carotid Artery Stenting without Protection Devices Short-Term Outcomes of Laparoscopic-assisted Anterior Perineal PlanE for Ultra-Low Anterior Resection (APPEAR) for Low Rectal Cancer: A Single Center Experience Open Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy for Treatment of Varus Knee in Adults Combined With Arthroscopic Evaluation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1