Vol 26, No 3 (2021)
Research paper
Published online: 2021-03-30

open access

Page views 606
Article views/downloads 430
Get Citation

Connect on Social Media

Connect on Social Media

Intensity modulated radiotherapy in carcinoma cervix with metastatic para-aortic nodes: an institutional experience from a Regional Cancer Centre of Eastern India

Misra Biplab1, Maji Tapas1, Lahiri Debarshi1, Roy Sanjoy1, Chaudhuri Prabir1, Ray K. Dilip1
Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 2021;26(3):400-407.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer is a major health problem, especially in developing countries like India. Extended field radiotherapy (EFRT) for cancer cervix treatment remains a challenging task for radiation oncologists. In the last decade studies have shown that EFRT using intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) is feasible in treating gynaecological malignancies but there is a dearth of literature on this specific topic from this part of the world where patient profile differs greatly in several aspects from that of the western world.

The aim of the study was evaluation of treatment response and toxicity profile in cases of carcinoma cervix with metastatic para-aortic nodes treated with intensity modulated radiotherapy technique.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study the treatment records of 45 para-aortic node positive cervical cancer patients treated with EFRT (IMRT) and concurrent cisplatin were analysed for evaluation of loco-regional control and toxicities.

RESULTS: Forty-four patients received full course of treatment. Among those 44 patients, 93.2% achieved complete response. Overall, the treatment was tolerated well and toxicities were within acceptable limits. Acute grade 3-4 toxicities were observed mostly in the form of anaemia and leucopenia. Most common late toxicities were those of small and large intestine.

CONCLUSION: EFRT with concurrent chemotherapy was successfully delivered for para-aortic nodes positive cervical cancer patients in Indian scenario where under-nutrition, infection, anaemia and several other factors adversely influence treatment outcome. Pelvic and para-aortic control rates were satisfactory. The technique was associated with an acceptable acute and late toxicity profile.

Article available in PDF format

View PDF Download PDF file

References

  1. International Agency for research on cancer. Cervical cancer estimated incidence, mortality and prevalence worldwide in 2012. World Health Organisation; 2012. http://globocon.iarc.fr/pages/factsheetcancer.aspx?Cancer=cervix (12th May 2012).
  2. Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM, et al. Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin. 2011; 61(2): 69–90.
  3. Park K. Epidemiology of chronic non-communicable diseases and conditions. Park’s Textbook of preventive and social medicine. 23rd Ed. Jabalpur, M/s Banarsidas Bhanot 2015: 388–389.
  4. Basu P, Biswas J, Mandal R, et al. Is interferon-alpha and retinoic acid combination along with radiation superior to chemo-radiation in the treatment of advanced carcinoma of cervix? Indian J Cancer. 2006; 43(2): 54–59.
  5. Nelson JH, Boyce J, Macasaet M, et al. Incidence, significance, and follow-up of para-aortic lymph node metastases in late invasive carcinoma of the cervix. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1977; 128(3): 336–340.
  6. Rotman M, Pajak TF, Choi K, et al. Prophylactic extended-field irradiation of para-aortic lymph nodes in stages IIB and bulky IB and IIA cervical carcinomas. Ten-year treatment results of RTOG 79-20. JAMA. 1995; 274(5): 387–393.
  7. Haie C, Pejovic MH, Gerbaulet A, et al. Is prophylactic para-aortic irradiation worthwhile in the treatment of advanced cervical carcinoma? Results of a controlled clinical trial of the EORTC radiotherapy group. Radiother Oncol. 1988; 11(2): 101–112.
  8. Chatani M, Matayoshi Y, Masaki N, et al. Prophylactic irradiation of para-aortic lymph nodes in carcinoma of the uterine cervix. A prospective randomized study. Strahlenther Onkol. 1995; 171(11): 655–660.
  9. Lepanto P, Littman P, Mikuta J, et al. Treatment of para-aortic nodes in carcinoma of the cervix. Cancer. 1975; 35(6): 1510–1513, doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(197506)35:6<1510::aid-cncr2820350605>3.0.co;2-u.
  10. Nori D, Valentine E, Hilaris BS. The role of paraaortic node irradiation in the treatment of cancer of the cervix. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1985; 11(8): 1469–1473.
  11. Goodman HM, Niloff JM, Nelson JR. et al. Cervical malignancies. In: Knapp RC, Berkowitz RS. ed. Gynecologic oncology. Macmillan, New York 1986: 225–273.
  12. Keys HM, Bundy BN, Stehman FB, et al. Cisplatin, radiation, and adjuvant hysterectomy compared with radiation and adjuvant hysterectomy for bulky stage IB cervical carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 1999; 340(15): 1154–1161.
  13. Peters WA, Liu PY, Barrett RJ, et al. Concurrent chemotherapy and pelvic radiation therapy compared with pelvic radiation therapy alone as adjuvant therapy after radical surgery in high-risk early-stage cancer of the cervix. J Clin Oncol. 2000; 18(8): 1606–1613.
  14. Whitney CW, Sause W, Bundy BN, et al. Randomized comparison of fluorouracil plus cisplatin versus hydroxyurea as an adjunct to radiation therapy in stage IIB-IVA carcinoma of the cervix with negative para-aortic lymph nodes: a Gynecologic Oncology Group and Southwest Oncology Group study. J Clin Oncol. 1999; 17(5): 1339–1348.
  15. Rose PG, Bundy BN, Watkins EB, et al. Concurrent cisplatin-based radiotherapy and chemotherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. 1999; 340(15): 1144–1153.
  16. Eifel PJ, Winter K, Morris M, et al. Pelvic irradiation with concurrent chemotherapy versus pelvic and para-aortic irradiation for high-risk cervical cancer: an update of radiation therapy oncology group trial (RTOG) 90-01. J Clin Oncol. 2004; 22(5): 872–880.
  17. Grigsby PW, Heydon K, Mutch DG, et al. Long-term follow-up of RTOG 92-10: Cervical cancer with positive para-aortic lymph nodes. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000; 51(4): 982–987.
  18. Small W, Winter K, Levenback C, et al. Extended field iadiation and intacavitay bachytheapy combined with cisplatin chemotheapy fo cevical cance with positive paa-aotic o high common iliac lymph nodes: Result of Am 1 of RTOG 0116. Int J Radiation Oncology Biol Phys. 2007; 68(4): 1081–1087.
  19. Varia MA, Bundy BN, Deppe G, et al. Cervical carcinoma metastatic to para-aortic nodes: extended field radiation therapy with concomitant 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin chemotherapy: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1998; 42(5): 1015–1023.
  20. Hacker NF, Wain GV, Nicklin JL. Resection of bulky positive lymph nodes in patients with cervical carcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 1995; 5(4): 250–256.
  21. Chou HH, Wang CC, Lai CH, et al. Isolated paraaortic lymph node recurrence after definitive irradiation for cervical carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001; 51(2): 442–448.
  22. Mell LK, Roeske JC, Mundt AJ. A survey of intensity-modulated radiation therapy use in the United States. Cancer. 2003; 98(1): 204–211.
  23. Mell LK, Mehrotra AK, Mundt AJ. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy use in the U.S., 2004. Cancer. 2005; 104(6): 1296–1303.
  24. Portelance L, Chao KS, Grigsby PW, et al. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) reduces small bowel, rectum, and bladder doses in patients with cervical cancer receiving pelvic and para-aortic irradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001; 51(1): 261–266.
  25. Gerszten K, Colonello K, Heron DE, et al. Feasibility of concurrent cisplatin and extended field radiation therapy (EFRT) using intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for carcinoma of the cervix. Gynecol Oncol. 2006; 102(2): 182–188.
  26. Salama JK, Mundt AJ, Roeske J, et al. Preliminary outcome and toxicity report of extended-field, intensity-modulated radiation therapy for gynecologic malignancies. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006; 65(4): 1170–1176.
  27. Beriwal S, Gan GN, Heron DE, et al. Early clinical outcome with concurrent chemotherapy and extended-field, intensity-modulated radiotherapy for cervical cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007; 68(1): 166–171.
  28. Gupta M, Chopra S, Kunder S, et al. Early toxicity and treatment outcomes of extended field-intensity modulated radiotherapy for cervical cancer patients with para-aortic nodal metastasis. Ecancermedicalscience. 2019; 13: 957.
  29. Ctep.cancer.gov.2020. https://ctep.cancer.gov/protocolDevelopment/docs/recist_guideline.pdf.
  30. Hong JH, Tsai CS, Lai CH, et al. Recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of cervix after definitive radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004; 60(1): 249–257.



Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy