From low-dose-rate to high-dose-rate brachytherapy in lip carcinoma: Equivalent results but fewer complications

Guinot, J.L.; Arribas, L.; Tortajada, M.I.; Crispín, V.; Carrascosa, M.; Santos, Miguel; Mut, Alejandro; Vendrell, Juan Bosco; Pesudo, C.; Chust, M.

doi:10.1016/j.brachy.2013.05.007

Cited by 33 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…LDR and HDR brachytherapy have produced similar results in three intramural studies with local control rates in the 90-95% range and similar toxicity [28][29][30]. Guinot et al compared 99 LDR cases and 104 HDR cases with similar local control (95%) but fewer complications using HDR and no case of bone or soft tissue necrosis in the last group [31]. PDR is effective with local control of 94% [32] Most cases are treated with brachytherapy alone although elective cervical treatment should be considered in lip tumors larger than 2 cm or with skin or commissure involvement [33].…”

Section: Lip Cancermentioning

confidence: 99%

GEC-ESTRO ACROP recommendations for head & neck brachytherapy in squamous cell carcinomas: 1st update – Improvement by cross sectional imaging based treatment planning and stepping source technology

Kovács

Martı́nez-Monge

Budrukkar

et al. 2017

Radiotherapy and Oncology

124

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Head and Neck Working Group of the GEC-ESTRO (Groupe Européen de Curiethérapie - European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology) published in 2009 the consensus recommendations for low-dose rate, pulsed-dose rate and high-dose rate brachytherapy in head & neck cancers. The use of brachytherapy in combination with external beam radiotherapy and/or surgery was also covered as well as the use of brachytherapy in previously irradiated patients. Given the developments in the field, these recommendations needed to be updated to reflect up-to-date knowledge. The present update does not repeat basic knowledge which was published in the first recommendation but covers in a general part developments in (1) dose and fractionation, (2) aspects of treatment selection for brachytherapy alone versus combined BT+EBRT and (3) quality assurance issues. Detailed expert committee opinion intends to help the clinical practice in lip-, oral cavity-, oropharynx-, nasopharynx-, and superficial cancers. Different aspects of adjuvant treatment techniques and their results are discussed, as well the possibilities of salvage brachytherapy applications.

show abstract

Section: Lip Cancermentioning

confidence: 99%

GEC-ESTRO ACROP recommendations for head & neck brachytherapy in squamous cell carcinomas: 1st update – Improvement by cross sectional imaging based treatment planning and stepping source technology

Kovács

Martı́nez-Monge

Budrukkar

et al. 2017

Radiotherapy and Oncology

124

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…6,65,78,84,85 A thorough literature review on this topic suggests that appropriate use of any of the 4 major radiation modalities results in similar local control and cosmetic outcome. 3,4,9,28,31,[64][65][66]68,[72][73][74][75][76][77][78][79][80][81][82][83][84][86][87][88] Thus, the decision of which modality and fractionation scheme to use should be based on both tumor characteristics (eg, shape, contour, depth, and location) and normal tissue considerations.…”

Section: Key Questions and Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Definitive and Postoperative Radiation Therapy for Basal and Squamous Cell Cancers of the Skin: Executive Summary of an American Society for Radiation Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline

Likhacheva

Awan

Barker

et al. 2020

Practical Radiation Oncology

145

158

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Merck; past honoraria and travel expenses from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network; a past advisory board position with Regeneron; and past honoraria from the University of Florida and University of Rochester. Dr Bhatnagar reports a position of state chapter president for the Arizona Radiologic Society; stock with Cancer Treatment Services International; and consulting and research for Icad. Dr Devlin is the task force chair and reports membership of the Massachusetts Medical Society Finance and Audit Committee and past honoraria, travel expenses, and advisory board membership for Sirtex. Dr Geiger, an American Society of Clinical Oncology representative, reports research and advisory board membership for Regeneron and research for Genentech/Roche. Dr Likhacheva is task force vice chair and reports spouse employment with Reflexion and travel expenses from the Russian Society of Clinical Oncology. Drs Brady (Society of Surgical Oncology representative), Buzurovic, Parvathaneni, and Zaky reported no disclosures. Disclaimer and Adherence: American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) guidelines present scientific, health, and safety information and may reflect scientific or medical opinion. They are available to ASTRO members and the public for educational and informational purposes only. Commercial use of any content in this guideline without the prior written consent of ASTRO is strictly prohibited. Adherence to this guideline does not ensure successful treatment in every situation. This guideline should not be deemed inclusive of all proper methods of care or exclusive of other methods reasonably directed to obtaining the same results. The physician must make the ultimate judgment regarding therapy considering all circumstances presented by the patient. ASTRO assumes no liability for the information, conclusions, and findings contained in its guidelines. This guideline cannot be assumed to apply to the use of these interventions performed in the context of clinical trials. This guideline is based on information available at the time the task force conducted its research and discussions on this topic. There may be new developments that are not reflected in this guideline and that may, over time, be a basis for ASTRO to revisit and update the guideline.

show abstract

“…Due to the necessity of performing visually controlled application, brachytherapy in this area is only possible in case of lip cancer, oral cavity cancer, selected neoplasms of nasopharynx, nasal cavity and nasopharynx, as well as in case of repeated radiotherapy of nodular relapses in the head and neck area [7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14]. …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Image-guided high-dose-rate brachytherapy of head and neck – a case series study

Cisek

Kieszko

Brzozowska

et al. 2016

jcb

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe aim of the study was the evaluation of image guided transdermal application of interstitial brachytherapy in patients undergoing repeated irradiation for relapsed local tumor of the head and neck area.Material and methodsThe article describes transdermal application of interstitial high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy in 4 patients treated due to relapsed local tumor in soft palate, submandibular area, laryngopharynx, as well as pterygoid muscles and maxillary sinus. The application was conducted under continuous computed tomography (CT)-image guidance (CT fluoroscopy). Patients qualified for this type of treatment had neoplastic lesions located deep under the skin surface. Because of their location, access to the lesions was limited, and the risk of damaging the adjacent tissues such as vessels and nerves was high. The following parameters have been evaluated: clinical response using RECIST 1.1, incidence of perisurgical complications using CTCAE 4.0 and the frequency of occurrence of radiotherapy related early morbidity using RTOG.ResultsVarious radiation schemes were used, from 3 to 5 fractions of 3.5-5 Gy. The median total dose (D90) was 20.6 Gy. Biologic effective dose (BED) and equivalent 2 Gy (DEQ2) median doses were 30.4 Gy and 25.3 Gy, respectively. In the follow-up period of 3-7 months (the median value of 3.5 months), 2 patients had partial regression of the disease and in 2 others the neoplastic process was stabilized. None of the patients had serious complications of treatment (of 3rd degree or higher).ConclusionsComputed tomography-image guided brachytherapy proved to be a safe method of treatment in patients with local relapse in sites, in which traditional visually controlled application was impossible due to risk of complications. Despite short observation period and small study group, it seems justified to conduct prospective studies for the evaluation of efficacy and safety of CT-image guided brachytherapy.

show abstract

From low-dose-rate to high-dose-rate brachytherapy in lip carcinoma: Equivalent results but fewer complications

Cited by 33 publications

References 18 publications

GEC-ESTRO ACROP recommendations for head & neck brachytherapy in squamous cell carcinomas: 1st update – Improvement by cross sectional imaging based treatment planning and stepping source technology

GEC-ESTRO ACROP recommendations for head & neck brachytherapy in squamous cell carcinomas: 1st update – Improvement by cross sectional imaging based treatment planning and stepping source technology

Definitive and Postoperative Radiation Therapy for Basal and Squamous Cell Cancers of the Skin: Executive Summary of an American Society for Radiation Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline

Image-guided high-dose-rate brachytherapy of head and neck – a case series study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About