Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2010 Jun;51(3):229-36.
doi: 10.3325/cmj.2010.51.229.

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy versus para-aortic field radiotherapy to treat para-aortic lymph node metastasis in cervical cancer: prospective study

Xue-lian Du  1 , Xiu-gui Sheng, Tao Jiang, Hao Yu, Yu-feng Yan, Rong Gao, Chun-hua Lu, Qing-shui Li
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy versus para-aortic field radiotherapy to treat para-aortic lymph node metastasis in cervical cancer: prospective study

Xue-lian Du et al. Croat Med J. 2010 Jun.

Abstract

Aim: To compare dosimetry, efficacy, and toxicity of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with para-aortic field radiotherapy in patients with para-aortic lymph node (PALN) metastasis of cervical cancer.

Methods: This prospective study examined 60 patients with cervical cancer with PALN metastasis who underwent whole-pelvis radiotherapy followed by brachytherapy between November 1, 2004 and May 31, 2008. After 3 cycles of chemotherapy, patients were serially allocated into two groups and treated with IMRT or para-aortic field RT at doses of 58-68 Gy and 45-50 Gy, respectively. Treatment response was evaluated and toxicities were assessed. Patients in the IMRT group were treated with both para-aortic field RT and IMRT in order to compare the exposure dose of organs at risk.

Results: In the IMRT group, the mean dose delivered to the planning target volume was 67.5 Gy. At least 99% of the gross tumor volume received effective coverage and radical dose (median, 63.5 Gy; range, 54.5-66) during treatment. IMRT plans yielded better dose conformity to the target and better sparing of the spinal cord and small intestine than para-aortic field RT. The IMRT patients experienced less acute and chronic toxicities. The IMRT group also had higher 2- and 3-year survival rates than the para-aortic RT group (2-year, 58.8% vs 25.0%, P = 0.019; 3-year, 36.4% vs 15.6%, P = 0.016). However, no significant difference was found in 1-year survival (67.7% vs 51.3%, P =0.201). The median survival in the IMRT group was 25 months (range, 3 to 37 months). The actuarial overall survival, disease-free survival, and locoregional control rates at 2 years were 67%, 77%, and 88%, respectively, in the IMRT group.

Conclusions: IMRT provides better clinical outcomes than para-aortic field radiotherapy in patients with PALN metastasis. However, cervical local and distal recurrence remain a problem. Long-term follow-up and studies involving more patients are needed to confirm our results.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Isodose curves of a cross section, sagittal section, and coronary section of one representative patient for intensity-modulated radiation therapy (A) and one patient for para-aortic field radiotherapy (B).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Dose-volume histogram (DVH) of a representative patient for intensity-modulated radiation therapy (A) and para-aortic field radiotherapy (B): dash-double dot-dash – gross tumor volume; dash-dot-dash – planning target volume; dots – right kidney; em dashes – left kidney; solid line – spinal cord; en dashes – small intestine.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Kaplan-Meier survival curve showing overall survival for patients with recurrent cervical cancer: broken line – intensity-modulated radiation therapy group; dotted line – para-aortic field radiotherapy group.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Hong JH, Tsai CS, Lai CH, Chang TC, Wang CC, Chou HH, et al. Recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of cervix after definitive radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004;60:249–57. - PubMed
    1. Chou HH, Wang CC, Lai CH, Hong JH, Ng KK, Chang TC, et al. Isolated paraaortic lymph node recurrence after definitive irradiation for cervical carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001;51:442–8. - PubMed
    1. Fletcher GH, Rutledge FN. Extended field technique in the management of the cancer of the uterine cervix. Am J Roent Rad Therapy Nucle Med. 1972;114:116–22. - PubMed
    1. Ahamad A, D'Souza W, Salehpour M, Iyer R, Tucker SL, Jhingran A, et al. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy after hysterectomy: comparison with conventional treatment and sensitivity of the normal-tissue-sparing effect to margin size. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005;62:1117–24. - PubMed
    1. Carballo N, Gonzalez-Cortijo L, Gonzalez-Martin A, Rojo A, Chiva L. Indications for adjuvant radiotherapy treatment after surgery and novel modalities for treatment. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;110(3) Suppl 2:S41–4. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2008.07.009. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types