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
. 2011 Jul 1;80(3):661-8.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.03.024. Epub 2010 Jul 17.

How does intensity-modulated radiotherapy versus conventional two-dimensional radiotherapy influence the treatment results in nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients?

Affiliations
Comparative Study

How does intensity-modulated radiotherapy versus conventional two-dimensional radiotherapy influence the treatment results in nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients?

Shu-Zhen Lai et al. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. .

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the results of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with those of two-dimensional conventional radiotherapy (2D-CRT) in the treatment of patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC).

Methods and materials: A retrospective review of data from 1,276 patients with biopsy-proven, nonmetastatic NPC was performed. All patients had undergone magnetic resonance imaging and were staged according to the sixth edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging criteria. Radiotherapy was the primary treatment for all patients.

Results: Of the 1,276 patients, 512 were treated with IMRT and 764 with 2D-CRT. The 5-year actuarial local relapse-free survival (LRFS), the nodal relapse-free survival (NRFS), the distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and the disease-free survival (DFS) rates were 92.7%, 97.0%, 84.0%, and 75.9%, respectively, for the IMRT group, and 86.8%, 95.5%, 82.6%, and 71.4%, respectively, for the 2D-CRT group. In stage T1 patients, improvement of LRFS in the IMRT group was even significantly higher than in the 2D-CRT group (100% vs. 94.4%; p = 0.016). A trend of improvement of DFS was observed in the IMRT group compared with the 2D-CRT group but without reaching statistical significance. NRFS and DMFS rates were similar in the two groups.

Conclusions: A greater improvement of treatment results with IMRT than with 2D-CRT was demonstrated primarily by achieving a higher local tumor control rate in NPC patients, especially in the early T stage patients. The goal of better control of both local failure in advanced, nonmetastatic NPC patients and of distant failure should be addressed in future studies.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources