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
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2013 May;27(9):462-4.

[Comparison of side effects of intensity modulated radiotherapy and conventional radiotherapy in 69 cases with nasopharyngeal carcinoma]

[Article in Chinese]
Affiliations
  • PMID: 23898610
Randomized Controlled Trial

[Comparison of side effects of intensity modulated radiotherapy and conventional radiotherapy in 69 cases with nasopharyngeal carcinoma]

[Article in Chinese]
Hailin Zhong et al. Lin Chuang Er Bi Yan Hou Tou Jing Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2013 May.

Abstract

Objective: To compare the side effects of intensity modulated radiotherapy(IMRT) and conventional radiotherapy in nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

Method: Sixty nine cases of nasopharyngeal carcinoma were random selected by stages,with 32 cases in IMRT group and 37 cases in conventional radiotherapy group. The target areas in IMRT group were nasopharyngeal carcinoma, parapharyngeal space and neck lymphatic area with the fractional dose of 2.00-2.12 Gy per time, for 33-35 times. The cases in conventional radiotherapy group were given facio-cervical field radiation, DT 40-60 Gy per time, for 20-30 times. The reinforcing dosage in lateral facial field increased to DT 70 Gy in the nasopharyngeal area. The prophylactic irradiation dose of the neck was DT 50-55 Gy.

Result: The incidence of dry mouth one year after radiotherapy in the IMRT and conventional radiotherapy groups were 9.38% (3/32) and 94.59% (35/37) respectively, with a significant difference between the two groups (P < 0.01). The incidence of difficulty in opening mouth in the IMRT and conventional radiotherapy groups were 6.25% (2/32) and 72.97% (27/37) respectively, with a significant difference between the two groups(P < 0.01).

Conclusion: Compared with the conventional radiotherapy, IMRT may improve the control rate and obviously de creases the side effects. It could be recommended for the radiotherapy of nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources