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
. 2017 Jul;146(1):20-26.
doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.04.016. Epub 2017 Apr 27.

Prophylactic lower para-aortic irradiation using intensity-modulated radiotherapy mitigates the risk of para-aortic recurrence in locally advanced cervical cancer: A 10-year institutional experience

Jie Lee  1 , Jhen-Bin Lin  2 , Chih-Long Chang  3 , Ya-Ting Jan  4 , Fang-Ju Sun  5 , Meng-Hao Wu  6 , Yu-Jen Chen  7
Affiliations

Prophylactic lower para-aortic irradiation using intensity-modulated radiotherapy mitigates the risk of para-aortic recurrence in locally advanced cervical cancer: A 10-year institutional experience

Jie Lee et al. Gynecol Oncol. 2017 Jul.

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the effects of prophylactic sub-renal vein radiotherapy (SRVRT) using intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for cervical cancer.

Methods: A total of 206 patients with FIGO stage IB2-IVA cervical cancer and negative para-aortic lymph nodes (PALNs) who underwent pelvic IMRT (PRT) or SRVRT between 2004 and 2013 at our institution were reviewed. SRVRT cranially extended the PRT field for PALNs up to the left renal vein level. The prescribed dose was consistent 50.4Gy in 28 fractions.

Results: Overall, 110 and 96 patients underwent PRT and SRVRT, respectively. The SRVRT group had more advanced disease based on FIGO stage and positive pelvic lymph nodes (PLNs). The median follow-up time was 60months (range, 7-143). For the total study population, the 5-year PALN recurrence-free survival (PARFS) and overall survival (OS) for PRT vs. SRVRT were 87.6% vs. 97.9% (p=0.03) and 74.5% vs. 87.8% (p=0.04), respectively. In patients with FIGO III-IVA or positive PLNs, the 5-year PARFS and OS for PRT vs. SRVRT were 80.1% vs. 96.4% (p=0.02) and 58.1% vs. 83.5% (p=0.012), respectively. However, there were no significant differences in these outcomes for patients with FIGO IB-IIB and negative PLNs. In a multivariate analysis, only SRVRT was associated with better PARFS (HR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.06-0.78; p=0.02). The SRVRT did not significantly increase severe late toxicities.

Conclusion: Prophylactic SRVRT using IMRT reduced PALN recurrence with tolerable toxicities, supporting the application of risk-based radiation fields for cervical cancer.

Keywords: Cervical cancer; Intensity-modulated radiation therapy; Para-aortic irradiation.

PubMed Disclaimer