Reduced Risk of Lymphedema With Intensity-modulated Radiation Therapy Compared With 3-dimensional Conformal Radiation Therapy in Patients With Cervical Cancer Who Received Postoperative Pelvic Radiation Therapy
- PMID: 37231540
- DOI: 10.1097/COC.0000000000001018
Reduced Risk of Lymphedema With Intensity-modulated Radiation Therapy Compared With 3-dimensional Conformal Radiation Therapy in Patients With Cervical Cancer Who Received Postoperative Pelvic Radiation Therapy
Abstract
Objectives: To compare the long-term adverse events of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with those of 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) in patients with intermediate-risk and high-risk uterine cervical cancer who underwent postoperative pelvic radiation therapy (PORT).
Methods: We reviewed the medical records of 177 patients with cervical cancer who underwent radical surgery and PORT. IMRT and 3D-CRT were administered to 93 and 84 patients, respectively. Follow-up and toxicity assessments were then carried out.
Results: The median follow-up period was 63 months (range: 3 to 177). There was a significant difference in the follow-up period between the IMRT and 3D-CRT cohorts (median: 59 vs. 112 mo, P <0.0001). The crude incidences of acute grade 2+ and grade 3+ gastrointestinal toxicities were significantly lower with IMRT than with 3D-CRT (22.6% vs. 48.1%, P =0.002, and 3.2% vs. 11.1%, P =0.04, respectively). The Kaplan-Meier estimates of late toxicities revealed that IMRT significantly reduced grade 2+ genitourinary (GU) toxicity and lower-extremity lymphedema ([LEL] requiring intervention) compared with 3D-CRT ([6.8% vs. 15.2% at 5-year, P =0.048] and [3.1% vs. 14.6% at 5-year, P =0.0029], respectively). IMRT was the only significant predictor of reducing LEL risk.
Conclusions: The risks of acute gastrointestinal toxicity, late GU toxicity, and LEL from PORT for cervical cancer were reduced by IMRT. Lower inguinal doses may have contributed to a lower risk of developing LEL, which should be validated in future studies.
Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
References
-
- Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71:209–249.
-
- National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Cervical Cancer (Version 1.2023). Accessed January 18, 2023. https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/cervical.pdf .
-
- Yamashita H, Nakagawa K, Shiraishi K, et al. Comparison between conventional surgery and radiotherapy for FIGO stage I-II cervical carcinoma: a retrospective Japanese study. Gynecol Oncol. 2005;97:834–839.
-
- Peters WA III, Liu PY, Barrett RJ II, et al. Concurrent chemotherapy and pelvic radiation therapy compared with pelvic radiation therapy alone as adjuvant therapy after radical surgery in high-risk early-stage cancer of the cervix. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18:1606–1613.
-
- Sedlis A, Bundy BN, Rotman MZ, et al. A randomized trial of pelvic radiation therapy versus no further therapy in selected patients with stage IB carcinoma of the cervix after radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy: a gynecologic oncology group study. Gynecol Oncol. 1999;73:177–183.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Research Materials
