Article

A consensus-based guideline defining the clinical target volume for pelvic lymph nodes in external beam radiotherapy for uterine cervical cancer.

Department of Radiology, Graduate School of Medical Science, University of the Ryukyus, Nishihara-cho, Okinawa 903-0215, Japan.
Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology (Impact Factor: 1.75). 05/2010; 40(5):456-63. DOI: 10.1093/jjco/hyp191
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To develop a consensus-based guideline as well as an atlas defining pelvic nodal clinical target volumes in external beam radiotherapy for uterine cervical cancer.
A working subgroup to establish the consensus-based guideline on clinical target volumes for uterine cervical cancer was formulated by the Radiation Therapy Study Group of the Japan Clinical Oncology Group in July 2008. The working subgroup consisted of seven radiation oncologists. The process resulting in the consensus included a comparison of contouring on CT images among the members, reviewing of published textbooks and the relevant literature and a distribution analysis of metastatic nodes on computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging of actual patients.
The working subgroup defined the pelvic nodal clinical target volumes for cervical cancer and developed an associated atlas. As a basic criterion, the lymph node clinical target volume was defined as the area encompassed by a 7 mm margin around the applicable pelvic vessels. Modifications were made in each nodal area to cover adjacent adipose tissues at risk of microscopic nodal metastases. Although the bones and muscles were excluded, the bowel was not routinely excluded in the definition. Each of the following pelvic node regions was defined: common iliac, external iliac, internal iliac, obturator and presacral. Anatomical structures bordering each lymph node region were defined for six directions; anterior, posterior, lateral, medial, cranial and caudal. Drafts of the definition and the atlas were reviewed by members of the JCOG Gynecologic Cancer Study Group (GCSG).
We developed a consensus-based guideline defining the pelvic node clinical target volumes that included an atlas. The guideline will be continuously updated to reflect the ongoing changes in the field.

2 Followers
 · 
203 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To compare highly sophisticated intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) delivered by either helical tomotherapy (HT), RapidArc (RA), IMRT with protons (IMPT) in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. Twenty cervical cancer patients were irradiated using either conventional IMRT, VMAT or HT; ten received pelvic (PEL) and ten extended field irradiation (EFRT). The dose to the planning-target volume A (PTV_A: cervix, uterus, pelvic ± para-aortic lymph nodes) was 1.8/50.4 Gy. The SIB dose for the parametrium (PTV_B), was 2.12/59.36 Gy. MRI-guided brachytherapy was administered with 5 fractions up to 25 Gy. For EBRT, the lower target constraints were 95% of the prescribed dose in 95% of the target volume. The irradiated small bowel (SB) volumes were kept as low as possible. For every patient, target parameters as well as doses to the organs at risk (SB, bladder, rectum) were evaluated intra-individually for IMRT, HT, VMAT and IMPT. All techniques provided excellent target volume coverage, homogeneity, conformity. With IMPT, there was a significant reduction of the mean dose (Dmean) of the SB from 30.2 ± 4.0 Gy (IMRT); 27.6 ± 5.6 Gy (HT); 34.1 ± 7.0 (RA) to 18.6 ± 5.9 Gy (IMPT) for pelvic radiation and 26.3 ± 3.2 Gy (IMRT); 24.0 ± 4.1 (HT); 25.3 ± 3.7 (RA) to 13.8 ± 2.8 Gy (IMPT) for patients with EFRT, which corresponds to a reduction of 38-52% for the Dmean (SB). Futhermore, the low dose bath (V10Gy) to the small bowel was reduced by 50% with IMPT in comparison to all photon techniques. Furthermore, Dmean to the bladder and rectum was decresed by 7-9 Gy with IMPT in patents with pelvic radiation and EFRT. All modern techniques (were proved to be dosimetrically adequate regarding coverage, conformity and homogeneity of the target. Protons offered the best sparing of small bowel and rectum and therefore could contribute to a significant reduction of acute and late toxicity in cervical cancer treatment.
    Radiation Oncology 04/2015; 10(1):91. DOI:10.1186/s13014-015-0402-z · 2.36 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of this study was to compare the dosimetric parameters of whole-pelvis radiotherapy (WPRT) for cervical cancer between step-and-shoot IMRT (SaS-IMRT) and Helical Tomotherapy™ (HT). Retrospective analysis was performed on 20 cervical cancer patients who received WPRT in our center between January 2011 and January 2014. SaS-IMRT and HT treatment plans were generated for each patient. The dosimetric values for target coverage and organ-at-risk (OAR) sparing were compared according to the criteria of the International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements 83 (ICRU 83) guidelines. Differences in beam-on time (BOT) were also compared. All the PTV dosimetric parameters (D5%, D50% and D95%) for the HT plan were (statistically significantly) of better quality than those for the SaS-IMRT plan (P-value < 0.001 in all respects). HT was also significantly more accurate than SaS-IMRT with respect to the D98% and Dmean of the CTV (P-values of 0.008 and <0.001, respectively). The median Conformity Index (CI) did not differ between the two plans (P-value = 0.057). However, the Uniformity Index for HT was significantly better than that for SaS-IMRT (P-value < 0.001). The median of D50% for the bladder, rectum and small bowel were significantly lower in HT planning than SaS-IMRT (P-value < 0.001). For D2%, we found that HT provided better sparing to the rectum and bladder (P-value < 0.001). However, the median of D2% for the small bowel was comparable for both plans. The median of Dmax of the head of the left femur was significantly lower in the HT plan, but this did not apply for the head of the right femur. BOT for HT was significantly shorter than for SaS-IMRT (P-value < 0.001). HT provided highly accurate plans, with more homogeneous PTV coverage and superior sparing of OARs than SaS-IMRT. In addition, HT enabled a shorter delivery time than SaS-IMRT.
    Journal of Radiation Research 02/2015; 56(3). DOI:10.1093/jrr/rrv004 · 1.69 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective: To assess the patterns of recurrence in cervical cancer patients treated with pelvic nodal clinical target volume at L4-L5 junction instead of aortic bifurcation. Methods: Records of patients with locally advanced cervical cancer treated with chemo-radiation were reviewed. Patients treated with standard pelvic fields (superior border of the field at L4/L5 junction), without any radiological evidence of regional lymphadenopathy (< 10 mm) were included in the study. The level of aortic bifurcation was retrospectively documented on computed tomography. Patterns of recurrences were correlated to the aortic bifurcation and the superior border of the radiation fields (L4/L5). Results: Aortic bifurcation was above the radiation fields (above L4/5) in 82 of 116 (70.7%) patients. Of the nine patients that recurred above the radiation field, 5 (55%) were above L4/5 failures, i. e. between aortic bifurcation and L4/5, and 4 (45%) had para-aortic failures. On retrospective analysis, 16 patients were found to have subcentimeter lymph nodes and higher nodal failures (7/16) were observed in patients with subcentimeter regional lymph nodes at diagnosis. Conclusions: Superior border of nodal clinical target volume should ideally include the aortic bifurcation instead of L4-L5 inter space in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. Radiotherapy fields need to be defined cautiously in patients with subcentimeter pelvic lymph nodes.
    Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology 08/2014; 44(10). DOI:10.1093/jjco/hyu107 · 1.75 Impact Factor