No abstract

PURPOSE To compare clinical outcomes of image-based versus non-image-based interstitial brachytherapy (IBBT) for vaginal cancer METHODS AND MATERIALS Of 72 patients with vaginal cancer treated with brachytherapy (BT), 47 had image guidance (CT=31, MRI=16) and 25 did not. Kaplan-Meier (KM) estimates were generated for any recurrence, local control (LC), disease-free interval (DFI), and overall survival (OS) and Cox models were used to assess prognostic factors. RESULTS Median age was 66 and median follow-up time was 24 months. Median cumulative EQD2 dose was 80.8 Gy in the non-IBBT group and 77 Gy in the IBBT group. For non-IBBT versus IBBT, the 2-year KM LC was 71% vs. 93% (p=0.03); DFI was 54% vs. 86% (p=0.04); and OS 52% vs. 82% (p=0.35). On multivariate analysis, IBBT was associated with better DFI (HR 0.24, 95% CI 0.07–0.73). Having any 2 or more of chemotherapy, high-dose-rate (HDR) BT or IBBT (temporally correlated variables) significantly reduced risk of relapse (HR=0.33, 95% CI= 0.13–0.83), compared to having none of these factors. CONCLUSION Over time, the use of chemotherapy, HDR and IBBT has increased in vaginal cancer. The combination of these factors resulted in the highest rates of disease control. Image-guided brachytherapy for vaginal cancer patients maximizes disease control.

Objective The purpose was to compare local control (LC), overall survival (OS) and dose to the organs at risk (OAR) in women with locally advanced cervical cancer treated with MR-guided versus CT-guided interstitial brachytherapy (BT). Methods 56 patients (29 MR, 27 CT) were treated with high-dose-rate (HDR) interstitial BT between 2005–2015. The MR patients had been prospectively enrolled on a Phase II clinical trial. Data were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier (K-M) and Cox proportional hazards statistical modeling in JMP® & R®. Results Median follow-up time was 19.7 months (MR group) and 18.4 months (CT group). There were no statistically significant differences in patient age at diagnosis, histology, percent with tumor size >4 cm, grade, FIGO stage or lymph node involvement between the groups. Patients in the MR group had more lymphovascular involvement compared to patients in the CT group (p<0.01). When evaluating plans generated, there were no statistically significant differences in median cumulative dose to the high-risk clinical target volume or the OAR. 2-year K-M LC rates for MR-based and CT-based treatments were 96% and 87%, respectively (log-rank p=0.65). At 2 years, OS was significantly better in the MR-guided cohort (84% vs. 56%, p=0.036). On multivariate analysis, squamous histology was associated with longer OS (HR 0.23, 95% CI 0.07–0.72) in a model with MR BT (HR 0.35, 95% CI 0.08–1.18). Conclusion In this population of locally advanced cervical-cancer patients, MR-guided HDR BT resulted in estimated 96% 2-year local control and excellent early survival rates. Squamous cell histology was the most significant predictor for survival.

No abstract

No abstract

ObjectiveThe role of F-18-fluorothymidine (FLT) PET-CT imaging in the evaluation of gynecologic cancers has not been established. We sought to evaluate (FLT) PET-CT imaging in gynecologic cancers by comparing standard uptake values (SUVs) of FLT with F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET in the primary tumor at diagnosis, and assess FLT uptake immediately following concurrent chemoradiotherapy (chemoRT).MethodsIn this pilot study, patients treated for cervical (5) or vaginal (1) cancer underwent FLT-PET and FDG-PET scanning at diagnosis (FLT1 and FDG1). Five patients (4 cervical and 1 vaginal) also underwent FLT-PET within 1–3 weeks after chemoRT before brachytherapy (FLT2). Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare the FLT1 and FDG1 parameters.ResultsMedian age at diagnosis was 61-years (range, 33–72). Cervical cancers were staged as IB2 (n = 1, 20%), IIB (n = 1, 20%), IIIB (n = 1, 20%) and IVA (n = 2, 40%) and the single vaginal cancer was staged IIIB. The most common histology was squamous cell carcinoma (n = 3, 50%) followed by adenocarcinoma (n = 2, 33%) and clear-cell adenosquamous carcinoma (n = 1, 17%). Median tumor SUVmax at diagnosis was 7.8 on FLT1-PET (3.9–14.2) versus 11.6 (5.9–23.2) on FDG1-PET (p = 0.15). Tumor SUVmax of FLT declined 54%–100% after chemoRT.ConclusionThe tumor SUV of FLT at diagnosis was lower than that of FDG-PET. FLT uptake was markedly decreased after chemoRT. Results indicate that there may not be a significant effect of inflammation on FLT uptake in gynecologic cancers. FLT may be a useful tool when assessing the effects of chemoRT on gynecologic malignancies and planning for postchemoRT brachytherapy treatments.

The authors regret that there was an error in Table 2 of their paper. Please find below the correct version of the table. The online version has also been updated.The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.

No abstract