• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• v.16 no.4
• /
• pp.485-495
• /
• 1998

Purpose : The major goal of the therapy in the soft tissue sarcoma is to control both local and distant tumor. However, the technique of obtaining local control has changed significantly over the past few decades from more aggressive surgery to combined therapy including conservative surgery and radiation and/or chemotherapy. We retrospectively analyzed the treatment results of the postoperative radiation therapy of soft tissue sarcoma and its prognostic factor. Materials and Methods : Between March 1983 and June 1994, 50 patients with soft tissue sarcoma were treated with surgery and postoperative radiation therapy at Kang-Nam St. Mary's hospital. Complete follow up was possible for all patients with median follow up duration 50 months (range 6-162 months). There were 28 male and 32 female patients. Their age ranged from 6 to 83 with a median of 44 years. Extremity (58$\%$) was the most frequent site of occurrence followed by trunk (20$\%$) and head and neck (12$\%$). Histologically malignant fibrous histiocytoma (23$\%$), liposarcoma (17$\%$), malignant schwannoma (12$\%$) constitute 52$\%$ of the patients. Daily radiation therapy designed to treat all areas at a risk for tumor spread upto dose of 4500-5000 cGy. A shrinking field technique was then used and total 55-65 Gy was delivered to tumor bed. Twenty-five patients (42$\%$) received chemotherapy with various regimen in the postoperative period. Results : Total 41 patients failed either with local recurrence or with distant metastasis. There were 29 patients (48$\%$) of local recurrence. Four patients (7$\%$) developed simultaneous local recurrence and distant metastasis and 8 patients (13$\%$) developed only distant metastasis. Local recurrence rate was rather higher than of other reported series. This study included patients of gross residual, recurrent cases after previous operation, trunk and head and neck Primary This feature is likely explanation for the decreased local control rate. Five of 29 Patients who failed only locally were salvaged by re-excision and/or re-irradiation and remained free of disease. Factors affecting local control include histologic type, grade, stage, extent of operation and surgical margin involvement, lymph node metastasis (p<0.05). All 21 patients who failed distantly are dead with progressive disease at the time of this report. Our overall survival results are similar to those of larger series. Actuarial 5 year overall survival and disease free survival were 60.4 $\%$, 30.6$\%$ respectively. Grade, stage (being close association with grade), residual disease (negative margin, microscopic, gross) were significant as a predictor of survival in our series (p<0.05). Conclusion : Combined surgery and postoperative radiation therapy obtained 5 year survival rate comparable to that of radical surgery.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.30 no.1_2
• /
• pp.9-16
• /
• 2018

Purpose : Brain Stereotactic Radiosurgery can treat non-invasive diseases with high rates of complications due to surgical operations. However, brain stereotactic radiosurgery may be accompanied by radiation induced side effects such as fractionation radiation therapy because it uses radiation. The effects of Coplanar Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy(C-VMAT) and Non-Coplanar Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy(NC-VMAT) on surrounding normal tissues were analyzed in order to reduce the side effects caused fractionation radiation therapy such as head and neck. But, brain stereotactic radiosurgery these contents were not analyzed. In this study, we evaluated the usefulness of NC-VMAT by comparing and analyzing C-VMAT and NC-VMAT in patients who underwent brain stereotactic radiosurgery. Methods and materials : With C-VMAT and NC-VMAT, 13 treatment plans for brain stereotactic radiosurgery were established. The Planning Target Volume ranged from a minimum of 0.78 cc to a maximum of 12.26 cc, Prescription doses were prescribed between 15 and 24 Gy. Treatment machine was TrueBeam STx (Varian Medical Systems, USA). The energy used in the treatment plan was 6 MV Flattening Filter Free (6FFF) X-ray. The C-VMAT treatment plan used a half 2 arc or full 2 arc treatment plan, and the NC-VMAT treatment plan used 3 to 7 Arc 40 to 190 degrees. The angle of the couch was planned to be 3-7 angles. Results : The mean value of the maximum dose was $105.1{\pm}1.37%$ in C-VMAT and $105.8{\pm}1.71%$ in NC-VMAT. Conformity index of C-VMAT was $1.08{\pm}0.08$ and homogeneity index was $1.03{\pm}0.01$. Conformity index of NC-VMAT was $1.17{\pm}0.1$ and homogeneity index was $1.04{\pm}0.01$. $V_2$, $V_8$, $V_{12}$, $V_{18}$, $V_{24}$ of the brain were $176{\pm}149.36cc$, $31.50{\pm}25.03cc$, $16.53{\pm}12.63cc$, $8.60{\pm}6.87cc$ and $4.03{\pm}3.43cc$ in the C-VMAT and $135.55{\pm}115.93cc$, $24.34{\pm}17.68cc$, $14.74{\pm}10.97cc$, $8.55{\pm}6.79cc$, $4.23{\pm}3.48cc$. Conclusions : The maximum dose, conformity index, and homogeneity index showed no significant difference between C-VMAT and NC-VMAT. $V_2$ to $V_{18}$ of the brain showed a difference of at least 0.5 % to 48 %. $V_{19}$ to $V_{24}$ of the brain showed a difference of at least 0.4 % to 4.8 %. When we compare the mean value of $V_{12}$ that Radione-crosis begins to generate, NC-VMAT has about 12.2 % less amount than C-VMAT. These results suggest that if NC-VMAT is used, the volume of $V_2$ to $V_{18}$ can be reduced, which can reduce Radionecrosis.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.32
• /
• pp.7-15
• /
• 2020

Purpose: In modern radiotherapy technology, several methods of image guided radiation therapy (IGRT) are used to deliver accurate doses to tumor target locations and normal organs, including CBCT (Cone Beam Computed Tomography) and other devices, ExacTrac System, other than CBCT equipped with linear accelerators. In previous studies comparing the two systems, positional errors were analysed rearwards using Offline-view or evaluated only with a Yaw rotation with the X, Y, and Z axes. In this study, when using CBCT and ExacTrac to perform 6 Degree of the Freedom(DoF) Online IGRT in a treatment center with two equipment, the difference between the set-up calibration values seen in each system, the time taken for patient set-up, and the radiation usefulness of the imaging device is evaluated. Materials and Methods: In order to evaluate the difference between mobile calibrations and exposure radiation dose, the glass dosimetry and Rando Phantom were used for 11 cancer patients with head circumference from March to October 2017 in order to assess the difference between mobile calibrations and the time taken from Set-up to shortly before IGRT. CBCT and ExacTrac System were used for IGRT of all patients. An average of 10 CBCT and ExacTrac images were obtained per patient during the total treatment period, and the difference in 6D Online Automation values between the two systems was calculated within the ROI setting. In this case, the area of interest designation in the image obtained from CBCT was fixed to the same anatomical structure as the image obtained through ExacTrac. The difference in positional values for the six axes (SI, AP, LR; Rotation group: Pitch, Roll, Rtn) between the two systems, the total time taken from patient set-up to just before IGRT, and exposure dose were measured and compared respectively with the RandoPhantom. Results: the set-up error in the phantom and patient was less than 1mm in the translation group and less than 1.5° in the rotation group, and the RMS values of all axes except the Rtn value were less than 1mm and 1°. The time taken to correct the set-up error in each system was an average of 256±47.6sec for IGRT using CBCT and 84±3.5sec for ExacTrac, respectively. Radiation exposure dose by IGRT per treatment was measured at 37 times higher than ExacTrac in CBCT and ExacTrac at 2.468mGy and 0.066mGy at Oral Mucosa among the 7 measurement locations in the head and neck area. Conclusion: Through 6D online automatic positioning between the CBCT and ExacTrac systems, the set-up error was found to be less than 1mm, 1.02°, including the patient's movement (random error), as well as the systematic error of the two systems. This error range is considered to be reasonable when considering that the PTV Margin is 3mm during the head and neck IMRT treatment in the present study. However, considering the changes in target and risk organs due to changes in patient weight during the treatment period, it is considered to be appropriately used in combination with CBCT.