• Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.559-562
• /
• 2012

Serum alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) is a significant marker for clinical diagnosis and prognosis evaluation in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients. However, some proportion of liver cancer patients are AFP-negative (AFP ${\leq}$20ng/ml). In order to study the differences between clinicopathological factors and prognosis of alpha-fetoprotein negative and positive patients, a total of 114 cases (41 AFP-negative and 73 AFP-positive) were selected for our research. By systematically statistical analysis, the results demonstrated that compared with AFP-negative patients, AFP-positive examples were more likely to feature cirrhosis nodules, non-complete neoplasm capsules, and a poor Edmondson-steiner grade. Furthermore, AFP-negative patients demonstrated a favorable long-term prognosis. By univariate analysis and multivariate analysis with Cox's proportional hazards model, multiple tumors were found to be independent risk factors for worse survival of AFP negative patients; however, less tumor-free margins, multiple tumors and Edmondson-steiner grades III/IV, proved to be independent risk factors leading to a poor prognosis of AFP positive cases. Finally, we can infer that high levels of AFP signify a highly malignant tumor and unfavorable prognosis.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.24 no.2
• /
• pp.157-165
• /
• 2012

Purpose: We evaluated usefulness of abdominal compressor for stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients and hepato-biliary cancer and metastatic liver cancer patients. Materials and Methods: From November 2011 to March 2012, we selected HCC patients who gained reduction of diaphragm movement >1 cm through abdominal compressor (diaphragm control, elekta, sweden) for HT (Hi-Art Tomotherapy, USA). We got planning computed tomography (CT) images and 4 dimensional (4D) images through 4D CT (somatom sensation, siemens, germany). The gross tumor volume (GTV) included a gross tumor and margins considering tumor movement. The planning target volume (PTV) included a 5 to 7 mm safety margin around GTV. We classified patients into two groups according to distance between tumor and organs at risk (OAR, stomach, duodenum, bowel). Patients with the distance more than 1 cm are classified as the 1st group and they received SBRT of 4 or 5 fractions. Patients with the distance less than 1 cm are classified as the 2nd group and they received tomotherapy of 20 fractions. Megavoltage computed tomography (MVCT) were performed 4 or 10 fractions. When we verify a MVCT fusion considering priority to liver than bone-technique. We sent MVCT images to Mim_vista (Mimsoftware, ver .5.4. USA) and we re-delineated stomach, duodenum and bowel to bowel_organ and delineated liver. First, we analyzed MVCT images to check the setup variation. Second we compared dose difference between tumor and OAR based on adaptive dose through adaptive planning station and Mim_vista. Results: Average setup variation from MVCT was $-0.66{\pm}1.53$ mm (left-right) $0.39{\pm}4.17$ mm (superior-inferior), $0.71{\pm}1.74$ mm (anterior-posterior), $-0.18{\pm}0.30$ degrees (roll). 1st group ($d{\geq}1$) and 2nd group (d<1) were similar to setup variation. 1st group ($d{\geq}1$) of $V_{diff3%}$ (volume of 3% difference of dose) of GTV through adaptive planing station was $0.78{\pm}0.05%$, PTV was $9.97{\pm}3.62%$, $V_{diff5%}$ was GTV 0.0%, PTV was $2.9{\pm}0.95%$, maximum dose difference rate of bowel_organ was $-6.85{\pm}1.11%$. 2nd Group (d<1) GTV of $V_{diff3%}$ was $1.62{\pm}0.55%$, PTV was $8.61{\pm}2.01%$, $V_{diff5%}$ of GTV was 0.0%, PTV was $5.33{\pm}2.32%$, maximum dose difference rate of bowel_organ was $28.33{\pm}24.41%$. Conclusion: Despite we saw diaphragm movement more than 5 mm with flouroscopy after use an abdominal compressor, average setup_variation from MVCT was less than 5 mm. Therefore, we could estimate the range of setup_error within a 5 mm. Target's dose difference rate of 1st group ($d{\geq}1$) and 2nd group (d<1) were similar, while 1st group ($d{\geq}1$) and 2nd group (d<1)'s bowel_organ's maximum dose difference rate's maximum difference was more than 35%, 1st group ($d{\geq}1$)'s bowel_organ's maximum dose difference rate was smaller than 2nd group (d<1). When applicating SBRT to HCC, abdominal compressor is useful to control diaphragm movement in selected patients with more than 1 cm bowel_organ distance.