• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.127-135
• /
• 2001

Purpose : This study is a prospective randomized clinical trial comparing the efficacy and complication of anti-emetic drugs for prevention of nausea and vomiting after radiotherapy which has moderate emetogenic potential. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the anti-emetic efficacy of ondansetron $(Zofran^{\circledR})$ 8 mg bid dose (Group O) is better than the efficacy of metoclopramide 5 mg lid dose (Group M) in patients undergoing fractionated radiotherapy to the abdominal region. Materials and Methods : Study entry was restricted to those patients who met the following eligibility criteria: histologically confirmed malignant disease; no distant metastasis; performance status of not more than ECOG grade 2; no previous chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Between March 1997 and February 1998, 60 patients enrolled in this study. All patients signed a written statement of informed consent prior to enrollment. Blinding was maintained by dosing identical number of tablets including one dose of matching placebo for Group O. The extent of nausea, appetite loss, and the number of emetic episodes were recorded everyday using diary card. The mean score of nausea, appetite loss and the mean number of emetic episodes were obtained in a weekly interval. Results : Prescription error occurred in one patient. And diary cards have not returned in 3 patients due to premature refusal of treatment. Card from one patient was excluded from the analysis because she had a history of treatment for neurosis. As a result, the analysis consisted of 55 patients. Patient characteristics and radiotherapy characteristics were similar except mean age was $52.9{\pm}11.2$ in group M, $46.5{\pm}9.5$ in group O. The difference of age was statistically significant. The mean score of nausea, appetite loss and emetic episodes in a weekly interval was higher in group M than O. In group M, the symptoms were most significant at 5th week. In a panel data analysis using mixed procedure, treatment group was only significant factor detecting the difference of weekly score for all three symptoms. Ondansetron $(Zofran^{\circledR})$ 8 mg bid dose and metoclopramide 5 mg lid dose were well tolerated without significant side effects. There were no clinically important changes In vital signs or clinical laboratory parameters with either drug. Conclusion : Concerning the fact that patients with younger age have higher emetogenic potential, there are possibilities that age difference between two treatment groups lowered the statistical power of analysis. There were significant difference favoring ondansetron group with respect to the severity of nausea, vomiting and loss of appetite. We concluded that ondansetron is more effective anti-emetic agents in the control of radiotherapy-induced nausea, vomiting, loss of appetite without significant toxicity, compared with commonly used drug, i.e., metoclopramide. However, there were patients suffering emesis despite the administration of ondansetron. The possible strategies to improve the prevention and the treatment of radiotherapy-induced emesis must be further studied.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.23 no.2
• /
• pp.91-98
• /
• 2012

Verification of internal organ motion during treatment and its feedback is essential to accurate dose delivery to the moving target. We developed an offline based internal organ motion verification system (IMVS) using cine EPID images and evaluated its accuracy and availability through phantom study. For verification of organ motion using live cine EPID images, a pattern matching algorithm using an internal surrogate, which is very distinguishable and represents organ motion in the treatment field, like diaphragm, was employed in the self-developed analysis software. For the system performance test, we developed a linear motion phantom, which consists of a human body shaped phantom with a fake tumor in the lung, linear motion cart, and control software. The phantom was operated with a motion of 2 cm at 4 sec per cycle and cine EPID images were obtained at a rate of 3.3 and 6.6 frames per sec (2 MU/frame) with $1,024{\times}768$ pixel counts in a linear accelerator (10 MVX). Organ motion of the target was tracked using self-developed analysis software. Results were compared with planned data of the motion phantom and data from the video image based tracking system (RPM, Varian, USA) using an external surrogate in order to evaluate its accuracy. For quantitative analysis, we analyzed correlation between two data sets in terms of average cycle (peak to peak), amplitude, and pattern (RMS, root mean square) of motion. Averages for the cycle of motion from IMVS and RPM system were $3.98{\pm}0.11$ (IMVS 3.3 fps), $4.005{\pm}0.001$ (IMVS 6.6 fps), and $3.95{\pm}0.02$ (RPM), respectively, and showed good agreement on real value (4 sec/cycle). Average of the amplitude of motion tracked by our system showed $1.85{\pm}0.02$ cm (3.3 fps) and $1.94{\pm}0.02$ cm (6.6 fps) as showed a slightly different value, 0.15 (7.5% error) and 0.06 (3% error) cm, respectively, compared with the actual value (2 cm), due to time resolution for image acquisition. In analysis of pattern of motion, the value of the RMS from the cine EPID image in 3.3 fps (0.1044) grew slightly compared with data from 6.6 fps (0.0480). The organ motion verification system using sequential cine EPID images with an internal surrogate showed good representation of its motion within 3% error in a preliminary phantom study. The system can be implemented for clinical purposes, which include organ motion verification during treatment, compared with 4D treatment planning data, and its feedback for accurate dose delivery to the moving target.