• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• v.7 no.1
• /
• pp.81-83
• /
• 1989

This study, involving thirty-two patients with carcinoma of uterine cervix treated by high dose rate intracavitary irradiation using a remotely controlled afterloading system, compares the doss at point A and 8 with the Curie-minutes prescription. A linear least-square regression analysis was used to compare the two sets of date. Correlation coefficients between doses at points A and B and the Ci-min prescription are 0.92 (p<0.001) and 0.90 (p<0.001), respectively, and linear relationship is observed between these two system. The limitation and significance of the comparison of the two approaches to intracavitary dosimetry is discussed.

• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• v.8 no.2
• /
• pp.231-239
• /
• 1990

From May 1979 through December 1981 a total of 524 patients with carcinoma of the uterine cervix were treated by radiation therapy with curative intent. Among the 524 patients, 350 were treated with a high-dose-rate (HDR), remote-controlled, afterloading intracavitary irradiation (ICR) system using a cobalt source (Ralstron), and 168 patients received a low-dose-rate (LDR) ICR using a radium source. External beam irradiation with a total dose of 40-50 Gy to the whole pelvis followed by intracavitary irradiation with a total dose of 30-39 Gy in 10-13 fractions to point A was the treatment protocol. ICR was given three times a week with a dose of 3 Gy per fraction. Five-year actuarial survival rates in the HDR-ICR group were $77.6{\%}$ in stage IB (N=20), $68.2{\%}$ in stage II (N=182), and $50.9{\%}$ in stage III (N=148). In LDR-ICR group, 5-year survival rates were $87.5{\%}$ in stage IB (N=22), $66.3{\%}$ in stage II (N=91), and $55.4{\%}$ in stage III (N=52). Survival rates showed a statistically significant difference by stage, but there was no significant difference between the two ICR groups. Late bowel complications after radiotherapy were noted in $3.7{\%}$ of the HDR-ICR group and $8.4{\%}$ of the LDR-ICR group. There was no severe complication requiring surgical management. The incidence of bladder complications was $1.4{\%}$ in the HDR-ICR group and $2.4{\%}$ in the LDR-ICR group. The application of HDR-ICR was technically simple and easily performed on an outpatient basis without anesthesia, and the patients tolerated it very well. Radiation exposure to personnel was virtually nil in contrast to that of LDR-ICR. Within a given period of time, more patients can be treated with HDR-ICR because of the short treatment time. Therefore, the HDR-ICR system is highly recommended for a cancer center, particularly one with a large number of patients to be treated. In order to achieve an improved outcome, however, the optimum dose-fractionation schedule of HDR-ICR and optimum combination of intracavitary irradiation with external beam irradiation should be determined through an extensive protocol.