Search

Copyright of China Oncology is the property of Editorial Board of China Oncology and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of China Oncology is the property of Editorial Board of China Oncology and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Cancer is one of the diseases that seriously harm human health. The cancer-related incidence and deaths are still increasing worldwide, which has brought heavy burden to the global public health system. During the long anticancer history, a variety of methods to treat tumors have been developed. More than 100 years ago, shortly after the discovery of Roentgen rays, people began to treat tumors with radiation, and thus pioneered radiation oncology. As a brachytherapy method, implantation of radioactive seeds acts well, has received public recognition, and becomes an important member of the oncology therapeutic spectrum. In vivo, some seeds can migrate from initial site of implantation to other locations. Permanent interstitial brachytherapy and the incidence, mechanism, influence and prevention of 125 I seed migration were reviewed here.

Objective: To investigate the dosimetric difference between manual and inverse optimization in 3-dimensional (3D) brachytherapy for gynecologic tumors., Methods: This retrospective study was conducted among a total of 110 patients with gynecologic tumors undergoing intracavitary combined with interstitial brachytherapy or interstitial brachytherapy. Based on the original images, the brachytherapy plans were optimized for each patient using Gro, IPSA1, IPSA2 (with increased volumetric dose limits on the basis of IPSA1) and HIPO algorithms. The dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters of the clinical target volume (CTV) including V 200 , V 150 , V 100 , D 90 , D 98 and CI, and the dosimetric parameters D 2cc , D 1cc , and D 0.1cc for the bladder, rectum, and sigmoid colon were compared among the 4 plans., Results: Among the 4 plans, Gro optimization took the longest time, followed by HIPO, IPSA2 and IPSA1 optimization. The mean D 90 , D 98 , and V 100 of HIPO plans were significantly higher than those of Gro and IPSA plans, and D 90 and V 100 of IPSA1, IPSA2 and HIPO plans were higher than those of Gro plans ( P < 0.05), but the CI of the 4 plans were similar ( P > 0.05). For the organs at risk (OARs), the HIPO plan had the lowest D 2cc of the bladder and rectum; the bladder absorbed dose of Gro plans were significantly greater than those of IPSA1 and HIPO ( P < 0.05). The D 2cc and D 1cc of the rectum in IPSA1, IPSA2 and HIPO plans were better than Gro ( P < 0.05). The D 2cc and D 1cc of the sigmoid colon did not differ significantly among the 4 plans., Conclusion: Among the 4 algorithms, the HIPO algorithm can better improve dose coverage of the target and lower the radiation dose of the OARs, and is thus recommended for the initial plan optimization. Clinically, the combination of manual optimization can achieve more individualized dose distribution of the plan.

Objective: To analyze the value of combined therapy in pancreatic cancer with a poor prognosis., Methods: The prognostic factors of pancreatic cancer with different clinicopathological characteristics and treatment modalities were analyzed retrospectively and the cumulative curve was plotted using the Kaplan-Meier method., Results: (1) From January 2001 to December 2005, 233 patients with pathological and cytological diagnosis of pancreatic cancer were analyzed. The median survival of all patients was 8.67 months, the 1-year survival rate 29.6% and the 5-year survival rate 4.5%. (2) Weightloss cases had a median survival of 7.7 months versus 10.0 months for cases without weightloss (P = 0.003). Back pain cases had a median survival of 6.5 months versus 9.0 months for cases without back pain (P = 0.015). Cases with normal CA19-9 levels (< or = 37 U/ml) had a median survival of 11.0 months versus 8.0 months for cases with CA19-9 > 37 U/ml levels (P = 0.000). Stages III and IV disease cases had a median survival of 8.7 and 6.3 months versus 16.0 months for cases of Stages I + II (P = 0.000). In the present study, patients suffering from weightloss or back pain or whose CA19-9 was above 37 U/ml or whose TNM stage was III/IV were defined as cases with a poor prognosis. (3) Patients were grouped as pancreatectomy group, cancer-directed treatment group (including intraoperative iodine-125 seed interstitial brachytherapy, 5-FU interstitial chemotherapy, radiotherapy, chemotherapy and transcatheter arterial infusion chemotherapy) and no cancer-directed treatment group (including cases receiving biopsies or bypass). Median survival of three groups were 14.0, 8.3 and 6.6 months respectively. And the 1-year survival rates were 53.5%, 22.5% and 11.8% respectively while the 5-year survival rate 5.8%, 0 and 0 respectively. (4) Median survival of poor prognostic cases (who suffered from weightloss or back pain or whose CA19-9 was above 37 U/ml or whose TNM stage was III/IV) treated with pancreatectomy were 12.0, 11.0, 12.0 and 7.0 months respectively. Median survival of poor prognostic cases treated with cancer-directed therapy were 7.7, 7.5, 8.6 and 8.0 months respectively. Median survival of poor prognostic cases treated with no cancer-directed therapy were 4.0, 3.0, 4.0 and 4.6 months respectively., Conclusion: Optimized combined therapy is recommended for pancreatic cancer patients with poor prognostic factors.