Search

The objective of this retrospective analysis was to determine the incidence and extent of vaginal mucositis (VM) in women with gynaecological cancer undergoing external (chemo)radiation therapy (CRT). A retrospective analysis was set up to collect data on the incidence and severity of VM in women treated with external pelvic RT for gynaecological cancer at the Jessa Hospital, Hasselt and ZOL, Genk, BE between January 2017 and June 2018. At the start and end of their external (C)RT, they rated the frequency and intensity of five common symptoms of VM. Thirty-three patients treated with RT for gynaecological cancer met the inclusion criteria. A non-negligible proportion of patients already experienced at least one VM symptom to any degree before the start of RT, a proportion that further increased towards the end of the RT (73%). At the end of RT, on average, about 25% of these patients reported moderate-to-severe symptoms (against about 7% before the (C)RT). These results suggest that VM is a rather frequent side effect in gynaecological cancer patients that aggravates during treatment up to a moderate severity level. Although the small sample size, these data highlight the need for attention to VM.Impact Statement What is already known about this topic? Radiotherapy plays an important role in the treatment of gynaecological malignancies. A debilitating complication in patients undergoing pelvic radiotherapy is vaginal mucositis, an inflammation of the vaginal mucosal lining. To date, the incidence of vaginal mucositis is still not well documented. What this paper adds? A non-negligible proportion of patients already experienced at least one symptom related to vaginal mucositis before the start of radiotherapy. Most patients presented mild to moderate vaginal mucositis symptoms at the end of external pelvic radiotherapy. Burning sensation, pruritus, and pain were the most frequently documented radiotherapy-induced complications. The implications of this paper: Vaginal mucositis is an underrated side effect of pelvic radiotherapy that needs to be tackled multidisciplinary by a team of nurses, radiotherapists, oncologists, and gynaecologists. The team should tackle the complication from the start of radiotherapy by using the most appropriate measures. Due to a possible link between acute vaginal mucositis and late vaginal toxicity, the team needs to follow-up patient's post-radiotherapy to support patients in late complications and advise/encourage patients in performing vaginal dilatation to prevent vaginal stenosis.

Objective: Acute radiation dermatitis (ARD) is a frequent adverse effect in patients with cancer undergoing radiotherapy (RT). The aim of this case series is to evaluate the effect of a novel skin barrier protectant in patients with ARD., Methods: The skin barrier protectant was used in four patients with different cancer types undergoing RT at two clinical sites. All patients received the standard institutional skincare alongside the novel skin barrier protectant. The skin reactions were evaluated by an RT nurse using the modified version of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group criteria., Results: At the final RT session, three of four patients developed erythema with or without dry desquamation. One patient presented only a minor patchy moist wound. Overall, the pain and pruritus due to ARD was low or nonexistent. No adverse events related to the skin barrier protectant were reported., Conclusions: This case series demonstrates the beneficial effects and safety of the novel skin barrier protectant in the management of ARD in patients with cancer of different etiologies. These results lay the foundation for future studies with larger, more homogeneous patient populations; a well-defined application scheme; and a stricter study design., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To evaluate the use of a novel skin barrier protectant in a patient treated with radiotherapy for vulvar cancer., Methods: This case report was conducted in a radiotherapy department with two women undergoing radiotherapy for vulvar carcinoma. A novel skin barrier protectant was evaluated in one patient; the other underwent the institutional standard skin care protocol. Skin reactions and pain were evaluated using the Radiotherapy Oncology Group Criteria., Main Results: The patient who was treated with the skin protectant showed accelerated healing toward the end of radiotherapy, and this was accompanied with a decrease in pain (maximum pain score 6/10). In comparison, the patient treated with the standard skin care protocol had an extended healing process, experienced a higher pain level (maximum pain score 9/10), and required more nursing care., Conclusions: This case report is the first to suggest that this novel skin barrier protectant could effectively manage acute radiodermatitis in patients with cancer. This case report hopes to lay the foundation for future randomized controlled trials with a larger and broader patient population.

Purpose: To quantify changes in radiotherapy costs occurring in a decade of medical-technological evolution., Materials and Methods: The activity-based costing (ABC) model of the University Hospitals Leuven (UHL) radiotherapy (RT) department was adapted to current RT standards. It allocated actual resource costs to the treatments based on the departmental work-flow and patient mix in 2009. A benchmark with the former model analyzed the cost increases related to changes in RT infrastructure and practice over 10 years., Results: A considerable increase in total RT costs was observed, resulting from higher capital investments (96%) and personnel cost (103%), the latter dominating the total picture. Treatment delivery remains the most costly activity, boosted by the cost of improved quality assurance (QA), 23% of total product costs, coming along with more advanced RT techniques. Hence, cost increases at the product level are most obvious for complex treatments, such as intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), representing cost increases ranging between 38% and 88% compared to conformal approaches., Conclusions: The ABC model provides insight into the financial consequences of evolving technology and practice. Such data are a mandatory first step in our strive to prove RT cost-effectiveness and thus support optimal reimbursement and provision of radiotherapy departments., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Time measurements were performed on daily treatment delivery with the aim to quantify the impact of quality assurance (QA) using an electronic portal imaging device (EPID) on RT delivery time and to validate the time burden of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) as an example of advanced technology. Both increased QA and the delivery of IMRT were found to be significant parameters determining daily treatment time (TT), which in turn translates in increased treatment costs.