Objective Radiation mucositis,especially pharyngeal mucositis,severely affects the oral intake of patients of head and neck cancer(HNC)during radiotherapy.Whether the nutritional status affects the severity of pharyng...Objective Radiation mucositis,especially pharyngeal mucositis,severely affects the oral intake of patients of head and neck cancer(HNC)during radiotherapy.Whether the nutritional status affects the severity of pharyngeal mucositis is currently unknown.This study investigated the incidence of malnutrition and radiation pharyngeal mucositis in patients with HNC during radiotherapy and analyzed the impact of the nutritional status on radiation pharyngeal mucositis.Methods Consecutive patients with HNC receiving radiotherapy were recruited for this longitudinal observational study.Data were collected at baseline(T_(1)),midtreatment(T_(2)),and at the end of treatment(T3).The Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0 and the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition criteria were used to assess pharyngeal mucositis and the nutritional status,respectively.Results There were 348 HNC patients who completed all assessments.The pharyngeal mucositis of patients with HNC was aggravated during radiotherapy(χ^(2)=553.521,P<0.001).At T3,56.0%of patients had moderate or severe pharyngeal mucositis.The proportion of patients with malnutrition increased significantly during treatment(21.3%at T_(1)vs 46.8%at T_(2)vs 76.1%at T3,χ^(2)=209.768,P<0.001).Both a multivariable analysis of generalized estimating equations and a logistic regression analysis showed that pharyngeal mucositis was associated with malnutrition.Conclusions Malnutrition was common in patients with HNC during radiotherapy,and it was closely related to pharyngeal mucositis.Joint interventions targeting nutrition and symptom management should be considered for patients with HNC.展开更多
Objective: A dosimetric study was performed to evaluate the performance of volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy with RapidArc on locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). Methods: The CT scan data sets of 20 p...Objective: A dosimetric study was performed to evaluate the performance of volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy with RapidArc on locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). Methods: The CT scan data sets of 20 patients of locally advanced NPC were selected randomly. The plans were managed using volumetric modulated arc with RapidArc and fixed nine-field coplanar dynamic intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for these patients. The dosimetry of the planning target volumes (PTV), the organs at risk (OARs) and the healthy tissue were evaluated. The dose prescription was set to 70 Gy to the primary tumor and 60 Gy to the clinical target volumes (CTV) in 33 fractions. Each fraction applied daily, five fractions per week. The monitor unit (MU) values and the delivery time were scored to evaluate the expected treatment efficiency. Results: Both techniques had reached clinical treatment’s requirement. The mean dose (Dmean), maximum dose (Dmax) and minimum dose (Dmin) in RapidArc and fixed field IMRT for PTV were 68.4±0.6 Gy, 74.8±0.9 Gy and 56.8±1.1 Gy; and 67.6±0.6 Gy, 73.8±0.4 Gy and 57.5±0.6 Gy (P<0.05), respectively. Homogeneity index was 78.85±1.29 in RapidArc and 80.34±0.54 (P<0.05) in IMRT. The conformity index (CI: 95%) was 0.78±0.01 for both techniques (P>0.05). Compared to IMRT, RapidArc allowed a reduction of Dmean to the brain stem, mandible and optic nerves of 14.1% (P<0.05), 5.6% (P<0.05) and 12.2% (P<0.05), respectively. For the healthy tissue and the whole absorbed dose, Dmean of RapidArc was reduced by 3.6% (P<0.05), and 3.7% (P<0.05), respectively. The Dmean to the parotids, the spinal cord and the lens had no statistical difference among them. The mean MU values of RapidArc and IMRT were 550 and 1,379. The mean treatment time of RapidArc and IMRT was 165 s and 447 s. Compared to IMRT, the delivery time and the MU values of RapidArc were reduced by 63% and 60%, respectively. Conclusion: For locally advanced NPC, both RapidArc and IMRT reached the clinic requirement. The target volume coverage was similar for the different techniques. The RapidArc technique showed some improvements in OARs and other tissue sparing while using reduced MUs and delivery time.展开更多
基金This research was supported by the National Key Research and Development Project of China(No.2017YFC1309204)the Medical Nutrition Clinical Research Project of China International Medical Foundation(No.Z-2017-24-2110).
文摘Objective Radiation mucositis,especially pharyngeal mucositis,severely affects the oral intake of patients of head and neck cancer(HNC)during radiotherapy.Whether the nutritional status affects the severity of pharyngeal mucositis is currently unknown.This study investigated the incidence of malnutrition and radiation pharyngeal mucositis in patients with HNC during radiotherapy and analyzed the impact of the nutritional status on radiation pharyngeal mucositis.Methods Consecutive patients with HNC receiving radiotherapy were recruited for this longitudinal observational study.Data were collected at baseline(T_(1)),midtreatment(T_(2)),and at the end of treatment(T3).The Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0 and the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition criteria were used to assess pharyngeal mucositis and the nutritional status,respectively.Results There were 348 HNC patients who completed all assessments.The pharyngeal mucositis of patients with HNC was aggravated during radiotherapy(χ^(2)=553.521,P<0.001).At T3,56.0%of patients had moderate or severe pharyngeal mucositis.The proportion of patients with malnutrition increased significantly during treatment(21.3%at T_(1)vs 46.8%at T_(2)vs 76.1%at T3,χ^(2)=209.768,P<0.001).Both a multivariable analysis of generalized estimating equations and a logistic regression analysis showed that pharyngeal mucositis was associated with malnutrition.Conclusions Malnutrition was common in patients with HNC during radiotherapy,and it was closely related to pharyngeal mucositis.Joint interventions targeting nutrition and symptom management should be considered for patients with HNC.
文摘Objective: A dosimetric study was performed to evaluate the performance of volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy with RapidArc on locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). Methods: The CT scan data sets of 20 patients of locally advanced NPC were selected randomly. The plans were managed using volumetric modulated arc with RapidArc and fixed nine-field coplanar dynamic intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for these patients. The dosimetry of the planning target volumes (PTV), the organs at risk (OARs) and the healthy tissue were evaluated. The dose prescription was set to 70 Gy to the primary tumor and 60 Gy to the clinical target volumes (CTV) in 33 fractions. Each fraction applied daily, five fractions per week. The monitor unit (MU) values and the delivery time were scored to evaluate the expected treatment efficiency. Results: Both techniques had reached clinical treatment’s requirement. The mean dose (Dmean), maximum dose (Dmax) and minimum dose (Dmin) in RapidArc and fixed field IMRT for PTV were 68.4±0.6 Gy, 74.8±0.9 Gy and 56.8±1.1 Gy; and 67.6±0.6 Gy, 73.8±0.4 Gy and 57.5±0.6 Gy (P<0.05), respectively. Homogeneity index was 78.85±1.29 in RapidArc and 80.34±0.54 (P<0.05) in IMRT. The conformity index (CI: 95%) was 0.78±0.01 for both techniques (P>0.05). Compared to IMRT, RapidArc allowed a reduction of Dmean to the brain stem, mandible and optic nerves of 14.1% (P<0.05), 5.6% (P<0.05) and 12.2% (P<0.05), respectively. For the healthy tissue and the whole absorbed dose, Dmean of RapidArc was reduced by 3.6% (P<0.05), and 3.7% (P<0.05), respectively. The Dmean to the parotids, the spinal cord and the lens had no statistical difference among them. The mean MU values of RapidArc and IMRT were 550 and 1,379. The mean treatment time of RapidArc and IMRT was 165 s and 447 s. Compared to IMRT, the delivery time and the MU values of RapidArc were reduced by 63% and 60%, respectively. Conclusion: For locally advanced NPC, both RapidArc and IMRT reached the clinic requirement. The target volume coverage was similar for the different techniques. The RapidArc technique showed some improvements in OARs and other tissue sparing while using reduced MUs and delivery time.
