Lymph node control in cervical cancer

被引:79
作者
Grigsby, PW
Singh, AK
Siegel, BA
Dehdashti, F
Rader, J
Zoberi, I
机构
[1] Washington Univ, Sch Med, Dept Radiat Oncol, St Louis, MO 63110 USA
[2] Washington Univ, Sch Med, Mallinckrodt Inst Radiol, Dept Radiol,Div Nucl Med, St Louis, MO 63110 USA
[3] Washington Univ, Sch Med, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Div Gynecol Oncol, St Louis, MO 63110 USA
[4] Washington Univ, Sch Med, Alvin J Siteman Canc Ctr, St Louis, MO 63110 USA
来源
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS | 2004年 / 59卷 / 03期
关键词
cervical cancer; FDG; irradiation; lymph nodes; PET;
D O I
10.1016/j.ijrobp.2003.12.038
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Purpose: The aim was to evaluate pretreatment lymph node size, irradiation dose, and failure patterns. Methods: Pretreatment PET and CT were performed in 208 patients. Lymph nodes were scored as either positive or negative by PET and lymph node size was measured by CT. Lymph node irradiation dose and sites of failure were recorded. Results: The mean pelvic lymph node doses were: PET negative nodes, less than or equal to1 cm, 66.8 Gy, and 0/76 failures; PET positive nodes, less than or equal to1 cm, 66.8 Gy, and 3/89 failures; 1.1-less than or equal to2 cm, 66.9 Gy, and 0/21 failures; 2.1-less than or equal to3 cm, 69.4 Gy, and 2/15 failures; and 3.1 to less than or equal to4 cm, 74.1 Gy, and 0/5 failures. The mean paraaortic lymph node dose was 43.3 Gy and there were no paraaortic failures for 24 patients with PET positive less than or equal to1 cm nodes, 0/5 failures for 1.1 to less than or equal to2 cm, and 0/4 failures for 2.1 to less than or equal to3 cm. The most common site of failure was distant metastases. Conclusions: The irradiation doses given in this study were adequate to control most lymph node metastases. Positive lymph nodes of any size at diagnosis were the most significant predictor for developing distant metastases. (C) 2004 Elsevier Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:706 / 712
页数:7
相关论文
共 18 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], INT J GYNECOL OBSTET
[2]  
Cosin JA, 1998, CANCER, V82, P2241, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19980601)82:11<2241::AID-CNCR20>3.0.CO
[3]  
2-T
[4]  
COX DR, 1972, J R STAT SOC B, V34, P187
[5]   Impact of surgical staging in women with locally advanced cervical cancer [J].
Goff, BA ;
Muntz, HG ;
Paley, PJ ;
Tamimi, HK ;
Koh, WJ ;
Greer, BE .
GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 1999, 74 (03) :436-442
[6]   Posttherapy surveillance monitoring of cervical cancer by FDG-pet [J].
Grigsby, PW ;
Siegel, BA ;
Dehdashti, F ;
Mutch, DG .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2003, 55 (04) :907-913
[7]   Long-term follow-up of RTOG 92-10: Cervical cancer with positive para-aortic lymph nodes [J].
Grigsby, PW ;
Heydon, K ;
Mutch, DG ;
Kim, RY ;
Eifel, P .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2001, 51 (04) :982-987
[8]   Lymph node staging by positron emission tomography in patients with carcinoma of the cervix [J].
Grigsby, PW ;
Siegel, BA ;
Dehdashti, F .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2001, 19 (17) :3745-3749
[9]   RESECTION OF BULKY POSITIVE LYMPH-NODES IN PATIENTS WITH CERVICAL-CARCINOMA [J].
HACKER, NF ;
WAIN, GV ;
NICKLIN, JL .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGICAL CANCER, 1995, 5 (04) :250-256
[10]   NONPARAMETRIC-ESTIMATION FROM INCOMPLETE OBSERVATIONS [J].
KAPLAN, EL ;
MEIER, P .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN STATISTICAL ASSOCIATION, 1958, 53 (282) :457-481