Similar articles

Abstract: Objective: To evaluate the pelvic lymph node coverage of conventional pelvic fields based on bony landmarks in Chinese patients with cervical cancer by using computed tomography (CT) simulation images to contour pelvic vessels as substitutes for lymph nodes location. Methods: A retrospective review of CT simulation images and conventional pelvic radiation planning data sets was performed in 100 patients with cervical cancer at the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) Stage IIB to IIIB in our hospital. Pelvic arteries were contoured on CT simulation images, and the outlines of conventional pelvic fields were drawn as defined by the gynecologic oncology group (GOG) after hiding the contours. The distances between the following vessel contours and field borders were measured: D₁, the superior border of the anterior/posterior (AP) field and the bifurcation of abdominal aorta; D₂, the ipsilateral border of the AP field and the distal end of external iliac artery; and D₃, the anterior border of the lateral (LAT) field and the distal end of the external iliac artery. The distances were recorded as positive values if the measuring point was within the conventional pelvic fields, or they were recorded as negative values. lymph nodes coverage was considered adequate when D₁(0 mm, D₂(17 mm or D₃(7 mm. Results: All patients had at least 1 inadequate margin, 97 patients (97.0%) had 2, and 22 patients (22.0%) had all the 3. On the AP field, 95 patients (95%) had the measuring point, the bifurcation of the abdominal aorta, out of the field (D₁<0 mm), and all the patients had a distance less than 17.0 mm between the distal end of the external iliac artery and ipsilateral border (D₂<17.0 mm). On the LAT field, 24 patients (24%) had a distance less than 7.0 mm between the distal end of the external iliac artery and anterior border (D₃<7.0 mm). Conclusion: We observed that conventional pelvic fields based on bony landmarks provided inadequate coverage of pelvic lymph nodes in our patients with cervical cancer. CT simulation may be a feasible technique for planning pelvic fields optimally and individually.

[1] Bonin, S.R., Lanciano, R.M., Corn, B.W., Hogan, W.M., Hartz, W.H., Hanks, G.E., 1996. Bony landmarks are not an adequate substitute for lymphangiography in defining pelvic lymph node location for the treatment of cervical cancer with radiotherapy. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys., 34(1):167-172.

[2] Eifel, P.J., Winter, K., Morris, M., Levenback, C., Grigsby, P.W., Cooper, J., Rotman, M., Gershenson, D., Mutch, D.G., 2004. Pelvic irradiation with concurrent chemotherapy versus pelvic and para-aortic irradiation for high-risk cervical cancer: an update of radiation therapy oncology group trial (RTOG) 90-01. J. Clin. Oncol., 22(5):872-880.

[3] Finlay, M.H., Ackerman, I., Tirona, R.G., Hamilton, P., Barbera, L., Thomas, G., 2006. Use of CT simulation for treatment of cervical cancer to assess the adequacy of lymph node coverage of conventional pelvic fields based on bony landmarks. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys., 64(1):205-209.

[4] Greer, B.E., Koh, W.J., Figge, D.C., Russell, A.H., Cain, J.M., Tamimi, H.K., 1990. Gynecologic radiotherapy fields defined by intraoperative measurements. Gynecol. Oncol., 38(3):421-424.

[5] Marnitz, S., Kohler, C., Schneider, A., Seiler, F., Hinkelbein, W., 2006. Interindividual variability of lymph drainages in patients with cervical cancer. Implication on irradiation planning. Strahlenther. Onkol., 182(2):80-85.

[6] McAlpine, J., Schlaerth, J.B., Lim, P., Chen, D., Eisenkop, S.M., Spirtos, N.M., 2004. Radiation fields in gynecologic oncology: correlation of soft tissue (surgical) to radiologic landmarks. Gynecol. Oncol., 92(1):25-30.

[7] Parkin, D.M., Bray, F., Ferlay, J., Pisani, P., 2001. Estimating the world cancer burden: Globocan 2000. Int. J. Cancer, 94(2):153-156.

[8] Pearcey, R., Brundage, M., Drouin, P., Jeffrey, J., Johnston, D., Lukka, H., MacLean, G., Souhami, L., Stuart, G., Tu, D., 2002. Phase III trial comparing radical radiotherapy with and without cisplatin chemotherapy in patients with advanced squamous cell cancer of the cervix. J. Clin. Oncol., 20(4):966-972.

[9] Pendlebury, S.C., Cahill, S., Crandon, A.J., Bull, C.A., 1993. Role of bipedal lymphangiogram in radiation treatment planning for cervix cancer. Int. J. Radiat Oncol. Biol. Phys., 27(4):959-962.

[10] Perez, C.A., Kuske, R.R., Camel, H.M., Galakatos, A.E., Hederman, M.A., Kao, M.S., Walz, B.J., 1988. Analysis of pelvic tumor control and impact on survival in carcinoma of the uterine cervix treated with radiation therapy alone. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys., 14(4):613-621.

[11] Taylor, A., Rockall, A.G., Reznek, R.H., Powell, M.E., 2005. Mapping pelvic lymph nodes: guidelines for delineation in intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys., 63(5):1604-1612.

[12] Tewari, K.S., Monk, B.J., 2009. Recent achievements and future developments in advanced and recurrent cervical cancer: trials of the gynecologic oncology group. Semin. Oncol., 36(2):170-180.

[13] Thomas, L., Chacon, B., Kind, M., Lasbareilles, O., Muyldermans, P., Chemin, A., Le Treut, A., Pigneux, J., Kantor, G., 1997. Magnetic resonance imaging in the treatment planning of radiation therapy in carcinoma of the cervix treated with the four-field pelvic technique. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys., 37(4):827-832.

[14] Withers, H.R., Peters, L.J., Taylor, J.M., 1995. Dose-response relationship for radiation therapy of subclinical disease. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys., 31(2):353-359.

[15] Zunino, S., Rosato, O., Lucino, S., Jauregui, E., Rossi, L., Venencia, D., 1999. Anatomic study of the pelvis in carcinoma of the uterine cervix as related to the box technique. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys., 44(1):53-59.