Locally advanced cervical cancer in renal transplant patients: a dilemma between control and toxicity.

PURPOSE: Treatment of locally advanced cervical cancer in patients with a renal graft requires precautions. The graft is usually in a pelvic position, close to the clinical target volume (CTV). Preserving the graft while ensuring local control is a challenge we have faced in two occasions. We report our experience. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We report the cases of 2 patients treated at our institution with a modified workup and therapeutic approach compared with our standard approach. The clinical and technical aspects of both treatments were systematically reviewed and contrasted with reports previously cited in the literature. RESULTS: The first patient received external beam conformal radiotherapy (total dose: 30 Gy in the pelvis) followed by two sessions of MRI-guided brachytherapy (2 × 15 Gy to 90% of the intermediate risk CTV). The second one received pelvic intensity-modulated radiation therapy (total dose: 45 Gy) followed by MRI-guided brachytherapy delivering 15 Gy to 90% of the intermediate risk CTV. Both patients had a complete response and were still in remission more than 2 years after treatment while retaining their graft. No severe late toxicity was reported. CONCLUSIONS: External beam radiotherapy followed by brachytherapy is feasible in locally advanced cervical cancer, despite the presence of a kidney graft near the targets. Image-guided adaptive brachytherapy allowed an accurate evaluation of the dose distribution, reaching the recommended treatment thresholds with optimal protection of the graft.

IMRT or conformal radiotherapy for adjuvant treatment of retroperitoneal sarcoma?

PURPOSE: To compare the dose distribution between three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT), intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with six coplanar beams (6b-IMRT) and IMRT with nine coplanar beams (9b-IMRT) during adjuvant radiotherapy for retroperitoneal sarcoma. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The 10 most recent patients who had received adjuvant radiotherapy were reviewed. Three different treatment plans were generated (3DCRT, 6b-IMRT and 9b-IMRT) to deliver 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions. The dose delivered to the organs at risk (intestinal cavity (IC), contra- and ipsilateral kidney, liver, stomach and whole body), and the conformity index (CI) were compared. RESULTS: The integral dose to the intestinal cavity was similar with the three modalities but the dose distribution was different, with a change-over around 25 Gy: the V50 and the V40 were reduced five- and twofold, respectively, with IMRT compared to 3DCRT, and the V20 was increased by about 25% with IMRT. A similar integral dose was delivered to the whole body with the three modalities. The treated volume (V95 body) was approximately halved with IMRT compared to 3DCRT, and the CI was twice as good with IMRT than with 3DCRT. As expected, the V5 (body) was higher with IMRT compared to 3DCRT (p<0.0001) (a 12% increase with 6b-IMRT and a 21% increase with 9b-IMRT). Compared to 3DCRT, the mean dose delivered to the contralateral kidney increased from 1.5 to 4-4.4 Gy with IMRT. The number of monitor units was increased with IMRT, especially when nine beams were used instead of six. CONCLUSIONS: As expected, IMRT greatly reduced the high-dose irradiated volume and increased the low-dose exposure of the intestinal cavity, with a change-over around 25 Gy, compared to 3DCRT. The conformity index was compellingly better with IMRT. The integral dose delivered to the whole body was conserved with both 3DCRT and IMRT. Longer follow-up is needed to assess late toxicities to the small bowel, contralateral kidney and the risk of second cancers.