Finger doses for staff handling radiopharmaceuticals in nuclear medicine.

UNLABELLED: Radiation doses to the fingers of occupational workers handling 99mTc-labeled compounds and 131I for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in nuclear medicine were measured by thermoluminescence dosimetry. METHODS: The doses were measured at the base of the ring finger and the index finger of both hands in 2 groups of workers. Group 1 (7 workers) handled 99mTc-labeled radiopharmaceuticals, and group 2 (6 workers) handled 131I for diagnosis and therapy. Radiation doses to the fingertips of 3 workers also were measured. Two were from group 1, and 1 was from group 2. RESULTS: The doses to the base of the fingers for the radiopharmacy staff and physicians from group 1 were observed to be 17+/-7.5 (mean+/-SD) and 13.4+/-6.5 microSv/GBq, respectively. Similarly, the dose to the base of the fingers for the 3 physicians in group 2 was estimated to be 82.0+/-13.8 microSv/GBq. Finger doses for the technologists in both groups could not be calculated per unit of activity because they did not handle the radiopharmaceuticals directly. Their doses were reported in millisieverts that accumulated in 1 wk. The doses to the fingertips of the radiopharmacy worker and the physician in group 1 were 74.3+/-19.8 and 53.5+/-21.9 microSv/GBq, respectively. The dose to the fingertips of the physician in group 2 was 469.9+/-267 microSv/GBq. CONCLUSION: The radiation doses to the fingers of nuclear medicine staff at our center were measured. The maximum expected annual dose to the extremities appeared to be less than the annual limit (500 mSv/y), except for a physician who handled large quantities of 131I for treatment. Because all of these workers are on rotation and do not constantly handle radioactivity throughout the year, the doses to the base of the fingers or the fingertips should not exceed the prescribed annual limit of 500 mSv.

Malignant melanoma: a retrospective series from a regional cancer center in India.

PURPOSE: To present our experience in treating malignant melanoma patients. METHODS AND MATERIALS: All melanoma patients treated at the Department of Radiotherapy, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India, from 1995 to 2007 were studied retrospectively. The endpoints were loco-regional recurrence, distant recurrence, recurrence-free survival (RFS), and duration of follow-up (DOFU). RFS and DOFU were analyzed with respect to the factors like age, sex, tissue of origin, site of disease, number of nodes, lymphadenopathy, ulceration, stage, and operability to find out any association. RESULTS: Seventy-two patients were found evaluable with 40 males and 32 females (median age 46.5 years). Eye was the commonest primary site with visual disturbance as the commonest symptom. Overall, 87% of the lesions were single, with most of the nonocular lesions presenting in the advanced stage. During the disease course, regional lymphadenopathy and distant metastases were seen in 33% and 32% of cases, respectively. Highest incidence of lymphadenopathy was seen in skin lesions and in primaries from trunk and extremities. Of all treated patients, 47% achieved complete response, 18% partial response, and others had either stable or progressive disease. The median DOFU was 6.2 months. RFS was studied only in curatively treated cases with a median of 10 months. Operability at presentation was the only prognostic factor influencing DOFU. CONCLUSION: Malignant melanoma is an uncommon disease in India carrying a lot of morbidity due to late presentation. Its management is still not clear regarding the optimum use and schedule of treatment modalities. More prospective studies in the future are required to come to a definite conclusion.

Pattern of palliative care, pain management and referral trends in patients receiving radiotherapy at a tertiary cancer center.

BACKGROUND: Pain is a common primary symptom of advanced cancer and metastatic disease, occurring in 50-75% of all patients. Although palliative care and pain management are essential components in oncology practice, studies show that these areas are often inadequately addressed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We randomly selected 152 patients receiving palliative radiotherapy (PRT) from October 2006 to August 2008, excluding metastatic bone lesions. Patients' records were studied retrospectively. RESULTS: A median follow-up of 21 weeks was available for 119 males and 33 females with a median age of 55 years. Maximum (60%) patients were of head and neck cancers followed by esophagus (14%), lung (10%) and others. Dysphagia, growth/ulcer and pain were the chief indications for PRT. Pain was present in 93 (61%) cases out of which, 56 (60%) were referred to pain clinic. All except one consulted pain clinic with a median pain score of 8 (0-10 point scale). Fifty-three of these 56 patients (96%) received opioid-based treatment with adequate pain relief in 33% cases and loss of follow-up in 40% cases. Only five (3%) cases were referred to a hospice. Twenty-two (14%) cases were considered for radical treatment following excellent response to PRT. CONCLUSION: In this selective sample, the standard of analgesic treatment was found to be satisfactory. However, there is a lot of scope for improvement regarding referral to pain clinic and later to the hospice. Patients' follow-up needs to be improved along with future studies evaluating those patients who were considered for further RT till radical dose. Programs to change the patients' attitude towards palliative care, physicians' (residents') training to improve communication skills, and institutional policies may be promising strategies.