Hippocampal sparing for brain tumor radiotherapy: A retrospective study comparing intensity-modulated radiotherapy and volumetric-modulated arc therapy.

CONTEXT: Radiotherapy may have side effects on the brain, such as radiation necrosis, cognitive impairment, and a high chance of tumor recurrence, which has been considered the most common cause of treatment failure. AIMS: Using intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) techniques, we aimed to test the potential outcome of sparing the contralateral hippocampus (CLH) in radiotherapy for brain tumors by comparing dosimetric parameters. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: A prospective clinical comparative study. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Using IMRT and VMAT, sparing CLH in radiotherapy of brain tumors was tested in ten patients, and various dosimetric parameters were compared. The treatment plans were accepted only if they met the set of planning objectives defined in the protocol. RESULTS: The dose delivered to 95% of the CLH volume (CLH D95), and the mean (CLH Dmean) and max (CLH Dmax) doses were found to be significantly highest in the standard IMRT (P = 0.002, <0.001, and < 0.001, respectively). The lowest CLH D95, CLH Dmean and CLH Dmax for the hippocampus were detected in sparing VMAT planning than in the other plans (P < 0.05). None of the post hoc comparisons for CLH D95 was different among any of the plans, whereas the mean dose to CLH was statistically different among all paired comparisons (P < 0.008). The maximum dose to CLH was also statistically different among all paired plans (P < 0.008), except the dose difference between standard VMAT and IMRT plans. CONCLUSIONS: Although VMAT planning is troublesome and time-consuming, the advantage of sparing the hippocampus is beneficial, preserving the hippocampus and cognitive functions during radiotherapy.

Prognostic factors and clinical course of extremity soft-tissue sarcomas.

PURPOSE: Although soft tissue constitutes half of the body weight, soft-tissue sarcomas (STSs) are less common than any other types of tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, the prognostic factors and clinical courses of 64 patients with extremity STSs treated at our clinic between 1996 and 2012 were investigated. RESULTS: Of the 64 patients included in this study, 35 (55%) were male and 29 (45%) were female. By the end of follow-up, 29 (45%) of the patients remained alive while 35 (55%) deceased. The overall survival (OS) time of the patients was 89.1 months, and their 1-, 3-, 5-, and 10-year survival rates were 82.8%, 69.3%, 51.6%, and 39.4%, respectively. Univariate analysis revealed the following variables as prognostic factors: tumor stage (P < 0.001), surgical method applied (P = 0.009), radiotherapy (RT) application (P = 0.018), RT dose (P < 0.001), and development of metastasis during follow-up (P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed only type of surgery to be a prognostic factor (P = 0.016). CONCLUSION: Besides surgery, RT plays a crucial role in the multimodal treatment of STSs and increases local control rates and OS. In our study, stage, surgery, and adjuvant RT were found to be effective factors indicating OS. However, more prospective work in this area is necessary.

Prognostic factors and clinical course of extremity soft-tissue sarcomas

Purpose: Although soft tissue constitutes half of the body weight, soft-tissue sarcomas (STSs) are less common than any other types of tumors. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective study, the prognostic factors and clinical courses of 64 patients with extremity STSs treated at our clinic between 1996 and 2012 were investigated. Results: Of the 64 patients included in this study, 35 (55%) were male and 29 (45%) were female. By the end of follow-up, 29 (45%) of the patients remained alive while 35 (55%) deceased. The overall survival (OS) time of the patients was 89.1 months, and their 1-, 3-, 5-, and 10-year survival rates were 82.8%, 69.3%, 51.6%, and 39.4%, respectively. Univariate analysis revealed the following variables as prognostic factors: tumor stage (P < 0.001), surgical method applied (P = 0.009), radiotherapy (RT) application (P = 0.018), RT dose (P < 0.001), and development of metastasis during follow-up (P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed only type of surgery to be a prognostic factor (P = 0.016). Conclusion: Besides surgery, RT plays a crucial role in the multimodal treatment of STSs and increases local control rates and OS. In our study, stage, surgery, and adjuvant RT were found to be effective factors indicating OS. However, more prospective work in this area is necessary