RESUMO
Objective@#The purposes of this trial were to demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of the hybrid of intracavitary and interstitial brachytherapy (HBT) for locally advanced cervical cancer patients in the phase I/II prospective clinical trial. @*Methods@#Patients with FIGO stage IB2-IVA uterine cervical cancer pretreatment width of which was ≥5 cm measured by magnetic resonance imaging were eligible for this clinical trial. The protocol therapy included 30–30.6 Gy in 15–17 fractions of whole pelvic radiotherapy concurrent with weekly CDDP, followed by 24 Gy in 4 fractions of HBT and pelvic radiotherapy with a central shield up to 50–50.4 Gy in 25–28 fractions. The primary endpoint of phase II part was 2-year pelvic progression-free survival (PPFS) rate higher than historical control of 64%. @*Results@#Between October 2015 and October 2019, 73 patients were enrolled in the initial registration and 52 patients proceeded to the secondary registration. With the median follow-up period of 37.3 months (range, 13.9–52.9 months), the 2- PPFS was 80.7% (90% confidence interval [CI]=69.7%–88%). Because the lower range of 90% CI of 2-year PPFS was 69.7%, which was higher than the historical control ICBT data of 64%, therefore, the primary endpoint of this study was met. @*Conclusion@#The effectiveness of HBT were demonstrated by a prospective clinical study. Because the dose goal determined in the protocol was lower than 85 Gy, there is room in improvement for local control. A higher dose might have been needed for tumors with poor responses.
RESUMO
In accordance with the new model-core-curriculum for medical education, the current status of education about the science of radiation health was surveyed in all medical schools in Japan. Among the four learning points related to the “Biological effects of radiation and radiation hazards” , about half of the schools covered issues on “radiation and human body” and the “effect of medical radiation exposure” in one, or less than one, 60-minutes class, but did not touch on “radiation risk communication” and “radiological disaster medicine” . A significant deviation of human resources was also observed between schools. Learning tools such as presentation files and video content were preferred as education support materials. Therefore, development and distribution of the learning tools, especially in “radiation risk communication” and “radiological disaster medicine” , may be a first step to promoting high-quality education on the science of radiation health risk in each school’s curriculum.