skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Patterns of brachytherapy practice for patients with carcinoma of the cervix (1996-1999): A Patterns of Care Study

Abstract

Purpose/Objective: To analyze the details of brachytherapy practice in patients treated for carcinoma of the cervix in the United States between 1996 and 1999. Methods and Materials: Radiation facilities were selected from a stratified random sample. Patients were randomly selected from lists of eligible patients treated at each facility. A total of 442 patients' records were reviewed in 59 facilities to obtain data about patients' characteristics, evaluation, tumor extent, and treatment. National estimates were made using weights that reflected the relative contribution of each institution and of each patient within the sampled institutions. From our survey we estimate that 16,375 patients were treated in the United States during this study period. Unless otherwise specified, brachytherapy practice was based on the 408 patients who had their brachytherapy or all their treatment at the surveyed facility. Results: A total of 91.5% of patients underwent brachytherapy at the initial treating institution; 8.5% were referred to a second site for brachytherapy. Forty-two percent of U.S. facilities referred at least some patients to a second facility for brachytherapy. Of U.S. facilities that treated {<=}2 eligible patients per year, 61% referred all of their patients to a second facility for brachytherapy or treated with external RTmore » alone; none of the U.S. facilities with larger experience (>2 eligible patients per year) referred all their patients to a second facility for brachytherapy treatment, but 28% referred some patients to an outside facility for brachytherapy. Overall, 94% of patients who completed treatment with curative intent received brachytherapy. Of these patients who had brachytherapy, 77.8%, 13.3%, and 0.9%, respectively, were treated with low-dose-rate (LDR), high-dose-rate (HDR), or a combination of HDR and LDR brachytherapy; 7.9% had interstitial brachytherapy (5.7% LDR and 1.9% HDR, 0.3% mixed). In facilities that treated >2 patients per year, 15.5% and 9.4% of brachytherapy procedures included HDR or interstitial, respectively; in facilities that treated fewer patients, 3.4% had HDR brachytherapy, and only 1.2% had interstitial brachytherapy. Patients treated with LDR intracavitary radiotherapy had one (23.5%), two (74.1%), or three (2.4%) implants. For patients treated with curative intent who completed radiation therapy with LDR intracavitary radiation therapy without hysterectomy, the median brachytherapy dose to Point A was 40.3 Gy, and the median total dose to Point A was 82.9 Gy. Patients were treated with HDR intracavitary radiation therapy using a variety of treatment schedules using 1-2 fractions (7.5%), 3-4 fractions (17.4%), 5-6 fractions (38.5%), 7-9 fractions (33.5%), or 12 fractions (3%). Fraction sizes were <500 cGy (29.5%), 500-<600 (25.2%), 600 (28.1%), >600 (8%), or unknown (9.2%). For patients treated with HDR, the median total dose to Point A (corrected for fraction size using a {alpha}/{beta} = 10) was 85.8 Gy (range: 56.2-116.1 Gy). At institutions treating <500 new patients per year, the percentage of patients receiving a brachytherapy dose <40 Gy was significantly higher than at institutions treating {>=}500 new patients per year (p < 0.0001). For LDR intracavitary radiation therapy, 5.8% had neither bladder nor rectal doses recorded for any of their implants, whereas in HDR intracavitary radiation therapy, 73.4% had neither bladder nor rectal doses recorded for any of their implants. The median total duration of radiation therapy was identical for patients who had HDR or LDR intracavitary radiation therapy (57 days). For LDR at institutions treating <500 new patients per year, the percentage of patients with treatment duration >56 days was significantly greater than at institutions {>=}500 new patients per year (p = 0.002). Of the patients who had LDR intracavitary radiation therapy implants, 65% were treated using tandem and shielded Fletcher-Suit-Delclos colpostats; other patients had mini ovoids (10.9%), cylinders (3.9%), Henschke (3.7%), or other/mixed applicators (16.5%) . In contrast, of patients treated with HDR intracavitary radiation therapy, 68.7% had tandem and rings, 18.2% Fletcher-Suit-Delclos ovoids, 7.5% mini ovoids, 2.3% cylinders, and 3.2% other or mixed applicators. Conclusions: The median duration of treatment and median Point A dose were very similar for patients treated with HDR or LDR. Patients with HDR were treated using a variety of treatment schedules. Different applicator types were favored for LDR vs. HDR. Of patients treated with HDR, 73.4% had no brachytherapy bladder or rectal doses recorded, suggesting that full dosimetric calculations were performed only for the first fraction in many institutions. Facility size significantly impacted on referral to another institution for brachytherapy, brachytherapy dose, and treatment duration.« less

Authors:
 [1];  [2];  [3];  [4];  [3];  [3]
  1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI (United States). E-mail: berickson@radonc.mcw.edu
  2. Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston TX (United States)
  3. ACR Patterns of Care Study, Philadelphia, PA (United States)
  4. Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI (United States)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
20706252
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology and Physics; Journal Volume: 63; Journal Issue: 4; Other Information: DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.04.035; PII: S0360-3016(05)00802-3; Copyright (c) 2005 Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, All rights reserved; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE; BLADDER; BRACHYTHERAPY; CARCINOMAS; DOSE RATES; EVALUATION; PATIENTS; RADIATION DOSES; RADIATION SOURCE IMPLANTS

Citation Formats

Erickson, Beth, Eifel, Patricia, Moughan, Jennifer, Rownd, Jason M.S., Iarocci, Thomas, and Owen, Jean. Patterns of brachytherapy practice for patients with carcinoma of the cervix (1996-1999): A Patterns of Care Study. United States: N. p., 2005. Web. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.04.035.
Erickson, Beth, Eifel, Patricia, Moughan, Jennifer, Rownd, Jason M.S., Iarocci, Thomas, & Owen, Jean. Patterns of brachytherapy practice for patients with carcinoma of the cervix (1996-1999): A Patterns of Care Study. United States. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.04.035.
Erickson, Beth, Eifel, Patricia, Moughan, Jennifer, Rownd, Jason M.S., Iarocci, Thomas, and Owen, Jean. Tue . "Patterns of brachytherapy practice for patients with carcinoma of the cervix (1996-1999): A Patterns of Care Study". United States. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.04.035.
@article{osti_20706252,
title = {Patterns of brachytherapy practice for patients with carcinoma of the cervix (1996-1999): A Patterns of Care Study},
author = {Erickson, Beth and Eifel, Patricia and Moughan, Jennifer and Rownd, Jason M.S. and Iarocci, Thomas and Owen, Jean},
abstractNote = {Purpose/Objective: To analyze the details of brachytherapy practice in patients treated for carcinoma of the cervix in the United States between 1996 and 1999. Methods and Materials: Radiation facilities were selected from a stratified random sample. Patients were randomly selected from lists of eligible patients treated at each facility. A total of 442 patients' records were reviewed in 59 facilities to obtain data about patients' characteristics, evaluation, tumor extent, and treatment. National estimates were made using weights that reflected the relative contribution of each institution and of each patient within the sampled institutions. From our survey we estimate that 16,375 patients were treated in the United States during this study period. Unless otherwise specified, brachytherapy practice was based on the 408 patients who had their brachytherapy or all their treatment at the surveyed facility. Results: A total of 91.5% of patients underwent brachytherapy at the initial treating institution; 8.5% were referred to a second site for brachytherapy. Forty-two percent of U.S. facilities referred at least some patients to a second facility for brachytherapy. Of U.S. facilities that treated {<=}2 eligible patients per year, 61% referred all of their patients to a second facility for brachytherapy or treated with external RT alone; none of the U.S. facilities with larger experience (>2 eligible patients per year) referred all their patients to a second facility for brachytherapy treatment, but 28% referred some patients to an outside facility for brachytherapy. Overall, 94% of patients who completed treatment with curative intent received brachytherapy. Of these patients who had brachytherapy, 77.8%, 13.3%, and 0.9%, respectively, were treated with low-dose-rate (LDR), high-dose-rate (HDR), or a combination of HDR and LDR brachytherapy; 7.9% had interstitial brachytherapy (5.7% LDR and 1.9% HDR, 0.3% mixed). In facilities that treated >2 patients per year, 15.5% and 9.4% of brachytherapy procedures included HDR or interstitial, respectively; in facilities that treated fewer patients, 3.4% had HDR brachytherapy, and only 1.2% had interstitial brachytherapy. Patients treated with LDR intracavitary radiotherapy had one (23.5%), two (74.1%), or three (2.4%) implants. For patients treated with curative intent who completed radiation therapy with LDR intracavitary radiation therapy without hysterectomy, the median brachytherapy dose to Point A was 40.3 Gy, and the median total dose to Point A was 82.9 Gy. Patients were treated with HDR intracavitary radiation therapy using a variety of treatment schedules using 1-2 fractions (7.5%), 3-4 fractions (17.4%), 5-6 fractions (38.5%), 7-9 fractions (33.5%), or 12 fractions (3%). Fraction sizes were <500 cGy (29.5%), 500-<600 (25.2%), 600 (28.1%), >600 (8%), or unknown (9.2%). For patients treated with HDR, the median total dose to Point A (corrected for fraction size using a {alpha}/{beta} = 10) was 85.8 Gy (range: 56.2-116.1 Gy). At institutions treating <500 new patients per year, the percentage of patients receiving a brachytherapy dose <40 Gy was significantly higher than at institutions treating {>=}500 new patients per year (p < 0.0001). For LDR intracavitary radiation therapy, 5.8% had neither bladder nor rectal doses recorded for any of their implants, whereas in HDR intracavitary radiation therapy, 73.4% had neither bladder nor rectal doses recorded for any of their implants. The median total duration of radiation therapy was identical for patients who had HDR or LDR intracavitary radiation therapy (57 days). For LDR at institutions treating <500 new patients per year, the percentage of patients with treatment duration >56 days was significantly greater than at institutions {>=}500 new patients per year (p = 0.002). Of the patients who had LDR intracavitary radiation therapy implants, 65% were treated using tandem and shielded Fletcher-Suit-Delclos colpostats; other patients had mini ovoids (10.9%), cylinders (3.9%), Henschke (3.7%), or other/mixed applicators (16.5%) . In contrast, of patients treated with HDR intracavitary radiation therapy, 68.7% had tandem and rings, 18.2% Fletcher-Suit-Delclos ovoids, 7.5% mini ovoids, 2.3% cylinders, and 3.2% other or mixed applicators. Conclusions: The median duration of treatment and median Point A dose were very similar for patients treated with HDR or LDR. Patients with HDR were treated using a variety of treatment schedules. Different applicator types were favored for LDR vs. HDR. Of patients treated with HDR, 73.4% had no brachytherapy bladder or rectal doses recorded, suggesting that full dosimetric calculations were performed only for the first fraction in many institutions. Facility size significantly impacted on referral to another institution for brachytherapy, brachytherapy dose, and treatment duration.},
doi = {10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.04.035},
journal = {International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology and Physics},
number = 4,
volume = 63,
place = {United States},
year = {Tue Nov 15 00:00:00 EST 2005},
month = {Tue Nov 15 00:00:00 EST 2005}
}
  • Purpose: To describe the patterns of definitive radiotherapy practice for patients with uterine cervical cancer from 1999 to 2001 in Japan. Methods and Materials: The Japanese Patterns of Care Study (JPCS) working group conducted a third extramural audit survey of 68 institutions and collected specific information on 324 cervical cancer patients treated with definitive radiotherapy. Results: Almost all patients (96%) were treated with whole pelvic radiotherapy using opposing anteroposterior fields (87%). A midline block was used in 70% of the patients. Intracavitary brachytherapy (ICBT) was applied in 82% of cases. Most patients (89%) were treated with high-dose rate (HDR) ICBT.more » Calculation of doses to organs at risk (ICRU 38) was performed for rectum in 25% of cases and for bladder in 18% of cases. Only 3% of patients were given intravenous conscious sedation during ICBT applicator insertions. The median total biologically effective dose at point A (EBRT+ICBT) was 74 Gy{sub 10} in cases treated with HDR-ICBT. There was no significant difference in total biologically effective dose between stages. The median overall treatment time was 47 days. Concurrent chemoradiation was applied in 17% of patients. Conclusions: This study describes the general patterns of radiotherapy practice for uterine cervical cancer in Japan. Although methods of external radiotherapy seemed to be appropriate, there was room for improvement in ICBT practice, such as pretreatment. A substantial difference in total radiotherapy dose between Japan and the United States was observed.« less
  • Purpose: The Patterns of Care Study survey process evaluation has been an effective means of assessing the evaluation and treatment practices used by radiation oncologists in the United States for Stage I-II breast cancer. The current 1998-1999 report updates the previous 1989 and 1993-1994 analyses and reflects the recent changes in surgery and systemic therapy observed nationally in the management of early-stage disease. Methods and Materials: A weighted sample size of 71,877 patient records of women treated with breast-conserving surgery and radiotherapy (RT) was obtained from a stratified two-stage sampling of 353 patient records. These cases were centrally reviewed frommore » academic and private radiation oncology practices across the United States. The data collected included patient characteristics, clinical and pathologic factors, and surgical and RT details. The results were compared with those of previous Patterns of Care Study survey reports. Results: Of the patients in the current survey, 97% had undergone mammography before biopsy. A review of the primary tumor pathologic findings indicated improved quantification of an intraductal component from 7.0% in 1993-1994 to 20.4% in 1998-1999 (p = 0.01). The tumor characteristics were better defined, with estrogen and progesterone receptor measurement performed in 91.4% and 91.3% in the 1998-1999 survey vs. 83.7% and 80.3% in the 1989 survey, respectively (p = 0.03 and p = 0.002, respectively). Axillary dissection was performed in 82.2% in the present survey compared with 93.6% in the 1993-1994 survey (p = 0.0004); sentinel node biopsy was performed in 20.1% of the present cases. The use of CT for planning was increased in the current survey, with 22.9% cases CT planned vs. 9% in 1993-1994 (p = 0.10). In the present survey, 100% had received whole breast RT. When a supraclavicular field was added, the dose was prescribed to a specified depth in 67.5% of cases, most commonly 3 cm. When an axillary field was added, the dose was generally prescribed to the mid-plane. Chemotherapy and tamoxifen was used in 36% and 55.8% of patients, respectively, in the 1998-1999 survey, representing a statistically significant increase compared with the 1993-1994 survey, despite comparable pathologic tumor size and nodal involvement. Conclusion: The present results demonstrate a high level of compliance of the sampled radiation oncology practices with current breast conservation standards and continued improvement in many categories compared with prior patterns of care study surveys. The estimates in the current survey after whole breast RT will serve as a benchmark against newer trends in breast cancer RT, such as partial breast RT.« less
  • Purpose: The patterns of care study (PCS) of radiotherapy for cervical cancer in Japan over the last 10 years was reviewed. Methods and Materials: The Japanese PCS working group analyzed data from 1,200 patients (1995-1997, 591 patients; 1999-2001, 324 patients; 2003-2005, 285 patients) with cervical cancer treated with definitive radiotherapy in Japan. Results: Patients in the 2001-2003 survey were significantly younger than those in the 1999-2001 study (p < 0.0001). Histology, performance status, and International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage were not significantly different among the three survey periods. Use of combinations of chemotherapy has increased significantly during thosemore » periods (1995-1997, 24%; 1999-2001, 33%; 2003-2005, 54%; p < 0.0001). The ratio of patients receiving concurrent chemotherapy has also dramatically increased (1995-1997, 20%; 1999-2001, 54%; 2003-2005, 83%; p < 0.0001). As for external beam radiotherapy (EBRT), the application rate of four-field portals has greatly increased over the three survey periods (1995-1997, 2%; 1999-2001, 7%; 2003-2005, 21%; p < 0.0001). In addition, the use of an appropriate beam energy for EBRT has shown an increase (1995-1997, 67%; 1999-2001, 74%; 2003-2005, 81%; p = 0.064). As for intracavitary brachytherapy (ICBT), an iridium source has become increasingly popular (1995-1997, 27%; 1999-2001, 42%; 2003-2005, 84%; p < 0.0001). Among the three surveys, the ratio of patients receiving ICBT (1995-1997, 77%; 1999-2001, 82%; 2003-2005, 78%) has not changed. Although follow-up was inadequate in each survey, no significant survival differences were observed (p = 0.36), and rates of late Grade 3 or higher toxicity were significantly different (p = 0.016). Conclusions: The Japanese PCS has monitored consistent improvements over the past 10 years in the application of chemotherapy, timing of chemotherapy, and EBRT methods. However, there is still room for improvement, especially in the clinical practice of ICBT.« less
  • This paper reports a dosimetric study of 43 patients treated with a combination of concomitant radiotherapy and cisplatin for locally advanced carcinoma of the cervix with the aim of investigating the correlation between the radiation dose to the rectum and the incidence of late rectal complications. Radiotherapy consisted of 46 Gy external beam irradiation plus three high dose rate intracavitary treatments given weekly, concurrent with the last 3 weeks of external beam therapy, to a total dose of 30 Gy to a point A. Cisplatin 30 mg/m[sup 2] was given weekly throughout the duration of the external beam irradiation. Themore » brachytherapy irradiated volume was reconstructed from the orthogonal treatment radiographs to accurately locate the reference points defined by the International Commission of Radiation Units and Measurements, report 38. The doses calculated at these points were compared to in vivo dose measurements performed immediately prior to treatment. The group of patients who were calculated to have received a dose to the rectal reference point greater than the prescribed point A dose (9/13) had a significantly greater probability of development of late rectal complications compared to the group of patients who were calculated to have received less than the prescribed point A dose at this rectal point (7/30), p = 0.003. There was no correlation of rate of complication with the in vivo measured dose in the rectum, stage of disease, or age. At 40 months post treatment, the group of patients receiving the higher dose to the rectal reference point had an actuarial rate of serious (Grade 3 and 4) rectal complications of 46% compared to a rate of 14% in the remainder. In terms of survival, the group of patients receiving the higher dose to the rectal reference point have all survived, whereas the group of patients receiving the lower dose to the rectal reference point have a significantly different rate of survival of 72%, p = 0.046. 24 refs., 4 figs., 4 tabs.« less
  • Purpose: To describe patient characteristics and the process of radiotherapy (RT) for patients with esophageal cancer treated between 1999 and 2001 in Japan. Methods and Materials: The Japanese Patterns of Care Study (PCS) Working Group conducted a third nationwide survey of 76 institutions. Detailed information was accumulated on 621 patients with thoracic esophageal cancer who received RT. Results: The median age of patients was 68 years. Eighty-eight percent were male, and 12% were female. Ninety-nine percent had squamous cell carcinoma histology. Fifty-five percent had the main lesion in the middle thoracic esophagus. Fourteen percent had clinical Stage 0-I disease, 32%more » had Stage IIA-IIB, 43% had Stage III, and 10% had Stage IV disease. Chemotherapy was given to 63% of patients; 39% received definitive chemoradiotherapy (CRT) without surgery and 24% pre- or postoperative CRT. Sixty-two percent of the patients aged {>=}75 years were treated with RT only. Median total dose of external RT was 60 Gy for definitive CRT patients, 60 Gy for RT alone, and 40 Gy for preoperative CRT. Conclusions: This PCS describes general aspects of RT for esophageal cancer in Japan. Squamous cell carcinoma accounted for the majority of patients. The standard total external RT dose for esophageal cancer was higher in Japan than in the United States. Chemoradiotherapy had become common for esophageal cancer treatment, but patients aged {>=}75 years were more likely to be treated by RT only.« less