MATERIALS AND METHODS: SEA country-specific cancer incidence by tumor site for 2015, 2025 and 2035 was extracted from the GLOBOCAN database. We utilized the optimal radiotherapy utilization rate model by Wong et al. (2016) to calculate the optimal number of fractions for all tumor sites in each SEA country. The available machines (LINAC & Co-60) were extracted from the IAEA's Directory of Radiotherapy Centres (DIRAC) from which the number of available fractions was calculated.
RESULTS: The incidence of cancers in SEA countries are expected to be 1.1 mil cases (2025) and 1.4 mil (2035) compared to 0.9 mil (2015). The number of radiotherapy fractions needed in 2025 and 2035 are 11.1 and 14.1 mil, respectively, compared to 7.6 mil in 2015. In 2015, the radiotherapy fulfillment rate (RFR; required fractions/available fractions) varied between countries with Brunei, Singapore and Malaysia are highest (RFR > 1.0 - available fractions > required fractions), whereas Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Myanmar, Philippines, Timor-Leste and Vietnam have RFR
MATERIALS/METHODS: The study was conducted on ten histologically proven cases of oral cancer undergoing radiotherapy. Stimulated whole saliva was collected at three stages of radiotherapy-0, 3, and 6 weeks. Salivary amylase was estimated using Henry-Chiamori method and comparison was made with appropriate age- and gender-matched controls.
RESULTS: Salivary amylase levels showed significant decrease in healthy subjects when compared to oral cancer patients (P < 0.001). The latter group also showed changing trend with initial decrease from 0 to 3 weeks followed by increase from 3 to 6 weeks following radiotherapy (P < 0.0528).
CONCLUSIONS: The trend in changes in the levels of salivary amylase could be used as a surrogate marker of salivary gland function in patients with oral cancer undergoing radiotherapy as primary treatment.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety-seven ROs were randomly assigned to either manual or AI-assisted contouring of eight OARs for two head-and-neck cancer cases with an in-between teaching session on contouring guidelines. Thereby, the effect of teaching (yes/no) and AI-assisted contouring (yes/no) was quantified. Second, ROs completed short-term and long-term follow-up cases all using AI assistance. Contour quality was quantified with Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC) between ROs' contours and expert consensus contours. Groups were compared using absolute differences in medians with 95% CIs.
RESULTS: AI-assisted contouring without previous teaching increased absolute DSC for optic nerve (by 0.05 [0.01; 0.10]), oral cavity (0.10 [0.06; 0.13]), parotid (0.07 [0.05; 0.12]), spinal cord (0.04 [0.01; 0.06]), and mandible (0.02 [0.01; 0.03]). Contouring time decreased for brain stem (-1.41 [-2.44; -0.25]), mandible (-6.60 [-8.09; -3.35]), optic nerve (-0.19 [-0.47; -0.02]), parotid (-1.80 [-2.66; -0.32]), and thyroid (-1.03 [-2.18; -0.05]). Without AI-assisted contouring, teaching increased DSC for oral cavity (0.05 [0.01; 0.09]) and thyroid (0.04 [0.02; 0.07]), and contouring time increased for mandible (2.36 [-0.51; 5.14]), oral cavity (1.42 [-0.08; 4.14]), and thyroid (1.60 [-0.04; 2.22]).
CONCLUSION: The study suggested that AI-assisted contouring is safe and beneficial to ROs working in LMICs. Prospective clinical trials on AI-assisted contouring should, however, be conducted upon clinical implementation to confirm the effects.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between March 2011 and May 2012, 20 patients were treated with 55 fractions of brachytherapy using tandem and ovoids and underwent post-implant CT scans. The external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) dose was 48.6 Gy in 27 fractions. HDR brachytherapy was delivered to a dose of 21 Gy in three fractions. The ICRU bladder and rectum point doses along with 4 additional rectal points were recorded. The maximum dose (DMax) to rectum was the highest recorded dose at one of these five points. Using the HDR plus 2.6 brachytherapy treatment planning system, the bladder and rectum were retrospectively contoured on the 55 CT datasets. The DVHs for rectum and bladder were calculated and the minimum doses to the highest irradiated 2cc area of rectum and bladder were recorded (D2cc) for all individual fractions. The mean D2cc of rectum was compared to the means of ICRU rectal point and rectal DMax using the Student's t-test. The mean D2cc of bladder was compared with the mean ICRU bladder point using the same statistical test .The total dose, combining EBRT and HDR brachytherapy, were biologically normalized to the conventional 2 Gy/fraction using the linear-quadratic model. (α/β value of 10 Gy for target, 3 Gy for organs at risk).
RESULTS: The total prescribed dose was 77.5 Gy α/β10. The mean dose to the rectum was 4.58 ± 1.22 Gy for D 2cc, 3.76 ± 0.65 Gy at D ICRU and 4.75 ± 1.01 Gy at DMax. The mean rectal D 2cc dose differed significantly from the mean dose calculated at the ICRU reference point (p<0.005); the mean difference was 0.82 Gy (0.48 -1.19 Gy). The mean EQD2 was 68.52 ± 7.24 Gy α/β3 for D 2cc, 61.71 ± 2.77 Gy α/β3 at D ICRU and 69.24 ± 6.02 Gy α/β3 at DMax. The mean ratio of D 2cc rectum to D ICRU rectum was 1.25 and the mean ratio of D 2cc rectum to DMax rectum was 0.98 for all individual fractions. The mean dose to the bladder was 6.00 ± 1.90 Gy for D 2cc and 5.10 ± 2.03 Gy at D ICRU. However, the mean D 2cc dose did not differ significantly from the mean dose calculated at the ICRU reference point (p=0.307); the mean difference was 0.90 Gy (0.49-1.25 Gy). The mean EQD2 was 81.85 ± 13.03 Gy α/β3 for D 2cc and 74.11 ± 19.39 Gy α/β3 at D ICRU. The mean ratio of D 2cc bladder to D ICRU bladder was 1.24. In the majority of applications, the maximum dose point was not the ICRU point. On average, the rectum received 77% and bladder received 92% of the prescribed dose.
CONCLUSIONS: OARs doses assessed by DVH criteria were higher than ICRU point doses. Our data suggest that the estimated dose to the ICRU bladder point may be a reasonable surrogate for the D 2cc and rectal DMax for D 2cc. However, the dose to the ICRU rectal point does not appear to be a reasonable surrogate for the D 2cc.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted at the Department of Radiotherapy and Oncology, Hospital Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. All patients with histologically confirmed recurrent NPC in the absence of distant metastasis treated in the period 1997-2010 were included in this study. These patients were treated with ICBT alone or in combination with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). Treatment outcomes measured were local recurrence free survival (LRFS), disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS).
RESULTS: Thirty three patients were eligible for this study. The median age at recurrence was 56 years with a median time to initial local recurrence of 27 months. Majority of patients were staged as rT1-2 (94%) or rN0 (82%). The proportion of patients categorised as stage III-IV at first local recurrence was only 9%. Twenty one patients received a combination of ICBT and external beam radiotherapy while 12 patients were treated with ICBT alone. Median interval of recurrence post re-irradiation was 32 months (range: 4-110 months). The median LRFS, DFS and OS were 30 months, 29 months and 36 months respectively. The 5 year LRFS, DFS and OS were 44.7%, 38.8% and 28.1% respectively. The N stage at recurrence was found to be a significant prognostic factor for LRFS and DFS after multivariate analysis. Major late complications occurred in 34.9% of our patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows ICBT was associated with a reasonable long term outcome in salvaging recurrent NPC although major complications remained a significant problem. The N stage at recurrence was a significant prognostic factor for both LRFS and DFS.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from 10 consecutive patients treated with IMRT from June-October 2011 in Penang General Hospital were collected retrospectively for analysis. For each patient, dose volume histograms were generated for both the IMRT and 3DCRT plans using a total dose of 70Gy. Comparison of the plans was accomplished by comparing the target volume coverage (5 measures) and sparing of organs at risk (17 organs) for each patient using both IMRT and 3DCRT. The means of each comparison target volume coverage measures and organs at risk measures were obtained and tested for statistical significance using the paired Student t-test.
RESULTS: All 5 measures for target volume coverage showed marked dosimetric superiority of IMRT over 3DCRT. V70 and V66.5 for PTV70 showed an absolute improvement of 39.3% and 24.1% respectively. V59.4 and V56.4 for PTV59.4 showed advantages of 18.4% and 16.4%. Moreover, the mean PTV70 dose revealed a 5.1 Gy higher dose with IMRT. Only 4 out of 17 organs at risk showed statistically significant difference in their means which were clinically meaningful between the IMRT and 3DCRT techniques. IMRT was superior in sparing the spinal cord (less 5.8Gy), V30 of right parotid (less 14.3%) and V30 of the left parotid (less 13.1%). The V55 of the left cochlea was lower with 3DCRT (less 44.3%).
CONCLUSIONS: IMRT is superior to 3DCRT due to its dosimetric advantage in target volume coverage while delivering acceptable doses to organs at risk. A total dose of 70Gy with IMRT should be considered as a standard of care for radical treatment of NPC.