Radiation Oncology Journal

The Korean Society for Radiation Oncology (대한방사선종양학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Perineal Skin Toxicity according to Irradiation Technique in Radiotherapy of Anal Cancer

항문암의 방사선치료 시 방사선 조사 기법에 따른 회음부 피부 독성

  • You, Sei-Hwan (Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University Health System) ;
  • Seong, Jin-Sil (Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University Health System) ;
  • Koom, Woong-Sub (Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University Health System)
  • 유세환 (연세대학교 의과대학 연세암센터 방사선종양학교실) ;
  • 성진실 (연세대학교 의과대학 연세암센터 방사선종양학교실) ;
  • 금웅섭 (연세대학교 의과대학 연세암센터 방사선종양학교실)
  • Published : 2008.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: Various treatment techniques have been attempted for the radiotherapy of anal cancer because of acute side effects such as perineal skin reactions. This study was performed to investigate an optimal radiotherapy technique in anal cancer. Materials and Methods: The study subjects included 35 patients who underwent definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy for anal cancer in Yonsei Cancer Center between 1990 and 2007. The patients' clinical data, including irradiation technique, were reviewed retrospectively. The primary lesion, regional lymph nodes, and both inguinal lymph nodes were irradiated by $41.4{\sim}45\;Gy$ with a conventional schedule, followed by a boost does to the primary lesion or metastatic lymph nodes. The radiotherapy technique was classified into four categories according to the irradiation field and number of portals. In turn, acute skin reactions associated with the treatment interruption period were investigated according to each of the four techniques. Results: 28 patients (80.0%) had grade 2 radiation dermatitis or greater, whereas 10 patients (28.6%) had grade 3 radiation dermatitis or greater during radiotherapy. Radiation dermatitis and the treatment interruption period were relatively lower in patients belonging to the posterior-right-left 3 x-ray field with inguinal electron boost and in patients belonging to electron thunderbird techniques. The interruption periods were $8.2{\pm}10.2$ and $5.7{\pm}7.7$ for the two technique groups, respectively. Twenty-seven patients (77.1%) went into complete remission at 1 month after radiotherapy and the overall 5 year survival rates were 67.7%. Conclusion: Field size and beam arrangement can affect patients' compliance in anal cancer radiotherapy, whereas a small x-ray field for the perineum seems to be helpful by decreasing severe radiation dermatitis.

목 적: 항문암의 방사선치료는 급성부작용을 많이 동반하므로 다양한 치료 기법이 적용되어왔다. 본원에서 시행된 항문암 방사선치료를 회음부 피부반응의 측면에서 검토하여 최적의 방사선치료 기법을 모색하고자 하였다. 대상 및 방법: 1990년부터 2007년까지 항문암으로 근치적 항암화학방사선치료를 마친 환자 35명을 대상으로 방사선 조사 방법 및 관련된 임상적 자료들을 이용하였다. 방사선치료는 원발병소, 영역림프절 및 서혜부림프절이 치료범위에 포함된 상태로 1.8 Gy 씩 $41.4{\sim}45\;Gy$ 조사 후 원발 병소 또는 전이성 림프절에 추가 조사하는 것을 원칙으로 하였다. 방사선 조사 기법은 조사 부위 및 조사 수에 따라 4가지로 분류하였으며 각 기법에 따른 회음부 급성피부반응 및 치료중지기간 간의 관련 여부를 알아보았다. 결 과: 방사선치료 중 28명(80.0%)의 환자에서 2등급 이상의 방사선 피부염이 발생하였고 10명(28.5%)이 3등급 이상의 방사선 피부염을 보였다. 4가지 방사선 조사 기법 중 원발병소와 영역림프절에 대한 3면 X-선 및 양측 서혜부림프절에 대한 전자선 조사 군과 electron thunderbird군에서 방사선 피부염이 동반된 환자 수가 상대적으로 적었으며 치료중지기간이 각각 $8.2{\pm}10.2$일, $5.7{\pm}5.7$일로써 다른 치료 기법보다 적었다. 방사선치료 종료 후 1개월 시점에서 27명(77.1%)의 환자에서 완전 관해를 보였으며 5년 생존율은 67.7%이었다. 결 론: 항문암의 방사선치료에 있어 방사선 조사 방법 및 범위가 치료순응도에 영향을 미칠 수 있으며, X-선의 회음부 조사 범위를 줄이는 방법이 회음부의 심각한 방사선 피부염을 감소시킴으로써 환자의 치료순응도를 높이는 데 있어 적절할 것으로 생각된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Nigro N, Vaitkevicius V, Considine B. Combined therapy for cancer of the anal canal: a preliminary report. Dis Colon Rectum 1974;15:354-356
  2. Bartelink H, Roelofsen F, Eschwege F, et al. Concomitant radiotherapy and chemotherapy is superior to radiotherapy alone in the treatment of locally advanced anal cancer: Results of a phase III randomized trial of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Radiotherapy and Gastrointestinal Cooperative Groups. J Clin Oncol 1997;15: 2040-2049 https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.1997.15.5.2040
  3. Chung WK, Kim SK, Lee CG, Seong J, Kim GE. Concurrent chemoradiotherapy results in patients with anal cancer. J Korean Soc Ther Radiol 1994;12:99-107
  4. Vuong T, Franco E, Lehnert S, et al. Silver leaf nylon dressing to prevent radiation dermatitis in patients undergoing chemotherapy and external beam radiotherapy to the perineum. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004;59:809-814 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2003.11.031
  5. John M, Pajak T, Flam MS, et al. Dose acceleration in chemoradiation for anal cancer: preliminary results of RTOG 92-08. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1995;32(Suppl.):157
  6. John M, Pajak T, Kreig R, Pinover WH, Myerson R. Dose escalation without split-course chemoradiation for anal cancer: results of a phase II RTOG study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1997;39(2 Suppl. 1):203
  7. Graf R, Wust P, Hildebrandt B, et al. Impact of overall treatment time on local control of anal cancer treated with radiochemotherapy. Oncology 2003;65:14-22 https://doi.org/10.1159/000071200
  8. Weber DC, Kurtz JM, Allal AS. The impact of gap duration on local control in anal canal carcinoma treated by split-course radiotherapy and concomitant chemotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2001;50:675-680 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-3016(01)01510-3
  9. Constantinou EC, Daly W, Fung CY, Willett CG, Kaufman DS, Delaney TF. Time-dose considerations in the treatment of anal cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1997;39:651-657 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-3016(97)00329-5
  10. Grigsby PW, Roberts HL, Perez CA. Femoral neck fracture following groin irradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1995; 32:63-67 https://doi.org/10.1016/0360-3016(95)00546-B
  11. Ma L, Chang W, Lau-Chin M, Tate EM, Boyer AL. Using static MLC fields to replace partial transmission cerrobend blocks in treatment planning of rectal carcinoma cases. Med Dosim 1998;23:264-266 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0958-3947(98)00034-X
  12. Moran M, Lund MW, Ahmad M, Trumpore HS, Haffty B, Nath R. Improved treatment of pelvis and inguinal nodes using modified segmental boost technique: dosimetric evaluation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004;59:1523-1530 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2004.01.006
  13. Gilroy JS, Amdur RJ, Louis DA, Li JG, Mendenhall WM. Irradiation the groin nodes without breaking a leg: a comparison of techniques for groin node irradiation. Med Dosim 2004; 29:258-264 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meddos.2004.02.001
  14. Melcher AA, Sebag-Montefiore D. Concurrent chemoradiotherapy for squamous cell carcinoma of the anus using a shrinking field radiotherapy technique without a boost. Br J Cancer 2003;88:1352-1357 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6600913
  15. Vuong T, Kopek N, Ducruet T, et al. Conformal therapy improves the therapeutic index of patients with anal canal cancer treated with combined chemotherapy and external beam radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007;67:1394-1400 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.11.038
  16. Gerard JP, Chapet O, Samiei F, et al. Management of inguinal lymph node metastases in patients with carcinoma of the anal canal. Cancer 2001;92:77-84 https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(20010701)92:1<77::AID-CNCR1294>3.0.CO;2-P
  17. Vuong T, Devic S, Belliveau P, Muanza T, Hegyi G. Contribution of conformal therapy in the treatment of anal canal carcinoma with combined chemotherapy and radiotherapy: results of a phase II study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2003;56:823-831 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-3016(03)00016-6
  18. Devic S, Hegye G, Vuong T, Muanza T, Podgorsak EB. Comparative skin dose measurement in the treatment of anal canal canceer: conventional versus conformal therapy. Med Phys 2004;31:1316-1321 https://doi.org/10.1118/1.1737511
  19. Charnley N, Choudhury A, Chesser P, Cooper RA, Sebag-Montefiore D. Effective treatment of anal canal in the elderly with low-dose chemotherapy. Br J Cancer 2005;92:1221-1225 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6602486
  20. Wong S, Gibbs P, Chao M, et al. Carcinoma of the anal canal: a local experience and review of the literature. ANZ J Surg 2004;74:541-546 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1445-2197.2004.02943.x
  21. Chie EK, Wu HG, Heo DS, Bang YJ, Kim NK, Ha SW. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radiotherapy in epidermoid carcinoma of anus. Tumori 2004;90:299-302 https://doi.org/10.1177/030089160409000307
  22. Svensson C, Goldman S, Friberg B, Glimelius B. Induction chemotherapy and radiotherapy in loco-regionally advanced epidermoid carcinoma of the anal canal. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1998;41:863-867 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-3016(98)00122-9
  23. Chie EK, Ha SW, Park JG, Bang YJ, Heo DS, Kim NK. Treatment results in anal cancer: non-operative treatment versus operative treatment. J Korean Soc Ther Radiol 2002;20: 62-67
  24. Mitchell SE, Mendenhall WM, Zlotecki RA, Carroll RR. Squamous cell carcinoma of the anal canal. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2001;49:1007-1013 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-3016(00)01518-2
  25. Myerson RJ, Kong F, Birnbaum EH, et al. Radiation therapy for epidermoid carcinoma of the anal canal, clinical and treatment factors associated with outcome. Radiother Oncol 2001; 61:15-22 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8140(01)00404-2