• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• v.7 no.2
• /
• pp.227-233
• /
• 1989

From April 1986 to Dec 1988, fifty one patients with carcinoma of lung were treated by radiation therapy in Department of Therapeutic Radiology, Yeungnam University Hospital Of the 51 patients, $31(61\%)$ were squamous cell ca, $8(15.7\%)$ were small cell ca, and remained $4(7.9\%)$ were other cell types. Total radiation dose was average $64Gy (60\~75 Gy)$ for group A and 45Gy $(40\~59Gy)$ for group B. The mass regression and the response of airway obstruction to radiation therapy was established on the basis of follow up chest X-ray. The mass regression above $50\%$ of total volume was noted in 23 patients $(74.2\%)$ among 31 patients and the difference between two groups was not seen. In squamous cell ca, however, the mass regression rate (above $50\%$ of total volume) was $83.3\%$ (10/12) in group A compared to $50\%$ (3/6) in group B(p<0.05). The alleviation of airway obstruction was noted as follows. In group A, CR $42.9\%$, PR $35.7\%$, no response $21.4\%$ and in group B, CR $55.6\%,\;PR\;33.3\%$, no response $11.1\%$. But, in squamous cell ca, responsiveness is higher than group B. The study indicates that the importance of higher radiation dose in the management of primary tumor mass and airway obstruction caused by lung cancer especially squamous cell ca. So, meticulous treatment planning and multimodality combination therapy without increasing si.do elect or complication is recommended in management of inoperable bronchogenic carcinoma.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.4 no.2
• /
• pp.19-25
• /
• 1993

Treatment planning of lung cancer with density corrected Computed tomography. Eighty-seven patients with lung cnacer who had radiation therapy in Yeungnam University Medical Center between, April 1 1990 and Aug. 30 1993 were retrospectively evaluated total tumor dose, dose distribution, field correction, and loading change, compared with contour or CT image planning and density corrected CT planning. In dose distribution, higher dose was calculated in compare with density corrected CT planning less than 5% difference were found in 45 patient(52%), 5-10% in 25 patients (29%), 10-15% in 15 patients (17%) and over 15% in 2 patients (2%). Correction of treatment field was performed in 18 patients (21%) and changing of dose loading was given in 15 patients (17%). In conclusion, we emphasize that density corrected CT planning is the very important factor which contribute to increase therapeutic gain by exact selection of target volume, target dose, normal tissue dose and dose of critical organ.