• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.157-162
• /
• 1995

Lung cancer study group at Asan Medical Center has conducted the second prospective study to determine the efficacy and feasibility of MVP chemotherapy with concurrent hyperfractionated radiotherapy for Patients with stage III unresectable non-small cell lung cancer(NSCLC). All eligible Patients with stage III unresectable NSCLC were treated with hyperfractionated radiotherapy(120 cGy/fx BID. 6480 cGy/54fx) and concurrent 2 cycles of MVP(Mitomycin C $6mg/m^2,$ d2 & d29.Vinblastine $6mg/m^2,$ d2 & d29, Cisplatin $60mg/m^2,$ dl & d28) chemotherapy. Between Aug. 1993 and Nov. 1994, 62 patients entered this study; $6(10\%)$ had advanced stage IIIa and $56(90\%)$ had IIIb disease including 11 with pleural effusion and 10 with supraclavicular metastases. Among 62 patients, $48(77\%)$ completed planned therapy. Fourteen patients refused further treatment during chemoradiotherapy. Of 46 patients evaluable for response, $34(74\%)$ showed major response including $10(22\%)$ with complete and $24(52\%)$ with partial responses. Of 48 patients evaluable for toxicity, $13(27\%)$ showed grade IV hematologic toxicity but treatment delay did not exceed 5 days Two patients died of sepsis during chemoradiotherapy. Severe weight loss(more than $10\%)$ occurred in 9 patients$(19\%)$ during treatment. Nine patients$(19\%)$ developed radiation pneumonitis Six of these patients had grade 1 (mild) Pneumonitis with radiographic changes within the treatment fields Three other patients had grade 11 Pneumonitis, but none of these patients had continuous symptoms after steroid treatment. Concurrent chemoradiotherapy for patients with advanced NSCLC was well tolerated with acceptable toxicity and achieved higher response rates than the first study, but rather low compliance $rate(77\%)$ in this study is worrisome. We need to improve nutritional support during treatment and to use G-CSF to improve leukopenia and if necessary. supportive care will be given as in patients, Longer follow-up and larger sample size is needed to observe survival advantage.

• The Korean Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology
• /
• v.20 no.1
• /
• pp.32-36
• /
• 2016

Purpose In nuclear medicine examination, $^{131}I$ is widely used in nuclear medicine examination such as diagnosis, treatment, and others of thyroid cancer and other diseases. $^{131}I$ conducts examination and treatment through emission of ${\gamma}$ ray and ${\beta}^-$ ray. Since $^{131}I$ (364 keV) contains more energy compared to $^{99m}Tc$ (140 keV) although it displays high integrated rate and enables quick discharge through kidney, the objective of this study lies in comparing the difference in exposure dose of $^{131}I$ before and after wearing apron when handling $^{131}I$ with focus on 3 elements of external exposure protection that are distance, time, and shield in order to reduce the exposure to technicians in comparison with $^{99m}Tc$ during the handling and administration process. When wearing apron (in general, Pb 0.5 mm), $^{99m}Tc$ presents shield of over 90% but shielding effect of $^{131}I$ is relatively low as it is of high energy and there may be even more exposure due to influence of scattered ray (secondary) and bremsstrahlung in case of high dose. However, there is no special report or guideline for low dose (74 MBq) high energy thus quantitative analysis on exposure dose of technicians will be conducted based on apron wearing during the handling of $^{131}I$. Materials and Methods With patients who visited Department of Nuclear Medicine of our hospital for low dose $^{131}I$ administration for thyroid cancer and diagnosis for 7 months from Jun 2014 to Dec 2014 as its subject, total 6 pieces of TLD was attached to interior and exterior of apron placed on thyroid, chest, and testicle from preparation to administration. Then, radiation exposure dose from $^{131}I$ examination to administration was measured. Total procedure time was set as within 5 min per person including 3 min of explanation, 1 min of distribution, and 1 min of administration. In regards to TLD location selection, chest at which exposure dose is generally measured and thyroid and testicle with high sensitivity were selected. For preparation, 74 MBq of $^{131}I$ shall be distributed with the use of $2m{\ell}$ syringe and then it shall be distributed after making it into dose of $2m{\ell}$ though dilution with normal saline. When distributing $^{131}I$ and administering it to the patient, $100m{\ell}$ of water shall be put into a cup, distributed $^{131}I$ shall be diluted, and then oral administration to patients shall be conducted with the distance of 1m from the patient. The process of withdrawing $2m{\ell}$ syringe and cup used for oral administration was conducted while wearing apron and TLD. Apron and TLD were stored at storage room without influence of radiation exposure and the exposure dose was measured with request to Seoul Radiology Services. Results With the result of monthly accumulated exposure dose of TLD worn inside and outside of apron placed on thyroid, chest, and testicle during low dose $^{131}I$ examination during the research period divided by number of people, statistics processing was conducted with Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test using SPSS Version. 12.0K. As a result, it was revealed that there was no significant difference since all of thyroid (p = 0.345), chest (p = 0.686), and testicle (p = 0.715) were presented to be p > 0.05. Also, when converting the change in total exposure dose during research period into percentage, it was revealed to be -23.5%, -8.3%, and 19.0% for thyroid, chest, and testicle respectively. Conclusion As a result of conducting Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test, it was revealed that there is no statistically significant difference (p > 0.05). Also, in case of calculating shielding rate with accumulate exposure dose during 7 months, it was revealed that there is irregular change in exposure dose for inside and outside of apron. Although the degree of change seems to be high when it is expressed in percentage, it cannot be considered a big change since the unit of accumulated exposure dose is in decimal points. Therefore, regardless of wearing apron during high energy low dose $^{131}I$ administration, placing certain distance and terminating the administration as soon as possible would be of great assistance in reducing the exposure dose. Although this study restricted $^{131}I$ administration time to be within 5 min per person and distance for oral administration to be 1m, there was a shortcoming to acquire accurate result as there was insufficient number of N for statistics and it could be processed only through non-parametric method. Also, exposure dose per person during lose dose $^{131}I$ administration was measured with accumulated exposure dose using TLD rather than through direct-reading exposure dose thus more accurate result could be acquired when measurement is conducted using electronic dosimeter and pocket dosimeter.