Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology 34:142-148 (2004)
© 2004 Foundation for Promotion of Cancer Research
Long-term Result of High Dose-rate Afterloading Brachytherapy in Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Cervix: Relationship between Facility Structure and Outcome
1 Department of Radiology, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya and 2 Department of Medical Information and Medical Records, Nagoya University Hospital, Nagoya, Japan
Objective: To compare outcome results for squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix between patients treated in a single facility [single facility therapy: (SFT)] and others combined with external beam irradiation (EBRT) in a small facility and intracavitary brachytherapy in a central facility (combined facilities therapy: CFT).
Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of 155 patients with histologically proven squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix radically treated by EBRT and high dose-rate (HDR) intracavitary brachytherapy from August 1995 to May 2000. The overall survival and cause-specific survival rates were calculated by using the Kaplan–Meier method. The endpoint was defined as death due to cervical cancer for the cause-specific survival. The log-rank test and the generalized Wilcoxon test were used to compare the survival curves between the two treatment groups.
Results: Nine patients were lost, so 146 patients were retrospectively analyzed. There were 22 patients (15%) in stage I, 21 (14%) stage IIA, 51 (35%) stage IIB, 41 (28%) stage III, 11 (8%) stage IVA. The median age was 72 years (range, 30–89 years). The median follow-up time was 58 months. The proportion of patients treated with SFT was 23% (33/146) and CFT 77% (113/146). The overall survival rate was 62.3% and the cause-specific survival rate was 71.3%. The cause-specific survival rates for SFT and CFT were 87.9% and 66.4%, respectively; the difference between these two treatments was statistically significant (P = 0.024). The difference in the survival rate between these two treatments for stage III and IVA patients was also statistically significant (P = 0.021). However, no significant difference between these treatments was seen in the cause-specific survival rate for each stage. There was a significant difference between SFT and CFT in the incidence rate of severe late complications (grade 3–5) (P = 0.038). There was no significant difference in overall treatment times and total dose between the two groups; the applied photon beam energy showed a significant difference.
Conclusion: Our results suggest that the survival outcome will be aggravated by CFT. If the treatment process of using a lower photon beam energy were to be improved by the installation of a high-energy linear accelerator, CFT can be applied to patients with cervical cancer.
+ For reprints and all correspondence: Takahito Okuda, Department of Radiology, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, 65 Tsurumai-cho, Showa-ku, Nagoya, Japan. E-mail: okuda{at}sc.dcns.ne.jp