8 research outputs found

    CARCINOMA OF UTERINE CERVIX WITH MULTIPLE SKULL METASTASES AS THE FIRST PRESENTATION OF RECURRENCE: A CASE REPORT

    No full text
    Carcinoma of cervix recurring as multiple skull metastasis is a very rare presentation. A 49-yearold woman, a diagnosed case of carcinoma cervix [International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IB1] treated with radical hysterectomy presented with generalized seizures to us after 40 months of initial diagnosis. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography showed metastasis to left temporoparietal bone and left frontal bone. Biopsy from the left temporal lesion showed non-keratinizing squamous cell carcinoma. She was thus diagnosed as recurrent carcinoma cervix with multiple calvarial metastases with the controlled primary site. She received palliative radiotherapy to the entire skull. She further received 4 cycles of palliative chemotherapy with paclitaxel and carboplatin repeated every 3 weeks. However, she could not tolerate chemotherapy after 4 cycles owing to significant deterioration of performance status and expired after 12 months of diagnosis of metastasis

    Pelvic bone anatomy vs implanted gold seed marker registration for image-guided intensity modulated radiotherapy for prostate carcinoma: Comparative analysis of inter-fraction motion and toxicities

    No full text
    Objectives: We compared the prostate motion variability and toxicities between patients treated with gold marker registration based IG-IMRT (IG-IMRT-M) and bony landmark registration based IG-IMRT (IG-IMRT-B). Methods: T1c-T3b (node negative), intermediate and high risk (non-metastatic) adenocarcinoma of prostate, age ≥18 years, Karnofsky Performance Status of ≥70 were included in this retrospective study. The prostate motion variability, acute and late radiation toxicities between the two treatment arms (IG-IMRT-M versus IG-IMRT-B) were compared. Results: Total of 35 patients (17 for IG-IMRT-M and 18 for IG-IMRT-B) were treated with a median radiotherapy dose of 76 Gray. The prostate variability observed with and without markers in millimeter was 4.1 ± 2.3 vs 3.7 ± 2.1 [Antero-Posterior (A-P); p = 0.001], 2.3 ± 1.5 vs 2.1 ± 1.2 [Superior-Inferior (S-I); p = 0.095] and 1.1 ± 1.7 vs 0.4 ± 1.4 [Left-Right (L-R); p = 0.003]. There was higher acute toxicity in IG-IMRT-B arm compared to IG-IMRT-M arm in terms of grade ≥2 diarrhea [50% vs 11% OR = 7.5 (1.3–42.7); p = 0.02] and grade ≥2 proctitis [38% vs 5.8%, OR = 10.1 (1.09–94.1); p = 0.04]. At a median follow up of 36 months, the late genitourinary toxicities grade ≥2 [27% vs 0%; p = 0.04] were higher in the IG-IMRT-B arm compared to IG-IMRT-M arm. Conclusions: IG-IMRT-M detects higher prostate motion variability as compared to IG-IMRT-B, inferring a significant prostate motion inside fixed pelvic bony cavity. The addition of marker based image guidance results in higher precision of prostate localization and lesser acute and late toxicities
    corecore