Brachytherapy for cervical cancer in septate uterus: Dose-volume differences with tandem implant placement in right vs. left uterine canal: A case report

Ishibashi,Naoya; Maebayashi,Toshiya; Aizawa,Takuya; Sakaguchi,Masakuni; Nakao,Takehiro; Okada,Masahiro

doi:10.3892/ol.2018.8179

Brachytherapy for cervical cancer in septate uterus: Dose-volume differences with tandem implant placement in right vs. left uterine canal: A case report

Authors:
- Naoya Ishibashi
- Toshiya Maebayashi
- Takuya Aizawa
- Masakuni Sakaguchi
- Takehiro Nakao
- Masahiro Okada
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Department of Radiology, Nihon University School of Medicine, Tokyo 173‑8610, Japan, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Nihon University School of Medicine, Tokyo 173‑8610, Japan
Published online on: March 6, 2018 https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2018.8179
Pages: 7273-7278

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

Brachytherapy is a standard treatment modality for locally advanced cervical cancer. In patients with uterine anomalies, the radiation dose to the target volume and the organs at risk can vary depending on the positioning of the brachytherapy tandem implant. However, there have been few reports concerning the use of brachytherapy in patients with uterine anomalies. The present study reports the case of a 55‑year‑old woman with locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix and complete septate uterus. The patient was treated with external‑beam radiation therapy, cisplatin chemotherapy, and brachytherapy. Computed tomography‑based planning was performed for image‑guided brachytherapy with the tandem implant alternately in the right and left uterine canals and using the right and left point A. A comparison of the resulting dose‑volume histograms revealed wide variations in the projected dose to the clinical target volume and organs at risk. Tandem implant positioning for brachytherapy was chosen to optimize the dose‑volume distribution. At the point of writing, the patient has not experienced local recurrence.

View Figures

View References

1	Eifel PJ, Winter K, Morris M, Levenback C, Grigsby PW, Cooper J, Rotman M, Gershenson D and Mutch DG: Pelvic irradiation with concurrent chemotherapy versus pelvic and para-aortic irradiation for high-risk cervical cancer: An update of radiation therapy oncology group trial (RTOG) 90–01. J Clin Oncol. 22:872–880. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
2	Rose PG, Bundy BN, Watkins EB, Thigpen JT, Deppe G, Maiman MA, Clarke-Pearson DL and Insalaco S: Concurrent cisplatin-based radiotherapy and chemotherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. 340:1144–1153. 1999. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
3	Chemoradiotherapy for Cervical Cancer Meta-Analysis Collaboration: Reducing uncertainties about the effects of chemoradiotherapy for cervical cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data from 18 randomized trials. J Clin Oncol. 26:5802–5812. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
4	Ribeiro I, Janssen H, De Brabandere M, Nulens A, De Bal D, Vergote I and Van Limbergen E: Long term experience with 3D image guided brachytherapy and clinical outcome in cervical cancer patients. Radiother Oncol. 120:447–454. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
5	Sturdza A, Pötter R, Fokdal LU, Haie-Meder C, Tan LT, Mazeron R, Petric P, Šegedin B, Jurgenliemk-Schulz IM, Nomden C, et al: Image guided brachytherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer: Improved pelvic control and survival in RetroEMBRACE, a multicenter cohort study. Radiother Oncol. 120:428–433. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
6	Ohno T, Noda SE, Okonogi N, Murata K, Shibuya K, Kiyohara H, Tamaki T, Ando K, Oike T, Ohkubo Y, et al: In-room computed tomography-based brachytherapy for uterine cervical cancer: Results of a 5-year retrospective study. J Radiat Res. 58:543–551. 2017.PubMed/NCBI
7	The American Fertility Society classifications of adnexal adhesions, distal tubal occlusion, tubal occlusion secondary to tubal ligation, tubal pregnancies, müllerian anomalies and intrauterine adhesions. Fertil Steril. 49:944–955. 1988. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
8	Grimbizis GF, Gordts S, Di Spiezio Sardo A, Brucker S, De Angelis C, Gergolet M, Li TC, Tanos V, Brölmann H, Gianaroli L and Campo R: The ESHRE/ESGE consensus on the classification of female genital tract congenital anomalies. Hum Reprod. 28:2032–2044. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
9	Pecorelli S: Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva, cervix, and endometrium. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 105:103–104. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
10	Haie-Meder C, Pötter R, Van Limbergen E, Briot E, De Brabandere M, Dimopoulos J, Dumas I, Hellebust TP, Kirisits C, Lang S, et al: Gynaecological (GYN) GEC-ESTRO working group. Recommendations from Gynaecological (GYN) GEC-ESTRO working group (I): Concepts and terms in 3D image based 3D treatment planning in cervix cancer brachytherapy with emphasis on MRI assessment of GTV and CTV. Radiother Oncol. 74:235–245. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
11	Pötter R, Haie-Meder C, Van Limbergen E, Barillot I, De Brabandere M, Dimopoulos J, Dumas I, Erickson B, Lang S, Nulens A, et al: Recommendations from gynaecological (GYN) GEC ESTRO working group (II): Concepts and terms in 3D image-based treatment planning in cervix cancer brachytherapy-3D dose volume parameters and aspects of 3D image-based anatomy, radiation physics, radiobiology. Radiother Oncol. 78:67–77. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
12	Dean EM, Lambert GD and Dawes PJ: Gynaecological treatments using the Selectron remote afterloading system. Br J Radiol. 61:1053–1057. 1988. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
13	National cancer institute common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE). 4.03. Jun 14–2010.
14	Monk BJ, Tewari KS and Koh WJ: Multimodality therapy for locally advanced cervical carcinoma: State of the art and future directions. J Clin Oncol. 25:2952–2965. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
15	Toita T, Kitagawa R, Hamano T, Umayahara K, Hirashima Y, Aoki Y, Oguchi M, Mikami M and Takizawa K: Cervical Cancer (Vulva Cancer) Committee of Japanese Gynecologic Oncology Group (JGOG): Phase II study of concurrent chemoradiotherapy with high-dose-rate intracavitary brachytherapy in patients with locally advanced uterine cervical cancer: Efficacy and toxicity of a low cumulative radiation dose schedule. Gynecol Oncol. 126:211–216. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
16	Ohno T, Toita T, Tsujino K, Uchida N, Hatano K, Nishimura T and Ishikura S: A questionnaire-based survey on 3D image-guided brachytherapy for cervical cancer in Japan: Advances and obstacles. J Radiat Res. 56:897–903. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
17	Lee CD, Churn M, Haddad N, Davies-Humphries J, Kingston RK and Jones B: Bilateral radical radiotherapy in a patient with uterus didelphys. Br J Radiol. 73:553–556. 2000. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
18	Loo HW and Locks SM: Squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix: Report of an unusual case of bicornuate bicollis uterus treated with bilateral intracavity brachytherapy. Br J Radiol. 83:e143–e146. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
19	Platta CS, Wallace C, Gondi V, Das R, Straub M, Al-Niaimi A, Applegate G and Bradley KA: Cervical brachytherapy technique for locally advanced carcinoma of the cervix in a patient with septate uterus. J Contemp Brachytherapy. 6:76–81. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
20	Cordoba A, Escande A, Comte P, Fumagalli I, Bresson L, Mubiayi N and Lartigau E: Locally advanced adenocarcinoma of the cervix on uterus didelphys: A case report. J Contemp Brachytherapy. 9:71–76. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
21	Bhagavath B, Ellie G, Griffiths KM, Winter T, Alur-Gupta S, Richardson C and Lindheim SR: Uterine malformations: An update of diagnosis, management, and outcomes. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 72:377–392. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
22	Troiano RN and McCarthy SM: Mullerian duct anomalies: Imaging and clinical issues. Radiology. 233:19–34. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI