OBJECTIVE: Sino-nasal cancer is rare and often diagnosed at advanced stages. Some patients cannot receive curative treatment and are treated with palliative irradiation. We aimed to identify prognostic factors for survival to facilitate treatment personalization for this group.
METHODS: Twelve patients treated with palliative radiotherapy for locally advanced sino-nasal cancer were retrospectively analyzed for survival. Ten characteristics were evaluated including age, gender, Karnofsky performance score (KPS), pre-radiotherapy hemoglobin, tumor site, lymph node involvement, histology, equivalent dose in 2 Gy-fractions, completion of radiotherapy and concurrent chemotherapy.
RESULTS: On univariate analysis, KPS ≥70 (p<0.001) and completion of radiotherapy (p<0.001) were significantly associated with better survival. Chemotherapy showed a trend (p=0.097). In the multivariate analysis, KPS ≥70 was significant (p=0.025), and completion of radiotherapy showed a trend (p=0.080).
CONCLUSIONS: KPS is an independent predictor of survival for palliative irradiation of sino-nasal cancer. Patients require close monitoring and care for side effects, since completion of radiotherapy is important for survival.

暂无摘要。

The aim of this study was to compare various dosimetric parameters of dynamic mlc intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plans with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans for sino-nasal cancers, which are rare and complex tumors to treat with radiotherapy. IMRT using five fields, coplanar in the sagittal plane and VMAT employing two coplanar arc plans were created for five patients. The plans were assessed by comparing Conformity Index and Sigma Index (dose homogeneity) in the Planning Target Volume (PTV) and through comparison of dose-volume characteristics to the following organs at risk (OARs): Spinal cord, brainstem, eye, ipsilateral and contralateral optic nerve and the volume of brain receiving 10% of the prescribed dose (V(10%)). The total monitor units required to deliver the plan were also compared. Conformity Index was found to be superior in VMAT plans for three patients and in IMRT plans for two patients. Dose homogeneity within the PTV was better with VMAT plans for all five cases. The mean difference in Sigma Index was 0.68%. There was no significant difference in dose between IMRT and VMAT plans for any of the OARs assessed in these patients. The monitor units were significantly reduced in the VMAT plan in comparison to the IMRT plan for four out of five patients, with mean reduction of 66%. It was found in this study that for the treatment of sino-nasal cancer, VMAT produced minimal, and statistically insignificant improvement in dose homogeneity within the PTV when compared with IMRT. VMAT plans were delivered using significantly fewer monitor units. We conclude in this study that VMAT does not offer significant improvement of treatment for sino-nasal cancer over the existing IMRT techniques, but the findings may change with a larger sample of patients in this rare condition.