A Comparison of the Subjective Responses to Two Hypofractionated Palliative Radiotherapy Regimens in Patients with Locally Advanced Inoperable Head and Neck Cancer

Mongal Sonar, M. Bhattacharyya, M. Singh, Yanpothung Yanthan, Moniprom Neog, Ankita Das, Abhinandan Das, T. Das, Prashasti Sharma
{"title":"A Comparison of the Subjective Responses to Two Hypofractionated Palliative Radiotherapy Regimens in Patients with Locally Advanced Inoperable Head and Neck Cancer","authors":"Mongal Sonar, M. Bhattacharyya, M. Singh, Yanpothung Yanthan, Moniprom Neog, Ankita Das, Abhinandan Das, T. Das, Prashasti Sharma","doi":"10.31557/apjcc.2023.8.2.327-332","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Patients with advanced head and neck cancers typically succumb to uncontrolled local disease. Even with aggressive therapy, median survival is about 12 months, and the five-year overall survival <20%. Radiation treatment used in palliative setting is an option for some patients who are not eligible for curative therapy. Palliative treatment aims to reduce cancer-related symptoms while causing the fewest side effects and toxicities as possible. Materials and Methods: After approval from the institutional ethical committee, a prospective randomised study was conducted on squamous cell carcinomas of locally advanced head and neck cancer patients treated with palliative radiotherapy. A total of 62 patients were chosen and randomly assigned (1:1) to one of two treatment groups. Patients in Arm-A received 40 Gy in 16 fractions of radiation therapy, while those in Arm-B received 30 Gy in 10 fractions. The primary goal was to evaluate the subjective responses in both arms, including pain, dysphagia, and bleeding. Results: Mean pain score after completion of radiotherapy was 4.69 and 3.65 in Arm-A and Arm-B respectively, with significant p-value of <0.001. The mean pain score 3 months after completion of treatment was 2.39 and 3.61 in Arm-A and Arm-B respectively, with significant p-value of <0.001. Comparing both the arms dysphagia relief at completion of treatment was higher in Arm-B compared to Arm- A with mean scores of 1.95 and 2.03 which was not significant. After 3 months, it was higher in Arm-A compared to Arm-B, which was also insignificant, while Arm A patients received significant relieve from dysphagia at completion of treatment and during follow-ups. Bleeding was not a significant factor in both the arms. Conclusion: Our study found for immediate pain relief, 30Gy/10 fractions was better, but for long-term relief, 40Gy/16 fractions was better. Alleviation of swallowing difficulties was seen in both regimens.","PeriodicalId":436394,"journal":{"name":"Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Care","volume":"96 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31557/apjcc.2023.8.2.327-332","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Patients with advanced head and neck cancers typically succumb to uncontrolled local disease. Even with aggressive therapy, median survival is about 12 months, and the five-year overall survival <20%. Radiation treatment used in palliative setting is an option for some patients who are not eligible for curative therapy. Palliative treatment aims to reduce cancer-related symptoms while causing the fewest side effects and toxicities as possible. Materials and Methods: After approval from the institutional ethical committee, a prospective randomised study was conducted on squamous cell carcinomas of locally advanced head and neck cancer patients treated with palliative radiotherapy. A total of 62 patients were chosen and randomly assigned (1:1) to one of two treatment groups. Patients in Arm-A received 40 Gy in 16 fractions of radiation therapy, while those in Arm-B received 30 Gy in 10 fractions. The primary goal was to evaluate the subjective responses in both arms, including pain, dysphagia, and bleeding. Results: Mean pain score after completion of radiotherapy was 4.69 and 3.65 in Arm-A and Arm-B respectively, with significant p-value of <0.001. The mean pain score 3 months after completion of treatment was 2.39 and 3.61 in Arm-A and Arm-B respectively, with significant p-value of <0.001. Comparing both the arms dysphagia relief at completion of treatment was higher in Arm-B compared to Arm- A with mean scores of 1.95 and 2.03 which was not significant. After 3 months, it was higher in Arm-A compared to Arm-B, which was also insignificant, while Arm A patients received significant relieve from dysphagia at completion of treatment and during follow-ups. Bleeding was not a significant factor in both the arms. Conclusion: Our study found for immediate pain relief, 30Gy/10 fractions was better, but for long-term relief, 40Gy/16 fractions was better. Alleviation of swallowing difficulties was seen in both regimens.
局部晚期不能手术头颈癌患者对两种减分放疗方案主观反应的比较
背景:晚期头颈癌患者通常死于无法控制的局部疾病。即使采用积极治疗,中位生存期约为12个月,5年总生存率<20%。在姑息性环境中使用放射治疗是一些不符合治愈性治疗条件的患者的一种选择。姑息治疗旨在减少癌症相关症状,同时尽可能减少副作用和毒性。材料和方法:经机构伦理委员会批准,对局部晚期头颈部癌鳞状细胞癌患者进行姑息性放疗的前瞻性随机研究。共选择62例患者,按1:1的比例随机分配到两个治疗组。a组患者接受16次40 Gy的放射治疗,而b组患者接受10次30 Gy的放射治疗。主要目的是评估两组患者的主观反应,包括疼痛、吞咽困难和出血。结果:a、b组放疗结束后平均疼痛评分分别为4.69、3.65,p值均<0.001。治疗结束后3个月,a组和b组的平均疼痛评分分别为2.39和3.61,p值均<0.001。两组比较,治疗结束时,b组吞咽困难缓解程度高于A组,平均评分分别为1.95和2.03,差异无统计学意义。3个月后,A组患者的吞咽困难明显高于b组,但差异也不显著,而A组患者在治疗结束和随访期间均明显缓解吞咽困难。两条手臂的出血并不是一个重要的因素。结论:我们的研究发现,对于即时缓解疼痛,30Gy/10分数较好,但对于长期缓解,40Gy/16分数较好。两种治疗方案均可减轻吞咽困难。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信