Search

OBJECTIVE This study aimed to evaluate the difference between serum levels of S100B and HSP70 in the non-meta-static, Luminal A breast cancer (BC) patients with the healthy population, and determine the impact of post-operative radiotherapy (RT) on serum markers. METHODS 21 BC patients who underwent chest wall/breast±axillary RT after adjuvant chemotherapy and twenty-one healthy individuals were included in the study group. The changes in serum HSP70 and S100B levels were observed in the study and control groups. RESULTS A total of 42 participants were included. A significant difference was found between the HSP70 and S100B measurements of the study and control groups before and after RT (P=0.001 and p<0.01, respectively). At the same time, the increase in HSP70 after RT was statistically significant (p=0.025 and p<0.05, respectively). However, the change in S100B measurements after RT was not statistically significant in the study group patients compared to before RT (p>0.627). CONCLUSION S100B and HSP70 levels are higher than the healthy population before and after RT in non-metastatic, luminal A BC patients. The significant increase in Hsp70 after RT may be due to the release from dying tumor cells in the microenvironment. Therefore, HSP70 levels in the blood may be useful for microscopic tumor focus detection or evaluation of treatment response. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE Central nervous system (CNS) tumors are the most common solid organ tumors in children. We aimed to compare two modern radiotherapy techniques in target volumes and doses received by organs at risk (OAR). METHODS Eleven patients who had undergone 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) with the indication of craniospinal radiation therapy (CSRT) were included. OAR and target volumes were defined. The planned target volume (PTV) was PTV of the brain and PTV of the entire spine. A total of 36 Gy at 1,8 Gy/fraction was given to all patients. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans were prepared. RESULTS At mean doses of optic nerve, thyroid, esophagus, heart and oral cavity; VMAT was significantly superior to IMRT. At mean doses of lungs and kidneys; IMRT was better than VMAT. Dmax of VMAT was at lower limits for all OAR. Regarding low doses received by the body, IMRT was better in V2 and V5; while VMAT was better in V15 and V20. For PTV, V95 was 99% and 97%, and V107 was 2.6% and 4% in IMRT and VMAT, respectively. Regarding monitor units (MU), VMAT revealed significantly lower MU than IMRT. CONCLUSION Two techniques are suitable treatment choices for CSRT and may be utilized to diminish the late adverse effects of radiation and to increase disease-free survival rates in patients receiving CSRT. Nevertheless, the risk of secondary cancer development should be kept in mind. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Radiation-induced hearing loss is a common complication of radiotherapy in patients with brain tumors. This retrospective study aims to compare Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT) with Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) for the patients with brain tumor concerning the sparing effect on the cochlea by comparing dosimetric parameters. METHODS In this study, 20 patients with pathological grade IV brain tumors were selected to have planning with VMAT and IMRT for dosimetric comparison concerning organs at risk. Target coverage and dose homogeneity were evaluated by calculating the conformity index (CI) and homogeneity index (HI) values. The treatment plans were accepted only if they met the set of planning objectives defined in the protocol. RESULTS The homogeneity and conformity of the two plans were statistically similar. The dose to receive 95% (D95%) of planning target volume (PTV) and the minimum dose received 46 Gy (Dmin) were significantly lower with IMRT compared with VMAT (p=0.01 and 0.001, respectively), but the volume receiving 46 Gy (V46Gy) and 60 Gy (V60Gy), and D95%, Dmean, Dmax, Dmin received 60 Gy were not different between two methods. There was no significant difference in D95%, Dmean, and Dmax for total and contralateral cochleae among groups. CONCLUSION Since VMAT and IMRT planning have the same effect on sparing the cochlea; no superiority can be suggested among these two plans during radiotherapy. The choice of plan for the treatment of brain tumors appears to base on the clinical experience, especially for patients who may experience hearing loss. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]