Acta Scientific Neurology (ASNE) (ISSN: 2582-1121)

Review Article Volume 4 Issue 7

Evolution of Intracavitary Brachytherapy in the Treatment of Cervical Cancer

Chrishanthi Rajasooriyar1,2* and Peter Hoskin3,4

1Teaching Hospital, Jaffna, Sri Lanka
2Tellipalai Trail Cancer Hospital, Jaffna, Sri Lanka
3Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, United Kingdom
4University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom

*Corresponding Author: Chrishanthi Rajasooriyar, Teaching Hospital, Jaffna, Sri Lanka.

Received: April 05, 2021 ; Published: June 30, 2021

Abstract

Purpose: The evolution of intracavitary brachytherapy in the treatment of cervical cancer spans over 120 years. The purpose of this review is to understand how the discovery of radium paved the way to the current standard of care; the image-guided adaptive brachytherapy.

Materials and Methods: A literature search was done to identify the important milestones in the evolution. The terminologies used for the search were “history”, “brachytherapy”, “radium”, “dosimetric systems” and “image-guided adaptive brachytherapy” (IGABT). The information gathered was organized in chronological order and the key milestones were identified.

Results: The origin of brachytherapy can be tracked down to the discovery of radioactivity by Sir Henry Becquerel, followed by the invention of radium by the Curies’ in the late 19th century. In the early 20th century, various dosimetric systems evolved. Among these systems, the Manchester system prescribing to point A became popular and was widely in practice for many decades. The deficiencies of the point A prescription model were brought to light with the advances in soft tissue imaging in the late 20th century. Imaging helped in prescribing to the actual tumor volume and to generate dose-volume histograms to achieve better target coverage while reducing the dose to the organs at risk. The IGABT started with computed tomography and was further enhanced by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) due to better anatomical delineation of the pelvis anatomy. Hence MRI based adaptive brachytherapy became the gold standard and has been proven to be safe and effective while significantly reduced toxicity. As cervix cancer is most prevalent in low resource regions, ultrasound scanning has been identified as a reasonable substitute for MRI.

Conclusion: Intracavitary brachytherapy in the treatment of cervical cancer has developed over the last 120 years and has made tremendous advances in the last 20 years.

Keywords: Cervix Cancer; Intracavitary Brachytherapy; Image-guided Adaptive Brachytherapy

References

  1. Nag S., et al. “The American Brachytherapy Society recommendations for high-dose-rate brachytherapy for carcinoma of the cervix”. International Journal of Radiation Oncology • Biology • Physics1 (2000): 201-211.
  2. Lanciano RM., et al. “Pretreatment and treatment factors associated with improved outcome in squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix: A final report of the 1973 and 1978 patterns of care studies”. International Journal of Radiation Oncology • Biology • Physics4 (1991): 667-676.
  3. Han K., et al. “Trends in the utilization of brachytherapy in cervical cancer in the United States”. International Journal of Radiation Oncology • Biology • Physics1 (2013): 111-119.
  4. Schad MD., et al. “Declining brachytherapy utilization for cervical cancer patients - Have we reversed the trend?” Gynecologic Oncology 3 (2020): 583-590.
  5. Albuquerque K., et al. “A Phase II Trial of Stereotactic Ablative Radiation Therapy as a Boost for Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer”. International Journal of Radiation Oncology • Biology • Physics3 (2020): 464-471.
  6. Cleaves MA. “Radium: With a preliminary note on radium rays in the treatment of cancer”. Medication Reconciliation 64 (1903): 601-606.
  7. Mould RF. “The Historical Roots of Modern Brachytherapy for Cervical and Endometrial Cancer”. Radiation Oncology of Gynecological Cancers (1997): 1-9.
  8. Evolution T. “3. Brachytherapy Techniques and Systems”. Journal of the International Commission on Radiation Units 13 (2013): 21-35.
  9. TOD M and MEREDITH WJ. “Treatment of cancer of the cervix uteri, a revised Manchester method”. British Journal of Radiology 305 (1953): 252-257.
  10. G C Lewis Jr and A Raventos JH. “Space Dose Relationships for Points A and B in the Radium Therapy of Cancer of the Uterine Cervix”. American Journal of Roentgenology Radium Therapy and Nuclear Medicine 83 (1960): 432-446.
  11. Erickson BA. “The sculpted pear: An unfinished brachytherapy tale”. In: Brachytherapy. (2003).
  12. , et al. “Direct measurements and isodose calculations in radium therapy of carcinoma of the cervix”. Radiology 61.6 (1953): 885-902.
  13. Romano KD., et al. “Transition from LDR to HDR brachytherapy for cervical cancer: Evaluation of tumor control, survival, and toxicity”. Brachytherapy 2 (2017): 378-386.
  14. Gaur R., et al. “Brachytherapy in Carcinoma Cervix : Results From a Randomized Study”. 23.4 (2012).
  15. ICRU Report 38. “Dose and volume specification for reporting intracavitary therapy in gynecology”. Journal of the International Commission on Radiation Units (1985).
  16. Pötter R., et al. “Present status and future of high-precision image guided adaptive brachytherapy for cervix carcinoma”. Acta Oncologica (Madr). 47.7 (2008): 1325-1336.
  17. Corn BW., et al. “Technically accurate intracavitary insertions improve pelvic control and survival among patients with locally advanced carcinoma of the uterine cervix”. Gynecologic Oncology3 (1994): 281-384.
  18. Viswanathan AN and Thomadsen B. “American Brachytherapy Society consensus guidelines for locally advanced carcinoma of the cervix. Part I: General principles”. Brachytherapy (2012).
  19. Fellner C., et al. “Comparison of radiography- and computed tomography-based treatment planning in cervix cancer in brachytherapy with specific attention to some quality assurance aspects”. Radiotherapy and Oncology1 (2001): 53-62.
  20. Shin KH., et al. “CT-guided intracavitary radiotherapy for cervical cancer: Comparison of conventional point a plan with clinical target volume-based three-dimensional plan using dose-volume parameters”. International Journal of Radiation Oncology • Biology • Physics1 (2006): 197-204.
  21. Simpson DR., et al. “Clinical outcomes of computed tomography-based volumetric brachytherapy planning for cervical cancer”. International Journal of Radiation Oncology • Biology • Physics1 (2015): 150-157.
  22. Thomas KM., et al. “Reduced toxicity with equivalent outcomes using three-dimensional volumetric (3DV) image–based versus nonvolumetric point–based (NV) brachytherapy in a cervical cancer population”. Brachytherapy 5 (2017): 943-948.
  23. Charra-Brunaud C., et al. “Impact of 3D image-based PDR brachytherapy on outcome of patients treated for cervix carcinoma in France: Results of the French STIC prospective study”. Radiotherapy and Oncology 3 (2012): 305-313.
  24. Derks K., et al. “Impact of brachytherapy technique (2D versus 3D) on outcome following radiotherapy of cervical cancer”. Journal of Contemporary Brachytherapy 1 (2018): 17-25.
  25. Madan R., et al. “Comparative evaluation of two-dimensional radiography and three dimensional computed tomography based dose-volume parameters for high-dose-rate intracavitary brachytherapy of cervical cancer: A prospective study”. Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention 11 (2014): 4717-4721.
  26. Hriack H., et al. “Early Invasive Cervical Cancer: CT and MR Imaging in Preoperative Evaluation”. Radiology 2 (2007): 491-498.
  27. Viswanathan AN., et al. “Computed Tomography Versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Based Contouring in Cervical Cancer Brachytherapy: Results of a Prospective Trial and Preliminary Guidelines for Standardized Contours”. International Journal of Radiation Oncology • Biology • Physics2 (2007): 491-498.
  28. Eskander RN., et al. “Comparison of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in cervical cancer brachytherapy target and normal tissue contouring”. International Journal of Gynecological Cancer 1 (2010): 47-53.
  29. Krishnatry R., et al. “CT or MRI for image-based brachytherapy in cervical cancer”. Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology 4 (2012): 309-313.
  30. Europe G. “Prescribing, Recording, and Reporting Brachytherapy for Cancer of the Cervix”. Journal of the International Commission on Radiation Units 13 (2013): 1-10.
  31. Sturdza A., et al. “Image guided brachytherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer: Improved pelvic control and survival in RetroEMBRACE, a multicenter cohort study”. Radiotherapy and Oncology3 (2016): 428-433.
  32. Venkat PS., et al. “Outcome Assessment of Dose Adaptation of MRI-Guided Cervical Cancer Brachytherapy”. International Journal of Radiation Oncology (2014).
  33. Haie-Meder C., et al. “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”. Radiotherapy Oncology3 (2005): 235-245.
  34. Nesvacil N., et al. “Adaptive image guided brachytherapy for cervical cancer: A combined MRI-/CT-planning technique with MRI only at first fraction”. Radiotherapy Oncology1 (2013): 75-81.
  35. Van Dyk S., et al. “Comparison of measurements of the uterus and cervix obtained by magnetic resonance and transabdominal ultrasound imaging to identify the brachytherapy target in patients with cervix cancer”. International Journal of Radiation Oncology • Biology • Physics4 (2014): 860-865.
  36. van Dyk S., et al. “Clinical outcomes from an innovative protocol using serial ultrasound imaging and a single MR image to guide brachytherapy for locally advanced cervix cancer”. Brachytherapy6 (2016): 817-824.
  37. Schmid MP., et al. “Feasibility of transrectal ultrasonography for assessment of cervical cancer”. Strahlentherapie und Onkologie2 (2013): 123-128.

Citation

Citation: Chrishanthi Rajasooriyar and Peter Hoskin. “Evolution of Intracavitary Brachytherapy in the Treatment of Cervical Cancer”. Acta Scientific Neurology 4.7 (2021): 47-53.

Copyright

Copyright: © 2021 Chrishanthi Rajasooriyar and Peter Hoskin. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.




Metrics

Acceptance rate32%
Acceptance to publication20-30 days

Indexed In




News and Events


  • Certification for Review
    Acta Scientific certifies the Editors/reviewers for their review done towards the assigned articles of the respective journals.
  • Submission Timeline for Upcoming Issue
    The last date for submission of articles for regular Issues is February 15, 2023.
  • Publication Certificate
    Authors will be issued a "Publication Certificate" as a mark of appreciation for publishing their work.
  • Best Article of the Issue
    The Editors will elect one Best Article after each issue release. The authors of this article will be provided with a certificate of “Best Article of the Issue”.
  • Welcoming Article Submission
    Acta Scientific delightfully welcomes active researchers for submission of articles towards the upcoming issue of respective journals.
  • Contact US