English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

1,3,4 III-year PG Residents, Department of Radiation Oncology, Acharya Tulsi Regional Cancer Treatment and Research Institute, S.P. Medical Collage, Bikaner, Rajasthan, India, 334001 2 Professor, Department of Radiation Oncology, Acharya Tulsi Regional Cancer Treatment and Research Institute, S.P. Medical Collage, Bikaner, Rajasthan, India, 334001 5 Senior Professor and Head, Department of Radiation Oncology, Acharya Tulsi Regional Cancer Treatment and Research Institute, S.P. Medical Collage, Bikaner, Rajasthan, India, 334001 *Corresponding Author Dr Neeti Sharma Professor, Department of Radiation Oncology, Acharya Tulsi Regional Cancer Treatment and Research Institute, S.P. Medical Collage, Bikaner, Rajasthan, India, 334001 Abstract Background: ABS (American Brachytherapy Society) necessitates use of BT (Brachytherapy) for successful completion of management of locally advanced cervical cancer. Multiple dose fractionation schedules are available but none is currently standardized. Objective: To analyze two different concurrent HDR-ICBT (Intracavitary BT) schedules, their disease response, acute and late toxicities. Materials and Methods: 50 cases of histologically proven stage II cervical cancer were randomized into two arms, Arm A and Arm B. Patients in both arms received 50 Gy (Gray) (2 Gy/ fraction, 25 fractions, Monday to Friday) of EBRT (External Beam Radiotherapy) to whole pelvis with weekly cisplatin (40 mg/m 2 ) on every Sunday. Patients in Arm A received HDR-ICBT regime of 7.5 Gy/fraction for 3 fractions, in Arm B patients received 6 Gy/fraction for 4 fractions on every Saturday. Results: Median follow up period of study was 14 months (range 7 – 20 months). There is no significant difference in local control and late toxicities in both arms. Conclusion: Both regimes of concurrent HDRICBT were tolerated well and were safe to use. Results of disease response and toxicity profile were also similar in both regimes.

Establishing use of Concurrent HDR-ICBT with EBRT for management of Stage II cervical cancer at a Regional Cancer Center