Authors : C. Ezzouitina; FZ. Chraa; R. Laraichi; I. Lahlai; M. Farina; A. Lachgar; K. Nouni; H. Elkacemi; T. Kebdani; K. Hassouni

Volume/Issue : Volume 10 - 2025, Issue 4 - April

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/rtf8ha34

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/2uwcz59e

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr318

Google Scholar

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Note : Google Scholar may take 15 to 20 days to display the article.

Abstract : Introduction: Tumor response after the first series of treatment is a predictive factor for outcomes in cervical cancer. There is a correlation between early tumor regression and the probability of loco-regional control. This study aims to assess the tumor response following concurrent radio-chemotherapy in the treatment of locally advanced cervical cancer.  Materials and Methods: This retrospective study includes 750 patients with locally advanced cervical cancer (started from IB) treated with concurrent radio-chemotherapy (46 Gy with weekly cisplatin) between January 1, 2018, and December 2022, at the National Oncology Institute in Rabat.  Results: The patients’ ages ranged from 22 to 85 years, with a median age of 50.67 years. The predominant histological type was squamous cell carcinoma (83%), followed by adenocarcinoma (16%). All patients received concurrent radio-chemotherapy with a dose of 46 Gy (2 Gy per fraction in 23 sessions), along with weekly cisplatin at 40 mg/m2. Tumor response after RCC was evaluated using clinical examination and\or pelvic MRI at the end of the treatment. In this study, 610 patients (81.33%) showed near-complete or complete tumor regression based and subsequently underwent intracavitary brachytherapy. Conversely, 140 patients (18.66%) presented significant residual tumors on pelvic MRI, rendering them ineligible for brachytherapy. These patients received additional irradiation using 3D conformal techniques, delivering a dose of 66–70 Gy in normo-fractionated sessions, combined with weekly cisplatin.  Conclusion: Tumor response after the initial series of concurrent radio-chemotherapy serves as a key prognostic factor for locally advanced cervical cancer. Patients with significant tumor regression demonstrate favorable outcomes with brachytherapy, while alternative radiation techniques are required for those with residual tumors.

Keywords : Brachytherapy, Cervical Cancer, Concurrent Radio-Chemotherapy.

References :

1. HAS – Service des maladies chroniques et dispositifs d’accompagnement des malades INCa – Département des recommandations pour les professionnels de santé. ALD n°30.Cancer invasif du col utérin ;Janvier 2010.
2. Lu JJ, Brady LW, editors. Decision Making in Radiation Oncology: Volume 2 [Internet]. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag; 2011 [cited 2021 Sep 13]. Available from: https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9783642163326
3. Ezra Niaina Randriamanovontsoa : Result of concurrent chemoradiotherapy for cervical cancer at Radiation Oncology Service of University Hospital Joseph Ravoahangy Andrianavalona from 2007 to 2009
4. Mbarki I, et al. Evaluation of tumor response three months after concomitant chemoradiotherapy with high dose rate brachytherapy as a definitive treatment modality for locally advanced cervical cancer. Bull Cancer (2021), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bulcan.2021.08.012
5. Ministère de la Santé du Maroc. Registre des cancers de Rabat. Résultats de l’année 2009; 2012
6. Moore DH. Cervical cancer. Obstet Gynecol 2006 ;107:1152-61.
7. Body G, Calais G, Fetissof F, et al. (1988) Cancer du col de l’utérus. Encycl Méd Chir (Paris-France), Gynécologie, 600 A10, 11, 26 p.
8. Bipat S, Glas AS, van der Velden J, et al. (2003) Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in staging of uterine cervical carcinoma: a systematic review. Gynecol Oncol 91: 59-66
9. S. Novellas, M. Fournol, C. Marcotte-Bloch, L. Mondot, T. Caramella, A.Bongain, P. Chevallier. Évaluation en résonance magnétique des carcinomes épidermoïdes du col de l’utérus. Feuillets de Radiologie, Volume 48, Issue 3, June 2008, Pages 147-155.
10. Fyles AW, Pintilie M, Kirkbride P, Levin W, Manchul LA, Rawlings GA et al. Prognostic factors in patients with cervix cancer treated by radiation therapy: results of a multiple regression analysis. Radiother Oncol 1995;35:107-17.
11. Tseng CJ, Chang CT, Lai CH, Soong YK, Hong JH, Tang SG, et al. A randomized trial of concurrent chemoradiotherapy versus radiotherapy in advanced carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Gynecol Oncol. 1997;66:52–8
12. Morris M, Eifel PJ, Lu J, Grigsby PW, Levenback C, Srevens RE et al. Pelvic radiation with concurrent chemotherapy compared with pelvic and para-aortic radiation for high-risk cervical cancer. N Engl J Med 1999;340:1137-43
13. Green JA, Kirwan JM, Tierney JF, Symonds P. Survival, recurrence after concomitant che- motherapy, radiotherapy for cancer of the uterine cervix: a systematic review, metaanalysis. Lancet 2001;358:781.
14. Green J, Kirwan J, Tierney J, Vale C, Symonds P, Fresco L, et al. Concomitant chemotherapy and radiation therapy for cancer of the uterine cervix. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2005:1–41. CD002225.
15. Lukka H, Hirte H, Fyles A, Thomas G, Elit L, Johnston M, et al. Concurrent cisplatin-based chemotherapy plus radiotherapy for cervical cancer – a metaanalysis. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2002;14:203–12.
16. Britten RA, Evans AJ, Allalunis-Turner MJ, Pearcey RG. Effect of cisplatin on the clinically relevant radiosensitivity of human cervical carcinoma cell lines. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1996;34:367–77.
17. Gallagher MJ, Brereton HD, Rostock RA, Zero JM, Zekoski DA, Poyss LF, Richter MP, Kligerman MM. A prospective study of treatment techni- ques to minimize the volume of pelvic small bowel with reduction of acute and late effects associated with pelvic irradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1986;12:1565–73. http://dx. doi.org/10.1016/0360-3016(86)90279-8.
18. Bucci MK, Bevan A, Roach MR. Advances in radiation therapy: conventional to 3D, to IMRT, to 4D, and beyond. CA Cancer J Clin 2005;55:117–34. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.3322/canjclin.55.2.117.
19. Marcial VA, Bosch A. Radiation-induced tumor regression in carcinoma of the uterine cervix: prognostic significance. Am J Roentgenol Radium Ther Nucl Med 1970;108:113-23.
20. Chen SW, Liang JA, Yang SN, Ko HL, Lin FJ. The adverse effect of treatment prolonga- tion in cervical cancer by high-dose-rate intracavitary brachytherapy. Radiother Oncol 2003;67:69-76.
21. Grossman I, Kurohara SS, Webster JH, George FW. The prognostic significance of tumor response during radiotherapy in cervical carcinoma. Radiology 1973;107:411–5.
22. Hong JH, Chen MS, Lin FJ, Tang SG. Prognostic assessment of tumor regression after exter- nal irradiation for cervical cancer. Int J Radiation Oncology Biol Phys 1992;22:913-7.
23. Datta NR, Pascricha R, Singh U, Srivastava A. Predictors of survival end points in patients with cancer of the cervix on long-term follow-up: inferences and implications from an audit of patients treated with a specific radiotherapy protocol. Clin Oncol 2004;16:536-42.
24. SaibishkumarEP, PatelFD, SharmaSC, Karu- nanidhiG, GhoshalS, KumarV et al. Prognostic value of response to external radiationin stage IIIB cancer cervix in predicting clinical outco- mes:a retrospective analysis of 556patients from India. RadiotherOncol 2006;79:142-6.