Decreased radiation doses to tongue with “stick-out” tongue position over neutral tongue position in head and neck cancer patients who refused or could not tolerate an intraoral device (bite-block, tongue blade, or mouthpiece) due to trismus, gag reflex, or discomfort during intensity-modulated radiation therapy

Whoon Jong Kil; Christina Kulasekere; Ronald Derrwaldt; Jacob Bugno; Craig Hatch

doi:10.18632/oncotarget.10621

Oncotarget

Oncotarget (a primarily oncology-focused, peer-reviewed, open access journal) aims to maximize research impact through insightful peer-review; eliminate borders between specialties by linking different fields of oncology, cancer research and biomedical sciences; and foster application of basic and clinical science.

Its scope is unique. The term "oncotarget" encompasses all molecules, pathways, cellular functions, cell types, and even tissues that can be viewed as targets relevant to cancer as well as other diseases. The term was introduced in the inaugural Editorial, Introducing Oncotarget.

As of January 1, 2022, Oncotarget has shifted to a continuous publishing model. Papers will now be published continuously within yearly volumes in their final and complete form and then quickly released to Pubmed.

Subscribe to receive alerts once a paper has been published by Oncotarget.

Impact Journals, LLC is the publisher of Oncotarget: www.impactjournals.com.

Impact Journals is a member of the Wellcome Trust List of Compliant Publishers.

Impact Journals is a member of the Society for Scholarly Publishing.

On December 23, 2022, Oncotarget server experienced a DDoS attack. As a result, Oncotarget site was inaccessible for a few hours. Oncotarget team swiftly dealt with the situation and took it under control. This malicious action will be reported to the FBI.

Research Papers:

Decreased radiation doses to tongue with “stick-out” tongue position over neutral tongue position in head and neck cancer patients who refused or could not tolerate an intraoral device (bite-block, tongue blade, or mouthpiece) due to trismus, gag reflex, or discomfort during intensity-modulated radiation therapy

Whoon Jong Kil _, Christina Kulasekere, Ronald Derrwaldt, Jacob Bugno and Craig Hatch

PDF | HTML | How to cite

Oncotarget. 2016; 7:53029-53036. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.10621

Metrics: PDF 2110 views | HTML 3093 views | ?

Abstract

Whoon Jong Kil1, Christina Kulasekere1, Ronald Derrwaldt1, Jacob Bugno1, Craig Hatch1

1Cleveland Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio, USA

Correspondence to:

Whoon Jong Kil, email: [email protected]

Keywords: head and neck cancer, IMRT, tongue position, customized immobilization mask, oral cavity

Received: May 09, 2016 Accepted: June 01, 2016 Published: July 16, 2016

ABSTRACT

Purpose: To assess changes in oral cavity (OC) shapes and radiation doses to tongue with different tongue positions during intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) but who refused or did not tolerate an intraoral device (IOD), such as bite block, tongue blade, or mouthpiece.

Results: Tongue volume outside of OC was 7.1 ± 3.8 cm³ (5.4 ± 2.6% of entire OC and 7.8 ± 3.1% of oral tongue) in IMRT-S. D_mean of OC was 34.9 ± 8.0 Gy and 31.4 ± 8.7 Gy with IMRT-N and IMRT-S, respectively (p < 0.001). OC volume receiving ≥ 36 Gy (V36) was 40.6 ± 16.9% with IMRT-N and 33.0 ± 17.0% with IMRT-S (p < 0.001). D_mean of tongue was 38.1 ± 7.9 Gy and 32.8 ± 8.8 Gy in IMRT-N and IMRT-S, respectively (p < 0.001). V15, V30, and V45 of tongue were significantly lower in IMRT-S (85.3 ± 15.0%, 50.6 ± 16.2%, 24.3 ± 16.0%, respectively) than IMRT-N (94.4 ± 10.6%, 64.7 ± 16.2%, 34.0 ± 18.6%, respectively) (all p < 0.001). Positional offsets of tongue during the course of IMRT-S was –0.1 ± 0.2 cm, 0.01 ± 0.1 cm, and –0.1 ± 0.2 cm (vertical, longitudinal, and lateral, respectively).

Materials and Methods: 13 patients with HNSCC underwent CT-simulations both with a neutral tongue position and a stick-out tongue for IMRT planning (IMRT-N and IMRT-S, respectively). Planning objectives were to deliver 70 Gy, 63 Gy, and 56 Gy in 35 fractions to 95% of PTVs. Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) recommended dose constraints were applied. Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation and compared using the student t-test.

Conclusions: IMRT-S for patients with HNSCC who refused or could not tolerate an IOD has significant decreased radiation dose to the tongue than IMRT-N, which may potentially reduce RT related toxicity in tongue in selected patients.

All site content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
PII: 10621

Publication Alerts

Research Papers:

Abstract