Intensity-modulated radiotherapy for XXXX .

@entity1 @entity137 @entity5 @entity343 @entity189 @entity1909
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to report on treatment outcome of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for early-stage (cT1-2 cN0 M0) squamous cell @entity189 , as compared with @entity1 treated with conventional radiotherapy. METHODS: Between November 2007 and December 2011, 40 consecutive @entity1 were treated with IMRT with daily cone-beam CT position verification. The median prescription to the planning target volume ( @entity343 ) was 63 Gy/28 fractions and 67.5 Gy/30 fractions for T1 and T2 @entity5 , respectively. The historical control comprised 81 consecutive @entity1 treated with conventional radiotherapy to total doses of 66 Gy/33 fractions (66 @entity1 ) and 70 Gy/35 fractions (15 @entity1 ) for T1 and T2 @entity5 , respectively. RESULTS: The median follow-up of living @entity1 was 3.8 years (range, 1.0-5.0 years) in the IMRT group and 9.0 years, (range, 5.2-12.7 years) in the conventional group. Five-year actuarial local control was equal compared to the conventional group: 83% versus 74% (p = .64). Five-year actuarial ultimate local control was 100% in the IMRT group and 95% in the conventional group (p = .17). Five-year actuarial overall and disease-specific survival was 85% after IMRT versus 65% after conventional radiotherapy (p = .15) and 97% versus 89% (p = .31), respectively. Incidence and severity of @entity1909 was significantly less during IMRT than in the control group (p < .001). Two @entity1 receiving IMRT had late grade 3 hoarseness. CONCLUSION: IMRT is as efficient as conventional radiotherapy in terms of disease control and overall survival. It has the potential to reduce @entity137 as compared to conventional radiotherapy.    2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck 38: E179-E184, 2016.
