Claire Vautravers Dewas
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Previous Organizations / Institutes
The organizations / institutes from the scholar's other articles in the past ten years
Research Subjects
Claire Vautravers Dewas has a total of 24 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Sylvain Dewas
Department of Radiotherapy, Centre Oscar Lambret, 3 rue Combemale, 59020 Lille Cedex, France
3 shared publications - Jean-Emmanuel Bibault
Radiation Oncology Department, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Paris, France
2 shared publications - Andrew Kramar
Methodology and Biostatistics, Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France
1 shared publication - Aurélie Petitfils
Department of Radiation Oncology, Anticancer center Georges François Leclerc, 1 rue du Professeur Marion, Dijon, 21000, France
1 shared publication - Cécile Dalban
Department of Biostatistics, Centre Georges Francois Leclerc, 21049, Dijon, France
1 shared publication - Cédric Khoury
Department of Radiation Oncology, Anticancer center Georges François Leclerc, 1 rue du Professeur Marion, Dijon, 21000, France
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- Open Access
- 29 November 2012
- Published by Springer Nature in Radiation Oncology
- Vol. 7 (1) , 201
Does gap-free intensity modulated chemoradiation therapy provide a greater clinical benefit than 3D conformal chemoradiation in patients with anal cancer?
Background: Chemoradiation is the standard treatment for anal cancer. 3D conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) is usually split in 2 sequences with a therapeutic break (gap) in between. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) makes it possible to reduce treatment time by abandoning this gap. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes and toxicities in patients treated with either IMRT or 3D-CRT. Methods: Between 2004 and 2011, the data of 51 patients treated with exclusive radiotherapy with or without concomitant chemotherapy for non-metastatic anal carcinoma were retrospectively analyzed. Twenty-seven patients were treated with 3D-CRT and 24 patients with IMRT, with a median dose delivered to the tumor of 59.4Gy [30.6-66.6], whatever the radiotherapy technique (p= 0.99). The median follow-up was 40 months [26.4-51.6]. Results: There was no difference between the two groups for response to treatment (p= 0.46). Two-year overall survival, locoregional relapse-free survival and colostomy-free survival rates were 88.5%, 63% and 60.3%, respectively for the IMRT group and 81%, 76.5% and 81.1% for the 3D-CRT group (all NS). Ten patients (37%) in 3D-CRT and 11 patients (45.8%) in IMRT (p= 0.524) had grade 3 acute toxicity. No grade 4 toxicity occurred. Conclusions: Our study suggests that further investigations concerning the use of IMRT to treat cancer of the anus are warranted. IMRT makes it possible to remove the gap, but with no impact on the prognosis. Nonetheless, a longer follow-up is essential to determine whether or not IMRT has an impact on late toxicity, local control and survival compared with conventional 3D-CRT.
- 29 November 2012
- Published by Springer Nature in Radiation Oncology
- Vol. 7 (1) , 201
Open AccessDoes gap-free intensity modulated chemoradiation therapy provide a greater clinical benefit than 3D conformal chemoradiation in patients with anal cancer?
Background: Chemoradiation is the standard treatment for anal cancer. 3D conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) is usually split in 2 sequences with a therapeutic break (gap) in between. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) makes it possible to reduce treatment time by abandoning this gap. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes and toxicities in patients treated with either IMRT or 3D-CRT. Methods: Between 2004 and 2011, the data of 51 patients treated with exclusive radiotherapy with or without concomitant chemotherapy for non-metastatic anal carcinoma were retrospectively analyzed. Twenty-seven patients were treated with 3D-CRT and 24 patients with IMRT, with a median dose delivered to the tumor of 59.4Gy [30.6-66.6], whatever the radiotherapy technique (p= 0.99). The median follow-up was 40 months [26.4-51.6]. Results: There was no difference between the two groups for response to treatment (p= 0.46). Two-year overall survival, locoregional relapse-free survival and colostomy-free survival rates were 88.5%, 63% and 60.3%, respectively for the IMRT group and 81%, 76.5% and 81.1% for the 3D-CRT group (all NS). Ten patients (37%) in 3D-CRT and 11 patients (45.8%) in IMRT (p= 0.524) had grade 3 acute toxicity. No grade 4 toxicity occurred. Conclusions: Our study suggests that further investigations concerning the use of IMRT to treat cancer of the anus are warranted. IMRT makes it possible to remove the gap, but with no impact on the prognosis. Nonetheless, a longer follow-up is essential to determine whether or not IMRT has an impact on late toxicity, local control and survival compared with conventional 3D-CRT.
- Open Access
- 10 October 2012
- Published by Springer Nature in Radiation Oncology
- Vol. 7 (1) , 166
Prognostic factors affecting local control of hepatic tumors treated by stereotactic body radiation therapy
Robotic Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy with real-time tumor tracking has shown encouraging results for hepatic tumors with good efficacy and low toxicity. We studied the factors associated with local control of primary or secondary hepatic lesions post-SBRT. Since 2007, 153 stereotactic liver treatments were administered to 120 patients using the CyberKnife® System. Ninety-nine liver metastases (72 patients), 48 hepatocellular carcinomas (42 patients), and six cholangiocarcinomas were treated. On average, three to four sessions were delivered over 12 days. Twenty-seven to 45 Gy was prescribed to the 80% isodose line. Margins consisted of 5 to 10 mm for clinical target volume (CTV) and 3 mm for planning target volume (PTV). Median size was 33 mm (range, 5-112 mm). Median gross tumor volume (GTV) was 32.38 cm3 (range, 0.2-499.5 cm3). Median total dose was 45 Gy in three fractions. Median minimum dose was 27 Gy in three fractions. With a median follow-up of 15.0 months, local control rates at one and two years were 84% and 74.6%, respectively. The factors associated with better local control were lesion size < 50 mm (p = 0.019), GTV volume (p < 0.05), PTV volume (p < 0.01) and two treatment factors: a total dose of 45 Gy and a dose-per-fraction of 15 Gy (p = 0.019). Dose, tumor diameter and volume are prognostic factors for local control when a stereotactic radiation therapy for hepatic lesions is considered. These results should be considered in order to obtain a maximum therapeutic efficacy.
- 10 October 2012
- Published by Springer Nature in Radiation Oncology
- Vol. 7 (1) , 166
Open AccessPrognostic factors affecting local control of hepatic tumors treated by stereotactic body radiation therapy
Robotic Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy with real-time tumor tracking has shown encouraging results for hepatic tumors with good efficacy and low toxicity. We studied the factors associated with local control of primary or secondary hepatic lesions post-SBRT. Since 2007, 153 stereotactic liver treatments were administered to 120 patients using the CyberKnife® System. Ninety-nine liver metastases (72 patients), 48 hepatocellular carcinomas (42 patients), and six cholangiocarcinomas were treated. On average, three to four sessions were delivered over 12 days. Twenty-seven to 45 Gy was prescribed to the 80% isodose line. Margins consisted of 5 to 10 mm for clinical target volume (CTV) and 3 mm for planning target volume (PTV). Median size was 33 mm (range, 5-112 mm). Median gross tumor volume (GTV) was 32.38 cm3 (range, 0.2-499.5 cm3). Median total dose was 45 Gy in three fractions. Median minimum dose was 27 Gy in three fractions. With a median follow-up of 15.0 months, local control rates at one and two years were 84% and 74.6%, respectively. The factors associated with better local control were lesion size < 50 mm (p = 0.019), GTV volume (p < 0.05), PTV volume (p < 0.01) and two treatment factors: a total dose of 45 Gy and a dose-per-fraction of 15 Gy (p = 0.019). Dose, tumor diameter and volume are prognostic factors for local control when a stereotactic radiation therapy for hepatic lesions is considered. These results should be considered in order to obtain a maximum therapeutic efficacy.
- Open Access
- 19 September 2011
- Published by Springer Nature in Radiation Oncology
- Vol. 6 (1) , 118
Delineation in thoracic oncology: a prospective study of the effect of training on contour variability and dosimetric consequences
As part of French residents' radiotherapy training, delineation workstations were available at a national teaching course. We report a prospective comparative study of a non small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) case delineated by 120 residents before and after a radioanatomy/radiotherapy lecture.
- 19 September 2011
- Published by Springer Nature in Radiation Oncology
- Vol. 6 (1) , 118
Open AccessDelineation in thoracic oncology: a prospective study of the effect of training on contour variability and dosimetric consequences
As part of French residents' radiotherapy training, delineation workstations were available at a national teaching course. We report a prospective comparative study of a non small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) case delineated by 120 residents before and after a radioanatomy/radiotherapy lecture.
- 1 January 2010
- Published by Elsevier in Cancer/Radiothérapie
- Vol. 14 (1) , 74-80
Sarcomes en territoire irradié : actualités
- 1 January 2010
- Published by Elsevier in Cancer/Radiothérapie
- Vol. 14 (1) , 74-80
Sarcomes en territoire irradié : actualités