Ninety-degree angled collimator: a dosimetric study related to dynamic intensity-modulated radiotherapy in patients with endometrial carcinoma

被引:0
|
作者
Serarslan, Alparslan [1 ]
Dastan, Yalcin [1 ]
Aksu, Telat [1 ]
Yildiz, Rana Elif [1 ]
Gursel, Bilge [1 ]
Meydan, Deniz [1 ]
Okumus, Nilguen Ozbek [1 ]
机构
[1] Ondokuz Mayis Univ, Fac Med, Dept Radiat Oncol, TR-55139 Samsun, Turkiye
关键词
Dosimetry; Endometrial carcinoma; Intensity-modulated radiotherapy; Volumetric modulated arc therapy; ARC THERAPY; GASTROINTESTINAL TOXICITY; HEMATOLOGIC TOXICITY; RADIATION-THERAPY; CERVICAL-CANCER; PHASE-II; GUIDELINES; ONCOLOGY; REIRRADIATION;
D O I
10.1186/s12885-023-11033-8
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
BackgroundOur purpose was to ensure that the dose constraints of the organs at risk (OARs) were not exceeded while increasing the prescription dose to the planning target volume (PTV) from 45 to 50.4 Gray (Gy) with the dynamic intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) technique. While trying for this purpose, a new dynamic IMRT technique named 90 degrees angled collimated dynamic IMRT (A-IMRT) planning was developed by us.MethodsThis study was based on the computed tomography data sets of 20 patients with postoperatively diagnosed International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage 2 endometrial carcinoma. For each patient, conventional dynamic IMRT (C-IMRT, collimator angle of 0 degrees at all gantry angles), A-IMRT (collimator angle of 90 degrees at gantry angles of 110 degrees, 180 degrees, 215 degrees, and 285 degrees), and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) were planned. Planning techniques were compared with parameters used to evaluate PTV and OARs via dose-volume-histogram analysis using the paired two-tailed Wilcoxon's signed-rank test; p ResultsAll plans achieved adequate dose coverage for PTV. Although the technique with the lowest mean conformality index was A-IMRT (0.76 +/- 0.05) compared to both C-IMRT (0.79 +/- 0.04, p = 0.000) and VMAT (0.83 +/- 0.03, p = 0.000), it protected the OARs especially the bladder (V45 = 32.84 +/- 2.03 vs. 44.21 +/- 6.67, p = 0.000), rectum (V30 = 56.18 +/- 2.05 vs. 73.80 +/- 4.75, p = 0.000) and both femoral heads (V30 for right = 12.19 +/- 1.34 vs. 21.42 +/- 4.03, p = 0.000 and V30 for left = 12.58 +/- 1.48 vs. 21.35 +/- 4.16, p = 0.000) better than C-IMRT. While the dose constraints of the bladder, rectum and bilateral femoral heads were not exceeded in any patient with A-IMRT or VMAT, they were exceeded in 19 (95%), 20 (100%) and 20 (100%) patients with C-IMRT, respectively.ConclusionsOARs are better protected when external beam radiotherapy is applied to the pelvis at a dose of 50.4 Gy by turning the collimator angle to 90 degrees at some gantry angles with the dynamic IMRT technique in the absence of VMAT.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Dosimetric variations of target volumes and organs at risk in nasopharyngeal carcinoma intensity-modulated radiotherapy
    Zhang, X.
    Li, M.
    Cao, J.
    Luo, J-W
    Xu, G-Z
    Gao, L.
    Yi, J.
    Huang, X.
    Xiao, J.
    Li, S.
    Dai, J.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2012, 85 (1016) : E506 - E513
  • [22] Dosimetric impact on changes in target volumes during intensity-modulated radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma
    Mnejja, Wafa
    Daoud, Hend
    Fourati, Nejla
    Sahnoun, Tarek
    Siala, Wicem
    Farhat, Leila
    Daoud, Jamel
    REPORTS OF PRACTICAL ONCOLOGY AND RADIOTHERAPY, 2020, 25 (01) : 41 - 45
  • [23] Clinical and dosimetric implications of intensity-modulated radiotherapy for early-stage glottic carcinoma
    Ward, Matthew Christopher
    Pham, Yvonne D.
    Kotecha, Rupesh
    Zakem, Sara J.
    Murray, Eric
    Greskovich, John F.
    MEDICAL DOSIMETRY, 2016, 41 (01) : 64 - 69
  • [24] Dosimetric ouality assurance for intensity-modulated radiotherapy - Feasibility study for a filmless approach
    Wiezorek, T
    Banz, N
    Schwedas, M
    Scheithauer, M
    Salz, H
    Georg, D
    Wendt, TG
    STRAHLENTHERAPIE UND ONKOLOGIE, 2005, 181 (07) : 468 - 474
  • [25] Volumetric intensity-modulated arc therapy vs conventional intensity-modulated radiation therapy in nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a dosimetric study
    White, Peter
    Chan, Kit Chi
    Cheng, Ka Wai
    Chan, Ka Yiu
    Chau, Ming Chun
    JOURNAL OF RADIATION RESEARCH, 2013, 54 (03) : 532 - 545
  • [26] Effectiveness and Toxicities of Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy for Patients with Locally Recurrent Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma
    Chen, Hai-yan
    Ma, Xiu-mei
    Ye, Ming
    Hou, Yan-li
    Xie, Hua-Ying
    Bai, Yong-rui
    PLOS ONE, 2013, 8 (09):
  • [27] Prognostic nomogram of xerostomia for patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma after intensity-modulated radiotherapy
    Pan, Xin-Bin
    Liu, Yang
    Li, Ling
    Qu, Song
    Chen, Long
    Liang, Shi-Xiong
    Chen, Kai-Hua
    Liang, Zhong-Guo
    Zhu, Xiao-Dong
    AGING-US, 2020, 12 (02): : 1838 - 1847
  • [28] Dosimetric comparison of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and RapidArc in low grade mucoepidermoid carcinoma of the salivary gland: a single institutional experience
    Ghaffar, Amna
    Yousaf, Muhammad
    Anees Minhas, Sajid
    Hameed, Rizwan
    Zafar, Umair
    Iqbal, Khalid
    JOURNAL OF RADIOTHERAPY IN PRACTICE, 2021, 20 (04) : 455 - 460
  • [29] Dosimetric evaluation and clinical outcome in post-operative patients of carcinoma vulva treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy
    Khosla, D.
    Patel, F. D.
    Shukla, A. K.
    Rai, B.
    Oinam, A. S.
    Sharma, S. C.
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2015, 52 (04) : 670 - +
  • [30] Can dosimetric parameters predict acute hematologic toxicity in rectal cancer patients treated with intensity-modulated pelvic radiotherapy?
    Wan, Juefeng
    Liu, Kaitai
    Li, Kaixuan
    Li, Guichao
    Zhang, Zhen
    RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2015, 10