DOSIMETRIC COMPARISON OF TANDEM AND OVOIDS VS. TANDEM AND RING FOR INTRACAVITARY GYNECOLOGIC APPLICATIONS

被引:15
作者
Levin, Daphne [1 ]
Menhel, Janna
Rabin, Tanya
Pfeffer, M. Raphael
Symon, Zvi
机构
[1] Assuta Med Ctr, Div Radiotherapy, IL-62748 Tel Aviv, Israel
关键词
Brachytherapy; Tandem and ring; Tandem and ovoids; High-dose rate (HDR); Cervical cancer;
D O I
10.1016/j.meddos.2008.06.003
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
We evaluated dosimetric differences in tandem and ovoid (TO) and tandem and ring (TR) gynecologic brachytherapy applicators. Seventeen patients with cervical cancer (Stages II-IV) receiving 3 high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy applications (both TO and TR) were studied. Patients underwent computed tomography (CT) scans with contrast in bladder, and were prescribed 8 Gy to ICRU points A, with additional optimization goals of maintaining the pear-shaped dose distribution and minimizing bladder and rectum doses. Bladder and rectum point doses, mean, and maximum doses were calculated. Total treatment time and volumes treated to 95%, 85%, 50%, and 20% or the prescription dose were compared. There were no significant differences between TO and TR applicators in doses to prescription points or critical organs. However, there were significant differences (p < 0.001) between the applicators in treated volumes and total treatment time. The TO treated larger volumes over a longer time. Within each patient, when the applicators were compared, treated volumes were also found to be significantly different (p < 0.01, chi(2)). Our results demonstrate that the 2 applicators, while delivering the prescribed dose to points A and keeping critical organ doses below tolerance, treat significantly different volumes. It is unclear if this difference is clinically meaningful. TO applicators may be treating surrounding healthy tissue unnecessarily, or TR applicators may be underdosing tumor tissue. Further investigation with appropriate imaging modalities is required for accurate delineation of target volumes. Clearly, the TO and TR are not identical, and should not be used interchangeably without further study. (C) 2008 American Association of Medical Dosimetrists.
引用
收藏
页码:315 / 320
页数:6
相关论文
共 21 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 1985, 38 ICRU
  • [2] Bahena JH, 1998, INT J RADIAT ONCOL, V41, P13
  • [3] COIA L, 1990, CANCER-AM CANCER SOC, V66, P2451, DOI 10.1002/1097-0142(19901215)66:12<2451::AID-CNCR2820661202>3.0.CO
  • [4] 2-5
  • [5] Erickson B, 2000, J BRACHYTHERAPY INT, V16, P131
  • [6] Comparison of radiography- and computed tomography-based treatment planning in cervix cancer in brachytherapy with specific attention to some quality assurance aspects
    Fellner, C
    Pötter, R
    Knocke, TH
    Wambersie, A
    [J]. RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2001, 58 (01) : 53 - 62
  • [7] Practice patterns of radiotherapy in cervical cancer among member groups of the Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup (GCIG)
    Gaffney, David K.
    Du Bois, Andreas
    Narayan, Kailash
    Reed, Nick
    Toita, Takafumi
    Pignata, Sandro
    Blake, Peter
    Portelance, Lorraine
    Sadoyze, Azmat
    Potter, Richard
    Colombo, Alessandro
    Randall, Marcus
    Mirza, Mansoor R.
    Trimble, Edward L.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2007, 68 (02): : 485 - 490
  • [8] GLANTZ S, 2001, PRIMER BIOSTATISTICS
  • [9] Kim Robert Y, 2003, Brachytherapy, V2, P200, DOI 10.1016/j.brachy.2003.06.001
  • [10] PRETREATMENT AND TREATMENT FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH IMPROVED OUTCOME IN SQUAMOUS-CELL CARCINOMA OF THE UTERINE CERVIX - A FINAL REPORT OF THE 1973 AND 1978 PATTERNS OF CARE STUDIES
    LANCIANO, RM
    WON, M
    COIA, LR
    HANKS, GE
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 1991, 20 (04): : 667 - 676