Comparison of helical tomotherapy with multi-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy treatment plans using simultaneous integrated boost in high-risk prostate cancer

被引:2
作者
Basaran, Hamit [1 ,2 ]
Karaca, Sibel [2 ,3 ]
Koca, Timur [2 ,3 ]
Gundogdu, Yasemin Ors [2 ]
机构
[1] Selcuk Univ, Dept Radiat Oncol, Fac Med, Konya, Turkey
[2] Saglik Bilimleri Univ, Erzurum Reg Training & Res Hosp, Dept Radiat Oncol, Erzurum, Turkey
[3] Akdeniz Univ, Dept Radiat Oncol, Fac Med, Antalya, Turkey
关键词
prostate cancer; tomotherapy; intensity-modulated radiation therapy; simultaneous integrated boost; THERAPY ONCOLOGY GROUP; RADIATION-THERAPY; ARC THERAPY; IMRT; VMAT; CONSENSUS;
D O I
10.2478/pjmpe-2021-0017
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Purpose: The aim of this study is to compare the dosimetric results of Helical Tomotherapy (HT) and Multi-field IMRT treatment plans using a Simultaneous Integrated Boost (SIB) technique in the treatment of High-Risk Prostate Cancer (HRPCa) with pelvic nodal radiation. Methods: Seventeen patients planned with HT and 7,8 and 9 fields IMRT were investigated. All plans were designed with the prescribed dose of 54.0 Gy to the PTVln while simultaneously delivering 74.0 Gy to the PTVPS in 30 fractions. Dosimetric data of PTV and OARs were compared. Results: HT gives a better CI and HI of PTVPS compared to multi- field IMRT plans. HT plans significantly improved target coverage (HT:0.95 vs multi-field IMRT: 0.52, 0.49 and 0.49 respectively, p < 0.001). Bladder mean dose(Gy) (HT: 45.6 vs multi-field IMRT: 53.6, 53.3 and 52.7 respectively, p = 0.004) and D66%(Gy) dose (HT: 35.3 vs multi-field IMRT: 46.7, 47.0 and 44.9 respectively, p = 0.006) were lower in HT. But multi-field IMRT plans significantly reduced the rectum volume receiving more than 75 Gy; (HT V75% (%) 2.7 vs multi-field IMRT 0.8, 1.4 and 0.9 respectively, p = 0.008). HT provided better sparing of the right and left femoral head receiving a mean dose. The penile bulb and small bowel doses were the highest in HT compared with multi-field IMRT. Conclusions: HT achieved better dose distribution to target compared to multi-field IMRT. This study suggests HT as a reasonable option for the treatment of HRPCa patients.
引用
收藏
页码:143 / 149
页数:7
相关论文
共 33 条
[21]   Single arc volumetric-modulated arc therapy is sufficient for nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a dosimetric comparison with dual arc VMAT and dynamic MLC and step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiotherapy [J].
Ning, Zhong-Hua ;
Mu, Jin-Ming ;
Jin, Jian-Xue ;
Li, Xiao-Dong ;
Li, Qi-Lin ;
Gu, Wen-Dong ;
Huang, Jin ;
Han, Yang ;
Pei, Hong-Lei .
RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2013, 8
[22]   Technological evolution of radiation treatment: Implications for clinical applications [J].
Pacelli, Roberto ;
Caroprese, Mara ;
Palma, Giuseppe ;
Oliviero, Caterina ;
Clemente, Stefania ;
Cella, Laura ;
Conson, Manuel .
SEMINARS IN ONCOLOGY, 2019, 46 (03) :193-201
[23]   A Dosimetric Comparison of Tomotherapy and Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy in the Treatment of High-Risk Prostate Cancer With Pelvic Nodal Radiation Therapy [J].
Pasquier, David ;
Cavillon, Fabrice ;
Lacornerie, Thomas ;
Touzeau, Claire ;
Tresch, Emmanuelle ;
Lartigau, Eric .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2013, 85 (02) :549-554
[24]  
Piotrowski T, 2014, TECHNOL CANCER RES T, V13, P583, DOI 10.7785/tcrtexpress.2013.600258
[25]   Clinical to planning target volume margins in prostate cancer radiotherapy [J].
Ramiandrisoa, F. ;
Duverge, L. ;
Castelli, J. ;
Nguyen, T. D. ;
Servagi-Vernat, S. ;
de Crevoisier, R. .
CANCER RADIOTHERAPIE, 2016, 20 (6-7) :629-639
[26]   HELICAL TOMOTHERAPY VERSUS SINGLE-ARC INTENSITY-MODULATED ARC THERAPY: A COLLABORATIVE DOSIMETRIC COMPARISON BETWEEN TWO INSTITUTIONS [J].
Rong, Yi ;
Tang, Grace ;
Welsh, James S. ;
Mohiuddin, Majid M. ;
Paliwal, Bhudatt ;
Yu, Cedric X. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2011, 81 (01) :284-296
[27]   Intensity-modulated pelvic radiation therapy and simultaneous integrated boost to the prostate area in patients with high-risk prostate cancer: a preliminary report of disease control [J].
Saracino, Biancamaria ;
Petrongari, Maria Grazia ;
Marzi, Simona ;
Bruzzaniti, Vicente ;
Sara, Gomellini ;
Arcangeli, Stefano ;
Arcangeli, Giorgio ;
Pinnaro, Paola ;
Giordano, Carolina ;
Ferraro, Anna Maria ;
Strigari, Lidia .
CANCER MEDICINE, 2014, 3 (05) :1313-1321
[28]   Impact of dynamic IMRT and tomotherapy in pelvic cancers: A prospective dosimetric study with 51 patients [J].
Servagi-Vernat, S. ;
Giraud, P. ;
Fenoglietto, P. ;
Azria, D. ;
Lisbona, A. ;
de La Rochefordiere, A. ;
Zefkili, S. ;
Fau, P. ;
Resbeut, M. ;
Huger, S. ;
Peiffert, D. ;
Meyer, P. ;
Noel, G. ;
Mazurier, J. ;
Latorzeff, I. ;
Biston, M. -C. ;
Pommier, P. ;
Ledu, D. ;
Garcia, R. ;
Chauvet, B. ;
Dudouet, P. ;
Belhomme, S. ;
Kantor, G. ;
Mahe, M. -A. .
CANCER RADIOTHERAPIE, 2014, 18 (02) :111-118
[29]   RADIATION-THERAPY ONCOLOGY GROUP - RADIOSURGERY QUALITY ASSURANCE GUIDELINES [J].
SHAW, E ;
KLINE, R ;
GILLIN, M ;
SOUHAMI, L ;
HIRSCHFELD, A ;
DINAPOLI, R ;
MARTIN, L .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 1993, 27 (05) :1231-1239
[30]   Optimization of treatment planning parameters used in tomotherapy for prostate cancer patients [J].
Skorska, M. ;
Piotrowski, T. .
PHYSICA MEDICA-EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2013, 29 (03) :273-285