Normal tissue complication probability: Does simultaneous integrated boost intensity-modulated radiotherapy score over other techniques in treatment of prostate adenocarcinoma

被引:3
作者
Basu, K. S. Jothy [1 ]
Bahl, Amit [1 ]
Subramani, V. [1 ]
Sharma, D. N. [1 ]
Rath, G. K. [1 ]
Julka, P. K. [1 ]
机构
[1] All India Inst Med Sci, Inst Rotary Canc Hosp, Dept Radiat Oncol, New Delhi 110029, India
关键词
Intensity-modulated radiotherapy; normal tissue complication probability; prostate; CONFORMAL RADIATION-THERAPY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED-TRIAL; COMPARING; 68; GY; DOSE-RESPONSE; DISTANT METASTASES; CANCER; FRACTIONATION; ESCALATION; CARCINOMA; TOXICITY;
D O I
10.4103/0973-1482.52789
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Aim: The main objective of this study was to analyze the radiobiological effect of different treatment strategies on high-risk prostate adenocarcinoma. Materials and Methods: Ten cases of high-risk prostate adenocarcinoma were selected for this dosimetric study. Four different treatment strategies used for treating prostate cancer were compared. Conventional four-field box technique covering prostate and nodal volumes followed by three-field conformal boost (3D 3DCRT), four-field box technique followed by intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) boost (3D IMRT), IMRT followed by IMRT boost (IMRT IMRT), and simultaneous integrated boost IMRT (SIBIMRT) were compared in terms of tumor control probability (TCP) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP). The dose prescription except for SIBIMRT was 45 Gy in 25 fractions for the prostate and nodal volumes in the initial phase and 27 Gy in 15 fractions for the prostate in the boost phase. For SIBIMRT, equivalent doses were calculated using biologically equivalent dose assuming the / ratio of 1.5 Gy with a dose prescription of 60.75 Gy for the gross tumor volume (GTV) and 45 Gy for the clinical target volume in 25 fractions. IMRT plans were made with 15-MV equispaced seven coplanar fields. NTCP was calculated using the Lyman-Kutcher-Burman (LKB) model. Results: An NTCP of 10.7 0.99, 8.36 0.66, 6.72 0.85, and 1.45 0.11 for the bladder and 14.9 0.99, 14.04 0.66, 11.38 0.85, 5.12 0.11 for the rectum was seen with 3D 3DCRT, 3D IMRT, IMRT IMRT, and SIBIMRT respectively. Conclusions: SIBIMRT had the least NTCP over all other strategies with a reduced treatment time (3 weeks less). It should be the technique of choice for dose escalation in prostate carcinoma.
引用
收藏
页码:78 / 84
页数:7
相关论文
共 21 条
[1]   The getug 70 GY vs. 80 GY randomized trial for localized prostate cancer:: Feasibility and acute toxicity [J].
Beckendorf, V ;
Guérif, S ;
Le Prisé, E ;
Cosset, JM ;
Lefloch, O ;
Chauvet, B ;
Salem, N ;
Chapet, O ;
Bourdin, S ;
Bachaud, JM ;
Maingon, P ;
Lagrange, JL ;
Malissard, L ;
Simon, JM ;
Pommier, P ;
Hay, MH ;
Dubray, B ;
Luporsi, E ;
Bey, P .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2004, 60 (04) :1056-1065
[2]   Fractionation and protraction for radiotherapy of prostate carcinoma [J].
Brenner, DJ ;
Hall, EJ .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 1999, 43 (05) :1095-1101
[3]   Planning, delivery, and quality assurance of intensity-modulated radiotherapy using dynamic multileaf collimator: A strategy for large-scale implementation for the treatment of carcinoma of the prostate [J].
Burman, C ;
Chui, CS ;
Kutcher, G ;
Leibel, S ;
Zelefsky, M ;
LoSasso, T ;
Spirou, S ;
Wu, QW ;
Yang, J ;
Stein, J ;
Mohan, R ;
Fuks, Z ;
Ling, CC .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 1997, 39 (04) :863-873
[4]   Ultra-high dose (86.4 Gy) IMRT for localized prostate cancer: Toxicity and biochemical outcomes [J].
Cahlon, Oren ;
Zelefsky, Michael J. ;
Shippy, Alison ;
Chan, Heather ;
Fuks, Zvi ;
Yamada, Yoshiya ;
Hunt, Margie ;
Greenstein, Steven ;
Amols, Howard .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2008, 71 (02) :330-337
[5]   Escalated-dose versus standard-dose conformal radiotherapy in prostate cancer: first results from the MRC RT01 randomised controlled trial [J].
Dearnaley, David P. ;
Sydes, Matthew R. ;
Graham, John D. ;
Aird, Edwin G. ;
Bottomley, David ;
Cowan, Richard A. ;
Huddart, Robert A. ;
Jose, Chakiath C. ;
Matthews, John H. L. ;
Millar, Jeremy ;
Moore, A. Rollo ;
Morgan, Rachel C. ;
Russell, J. Martin ;
Scrase, Christopher D. ;
Stephens, Richard J. ;
Syndikus, Isabel ;
Parmar, Mahesh K. B. .
LANCET ONCOLOGY, 2007, 8 (06) :475-487
[6]   TOLERANCE OF NORMAL TISSUE TO THERAPEUTIC IRRADIATION [J].
EMAMI, B ;
LYMAN, J ;
BROWN, A ;
COIA, L ;
GOITEIN, M ;
MUNZENRIDER, JE ;
SHANK, B ;
SOLIN, LJ ;
WESSON, M .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 1991, 21 (01) :109-122
[7]  
Fonteyne V, 2008, INT J RAD O IN PRESS, P1
[8]   Is α/β for prostate tumors really low? [J].
Fowler, J ;
Chappell, R ;
Ritter, M .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2001, 50 (04) :1021-1031
[9]   Simultaneous integrated intensity-modulated radiotherapy boost for locally advanced gynecological cancer: Radiobiological and dosimetric considerations [J].
Guerrero, M ;
Li, XA ;
Ma, LJ ;
Linder, J ;
Deyoung, C ;
Erickson, B .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2005, 62 (03) :933-939
[10]   Dose selection for prostate cancer patients based on dose comparison and dose response studies [J].
Hanks, GE ;
Hanlon, AL ;
Pinover, WH ;
Horwitz, EM ;
Price, RA ;
Schultheiss, T .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2000, 46 (04) :823-832