鼻咽癌螺旋断层放疗与常规加速器调强放疗的剂量学比较

目的 通过比较鼻咽癌螺旋断层放疗与常规直线加速器静态调强治疗计划,研究其剂量学特性.方法 选10例鼻咽癌患者的CT图像,统一勾画靶区及正常器官后,分别传输至螺旋断层放疗、常规调强放疗逆向调强计划系统.统一给予肿瘤靶区(pGTV、PTVnd)处方剂量70 Gy分33次,亚临床病灶区(PTV1)60 Gy分33次,预防照射区(PTV2)54 Gy分33次.正常器官限制体积与剂量为腮腺V35＜50%,脑干＜54 Gy,脊髓＜45 Gy,晶体＜9 Gy等.对两组数据进行配对t检验.结果 两组计划均有较好靶区处方剂量分布,但螺旋断层放疗组的均匀性好于常规调强放疗组;PTV1平均剂量(63.84 Gy)也显著低于常规调强放疗组(70.30 Gy);腮腺平均剂量较常规常规调强放疗组低5.3Gy,V30及V35显著低于常规调强放疗组;喉-气管-食管的最大剂量也较常规调强放疗组明显降低.结论 在鼻咽癌调强放疗中,螺旋断层放疗较常规直线加速器静态调强放疗有更好的剂量均匀性及更陡峭的剂量梯度,并可更好地保护正常器官.     

Does helical tomotherapy improve dose conformity and normal tissue sparing compared to conventional IMRT? A dosimetric comparison in high risk prostate cancer

The study was designed to compare Helical Tomotherapy (HT) based IMRT and conventional sliding window (SW IMRT) in patients with high risk prostate cancer. Complementary plans with HT and SWIMRT were compared using DVH parameters. The PTV Prostate was prescribed 74 Gy in 37 fractions and the nodal PTV received 55 Gy in 37 fractions by simultaneous integrated boost. Conformity Index, Homogeneity Index and dose-volume parameters were compared. The conformity index (CI) of HT (0.77, SD = 0.54) plans tended to be better (p = 0.069) compared to SWIMRT (0.70, SD = 0.01) for prostate PTV. CI for nodal PTV was similar. Helical tomotherapy plans were more homogeneous, with homogeneity index (HI) of 0.04 compared to 0.06 in SWIMRT (p = 0.018) for PTV prostate and HI of 0.06 and 0.15 (p = 0.025) for PTV nodes respectively. Median dose to bladder (p = 0.025) and rectum (p = 0.012) were less with HT. However, HT delivered a higher D10Gy and D1Gy to rectum and bladder overlap volumes as a consequence of achieving better homogeneity. Femoral heads were better spared with HT plans (p = 0.012). HT improves dose homogeneity, target coverage and conformity as compared to SWIMRT, with overall improvement in critical organ sparing.     

食管癌螺旋断层放疗及三维适形调强放疗计划剂量学研究

目的 近年来放射治疗设备不断更新,放疗技术持续发展,肿瘤放疗方式有了更多的选择.本研究通过评估食管癌的螺旋断层放疗(tomotherapy, TOMO)及三维适形调强放疗(intensity modulation radiation therapy, IMRT)的剂量学特性,为临床上食管癌放疗方式的选择提供依据.方法 选取2014-07-13-2015-02-25浙江省肿瘤医院胸部肿瘤放疗科10例食管癌患者,勾画靶区及正常器官后,分别传输至Raystation及TOMO计划系统,给予肿瘤原发灶(PGTV)61.6 Gy/28次,计划靶区(PTV)56.0 Gy/28次,根据RTOG 1106标准限制危及器官(organs at risk, OAR)剂量.分别对靶区的剂量体积直方图(dose volume histogram, DVH)、均匀性指数(homogeneity index, HI)、适形性指数(conformal index CI)和OAR(肺、心脏、脊髓)受照最大剂量及平均剂量进行评估.结果 两种计划都能满足处方剂量要求和危及器官受量限制.TOMO计划中PGTV的中位均匀性指数(HI)为0.057 5,优于IMRT计划的0.073 5, P=0.047.TOMO计划中PTV的中位适形性指数(CI)为0.785,优于IMRT计划的0.682 5, P=0.009.TOMO计划中PGTV的中位最大剂量Dmax为64.9 Gy,明显低于IMRT计划的66.5 Gy, P=0.005;TOMO计划中PTV的中位最大剂量Dmax为64.1 Gy,明显低于IMRT计划的64.9 Gy, P=0.028. TOMO计划的中位总的肺剂量为10.8 Gy,低于IMRT计划的11.9 Gy, P=0.005.TOMO计划的中位总的心脏剂量为22.6 Gy,明显低于IMRT计划的24.3 Gy, P=0.028. TOMO计划的中位脊髓最大剂量为40.2 Gy,明显低于IMRT计划的41.7 Gy, P=0.007.结论 食管癌放疗中TOMO放疗计划对比IMRT放疗计划,具有更好的靶区覆盖适形性及剂量分布均匀性,同时明显减少双肺、心脏及脊髓的受照剂量.     

Comparing step-and-shoot IMRT with dynamic helical tomotherapy IMRT plans for head-and-neck cancer

PURPOSE: The goal of this planning study was to compare step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plans with helical dynamic IMRT plans for oropharynx patients on the basis of dose distribution. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Five patients with oropharynx cancer had been previously treated by step-and-shoot IMRT at the University Medical Centre Utrecht, The Netherlands, applying five fields and approximately 60-90 segments. Inverse planning was carried out using Plato, version 2.6.2. For each patient, an inverse IMRT plan was also made using Tomotherapy Hi-Art System, version 2.0, and using the same targets and optimization goals. Statistical analysis was performed by a paired t test. RESULTS: All tomotherapy plans compared favorably with the step-and-shoot plans regarding sparing of the organs at risk and keeping an equivalent target dose homogeneity. Tomotherapy plans in particular realized sharper dose gradients compared with the step-and-shoot plans. The mean dose to all parotid glands (n = 10) decreased on average 6.5 Gy (range, -4 to 14; p = 0.002). The theoretical reduction in normal tissue complication probabilities in favor of the tomotherapy plans depended on the parotid normal tissue complication probability model used (range, -3% to 32%). CONCLUSION: Helical tomotherapy IMRT plans realized sharper dose gradients compared with the clinically applied step-and shoot plans. They are expected to be able to reduce the parotid normal tissue complication probability further, keeping a similar target dose homogeneity.     

Dose–volume and biological-model based comparison between helical tomotherapy and (inverse-planned) IMAT for prostate tumours

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Helical tomotherapy (HT) and intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMAT) are two arc-based approaches to the delivery of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Through plan comparisons we have investigated the potential of IMAT, both with constant (conventional or IMAT-C) and variable (non-conventional or IMAT-NC, a theoretical exercise) dose-rate, to serve as an alternative to helical tomotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six patients with prostate tumours treated by HT with a moderately hypo-fractionated protocol, involving a simultaneous integrated boost, were re-planned as IMAT treatments. A method for IMAT inverse-planning using a commercial module for static IMRT combined with a multi-leaf collimator (MLC) arc-sequencing was developed. IMAT plans were compared to HT plans in terms of dose statistics and radiobiological indices. RESULTS: Concerning the planning target volume (PTV), the mean doses for all PTVs were similar for HT and IMAT-C plans with minimum dose, target coverage, equivalent uniform dose (EUD) and tumour control probability (TCP) values being generally higher for HT; maximum dose and degree of heterogeneity were instead higher for IMAT-C. In relation to organs at risk, mean doses and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) values were similar between the two modalities, except for the penile bulb where IMAT was significantly better. Re-normalizing all plans to the same rectal toxicity (NTCP=5%), the HT modality yielded higher TCP than IMAT-C but there was no significant difference between HT and IMAT-NC. The integral dose with HT was higher than that for IMAT. CONCLUSIONS: with regards to the plan analysis, the HT is superior to IMAT-C in terms of target coverage and dose homogeneity within the PTV. Introducing dose-rate variation during arc-rotation, not deliverable with current linac technology, the simulations result in comparable plan indices between (IMAT-NC) and HT.     

Intensity-modulated proton therapy versus helical tomotherapy in nasopharynx cancer: planning comparison and NTCP evaluation

PURPOSE: To compare intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) and helical tomotherapy (HT) treatment plans for nasopharynx cancer using a simultaneous integrated boost approach. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The data from 6 patients who had previously been treated with HT were used. A three-beam IMPT technique was optimized in the Hyperion treatment planning system, simulating a "beam scanning" technique. HT was planned using the tomotherapy treatment planning system. Both techniques were optimized to simultaneously deliver 66 Gy in 30 fractions to planning target volume (PTV1; GTV and enlarged nodes) and 54 Gy to PTV2 subclinical, electively treated nodes. Normal tissue complication probability calculation was performed for the parotids and larynx. RESULTS: Very similar PTVs coverage and homogeneity of the target dose distribution for IMPT and HT were found. The conformity index was significantly lower for protons than for photons (1.19 vs. 1.42, respectively). The mean dose to the ipsilateral and contralateral parotid glands decreased by 6.4 Gy and 5.6 Gy, respectively, with IMPT. The volume of mucosa and esophagus receiving >/=20 Gy and >/=30 Gy with IMPT was significantly lower than with HT. The average volume of larynx receiving >/=50 Gy was significantly lower with HT, while for thyroid, it was comparable. The volume receiving >/=30, >/=20, and >/=10 Gy in total body volume decreased with IMPT by 14.5%, 19.4%, and 23.1%, respectively. The normal tissue complication probability for the parotid glands was significantly lower with IMPT for all sets of parameters; however, we also estimated an almost full recovery of the contralateral parotid with HT. The normal tissue complication probability for the larynx was not significantly different between the two irradiation techniques. CONCLUSION: Excellent target coverage, homogeneity within the PTVs, and sparing of the organs at risk were reached with both modalities. IMPT allows for better sparing of most organs at risk at medium-to-low doses.     

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) dosimetry of the head and neck: a comparison of treatment plans using linear accelerator-based IMRT and helical tomotherapy

PURPOSE: To date, most intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) delivery has occurred using linear accelerators (linacs), although helical tomotherapy has become commercially available. To quantify the dosimetric difference, we compared linac-based and helical tomotherapy-based treatment plans for IMRT of the oropharynx. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We compared the dosimetry findings of 10 patients who had oropharyngeal carcinoma. Five patients each had cancers in the base of the tongue and tonsil. Each plan was independently optimized using either the CORVUS planning system (Nomos Corporation, Sewickly, PA), commissioned for a Varian 2300 CD linear accelerator (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA) with 1-cm multileaf collimator leaves, or helical tomotherapy. The resulting treatment plans were evaluated by comparing the dose-volume histograms, equivalent uniform dose (EUD), dose uniformity, and normal tissue complication probabilities. RESULTS: Helical tomotherapy plans showed improvement of critical structure avoidance and target dose uniformity for all patients. The average equivalent uniform dose reduction for organs at risk (OARs) surrounding the base of tongue and the tonsil were 17.4% and 27.14% respectively. An 80% reduction in normal tissue complication probabilities for the parotid glands was observed in the tomotherapy plans relative to the linac-based plans. The standard deviation of the planning target volume dose was reduced by 71%. In our clinic, we use the combined dose-volume histograms for each class of plans as a reference goal for helical tomotherapy treatment planning optimization. CONCLUSIONS: Helical tomotherapy provides improved dose homogeneity and normal structure dose compared with linac-based IMRT in the treatment of oropharyngeal carcinoma resulting in a reduced risk for complications from focal hotspots within the planning target volume and for the adjacent parotid glands.     

Dosimetric comparisons of helical tomotherapy and step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiotherapy in nasopharyngeal carcinoma

PURPOSE: The study evaluates and quantifies the potential dosimetric gains of helical tomotherapy (HT) versus step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiotherapy (SaS-IMRT) for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty consecutive NPC patients curatively treated by HT were examined. Each case was planned by HT and SaS-IMRT (ADAC Pinnacle(3)) planning system, respectively. Dose plans were compared using dose volume histograms (DVH), conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), and minimal dose to 1cc (D(min_1cc)) of the planned target volume (PTV) and a comprehensive quality index (CQI) of ten organs at risk (OARs). The prescribed dose/fractionation was 72Gy to the PTV, 64.8Gy to the elective PTV, and 54Gy to the clinically negative neck region. The plan of 54Gy to the PTV (PTV(54)) was used to evaluate the CI and HI in the target. The cumulative doses of the three PTV plans to the OARs were calculated. RESULTS: We observed the HT plans significantly improved the CI (improvement ratio: 11.9+/-5.5%) and HI (improvement ratio: 8.8+/-1.5%) of the PTV(54) compared with SaS-IMRT plans. In addition, the mean/maximal dose of most of the OARs except chiasm was significantly reduced in HT plans, with the CQI of 0.92+/-0.08. A negative result of HT in chiasm was observed but only significantly revealed in cases without skull base infiltration. CONCLUSIONS: A dosimetric gain in CI and HI of PTV and sparing of OARs was significantly obtained in HT versus SaS-IMRT plans in NPC patients. Whether such dosimetric superiority in HT could transfer into clinical advantages needs further investigation.     

髓母细胞瘤不同放疗技术剂量学研究

目的 比较髓母细胞瘤常规加速器不同三维放疗技术与断层治疗计划的剂量分布。
方法 2011年12例髓母细胞瘤患者在CT模拟分段扫描后图像耦合,分别进行7个野三维适形放疗(3DCRT)、9和13个野调强放疗(IMRT)计划[全脑全脊髓(PTV)36 Gy,后颅窝加量至54 Gy],对PTV、危及器官剂量参数进行分析并与国外断层治疗计划比较。
结果 3DCRT需设置3个中心,而IMRT只要2个中心。PTV剂量分布9个野IMRT好于3DCRT、13个野IMRT,靶区均匀性指数分别为0.93、0.82、0.89(F=6.17,P=0.02),靶区适形指数分别为0.97、 0.88、0.95(F=5.23,P=0.01)。9个野IMRT与断层治疗的剂量分布类似。
结论 常规加速器全脑全脊髓9个野IMRT可达断层治疗剂量分布且简便易行。     

Geometric factors influencing dosimetric sparing of the parotid glands using IMRT

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE: To determine the relationship between the parotid volume, parotid-planning target volume (PTV) overlap, and dosimetric sparing of the parotid with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Parotid data were collected retrospectively for 51 patients treated with simultaneous boost IMRT. Unresectable patients received 54 or 59.4 Gy to subclinical disease, 70 Gy to gross disease. Patients treated postoperatively received 54, 60, and 66 Gy to low-risk, high-risk, and tumor bed regions. Volume and mean dose of each gland and gland segments outside of and overlapping the PTV were collected. Proximity of each gland to each PTV was recorded. RESULTS: Dosimetric sparing (mean dose 21% overlap (p = <0.0001). Among spared glands, the median mean dose in the overlap region was 55.0 Gy in glands with < or =21% overlap, but only 45.4 Gy when overlap >21%. Median mean dose was 25.9 Gy to glands overlapping PTV(54) or PTV(59) alone and 30.0 Gy to those abutting PTV(70) (p < 0.001). Although proximity to PTV(70) was associated with higher parotid dose, satisfactory sparing was achieved in 24 of 43 ipsilateral glands. CONCLUSIONS: Dosimetric sparing of the parotid is feasible when the parotid-PTV overlap is less than approximately 20%. With more overlap, sparing may result in low doses within the overlap region, possibly leading to inadequate PTV coverage. Gland proximity to the high-dose PTV is associated with higher mean dose but does not always preclude dosimetric sparing.     

鼻腔NK/T细胞淋巴瘤螺旋断层治疗与常规加速器调强放疗的剂量学研究

目的分析评价鼻腔NK/T细胞淋巴瘤在螺旋断层放疗（helical tomotherapy,HT）与常规静态调强放疗（IMRT）2种治疗技术中剂量学特点。方法对10例局限性Ⅰ～Ⅱ期鼻腔NK/T细胞淋巴瘤患者,统一给予靶区剂量50Gy/25次,对每例患者分别实施设计HT和IMRT计划。比较靶区、危及器官剂量分布情况。结果 HT组平均适形度指数为0.81,平均均匀性指数为1.08,均明显好于IMRT组（平均适形度指数为0.71,平均均匀性指数为1.12）（t=8.22,t=-4.81,P〈0.05）。HT组晶体、腮腺和脑干的最大剂量与平均剂量均小于IMRT组,HT组腮腺的V5、V10和V15低于IMRT组,而HT组视神经的最大剂量、平均剂量、V20、V30和V40均高于IMRT组,但无统计学意义。结论 HT和IMRT计划均有较好的靶区剂量分布,但HT技术较IMRT技术明显改善了靶区剂量分布适形度,降低了晶体等正常组织受照剂量,可使患者从中获益,其临床意义有待进一步研究。     

Evaluating target coverage and normal tissue sparing in the adjuvant radiotherapy of malignant pleural mesothelioma: helical tomotherapy compared with step-and-shoot IMRT.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the potential of helical tomotherapy in the adjuvant treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma and compare target homogeneity, conformity and normal tissue dose with step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiotherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Ten patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma who had undergone neoadjuvant chemotherapy with cisplatin and permetrexed followed by extrapleural pneumonectomy (EPP) were treated in our department with 54 Gy to the hemithorax delivered by step-and-shoot IMRT. A planning comparison was performed by creating radiation plans for helical tomotherapy. The different plans were compared by analysing target homogeneity using the homogeneity indices HI(max) and HI(min) and target conformity by using the conformity index CI(95). To assess target coverage and normal tissue sparing TV(90), TV(95) and mean and maximum doses were compared. RESULTS: Both modalities achieved excellent dose distributions while sparing organs at risk. Target coverage and homogeneity could be increased significantly with helical tomotherapy compared with step-and-shoot IMRT. Mean dose to the contralateral lung could be lowered beyond 5 Gy. CONCLUSIONS: Our planning study showed that helical tomotherapy is an excellent option for the adjuvant intensity-modulated radiotherapy of MPM. It is capable of improving target coverage and homogeneity.     

Dosimetric comparison of left-sided whole breast irradiation with 3DCRT, forward-planned IMRT, inverse-planned IMRT, helical tomotherapy, and topotherapy

Background and purpose

To compare left-sided whole breast conventional and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) treatment planning techniques.

Materials and methods

Treatment plans were created for 10 consecutive patients. Three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT), forward-planned IMRT (for-IMRT), and inverse-planned IMRT (inv-IMRT) used two tangent beams. For-IMRT utilized up to four segments per beam. For helical tomotherapy (HT) plans, beamlet entrance and/or exit to critical structures was blocked. Topotherapy plans, which used static gantry angles with simultaneous couch translation and inverse-planned intensity modulation, used two tangent beams. Plans were normalized to 50 Gy to 95% of the retracted PTV.

Results

Target max doses were reduced with for-IMRT compared to 3DCRT, which were further reduced with HT, topotherapy, and inv-IMRT. HT resulted in lowest heart and ipsilateral lung max doses, but had higher mean doses. Inv-IMRT and topotherapy reduced ipsilateral lung mean and max doses compared to 3DCRT and for-IMRT.

Conclusions

All modalities evaluated provide adequate coverage of the intact breast. HT, topotherapy, and inv-IMRT can reduce high doses to the target and normal tissues, although HT results in increased low doses to large volume of normal tissue. For-IMRT improves target homogeneity compared with 3DCRT, but to a lesser degree than the inverse-planned modalities.     

Intensity-modulated radiotherapy improves target coverage, spinal cord sparing and allows dose escalation in patients with locally advanced cancer of the larynx.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: An investigation has been carried out into the potential of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) to improve the coverage of the targets and the sparing of the spinal cord (SC) in radiotherapy treatment of the larynx and bilateral cervical lymph nodes, in patients with advanced larynx cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Conventional radiotherapy (CRT) and IMRT plans were produced for six patients to treat the larynx (PTV1) and lymph nodes (PTV2) to 50 Gy (phase 1). A second plan was created to treat the PTV1 to 65 Gy and PTV2 to 50 Gy (phases 1 and 2). The potential to escalate the dose to both the larynx (to 67 Gy) and the nodes (to 56 Gy) was investigated for the IMRT plans. RESULTS: The phase 1 treatment gave average minimum doses (dose received by 99% volume) of 38.1 (+/-8.2) and 48.5 (+/-0.2)Gy for PTV1, treated by CRT and IMRT, respectively, and 35.9 (+/-2.9) and 46.2 (+/-1.8)Gy for PTV2. For the two phase treatment the average minimum doses to PTV1 were 51.6 (+/-8.2) (CRT) and 62.1 (+/-0.7)Gy (IMRT) (p=0.028) and for PTV2 were 36.2 (+/-2.9) (CRT) and 46.8 (+/-0.5)Gy (IMRT) (P=0.0004). The average maximum doses (dose received by 1% volume) to the SC were 42.5 (+/-1.9) (CRT) and 37.9 (+/-1.4)Gy (IMRT) (P=0.01). For the dose escalated IMRT plans the minimum dose to PTV1 was 64.6 (+/-0.5) and 50.8 (+/-1.8)Gy to PTV2. The average SC maximum was 41.5 (+/-1.6)Gy. CONCLUSIONS: IMRT offers improved target homogeneity and reduces irradiation of the SC. This sparing of normal tissue structures is sufficient that significant dose escalation of both the larynx and lymph nodes may be possible.     

Dynamic intensity-modulated non-coplanar arc radiotherapy (INCA) for head and neck cancer.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To define the potential advantages of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) applied using a non-coplanar dynamic arc technique for the treatment of head and neck cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: External beam radiotherapy (EBRT) was planned in ten patients with head and neck cancer using coplanar IMRT and non-coplanar arc techniques, termed intensity modulated non-coplanar arc EBRT (INCA). Planning target volumes (PTV1) of first order covered the gross tumor volume and surrounding clinical target volume treated with 68-70 Gy, whereas PTV2 covered the elective lymph nodes with 54-55 Gy using a simultaneous internal boost. Treatment plan comparison between IMRT and INCA was carried out using dose-volume histogram and "equivalent uniform dose" (EUD). RESULTS: INCA resulted in better dose coverage and homogeneity of the PTV1, PTV2, and reduced dose delivered to most of the organs at risk (OAR). For the parotid glands, a reduction of the mean dose of 2.9 (+/- 2.0) Gy was observed (p = 0.002), the mean dose to the larynx was reduced by 6.9 (+/- 2.9) Gy (p = 0.003), the oral mucosa by 2.4 (+/- 1.1) Gy (p < 0.001), and the maximal dose to the spinal cord by 3.2 (+/- 1.7) Gy (p = 0.004). The mean dose to the brain was increased by 3.0 (+/- 1.4) Gy (p = 0.002) and the mean lung dose increased by 0.2 (+/- 0.4) Gy (p = 0.87). The EUD suggested better avoidance of the OAR, except for the lung, and better coverage and dose uniformity were achieved with INCA compared to IMRT. CONCLUSION: Dose delivery accuracy with IMRT using a non-coplanar dynamic arc beam geometry potentially improves treatment of head and neck cancer.     

Comparison of IMRT techniques in the radiotherapeutic management of head and neck cancer: is tomotherapy "better" than step-and-shoot IMRT?

Currently, the most common method of delivering intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) is through step-and-shoot, segmental multi-leaf collimator (SMLC)-based techniques. Although rotational delivery methods such as helical tomotherapy (HT) have been proposed as offering advantages in the treatment of head and neck cancer, a lack of clinical data exists on its potential utility. This study compared dosimetric, clinical, and quality-of-life endpoints among 149 patients treated by HT and SMLC-IMRT for head and neck cancer. Dosimetric analysis revealed that the use of HT resulted in significant improvements with respect to mean dose (23.5 versus 27.9 Gy, p = 0.03) and V30 (30.1 versus 43.9 Gy, p = 0.01) to the contralateral (spared) parotid gland. However, the incidence of grade 3+ xerostomia in the late setting was 10% and 8% among patients treated by HT and SMLC-IMRT, respectively (p = 0.46). There were no significant differences in any of the quality of life endpoints among patients treated by HT and SMLC-IMRT (p > 0.05, for all). Acknowledging the biases inherent in this retrospective analysis, we found that the dosimetric advantages observed with HT compared to SMLC-IMRT failed to translate into significant improvements in clinical outcome. Prospective studies are needed to further evaluate how HT may affect the therapeutic ratio.     

Sparing the parotid glands and surgically transferred submandibular gland with helical tomotherapy in post-operative radiation of head and neck cancer: a planning study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To evaluate the feasibility of sparing the parotid glands and surgically transferred submandibular gland (SMG) by intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in post-operative cases of head and neck cancer (HNC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten patients (larynx-2, base of tongue-4, tonsil-3, and unknown primary-1; pathologic stages III-IV) who underwent SMG transfers on the side of N0 neck along with definitive surgery were selected for this study. IMRT planning was done retrospectively using helical tomotherapy approach. Planning objective was to deliver 60 Gy to PTV1 and 54 Gy to PTV2 while maintaining the mean dose to the total parotid volume (TPV) and SMG less than 26 Gy. RESULTS: The mean dose (+/-SD) to the TPV and SMG were 25+/-0.6 Gy and 23+/-1.9 Gy, respectively. The D(95) for PTV1 and PTV2 were 59.9+/-0.1 Gy and 54.9+/-0.3 Gy, respectively, satisfying our planning goal for PTV coverage. The D(99) for PTV1 and PTV2 were 58.2+/-0.7 Gy and 49.5+/-2.2 Gy, respectively, showing that sparing the salivary glands did not result in underdosing of the PTVs. CONCLUSIONS: By combining the gland transfer and IMRT, the mean dose to TPV and transferred SMG could be reduced to less than 26 Gy in post-operative patients of HNC.     

Can All Centers Plan Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT) Effectively? An External Audit of Dosimetric Comparisons Between Three-Dimensional Conformal Radiotherapy and IMRT for Adjuvant Chemoradiation for Gastric Cancer

PURPOSE: To compare dosimetric endpoints between three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) at our center with limited IMRT experience, and to perform an external audit of the IMRT plans. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Ten patients, who received adjuvant chemoradiation for gastric cancer, formed the study cohort. For standardization, the planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk were recontoured with the assistance of a study protocol radiologic atlas. The cohort was replanned with CMS Xio to generate coplanar 3D-CRT and IMRT plans. All 10 datasets, including volumes but without the plans (i.e., blinded), were transmitted to an experienced center where IMRT plans were designed using Nomos Corvus (IMRT-C) and ADAC Pinnacle (IMRT-P). All IMRT plans were normalized to D95% receiving 45 Gy. RESULTS: Intensity-modulated radiotherapy yielded higher PTV V45 (volume that receives > or = 45 Gy) (p < 0.001) than 3D-CRT. No difference in V20 was seen in the right (p = 0.9) and left (p = 0.3) kidneys, but the liver mean dose (p < 0.001) was superior with IMRT. For the external audit, IMRT-C (p = 0.002) and IMRT-P (p < 0.001) achieved significantly lower left kidney V20 than IMRT, and IMRT-P (p < 0.001) achieved lower right kidney V20 than IMRT. The IMRT-C (p = 0.003) but not IMRT-P (p = 0.6) had lower liver mean doses than IMRT. CONCLUSIONS: At our institution with early IMRT experience, IMRT improved PTV dose coverage and liver doses but not kidney doses. An external audit of IMRT plans showed that an experienced center can yield superior IMRT plans.