Clinical Implementation of Tangential Field Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) Using Sliding Window Technique and Dosimetric Comparison with 3D Conformal Therapy (3DCRT) in Breast Cancer

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical implementation of tangential field IMRT using sliding window technique and to compare dosimetric parameters with 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT). Twenty breast cancer patients were randomly selected for comparison of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT)-based treatment plan with 3DCRT. Inverse treatment was performed using the sliding window technique, employing the Eclipse^® Planning System (version 7.1.59, Varian, Palo Alto, CA). The dosimetric parameters compared were V₉₅ (the percentage of target volume getting ≥95% of prescribed dose), V₁₀₅, V₁₁₀, and dose homogeneity index, DHI (percentage of target volume getting between 95% and 110% of prescribed dose). The mean V₉₅, DHI, V₁₀₅, and V₁₁₀ for target volume for IMRT vs. 3D were 90.6% (standard deviation [SD]: 3.2) vs. 91% (SD: 3.0), 87.7 (SD: 6.0) vs. 82.6 (SD: 7.8), 27.3% (SD: 20.3) vs. 49.4% (SD: 14.3), and 2.8 (SD: 5.6) vs. 8.4% (SD: 7.4), respectively. DHI was increased by 6.3% with IMRT compared to 3DCRT (p < 0.05). The reductions of V₁₀₅ and V₁₁₀ for the IMRT compared to 3DCRT were 44.7% and 66.3%, respectively (p < 0.01). The mean dose and V₃₀ for heart with IMRT were 2.3 (SD: 1.1) and 1.05 (SD: 1.5) respectively, which was a reduction by 6.8% and 7.9%, respectively, in comparison with 3D. Similarly, the mean dose and V₂₀ for the ipsilateral lung and the percentage of volume of contralateral volume lung receiving > 5% of prescribed dose with IMRT were reduced by 9.9%, 2.2%, and 35%, respectively. The mean of total monitor units used for IMRT and 3DCRT was about the same (397 vs. 387). The tangential field IMRT for intact breast using sliding window technique was successfully implemented in the clinic. We have now treated more than 1000 breast cancer patients with this technique. The dosimetric data suggest improved dose homogeneity in the breast and reduction in the dose to lung and heart for IMRT treatments, which may be of clinical value in potentially contributing to improved cosmetic results and reduced late treatment-related toxicity.     

Clinical Implementation of Tangential Field Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) Using Sliding Window Technique and Dosimetric Comparison with 3D Conformal Therapy (3DCRT) in Breast Cancer

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical implementation of tangential field IMRT using sliding window technique and to compare dosimetric parameters with 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT). Twenty breast cancer patients were randomly selected for comparison of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT)-based treatment plan with 3DCRT. Inverse treatment was performed using the sliding window technique, employing the Eclipse^® Planning System (version 7.1.59, Varian, Palo Alto, CA). The dosimetric parameters compared were V₉₅ (the percentage of target volume getting ≥95% of prescribed dose), V₁₀₅, V₁₁₀, and dose homogeneity index, DHI (percentage of target volume getting between 95% and 110% of prescribed dose). The mean V₉₅, DHI, V₁₀₅, and V₁₁₀ for target volume for IMRT vs. 3D were 90.6% (standard deviation [SD]: 3.2) vs. 91% (SD: 3.0), 87.7 (SD: 6.0) vs. 82.6 (SD: 7.8), 27.3% (SD: 20.3) vs. 49.4% (SD: 14.3), and 2.8 (SD: 5.6) vs. 8.4% (SD: 7.4), respectively. DHI was increased by 6.3% with IMRT compared to 3DCRT (p < 0.05). The reductions of V₁₀₅ and V₁₁₀ for the IMRT compared to 3DCRT were 44.7% and 66.3%, respectively (p < 0.01). The mean dose and V₃₀ for heart with IMRT were 2.3 (SD: 1.1) and 1.05 (SD: 1.5) respectively, which was a reduction by 6.8% and 7.9%, respectively, in comparison with 3D. Similarly, the mean dose and V₂₀ for the ipsilateral lung and the percentage of volume of contralateral volume lung receiving > 5% of prescribed dose with IMRT were reduced by 9.9%, 2.2%, and 35%, respectively. The mean of total monitor units used for IMRT and 3DCRT was about the same (397 vs. 387). The tangential field IMRT for intact breast using sliding window technique was successfully implemented in the clinic. We have now treated more than 1000 breast cancer patients with this technique. The dosimetric data suggest improved dose homogeneity in the breast and reduction in the dose to lung and heart for IMRT treatments, which may be of clinical value in potentially contributing to improved cosmetic results and reduced late treatment-related toxicity.     

不同照射野调强放疗在胸中下段食管癌中对正常组织受量的影响

目的比较三种不同放疗布野方式在胸中下段食管癌患者中的剂量分布情况,为临床调强放疗计划的选择提供参考。方法选择30例胸中下段食管癌患者进行CT定位,并由主治医师画出各自靶区,然后设计GTV和PTV,并设计三组布野方案(A组:0°、72°、144°、216°、288°;B组:0°、57°、144°、216°、303°;C组:0°、42°、144°、216°、318°),分别模拟三维适型调强计划,给予相同的单次剂量、治疗次数及优化条件,最后以95%PTV体积获得60 Gy处方剂量进行归一,利用等剂量曲线以及剂量体积直方图对以上三组计划进行下列参数的两两比较:心脏受量为20 Gy、30 Gy、40 Gy、50 Gy时的体积值;左右侧肺分别受量为5 Gy、10 Gy、20 Gy、25 Gy、30 Gy、35 Gy、40 Gy时的体积值;脊髓最大点受量。结果 C组与A、B组相比,患者肺低剂量受照射体积(V5、V10)明显减小(P≤0.003),C组V20较A组有提高,高剂量受照射体积V25、V30及V35较A、B两组有一定的提高(P<0.05),但均在临床可评价的安全范围内;脊髓最高点及心脏受量比较提示:C组脊髓最大点受量较A组增加,C组心脏V20较其他两组有增加(P<0.05),但也均在临床可评价的安全范围内。结论三维适型调强计划中,在5野均分的基础上适当减小两前斜野与零度野之间的夹角(C组),可以在基本不增加心脏和脊髓受量的同时有效地减少肺低剂量区受照射体积,但有提高肺高剂量区受照射体积的风险。     

Evaluation of a Single-Isocenter Technique for Axillary Radiotherapy in Breast Cancer

The aim of this study was to develop a technique for axillary radiotherapy that minimizes the risk of radiation-induced damage to the surrounding normal tissue (i.e., arm, shoulder, lung, esophagus, and spinal cord) while keeping the risk of a nodal recurrence to a minimum. A planning study was performed in 20 breast cancer patients. The target volume of the axillary treatment encompassed the periclavicular and axillary lymph node areas. The 3-dimensional (3D) computed tomography (CT) information in this study was used to outline the lymph node areas and the organs at risk (i.e., the esophagus, spinal cord, brachial plexus, and lung). A conventional AP-PA technique (with a transmission plate placed in the AP beam) was evaluated. In addition, a new single-isocenter technique consisting of AP/PA fields using a gantry rotation of ±20° and a medial AP segment was developed. Both techniques were compared by evaluation of the calculated dose distributions and the dose-volume histograms of the target volume and surrounding organs at risk. The field borders and humeral shielding were redefined based on the 3D anatomical references. Adapting the humeral shielding reduced the irradiated volume by 19% and might contribute to a reduction of the incidence of arm edema and impairment of shoulder function. The maximum radiation dose in the esophagus and spinal cord was reduced by more than 50% using the single-isocenter technique. The difference between both techniques with respect to the mean doses in the target volume and lung, and the maximum dose in brachial plexus, was not statistically significant. Moreover, the single-isocenter technique allowed a fast and easy treatment preparation and reduced the execution time considerably (with approximately 10 minutes per fraction).     

非小细胞肺癌不同调强放疗方案的剂量学对比研究

目的 探讨非小细胞肺癌调强放疗计划设计的合理方案。方法 对11例非小细胞肺癌患者分别制定2种放疗计划:PTV60计划的PTV为(GTV+6～8mm)+呼吸动度+摆位误差,对PTV获得60Gy处方剂量进行归一;PTV70计划的PTV为GTV+呼吸动度+摆位误差,对PTV获得70Gy处方剂量进行归一。通过剂量体积直方图分析2种治疗计划的靶区剂量分布和危及器官受量,并进行剂量学的对比研究。结果 PTV70计划接受60Gy剂量的靶区体积明显高于PTV60计划,两组在靶区剂量均匀性方面相似。PTV70计划的肺V₂₀较PTV60计划平均下降(1.69±0.42)%,两组相比差异有统计学意义(t=0.047,P=0.002);肺V₅平均下降(1.29±1.09)%,两组相比差异无统计学意义。结论 在非小细胞肺癌调强放疗设计中,PTV70计划优于PTV60计划。     

左侧乳腺癌患者根治术后常规调强计划与电子束适形联合调强计划的剂量比较

目的比较左侧乳腺癌患者根治术后常规调强放射治疗计划(intensity modulated radiotherapy, IMRT)与电子束适形放疗(electron beam conformal radiotherapy, EBCRT)联合调强放疗计划的剂量学差异。方法选择2018年6月至2021年10月于宁波市第一医院放化疗中心收治的20例左侧乳腺癌根治术后患者资料, 计划靶区(plan target volume, PTV)包括锁骨上下淋巴结引流区域计划靶区(PTVsc)和患侧胸壁计划靶区(PTVcw), 处方剂量均为50 Gy/25次。所有患者均采用美国Varian Eclipse治疗计划系统(treatment planning system, TPS)设计两种放疗计划, 然后对比两种放疗计划的剂量学参数差异。结果所有20例患者的IMRT计划全部满足临床要求, 与此同时EBCRT联合IMRT计划中有2例患者因患侧肺剂量参数超出本单位的剂量限定标准而不被临床接受, 两例失败计划的胸壁最大深度分别为3.7和4.4 cm, 使用的电子束能量分别为12和15 MeV。其余18例患者的胸...     

A Device and Procedure for Immobilization of Patients Receiving Limb-Preserving Radiotherapy for Soft Tissue Sarcoma

The purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy and efficiency of a custom-designed immobilization device for patients with extremity soft-tissue sarcoma. The custom device consisted of a thermoplastic shell, vacuum pillow, and adaptable baseplate. The study included patients treated from January 2005 to March 2007, with 92 patients immobilized with the custom device and 98 with an established standard. Setup times for these cohorts were analyzed retrospectively for conformal and intensity modulated radiotherapy techniques (IMRT). Thigh tumor setup times were analyzed independently. A subset of patients treated with IMRT was analyzed for setup error using the radiographically verified isocenter position measured daily with electronic portal imaging and cone-beam computed tomography. Mean setup time was reduced by 2.2 minutes when using the custom device for conformal treatment (p = 0.03) and by 5.8 min for IMRT of thigh tumors (p = 0.009). All other setup time comparisons were not significant. A significant systematic error reduction was seen in all directions using the custom device. Random error standard deviations favored the custom device. The custom device offers immobilization advantages. Patient setup time was reduced for conformal techniques and IMRT of thigh tumors. Positioning uncertainty was improved, permitting a reduction of the planning target volume margin by 2 to 4 mm.     

Dosimetric Comparison of RapidArc with Fixed Gantry Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy Treatment for Multiple Liver Metastases Radiotherapy

We wanted to compare the dosimetric difference and treatment efficiency of RapidArc and fixed gantry intensity-modulated radiotherapy treatment (IMRT) for multiple liver metastases. Computed tomography datasets of 10 patients were studied retrospectively. IMRT plans were generated using 5 fields and RapidArc using either 1 or 2 arcs. The dose distribution of planning target volume (PTV), organs at risk (OARs), and the normal tissue were compared. Monitor units and treatment time were scored to measure expected treatment efficiency. Both RapidArc and IMRT plans resulted in equivalent target coverage. There was no statistically significant difference for the maximum and the minimum dose of PTV. RapidArc plans achieved an improved conformity index compared with IMRT (RA1 = 1.68 ± 0.27, RA2 = 1.61 ± 0.25, IMRT = 1.80 ± 0.37). For OARs, all techniques respected planning objectives. RapidArc plans had a lower dose in V₄₀ of small bowel than IMRT, but were higher in mean dose of kidneys. Concerning the V₅, V₁₀, and V₁₅ of healthy tissue, RapidArc plans were higher than IMRT. However, the V₂₀, V₂₅, and V₃₀ of healthy tissue in RapidArc plans were lower than IMRT. Monitor units per fraction of RapidArc plans were about 40% or 46% of IMRT. Compared with IMRT plans, treatment time of RapidArc plans were reduced by 60% or 70%. All techniques respected planning objectives. RapidArc showed statistical improvements in conformity index and healthy tissue sparing with uncompromised target coverage. This, in combination with fewer monitor units and short delivery time, can lead to clinically significant advances for the treatment of multiple liver metastases.     

三维适形放疗照射野数量对肝脏肿瘤的剂量学研究

目的 研究三维适形放疗照射野数量对肝脏肿瘤的剂量学特点和正常组织保护方面的差异.资料与方法 选取18例肝脏肿瘤放疗患者的CT图像,每例图像分别实施2野、3野和5野治疗计划,评价靶区适形度(CI)、剂量均匀指数(HI)、95％和100％处方剂量覆盖的靶区体积及肝脏、胃、右肾和脊髓接受的照射剂量体积.结果 2野、3野和5野组95％和100％处方剂量覆盖的靶区体积分别为(95.37±136)％和(95.17±0.76)％、(96.51±1.03)％和(95.19±0.69)％、(97.42±1.32)％和(95.20±0.62)％(P=0.0000和P=0.8912);靶区适形度和剂量均匀指数分别为0.430±0.117和1.096±0.018、0.530±0.065和1.077±0.018、0.610±0.105和1.073±0.026 (P均＜0.05).正常组织接受的照射剂量在低剂量区及脊髓接受的最大剂量以2野组最优:高剂量区5野组占优势.结论 肝脏肿瘤放疗处方剂量覆盖的靶区体积、适形度和剂量均匀指数及高剂量区5野组最好;低剂量区则以2野组最低.     

直肠癌调强放疗中固定铅门技术和分野技术的剂量学比较

目的 研究直肠癌患者应用固定铅门技术(FJT)和分野技术(SFT),分析比较2种不同的调强放疗技术的剂量学差异。方法 选择15例直肠癌患者,进行CT模拟定位,勾画靶区及危及器官,对同一CT图像设计FJT计划和SFT计划。评估靶区及危及器官的剂量分布。结果 FJT计划组PTV₉₅覆盖度降低(t=-2.24,P<0.05);D_mean升高(t=2.54,P<0.05);HI较差(t=3.09,P<0.05),CI无差异。小肠V₅升高(t=4.76,P<0.05),骨髓V₂₀和V₅₀优于SFT计划组(t=-2.66、-3.36,P<0.05),而D_max高于SFT计划组(t=3.30,P<0.05);全身的V₂₀高于SFT计划组(t=2.48,P<0.05)。MU的数量和子野数量明显低于SFT计划组(t=-9.38、-6.46,P<0.05),计划验证通过率优于SFT计划组(t=10.46,P<0.05);治疗时间由原来的平均12 min缩短至6 min,缩短50%。结论 与SFT技术比较,直肠癌患者采用FJT技术,其靶区、危及器官受量均能满足临床治疗要求。患者治疗时间缩短,MU数量降低,单位时间内每天每台机器治疗患者的数量增加,减少患者的等待时间,降低加速器质量保证的难度。     

左侧乳腺癌患者根治术后靶区分割式计划和常规调强计划的剂量学比较研究

目的 比较左侧乳腺癌患者根治术后靶区分割式放射治疗计划（target segmented plan,TSP）、与TSP优化参数相同但未分割靶区计划（Non-TSP）与常规8野调强计划（8fields IMRT,8F-IMRT）的剂量学差异。方法 选择2017年6月至2018年11月于武汉大学人民医院放疗科收治的30例左侧乳腺癌根治术后患者资料,所有胸壁靶区两侧后界连线切肺最大深度均>2 cm。将连线切肺最大深度按照<3 cm、3~4 cm、>4 cm分组。所有患者均采用美国Varian Eclipse治疗计划系统设计3种（TSP、Non-TSP和8F-IMRT）治疗计划,然后对比分析3种方式计划的剂量学参数差异。结果 所有患者的治疗计划都达到了处方剂量要求。TSP的D_98%明显低于Non-TSP和8F-IMRT （Z=-3.294,-3.266,P<0.05）;3种计划的均匀指数（HI）和适形指数（CI）比较,差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）;Non-TSP的加速器治疗的跳数（monitor unit,MU）明显高于TSP和8F-IMRT （Z=-3.04,-2.669,P<0.05）。TSP的D_mean高于8F-IMRT （Z=-3.181,P<0.05）。对于危及器官（Organs at risk,OARs）,TSP较Non-TSP和8F-IMRT计划明显降低了所有患者患侧肺和心脏的V_{5 Gy}、V_{10 Gy}、V_{20 Gy}和D_mean（肺：V_{5 Gy}：Z=-3.408、-3.408,V_{10 Gy}：Z=-3.408、-3.408,V_{20 Gy}：Z=-3.408、-3.124,D_mean：Z=-3.408、-3.408,P<0.05;心脏：V_{5 Gy}：Z=-3.408、-3.408,V_{10 Gy}：Z=-3.408、-3.408,V_{20 Gy}：Z=-2.499、-3.067,D_mean：Z=-3.408、-3.408,P<0.05）。Non-TSP健侧乳腺的D_mean明显高于TSP和8F-IMRT （Z=-2.954、-2.215,P<0.05）,但D_max的比较差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。3种计划的脊髓D_max差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）;8F-IMRT肱骨头D_mean明显高于TSP和Non-TSP （Z=-3.01、-2.442,P<0.05）。分组的患侧肺V_{5 Gy}、V_{10 Gy}、V_{20 Gy}和心脏的V_{5 Gy}、V_{10 Gy}、D_mean的Non-TSP和8F-IMRT计划与TSP的幅度差均值均满足D （N-T,A）< D （N-T,B）< D （N-T,C）和D （8F-T,A）< D （8F-T,B）< D （8F-T,C）。结论 TSP能在保持原有靶区剂量充分的同时,在不增加高剂量照射体积的前提下,有效地减小左侧乳腺癌患者根治术后放疗患侧肺和心脏的低剂量区照射体积;随着靶区后界连线切肺最大深度的增加,TSP对患侧肺和心脏的低剂量保护优势愈明显。     

左侧乳腺癌根治术后调强放疗中剂量累加的研究

目的 通过形变配准及刚性配准进行左侧乳腺癌放疗中靶区及危及器官剂量累加的研究,探讨二者受量的变化规律。方法 回顾分析16例女性左侧乳腺癌根治术后患者,靶区包括锁上淋巴结引流区加胸壁,均采用6 MV X射线调强放疗（IMRT）。所有患者均接受定位、二程CT扫描,在定位图像（CT1）上制定放疗计划为Plan1,在二程定位图像（CT2）上制定放疗计划为Plan2。利用Velocity软件将Plan2的剂量进行刚性、形变配准到CT1剂量累加后获得Plan-rigid、Plan-deform。比较4个计划中靶区及危及器官的剂量学差异。结果 CT2比CT1的CTV体积平均缩小6.64%;形变后靶区剂量均匀性指数（HI）提高23.05%,而形变后心脏、左、右肺戴斯相似系数（DSC）均低于形变前（0.94±0.01 vs.0.89±0.05、0.96±0.01 vs.0.91±0.03、0.96±0.01 vs.0.92±0.03）,且差异均有统计学意义（Z=-3.208、-3.533、-3.535,P<0.05）;心脏及左肺各剂量-体积指标在Plan2、Plan-rigid、Plan-deform与Plan1的组间差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）;在Plan-rigid组各剂量-体积指标均高于Plan-deform组。结论 靶区及危及器官体积、剂量-体积指标变化较小的左乳癌根治术后患者在进行放疗剂量累加时,推荐使用刚性配准,且初次调强计划的剂量-体积指标可基本反映双肺及心脏的受量情况。     

Dosimetric Comparison of Manual and Beam Angle Optimization of Gantry Angles in IMRT

Dosimetric comparison of manual beam angle selection (MBS) and beam angle optimization (BAO) for IMRT plans is investigated retrospectively for 15 head and neck and prostate patients. The head and neck and prostate had planning target volumes (PTVs) ranging between 96.0 and 319.9 cm³ and 153.6 and 321.3 cm³, whereas OAR ranged between 8.3 and 47.8 cm³ and 68.3 and 469.2 cm³, respectively. In MBS, a standard coplanar 7–9 fields equally spaced gantry angles were used. In BAO, the selection of gantry angle was optimized by the algorithm for the same number of beams. The optimization and dose-volume constraints were kept the same for both techniques. Treatment planning was performed on the Eclipse treatment planning system. Our results showed that the dose-volume histogram for PTV are nearly identical in both techniques but BAO provided superior sparing of the organs at risk compared with the MBS. Also, MBS produced statistically significant higher monitor units (MU) and segments than the BAO; 13.1 ± 6.6% (p = 0.012) and 10.4 ± 13.6% (p = 0.140), and 14.6 ± 5.6% (p = 1.003E-5) and 12.6 ± 7.4% (p = 0.76E-3) for head and neck and prostate cases, respectively. The reduction in MU translates into the reduction in total body and integral dose. It is concluded that BAO provides advantage over MBS for most intenisty-modulated radiation therapy cases.     

乳腺癌根治术后双弧VMAT与IMRT计划的剂量学比较

目的 比较乳腺癌根治术后双弧的容积旋转调强放射治疗(VMAT)与5野的静态调强放射治疗(IMRT)2种计划之间的剂量学差异,评估VMAT技术在乳腺癌根治术后的剂量学特点与应用能力.方法 选取28例乳腺癌根治术后患者(左侧10例,右侧18例),分别制定双90度弧段的VMAT与5野的IMRT 2种计划,主要的计划评估参数为靶区的肿瘤控制概率(TCP)、适形指数(CI)、均匀指数(HI)以及接受相应处方剂量水平照射体积百分比V₉₅、V₁₁₀,危及器官(OAR)评估包括患侧肺的正常组织并发症概率(NTCP)、D_mean、V₅、V₂₀、V₃₀,心脏的NTCP值、D_mean、V₂₅,健侧乳腺的D_mean、机器跳数(MU)以及治疗时间.结果 VMAT计划与IMRT计划的TCP值分别为(96±2)%、(90±2)%(t=-6.28,P<0.01);HI值分别为0.15±0.04,0.22±0.02(t=13.29,P<0.05);肿瘤位于左侧时,心脏NTCP值在VMAT计划与IMRT计划中分别为(1.0±0.12)%,(1.7±0.13)%(t=2.14,P<0.05);肿瘤位于右侧时,2种计划心脏的NTCP差异无统计学意义,平均剂量分别为(3.27±0.26)、(6.0±0.47)Gy(t=9.21, P<0.01);VMAT计划在MU少于IMRT计划(t=9.58,P<0.01),治疗时间短于IMRT计划(t=8.40,P<0.05).结论 乳腺癌根治术后,VMAT计划具有更强的临床应用能力,且表现出更优的剂量学特点.     

Retrospective analysis of self-reporting pain scores and pain management during head and neck IMRT radiotherapy: A single institution experience

AimsHead and neck carcinomas are relatively rare in the United Kingdom with an estimated 9000 cases diagnosed annually. However, pain associated with disease and treatment side effects such as oral mucositis present a major issue for therapy radiographers in providing effective care and maintaining radiotherapy treatment compliance, all factors that can compromise patient outcome if not managed appropriately.MethodThis retrospective analysis of self-reporting pain scores collected during a course of radiotherapy aims to assess the perceived pain intensity scores in 30 patients. Data was collected during radiographer review sessions held weekly to determine if any variables to perceived pain scores occurred during a course of radiotherapy.ResultsAs treatment progressed, the self-reporting pain scores within the cohort increased, in week one the total cohort pain score was 35, this increased to 114 in week 3 and in the final week had totalled 151. An escalation in pain was observed in week 3 of treatment possibly as a result of radiation induced inflammation alongside cytotoxic chemotherapy.ConclusionsThe findings of this study provide further evidence to an individualised approach to patient pain relief and providing regular on treatment reviews, thus maintaining patient comfort and ensuring continued treatment compliance.     

Acute toxicity of postoperative IMRT and chemotherapy for endometrial cancer

Purpose The aim of this study was to determine the acute toxicity of postoperative intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with and without chemotherapy in patients with endometrial cancer. Materials and methods A total of 19 patients with stages IB–IVB endometrial cancer who underwent surgery and postoperative IMRT were reviewed. The treatment planning goal was to cover the tissue at risk and minimize the dose to the bladder, bowel, and bone marrow. Median dose was 50.4 Gy (range 49.6–51.2 Gy). Altogether, 14 patients underwent chemotherapy; most were given carboplatin and paclitaxel. Toxicity was scored according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 3.0 (CTCAE). Results The prescribed radiation treatment was completed in all patients. The prescribed cycles of chemotherapy were completed in all 14 patients, except one who received five of six cycles limited by prolonged thrombocytopenia. Chemotherapy was delayed in two patients (14%). Three patients required growth factor support during chemotherapy, and one patient required a blood transfusion. Acute grades 3–4 hematological toxicity occurred in 9 of the 14 patients (64%) who underwent chemotherapy. None experienced acute grade 3 or 4 genitourinary or gastrointestinal toxicity. Conclusion Adjuvant IMRT and chemotherapy following surgery in patients with endometrial cancer is well tolerated and did not lead to treatment modification in most patients.     

A systematic benchmark method for analysis and comparison of IMRT treatment planning algorithms

Tools and procedures for evaluating and comparing different intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) systems are presented. IMRT is increasingly in demand and there are numerous systems available commercially. These programs introduce significantly different software to dosimetrists and physicists than conventional planning systems, and the options often seem initially overwhelmingly complex to the user. By creating geometric target volumes and critical normal tissues, the characteristics of the algorithms may be investigated, and the influence of the different parameters explored. Overall optimization strategies of the algorithm may be characterized by treating a square target volume (TV) with 2 perpendicular beams, with and without heterogeneities. A half-donut (hemi-annulus) TV with a “donut hole” (central cylinder) critical normal tissue (CNT) on a CT of a simulated quality assurance phantom is suggested as a good geometry to explore the IMRT algorithm parameters. Using this geometry, the order of varying parameters is suggested. First is to determine the effects of the number of stratifications of optimized intensity fluence on the resulting dose distribution, and selecting a fixed number of stratifications for further studies. To characterize the dose distributions, a dose-homogeneity index (DHI) is defined as the ratio of the dose received by 90% of the volume to the minimum dose received by the “hottest” 10% of the volume. The next step is to explore the effects of priority and penalty on both the TV and the CNT. Then, choosing and fixing these parameters, the effects of varying the number of beams can be looked at. As well as evaluating the dose distributions (and DHI), the number of subfields and the number of monitor units required for different numbers of stratifications and beams can be evaluated.