A national dosimetry audit of intraoperative radiotherapy

Objective:

National dosimetry audits are a fundamental part of quality assurance in radiotherapy, especially for new techniques. Intraoperative radiotherapy with a compact mobile kilovoltage X-ray source is a novel approach for the treatment of breast and other cancers. All seven current clinical sites in the UK were audited by a single visiting group and set of measurement equipment.

Methods:

Measurements of output, isotropy and depth doses were performed using an ion chamber in solid water, thermoluminescent dosemeters and radiochromic film, respectively.

Results:

The mean difference between measured and planned dose across all centres was −3.2±2.7%. Measured isotropy was within ±3% around the lateral plane of the X-ray source and +11±4% in the forward direction compared with the lateral plane. Measured depth doses were agreed within 5±2% of manufacturer-provided calibration values or a mean gamma index of 97% at a tolerance of 7%/0.5 mm.

Conclusion:

Agreement within measurement uncertainties was found for all three parameters except forward anisotropy, which is unlikely to be clinically significant. Steep dose gradients increase the sensitivity to small variations in positioning, but these tests are practical for use in interdepartmental audits and local baseline comparison.

Advances in knowledge:

The first UK interdepartmental audit of intraoperative radiotherapy builds confidence in the delivery of this treatment.Dosimetry audits have been a fundamental part of quality assurance (QA) in UK radiotherapy departments for over 20 years [1–6]. More recently, ongoing verification of established systems has been delegated to regional audit groups; however, new techniques such as intensity-modulated radiotherapy [7,8] or volumetric modulated arc therapy [9] have been assessed on a national level. This gives confidence in the accurate, safe and consistent delivery of complex treatments, regardless of location or prior experience.Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) has also been practised in the UK for nearly 20 years, using a compact mobile 50 kV X-ray device called PRS400 (Photoelectron Corporation, Lexington, MA) and, more recently, INTRABEAM® (PRS500; Carl Zeiss Surgical, Oberkochen, Germany). Initially, the system was used for intracranial stereotaxy [10] but found wider application in the delivery of a single fraction of radiation soon after surgical excision of breast tumours [11]. Most patients have been treated as part of the targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT) international randomised controlled trial [12], although some other cases have also been successfully treated where external beam therapy was contraindicated [13]. Full calibration of the system is provided by the manufacturer, but recently, methods for independent dosimetry and quality assurance have been described [14,15]. The aim of this study was to audit all UK clinical centres in 2012 (

A comparative dosimetric analysis of virtual stereotactic body radiotherapy to high-dose-rate monotherapy for intermediate-risk prostate cancer

PurposeStereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is being used with increasing frequency as definitive treatment of early stage prostate cancer. Much of the justification for its adoption was derived from earlier clinical results using high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy. We determine whether HDR's dosimetry can be achieved by virtual SBRT.Methods and MaterialsPatients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer on a prospective trial evaluating the efficacy of HDR monotherapy treated to dose of 9.5 Gy × 4 fractions were used for this study. A total of 5 patients were used in this analysis. Virtual SBRT plans were developed to reproduce the planning target volume (PTV) HDR dose distributions. Both normal tissue– and PTV-prioritized plans were generated.ResultsFrom the normal tissue–prioritized plan, HDR and virtual SBRT achieved similar PTV V₁₀₀ (93.8% vs. 93.1%, p = 0.20) and V₁₅₀ (40.3% vs. 42.9%, p = 0.69) coverage. However, the PTV V₂₀₀ was not attainable with SBRT (15.2% vs. 0.0%, p < 0.001). The rectal D_max was significantly lower with HDR (94.2% vs. 99.42%, p = 0.05). The rectal D_{2 cc} was also lower (60.8% vs. 71.1%, p = 0.07). Difference in D_{1 cc} urethral dose was not significantly different (87.7% vs. 75.2%, p = 0.33). Comparing the PTV-prioritized plans, the rectal D_max (94.2% vs. 111.1%, p = 0.05) and mean dose (27.1% vs. 33.3%, p = 0.03) were significantly higher using SBRT, and the rectal D_{2 cc} was higher using SBRT (60.8% vs. 81.8%, p = 0.07).ConclusionsHDR achieves significantly higher intraprostatic doses while achieving a lower maximum rectal dose compared with our virtual SBRT treatment planning. Future studies should compare clinical outcomes and toxicity between these modalities.     

A pragmatic approach to the radiologic diagnosis of pediatric syndromes and skeletal dysplasias

This article describes a practical approach to the radiologic evaluation and diagnosis of inherited bone dysplasias and syndromes. Useful references and resource materials are suggested. To illustrate these points, challenge cases are provided. The reader is invited to research each of these examples and arrive at a diagnosis. The correct diagnosis and case discussion follow the figures.     

个体患者适形调强放疗计划模体内剂量实测验证技术的建立

目的建立个体患者适形调强放疗（IMRT）计划的模体内剂量实测验证技术。方法选择1例鼻咽癌患者，设计IMRT计划。将患者计划转移到模体上设计杂交计划。执行杂交计划时，用针点电离室测量感兴趣点的剂量，并与该点的计算剂量比较。用胶片剂量测量系统测量杂交计划中感兴趣平面的剂量，胶片与计划剂量矩阵登记后，依次进行计划，胶片分析、计划，胶片剖面分析和计划／胶片等剂量线分析。采用复合判断标准评价验证结果。结果针点电离室测量得到杂交计划单次照射的总剂量为121．5cGy，比计算值低约4％。计划，胶片分析得到高剂量、高梯度区域的距离差别均在4mm以内；计划／胶片剖面分析显示，计划与胶片在通过靶区的剖面具有较好的一致性；计划，胶片等剂量线分析显示，计划与胶片对应值的等剂量线重合良好。按照复合判断标准，该计划验证通过。结论初步建立了个体患者IMRT计划的模体内剂量实测验证技术，建立并优化了剂量登记技术、剂量归一方法和评价方法。     

Surface and superficial dose dosimetric verification for postmastectomy radiotherapy

In patients given postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT), the chest wall is a very thin layer of soft tissue with a low-density lung tissue behind. Chest wall treated in this situation with a high-energy photon beam presents a high dosimetric uncertainty region for both calculation and measurement. The purpose of this study was to measure and to evaluate the surface and superficial doses for patients requiring PMRT with different treatment techniques. An elliptic cylinder cork and superflab boluses were used to simulate the lung and the chest wall, respectively. Sets of computed tomography (CT) images with different chest wall thicknesses were acquired for the study phantom. Hypothetical clinical target volumes (CTVs) were outlined and modified to fit a margin of 1–3 mm, depending on the chest wall thickness, away from the surface for the sets of CT images. The planning target volume (PTV) was initially created by expanding an isotropic 3-mm margin from the CTV, and then a margin of 3 mm was shrunk from the phantom surface to avoid artifact-driven results in the beam-let intensity. Treatment techniques using a pair of tangential wedged fields (TWFs) and 4-field intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) were designed with a prescribed fraction dose (D_p) of 180 cGy. Superficial dose profiles around the phantom circumference at depths of 0, 1, 2, 3, and 5 mm were obtained for each treatment technique using radiochromic external beam therapy (EBT) films. EBT film exhibits good characteristics for dose measurements in the buildup region. Underdoses at the median and lateral regions of the TWF plans were shown. The dose profiles at shallow depths for the TWF plans show a dose buildup about 3 mm at the median and lateral tangential incident regions with a surface dose of about 52% of D_p. The dose was gradually increased toward the most obliquely tangential angle with a maximum dose of about 118% of D_p. Dose profiles were more uniform in the PTV region for the 4-F IMRT plans. Most of the PTV region had doses >94% of D_p at depths >1 mm. The mean surface dose was about 65% of D_p for the 4-F IMRT plans. The maximum dose for the 4-F IMRT plans was <118.4% of D_p. The application of added bolus has to consider the treatment technique, tumor coverage, and possible skin reactions. For PMRT, if the chest surface and wall are treated adequately, at least 3 mm bolus should be added to the chest wall when tangential beams and 6-MV photon energy are arranged. However, when the surface and superficial regions are not high-risk areas, an IMRT plan with tangential beams and 6-MV photon energy can provide uniform dose distributions within the PTV, spare the skin reaction, and deliver sufficient doses to the chest wall at depths >1 mm.     

立体定向调强放射治疗剂量验证结果分析

目的 研究测量数据插值、计划系统剂量计算网格及剂量评估阈值等因素对立体定向调强放射治疗患者计划的剂量验证结果的影响。方法 回顾性分析了50例立体定向放射治疗的患者放疗计划的剂量验证结果。剂量验证设备采用MatriXX及配套MultiCube固体水模。测量数据分别选择线性插值（1.00 mm）和不插值（7.62 mm）两种分辨率;计划系统剂量计算网格分别选择1.0、2.5和4.0 mm;剂量评估阈值分别选择10%、20%和30%,γ评估标准分别选择2%/2 mm、3%/2 mm和3%/3 mm,分析不同因素选择对平面剂量验证结果的影响。结果 测量数据插值选择线性插值和不插值,2%/2 mm标准下,γ平均通过率分别为（86.3±7.3）%和（93.7±5.5）%;3%/2 mm标准下,γ平均通过率分别为（94.1±4.4）%和（97.7±3.9）%;3%/3 mm标准下,γ平均通过率分别为（97.7 ±2.2）%和（99.1±1.7）%。相比1.0 mm的剂量计算网格,使用2.5 mm计算网格,3种标准下γ平均通过率分别降低3.8%、1.9%和0.8%（t=8.41、9.06、5.30,P<0.05）,4.0 mm分别降低6.5%、6.0%和3.5%（t=-13.76、-13.15、-9.80,P<0.05）,差异有统计学意义。相比剂量评估阈值为10%,当阈值设置为20%时,2%/2 mm、3%/2 mm和3%/3 mm标准下,γ平均通过率分别降低2.4%、1.0%和0.6%（t=-8.60、-5.86、-4.68,P<0.05）;当阈值设置为30%,3种标准下γ平均通过率分别降低4.0%、1.7%和0.9%（t=-9.45、-6.66、-5.06,P<0.05）,差异有统计学意义。结论 测量数据插值、剂量计算网格大小及剂量评估阈值对立体定向放射治疗患者计划剂量验证结果均有明显影响,因此在进行立体定向放射治疗患者计划剂量验证时需要考虑这些因素。     

A pragmatic approach to metal artifact reduction in CT: merging of metal artifact reduced images

The purpose of this study was to improve metal artifact reduction (MAR) in X-ray computed tomography (CT) by the combination of two artifact reduction methods. The presented method constitutes an image-based weighted superposition of images processed with two known methods for MAR: linear interpolation of reprojected metal traces (LI) and multi-dimensional adaptive filtering of the raw data (MAF). Two weighting concepts were realized that take into account mean distances of image points from metal objects or additional directional components. Artifact reduction on patient data from the jaw and the hip region shows that although the application of only one of the MAR algorithms can already improve image quality, these methods have specific drawbacks. While MAF does not correct corrupted CT values, LI often introduces secondary artifacts. The corrective impact of the merging algorithm is almost always superior to the application of only one of the methods. The results obtained with directional weighting are equal to or in many cases better than those of the distance weighting scheme. Merging combines the advantages of two fundamentally different approaches to artifact reduction and can improve the quality of images that are affected by metal artifacts.Symbols LI linear interpolation algorithm - MAF multi-dimensional adaptive filtering algorithm - MAR metal artifact reduction - f(x, y) object function at (x, y) - F(), F() normalized filter function in the direction of the coordinates and - I primary X-ray intensity - I₀ transmitted X-ray intensity - N_D number of detectors per detector row - p attenuation - p(,), p(,) projection data (fan and parallel geometry) - p_th lower threshold of the attenuation of adaptive filtering - p_max maximum value of the attenuation of adaptive filtering - (x, y) image point - projection angle in fan geometry - angle within the fan relative to the central ray - , , z, , minimum functions for adaptive filtering - projection angle in parallel geometry - orthogonal distance of a ray to the center of rotation in parallel geometry     

A simple approach for EPID dosimetric calibration to overcome the effect of image-lag and ghosting

EPID dosimetry has known drawbacks. The main issue is that a measurable residual signal is observed after the end of irradiation for prolonged periods of time, thus making measurement difficult. We present a detailed analysis of EPID response and suggest a simple, yet accurate approach for calibration that avoids the complexity of incorporating ghosting and image-lag using the maximum integrated signal instead of the total integrated signal. This approach is linear with dose and independent of dose rate.     

The transition in practice to reduce bolus use in post-mastectomy radiotherapy: A dosimetric study of skin and subcutaneous tissue

To inform clinical practice for women receiving post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT), this study demonstrates the dosimetric impact of removing daily bolus on skin and subcutaneous tissue. Two planning strategies were used: clinical field-based (n = 30) and volume-based planning (n = 10). The clinical field-based plans were created with bolus and recalculated without bolus for comparison. The volume-based plans were created with bolus to ensure a minimum target coverage of the chest wall PTV and recalculated without bolus. In each scenario, the dose to superficial structures, including skin (3 mm and 5 mm) and subcutaneous tissue (a 2 mm layer, 3 mm deep from surface) were reported. Additionally, the difference in the clinically evaluated dosimetry to skin and subcutaneous tissue in volume-based plans were recalculated using Acuros (AXB) and compared to the Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA) algorithm. For all treatment planning strategies, chest wall coverage (V90%) was maintained. As expected, superficial structures demonstrate significant loss in coverage. The largest difference observed in the most superficial 3 mm where V90% coverage is reduced from a mean (± standard deviation) of 95.1% (± 2.8) to 18.9% (± 5.6) for clinical field-based treatments with and without bolus, respectively. For volume-based planning, the subcutaneous tissue maintains a V90% of 90.5% (± 7.0) compared to the clinical field-based planning coverage of 84.4% (± 8.0). In all skin and subcutaneous tissue, the AAA algorithm underestimates the volume of the 90% isodose. Removing bolus results in minimal dosimetric differences in the chest wall and significantly lower skin dose while dose to the subcutaneous tissue is maintained. Unless the skin has disease involvement, the most superficial 3 mm is not considered part of the target volume. The continued use of the AAA algorithm is supported for the PMRT setting.     

Multicentre dosimetric comparison of photon-junctioning techniques in head and neck radiotherapy

Because many head and neck radiotherapy treatment techniques rely on a junction between X-ray fields, it was the aim of the present study to investigate the use of different junctioning techniques and the affect on the dose across the junction. Techniques in use at nine radiotherapy centres in Australia were investigated using thermoluminescence dosimetry (TLD). The techniques could broadly be divided into two groups: (i) use of the light field to match the fields after moving the patient; and (ii) use of asymmetric collimation to create a single isocentre located in the junction. The mean dose at the junction and its reproducibility was studied in five consecutive treatments in each centre using 25 TLD chips placed throughout the junction in an anthropomorphic phantom. There was a tendency for the mono-isocentric technique to deliver a lower, more accurate mean dose at the junction (Group I: 1.22 Gy (n = 8) vs Group II: 0.96 Gy (n = 5) for 1 Gy planned, some centres contributed to both technique) with greater reproducibility (Group I: 9.6%, Group II: 5.1% of the mean dose). We conclude that a mono-isocentric treatment technique has the potential to deliver a more accurate and reproducible dose distribution at the field junction of photon beams in head and neck treatment.     

快速旋转调强与五野动态调强在乳腺癌 保乳术后放疗中的剂量学比较

目的 比较乳腺癌保乳术后RapidArc计划与五野动态调强(5F-IMRT)计划的剂量学差异。方法 选择8例左侧乳腺癌保乳术后女性患者,处方剂量为50 Gy/ 25次。分别设计RapidArc计划与5F-IMRT计划。比较两种计划的靶区适形度指数、均匀性指数、靶区覆盖度和危及器官的受照剂量体积,同时比较两组计划实施时的治疗时间和机器跳数。结果 在两种计划的靶区比较中,RapidArc计划的靶区适形度指数为(0.88±0.03),高于5F-IMRT计划的(0.79±0.02)(t=8.28,P<0.05);RapidArc计划的均匀性指数为(9.01±0.73),优于5F-IMRT计划的(10.44±1.08)(t=-2.73,P<0.05)。两组计划在同侧肺受照剂量体积比较中RapidArc计划的D_mean、V₁₀、V₂₀、V₃₀小于5F-IMRT计划(t=-7.53、-7.20、-8.39、-7.80,P<0.05),但RapidArc计划中的V₅较5F-IMRT计划增加了约16% (t=5.67,P<0.05);心脏的受照剂量体积比较中RapidArc计划中的D_mean、V₅、V₁₀均高于5F-IMRT(t=10.46、28.76、5.40,P<0.05),但在RapidArc计划中心脏的V₃₀低于5F-IMRT (t=-6.12,P<0.05)。对侧肺和对侧乳腺的V₅在RapidArc计划中明显高于5F-IMRT计划 (肺:t=21.50,P<0.05;乳腺:t=5.44,P<0.05)。RapidArc计划中机器跳数减少了25%,平均治疗时间节省了60%。结论 乳腺癌保乳术后RapidArc计划与5F-IMRT计划比较提高了靶区的适形度和均匀度,减少了高剂量区的受照体积,降低了机器跳数,缩短了治疗时间,但增加了正常组织低剂量区的受照体积。     

肺癌立体定向放疗偏中心计划设计剂量学研究

目的研究不同程度的偏中心计划对肺癌立体定向放疗(SBRT)计划质量和执行准确度的影响, 为肺癌SBRT的临床计划设计提供参考。方法首先, 选取10例肺癌SBRT患者, 将计划等中心置于肿瘤质心位置, 设计等中心参考计划。将计划等中心置于偏离肿瘤质心1、3、5、8及10 cm位置, 设计偏中心计划, 共计60个, 分析这些偏中心计划相对于参考计划的剂量学差异。然后, 引入不同程度的位置误差(0～5 mm), 利用Octavius 4D高分辨率剂量验证系统, 测量这些计划的伽马通过率(GPR), 完成240次计划验证, 分析参考计划和偏中心计划的执行准确度对位置误差的鲁棒性。结果偏中心计划的剂量梯度指标略差于等中心计划, 差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。随着偏中心距离增加, 正常肺平均剂量(MLD)和V20以及支气管Dmax略微有升高趋势。MLD在偏中心距离1、3和10 cm, 较等中心计划分别升高了0.8%、0.8%和1.9%, 差异具有统计学意义(z=-2.34～-1.99, P<0.05), V20在偏中心距离1、5和10 cm, 较等中心计划分别增加了2.0%、2.5...     

A regional audit of kilovoltage X-rays--a single centre approach

A dosimetric comparison between therapeutic kilovoltage (kV) equipment in the South West of the UK was carried out. The aim was to detect dosimetric errors and examine consistency across the region. This work also investigated the use of a single ionization chamber to minimize errors introduced through multicentre auditing and assessed the potential impact of the "Addendum to the IPEMB Code of Practice" for the determination of absorbed dose for X-rays below 300 kV. Comparisons were carried out at low and medium energies, with additional measurements made "in-air" at medium energy in accordance with the addendum. The measurement of output with a non-standard applicator was also assessed by calculating the ratio of the two outputs or applicator factor. The mean ratio of visitor's measured dose to that measured locally was 0.994 (standard deviation, 0.006) for nine low-energy beams and 0.991 (standard deviation, 0.011) for four medium-energy beams. The mean ratio of visitor's measured dose in-air and in-phantom at medium energy was 0.981 (standard deviation, 0.024). Applicator factors were within +/-4% for low and medium energies. In conclusion, the use of a single ionization chamber and single centre to carry out the audit gives a smaller deviation between measured values, although there are both advantages and disadvantages to the method. There are differences between doses calculated from the in-air and in-phantom protocols for medium energy, although these could be within quoted uncertainties.     

Application of hypoglossal nerve constraint in definitive radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A dosimetric feasibility study

Purpose: Radiation-induced hypoglossal nerve palsy is an infrequent but debilitating late complication after definitive radiotherapy for head and neck cancers. D1cc < 74 Gy (equivalent dose in 2 Gy fractions, EQD2) has been proposed as a potential dose constraint that limits 8-year palsy risk to < 5%. This study sets to perform detailed dosimetric assessments on the applicability of this novel dose constraint in advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). Materials and methods: This is a retrospective single-institution dosimetry study. NPC radiotherapy plans were identified from an institutional database, with an aim to select 10 eligible cases. Bilateral hypoglossal nerves were retrospectively contoured following a standard atlas. Cases with either one, or both, hypoglossal nerves D1cc exceeded 74 Gy EQD2 were included. Dosimetry of hypoglossal nerves, planning target volumes (PTV) and normal structures before and after application of the new hypoglossal nerve constraint were compared and analyzed. Results: Ten NPC cases were replanned. All hypoglossal nerve contours overlapped with high-dose PTV, predominantly at regions of gross nodal diseases. D1cc in 15 out of 20 hypoglossal nerves exceeded 74G y EQD2 at initial plans. All nerves fulfilled the pre-specified constraint of 74Gy EQD2 after re-plan. Median hypoglossal nerve D1cc reduced from 74.8Gy (range, 74.1 to 77.4Gy) to 73.5Gy (range, 72.4 to 74.0Gy) (p < 0.001), corresponded to a projected reduction in 8-year palsy risk from 5%-14% to 3%-5%. PTV V100 was maintained above 95% in all cases. Dose increments in near-maximum (D2) and decrements in near-minimum (D98) were < 1 Gy. Safety dosimetric parameters of standard head and neck organs-at-risk showed no significant changes. Conclusions: Hypoglossal nerve D1cc < 74 Gy EQD2 is a dosimetrically feasible constraint in definitive radiotherapy for NPC. Tumor target coverage and normal organ dosimetry were not compromised with its usage. Its routine application should be considered in definitive radiotherapy for head and neck cancers.     

Comparative dosimetric study of two strategies of intensity-modulated radiotherapy in nasopharyngeal cancer

This study compared the target volume coverage and normal tissues sparing of simultaneous integrated boost (SIB-IMRT, 1-phase) and sequential-IMRT (2-phase) for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). Fourteen consecutive patients with newly diagnosed primary NPC were enrolled in this study. The CT images were transferred to a commercial planning system for structural delineation. The gross tumor volume (GTV) included gross nasopharyngeal tumor and involved lymph nodes of more than 1-cm diameter. The clinical target volume (CTV) modeled two regions considered to represent different risks. CTV1 encompassed the GTV with 5–10-mm margin of adjacent tissues. CTV2 encompassed ipsilateral or contralateral elective nodal regions at risk of harboring microscopic tumor. A commercial IMRT treatment planning system (Eclipse Version 7.1) was used to provide treatment planning. Seven fixed-gantry (0°, 50°, 100°, 150°, 210°, 260°, 310°) angles were designated. The 14 patients were treated with sequential-IMRT, and treatment was then replanned with an SIB strategy to compare the dosimetric difference. For the sequential strategy, the dose delivered to CTV1/CTV2 in the first course was 54 Gy (1.8 Gy × 30 Fr); while CTV1 was boosted by an additional 16.2 Gy (1.8 Gy × 9 Fr) in the second course. For SIB-IMRT, the dose prescribed to CTV1 was 69.7 Gy (2.05 Gy × 34 Fr); 56.1 Gy was given to CTV2 (1.65 Gy × 34 Fr). A statistical analysis of the dose-volume-histogram of target volumes and critical organs was performed. Paired Student’s t-test was used to compare the dosimetric differences between the two techniques. The mean dose to CTV1 was 101.7 ± 2.4% and 102.3 ± 3.1% of the prescribed dose for SIB-IMRT and sequential-IMRT, respectively. The mean CTV2 dose was 109.8 ± 4.7% of the prescribed dose for SIB-IMRT and 112.6 ± 6.0% of the prescribed dose for sequential-IMRT. The maximal dose to the spinal cord was 4489 ± 495 cGy and 3547 ± 767 cGy for SIB and sequential-IMRT (p = 0.0001), respectively. The maximal dose to brain stem was significantly higher using SIB technique (5284 ± 551 cGy) than sequential-IMRT (4834 ± 388 cGy) (p = 0.0001). The mean dose to the parotid gland and ear apparatus was significantly lower using SIB-IMRT. The mean dose to the right/left parotids was 2865 ± 320 cGy/2903 ± 429 cGy and 3567 ± 534 cGy/3476 ± 489 cGy for SIB and sequential-IMRT, respectively (p = 0.0001). Target coverage was the same for both techniques; the dose distribution in the elective nodal area with SIB was superior to that with sequential-IMRT. SIB-IMRT provides better sparing of parotid gland and inner ear structures. Extra caution should be taken when applying SIB-IMRT since critical organs close to the boost volume may receive higher doses.     

Comparative dosimetric study of two strategies of intensity-modulated radiotherapy in nasopharyngeal cancer

This study compared the target volume coverage and normal tissues sparing of simultaneous integrated boost (SIB-IMRT, 1-phase) and sequential-IMRT (2-phase) for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). Fourteen consecutive patients with newly diagnosed primary NPC were enrolled in this study. The CT images were transferred to a commercial planning system for structural delineation. The gross tumor volume (GTV) included gross nasopharyngeal tumor and involved lymph nodes of more than 1-cm diameter. The clinical target volume (CTV) modeled two regions considered to represent different risks. CTV1 encompassed the GTV with 5–10-mm margin of adjacent tissues. CTV2 encompassed ipsilateral or contralateral elective nodal regions at risk of harboring microscopic tumor. A commercial IMRT treatment planning system (Eclipse Version 7.1) was used to provide treatment planning. Seven fixed-gantry (0°, 50°, 100°, 150°, 210°, 260°, 310°) angles were designated. The 14 patients were treated with sequential-IMRT, and treatment was then replanned with an SIB strategy to compare the dosimetric difference. For the sequential strategy, the dose delivered to CTV1/CTV2 in the first course was 54 Gy (1.8 Gy × 30 Fr); while CTV1 was boosted by an additional 16.2 Gy (1.8 Gy × 9 Fr) in the second course. For SIB-IMRT, the dose prescribed to CTV1 was 69.7 Gy (2.05 Gy × 34 Fr); 56.1 Gy was given to CTV2 (1.65 Gy × 34 Fr). A statistical analysis of the dose-volume-histogram of target volumes and critical organs was performed. Paired Student’s t-test was used to compare the dosimetric differences between the two techniques. The mean dose to CTV1 was 101.7 ± 2.4% and 102.3 ± 3.1% of the prescribed dose for SIB-IMRT and sequential-IMRT, respectively. The mean CTV2 dose was 109.8 ± 4.7% of the prescribed dose for SIB-IMRT and 112.6 ± 6.0% of the prescribed dose for sequential-IMRT. The maximal dose to the spinal cord was 4489 ± 495 cGy and 3547 ± 767 cGy for SIB and sequential-IMRT (p = 0.0001), respectively. The maximal dose to brain stem was significantly higher using SIB technique (5284 ± 551 cGy) than sequential-IMRT (4834 ± 388 cGy) (p = 0.0001). The mean dose to the parotid gland and ear apparatus was significantly lower using SIB-IMRT. The mean dose to the right/left parotids was 2865 ± 320 cGy/2903 ± 429 cGy and 3567 ± 534 cGy/3476 ± 489 cGy for SIB and sequential-IMRT, respectively (p = 0.0001). Target coverage was the same for both techniques; the dose distribution in the elective nodal area with SIB was superior to that with sequential-IMRT. SIB-IMRT provides better sparing of parotid gland and inner ear structures. Extra caution should be taken when applying SIB-IMRT since critical organs close to the boost volume may receive higher doses.