A Dosimetric Comparison of Tomotherapy and Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy in the Treatment of High-Risk Prostate Cancer With Pelvic Nodal Radiation Therapy
- Departement Universitaire de Radiotherapie, Centre O. Lambret, Lille (France)
- Universite Lille Nord de France, Lille (France)
- Centre Galilee, Clinique de la Louviere, Lille (France)
- Unite de Methodologie et Biostatistique, Centre O. Lambret, Lille (France)
Purpose: To compare the dosimetric results of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and helical tomotherapy (HT) in the treatment of high-risk prostate cancer with pelvic nodal radiation therapy. Methods and Materials: Plans were generated for 10 consecutive patients treated for high-risk prostate cancer with prophylactic whole pelvic radiation therapy (WPRT) using VMAT and HT. After WPRT, a sequential boost was delivered to the prostate. Plan quality was assessed according to the criteria of the International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements 83 report: the near-minimal (D98%), near-maximal (D2%), and median (D50%) doses; the homogeneity index (HI); and the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC). Beam-on time, integral dose, and several organs at risk (OAR) dosimetric indexes were also compared. Results: For WPRT, HT was able to provide a higher D98% than VMAT (44.3 {+-} 0.3 Gy and 43.9 {+-} 0.5 Gy, respectively; P=.032) and a lower D2% than VMAT (47.3 {+-} 0.3 Gy and 49.1 {+-} 0.7 Gy, respectively; P=.005), leading to a better HI. The DSC was better for WPRT with HT (0.89 {+-} 0.009) than with VMAT (0.80 {+-} 0.02; P=.002). The dosimetric indexes for the prostate boost did not differ significantly. VMAT provided better rectum wall sparing at higher doses (V70, V75, D2%). Conversely, HT provided better bladder wall sparing (V50, V60, V70), except at lower doses (V20). The beam-on times for WPRT and prostate boost were shorter with VMAT than with HT (3.1 {+-} 0.1 vs 7.4 {+-} 0.6 min, respectively; P=.002, and 1.5 {+-} 0.05 vs 3.7 {+-} 0.3 min, respectively; P=.002). The integral dose was slightly lower for VMAT. Conclusion: VMAT and HT provided very similar and highly conformal plans that complied well with OAR dose-volume constraints. Although some dosimetric differences were statistically significant, they remained small. HT provided a more homogeneous dose distribution, whereas VMAT enabled a shorter delivery time.
- OSTI ID:
- 22149788
- Journal Information:
- International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology and Physics, Vol. 85, Issue 2; Other Information: Copyright (c) 2013 Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, All rights reserved.; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA); ISSN 0360-3016
- Country of Publication:
- United States
- Language:
- English
Similar Records
Dosimetric comparison between step-shoot intensity-modulated radiotherapy and volumetric-modulated arc therapy for upper thoracic and cervical esophageal carcinoma
Assessing the feasibility of volumetric-modulated arc therapy using simultaneous integrated boost (SIB-VMAT): An analysis for complex head-neck, high-risk prostate and rectal cancer cases