skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Volumetric-modulated arc therapy (RapidArc) vs. conventional fixed-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy for {sup 18}F-FDG-PET-guided dose escalation in oropharyngeal cancer: A planning study

Abstract

Fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography ({sup 18}F-FDG-PET)–guided focal dose escalation in oropharyngeal cancer may potentially improve local control. We evaluated the feasibility of this approach using volumetric-modulated arc therapy (RapidArc) and compared these plans with fixed-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) focal dose escalation plans. Materials and methods: An initial study of 20 patients compared RapidArc with fixed-field IMRT using standard dose prescriptions. From this cohort, 10 were included in a dose escalation planning study. Dose escalation was applied to {sup 18}F-FDG-PET–positive regions in the primary tumor at dose levels of 5% (DL1), 10% (DL2), and 15% (DL3) above standard radical dose (65 Gy in 30 fractions). Fixed-field IMRT and double-arc RapidArc plans were generated for each dataset. Dose-volume histograms were used for plan evaluation and comparison. The Paddick conformity index (CI{sub Paddick}) and monitor units (MU) for each plan were recorded and compared. Both IMRT and RapidArc produced clinically acceptable plans and achieved planning objectives for target volumes. Dose conformity was significantly better in the RapidArc plans, with lower CI{sub Paddick} scores in both primary (PTV1) and elective (PTV2) planning target volumes (largest difference in PTV1 at DL3; 0.81 ± 0.03 [RapidArc] vs. 0.77 ± 0.07 [IMRT], p = 0.04). Maximum dose constraintsmore » for spinal cord and brainstem were not exceeded in both RapidArc and IMRT plans, but mean doses were higher with RapidArc (by 2.7 ± 1 Gy for spinal cord and 1.9 ± 1 Gy for brainstem). Contralateral parotid mean dose was lower with RapidArc, which was statistically significant at DL1 (29.0 vs. 29.9 Gy, p = 0.01) and DL2 (29.3 vs. 30.3 Gy, p = 0.03). MU were reduced by 39.8–49.2% with RapidArc (largest difference at DL3, 641 ± 94 vs. 1261 ± 118, p < 0.01). {sup 18}F-FDG-PET–guided focal dose escalation in oropharyngeal cancer is feasible with RapidArc. Compared with conventional fixed-field IMRT, RapidArc can achieve better dose conformity, improve contralateral parotid sparing, and uses fewer MU.« less

Authors:
 [1];  [2]; ;  [1]; ; ; ;  [2];  [2]
  1. Department of Oncology, St. Luke's Cancer Centre, Royal Surrey County Hospital, Guildford, Surrey (United Kingdom)
  2. Department of Medical Physics, St. Luke's Cancer Centre, Royal Surrey County Hospital, Guildford, Surrey (United Kingdom)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22262785
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Journal Name:
Medical Dosimetry
Additional Journal Information:
Journal Volume: 38; Journal Issue: 1; Other Information: Copyright (c) 2013 Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, All rights reserved.; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA); Journal ID: ISSN 0958-3947
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY; EXTERNAL BEAM RADIATION THERAPY; FLUORINE 18; NEOPLASMS; PLANNING; POSITRON COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; RADIATION DOSES

Citation Formats

Teoh, May, Beveridge, Sabeena, Wood, Katie, Whitaker, Stephen, Adams, Elizabeth, Rickard, Donna, Jordan, Tom, Nisbet, Andrew, Clark, Catharine H., and National Physical Laboratory, Hampton Road, Teddington, Middlesex. Volumetric-modulated arc therapy (RapidArc) vs. conventional fixed-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy for {sup 18}F-FDG-PET-guided dose escalation in oropharyngeal cancer: A planning study. United States: N. p., 2013. Web. doi:10.1016/J.MEDDOS.2012.05.002.
Teoh, May, Beveridge, Sabeena, Wood, Katie, Whitaker, Stephen, Adams, Elizabeth, Rickard, Donna, Jordan, Tom, Nisbet, Andrew, Clark, Catharine H., & National Physical Laboratory, Hampton Road, Teddington, Middlesex. Volumetric-modulated arc therapy (RapidArc) vs. conventional fixed-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy for {sup 18}F-FDG-PET-guided dose escalation in oropharyngeal cancer: A planning study. United States. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MEDDOS.2012.05.002
Teoh, May, Beveridge, Sabeena, Wood, Katie, Whitaker, Stephen, Adams, Elizabeth, Rickard, Donna, Jordan, Tom, Nisbet, Andrew, Clark, Catharine H., and National Physical Laboratory, Hampton Road, Teddington, Middlesex. 2013. "Volumetric-modulated arc therapy (RapidArc) vs. conventional fixed-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy for {sup 18}F-FDG-PET-guided dose escalation in oropharyngeal cancer: A planning study". United States. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MEDDOS.2012.05.002.
@article{osti_22262785,
title = {Volumetric-modulated arc therapy (RapidArc) vs. conventional fixed-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy for {sup 18}F-FDG-PET-guided dose escalation in oropharyngeal cancer: A planning study},
author = {Teoh, May and Beveridge, Sabeena and Wood, Katie and Whitaker, Stephen and Adams, Elizabeth and Rickard, Donna and Jordan, Tom and Nisbet, Andrew and Clark, Catharine H. and National Physical Laboratory, Hampton Road, Teddington, Middlesex},
abstractNote = {Fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography ({sup 18}F-FDG-PET)–guided focal dose escalation in oropharyngeal cancer may potentially improve local control. We evaluated the feasibility of this approach using volumetric-modulated arc therapy (RapidArc) and compared these plans with fixed-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) focal dose escalation plans. Materials and methods: An initial study of 20 patients compared RapidArc with fixed-field IMRT using standard dose prescriptions. From this cohort, 10 were included in a dose escalation planning study. Dose escalation was applied to {sup 18}F-FDG-PET–positive regions in the primary tumor at dose levels of 5% (DL1), 10% (DL2), and 15% (DL3) above standard radical dose (65 Gy in 30 fractions). Fixed-field IMRT and double-arc RapidArc plans were generated for each dataset. Dose-volume histograms were used for plan evaluation and comparison. The Paddick conformity index (CI{sub Paddick}) and monitor units (MU) for each plan were recorded and compared. Both IMRT and RapidArc produced clinically acceptable plans and achieved planning objectives for target volumes. Dose conformity was significantly better in the RapidArc plans, with lower CI{sub Paddick} scores in both primary (PTV1) and elective (PTV2) planning target volumes (largest difference in PTV1 at DL3; 0.81 ± 0.03 [RapidArc] vs. 0.77 ± 0.07 [IMRT], p = 0.04). Maximum dose constraints for spinal cord and brainstem were not exceeded in both RapidArc and IMRT plans, but mean doses were higher with RapidArc (by 2.7 ± 1 Gy for spinal cord and 1.9 ± 1 Gy for brainstem). Contralateral parotid mean dose was lower with RapidArc, which was statistically significant at DL1 (29.0 vs. 29.9 Gy, p = 0.01) and DL2 (29.3 vs. 30.3 Gy, p = 0.03). MU were reduced by 39.8–49.2% with RapidArc (largest difference at DL3, 641 ± 94 vs. 1261 ± 118, p < 0.01). {sup 18}F-FDG-PET–guided focal dose escalation in oropharyngeal cancer is feasible with RapidArc. Compared with conventional fixed-field IMRT, RapidArc can achieve better dose conformity, improve contralateral parotid sparing, and uses fewer MU.},
doi = {10.1016/J.MEDDOS.2012.05.002},
url = {https://www.osti.gov/biblio/22262785}, journal = {Medical Dosimetry},
issn = {0958-3947},
number = 1,
volume = 38,
place = {United States},
year = {Mon Apr 01 00:00:00 EDT 2013},
month = {Mon Apr 01 00:00:00 EDT 2013}
}