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

Title: SU-E-T-29: A Dosimetric Study of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy with Simultaneous Integrated Boost for Rectal Cancer

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the dosimetric differences among fixed field intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and double-arc volumetricmodulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans with simultaneous integrated boost in rectal cancer. Methods: Ten patients with rectal cancer previously treated with IMRT were included in this analysis. For each patient, two treatment techniques were designed for each patient: the fixed 7 fields IMRT and double-arc VMAT with RapidArc technique. The treatment plan was designed to deliver in one process with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB). The prescribed doses to the planning target volume of the subclinical disease (PTV1) and the gross disease (PTV2) were 45 Gy and 55 Gy in 25 fractions, respectively. The dose distribution in the target, the dose to the organs at risk, total MU and the delivery time in two techniques were compared to explore the dosimetric differences. Results: For the target dose and homogeneity in PTV1 and PTV2, no statistically differences were observed in the two plans. VMAT plans showed a better conformity in PTV1. VMAT plans reduced the mean dose to bladder, small bowel, femur heads and iliac wings. For iliac wings, VMAT plans resulted in a statistically significant reduction in irradiated volume of 15 Gy, 20 Gy, 30 Gy butmore » increased the 10 Gy irradiated volume. VMAT plans reduced the small bowel irradiated volume of 20 Gy and 30 Gy. Compared with IMRT plans, VMAT plans showed a significant reduction of monitor units by nearly 30% and reduced treatment time by an average of 70% Conclusion: Compared to IMRT plans, VMAT plans showed the similar target dose and reduced the dose of the organs at risk, especially for small bowel and iliac wings. For rectal cancer, VMAT with simultaneous integrated boost can be carried out with high quality and efficiency.« less

Authors:
; ; ;  [1]
  1. Shandong Cancer Hospital, Jinan, Shandong (China)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22545163
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Physics; Journal Volume: 42; Journal Issue: 6; Other Information: (c) 2015 American Association of Physicists in Medicine; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES; BLADDER; FEMUR; HEALTH HAZARDS; IRRADIATION; NEOPLASMS; PATIENTS; RADIATION DOSE DISTRIBUTIONS; RADIATION DOSES; RADIOTHERAPY; RECTUM

Citation Formats

Sun, T, Lin, X, Yin, Y, and Liu, T. SU-E-T-29: A Dosimetric Study of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy with Simultaneous Integrated Boost for Rectal Cancer. United States: N. p., 2015. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4924390.
Sun, T, Lin, X, Yin, Y, & Liu, T. SU-E-T-29: A Dosimetric Study of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy with Simultaneous Integrated Boost for Rectal Cancer. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4924390.
Sun, T, Lin, X, Yin, Y, and Liu, T. 2015. "SU-E-T-29: A Dosimetric Study of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy with Simultaneous Integrated Boost for Rectal Cancer". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4924390.
@article{osti_22545163,
title = {SU-E-T-29: A Dosimetric Study of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy with Simultaneous Integrated Boost for Rectal Cancer},
author = {Sun, T and Lin, X and Yin, Y and Liu, T},
abstractNote = {Purpose: To compare the dosimetric differences among fixed field intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and double-arc volumetricmodulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans with simultaneous integrated boost in rectal cancer. Methods: Ten patients with rectal cancer previously treated with IMRT were included in this analysis. For each patient, two treatment techniques were designed for each patient: the fixed 7 fields IMRT and double-arc VMAT with RapidArc technique. The treatment plan was designed to deliver in one process with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB). The prescribed doses to the planning target volume of the subclinical disease (PTV1) and the gross disease (PTV2) were 45 Gy and 55 Gy in 25 fractions, respectively. The dose distribution in the target, the dose to the organs at risk, total MU and the delivery time in two techniques were compared to explore the dosimetric differences. Results: For the target dose and homogeneity in PTV1 and PTV2, no statistically differences were observed in the two plans. VMAT plans showed a better conformity in PTV1. VMAT plans reduced the mean dose to bladder, small bowel, femur heads and iliac wings. For iliac wings, VMAT plans resulted in a statistically significant reduction in irradiated volume of 15 Gy, 20 Gy, 30 Gy but increased the 10 Gy irradiated volume. VMAT plans reduced the small bowel irradiated volume of 20 Gy and 30 Gy. Compared with IMRT plans, VMAT plans showed a significant reduction of monitor units by nearly 30% and reduced treatment time by an average of 70% Conclusion: Compared to IMRT plans, VMAT plans showed the similar target dose and reduced the dose of the organs at risk, especially for small bowel and iliac wings. For rectal cancer, VMAT with simultaneous integrated boost can be carried out with high quality and efficiency.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4924390},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 42,
place = {United States},
year = 2015,
month = 6
}
  • Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) allowed the simultaneous delivery of different doses to different target volumes within a single fraction, an approach called simultaneous integrated boost (SIB). As consequence, the fraction dose to the boost volume can be increased while keeping low doses to the elective volumes, and the number of fractions and overall treatment time will be reduced, translating into better radiobiological effectiveness. In recent years, volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) has been shown to provide similar plan quality with respect to fixed-field IMRT but with large reduction in treatment time and monitor units (MUs) number. However, the feasibility of VMAT whenmore » used with SIB strategy has few investigations to date. We explored the potential of VMAT in a SIB strategy for complex cancer sites. A total of 15 patients were selected, including 5 head-and-neck, 5 high-risk prostate, and 5 rectal cancer cases. Both a double-arc VMAT and a 7-field IMRT plan were generated for each case using Oncentra MasterPlan treatment planning system for an Elekta Precise linac. Dosimetric indexes for targets and organs at risk (OARs) were compared based on dose-volume histograms. Conformity index, homogeneity index, and dose-contrast index were used for target analyses. The equivalent uniform doses and the normal tissue complication probabilities were calculated for main OARs. MUs number and treatment time were analyzed to score treatment efficiency. Pretreatment dosimetry was performed using 2-dimensional (2D)-array dosimeter. SIB-VMAT plans showed a high level of fluence modulation needed for SIB treatments, high conformal dose distribution, similar target coverage, and a tendency to improve OARs sparing compared with the benchmark SIB-IMRT plans. The median treatment times reduced from 13 to 20 minutes to approximately 5 minutes for all cases with SIB-VMAT, with a MUs reduction up to 22.5%. The 2D-array ion-chambers' measurements reported an agreement of more than 95% for a criterion of 3% to 3 mm. SIB-VMAT was able to combine the advantages of conventional SIB-IMRT with its highly conformal dose distribution and OARs sparing and the advantages of 3D-conformal radiotherapy with its fast delivery.« less
  • Purpose: To compare the plan quality and performance of Simultaneous Integrated Boost (SIB) Treatment plan between Seven field (7F) and Nine field(9F) Intensity Modulated Radiotherapies and Single Arc (SA) and Dual Arc (DA) Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy( VMAT). Methods: Retrospective planning study of 16 patients treated in Elekta Synergy Platform (mlci2) by 9F-IMRT were replanned with 7F-IMRT, Single Arc VMAT and Dual Arc VMAT using CMS, Monaco Treatment Planning System (TPS) with Monte Carlo simulation. Target delineation done as per Radiation Therapy Oncology Protocols (RTOG 0225&0615). Dose Prescribed as 70Gy to Planning Target Volumes (PTV70) and 61Gy to PTV61 inmore » 33 fraction as a SIB technique. Conformity Index(CI), Homogeneity Index(HI) were used as analysis parameter for Target Volumes as well as Mean dose and Max dose for Organ at Risk(OAR,s).Treatment Delivery Time(min), Monitor unit per fraction (MU/fraction), Patient specific quality assurance were also analysed. Results: A Poor dose coverage and Conformity index (CI) was observed in PTV70 by 7F-IMRT among other techniques. SA-VMAT achieved poor dose coverage in PTV61. No statistical significance difference observed in OAR,s except Spinal cord (P= 0.03) and Right optic nerve (P=0.03). DA-VMAT achieved superior target coverage, higher CI (P =0.02) and Better HI (P=0.03) for PTV70 other techniques (7F-IMRT/9F-IMRT/SA-VMAT). A better dose spare for Parotid glands and spinal cord were seen in DA-VMAT. The average treatment delivery time were 5.82mins, 6.72mins, 3.24mins, 4.3mins for 7F-IMRT, 9F-IMRT, SA-VMAT and DA-VMAT respectively. Significance difference Observed in MU/fr (P <0.001) and Patient quality assurance pass rate were >95% (Gamma analysis (Γ3mm, 3%). Conclusion: DA-VAMT showed better target dose coverage and achieved better or equal performance in sparing OARs among other techniques. SA-VMAT offered least Treatment Time than other techniques but achieved poor target coverage. DA-VMAT offered shorter delivery time than 7F-IMRT and 9F-IMRT without compromising the plan quality.« less
  • Purpose: To study the dosimetric impact of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), hybrid intensity-modulated radiotherapy (h-IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy(VMAT) for whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) with simultaneous integrated boost in patients with multiple brain metastases. Methods: Ten patients with multiple brain metastases were included in this analysis. The prescribed dose was 45 Gy to the whole brain (PTVWBRT) and 55 Gy to individual brain metastases (PTVboost) delivered simultaneously in 25 fractions. Three treatment techniques were designed: the 7 equal spaced fields IMRT plan, hybrid IMRT plan and VMAT with two 358°arcs. In hybrid IMRT plan, two fields(90°and 270°) were planned to themore » whole brain. This was used as a base dose plan. Then 5 fields IMRT plan was optimized based on the two fields plan. The dose distribution in the target, the dose to the organs at risk and total MU in three techniques were compared. Results: For the target dose, conformity and homogeneity in PTV, no statistically differences were observed in the three techniques. For the maximum dose in bilateral lens and the mean dose in bilateral eyes, IMRT and h-IMRT plans showed the highest and lowest value respectively. No statistically significant differences were observed in the dose of optic nerve and brainstem. For the monitor units, IMRT and VMAT plans showed the highest and lowest value respectively. Conclusion: For WBRT with simultaneous integrated boost in patients with multiple brain metastases, hybrid IMRT could reduce the doses to lens and eyes. It is feasible for patients with brain metastases.« less
  • Background and Purpose: This phase 2 study investigated the efficacy and safety of preoperative intensity modulated radiation therapy with a simultaneous integrated boost (IMRT-SIB) without dose escalation, concomitant with standard capecitabine chemotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer. Methods and Materials: Between January 2014 and March 2015, 51 patients with operable stage II-III rectal adenocarcinoma received preoperative IMRT with pelvic dose of 41.8 Gy and simultaneously delivered 46.2 Gy to T2/3 and 48.4 Gy to T4 tumor in 22 fractions, concomitant with capecitabine, 825 mg/m{sup 2}/12 hours, including weekends. The primary endpoint was pathologic complete response (pCR). Results: Fifty patients completed preoperative treatment according to themore » protocol, and 47 underwent surgical resection. The sphincter preservation rate for the low rectal tumors was 62%, and the resection margins were free in all but 1 patient. Decrease in tumor and nodal stage was observed in 32 (68%) and 39 (83%) patients, respectively, with pCR achieved in 12 (25.5%) patients. There were only 2 G ≥ 3 acute toxicities, with infectious enterocolitis in 1 patient and dermatitis over the sacral area caused by the bolus effect of the treatment table in the second patient. Conclusions: Preoperative IMRT-SIB without dose escalation is well tolerated, with a low acute toxicity profile, and can achieve a high rate of pCR and downstaging.« less
  • Purpose: To compare and analyze the characteristics of intensity-modulated arc therapy(IMAT) versus fixed-gantry intensity-modulated radiotherapy(IMRT) in treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer. Methods: Twelve patients treated in our radiotherapy center were selected for this study. The patient subsequently underwent 4D-CT simulation.Margins of 5mm and 10mm were added to the ITV to generate the CTV and PTV respectively. Three treatment plans (IMRT,one single arc (RA1),double arcs (RA2))were generated with Eclipse ver.8.6 planning systems. Using a dose level of 75Gy in 15fractions to the ITV,60Gy in 15fractions to the CTV and 45Gy in 15fractions to the PTV respectively. The target and normol tissuemore » volumes were compared,as were the dosimetry parameters. Results: There were no significant differences in CI of ITV,PTV,HI of ITV,CTV and PTV, V5,V10,V15,V20,V25,V30,V45,V50 of total-lung and mean lung dose (all p>0.05). However, the differences were significant in terms of CI of CTV,V5 of B-P (all p<0.05). On the MU, IMRT=1540MU,RA1=1006 MU and RA2=1096 MU. (F=12.00,P=0.000).On the treatment time, IMRT= 13.5min,RA1= 1.5min,and RA2=2.5 min (F= 30.11,P=0.000 ). Conclusion: IMAT is equal to IMRT in dosimetril evaluation. Due to much less Mu and delivery time,IMAT is an ideal technique in treating patients by reduceing the uncomfortable influnce which could effect the treatment.« less