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

Title: Dosimetric comparison between step-shoot intensity-modulated radiotherapy and volumetric-modulated arc therapy for upper thoracic and cervical esophageal carcinoma

Abstract

To compare and analyze the dosimetric characteristics of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) vs step-shoot intensity-modulated radiation therapy (sIMRT) for upper thoracic and cervical esophageal carcinoma. Single-arc VMAT (VMAT1), dual-arc VMAT (VMAT2), and 7-field sIMRT plans were designed for 30 patients with upper thoracic or cervical esophageal carcinoma. Planning target volume (PTV) was prescribed to 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions, and PTV1 was prescribed to 60 Gy in 28 fractions. The parameters evaluated included dose homogeneity and conformality, dose to organs at risk (OARs), and delivery efficiency. (1) In comparison to sIMRT, VMAT provided a systematic improvement in PTV1 coverage. The homogeneity index of VMAT1 was better than that of VMAT2. There were no significant differences among sIMRT, VMAT1, and VMAT2 in PTV coverage. (2) VMAT1 and VMAT2 reduced the maximum dose of spinal cord as compared with sIMRT (p < 0.05). The rest dose-volume characteristics of OARs were similar. (3) Monitor units of VMAT2 and VMAT1 were more than sIMRT. However, the treatment time of VMAT1, VMAT2, and sIMRT was (2.0 ± 0.2), (2.8 ± 0.3), and (9.8 ± 0.8) minutes, respectively. VMAT1 was the fastest, and the difference was statistically significant. In the treatment of upper thoracic andmore » cervical esophageal carcinoma by the AXESSE linac, compared with 7-field sIMRT, VMAT showed better PTV1 coverage and superior spinal cord sparing. Single-arc VMAT had similar target volume coverage and the sparing of OAR to dual-arc VMAT, with shortest treatment time and highest treatment efficiency in the 3 kinds of plans.« less

Authors:
; ; ; ; ; ;
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22577873
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Dosimetry; Journal Volume: 41; Journal Issue: 2; Other Information: Copyright (c) 2016 Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, All rights reserved.; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY; 62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE; CARCINOMAS; DOSIMETRY; ESOPHAGUS; HEALTH HAZARDS; PATIENTS; PLANNING; RADIATION DOSES; RADIOTHERAPY; SPINAL CORD

Citation Formats

Gao, Min, Li, Qilin, Ning, Zhonghua, Gu, Wendong, Huang, Jin, Mu, Jinming, and Pei, Honglei, E-mail: hongleipei@126.com. Dosimetric comparison between step-shoot intensity-modulated radiotherapy and volumetric-modulated arc therapy for upper thoracic and cervical esophageal carcinoma. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.1016/J.MEDDOS.2015.10.007.
Gao, Min, Li, Qilin, Ning, Zhonghua, Gu, Wendong, Huang, Jin, Mu, Jinming, & Pei, Honglei, E-mail: hongleipei@126.com. Dosimetric comparison between step-shoot intensity-modulated radiotherapy and volumetric-modulated arc therapy for upper thoracic and cervical esophageal carcinoma. United States. doi:10.1016/J.MEDDOS.2015.10.007.
Gao, Min, Li, Qilin, Ning, Zhonghua, Gu, Wendong, Huang, Jin, Mu, Jinming, and Pei, Honglei, E-mail: hongleipei@126.com. Fri . "Dosimetric comparison between step-shoot intensity-modulated radiotherapy and volumetric-modulated arc therapy for upper thoracic and cervical esophageal carcinoma". United States. doi:10.1016/J.MEDDOS.2015.10.007.
@article{osti_22577873,
title = {Dosimetric comparison between step-shoot intensity-modulated radiotherapy and volumetric-modulated arc therapy for upper thoracic and cervical esophageal carcinoma},
author = {Gao, Min and Li, Qilin and Ning, Zhonghua and Gu, Wendong and Huang, Jin and Mu, Jinming and Pei, Honglei, E-mail: hongleipei@126.com},
abstractNote = {To compare and analyze the dosimetric characteristics of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) vs step-shoot intensity-modulated radiation therapy (sIMRT) for upper thoracic and cervical esophageal carcinoma. Single-arc VMAT (VMAT1), dual-arc VMAT (VMAT2), and 7-field sIMRT plans were designed for 30 patients with upper thoracic or cervical esophageal carcinoma. Planning target volume (PTV) was prescribed to 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions, and PTV1 was prescribed to 60 Gy in 28 fractions. The parameters evaluated included dose homogeneity and conformality, dose to organs at risk (OARs), and delivery efficiency. (1) In comparison to sIMRT, VMAT provided a systematic improvement in PTV1 coverage. The homogeneity index of VMAT1 was better than that of VMAT2. There were no significant differences among sIMRT, VMAT1, and VMAT2 in PTV coverage. (2) VMAT1 and VMAT2 reduced the maximum dose of spinal cord as compared with sIMRT (p < 0.05). The rest dose-volume characteristics of OARs were similar. (3) Monitor units of VMAT2 and VMAT1 were more than sIMRT. However, the treatment time of VMAT1, VMAT2, and sIMRT was (2.0 ± 0.2), (2.8 ± 0.3), and (9.8 ± 0.8) minutes, respectively. VMAT1 was the fastest, and the difference was statistically significant. In the treatment of upper thoracic and cervical esophageal carcinoma by the AXESSE linac, compared with 7-field sIMRT, VMAT showed better PTV1 coverage and superior spinal cord sparing. Single-arc VMAT had similar target volume coverage and the sparing of OAR to dual-arc VMAT, with shortest treatment time and highest treatment efficiency in the 3 kinds of plans.},
doi = {10.1016/J.MEDDOS.2015.10.007},
journal = {Medical Dosimetry},
number = 2,
volume = 41,
place = {United States},
year = {Fri Jul 01 00:00:00 EDT 2016},
month = {Fri Jul 01 00:00:00 EDT 2016}
}