Cargando…

Does Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) prevent additional toxicity of treating the pelvic lymph nodes compared to treatment of the prostate only?

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the risk of rectal, bladder and small bowel toxicity in intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) of the prostate only compared to additional irradiation of the pelvic lymphatic region. METHODS: For ten patients with localized prostate cancer, IMRT plans with a simultaneou...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Guckenberger, Matthias, Baier, Kurt, Richter, Anne, Vordermark, Dirk, Flentje, Michael
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2008
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2253547/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18190681
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-3-3
_version_ 1782151118576418816
author Guckenberger, Matthias
Baier, Kurt
Richter, Anne
Vordermark, Dirk
Flentje, Michael
author_facet Guckenberger, Matthias
Baier, Kurt
Richter, Anne
Vordermark, Dirk
Flentje, Michael
author_sort Guckenberger, Matthias
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: To evaluate the risk of rectal, bladder and small bowel toxicity in intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) of the prostate only compared to additional irradiation of the pelvic lymphatic region. METHODS: For ten patients with localized prostate cancer, IMRT plans with a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) were generated for treatment of the prostate only (plan-PO) and for additional treatment of the pelvic lymph nodes (plan-WP). In plan-PO, doses of 60 Gy and 74 Gy (33 fractions) were prescribed to the seminal vesicles and to the prostate, respectively. Three plans-WP were generated with prescription doses of 46 Gy, 50.4 Gy and 54 Gy to the pelvic target volume; doses to the prostate and seminal vesicles were identical to plan-PO. The risk of rectal, bladder and small bowel toxicity was estimated based on NTCP calculations. RESULTS: Doses to the prostate were not significantly different between plan-PO and plan-WP and doses to the pelvic lymph nodes were as planned. Plan-WP resulted in increased doses to the rectum in the low-dose region ≤ 30 Gy, only, no difference was observed in the mid and high-dose region. Normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) for late rectal toxicity ranged between 5% and 8% with no significant difference between plan-PO and plan-WP. NTCP for late bladder toxicity was less than 1% for both plan-PO and plan-WP. The risk of small bowel toxicity was moderately increased for plan-WP. DISCUSSION: This retrospective planning study predicted similar risks of rectal, bladder and small bowel toxicity for IMRT treatment of the prostate only and for additional treatment of the pelvic lymph nodes.
format Text
id pubmed-2253547
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2008
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-22535472008-02-23 Does Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) prevent additional toxicity of treating the pelvic lymph nodes compared to treatment of the prostate only? Guckenberger, Matthias Baier, Kurt Richter, Anne Vordermark, Dirk Flentje, Michael Radiat Oncol Research BACKGROUND: To evaluate the risk of rectal, bladder and small bowel toxicity in intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) of the prostate only compared to additional irradiation of the pelvic lymphatic region. METHODS: For ten patients with localized prostate cancer, IMRT plans with a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) were generated for treatment of the prostate only (plan-PO) and for additional treatment of the pelvic lymph nodes (plan-WP). In plan-PO, doses of 60 Gy and 74 Gy (33 fractions) were prescribed to the seminal vesicles and to the prostate, respectively. Three plans-WP were generated with prescription doses of 46 Gy, 50.4 Gy and 54 Gy to the pelvic target volume; doses to the prostate and seminal vesicles were identical to plan-PO. The risk of rectal, bladder and small bowel toxicity was estimated based on NTCP calculations. RESULTS: Doses to the prostate were not significantly different between plan-PO and plan-WP and doses to the pelvic lymph nodes were as planned. Plan-WP resulted in increased doses to the rectum in the low-dose region ≤ 30 Gy, only, no difference was observed in the mid and high-dose region. Normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) for late rectal toxicity ranged between 5% and 8% with no significant difference between plan-PO and plan-WP. NTCP for late bladder toxicity was less than 1% for both plan-PO and plan-WP. The risk of small bowel toxicity was moderately increased for plan-WP. DISCUSSION: This retrospective planning study predicted similar risks of rectal, bladder and small bowel toxicity for IMRT treatment of the prostate only and for additional treatment of the pelvic lymph nodes. BioMed Central 2008-01-11 /pmc/articles/PMC2253547/ /pubmed/18190681 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-3-3 Text en Copyright © 2008 Guckenberger et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Guckenberger, Matthias
Baier, Kurt
Richter, Anne
Vordermark, Dirk
Flentje, Michael
Does Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) prevent additional toxicity of treating the pelvic lymph nodes compared to treatment of the prostate only?
title Does Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) prevent additional toxicity of treating the pelvic lymph nodes compared to treatment of the prostate only?
title_full Does Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) prevent additional toxicity of treating the pelvic lymph nodes compared to treatment of the prostate only?
title_fullStr Does Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) prevent additional toxicity of treating the pelvic lymph nodes compared to treatment of the prostate only?
title_full_unstemmed Does Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) prevent additional toxicity of treating the pelvic lymph nodes compared to treatment of the prostate only?
title_short Does Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) prevent additional toxicity of treating the pelvic lymph nodes compared to treatment of the prostate only?
title_sort does intensity modulated radiation therapy (imrt) prevent additional toxicity of treating the pelvic lymph nodes compared to treatment of the prostate only?
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2253547/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18190681
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-3-3
work_keys_str_mv AT guckenbergermatthias doesintensitymodulatedradiationtherapyimrtpreventadditionaltoxicityoftreatingthepelviclymphnodescomparedtotreatmentoftheprostateonly
AT baierkurt doesintensitymodulatedradiationtherapyimrtpreventadditionaltoxicityoftreatingthepelviclymphnodescomparedtotreatmentoftheprostateonly
AT richteranne doesintensitymodulatedradiationtherapyimrtpreventadditionaltoxicityoftreatingthepelviclymphnodescomparedtotreatmentoftheprostateonly
AT vordermarkdirk doesintensitymodulatedradiationtherapyimrtpreventadditionaltoxicityoftreatingthepelviclymphnodescomparedtotreatmentoftheprostateonly
AT flentjemichael doesintensitymodulatedradiationtherapyimrtpreventadditionaltoxicityoftreatingthepelviclymphnodescomparedtotreatmentoftheprostateonly