Cargando…

Helical tomotherapy for single and multiple liver tumours

PURPOSE: Dosimetric evaluations of single and multiple liver tumours performed using intensity-modulated helical tomotherapy (HT) were quantitatively investigated. Step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiotherapy (SaS-IMRT) was used as a benchmark. METHODS: Sixteen patients separated into two groups...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lee, Tsair-Fwu, Chao, Pei-Ju, Fang, Fu-Min, Su, Te-Jen, Leung, Stephen W, Hsu, Hsuan-Chih
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2900282/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20576108
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-5-58
_version_ 1782183617076658176
author Lee, Tsair-Fwu
Chao, Pei-Ju
Fang, Fu-Min
Su, Te-Jen
Leung, Stephen W
Hsu, Hsuan-Chih
author_facet Lee, Tsair-Fwu
Chao, Pei-Ju
Fang, Fu-Min
Su, Te-Jen
Leung, Stephen W
Hsu, Hsuan-Chih
author_sort Lee, Tsair-Fwu
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Dosimetric evaluations of single and multiple liver tumours performed using intensity-modulated helical tomotherapy (HT) were quantitatively investigated. Step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiotherapy (SaS-IMRT) was used as a benchmark. METHODS: Sixteen patients separated into two groups with primary hepatocellular carcinomas or metastatic liver tumours previously treated using SaS-IMRT were examined and re-planned by HT. The dosimetric indices used included the conformity index (CI) and homogeneity index (HI) for the planned target volume (PTV), max/mean dose, quality index (QI), normal tissue complication probability (NTCP), V(30 Gy), and V(50% )for the specified organs at risk (OARs). The monitor units per fraction (MU/fr) and delivery time were also analysed. RESULTS: For the single tumour group, both planning systems satisfied the required PTV prescription, but no statistical significance was shown by the indexes checking. A shorter delivery time and lower MU/fr value were achieved by the SaS-IMRT. For the group of multiple tumours, the average improvement in CI and HI was 14% and 4% for HT versus SaS-IMRT, respectively. Lower V(50%), V(30 Gy )and QI values were found, indicating a significant dosimetric gain in HT. The NTCP value of the normal liver was 20.27 ± 13.29% for SaS-IMRT and 2.38 ± 2.25% for HT, indicating fewer tissue complications following HT. The latter also required a shorter delivery time. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests dosimetric benefits of HT over SaS-IMRT plans in the case of multiple liver tumours, especially with regards sparing of OARs. No significant dosimetric difference was revealed in the case of single liver tumour, but SaS-IMRT showed better efficiency in terms of MU/fr and delivery time.
format Text
id pubmed-2900282
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-29002822010-07-09 Helical tomotherapy for single and multiple liver tumours Lee, Tsair-Fwu Chao, Pei-Ju Fang, Fu-Min Su, Te-Jen Leung, Stephen W Hsu, Hsuan-Chih Radiat Oncol Research PURPOSE: Dosimetric evaluations of single and multiple liver tumours performed using intensity-modulated helical tomotherapy (HT) were quantitatively investigated. Step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiotherapy (SaS-IMRT) was used as a benchmark. METHODS: Sixteen patients separated into two groups with primary hepatocellular carcinomas or metastatic liver tumours previously treated using SaS-IMRT were examined and re-planned by HT. The dosimetric indices used included the conformity index (CI) and homogeneity index (HI) for the planned target volume (PTV), max/mean dose, quality index (QI), normal tissue complication probability (NTCP), V(30 Gy), and V(50% )for the specified organs at risk (OARs). The monitor units per fraction (MU/fr) and delivery time were also analysed. RESULTS: For the single tumour group, both planning systems satisfied the required PTV prescription, but no statistical significance was shown by the indexes checking. A shorter delivery time and lower MU/fr value were achieved by the SaS-IMRT. For the group of multiple tumours, the average improvement in CI and HI was 14% and 4% for HT versus SaS-IMRT, respectively. Lower V(50%), V(30 Gy )and QI values were found, indicating a significant dosimetric gain in HT. The NTCP value of the normal liver was 20.27 ± 13.29% for SaS-IMRT and 2.38 ± 2.25% for HT, indicating fewer tissue complications following HT. The latter also required a shorter delivery time. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests dosimetric benefits of HT over SaS-IMRT plans in the case of multiple liver tumours, especially with regards sparing of OARs. No significant dosimetric difference was revealed in the case of single liver tumour, but SaS-IMRT showed better efficiency in terms of MU/fr and delivery time. BioMed Central 2010-06-24 /pmc/articles/PMC2900282/ /pubmed/20576108 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-5-58 Text en Copyright ©2010 Lee 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
Lee, Tsair-Fwu
Chao, Pei-Ju
Fang, Fu-Min
Su, Te-Jen
Leung, Stephen W
Hsu, Hsuan-Chih
Helical tomotherapy for single and multiple liver tumours
title Helical tomotherapy for single and multiple liver tumours
title_full Helical tomotherapy for single and multiple liver tumours
title_fullStr Helical tomotherapy for single and multiple liver tumours
title_full_unstemmed Helical tomotherapy for single and multiple liver tumours
title_short Helical tomotherapy for single and multiple liver tumours
title_sort helical tomotherapy for single and multiple liver tumours
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2900282/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20576108
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-5-58
work_keys_str_mv AT leetsairfwu helicaltomotherapyforsingleandmultiplelivertumours
AT chaopeiju helicaltomotherapyforsingleandmultiplelivertumours
AT fangfumin helicaltomotherapyforsingleandmultiplelivertumours
AT sutejen helicaltomotherapyforsingleandmultiplelivertumours
AT leungstephenw helicaltomotherapyforsingleandmultiplelivertumours
AT hsuhsuanchih helicaltomotherapyforsingleandmultiplelivertumours