Cargando…

Dosimetric comparison of standard three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy followed by intensity-modulated radiotherapy boost schedule (sequential IMRT plan) with simultaneous integrated boost–IMRT (SIB IMRT) treatment plan in patients with localized carcinoma prostate

AIMS: Dosimeteric and radiobiological comparison of two radiation schedules in localized carcinoma prostate: Standard Three-Dimensional Conformal Radiotherapy (3DCRT) followed by Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT) boost (sequential-IMRT) with Simultaneous Integrated Boost IMRT (SIB-IMRT). MATER...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bansal, A., Kapoor, R., Singh, S. K., Kumar, N., Oinam, A. S., Sharma, S. C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3507400/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23204659
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0970-1591.102707
_version_ 1782251068369928192
author Bansal, A.
Kapoor, R.
Singh, S. K.
Kumar, N.
Oinam, A. S.
Sharma, S. C.
author_facet Bansal, A.
Kapoor, R.
Singh, S. K.
Kumar, N.
Oinam, A. S.
Sharma, S. C.
author_sort Bansal, A.
collection PubMed
description AIMS: Dosimeteric and radiobiological comparison of two radiation schedules in localized carcinoma prostate: Standard Three-Dimensional Conformal Radiotherapy (3DCRT) followed by Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT) boost (sequential-IMRT) with Simultaneous Integrated Boost IMRT (SIB-IMRT). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty patients were enrolled. In all, the target consisted of PTV P + SV (Prostate and seminal vesicles) and PTV LN (lymph nodes) where PTV refers to planning target volume and the critical structures included: bladder, rectum and small bowel. All patients were treated with sequential-IMRT plan, but for dosimetric comparison, SIB-IMRT plan was also created. The prescription dose to PTV P + SV was 74 Gy in both strategies but with different dose per fraction, however, the dose to PTV LN was 50 Gy delivered in 25 fractions over 5 weeks for sequential-IMRT and 54 Gy delivered in 27 fractions over 5.5 weeks for SIB-IMRT. The treatment plans were compared in terms of dose–volume histograms. Also, Tumor Control Probability (TCP) and Normal Tissue Complication Probability (NTCP) obtained with the two plans were compared. RESULTS: The volume of rectum receiving 70 Gy or more (V > 70 Gy) was reduced to 18.23% with SIB-IMRT from 22.81% with sequential-IMRT. SIB-IMRT reduced the mean doses to both bladder and rectum by 13% and 17%, respectively, as compared to sequential-IMRT. NTCP of 0.86 ± 0.75% and 0.01 ± 0.02% for the bladder, 5.87 ± 2.58% and 4.31 ± 2.61% for the rectum and 8.83 ± 7.08% and 8.25 ± 7.98% for the bowel was seen with sequential-IMRT and SIB-IMRT plans respectively. CONCLUSIONS: For equal PTV coverage, SIB-IMRT markedly reduced doses to critical structures, therefore should be considered as the strategy for dose escalation. SIB-IMRT achieves lesser NTCP than sequential-IMRT.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3507400
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-35074002012-11-30 Dosimetric comparison of standard three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy followed by intensity-modulated radiotherapy boost schedule (sequential IMRT plan) with simultaneous integrated boost–IMRT (SIB IMRT) treatment plan in patients with localized carcinoma prostate Bansal, A. Kapoor, R. Singh, S. K. Kumar, N. Oinam, A. S. Sharma, S. C. Indian J Urol Original Article AIMS: Dosimeteric and radiobiological comparison of two radiation schedules in localized carcinoma prostate: Standard Three-Dimensional Conformal Radiotherapy (3DCRT) followed by Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT) boost (sequential-IMRT) with Simultaneous Integrated Boost IMRT (SIB-IMRT). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty patients were enrolled. In all, the target consisted of PTV P + SV (Prostate and seminal vesicles) and PTV LN (lymph nodes) where PTV refers to planning target volume and the critical structures included: bladder, rectum and small bowel. All patients were treated with sequential-IMRT plan, but for dosimetric comparison, SIB-IMRT plan was also created. The prescription dose to PTV P + SV was 74 Gy in both strategies but with different dose per fraction, however, the dose to PTV LN was 50 Gy delivered in 25 fractions over 5 weeks for sequential-IMRT and 54 Gy delivered in 27 fractions over 5.5 weeks for SIB-IMRT. The treatment plans were compared in terms of dose–volume histograms. Also, Tumor Control Probability (TCP) and Normal Tissue Complication Probability (NTCP) obtained with the two plans were compared. RESULTS: The volume of rectum receiving 70 Gy or more (V > 70 Gy) was reduced to 18.23% with SIB-IMRT from 22.81% with sequential-IMRT. SIB-IMRT reduced the mean doses to both bladder and rectum by 13% and 17%, respectively, as compared to sequential-IMRT. NTCP of 0.86 ± 0.75% and 0.01 ± 0.02% for the bladder, 5.87 ± 2.58% and 4.31 ± 2.61% for the rectum and 8.83 ± 7.08% and 8.25 ± 7.98% for the bowel was seen with sequential-IMRT and SIB-IMRT plans respectively. CONCLUSIONS: For equal PTV coverage, SIB-IMRT markedly reduced doses to critical structures, therefore should be considered as the strategy for dose escalation. SIB-IMRT achieves lesser NTCP than sequential-IMRT. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2012 /pmc/articles/PMC3507400/ /pubmed/23204659 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0970-1591.102707 Text en Copyright: © Indian Journal of Urology http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Bansal, A.
Kapoor, R.
Singh, S. K.
Kumar, N.
Oinam, A. S.
Sharma, S. C.
Dosimetric comparison of standard three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy followed by intensity-modulated radiotherapy boost schedule (sequential IMRT plan) with simultaneous integrated boost–IMRT (SIB IMRT) treatment plan in patients with localized carcinoma prostate
title Dosimetric comparison of standard three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy followed by intensity-modulated radiotherapy boost schedule (sequential IMRT plan) with simultaneous integrated boost–IMRT (SIB IMRT) treatment plan in patients with localized carcinoma prostate
title_full Dosimetric comparison of standard three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy followed by intensity-modulated radiotherapy boost schedule (sequential IMRT plan) with simultaneous integrated boost–IMRT (SIB IMRT) treatment plan in patients with localized carcinoma prostate
title_fullStr Dosimetric comparison of standard three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy followed by intensity-modulated radiotherapy boost schedule (sequential IMRT plan) with simultaneous integrated boost–IMRT (SIB IMRT) treatment plan in patients with localized carcinoma prostate
title_full_unstemmed Dosimetric comparison of standard three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy followed by intensity-modulated radiotherapy boost schedule (sequential IMRT plan) with simultaneous integrated boost–IMRT (SIB IMRT) treatment plan in patients with localized carcinoma prostate
title_short Dosimetric comparison of standard three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy followed by intensity-modulated radiotherapy boost schedule (sequential IMRT plan) with simultaneous integrated boost–IMRT (SIB IMRT) treatment plan in patients with localized carcinoma prostate
title_sort dosimetric comparison of standard three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy followed by intensity-modulated radiotherapy boost schedule (sequential imrt plan) with simultaneous integrated boost–imrt (sib imrt) treatment plan in patients with localized carcinoma prostate
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3507400/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23204659
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0970-1591.102707
work_keys_str_mv AT bansala dosimetriccomparisonofstandardthreedimensionalconformalradiotherapyfollowedbyintensitymodulatedradiotherapyboostschedulesequentialimrtplanwithsimultaneousintegratedboostimrtsibimrttreatmentplaninpatientswithlocalizedcarcinomaprostate
AT kapoorr dosimetriccomparisonofstandardthreedimensionalconformalradiotherapyfollowedbyintensitymodulatedradiotherapyboostschedulesequentialimrtplanwithsimultaneousintegratedboostimrtsibimrttreatmentplaninpatientswithlocalizedcarcinomaprostate
AT singhsk dosimetriccomparisonofstandardthreedimensionalconformalradiotherapyfollowedbyintensitymodulatedradiotherapyboostschedulesequentialimrtplanwithsimultaneousintegratedboostimrtsibimrttreatmentplaninpatientswithlocalizedcarcinomaprostate
AT kumarn dosimetriccomparisonofstandardthreedimensionalconformalradiotherapyfollowedbyintensitymodulatedradiotherapyboostschedulesequentialimrtplanwithsimultaneousintegratedboostimrtsibimrttreatmentplaninpatientswithlocalizedcarcinomaprostate
AT oinamas dosimetriccomparisonofstandardthreedimensionalconformalradiotherapyfollowedbyintensitymodulatedradiotherapyboostschedulesequentialimrtplanwithsimultaneousintegratedboostimrtsibimrttreatmentplaninpatientswithlocalizedcarcinomaprostate
AT sharmasc dosimetriccomparisonofstandardthreedimensionalconformalradiotherapyfollowedbyintensitymodulatedradiotherapyboostschedulesequentialimrtplanwithsimultaneousintegratedboostimrtsibimrttreatmentplaninpatientswithlocalizedcarcinomaprostate