Cargando…

Prescribed dose versus calculated dose of spinal cord in standard head and neck irradiation assessed by 3-D plan

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Spinal cord toxicity can be dreaded complication while treating head and neck cancer by conventional radiotherapy. Cord sparing approach is applied by two phase planning in conventional head neck radiotherapy. In spite of cord sparing approach spinal cord still receives consi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Majumder, Dipanjan, Patra, Niladri Bihari, Chatterjee, Debashis, Mallick, Swapan Kumar, Kabasi, Apurba Kumar, Majumder, Anjali
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3961863/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24665442
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2278-330X.126510
_version_ 1782308349181689856
author Majumder, Dipanjan
Patra, Niladri Bihari
Chatterjee, Debashis
Mallick, Swapan Kumar
Kabasi, Apurba Kumar
Majumder, Anjali
author_facet Majumder, Dipanjan
Patra, Niladri Bihari
Chatterjee, Debashis
Mallick, Swapan Kumar
Kabasi, Apurba Kumar
Majumder, Anjali
author_sort Majumder, Dipanjan
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Spinal cord toxicity can be dreaded complication while treating head and neck cancer by conventional radiotherapy. Cord sparing approach is applied by two phase planning in conventional head neck radiotherapy. In spite of cord sparing approach spinal cord still receives considerable scatter dose. Our study aims to do the volumetric analysis of spinal cord dosimetry and to correlate with the clinical findings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Treatment planning was done in two phases. First phase treatment fields include gross disease- both tumor and involved nodes. in the second phase, treatment field shrinkage was done to cover the gross disease sparing the spinal cord. These fields are termed as off-cord fields. 42 patients with histological proven squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck region were analysed with two groups. In Group A, 46 Gy was given in 23 fractions, and then tumor-boost with off-cord field received 24 Gy in 12 fractions. In Group B 50 Gy was prescribed in 25 fractions initially, then off-cord field given 20 Gy in 10 fractions to analyze theoutcome. Planning Computed tomography (CT) scan was done Philips Brilliance 16 slice CT scan machine, and contouring and dose calculation were done at ASHA treatment planning software. RESULTS: Maximum dose and dose at 1 cm3, 2 cm3, and 5 cm3 were calculated. Maximum dose to cord was 52.6 Gy (range 48.1-49.7 Gy) in Group A and 54.3 Gy (range 51.48-52.33 Gy) in Group B initially. Off-cord fields received mean dose 8.07 Gy (85.85% of maximum) in Group A and 5.47 Gy (86.84% of maximum) in Group B. At the end of 6 months from the last date of radiotherapy, grade 1 spinal cord toxicity found in two patients in Group A and one patient in Group B respectively (P = 0.55). Both groups received additional dose, which are higher than the prescribed dose, but no patients show significant spinal cord toxicity after 6 month of follow-up. CONCLUSION: Spinal cord received scatter dose which much higher than the predicted dose in conventional radiotherapy of head neck cancer. Short term follow up failed to establish clinical correlation with volumetric dose of spinal cord. Two phase cord sparing head neck radiation planning if practiced should be used with caution.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3961863
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-39618632014-03-24 Prescribed dose versus calculated dose of spinal cord in standard head and neck irradiation assessed by 3-D plan Majumder, Dipanjan Patra, Niladri Bihari Chatterjee, Debashis Mallick, Swapan Kumar Kabasi, Apurba Kumar Majumder, Anjali South Asian J Cancer THE CUTTING EDGE OF RADIOTHERAPEUTICS: Original Article BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Spinal cord toxicity can be dreaded complication while treating head and neck cancer by conventional radiotherapy. Cord sparing approach is applied by two phase planning in conventional head neck radiotherapy. In spite of cord sparing approach spinal cord still receives considerable scatter dose. Our study aims to do the volumetric analysis of spinal cord dosimetry and to correlate with the clinical findings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Treatment planning was done in two phases. First phase treatment fields include gross disease- both tumor and involved nodes. in the second phase, treatment field shrinkage was done to cover the gross disease sparing the spinal cord. These fields are termed as off-cord fields. 42 patients with histological proven squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck region were analysed with two groups. In Group A, 46 Gy was given in 23 fractions, and then tumor-boost with off-cord field received 24 Gy in 12 fractions. In Group B 50 Gy was prescribed in 25 fractions initially, then off-cord field given 20 Gy in 10 fractions to analyze theoutcome. Planning Computed tomography (CT) scan was done Philips Brilliance 16 slice CT scan machine, and contouring and dose calculation were done at ASHA treatment planning software. RESULTS: Maximum dose and dose at 1 cm3, 2 cm3, and 5 cm3 were calculated. Maximum dose to cord was 52.6 Gy (range 48.1-49.7 Gy) in Group A and 54.3 Gy (range 51.48-52.33 Gy) in Group B initially. Off-cord fields received mean dose 8.07 Gy (85.85% of maximum) in Group A and 5.47 Gy (86.84% of maximum) in Group B. At the end of 6 months from the last date of radiotherapy, grade 1 spinal cord toxicity found in two patients in Group A and one patient in Group B respectively (P = 0.55). Both groups received additional dose, which are higher than the prescribed dose, but no patients show significant spinal cord toxicity after 6 month of follow-up. CONCLUSION: Spinal cord received scatter dose which much higher than the predicted dose in conventional radiotherapy of head neck cancer. Short term follow up failed to establish clinical correlation with volumetric dose of spinal cord. Two phase cord sparing head neck radiation planning if practiced should be used with caution. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2014 /pmc/articles/PMC3961863/ /pubmed/24665442 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2278-330X.126510 Text en Copyright: © South Asian Journal of Cancer 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 THE CUTTING EDGE OF RADIOTHERAPEUTICS: Original Article
Majumder, Dipanjan
Patra, Niladri Bihari
Chatterjee, Debashis
Mallick, Swapan Kumar
Kabasi, Apurba Kumar
Majumder, Anjali
Prescribed dose versus calculated dose of spinal cord in standard head and neck irradiation assessed by 3-D plan
title Prescribed dose versus calculated dose of spinal cord in standard head and neck irradiation assessed by 3-D plan
title_full Prescribed dose versus calculated dose of spinal cord in standard head and neck irradiation assessed by 3-D plan
title_fullStr Prescribed dose versus calculated dose of spinal cord in standard head and neck irradiation assessed by 3-D plan
title_full_unstemmed Prescribed dose versus calculated dose of spinal cord in standard head and neck irradiation assessed by 3-D plan
title_short Prescribed dose versus calculated dose of spinal cord in standard head and neck irradiation assessed by 3-D plan
title_sort prescribed dose versus calculated dose of spinal cord in standard head and neck irradiation assessed by 3-d plan
topic THE CUTTING EDGE OF RADIOTHERAPEUTICS: Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3961863/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24665442
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2278-330X.126510
work_keys_str_mv AT majumderdipanjan prescribeddoseversuscalculateddoseofspinalcordinstandardheadandneckirradiationassessedby3dplan
AT patraniladribihari prescribeddoseversuscalculateddoseofspinalcordinstandardheadandneckirradiationassessedby3dplan
AT chatterjeedebashis prescribeddoseversuscalculateddoseofspinalcordinstandardheadandneckirradiationassessedby3dplan
AT mallickswapankumar prescribeddoseversuscalculateddoseofspinalcordinstandardheadandneckirradiationassessedby3dplan
AT kabasiapurbakumar prescribeddoseversuscalculateddoseofspinalcordinstandardheadandneckirradiationassessedby3dplan
AT majumderanjali prescribeddoseversuscalculateddoseofspinalcordinstandardheadandneckirradiationassessedby3dplan