Cargando…

VMAT planning study in rectal cancer patients

BACKGROUND: To compare the dosimetric differences among fixed field intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), single-arc volumetric-modulated arc therapy (SA-VMAT) and double-arc volumetric-modulated arc therapy (DA-VMAT) plans in rectal cancer. METHOD: Fifteen patients with rectal cancer previo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shang, Jun, Kong, Wei, Wang, Yan-yang, Ding, Zhe, Yan, Gang, Zhe, Hong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4205282/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25319073
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-014-0219-1
_version_ 1782340672873824256
author Shang, Jun
Kong, Wei
Wang, Yan-yang
Ding, Zhe
Yan, Gang
Zhe, Hong
author_facet Shang, Jun
Kong, Wei
Wang, Yan-yang
Ding, Zhe
Yan, Gang
Zhe, Hong
author_sort Shang, Jun
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: To compare the dosimetric differences among fixed field intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), single-arc volumetric-modulated arc therapy (SA-VMAT) and double-arc volumetric-modulated arc therapy (DA-VMAT) plans in rectal cancer. METHOD: Fifteen patients with rectal cancer previously treated with IMRT in our institution were selected for this study. For each patient, three plans were generated with the planning CT scan: one using a fixed beam IMRT, and two plans using the VMAT technique: SA-VMAT and DA-VMAT. Dose prescription to the PTV was 50 Gy in 2 Gy per fraction. Dose volume histograms (DVH) for the target volume and the organs at risk (small bowel, bladder, femoral heads and healthy tissue) were compared for these different techniques. Monitor units (MU) and delivery treatment time were also reported. RESULTS: DA-VMAT achieved the highest minimum planning target volume (PTV) dose and the lowest maximal dose, resulting in the most homogeneous PTV dose distribution. DA-VMAT also yielded the best CI, although the difference was not statistically significant. Between SA-VMAT and IMRT, the target dose coverage was largely comparable; however, SA-VMAT was able to achieve a better V95 and V107. VMAT showed to be inferior to IMRT in terms of organ at risk sparing, especially for the small bowel. Compared with IMRT, DA-VMAT increased the V15 of small bowel nearly 55 cc. The MU and treatment delivery time were significantly reduced by the use of VMAT techniques. CONCLUSION: VMAT is a new radiation technique that combines the ability to achieve highly conformal dose distributions with highly efficient treatment delivery. Considering the inferior role of normal tissue sparing, especially for small bowel, VMAT need further investigation in rectal cancer treatment.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4205282
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42052822014-10-23 VMAT planning study in rectal cancer patients Shang, Jun Kong, Wei Wang, Yan-yang Ding, Zhe Yan, Gang Zhe, Hong Radiat Oncol Research BACKGROUND: To compare the dosimetric differences among fixed field intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), single-arc volumetric-modulated arc therapy (SA-VMAT) and double-arc volumetric-modulated arc therapy (DA-VMAT) plans in rectal cancer. METHOD: Fifteen patients with rectal cancer previously treated with IMRT in our institution were selected for this study. For each patient, three plans were generated with the planning CT scan: one using a fixed beam IMRT, and two plans using the VMAT technique: SA-VMAT and DA-VMAT. Dose prescription to the PTV was 50 Gy in 2 Gy per fraction. Dose volume histograms (DVH) for the target volume and the organs at risk (small bowel, bladder, femoral heads and healthy tissue) were compared for these different techniques. Monitor units (MU) and delivery treatment time were also reported. RESULTS: DA-VMAT achieved the highest minimum planning target volume (PTV) dose and the lowest maximal dose, resulting in the most homogeneous PTV dose distribution. DA-VMAT also yielded the best CI, although the difference was not statistically significant. Between SA-VMAT and IMRT, the target dose coverage was largely comparable; however, SA-VMAT was able to achieve a better V95 and V107. VMAT showed to be inferior to IMRT in terms of organ at risk sparing, especially for the small bowel. Compared with IMRT, DA-VMAT increased the V15 of small bowel nearly 55 cc. The MU and treatment delivery time were significantly reduced by the use of VMAT techniques. CONCLUSION: VMAT is a new radiation technique that combines the ability to achieve highly conformal dose distributions with highly efficient treatment delivery. Considering the inferior role of normal tissue sparing, especially for small bowel, VMAT need further investigation in rectal cancer treatment. BioMed Central 2014-10-16 /pmc/articles/PMC4205282/ /pubmed/25319073 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-014-0219-1 Text en © Shang et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Shang, Jun
Kong, Wei
Wang, Yan-yang
Ding, Zhe
Yan, Gang
Zhe, Hong
VMAT planning study in rectal cancer patients
title VMAT planning study in rectal cancer patients
title_full VMAT planning study in rectal cancer patients
title_fullStr VMAT planning study in rectal cancer patients
title_full_unstemmed VMAT planning study in rectal cancer patients
title_short VMAT planning study in rectal cancer patients
title_sort vmat planning study in rectal cancer patients
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4205282/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25319073
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-014-0219-1
work_keys_str_mv AT shangjun vmatplanningstudyinrectalcancerpatients
AT kongwei vmatplanningstudyinrectalcancerpatients
AT wangyanyang vmatplanningstudyinrectalcancerpatients
AT dingzhe vmatplanningstudyinrectalcancerpatients
AT yangang vmatplanningstudyinrectalcancerpatients
AT zhehong vmatplanningstudyinrectalcancerpatients