Cargando…

Dosimetric Comparative Study of 3 Different Postoperative Radiotherapy Techniques (3D-CRT, IMRT, and RapidArc) for II–III Stage Rectal Cancer

Postoperative radiotherapy is critical for reducing local relapse for advanced rectal carcinoma but has many side effects. Our study compared the dose distribution of target volumes, protection of normal organs at risk (OAR), and monitor unit (MU) for 3 radiotherapy techniques (3-dimensional conform...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Liu, Min, Liu, Bailong, Wang, Huidong, Ding, Lijuan, Shi, Yinghua, Ge, Chao, Su, Xu, Liu, Xiaodong, Dong, Lihua
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer Health 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4602855/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25569661
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000000372
_version_ 1782394807358849024
author Liu, Min
Liu, Bailong
Wang, Huidong
Ding, Lijuan
Shi, Yinghua
Ge, Chao
Su, Xu
Liu, Xiaodong
Dong, Lihua
author_facet Liu, Min
Liu, Bailong
Wang, Huidong
Ding, Lijuan
Shi, Yinghua
Ge, Chao
Su, Xu
Liu, Xiaodong
Dong, Lihua
author_sort Liu, Min
collection PubMed
description Postoperative radiotherapy is critical for reducing local relapse for advanced rectal carcinoma but has many side effects. Our study compared the dose distribution of target volumes, protection of normal organs at risk (OAR), and monitor unit (MU) for 3 radiotherapy techniques (3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy [3D-CRT], intensity-modulated radiation therapy [IMRT], and RapidArc (Varian Medical Systems, Inc., Palo Alto, CA, USA)). The results advocate for the clinical application of RapidArc technique in the future. Thirty postoperative patients with rectal cancer were enrolled. The 3 radiotherapy plans mentioned above were designed for each patient. The target volume coverage indicators included average dose, conformity index (CI), and homogeneity index (HI) of planning tumor volume (PTV). OAR included the bladder, small intestine, colon, and bilateral proximal femurs. The 30 patients were divided into 3 groups (10 cases in each group) for postoperative radiotherapy with the 3D-CRT, IMRT, or RapidArc technique, respectively. Both the IMRT and RapidArc plans have a significantly higher average PTV dose and better CI and HI (P < 0.01) than 3D-CRT. IMRT and RapidArc result in significantly lower doses of irradiation for all the OAR examined. Both the IMRT and RapidArc plans have a significantly lower V40 of the bladder, small intestine, and colon than 3D-CRT (P < 0.01). The IMRT and RapidArc plans can also reduce the maximum dose (Dmax) for the left proximal femur, V30, and V40 of bilateral proximal femurs compared with 3D-CRT (P < 0.01). Compared with IMRT, RapidArc can further reduce the Dmax of the small intestine, the Dmax and V30 of the bilateral proximal femurs, and the V40 of the right proximal femur (P < 0.01). RapidArc reduces MU remarkably compared with IMRT (P < 0.01). Regarding acute side effects, IMRT and RapidArc can greatly reduce the incidence of grade 3 radiation-induced cystitis and grade 2 enteritis. Both IMRT and RapidArc are better than 3D-CRT regarding PTV coverage and OAR protection. Furthermore, RapidArc is superior to IMRT regarding protection of the small intestine and bilateral proximal femurs and requires a reduced treatment time. RapidArc could be widely applied for postoperative radiotherapy for patients with ΙΙ–ΙΙΙ stage rectal cancer.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4602855
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Wolters Kluwer Health
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46028552015-10-27 Dosimetric Comparative Study of 3 Different Postoperative Radiotherapy Techniques (3D-CRT, IMRT, and RapidArc) for II–III Stage Rectal Cancer Liu, Min Liu, Bailong Wang, Huidong Ding, Lijuan Shi, Yinghua Ge, Chao Su, Xu Liu, Xiaodong Dong, Lihua Medicine (Baltimore) 5700 Postoperative radiotherapy is critical for reducing local relapse for advanced rectal carcinoma but has many side effects. Our study compared the dose distribution of target volumes, protection of normal organs at risk (OAR), and monitor unit (MU) for 3 radiotherapy techniques (3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy [3D-CRT], intensity-modulated radiation therapy [IMRT], and RapidArc (Varian Medical Systems, Inc., Palo Alto, CA, USA)). The results advocate for the clinical application of RapidArc technique in the future. Thirty postoperative patients with rectal cancer were enrolled. The 3 radiotherapy plans mentioned above were designed for each patient. The target volume coverage indicators included average dose, conformity index (CI), and homogeneity index (HI) of planning tumor volume (PTV). OAR included the bladder, small intestine, colon, and bilateral proximal femurs. The 30 patients were divided into 3 groups (10 cases in each group) for postoperative radiotherapy with the 3D-CRT, IMRT, or RapidArc technique, respectively. Both the IMRT and RapidArc plans have a significantly higher average PTV dose and better CI and HI (P < 0.01) than 3D-CRT. IMRT and RapidArc result in significantly lower doses of irradiation for all the OAR examined. Both the IMRT and RapidArc plans have a significantly lower V40 of the bladder, small intestine, and colon than 3D-CRT (P < 0.01). The IMRT and RapidArc plans can also reduce the maximum dose (Dmax) for the left proximal femur, V30, and V40 of bilateral proximal femurs compared with 3D-CRT (P < 0.01). Compared with IMRT, RapidArc can further reduce the Dmax of the small intestine, the Dmax and V30 of the bilateral proximal femurs, and the V40 of the right proximal femur (P < 0.01). RapidArc reduces MU remarkably compared with IMRT (P < 0.01). Regarding acute side effects, IMRT and RapidArc can greatly reduce the incidence of grade 3 radiation-induced cystitis and grade 2 enteritis. Both IMRT and RapidArc are better than 3D-CRT regarding PTV coverage and OAR protection. Furthermore, RapidArc is superior to IMRT regarding protection of the small intestine and bilateral proximal femurs and requires a reduced treatment time. RapidArc could be widely applied for postoperative radiotherapy for patients with ΙΙ–ΙΙΙ stage rectal cancer. Wolters Kluwer Health 2015-01-09 /pmc/articles/PMC4602855/ /pubmed/25569661 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000000372 Text en Copyright © 2015 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0
spellingShingle 5700
Liu, Min
Liu, Bailong
Wang, Huidong
Ding, Lijuan
Shi, Yinghua
Ge, Chao
Su, Xu
Liu, Xiaodong
Dong, Lihua
Dosimetric Comparative Study of 3 Different Postoperative Radiotherapy Techniques (3D-CRT, IMRT, and RapidArc) for II–III Stage Rectal Cancer
title Dosimetric Comparative Study of 3 Different Postoperative Radiotherapy Techniques (3D-CRT, IMRT, and RapidArc) for II–III Stage Rectal Cancer
title_full Dosimetric Comparative Study of 3 Different Postoperative Radiotherapy Techniques (3D-CRT, IMRT, and RapidArc) for II–III Stage Rectal Cancer
title_fullStr Dosimetric Comparative Study of 3 Different Postoperative Radiotherapy Techniques (3D-CRT, IMRT, and RapidArc) for II–III Stage Rectal Cancer
title_full_unstemmed Dosimetric Comparative Study of 3 Different Postoperative Radiotherapy Techniques (3D-CRT, IMRT, and RapidArc) for II–III Stage Rectal Cancer
title_short Dosimetric Comparative Study of 3 Different Postoperative Radiotherapy Techniques (3D-CRT, IMRT, and RapidArc) for II–III Stage Rectal Cancer
title_sort dosimetric comparative study of 3 different postoperative radiotherapy techniques (3d-crt, imrt, and rapidarc) for ii–iii stage rectal cancer
topic 5700
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4602855/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25569661
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000000372
work_keys_str_mv AT liumin dosimetriccomparativestudyof3differentpostoperativeradiotherapytechniques3dcrtimrtandrapidarcforiiiiistagerectalcancer
AT liubailong dosimetriccomparativestudyof3differentpostoperativeradiotherapytechniques3dcrtimrtandrapidarcforiiiiistagerectalcancer
AT wanghuidong dosimetriccomparativestudyof3differentpostoperativeradiotherapytechniques3dcrtimrtandrapidarcforiiiiistagerectalcancer
AT dinglijuan dosimetriccomparativestudyof3differentpostoperativeradiotherapytechniques3dcrtimrtandrapidarcforiiiiistagerectalcancer
AT shiyinghua dosimetriccomparativestudyof3differentpostoperativeradiotherapytechniques3dcrtimrtandrapidarcforiiiiistagerectalcancer
AT gechao dosimetriccomparativestudyof3differentpostoperativeradiotherapytechniques3dcrtimrtandrapidarcforiiiiistagerectalcancer
AT suxu dosimetriccomparativestudyof3differentpostoperativeradiotherapytechniques3dcrtimrtandrapidarcforiiiiistagerectalcancer
AT liuxiaodong dosimetriccomparativestudyof3differentpostoperativeradiotherapytechniques3dcrtimrtandrapidarcforiiiiistagerectalcancer
AT donglihua dosimetriccomparativestudyof3differentpostoperativeradiotherapytechniques3dcrtimrtandrapidarcforiiiiistagerectalcancer