Cargando…

Treating lung cancer with dynamic conformal arc therapy: a dosimetric study

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer patients are often in poor physical condition, and a shorter treatment time would reduce their discomfort. Dynamic conformal arc therapy (DCAT) offers a shorter treatment time than conventional 3D conformal radiotherapy (3D CRT) and is usually available even in departments wi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Peterlin, Primož, Stanič, Karmen, Méndez, Ignasi, Strojnik, Andrej
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5457634/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28578699
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-017-0823-y
_version_ 1783241583977562112
author Peterlin, Primož
Stanič, Karmen
Méndez, Ignasi
Strojnik, Andrej
author_facet Peterlin, Primož
Stanič, Karmen
Méndez, Ignasi
Strojnik, Andrej
author_sort Peterlin, Primož
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Lung cancer patients are often in poor physical condition, and a shorter treatment time would reduce their discomfort. Dynamic conformal arc therapy (DCAT) offers a shorter treatment time than conventional 3D conformal radiotherapy (3D CRT) and is usually available even in departments without inverse planning possibilities. We examined its suitability as a treatment modality for lung cancer patients. METHODS: On a cohort of 35 lung cancer patients, relevant dosimetric parameters were compared in respective DCAT and 3D CRT treatment plans. Radiochromic film dosimetry in an anthropomorphic phantom was used to compare both DCAT and 3D CRT dose distributions against their planned counterparts. RESULTS: In comparison with their 3D CRT counterparts, DCAT plans equal or exceed the agreement between the calculated dose and the dose measured using film dosimetry. In dosimetric comparison, DCAT performed significantly better than 3D CRT in dose conformity to PTV and the number of monitor units used per plan, and significantly worse in dose homogeneity, mean lung dose and lung volume exposed to 5 Gy or more (V5Gy). No significant difference was found in the V20Gy value to lung, dose to 1 cm(3) of spinal cord, and the mean dose to oesophagus. Improvements in V20Gy and V5Gy were found to be negatively correlated. DCAT plans differ from 3D CRT by exhibiting a moderate negative correlation between target volume sphericity and dose homogeneity. CONCLUSIONS: With respect to the agreement between the planned and the irradiated dose distribution, DCAT appears at least as reliable as 3D CRT. In specific conditions concerning the patient anatomy and treatment prescription, DCAT may yield more favourable dosimetric parameters. On average, however, conventional 3D CRT usually obtains better dosimetric parameters. We can thus only recommend DCAT as a complementary technique to the conventional 3D CRT. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13014-017-0823-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5457634
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54576342017-06-06 Treating lung cancer with dynamic conformal arc therapy: a dosimetric study Peterlin, Primož Stanič, Karmen Méndez, Ignasi Strojnik, Andrej Radiat Oncol Research BACKGROUND: Lung cancer patients are often in poor physical condition, and a shorter treatment time would reduce their discomfort. Dynamic conformal arc therapy (DCAT) offers a shorter treatment time than conventional 3D conformal radiotherapy (3D CRT) and is usually available even in departments without inverse planning possibilities. We examined its suitability as a treatment modality for lung cancer patients. METHODS: On a cohort of 35 lung cancer patients, relevant dosimetric parameters were compared in respective DCAT and 3D CRT treatment plans. Radiochromic film dosimetry in an anthropomorphic phantom was used to compare both DCAT and 3D CRT dose distributions against their planned counterparts. RESULTS: In comparison with their 3D CRT counterparts, DCAT plans equal or exceed the agreement between the calculated dose and the dose measured using film dosimetry. In dosimetric comparison, DCAT performed significantly better than 3D CRT in dose conformity to PTV and the number of monitor units used per plan, and significantly worse in dose homogeneity, mean lung dose and lung volume exposed to 5 Gy or more (V5Gy). No significant difference was found in the V20Gy value to lung, dose to 1 cm(3) of spinal cord, and the mean dose to oesophagus. Improvements in V20Gy and V5Gy were found to be negatively correlated. DCAT plans differ from 3D CRT by exhibiting a moderate negative correlation between target volume sphericity and dose homogeneity. CONCLUSIONS: With respect to the agreement between the planned and the irradiated dose distribution, DCAT appears at least as reliable as 3D CRT. In specific conditions concerning the patient anatomy and treatment prescription, DCAT may yield more favourable dosimetric parameters. On average, however, conventional 3D CRT usually obtains better dosimetric parameters. We can thus only recommend DCAT as a complementary technique to the conventional 3D CRT. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13014-017-0823-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-06-02 /pmc/articles/PMC5457634/ /pubmed/28578699 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-017-0823-y Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. 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
Peterlin, Primož
Stanič, Karmen
Méndez, Ignasi
Strojnik, Andrej
Treating lung cancer with dynamic conformal arc therapy: a dosimetric study
title Treating lung cancer with dynamic conformal arc therapy: a dosimetric study
title_full Treating lung cancer with dynamic conformal arc therapy: a dosimetric study
title_fullStr Treating lung cancer with dynamic conformal arc therapy: a dosimetric study
title_full_unstemmed Treating lung cancer with dynamic conformal arc therapy: a dosimetric study
title_short Treating lung cancer with dynamic conformal arc therapy: a dosimetric study
title_sort treating lung cancer with dynamic conformal arc therapy: a dosimetric study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5457634/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28578699
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-017-0823-y
work_keys_str_mv AT peterlinprimoz treatinglungcancerwithdynamicconformalarctherapyadosimetricstudy
AT stanickarmen treatinglungcancerwithdynamicconformalarctherapyadosimetricstudy
AT mendezignasi treatinglungcancerwithdynamicconformalarctherapyadosimetricstudy
AT strojnikandrej treatinglungcancerwithdynamicconformalarctherapyadosimetricstudy