Cargando…

Dosimetric Comparison and Evaluation of 4 Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy Techniques for the Treatment of Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare dosimetric characteristics, monitor unit, and delivery efficiency of 4 different stereotactic body radiotherapy techniques for the treatment of prostate cancer. METHODS: This study included 8 patients with localized prostate cancer. Dosimetric assets of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Seppälä, Jan, Suilamo, Sami, Tenhunen, Mikko, Sailas, Liisa, Virsunen, Heli, Kaleva, Erna, Keyriläinen, Jani
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5616037/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28279147
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1533034616682156
_version_ 1783266715026587648
author Seppälä, Jan
Suilamo, Sami
Tenhunen, Mikko
Sailas, Liisa
Virsunen, Heli
Kaleva, Erna
Keyriläinen, Jani
author_facet Seppälä, Jan
Suilamo, Sami
Tenhunen, Mikko
Sailas, Liisa
Virsunen, Heli
Kaleva, Erna
Keyriläinen, Jani
author_sort Seppälä, Jan
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare dosimetric characteristics, monitor unit, and delivery efficiency of 4 different stereotactic body radiotherapy techniques for the treatment of prostate cancer. METHODS: This study included 8 patients with localized prostate cancer. Dosimetric assets of 4 delivery techniques for stereotactic body radiotherapy were evaluated: robotic CyberKnife, noncoplanar intensity-modulated radiotherapy, and 2 intensity-modulated arc therapy techniques (RapidArc and Elekta volumetric-modulated arc therapy). All the plans had equal treatment margins and a prescription dose of 35 Gy in 5 fractions. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were observed in homogeneity index and mean doses of bladder wall and penile bulb, all of which were highest with CyberKnife. No significant differences were observed in the mean doses of rectum, with values of 15.2 ± 2.6, 13.3 ± 2.6, 13.1 ± 2.8, and 13.8 ± 1.6 Gy with CyberKnife, RapidArc, volumetric-modulated arc therapy, and noncoplanar intensity-modulated radiotherapy, respectively. The highest dose conformity was realized with RapidArc. The dose coverage of the planning target volume was lowest with noncoplanar intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Treatment times and number of monitor units were largest with CyberKnife (on average 34.0 ± 5.0 minutes and 8704 ± 1449 monitor units) and least with intensity-modulated arc therapy techniques (on average 5.1 ± 1.1 minutes and 2270 ± 497 monitor units). CONCLUSION: Compared to CyberKnife, the RapidArc, volumetric-modulated arc therapy, and noncoplanar intensity-modulated radiotherapy produced treatment plans with similar dosimetric quality, with RapidArc achieving the highest dose conformity. Overall, the dosimetric differences between the studied techniques were marginal, and thus, the choice of the technique should rather focus on the delivery accuracies and dose delivery times.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5616037
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56160372017-10-03 Dosimetric Comparison and Evaluation of 4 Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy Techniques for the Treatment of Prostate Cancer Seppälä, Jan Suilamo, Sami Tenhunen, Mikko Sailas, Liisa Virsunen, Heli Kaleva, Erna Keyriläinen, Jani Technol Cancer Res Treat Radiotherapy PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare dosimetric characteristics, monitor unit, and delivery efficiency of 4 different stereotactic body radiotherapy techniques for the treatment of prostate cancer. METHODS: This study included 8 patients with localized prostate cancer. Dosimetric assets of 4 delivery techniques for stereotactic body radiotherapy were evaluated: robotic CyberKnife, noncoplanar intensity-modulated radiotherapy, and 2 intensity-modulated arc therapy techniques (RapidArc and Elekta volumetric-modulated arc therapy). All the plans had equal treatment margins and a prescription dose of 35 Gy in 5 fractions. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were observed in homogeneity index and mean doses of bladder wall and penile bulb, all of which were highest with CyberKnife. No significant differences were observed in the mean doses of rectum, with values of 15.2 ± 2.6, 13.3 ± 2.6, 13.1 ± 2.8, and 13.8 ± 1.6 Gy with CyberKnife, RapidArc, volumetric-modulated arc therapy, and noncoplanar intensity-modulated radiotherapy, respectively. The highest dose conformity was realized with RapidArc. The dose coverage of the planning target volume was lowest with noncoplanar intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Treatment times and number of monitor units were largest with CyberKnife (on average 34.0 ± 5.0 minutes and 8704 ± 1449 monitor units) and least with intensity-modulated arc therapy techniques (on average 5.1 ± 1.1 minutes and 2270 ± 497 monitor units). CONCLUSION: Compared to CyberKnife, the RapidArc, volumetric-modulated arc therapy, and noncoplanar intensity-modulated radiotherapy produced treatment plans with similar dosimetric quality, with RapidArc achieving the highest dose conformity. Overall, the dosimetric differences between the studied techniques were marginal, and thus, the choice of the technique should rather focus on the delivery accuracies and dose delivery times. SAGE Publications 2016-12-08 2017-04 /pmc/articles/PMC5616037/ /pubmed/28279147 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1533034616682156 Text en © The Author(s) 2016 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Radiotherapy
Seppälä, Jan
Suilamo, Sami
Tenhunen, Mikko
Sailas, Liisa
Virsunen, Heli
Kaleva, Erna
Keyriläinen, Jani
Dosimetric Comparison and Evaluation of 4 Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy Techniques for the Treatment of Prostate Cancer
title Dosimetric Comparison and Evaluation of 4 Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy Techniques for the Treatment of Prostate Cancer
title_full Dosimetric Comparison and Evaluation of 4 Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy Techniques for the Treatment of Prostate Cancer
title_fullStr Dosimetric Comparison and Evaluation of 4 Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy Techniques for the Treatment of Prostate Cancer
title_full_unstemmed Dosimetric Comparison and Evaluation of 4 Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy Techniques for the Treatment of Prostate Cancer
title_short Dosimetric Comparison and Evaluation of 4 Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy Techniques for the Treatment of Prostate Cancer
title_sort dosimetric comparison and evaluation of 4 stereotactic body radiotherapy techniques for the treatment of prostate cancer
topic Radiotherapy
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5616037/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28279147
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1533034616682156
work_keys_str_mv AT seppalajan dosimetriccomparisonandevaluationof4stereotacticbodyradiotherapytechniquesforthetreatmentofprostatecancer
AT suilamosami dosimetriccomparisonandevaluationof4stereotacticbodyradiotherapytechniquesforthetreatmentofprostatecancer
AT tenhunenmikko dosimetriccomparisonandevaluationof4stereotacticbodyradiotherapytechniquesforthetreatmentofprostatecancer
AT sailasliisa dosimetriccomparisonandevaluationof4stereotacticbodyradiotherapytechniquesforthetreatmentofprostatecancer
AT virsunenheli dosimetriccomparisonandevaluationof4stereotacticbodyradiotherapytechniquesforthetreatmentofprostatecancer
AT kalevaerna dosimetriccomparisonandevaluationof4stereotacticbodyradiotherapytechniquesforthetreatmentofprostatecancer
AT keyrilainenjani dosimetriccomparisonandevaluationof4stereotacticbodyradiotherapytechniquesforthetreatmentofprostatecancer