Cargando…
Maximizing rectal dose sparing with hydrogel: A retrospective planning study
External beam radiation therapy for prostate cancer can result in urinary, sexual, and rectal side effects, often impairing quality of life. A polyethylene glycol‐based product, SpaceOAR© hydrogel (SOH), implanted into the connective tissue between the prostate gland and rectum can significantly red...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6448161/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30889318 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12566 |
_version_ | 1783408641810890752 |
---|---|
author | Paetkau, Owen Gagne, Isabelle M. Pai, Howard H. Lam, Jacqueline Goulart, Jennifer Alexander, Abraham |
author_facet | Paetkau, Owen Gagne, Isabelle M. Pai, Howard H. Lam, Jacqueline Goulart, Jennifer Alexander, Abraham |
author_sort | Paetkau, Owen |
collection | PubMed |
description | External beam radiation therapy for prostate cancer can result in urinary, sexual, and rectal side effects, often impairing quality of life. A polyethylene glycol‐based product, SpaceOAR© hydrogel (SOH), implanted into the connective tissue between the prostate gland and rectum can significantly reduce the dose received by the rectum and hence risk of rectal toxicity. The optimal way to manage the hydrogel and rectal structures for plan optimization is therefore of interest. In 13 patients, computerized tomography (CT) scans were taken pre‐ and post‐SpaceOAR© implant. A prescription of 60 Gy in 20 fractions was planned on both scans. Six treatment plans were produced per anonymized dataset using either a structure of rectum plus the hydrogel, termed composite rectum wall (CRW), or rectal wall (RW) as an inverse optimization structure and intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) or volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) as a treatment technique. Dose‐volume histogram metrics were compared between plans to determine which optimization structure and treatment technique offered the maximum rectal dose sparing. RW structures offered a statistically significant decrease in rectal dose over CRW structures, whereas the treatment technique (IMRT vs VMAT) did not significantly affect the rectal dose. There was improvement seen in bladder and penile bulb dose when VMAT was used as a treatment technique. Overall, treatment plans using the RW optimization structure offered the lowest rectal dose while VMAT treatment technique offered the lowest bladder and penile bulb dose. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6448161 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-64481612019-04-15 Maximizing rectal dose sparing with hydrogel: A retrospective planning study Paetkau, Owen Gagne, Isabelle M. Pai, Howard H. Lam, Jacqueline Goulart, Jennifer Alexander, Abraham J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics External beam radiation therapy for prostate cancer can result in urinary, sexual, and rectal side effects, often impairing quality of life. A polyethylene glycol‐based product, SpaceOAR© hydrogel (SOH), implanted into the connective tissue between the prostate gland and rectum can significantly reduce the dose received by the rectum and hence risk of rectal toxicity. The optimal way to manage the hydrogel and rectal structures for plan optimization is therefore of interest. In 13 patients, computerized tomography (CT) scans were taken pre‐ and post‐SpaceOAR© implant. A prescription of 60 Gy in 20 fractions was planned on both scans. Six treatment plans were produced per anonymized dataset using either a structure of rectum plus the hydrogel, termed composite rectum wall (CRW), or rectal wall (RW) as an inverse optimization structure and intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) or volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) as a treatment technique. Dose‐volume histogram metrics were compared between plans to determine which optimization structure and treatment technique offered the maximum rectal dose sparing. RW structures offered a statistically significant decrease in rectal dose over CRW structures, whereas the treatment technique (IMRT vs VMAT) did not significantly affect the rectal dose. There was improvement seen in bladder and penile bulb dose when VMAT was used as a treatment technique. Overall, treatment plans using the RW optimization structure offered the lowest rectal dose while VMAT treatment technique offered the lowest bladder and penile bulb dose. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-03-19 /pmc/articles/PMC6448161/ /pubmed/30889318 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12566 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Radiation Oncology Physics Paetkau, Owen Gagne, Isabelle M. Pai, Howard H. Lam, Jacqueline Goulart, Jennifer Alexander, Abraham Maximizing rectal dose sparing with hydrogel: A retrospective planning study |
title | Maximizing rectal dose sparing with hydrogel: A retrospective planning study |
title_full | Maximizing rectal dose sparing with hydrogel: A retrospective planning study |
title_fullStr | Maximizing rectal dose sparing with hydrogel: A retrospective planning study |
title_full_unstemmed | Maximizing rectal dose sparing with hydrogel: A retrospective planning study |
title_short | Maximizing rectal dose sparing with hydrogel: A retrospective planning study |
title_sort | maximizing rectal dose sparing with hydrogel: a retrospective planning study |
topic | Radiation Oncology Physics |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6448161/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30889318 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12566 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT paetkauowen maximizingrectaldosesparingwithhydrogelaretrospectiveplanningstudy AT gagneisabellem maximizingrectaldosesparingwithhydrogelaretrospectiveplanningstudy AT paihowardh maximizingrectaldosesparingwithhydrogelaretrospectiveplanningstudy AT lamjacqueline maximizingrectaldosesparingwithhydrogelaretrospectiveplanningstudy AT goulartjennifer maximizingrectaldosesparingwithhydrogelaretrospectiveplanningstudy AT alexanderabraham maximizingrectaldosesparingwithhydrogelaretrospectiveplanningstudy |