Cargando…

Does 5 + 5 Equal Better Radiation Treatment Plans in Head and Neck Cancers?

PURPOSE: Accurate contouring in head and neck cancer (HNC) is critical. International consensus guidelines recommend the 5 + 5 mm rule for expansions around the primary tumor, wherein high- and low-dose clinical target volumes (CTV-P1 and CTV-P2, respectively) are created using successive 5 mm expan...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Corkum, Mark T., Mitchell, Sylvia, Venkatesan, Varagur, Read, Nancy, Warner, Andrew, Palma, David A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6817533/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31673661
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.adro.2019.06.001
_version_ 1783463441518821376
author Corkum, Mark T.
Mitchell, Sylvia
Venkatesan, Varagur
Read, Nancy
Warner, Andrew
Palma, David A.
author_facet Corkum, Mark T.
Mitchell, Sylvia
Venkatesan, Varagur
Read, Nancy
Warner, Andrew
Palma, David A.
author_sort Corkum, Mark T.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Accurate contouring in head and neck cancer (HNC) is critical. International consensus guidelines recommend the 5 + 5 mm rule for expansions around the primary tumor, wherein high- and low-dose clinical target volumes (CTV-P1 and CTV-P2, respectively) are created using successive 5 mm expansions on the gross tumor volume. To our knowledge, the necessity of a low-dose CTV-P2 has never been assessed; therefore, we evaluated the dosimetric impact of adding a CTV-P2 expansion using the 5 + 5 mm rule compared with contouring with a high-dose CTV-P1 alone. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A retrospective study of clinically delivered (chemo)radiation therapy treatment plans for HNC was conducted. All patients were treated with 70 Gy in 35 fractions using volumetric modulated arc therapy in a single phase. CTV-P2 was retrospectively contoured per guidelines as a 5 mm expansion on CTV-P1 from the clinical plan, carving off specified barriers to spread. We used a 5 mm planning target volume (PTV) expansion. Our primary outcome was whether 95% of the volume of the PTV for the CTV-P2 contour (ie, PTV-P2) received at least 56 Gy. To assess dose falloff, the coverage of a PTV ring structure was created by subtracting PTV-P1 from PTV-P2. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients from 4 HNC subsites (base of tongue, tonsil, hypopharynx, and supraglottic larynx) were included. In all 108 treatment plans, at least 95% of the PTV-P2 structure received at least 56 Gy. The minimum volume of the PTV-P2 structure receiving at least 56 Gy was 97.4%. Eight of 108 treatment plans had borderline coverage of the PTV ring substructure alone. CONCLUSIONS: Adding a CTV-P2 structure using the 5 + 5 mm rule had no dosimetric impact, adds contouring time, adds treatment planning complexity, and could potentially introduce errors. The 5 + 5 mm rule may have value in other settings, such as when smaller PTV margins are used, and warrants further evaluation with prospective or randomized studies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6817533
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68175332019-10-31 Does 5 + 5 Equal Better Radiation Treatment Plans in Head and Neck Cancers? Corkum, Mark T. Mitchell, Sylvia Venkatesan, Varagur Read, Nancy Warner, Andrew Palma, David A. Adv Radiat Oncol Head and Neck Cancer PURPOSE: Accurate contouring in head and neck cancer (HNC) is critical. International consensus guidelines recommend the 5 + 5 mm rule for expansions around the primary tumor, wherein high- and low-dose clinical target volumes (CTV-P1 and CTV-P2, respectively) are created using successive 5 mm expansions on the gross tumor volume. To our knowledge, the necessity of a low-dose CTV-P2 has never been assessed; therefore, we evaluated the dosimetric impact of adding a CTV-P2 expansion using the 5 + 5 mm rule compared with contouring with a high-dose CTV-P1 alone. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A retrospective study of clinically delivered (chemo)radiation therapy treatment plans for HNC was conducted. All patients were treated with 70 Gy in 35 fractions using volumetric modulated arc therapy in a single phase. CTV-P2 was retrospectively contoured per guidelines as a 5 mm expansion on CTV-P1 from the clinical plan, carving off specified barriers to spread. We used a 5 mm planning target volume (PTV) expansion. Our primary outcome was whether 95% of the volume of the PTV for the CTV-P2 contour (ie, PTV-P2) received at least 56 Gy. To assess dose falloff, the coverage of a PTV ring structure was created by subtracting PTV-P1 from PTV-P2. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients from 4 HNC subsites (base of tongue, tonsil, hypopharynx, and supraglottic larynx) were included. In all 108 treatment plans, at least 95% of the PTV-P2 structure received at least 56 Gy. The minimum volume of the PTV-P2 structure receiving at least 56 Gy was 97.4%. Eight of 108 treatment plans had borderline coverage of the PTV ring substructure alone. CONCLUSIONS: Adding a CTV-P2 structure using the 5 + 5 mm rule had no dosimetric impact, adds contouring time, adds treatment planning complexity, and could potentially introduce errors. The 5 + 5 mm rule may have value in other settings, such as when smaller PTV margins are used, and warrants further evaluation with prospective or randomized studies. Elsevier 2019-06-12 /pmc/articles/PMC6817533/ /pubmed/31673661 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.adro.2019.06.001 Text en © 2019 The Author(s) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Head and Neck Cancer
Corkum, Mark T.
Mitchell, Sylvia
Venkatesan, Varagur
Read, Nancy
Warner, Andrew
Palma, David A.
Does 5 + 5 Equal Better Radiation Treatment Plans in Head and Neck Cancers?
title Does 5 + 5 Equal Better Radiation Treatment Plans in Head and Neck Cancers?
title_full Does 5 + 5 Equal Better Radiation Treatment Plans in Head and Neck Cancers?
title_fullStr Does 5 + 5 Equal Better Radiation Treatment Plans in Head and Neck Cancers?
title_full_unstemmed Does 5 + 5 Equal Better Radiation Treatment Plans in Head and Neck Cancers?
title_short Does 5 + 5 Equal Better Radiation Treatment Plans in Head and Neck Cancers?
title_sort does 5 + 5 equal better radiation treatment plans in head and neck cancers?
topic Head and Neck Cancer
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6817533/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31673661
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.adro.2019.06.001
work_keys_str_mv AT corkummarkt does55equalbetterradiationtreatmentplansinheadandneckcancers
AT mitchellsylvia does55equalbetterradiationtreatmentplansinheadandneckcancers
AT venkatesanvaragur does55equalbetterradiationtreatmentplansinheadandneckcancers
AT readnancy does55equalbetterradiationtreatmentplansinheadandneckcancers
AT warnerandrew does55equalbetterradiationtreatmentplansinheadandneckcancers
AT palmadavida does55equalbetterradiationtreatmentplansinheadandneckcancers