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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |