Cargando…
Dosimetric comparison of MR-linac-based IMRT and conventional VMAT treatment plans for prostate cancer
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the performance of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plans, planned for low-field strength magnetic resonance (MR) guided linear accelerator (linac) delivery (labelled IMRT MRL plans), and clinical conventional volumetric modul...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8296626/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34289868 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-021-01858-7 |
_version_ | 1783725681037803520 |
---|---|
author | Da Silva Mendes, Vanessa Nierer, Lukas Li, Minglun Corradini, Stefanie Reiner, Michael Kamp, Florian Niyazi, Maximilian Kurz, Christopher Landry, Guillaume Belka, Claus |
author_facet | Da Silva Mendes, Vanessa Nierer, Lukas Li, Minglun Corradini, Stefanie Reiner, Michael Kamp, Florian Niyazi, Maximilian Kurz, Christopher Landry, Guillaume Belka, Claus |
author_sort | Da Silva Mendes, Vanessa |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the performance of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plans, planned for low-field strength magnetic resonance (MR) guided linear accelerator (linac) delivery (labelled IMRT MRL plans), and clinical conventional volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans, for the treatment of prostate cancer (PCa). Both plans used the original planning target volume (PTV) margins. Additionally, the potential dosimetric benefits of MR-guidance were estimated, by creating IMRT MRL plans using smaller PTV margins. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 20 PCa patients previously treated with conventional VMAT were considered. For each patient, two different IMRT MRL plans using the low-field MR-linac treatment planning system were created: one with original (orig.) PTV margins and the other with reduced (red.) PTV margins. Dose indices related to target coverage, as well as dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters for the target and organs at risk (OAR) were compared. Additionally, the estimated treatment delivery times and the number of monitor units (MU) of each plan were evaluated. RESULTS: The dose distribution in the high dose region and the target volume DVH parameters (D(98%), D(50%), D(2%) and V(95%)) were similar for all three types of treatment plans, with deviations below 1% in most cases. Both IMRT MRL plans (orig. and red. PTV margins) showed similar homogeneity indices (HI), however worse values for the conformity index (CI) were also found when compared to VMAT. The IMRT MRL plans showed similar OAR sparing when the orig. PTV margins were used but a significantly better sparing was feasible when red. PTV margins were applied. Higher number of MU and longer predicted treatment delivery times were seen for both IMRT MRL plans. CONCLUSIONS: A comparable plan quality between VMAT and IMRT MRL plans was achieved, when applying the same PTV margin. However, online MR-guided adaptive radiotherapy allows for a reduction of PTV margins. With a red. PTV margin, better sparing of the surrounding tissues can be achieved, while maintaining adequate target coverage. Nonetheless, longer treatment delivery times, characteristic for the IMRT technique, have to be expected. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8296626 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-82966262021-07-22 Dosimetric comparison of MR-linac-based IMRT and conventional VMAT treatment plans for prostate cancer Da Silva Mendes, Vanessa Nierer, Lukas Li, Minglun Corradini, Stefanie Reiner, Michael Kamp, Florian Niyazi, Maximilian Kurz, Christopher Landry, Guillaume Belka, Claus Radiat Oncol Research BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the performance of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plans, planned for low-field strength magnetic resonance (MR) guided linear accelerator (linac) delivery (labelled IMRT MRL plans), and clinical conventional volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans, for the treatment of prostate cancer (PCa). Both plans used the original planning target volume (PTV) margins. Additionally, the potential dosimetric benefits of MR-guidance were estimated, by creating IMRT MRL plans using smaller PTV margins. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 20 PCa patients previously treated with conventional VMAT were considered. For each patient, two different IMRT MRL plans using the low-field MR-linac treatment planning system were created: one with original (orig.) PTV margins and the other with reduced (red.) PTV margins. Dose indices related to target coverage, as well as dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters for the target and organs at risk (OAR) were compared. Additionally, the estimated treatment delivery times and the number of monitor units (MU) of each plan were evaluated. RESULTS: The dose distribution in the high dose region and the target volume DVH parameters (D(98%), D(50%), D(2%) and V(95%)) were similar for all three types of treatment plans, with deviations below 1% in most cases. Both IMRT MRL plans (orig. and red. PTV margins) showed similar homogeneity indices (HI), however worse values for the conformity index (CI) were also found when compared to VMAT. The IMRT MRL plans showed similar OAR sparing when the orig. PTV margins were used but a significantly better sparing was feasible when red. PTV margins were applied. Higher number of MU and longer predicted treatment delivery times were seen for both IMRT MRL plans. CONCLUSIONS: A comparable plan quality between VMAT and IMRT MRL plans was achieved, when applying the same PTV margin. However, online MR-guided adaptive radiotherapy allows for a reduction of PTV margins. With a red. PTV margin, better sparing of the surrounding tissues can be achieved, while maintaining adequate target coverage. Nonetheless, longer treatment delivery times, characteristic for the IMRT technique, have to be expected. BioMed Central 2021-07-21 /pmc/articles/PMC8296626/ /pubmed/34289868 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-021-01858-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Da Silva Mendes, Vanessa Nierer, Lukas Li, Minglun Corradini, Stefanie Reiner, Michael Kamp, Florian Niyazi, Maximilian Kurz, Christopher Landry, Guillaume Belka, Claus Dosimetric comparison of MR-linac-based IMRT and conventional VMAT treatment plans for prostate cancer |
title | Dosimetric comparison of MR-linac-based IMRT and conventional VMAT treatment plans for prostate cancer |
title_full | Dosimetric comparison of MR-linac-based IMRT and conventional VMAT treatment plans for prostate cancer |
title_fullStr | Dosimetric comparison of MR-linac-based IMRT and conventional VMAT treatment plans for prostate cancer |
title_full_unstemmed | Dosimetric comparison of MR-linac-based IMRT and conventional VMAT treatment plans for prostate cancer |
title_short | Dosimetric comparison of MR-linac-based IMRT and conventional VMAT treatment plans for prostate cancer |
title_sort | dosimetric comparison of mr-linac-based imrt and conventional vmat treatment plans for prostate cancer |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8296626/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34289868 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-021-01858-7 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dasilvamendesvanessa dosimetriccomparisonofmrlinacbasedimrtandconventionalvmattreatmentplansforprostatecancer AT niererlukas dosimetriccomparisonofmrlinacbasedimrtandconventionalvmattreatmentplansforprostatecancer AT liminglun dosimetriccomparisonofmrlinacbasedimrtandconventionalvmattreatmentplansforprostatecancer AT corradinistefanie dosimetriccomparisonofmrlinacbasedimrtandconventionalvmattreatmentplansforprostatecancer AT reinermichael dosimetriccomparisonofmrlinacbasedimrtandconventionalvmattreatmentplansforprostatecancer AT kampflorian dosimetriccomparisonofmrlinacbasedimrtandconventionalvmattreatmentplansforprostatecancer AT niyazimaximilian dosimetriccomparisonofmrlinacbasedimrtandconventionalvmattreatmentplansforprostatecancer AT kurzchristopher dosimetriccomparisonofmrlinacbasedimrtandconventionalvmattreatmentplansforprostatecancer AT landryguillaume dosimetriccomparisonofmrlinacbasedimrtandconventionalvmattreatmentplansforprostatecancer AT belkaclaus dosimetriccomparisonofmrlinacbasedimrtandconventionalvmattreatmentplansforprostatecancer |