Cargando…
Assessment of Field-in-Field, 3-Field, and 4-Field Treatment Planning Methods for Radiotherapy of Gastro-Esophageal Junction Cancer
BACKGROUND: Gastro-esophageal (GE) junction cancer is the fastest-growing tumor, particularly in the United States (US). OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare dosimetric and radiobiological factors among field-in-field (FIF), three-field (3F), and four-field box (4FB) radiotherapy planning techniqu...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Shiraz University of Medical Sciences
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9589079/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36313414 http://dx.doi.org/10.31661/jbpe.v0i0.2206-1500 |
_version_ | 1784814220483756032 |
---|---|
author | Mehri-Kakavand, Ghazal Pursamimi, Mohamad Parwaie, Wrya Ghorbani, Mahdi Khosravi, Mehdi Hosseini, Seyyed Mohammad Soleimani Meigooni, Ali |
author_facet | Mehri-Kakavand, Ghazal Pursamimi, Mohamad Parwaie, Wrya Ghorbani, Mahdi Khosravi, Mehdi Hosseini, Seyyed Mohammad Soleimani Meigooni, Ali |
author_sort | Mehri-Kakavand, Ghazal |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Gastro-esophageal (GE) junction cancer is the fastest-growing tumor, particularly in the United States (US). OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare dosimetric and radiobiological factors among field-in-field (FIF), three-field (3F), and four-field box (4FB) radiotherapy planning techniques for gastro-esophageal junction cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this experimental study, thirty patients with GE junction cancer were evaluated, and three planning techniques (field-in-field (FIF), three-field (3F), and four-field box (4FB)) were performed for each patient for a 6-MV photon beam. Dose distribution in the target volume, the monitor units (MUs) required, and the dose delivered to organs at risk (OARs) were compared for these techniques using the paired-sample t-test. RESULTS: A significant difference was measured between the FIF and 3F techniques with respect to conformity index (CI), dose homogeneity index (HI), and tumor control probability (TCP) for the target organ, as well as the D(mean) for the heart, kidneys, and liver. For the spinal cord, the FIF technique showed a slight reduction in the maximum dose compared to the other two techniques. In addition, the V(20 Gy) of the lungs and the normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) of all OARs were reduced with FIF method. CONCLUSION: The FIF technique showed better performance for treating patients with gastro-esophageal junction tumors, in terms of dose homogeneity in the target, conformity of the radiation field with the target volume, TCP, less dose to healthy organs, and fewer MU. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9589079 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Shiraz University of Medical Sciences |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-95890792022-10-28 Assessment of Field-in-Field, 3-Field, and 4-Field Treatment Planning Methods for Radiotherapy of Gastro-Esophageal Junction Cancer Mehri-Kakavand, Ghazal Pursamimi, Mohamad Parwaie, Wrya Ghorbani, Mahdi Khosravi, Mehdi Hosseini, Seyyed Mohammad Soleimani Meigooni, Ali J Biomed Phys Eng Original Article BACKGROUND: Gastro-esophageal (GE) junction cancer is the fastest-growing tumor, particularly in the United States (US). OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare dosimetric and radiobiological factors among field-in-field (FIF), three-field (3F), and four-field box (4FB) radiotherapy planning techniques for gastro-esophageal junction cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this experimental study, thirty patients with GE junction cancer were evaluated, and three planning techniques (field-in-field (FIF), three-field (3F), and four-field box (4FB)) were performed for each patient for a 6-MV photon beam. Dose distribution in the target volume, the monitor units (MUs) required, and the dose delivered to organs at risk (OARs) were compared for these techniques using the paired-sample t-test. RESULTS: A significant difference was measured between the FIF and 3F techniques with respect to conformity index (CI), dose homogeneity index (HI), and tumor control probability (TCP) for the target organ, as well as the D(mean) for the heart, kidneys, and liver. For the spinal cord, the FIF technique showed a slight reduction in the maximum dose compared to the other two techniques. In addition, the V(20 Gy) of the lungs and the normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) of all OARs were reduced with FIF method. CONCLUSION: The FIF technique showed better performance for treating patients with gastro-esophageal junction tumors, in terms of dose homogeneity in the target, conformity of the radiation field with the target volume, TCP, less dose to healthy organs, and fewer MU. Shiraz University of Medical Sciences 2022-10-01 /pmc/articles/PMC9589079/ /pubmed/36313414 http://dx.doi.org/10.31661/jbpe.v0i0.2206-1500 Text en Copyright: © Journal of Biomedical Physics and Engineering https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 Unported License, ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Mehri-Kakavand, Ghazal Pursamimi, Mohamad Parwaie, Wrya Ghorbani, Mahdi Khosravi, Mehdi Hosseini, Seyyed Mohammad Soleimani Meigooni, Ali Assessment of Field-in-Field, 3-Field, and 4-Field Treatment Planning Methods for Radiotherapy of Gastro-Esophageal Junction Cancer |
title | Assessment of Field-in-Field, 3-Field, and 4-Field Treatment Planning Methods for Radiotherapy of Gastro-Esophageal Junction Cancer |
title_full | Assessment of Field-in-Field, 3-Field, and 4-Field Treatment Planning Methods for Radiotherapy of Gastro-Esophageal Junction Cancer |
title_fullStr | Assessment of Field-in-Field, 3-Field, and 4-Field Treatment Planning Methods for Radiotherapy of Gastro-Esophageal Junction Cancer |
title_full_unstemmed | Assessment of Field-in-Field, 3-Field, and 4-Field Treatment Planning Methods for Radiotherapy of Gastro-Esophageal Junction Cancer |
title_short | Assessment of Field-in-Field, 3-Field, and 4-Field Treatment Planning Methods for Radiotherapy of Gastro-Esophageal Junction Cancer |
title_sort | assessment of field-in-field, 3-field, and 4-field treatment planning methods for radiotherapy of gastro-esophageal junction cancer |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9589079/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36313414 http://dx.doi.org/10.31661/jbpe.v0i0.2206-1500 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mehrikakavandghazal assessmentoffieldinfield3fieldand4fieldtreatmentplanningmethodsforradiotherapyofgastroesophagealjunctioncancer AT pursamimimohamad assessmentoffieldinfield3fieldand4fieldtreatmentplanningmethodsforradiotherapyofgastroesophagealjunctioncancer AT parwaiewrya assessmentoffieldinfield3fieldand4fieldtreatmentplanningmethodsforradiotherapyofgastroesophagealjunctioncancer AT ghorbanimahdi assessmentoffieldinfield3fieldand4fieldtreatmentplanningmethodsforradiotherapyofgastroesophagealjunctioncancer AT khosravimehdi assessmentoffieldinfield3fieldand4fieldtreatmentplanningmethodsforradiotherapyofgastroesophagealjunctioncancer AT hosseiniseyyedmohammad assessmentoffieldinfield3fieldand4fieldtreatmentplanningmethodsforradiotherapyofgastroesophagealjunctioncancer AT soleimanimeigooniali assessmentoffieldinfield3fieldand4fieldtreatmentplanningmethodsforradiotherapyofgastroesophagealjunctioncancer |