Cargando…

Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) comparison to 3D‐conformal technique in lung stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR)

INTRODUCTION: Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) can be a curative option for non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and oligometastatic lung disease. Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) has offered further advancements in terms of radiation dose shaping without compromising treatment times h...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mark, Frances, Alnsour, Anoud, Penfold, Scott N., Esterman, Adrian, Keys, Robert, Le, Hien
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9977664/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36424510
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.634
_version_ 1784899344310206464
author Mark, Frances
Alnsour, Anoud
Penfold, Scott N.
Esterman, Adrian
Keys, Robert
Le, Hien
author_facet Mark, Frances
Alnsour, Anoud
Penfold, Scott N.
Esterman, Adrian
Keys, Robert
Le, Hien
author_sort Mark, Frances
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) can be a curative option for non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and oligometastatic lung disease. Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) has offered further advancements in terms of radiation dose shaping without compromising treatment times however there is potential for greater low‐dose exposure to the lung. This study was to assess whether VMAT lung SABR would result in any increase to the dosimetry parameters compared with three‐dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D‐CRT) that could confer increased risk of radiation pneumonitis. METHODS: A total of 53 and 30 3D‐CRT treatment plans of patients treated with 48 Gy in 4 fractions were compared. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference in planning target volumes between the VMAT 29.9 cc (range 12.4–58.5 cc) and 3D‐CRT 31.2 cc (range 12.3–58.3 cc) P = 0.79. The mean of total lung V5, ipsilateral lung V5 and contralateral lung V5 all showed a trend of being smaller in the VMAT treatment group‐ 14% versus 15.8%, 25.6% versus 30.4% and 1.6% versus 2.2%, respectively, but all were not statistically significant differences. Mean of the mean lung dose MLD, again showed a trend of being lower in the VMAT treatments but was also non‐significant, 2.6 Gy versus 3.0 Gy, P = 1.0. Mean V20 was the same in both cohorts, 3.3%. CONCLUSIONS: The dosimetry for 3D‐CRT and VMAT plans were not significantly different including V5, and therefore we conclude that VMAT treatment is unlikely to be associated with an increased risk of radiation pneumonitis.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9977664
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99776642023-03-03 Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) comparison to 3D‐conformal technique in lung stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) Mark, Frances Alnsour, Anoud Penfold, Scott N. Esterman, Adrian Keys, Robert Le, Hien J Med Radiat Sci Original Articles INTRODUCTION: Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) can be a curative option for non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and oligometastatic lung disease. Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) has offered further advancements in terms of radiation dose shaping without compromising treatment times however there is potential for greater low‐dose exposure to the lung. This study was to assess whether VMAT lung SABR would result in any increase to the dosimetry parameters compared with three‐dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D‐CRT) that could confer increased risk of radiation pneumonitis. METHODS: A total of 53 and 30 3D‐CRT treatment plans of patients treated with 48 Gy in 4 fractions were compared. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference in planning target volumes between the VMAT 29.9 cc (range 12.4–58.5 cc) and 3D‐CRT 31.2 cc (range 12.3–58.3 cc) P = 0.79. The mean of total lung V5, ipsilateral lung V5 and contralateral lung V5 all showed a trend of being smaller in the VMAT treatment group‐ 14% versus 15.8%, 25.6% versus 30.4% and 1.6% versus 2.2%, respectively, but all were not statistically significant differences. Mean of the mean lung dose MLD, again showed a trend of being lower in the VMAT treatments but was also non‐significant, 2.6 Gy versus 3.0 Gy, P = 1.0. Mean V20 was the same in both cohorts, 3.3%. CONCLUSIONS: The dosimetry for 3D‐CRT and VMAT plans were not significantly different including V5, and therefore we conclude that VMAT treatment is unlikely to be associated with an increased risk of radiation pneumonitis. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-11-24 2023-03 /pmc/articles/PMC9977664/ /pubmed/36424510 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.634 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Australian Society of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy and New Zealand Institute of Medical Radiation Technology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Mark, Frances
Alnsour, Anoud
Penfold, Scott N.
Esterman, Adrian
Keys, Robert
Le, Hien
Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) comparison to 3D‐conformal technique in lung stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR)
title Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) comparison to 3D‐conformal technique in lung stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR)
title_full Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) comparison to 3D‐conformal technique in lung stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR)
title_fullStr Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) comparison to 3D‐conformal technique in lung stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR)
title_full_unstemmed Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) comparison to 3D‐conformal technique in lung stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR)
title_short Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) comparison to 3D‐conformal technique in lung stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR)
title_sort volumetric modulated arc therapy (vmat) comparison to 3d‐conformal technique in lung stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (sabr)
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9977664/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36424510
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.634
work_keys_str_mv AT markfrances volumetricmodulatedarctherapyvmatcomparisonto3dconformaltechniqueinlungstereotacticablativeradiotherapysabr
AT alnsouranoud volumetricmodulatedarctherapyvmatcomparisonto3dconformaltechniqueinlungstereotacticablativeradiotherapysabr
AT penfoldscottn volumetricmodulatedarctherapyvmatcomparisonto3dconformaltechniqueinlungstereotacticablativeradiotherapysabr
AT estermanadrian volumetricmodulatedarctherapyvmatcomparisonto3dconformaltechniqueinlungstereotacticablativeradiotherapysabr
AT keysrobert volumetricmodulatedarctherapyvmatcomparisonto3dconformaltechniqueinlungstereotacticablativeradiotherapysabr
AT lehien volumetricmodulatedarctherapyvmatcomparisonto3dconformaltechniqueinlungstereotacticablativeradiotherapysabr