Simultaneous Integrated Boost Plan Comparison between Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) and Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) for Prostate, Seminal vesicle and Lymph Node Irradiation

I. Ariyo
{"title":"Simultaneous Integrated Boost Plan Comparison between Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) and Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) for Prostate, Seminal vesicle and Lymph Node Irradiation","authors":"I. Ariyo","doi":"10.14744/ejmo.2022.75665","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: We performed a planning study to evaluate the dosimetric differences between Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) and Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) using simultaneous Integrated Boost (SIB) for prostate cancer cases. Methods: 20 prostate cancer patients scheduled for SIB-VMAT treatment on the Halcyon TM 2.0 linear accelerator were recruited for this study and SIB-IMRT plans were generated for comparison purpose. The pelvic lymph nodes (PTV46), the seminal vesicle (PTV50), and the prostate (PTV60) were simultaneously treated to 46 Gy 50 Gy, and 60 Gy delivered in 20 fractions respectively. Results: SIB-VMAT was better due to its higher (1.41%) CI, lower (2.7%) HI, and lower (26%) GI than SIB-IMRT for PTV60. For PTV50, a higher (7.3%) CI, lower (48%) HI, and a lower (31.73%) GI for SIB-VMAT compared to SIB-IMRT. Also, for PTV46, a higher (9.4%) CI, lower (2.5%) HI, and a lower (16.4%) GI were achieved by SIB-VMAT compared to SIB-IMRT. Conclusion: Better conformal and slightly similar homogeneous dose distribution were noticed in SIB-VMAT plans compared to SIB-IMRT plans. However, SIB-IMRT provided better OARs sparing of the bladder and the femoral heads while SIB-VMAT had better sparing for rectum.","PeriodicalId":11831,"journal":{"name":"Eurasian Journal of Medicine and Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Eurasian Journal of Medicine and Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14744/ejmo.2022.75665","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: We performed a planning study to evaluate the dosimetric differences between Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) and Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) using simultaneous Integrated Boost (SIB) for prostate cancer cases. Methods: 20 prostate cancer patients scheduled for SIB-VMAT treatment on the Halcyon TM 2.0 linear accelerator were recruited for this study and SIB-IMRT plans were generated for comparison purpose. The pelvic lymph nodes (PTV46), the seminal vesicle (PTV50), and the prostate (PTV60) were simultaneously treated to 46 Gy 50 Gy, and 60 Gy delivered in 20 fractions respectively. Results: SIB-VMAT was better due to its higher (1.41%) CI, lower (2.7%) HI, and lower (26%) GI than SIB-IMRT for PTV60. For PTV50, a higher (7.3%) CI, lower (48%) HI, and a lower (31.73%) GI for SIB-VMAT compared to SIB-IMRT. Also, for PTV46, a higher (9.4%) CI, lower (2.5%) HI, and a lower (16.4%) GI were achieved by SIB-VMAT compared to SIB-IMRT. Conclusion: Better conformal and slightly similar homogeneous dose distribution were noticed in SIB-VMAT plans compared to SIB-IMRT plans. However, SIB-IMRT provided better OARs sparing of the bladder and the femoral heads while SIB-VMAT had better sparing for rectum.
前列腺、精囊和淋巴结放射治疗中体积调制弧线治疗(VMAT)和强度调制放射治疗(IMRT)同步集成增强计划的比较
目的:我们进行了一项计划研究,以评估体积调制弧线治疗(VMAT)和强度调制放射治疗(IMRT)同时使用集成增强(SIB)治疗前列腺癌病例的剂量学差异。方法:本研究招募20例计划在Halcyon TM 2.0线性加速器上进行sibb - vmat治疗的前列腺癌患者,并制定sibb - imrt计划进行比较。盆腔淋巴结(PTV46)、精囊(PTV50)和前列腺(PTV60)同时给予46 Gy、50 Gy和60 Gy,分20次递送。结果:与sibb - imrt相比,sibb - vmat治疗PTV60的CI(1.41%)更高,HI(2.7%)更低,GI(26%)更低。对于PTV50,与sibb - imrt相比,sibb - vmat的CI更高(7.3%),HI更低(48%),GI更低(31.73%)。此外,对于PTV46,与sibb - imrt相比,sibb - vmat实现了更高(9.4%)的CI,更低(2.5%)的HI和更低(16.4%)的GI。结论:与SIB-IMRT方案相比,SIB-VMAT方案具有更好的适形和稍相似的均匀剂量分布。然而,sibb - imrt对膀胱和股骨头提供了更好的OARs保留,而sibb - vmat对直肠有更好的保留。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信