Amaç: Prostat kanseri radyoterapisinde dinamik yoğunluk ayarlı radyoterapi (D-IMRT) ve hacimsel yoğunluk ayarlı ark tedavisi (VMAT) tekniklerinin, hasta tedavi planları ile dozimetrik olarak karşılaştırılmasıdır. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Yüksek riskli 10 prostat kanseri hastası için, CMS Monaco Tedavi Planlama Sistemi (TPS) kullanılarak 6MV enerjide X ışını üreten Linak tabanlı 9-alan D-IMRT ve çift ark VMAT teknikleri ile planlar tasarlandı. İki planlama tekniği; planlanmış hedef hacim (PTV) 46, PTV 56, PTV 74 yapılarındaki doz sarımı ve homojenite indeksi (HI) ile konformite indeksi (CI) değerleri bakımından karşılaştırıldı. Kritik organlarda, rektum için V50, V60, V65, V70 (doz volümleri) değerleri mesane için V65, V70 değerleri, femur başları için ise V40 değerleri incelendi. Her iki teknik ile elde edilen planların tedavi süreleri, segment sayıları ve monitör ünite (MU) değerleri karşılaştırıldı. Ayrıca, hastaların aldığı integral doz olarak V37 değerlendirildi. Elde edilen tüm veriler Wilcoxon işaretli sıra testi uygulanarak, istatistiksel olarak karşılaştırıldı. Bulgular: D-IMRT ve VMAT teknikleri ile hedef hacimler için, birbirlerine yakın doz sarımları elde edilmiştir. PTV 74 için hesaplanan HI ve CI değerleri her iki teknikte benzer bulunmuştur. Her iki planlama tekniği ile tüm kritik organlar, doz sınırlamalarının altında tutulabilmiştir. Genel olarak, risk altındaki organ dozları bakımından her iki teknik ile birbirlerine yakın sonuçlar elde edilmiştir. Ancak; rektum için V70 değerleri bakımından her iki teknik arasında anlamlı bir fark bulunmuştur. İntegral doz açısından da her iki teknik arasında anlamlı fark bulunmuştur. VMAT tekniği ile oluşturulan planlardan elde edilen segment ve MU sayıları, D-IMRT tekniği ile oluşturulan planlara göre fazla olmasına rağmen tedavi süresinin daha kısa olduğu gözlenmiştir. Sonuç: Prostat kanseri radyoterapisinde kullanılan 9-alan D-IMRT tekniği ve VMAT teknikleri tedavi planlama sistemi üzerinden karşılaştırıldığında, hem PTV sarımları hem de kritik organ korumaları açısından benzer dozimetrik sonuçlar elde edilmiştir. Sadece tedavi süresi açısından, VMAT tekniğinin D-IMRT tekniğine belirgin bir üstünlüğü gözlenmiştir.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Prostat kanseri; D-IMRT; VMAT
Objective: The aim of this study is to compare dosimetric values of dynamic intensity modulated radiation therapy (dIMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatment techniques in the treatment of prostate cancer radiotherapy. Material and Methods: Treatment plans were designed for 10 high-risk prostate cancer patient with Linac based 9-fields D-IMRT and double arc VMAT techniques using CMS Monaco Treatment Planning System (TPS). Two planning techniques; were compared to homogeneity index (HI) and conformity index (CI) values as well as the dose coverage of planning target volume (PTV) structures. Critical organs were assessed V50, V60, V65, V70 for the rectum, V65, V70 for the bladder and V40 for the femoral heads. The treatment time, segment number and monitor unit (MU) values of the plans obtained with the two techniques were compared. V37 was also evaluated as integral dose of the patients. All obtained data were statistically evaluated by Wilcoxon signed rank test. Results: With the D-IMRT and VMAT techniques, similar dose coverage were obtained for target volumes. HI and CI values calculated for PTV 74 were found to be the similar in both techniques. With both planning techniques, all critical organs could be kept below the dose limits. In general, in terms of organs at risk doses, close results were obtained from both techniques. However, there was a significant difference between the two techniques in terms of V70 values for rectum. A significant difference was also found between the two techniques in terms of integral dose. Although the segment and MU numbers obtained from the plans generated by the VMAT technique were higher than the plans generated by the D-IMRT technique, the treatment time was found shorter. Conclusion: Similar dosimetric results were obtained from 9-fields D-IMRT and VMAT techniques used in the treatment of prostate cancer radiotherapy in terms of PTV dose coverage and critical organ protection. The VMAT technique has an advantage over the D-IMRT technique only in terms of treatment time.
Keywords: Prostate cancer; D-IMRT; VMAT
- Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(6):394-424. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Fischer-Valuck BW, Rao YJ, Michalski JM. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Transl Androl Urol. 2018;7(3):297-307. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Rana S. Intensity modulated radiation therapy versus volumetric intensity modulated arc therapy. J Med Radiat Sci. 2013;60(3):81-3. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Michalski JM, Pisansky TM, Lanoton CAF, Potters L. Prostata cancer. In: Gunderson LL, Tepper JE, eds. Clinical Radiation Oncology. 4th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier; 2016. p.1038-93. [Crossref]
- Paddick I. A simple scoring ratio to index the conformity of radiosurgical treatment plans. Technical note. J Neurosurg. 2000;93 Suppl 3:219-22. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- ICRU 83. The International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements. Report 83. Journal of the ICRU. 2010;10:1. [Crossref]
- Emami B. Tolerance of normal tissue to therapeutic radiation. Spring Reports of Radiotherapy and Oncology. 2013;1(1):35-48.
- Shaverdian N, Tenn S, Veruttipong D, Wang J, Hegde J, Lee C, et al. The significance of PTV dose coverage on cancer control outcomes in early stage non-small cell lung cancer patients treated with highly ablative stereotactic body radiation therapy. Br J Radiol. 2016;89(1059):20150963. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Aznar MC, Petersen PM, Logadottir A, Lindberg H, Korreman SS, Kjær-Kristoffersen F, et al. Rotational radiotherapy for prostate cancer in clinical practice. Radiother Oncol. 2010;97(3):480-4. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Sale C, Moloney P. Dose comparisons for conformal, IMRT and VMAT prostate plans. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2011;55(6):611-21. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Kinhikar RA, Pawar AB, Mahantshetty U, Murthy V, Dheshpande DD, Shrivastava SK. Rapid Arc, helical tomotherapy, sliding window intensity modulated radiotherapy and three dimensional conformal radiation for localized prostate cancer: a dosimetric comparison. J Cancer Res Ther. 2014;10(3): 575-82.
- Peters S, Schiefer H, Plasswilm L. A treatment planning study comparing Elekta VMAT and fixed field IMRT using the varian treatment planning system eclipse. Radiat Oncol. 2014;9:153. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Kataria T, Sharma K, Subramani V, Karrthick KP, Bisht SS. Homogeneity index: an objective tool for assessment of conformal radiation treatments. J Med Phys. 2012;37(4):207-13. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Viswanathan AN, Yorke ED, Marks LB, Eifel PJ, Shipley WU. Radiation dose-volume effects of the urinary bladder. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010;76(3 Suppl):S116-22. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Marks LB, Yorke ED, Jackson A, Ten Haken RK, Consrtine LS, Eisbruch A, et al. Use of normal tissue complication probability models in the clinic. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010;76(3 Suppl):S10-9. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Michalski JM, Gay H, Jackson A, Tucker SL, Deasy JO. Radiation dose-volume effects in radiation-induced rectal injury. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010;76(3 Suppl): S123-9. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Davidson MT, Blake SJ, Batchela DL, Cheung P, Mah K. Assessing the role of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) relative to IMRT and helical tomotherapy in the management of localized, locally advanced, and post-operative prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011;80(5):1550-8. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Yang R, Xu S, Jiang W, Xie C, Wang J. Integral dose in three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy and helical tomotherapy. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2009;21(9):706-12. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Brenner DJ, Curtis RE, Hall EJ, Ron E. Second malignancies in prostate carcinoma patients after radiotherapy compared with surgery. Cancer. 2000;88(2):398-406. [Crossref]
- Wallis CJ, Mahar AL, Choo R, Herschorn S, Kodama RT, Shah PS, et al. Second malignancies after radiotherapy for prostate cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2016;352:i851. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Ishii K, Ogino R, Okada W, Nakahara R, Kawamorita R, Nakajima T. A dosimetric comparison of RapidArc and IMRT with hypofractionated simultaneous integrated boost to the prostate for treatment of prostate cancer. Br J Radiol. 2013;86(1030):20130199. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Sze HC, Lee MC, Hung WM, Yau TK, Lee AW. RapidArc radiotherapy planning for prostate cancer: single-arc and double-arc techniques vs. intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Med Dosim. 201;37(1):87-91. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Teoh M, Clark CH, Wood K, Whitaker S, Nisbet A. Volumetric modulated arc therapy: a review of current literature and clinical use in practice. Br J Radiol. 2011;84(1007):967-96. [Crossref] [PubMed]
.: Process List