Report on planning comparison of VMAT, IMRT and helical tomotherapy for the ESCALOX-trial pre-study.
Combined chemoradiation therapy
Dose escalation
Head and neck cancer
Helical tomotherapy
IMRT
RT planning comparison
SIB
VMAT
Journal
Radiation oncology (London, England)
ISSN: 1748-717X
Titre abrégé: Radiat Oncol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101265111
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 Nov 2020
02 Nov 2020
Historique:
received:
28
07
2020
accepted:
21
10
2020
entrez:
3
11
2020
pubmed:
4
11
2020
medline:
4
8
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The ESCALOX trial was designed as a multicenter, randomized prospective dose escalation study for head and neck cancer. Therefore, feasibility of treatment planning via different treatment planning systems (TPS) and radiotherapy (RT) techniques is essential. We hypothesized the comparability of dose distributions for simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) volumes respecting the constraints by different TPS and RT techniques. CT data sets of the first six patients (all male, mean age: 61.3 years) of the pre-study (up to 77 Gy) were used for comparison of IMRT, VMAT, and helical tomotherapy (HT). Oropharynx was the primary tumor location. Normalization of the three step SIB (77 Gy, 70 Gy, 56 Gy) was D95% = 77 Gy. Coverage (CVF), healthy tissue conformity index (HTCI), conformation number (CN), and dose homogeneity (HI) were compared for PTVs and conformation index (COIN) for parotids. All RT techniques achieved good coverage. For SIB77Gy, CVF was best for IMRT and VMAT, HT achieved highest CN followed by VMAT and IMRT. HT reached good HTCI value, and HI compared to both other techniques. For SIB70Gy, CVF was best by IMRT. HTCI favored HT, consequently CN as well. HI was slightly better for HT. For SIB56Gy, CVF resulted comparably. Conformity favors VMAT as seen by HTCI and CN. Dmean of ipsilateral and contralateral parotids favor HT. Different TPS for dose escalation reliably achieved high plan quality. Despite the very good results of HT planning for coverage, conformity, and homogeneity, the TPS also achieved acceptable results for IMRT and VMAT. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01212354, EudraCT-No.: 2010-021139-15. ARO: ARO 14-01.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The ESCALOX trial was designed as a multicenter, randomized prospective dose escalation study for head and neck cancer. Therefore, feasibility of treatment planning via different treatment planning systems (TPS) and radiotherapy (RT) techniques is essential. We hypothesized the comparability of dose distributions for simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) volumes respecting the constraints by different TPS and RT techniques.
METHODS
METHODS
CT data sets of the first six patients (all male, mean age: 61.3 years) of the pre-study (up to 77 Gy) were used for comparison of IMRT, VMAT, and helical tomotherapy (HT). Oropharynx was the primary tumor location. Normalization of the three step SIB (77 Gy, 70 Gy, 56 Gy) was D95% = 77 Gy. Coverage (CVF), healthy tissue conformity index (HTCI), conformation number (CN), and dose homogeneity (HI) were compared for PTVs and conformation index (COIN) for parotids.
RESULTS
RESULTS
All RT techniques achieved good coverage. For SIB77Gy, CVF was best for IMRT and VMAT, HT achieved highest CN followed by VMAT and IMRT. HT reached good HTCI value, and HI compared to both other techniques. For SIB70Gy, CVF was best by IMRT. HTCI favored HT, consequently CN as well. HI was slightly better for HT. For SIB56Gy, CVF resulted comparably. Conformity favors VMAT as seen by HTCI and CN. Dmean of ipsilateral and contralateral parotids favor HT.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Different TPS for dose escalation reliably achieved high plan quality. Despite the very good results of HT planning for coverage, conformity, and homogeneity, the TPS also achieved acceptable results for IMRT and VMAT. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01212354, EudraCT-No.: 2010-021139-15. ARO: ARO 14-01.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33138837
doi: 10.1186/s13014-020-01693-2
pii: 10.1186/s13014-020-01693-2
pmc: PMC7607845
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT01212354']
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
253Subventions
Organisme : Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG)
ID : MO-363/4-1
Références
Semin Radiat Oncol. 2018 Jan;28(1):35-45
pubmed: 29173754
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004 Oct 1;60(2):374-87
pubmed: 15380569
Strahlenther Onkol. 2012 Mar;188(3):243-7
pubmed: 22294198
Radiat Oncol. 2013 Feb 20;8:37
pubmed: 23425449
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006 Feb 1;64(2):333-42
pubmed: 16414369
Anticancer Res. 2015 May;35(5):2991-7
pubmed: 25964586
Strahlenther Onkol. 2010 Sep;186(9):502-10
pubmed: 20803184
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000 Feb 1;46(3):619-30
pubmed: 10701741
Phys Med. 2014 May;30(3):280-5
pubmed: 23948367
Radiother Oncol. 1997 Jul;44(1):17-22
pubmed: 9288852
Radiother Oncol. 2011 Dec;101(3):343-50
pubmed: 21724283
Strahlenther Onkol. 2016 Jan;192(1):17-24
pubmed: 26462675
Acta Oncol. 2016;55(2):217-25
pubmed: 26079436
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011 Jul 15;80(4):1045-55
pubmed: 20643512
J Cancer Res Ther. 2015 Oct-Dec;11(4):746-51
pubmed: 26881512
Strahlenther Onkol. 2016 Apr;192(4):232-9
pubmed: 26852243
Radiother Oncol. 2011 Dec;101(3):351-5
pubmed: 21742392
Med Dosim. 2016 Winter;41(4):329-333
pubmed: 27765542
Radiother Oncol. 2013 Jun;107(3):310-6
pubmed: 23647760
Radiat Oncol. 2017 Mar 1;12(1):45
pubmed: 28249612
Oral Oncol. 2019 Jan;88:180-185
pubmed: 30616792
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010 Mar 1;76(3 Suppl):S64-9
pubmed: 20171520
Radiother Oncol. 2014 Sep;112(3):337-42
pubmed: 25005577
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1989 Oct;17(4):893-900
pubmed: 2674086
Radiat Oncol. 2011 Feb 21;6:20
pubmed: 21338501
Radiat Oncol. 2013 Jan 31;8:26
pubmed: 23369221
Radiat Oncol. 2017 Mar 23;12(1):59
pubmed: 28335778
Anticancer Res. 2016 Aug;36(8):4181-5
pubmed: 27466529
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011 Jul 15;80(4):1248-55
pubmed: 20947268
Semin Radiat Oncol. 2003 Jul;13(3):302-8
pubmed: 12903018
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007 May 1;68(1):291-300
pubmed: 17448882
Radiother Oncol. 2017 Sep;124(3):526-532
pubmed: 28434798
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1997 Feb 1;37(3):731-6
pubmed: 9112473
World J Surg. 2003 Jul;27(7):832-7
pubmed: 14509515
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001 Jul 1;50(3):695-704
pubmed: 11395238
J Clin Oncol. 2010 Jun 20;28(18):2996-3001
pubmed: 20479390
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1998 Jan 15;40(2):515-24
pubmed: 9457842
Strahlenther Onkol. 2013 Apr;189(4):293-300
pubmed: 23443611
Radiat Oncol. 2015 Dec 23;10:261
pubmed: 26701749
Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2018 Dec;62(4):349-368
pubmed: 29869487