SBRT for Localized Prostate Cancer: CyberKnife vs. VMAT-FFF, a Dosimetric Study.
CyberKnife
SBRT
VMAT
flattening filter free
hypofractionation
prostate cancer
Journal
Life (Basel, Switzerland)
ISSN: 2075-1729
Titre abrégé: Life (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101580444
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 May 2022
10 May 2022
Historique:
received:
31
03
2022
revised:
04
05
2022
accepted:
05
05
2022
entrez:
28
5
2022
pubmed:
29
5
2022
medline:
29
5
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
In recent years, stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has gained popularity among clinical methods for the treatment of medium and low risk prostate cancer (PCa), mainly as an alternative to surgery. The hypo-fractionated regimen allows the administration of high doses of radiation in a small number of fractions; such a fractionation is possible by exploiting the different intrinsic prostate radiosensitivity compared with the surrounding healthy tissues. In addition, SBRT treatment guaranteed a better quality of life compared with surgery, avoiding risks, aftermaths, and possible complications. At present, most stereotactic prostate treatments are performed with the CyberKnife (CK) system, which is an accelerator exclusively dedicated for stereotaxis and it is not widely spread in every radiotherapy centre like a classic linear accelerator (LINAC). To be fair, a stereotactic treatment is achievable also by using a LINAC through Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT), but some precautions must be taken. The aim of this work is to carry out a dosimetric comparison between these two methodologies. In order to pursue such a goal, two groups of patients were selected at Instituto Nazionale Tumori-IRCCS Fondazione G. Pascale: the first group consisting of ten patients previously treated with a SBRT performed with CK; the second one was composed of ten patients who received a hypo-fractionated VMAT treatment and replanned in VMAT-SBRT flattening filter free mode (FFF). The two SBRT techniques were rescaled at the same target coverage and compared by normal tissue sparing, dose distribution parameters and delivery time. All organs at risk (OAR) constraints were achieved by both platforms. CK exhibits higher performances in terms of dose delivery; nevertheless, the general satisfying dosimetric results and the significantly shorter delivery time make VMAT-FFF an attractive and reasonable alternative SBRT technique for the treatment of localized prostate cancer.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35629378
pii: life12050711
doi: 10.3390/life12050711
pmc: PMC9144859
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Références
Acta Oncol. 2005;44(3):265-76
pubmed: 16076699
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2021 May 1;110(1):227-236
pubmed: 32900561
World J Oncol. 2019 Apr;10(2):63-89
pubmed: 31068988
J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2020 Sep;146(9):2379-2397
pubmed: 32372146
J Xray Sci Technol. 2017;25(3):465-477
pubmed: 28157113
Medicine (Baltimore). 2020 Dec 11;99(50):e23574
pubmed: 33327317
Radiother Oncol. 2016 Jan;118(1):112-7
pubmed: 26796591
Prostate Cancer. 2013;2013:103547
pubmed: 23533777
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007 May 1;68(1):24-33
pubmed: 17448868
Rep Pract Oncol Radiother. 2014 Nov 18;20(2):99-103
pubmed: 25859398
Eur Urol. 2019 Dec;76(6):790-813
pubmed: 31587989
Radiother Oncol. 2021 May;158:184-190
pubmed: 33639192
Pract Radiat Oncol. 2018 Nov - Dec;8(6):354-360
pubmed: 30322661
Radiat Oncol. 2019 Aug 9;14(1):143
pubmed: 31399115
JAMA Netw Open. 2019 Feb 1;2(2):e188006
pubmed: 30735235
Strahlenther Onkol. 2021 Feb;197(2):89-96
pubmed: 33301049
Semin Radiat Oncol. 2017 Jul;27(3):268-278
pubmed: 28577834
J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2014 Oct;140(10):1795-800
pubmed: 24906878
Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2015 May;27(5):260-9
pubmed: 25797579
In Vivo. 2021 May-Jun;35(3):1849-1856
pubmed: 33910872
Br J Radiol. 2016 Dec;89(1068):20160296
pubmed: 27585736
Health Phys. 2022 Apr 1;122(4):548-555
pubmed: 35244621
Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2017 Apr;16(2):238-245
pubmed: 28279147
Radiother Oncol. 2020 Aug;149:134-141
pubmed: 32387546
Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2021 Feb 4;7(1):9
pubmed: 33542230
Radiother Oncol. 2020 Jul;148:235-242
pubmed: 32505965
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Sep 03;9:CD011462
pubmed: 31476800
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2020 Apr 01;21(4):1149-1154
pubmed: 32334484
Radiat Oncol. 2020 Mar 23;15(1):69
pubmed: 32248826
Rev Urol. 2008 Spring;10(2):111-9
pubmed: 18660852
Lancet Oncol. 2019 Nov;20(11):1531-1543
pubmed: 31540791
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012 Jan 1;82(1):e17-24
pubmed: 21324610
Transl Androl Urol. 2018 Jun;7(3):308-320
pubmed: 30050792
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011 Jan 1;79(1):195-201
pubmed: 20381268
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010 Apr;76(5):1297-304
pubmed: 20338473
Lancet Oncol. 2021 Feb;22(2):235-245
pubmed: 33444529
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010 Jan 1;76(1):260-8
pubmed: 19879698
Cureus. 2017 Sep 9;9(9):e1668
pubmed: 29152425
Phys Med. 2014 Sep;30(6):654-61
pubmed: 24726212
Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2018 May 25;6:66-70
pubmed: 33458391