Optimal plan target in cases with locally advanced nasopharyngeal cancer: Comparison of VMAT, IMRT, hybrid, and tomotherapy results.
Journal
Journal of cancer research and therapeutics
ISSN: 1998-4138
Titre abrégé: J Cancer Res Ther
Pays: India
ID NLM: 101249598
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Jan 2023
01 Jan 2023
Historique:
received:
08
02
2022
accepted:
06
08
2022
medline:
1
1
2023
pubmed:
1
1
2023
entrez:
22
2
2024
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
In locally advanced nasopharyngeal cancer (NC), the spread of the disease, proximity to critical structures, and high dose requirement for tumor control may complicate the treatment plan. In this study, VMAT/IMRT/hybrid/tomotherapy plans were made to reach the safest and most effective dose distribution for each of the patients and the results were compared. Double volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and 7- and 9-field intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plans were made to 21 locally advanced NCs with Varian Trilogy System. It was observed that appropriate dose distributions could not be achieved with IMRT or VMAT, and hybrid IMRT-VMAT plans were made. All cases were also planned with Tomotherapy Precision System, and the data of four different techniques were compared retrospectively. For normal tissue tolerances in 73 structures could not be obtained with VMAT and 38 structures with IMRT whereas the desired tolerance was provided with the hybrid plan. Hybrid plans were made with an average of 14 VMATs and 20 IMRTs. The maximum brainstem and spinal cord doses were found significantly lower in hybrid and tomotherapy techniques. Homogeneity index (HI) and conformity index (CI) values were the best in hybrid plans. No statistically significant difference between the hybrid plan and tomotherapy in terms of normal tissue tolerance doses and HI whereas a significant difference was found in the hybrid plan for CI. It was observed that the most ideal plans for the locally advanced NC could be obtained with tomotherapy and hybrid plan techniques that the better protection in critical structures and desired dose distribution at target volumes.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38384047
doi: 10.4103/jcrt.jcrt_298_22
pii: 01363817-202319002-00043
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
S731-S736Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 Copyright: © 2023 Journal of Cancer Research and Therapeutics.
Références
Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. Availble from: https://gco.iarc.fr/today/data/factsheets/populations/792- turkey-fact-
Aksoy S. Systemic treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma Turkiye Klinikleri. J Med Oncol-Special Topics 2018;11:181–4
Chan A, Gregoire V, Lefebvre JL, Licitra L, Felip E; EHNS-ESMO-ESTRO Guidelines Working Group. Nasopharyngeal cancer: EHNS–ESMO–ESTRO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2012;23:83–5
Hacıislamoğlu E. Comparision of radiation-induced secondary malignancy risk between intensity modulated radiotherapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy with simultaneous integrated boost in the treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Acta Oncologica Turcica 2019; 398–404. doi: 10.5505/aot.2019.49379
doi: 10.5505/aot.2019.49379
Özden Ö, Abakay C, Çetintaş S, Kurt M, Etiz D, Tunç S. Treatment planning and dosymmetric comparison of two different volumetric arc therapy technique. UludağÜniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi 2017;43:53–9
Lee TF, Chao PJ, Ting HM, Lo SH, Wang YW, Tuan CC, et al. Comparative analysis of SmartArc-based dual arc volumetric-modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT) versus intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for nasopharyngeal carcinoma. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2011;12:3587
Abd El Wahab AS, Mohammed DA, Gaballah AM, Abdallah MM. Three-dimensional conformal versus intensity modulated radiation therapy in treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Egypt J Hosp Med 2018;71:3492–9
Bentzen SM, Constine LS, Deasy JO, Eisbruch A, Jackson A, Marks LB, et al. Quantitative analysis of normal tissue Effects in the clinic (QUANTEC): An introduction to the scientific issues. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2010;76:S3–9
Bahman E. Tolerance of normal tissue to therapeutic radiation. Rep Radiother Oncol 2013;1:S35–48
Bijina TK, Ganesh KM, Pichandi A, Muthuselvi CA. Cyberknife, helical tomotherapy and rapid arc sib-sbrt treatment plan comparison for carcinoma prostate. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2020;21:1149–54
Zhang J, Peng Y, Ding S, Zhu J, Liu Y, Chen M, et al. Comparison of different combinations of irradiation mode and jaw width in helical tomotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Front Oncol 2020;10:598. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2020.00598
doi: 10.3389/fonc.2020.00598
Kam MK, Chau RM, Suen J, Choi PH, Teo PM. IMRT in nasopharyngeal carcinoma: Dosimetric advantage over conventional plans and feasibilty of dose escalation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2003;56:145–57
Bedford JL. Treatment planning for volumetric modulated arc therapy. Med Phys 2009;36:5128–38
Johnston M, Clifford S, Bromley R, Back M, Oliver L, Eade T. Volumetric-modulated arc therapy in head and neck radiotherapy: A planning comparison using simultaneous integrated boost for nasopharynx and oropharynx carcinoma. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2011;23:503–11
Lee HF, Lan JH, Chao PJ, Ting HM, Chen HC, Hsu HC, et al. Radiation-induced secondary malignancies for nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A pilot study of patients treated via IMRT or VMAT. Cancer Manag Res 2018;10:131–41
Rudat V, Aziz Alaradi A, Mohamed A, AI-Yahya K, Altuwaijri S. Tangential beam IMRT versus tangential beam 3D-CRT of the chest wall in postmastectomy breast cancer patients: A dosimetric comparison. Radiat Oncol 2011;6:26. doi: 10.1186/1748-717X-6-26
doi: 10.1186/1748-717X-6-26
Jin GH, Chen LX, Deng XW, Liu XW, Huang Y, Huang XB. A comparative dosimetric study for treating left-sided breast cancer for small breast size using five different radiotherapy techniques: Conventional tangential field, filed-in-filed, tangential-IMRT, multi-beam IMRT and VMAT. Radiat Oncol 2013;8:89
Zhao H, He M, Cheng G, Han D, Wu N, Shi D, et al. A comparative dosimetric study of left sided breast cancer after breast-conserving surgery treated with VMAT and IMRT. Radiat Oncol 2015;10:231
Zhao N, Yang R, Jiang Y, Tian S, Guo F, Wang J. A hybrid IMRT/VMAT Technique fort he treatment of nasopharyngeal cancer. Biomed Res Int 2015 2015; 940102. doi: 10.1155/2015/940102
doi: 10.1155/2015/940102
Otto K. Volumetric modulated arc therapy: IMRT in a single gantry arc. Med Phys 2008;35:310–7
Sanda C, Sarafoleanu C. Advantages of VMAT-IMRTtechnique in nasopharyngeal cancer. Rom J Rhinol 2016;6:101–8
Chen W, Yang X, Jiang N, Zhang Z, Hong J, He Y, et al. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy, volume-modulated arc therapy and helical tomotherapy for locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A dosimetric comparison. Transl Cancer Res 2017;6:929–39
Li S, Zhou Q, Shen LF, Li H, Li ZZ, Yang Z, et al. Dosimetric comparisons of volumetric modulated arc therapy and tomotherapy for early T-stage nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Biomed Res Int 2018 2018; 2653497
Yetmen Dogan O, Cini N, Nasır Can SS. Dosimetric comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and Helical tomotherapy for hippocampal avoidance prophylactic whole brain radiotherapy (HA-PWBRT) in small cell lung cancer: Treatment plans based study. Med J Bakirkoy 2020;16:263–71
Broggi S, Perna L, Bonsignore F, Rinaldin G, Fiorino C, Chiara A, et al. Static and rotational ıntensity modulated techniques for head and neck cancer radiotherapy: A planning comparison. Phys Med 2014;30:973–9
Van Gestel D, van Vliet-Vroegindeweij C, Van den Heuvel F, Crijns W, Coelmont A, De Ost B, et al. RapidArc, SmartArc and TomoHD compared with classical step and shoot and sliding window intensity modulated radiotherapy in an oropharyngeal cancer treatment plan comparison. Radiat Oncol 2013;8:37