PURPOSE: To investigate the potential for intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) to spare the bowel in rectal tumors. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The targets (pelvic nodal and rectal volumes), bowel, and bladder were outlined in 5 patients. All had conventional, three-dimensional conformal RT and forward-planned multisegment three-field IMRT plans compared with inverse-planned simultaneous integrated boost nine-field equally spaced IMRT plans. Equally spaced seven-field and five-field and five-field, customized, segmented IMRT plans were also evaluated. RESULTS: Ninety-five percent of the prescribed dose covered at least 95% of both planning target volumes using all but the conventional plan (mean primary and pelvic planning target volume receiving 95% of the prescribed dose was 32.8 +/- 13.7 Gy and 23.7 +/- 4.87 Gy, respectively), reflecting a significant lack of coverage. The three-field forward planned IMRT plans reduced the volume of bowel irradiated to 45 Gy and 50 Gy by 26% +/- 16% and 42% +/- 27% compared with three-dimensional conformal RT. Additional reductions to 69 +/- 51 cm(3) to 45 Gy and 20 +/- 21 cm(3) to 50 Gy were obtained with the nine-field equally spaced IMRT plans-64% +/- 11% and 64% +/- 20% reductions compared with three-dimensional conformal RT. Reducing the number of beams and customizing the angles for the five-field equally spaced IMRT plan did not significantly reduce bowel sparing. CONCLUSION: The bowel volume irradiated to 45 Gy and 50 Gy was significantly reduced with IMRT, which could potentially lead to less bowel toxicity. Reducing the number of beams did not reduce bowel sparing and the five-field customized segmented IMRT plan is a reasonable technique to be tested in clinical trials.
PURPOSE: To investigate the potential for intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) to spare the bowel in rectal tumors. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The targets (pelvic nodal and rectal volumes), bowel, and bladder were outlined in 5 patients. All had conventional, three-dimensional conformal RT and forward-planned multisegment three-field IMRT plans compared with inverse-planned simultaneous integrated boost nine-field equally spaced IMRT plans. Equally spaced seven-field and five-field and five-field, customized, segmented IMRT plans were also evaluated. RESULTS: Ninety-five percent of the prescribed dose covered at least 95% of both planning target volumes using all but the conventional plan (mean primary and pelvic planning target volume receiving 95% of the prescribed dose was 32.8 +/- 13.7 Gy and 23.7 +/- 4.87 Gy, respectively), reflecting a significant lack of coverage. The three-field forward planned IMRT plans reduced the volume of bowel irradiated to 45 Gy and 50 Gy by 26% +/- 16% and 42% +/- 27% compared with three-dimensional conformal RT. Additional reductions to 69 +/- 51 cm(3) to 45 Gy and 20 +/- 21 cm(3) to 50 Gy were obtained with the nine-field equally spaced IMRT plans-64% +/- 11% and 64% +/- 20% reductions compared with three-dimensional conformal RT. Reducing the number of beams and customizing the angles for the five-field equally spaced IMRT plan did not significantly reduce bowel sparing. CONCLUSION: The bowel volume irradiated to 45 Gy and 50 Gy was significantly reduced with IMRT, which could potentially lead to less bowel toxicity. Reducing the number of beams did not reduce bowel sparing and the five-field customized segmented IMRT plan is a reasonable technique to be tested in clinical trials.
Authors: Sergiu Scobioala; Christopher Kittel; Philipp Niermann; Heidi Wolters; Katharina Helene Susek; Uwe Haverkamp; Hans Theodor Eich Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2018-05-31 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Laura Cerezo; Juan Pablo Ciria; Leire Arbea; Olga Liñán; Sergio Cafiero; Vincenzo Valentini; Francesco Cellini Journal: Rep Pract Oncol Radiother Date: 2013-10-03