PURPOSE: To determine whether intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) treatment increases the total integral dose of nontarget tissue relative to the conventional three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) technique for high-grade gliomas. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty patients treated with 3D-CRT for glioblastoma multiforme were selected for a comparative dosimetric evaluation with IMRT. Original target volumes, organs at risk (OAR), and dose-volume constraints were used for replanning with IMRT. Predicted isodose distributions, cumulative dose-volume histograms of target volumes and OAR, normal tissue integral dose, target coverage, dose conformity, and normal tissue sparing with 3D-CRT and IMRT planning were compared. Statistical analyses were performed to determine differences. RESULTS: In all 20 patients, IMRT maintained equivalent target coverage, improved target conformity (conformity index [CI] 95% 1.52 vs. 1.38, p < 0.001), and enabled dose reductions of normal tissues, including brainstem (D(mean) by 19.8% and D(max) by 10.7%), optic chiasm (D(mean) by 25.3% and D(max) by 22.6%), right optic nerve (D(mean) by 37.3% and D(max) by 28.5%), and left optic nerve (D(mean) by 40.6% and D(max) by 36.7%), p < or = 0.01. This was achieved without increasing the total nontarget integral dose by greater than 0.5%. Overall, total integral dose was reduced by 7-10% with IMRT, p < 0.001, without significantly increasing the 0.5-5 Gy low-dose volume. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that IMRT treatment for high-grade gliomas allows for improved target conformity, better critical tissue sparing, and importantly does so without increasing integral dose and the volume of normal tissue exposed to low doses of radiation.
PURPOSE: To determine whether intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) treatment increases the total integral dose of nontarget tissue relative to the conventional three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) technique for high-grade gliomas. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty patients treated with 3D-CRT for glioblastoma multiforme were selected for a comparative dosimetric evaluation with IMRT. Original target volumes, organs at risk (OAR), and dose-volume constraints were used for replanning with IMRT. Predicted isodose distributions, cumulative dose-volume histograms of target volumes and OAR, normal tissue integral dose, target coverage, dose conformity, and normal tissue sparing with 3D-CRT and IMRT planning were compared. Statistical analyses were performed to determine differences. RESULTS: In all 20 patients, IMRT maintained equivalent target coverage, improved target conformity (conformity index [CI] 95% 1.52 vs. 1.38, p < 0.001), and enabled dose reductions of normal tissues, including brainstem (D(mean) by 19.8% and D(max) by 10.7%), optic chiasm (D(mean) by 25.3% and D(max) by 22.6%), right optic nerve (D(mean) by 37.3% and D(max) by 28.5%), and left optic nerve (D(mean) by 40.6% and D(max) by 36.7%), p < or = 0.01. This was achieved without increasing the total nontarget integral dose by greater than 0.5%. Overall, total integral dose was reduced by 7-10% with IMRT, p < 0.001, without significantly increasing the 0.5-5 Gy low-dose volume. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that IMRT treatment for high-grade gliomas allows for improved target conformity, better critical tissue sparing, and importantly does so without increasing integral dose and the volume of normal tissue exposed to low doses of radiation.
Authors: A Zabel-du Bois; S Nill; S Ulrich; U Oelfke; B Rhein; P Haering; S Milker-Zabel; A Schwahofer Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2012-01-05 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Krzysztof Ślosarek; Wojciech Osewski; Aleksandra Grządziel; Michał Radwan; Łukasz Dolla; Marta Szlag; Małgorzata Stąpór-Fudzińska Journal: Rep Pract Oncol Radiother Date: 2014-11-18
Authors: J C Easaw; W P Mason; J Perry; N Laperrière; D D Eisenstat; R Del Maestro; K Bélanger; D Fulton; D Macdonald Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2011-06 Impact factor: 3.677
Authors: Marc D Piroth; Michael Pinkawa; Richard Holy; Gabriele Stoffels; Cengiz Demirel; Charbel Attieh; Hans J Kaiser; Karl J Langen; Michael J Eble Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2009-11-23 Impact factor: 3.481