PURPOSE: To explore the potential of helical tomotherapy (HT) in the treatment of nasopharynx cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Six T1-4 N1-3 patients were considered. A simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) technique was planned with inversely optimized conventional intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT; dynamic multileaf collimator using the Eclipse-Helios Varian system) and HT. The prescribed (median) doses were 54 Gy, 61.5 Gy, and 64.5 Gy delivered in 30 fractions to PTV1 (planning target volume), PTV2, and PTV3, respectively. The same constraints for PTV coverage and for parotids, spinal cord, mandible, optic structures, and brain stem were followed in both modalities. The planner also tried to reduce the dose to other structures (mucosae outside PTV1, larynx, esophagus, inner ear, thyroid, brain, lungs, submental connective tissue, bony structures) as much as possible. RESULTS: The fraction of PTV receiving >95% of the prescribed dose (V95%) increased from 97.6% and 94.3% (IMRT) to 99.6% and 97% (HT) for PTV1 and PTV3, respectively (p<0.05); median dose to parotids decreased from 30.1 Gy for IMRT to 25.0 Gy for HT (p<0.05). Significant gains (p<0.05) were found for most organs at risk (OARs): mucosae (V30 decreased from 44 cm(3) [IMRT] to 18 cm(3) [HT]); larynx (V30: 25 cm(3) vs. 11 cm(3)); thyroid (mean dose: 48.7 Gy vs. 41.5 Gy); esophagus (V45: 4 cm(3) vs. 1 cm(3)); brain stem (D1%: 45.1 Gy vs. 37.7 Gy). CONCLUSION: HT improves the homogeneity of dose distribution within PTV and PTV coverage together with a significantly greater sparing of OARs compared to linac five-field IMRT.
PURPOSE: To explore the potential of helical tomotherapy (HT) in the treatment of nasopharynx cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Six T1-4 N1-3 patients were considered. A simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) technique was planned with inversely optimized conventional intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT; dynamic multileaf collimator using the Eclipse-Helios Varian system) and HT. The prescribed (median) doses were 54 Gy, 61.5 Gy, and 64.5 Gy delivered in 30 fractions to PTV1 (planning target volume), PTV2, and PTV3, respectively. The same constraints for PTV coverage and for parotids, spinal cord, mandible, optic structures, and brain stem were followed in both modalities. The planner also tried to reduce the dose to other structures (mucosae outside PTV1, larynx, esophagus, inner ear, thyroid, brain, lungs, submental connective tissue, bony structures) as much as possible. RESULTS: The fraction of PTV receiving >95% of the prescribed dose (V95%) increased from 97.6% and 94.3% (IMRT) to 99.6% and 97% (HT) for PTV1 and PTV3, respectively (p<0.05); median dose to parotids decreased from 30.1 Gy for IMRT to 25.0 Gy for HT (p<0.05). Significant gains (p<0.05) were found for most organs at risk (OARs): mucosae (V30 decreased from 44 cm(3) [IMRT] to 18 cm(3) [HT]); larynx (V30: 25 cm(3) vs. 11 cm(3)); thyroid (mean dose: 48.7 Gy vs. 41.5 Gy); esophagus (V45: 4 cm(3) vs. 1 cm(3)); brain stem (D1%: 45.1 Gy vs. 37.7 Gy). CONCLUSION:HT improves the homogeneity of dose distribution within PTV and PTV coverage together with a significantly greater sparing of OARs compared to linac five-field IMRT.
Authors: Mark Rickhey; Zdenek Morávek; Christoph Eilles; Oliver Koelbl; Ludwig Bogner Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2010-05-21 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Martin Dolezel; Karel Odrazka; Miloslava Vaculikova; Jaroslav Vanasek; Jana Sefrova; Petr Paluska; Milan Zouhar; Jan Jansa; Zuzana Macingova; Lida Jarosova; Milos Brodak; Petr Moravek; Igor Hartmann Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2010-03-26 Impact factor: 3.621