BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Radiotherapy planning for cervical esophageal cancer is challenging. We compared IMRT and 3D conformal radiotherapy (CRT) with respect to conformality of target coverage and normal tissue sparing. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We selected five patients with cervical esophagus cancer, who represented the heterogeneity of clinical cases, treated to radical dose and planned with Pinnacle v6.2. Target doses for CRT plans were 50, 60, and 70Gy (single-phase IMRT 56, 63, and 70). We compared PTV coverage by the 95% isodose (PTV(95)), conformality ratio (CR), conformation number (CN), and maximum or mean doses (D(max), D(mean)) to normal structures. RESULTS: Median PTV(95) for IMRT plans for PTV70, PTV63, and PTV56 were 97%, 99%, and 98% (CRT 91%, 98%, and 85%). IMRT plans demonstrated lower D(max) to the spinal cord and brainstem (42 and 36Gy) compared to CRT (46 and 39Gy). Median left parotid D(mean) was 35Gy (IMRT) vs. 53Gy (CRT). Median right parotid D(mean) was 35Gy (IMRT) vs. 36Gy (CRT). The median CR50/56Gy was 1.4 (CRT) vs. 1.2 (IMRT), CR70Gy 1.7 (CRT) vs. 1.1 (IMRT). CN50/56 and CN70 values were 0.80 and 0.85 (IMRT) vs. 0.56 and 0.5 (CRT). CONCLUSIONS: IMRT provides superior target volume coverage and conformality, with decreased dose to normal structures.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Radiotherapy planning for cervical esophageal cancer is challenging. We compared IMRT and 3D conformal radiotherapy (CRT) with respect to conformality of target coverage and normal tissue sparing. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We selected five patients with cervical esophagus cancer, who represented the heterogeneity of clinical cases, treated to radical dose and planned with Pinnacle v6.2. Target doses for CRT plans were 50, 60, and 70Gy (single-phase IMRT 56, 63, and 70). We compared PTV coverage by the 95% isodose (PTV(95)), conformality ratio (CR), conformation number (CN), and maximum or mean doses (D(max), D(mean)) to normal structures. RESULTS: Median PTV(95) for IMRT plans for PTV70, PTV63, and PTV56 were 97%, 99%, and 98% (CRT 91%, 98%, and 85%). IMRT plans demonstrated lower D(max) to the spinal cord and brainstem (42 and 36Gy) compared to CRT (46 and 39Gy). Median left parotid D(mean) was 35Gy (IMRT) vs. 53Gy (CRT). Median right parotid D(mean) was 35Gy (IMRT) vs. 36Gy (CRT). The median CR50/56Gy was 1.4 (CRT) vs. 1.2 (IMRT), CR70Gy 1.7 (CRT) vs. 1.1 (IMRT). CN50/56 and CN70 values were 0.80 and 0.85 (IMRT) vs. 0.56 and 0.5 (CRT). CONCLUSIONS: IMRT provides superior target volume coverage and conformality, with decreased dose to normal structures.
Authors: Milan Vosmik; Jiri Petera; Igor Sirak; Miroslav Hodek; Petr Paluska; Jiri Dolezal; Marcela Kopacova Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2010-11-28 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Liru He; Andrew Chapple; Zhongxing Liao; Ritsuko Komaki; Peter F Thall; Steven H Lin Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2016-08-22 Impact factor: 6.280