PURPOSE: To report planning and acute toxicity data of the first 60 patients treated within a Phase I-II study with moderate hypofractionation by image-guided helical tomotherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Various clinical target volumes (CTVs) were defined: CTV1-pelvic nodes; CTV2-upper portion of seminal vesicles; CTV3-lower portion of SV; CTV4-prostate; overlap between planning target volume (PTV) 4 and rectum. Different doses to each PTV were simultaneously delivered in 28 fractions. For 31 low-risk patients: 56.0, 61.6, and 71.4 Gy for PTV2-4, respectively; for 20 intermediate-risk patients: 51.8, 61.6, 65.5, and 74.2 Gy for PTV1-4, respectively; for 9 high-risk patients: 51.8 and 65.5 Gy for PTV1-2 and 74.2 Gy for PTV3-4. For all patients, the dose to overlap was 65.5 Gy. RESULTS: The mean fraction of rectum receiving more than 65 Gy (V65) and rectal Dmax were 10% and 70.8 Gy respectively. In cases of pelvic node irradiation, the intestinal cavity (outside PTV) receiving > 45 and 50 Gy was 86 and 12 cc, respectively. A homogeneous dose distribution within each PTV was guaranteed. Acute genitourinary toxicity according to RTOG scoring system was as follows: 21/60 (35%) Grade 1, 12/60 (20%) Grade 2, 2/60 (3%) Grade 3. Acute rectal toxicities were: 18/60 (30%) Grade 1. Twelve (20%) patients showed Grade 1 upper intestinal toxicity (uGI). No patients experienced > or = Grade 2 acute rectal or uGI side effects. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows excellent results with regard to acute toxicity. Further research is necessary to assess definitive late toxicity and tumor control outcome.
PURPOSE: To report planning and acute toxicity data of the first 60 patients treated within a Phase I-II study with moderate hypofractionation by image-guided helical tomotherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Various clinical target volumes (CTVs) were defined: CTV1-pelvic nodes; CTV2-upper portion of seminal vesicles; CTV3-lower portion of SV; CTV4-prostate; overlap between planning target volume (PTV) 4 and rectum. Different doses to each PTV were simultaneously delivered in 28 fractions. For 31 low-risk patients: 56.0, 61.6, and 71.4 Gy for PTV2-4, respectively; for 20 intermediate-risk patients: 51.8, 61.6, 65.5, and 74.2 Gy for PTV1-4, respectively; for 9 high-risk patients: 51.8 and 65.5 Gy for PTV1-2 and 74.2 Gy for PTV3-4. For all patients, the dose to overlap was 65.5 Gy. RESULTS: The mean fraction of rectum receiving more than 65 Gy (V65) and rectal Dmax were 10% and 70.8 Gy respectively. In cases of pelvic node irradiation, the intestinal cavity (outside PTV) receiving > 45 and 50 Gy was 86 and 12 cc, respectively. A homogeneous dose distribution within each PTV was guaranteed. Acute genitourinary toxicity according to RTOG scoring system was as follows: 21/60 (35%) Grade 1, 12/60 (20%) Grade 2, 2/60 (3%) Grade 3. Acute rectal toxicities were: 18/60 (30%) Grade 1. Twelve (20%) patients showed Grade 1 upper intestinal toxicity (uGI). No patients experienced > or = Grade 2 acute rectal or uGI side effects. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows excellent results with regard to acute toxicity. Further research is necessary to assess definitive late toxicity and tumor control outcome.
Authors: Giuseppe Ferrera; Gianluca Mortellaro; Mariella Mannino; Giovanni Caminiti; Antonio Spera; Vanessa Figlia; Giuseppina Iacoviello; Gioacchino Di Paola; Rosario Mazzola; Antonio Lo Casto; Filippo Alongi; Maria Pia Pappalardo; Roberto Lagalla Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2015-05-24 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: M Geier; S T Astner; M N Duma; V Jacob; C Nieder; J Putzhammer; C Winkler; M Molls; H Geinitz Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2012-02-26 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
Authors: F Alongi; A Fogliata; P Navarria; A Tozzi; P Mancosu; F Lobefalo; G Reggiori; A Clivio; L Cozzi; M Scorsetti Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2012-09-29 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: R Mazzola; S Fersino; A Fiorentino; F Ricchetti; N Giaj Levra; G Di Paola; G Sicignano; S Naccarato; R Ruggieri; F Alongi Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2015-08-07 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: M Picchio; G Berardi; A Fodor; E Busnardo; C Crivellaro; G Giovacchini; C Fiorino; M Kirienko; E Incerti; C Messa; L Gianolli; N Di Muzio Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2014-03-06 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Jose Luis Lopez Guerra; Nicolas Isa; Raul Matute; Moises Russo; Fernando Puebla; Michelle Miran Kim; Alberto Sanchez-Reyes; Cesar Beltran; Javier Jaen; Celine Bourgier; Hugo Marsiglia Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2012-07-24 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: Filippo Alongi; Rocco L E Liardo; Cristina Iftode; Egesta Lopci; Elisa Villa; Tiziana Comito; Angelo Tozzi; Pierina Navarria; Anna M Ascolese; Pietro Mancosu; Stefano Tomatis; Carlo Bellorofonte; Chiti Arturo; Marta Scorsetti Journal: Technol Cancer Res Treat Date: 2013-08-31