OBJECTIVE: The preferential use of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) over conventional radiotherapy (CRT) in the treatment of head and neck cancer has raised concerns regarding dose to non-target tissue. The purpose of this study was to compare dose-volume characteristics with the brachial plexus between treatment plans generated by IMRT and CRT using several common treatment scenarios. METHOD: The brachial plexus was delineated on radiation treatment planning CT scans from 10 patients undergoing IMRT for locally advanced head and neck cancer using a Radiation Therapy Oncology Group-endorsed atlas. No brachial plexus constraint was used. For each patient, a conventional three-field shrinking-field plan was generated and the dose-volume histogram (DVH) for the brachial plexus was compared with that of the IMRT plan. RESULTS: The mean irradiated volumes of the brachial plexus using the IMRT vs the CRT plan, respectively, were as follows: V50 (18±5 ml) vs (11±6 ml), p = 0.01; V60 (6±4 ml) vs (3±3 ml), p = 0.02; V66 (3±1 ml) vs (1±1 ml), p = 0.04, V70 (0±1 ml) vs (0±1 ml), p = 0.68. The maximum point dose to the brachial plexus was 68.9 Gy (range 62.3-78.7 Gy) and 66.1 Gy (range 60.2-75.6 Gy) for the IMRT and CRT plans, respectively (p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Dose to the brachial plexus is significantly increased among patients undergoing IMRT compared with CRT for head and neck cancer. Preliminary studies on brachial plexus-sparing IMRT are in progress.
OBJECTIVE: The preferential use of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) over conventional radiotherapy (CRT) in the treatment of head and neck cancer has raised concerns regarding dose to non-target tissue. The purpose of this study was to compare dose-volume characteristics with the brachial plexus between treatment plans generated by IMRT and CRT using several common treatment scenarios. METHOD: The brachial plexus was delineated on radiation treatment planning CT scans from 10 patients undergoing IMRT for locally advanced head and neck cancer using a Radiation Therapy Oncology Group-endorsed atlas. No brachial plexus constraint was used. For each patient, a conventional three-field shrinking-field plan was generated and the dose-volume histogram (DVH) for the brachial plexus was compared with that of the IMRT plan. RESULTS: The mean irradiated volumes of the brachial plexus using the IMRT vs the CRT plan, respectively, were as follows: V50 (18±5 ml) vs (11±6 ml), p = 0.01; V60 (6±4 ml) vs (3±3 ml), p = 0.02; V66 (3±1 ml) vs (1±1 ml), p = 0.04, V70 (0±1 ml) vs (0±1 ml), p = 0.68. The maximum point dose to the brachial plexus was 68.9 Gy (range 62.3-78.7 Gy) and 66.1 Gy (range 60.2-75.6 Gy) for the IMRT and CRT plans, respectively (p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Dose to the brachial plexus is significantly increased among patients undergoing IMRT compared with CRT for head and neck cancer. Preliminary studies on brachial plexus-sparing IMRT are in progress.
Authors: B Emami; J Lyman; A Brown; L Coia; M Goitein; J E Munzenrider; B Shank; L J Solin; M Wesson Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1991-05-15 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: William H Hall; Michael Guiou; Nancy Y Lee; Arthur Dublin; Samir Narayan; Srinivasan Vijayakumar; James A Purdy; Allen M Chen Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2008-04-28 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Adam S Garden; William H Morrison; Pei-Fong Wong; Sam S Tung; David I Rosenthal; Lei Dong; Brian Mason; George H Perkins; K Kian Ang Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2006-12-04 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Bouthaina Dabaja; Mohammad R Salehpour; Isaac Rosen; Sam Tung; William H Morrison; K Kian Ang; Adam S Garden Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2005-06-22 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: David I Rosenthal; Mark S Chambers; Clifton D Fuller; Neal C S Rebueno; John Garcia; Merrill S Kies; William H Morrison; K Kian Ang; Adam S Garden Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2008-05-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Minh Tam Truong; Paul B Romesser; Muhammad M Qureshi; Nataliya Kovalchuk; Lawrence Orlina; John Willins Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2012-01-31 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Joris Van de Velde; Stephanie Bogaert; Pieter Vandemaele; Wouter Huysse; Eric Achten; Joris Leijnse; Wilfried De Neve; Tom Van Hoof Journal: Surg Radiol Anat Date: 2015-08-23 Impact factor: 1.246
Authors: Emily Neubauer; Lei Dong; David S Followill; Adam S Garden; Laurence E Court; R Allen White; Stephen F Kry Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2012-02-08 Impact factor: 3.481