PURPOSE: To evaluate the dosimetric changes of parotid glands (PG) during a course of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in head and neck (H&N) cancer patients. METHODS: Ten patients with H&N cancer treated by IMRT were analyzed. The original treatment plan (CT(plan)) was transferred to cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) acquired at the 15th and 20th treatment day (CBCT(plan) I and II, respectively). The PG mean dose (D(mean)), the dose to 50 % of the volume, and the percent of volume receiving 30 and 50 Gy were measured by the dose volume histogram. RESULTS: 30 IMRT plans were evaluated (3 plans/patient). All dosimetric end points increased significantly for both PG only when CT(plan) was compared to CBCT(plan) I. The D(mean) increased significantly only for ipsilateral PG (p = 0.02) at week 3. CONCLUSION: During a course of IMRT, CBCT is a feasible method to check the PG dosimetric variations. Perhaps, the 3rd week of radiotherapy could be considered as the time-check-point.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the dosimetric changes of parotid glands (PG) during a course of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in head and neck (H&N) cancerpatients. METHODS: Ten patients with H&N cancer treated by IMRT were analyzed. The original treatment plan (CT(plan)) was transferred to cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) acquired at the 15th and 20th treatment day (CBCT(plan) I and II, respectively). The PG mean dose (D(mean)), the dose to 50 % of the volume, and the percent of volume receiving 30 and 50 Gy were measured by the dose volume histogram. RESULTS: 30 IMRT plans were evaluated (3 plans/patient). All dosimetric end points increased significantly for both PG only when CT(plan) was compared to CBCT(plan) I. The D(mean) increased significantly only for ipsilateral PG (p = 0.02) at week 3. CONCLUSION: During a course of IMRT, CBCT is a feasible method to check the PG dosimetric variations. Perhaps, the 3rd week of radiotherapy could be considered as the time-check-point.
Authors: H Loo; J Fairfoul; A Chakrabarti; J C Dean; R J Benson; S J Jefferies; N G Burnet Journal: Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) Date: 2010-10-06 Impact factor: 4.126
Authors: Shreerang A Bhide; Mark Davies; Kevin Burke; Helen A McNair; Vibeke Hansen; Y Barbachano; I A El-Hariry; Kate Newbold; Kevin J Harrington; Christopher M Nutting Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Eric K Hansen; M Kara Bucci; Jeanne M Quivey; Vivian Weinberg; Ping Xia Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2005-10-26 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Eliana M Vásquez Osorio; Mischa S Hoogeman; Abrahim Al-Mamgani; David N Teguh; Peter C Levendag; Ben J M Heijmen Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2008-03-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: A Fiorentino; R Caivano; V Metallo; C Chiumento; M Cozzolino; G Califano; S Clemente; P Pedicini; V Fusco Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2012-05-09 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: R Mazzola; F Ricchetti; A Fiorentino; S Fersino; N Giaj Levra; S Naccarato; G Sicignano; S Albanese; G Di Paola; D Alterio; R Ruggieri; F Alongi Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2014-10-28 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Petronella M Kager; Sanne C C van Weerdenburg; Simon R van Kranen; Suzanne van Beek; Elisabeth A Lamers-Kuijper; Wilma D Heemsbergen; Olga Hamming-Vrieze; Peter Remeijer Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2015-12-01 Impact factor: 3.481