Malcolm D Mattes1, Cyril Tai2, Alvin Lee2, Hani Ashamalla2, N C Ikoro2. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, New York Methodist Hospital, Brooklyn, New York. Electronic address: mdm9007@nyp.org. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, New York Methodist Hospital, Brooklyn, New York.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Studies comparing the dosimetric effects of high- and low-energy photons to treat prostate cancer using 3-dimensional conformal and intensity modulated radiation therapy have yielded mixed results. With the advent of newer radiation delivery systems like volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), the impact of changing photon energy is readdressed. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Sixty-five patients treated for prostate cancer at our institution from 2011 to 2012 underwent CT simulation. A target volume encompassing the prostate and entire seminal vesicles was treated to 50.4 Gy, followed by a boost to the prostate and proximal seminal vesicles to a total dose of 81 Gy. The VMAT plans were generated for 6-MV and 10-MV photons under identical optimization conditions using the Eclipse system version 8.6 (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA). The analytical anisotropic algorithm was used for all dose calculations. Plans were normalized such that 98% of the planning target volume (PTV) received 100% of the prescribed dose. Dose-volumetric data from the treatment planning system was recorded for both 6-MV and 10-MV plans, which were compared for both the entire cohort and subsets of patients stratified according to the anterior-posterior separation. RESULTS: Plans using 10-MV photons had statistically significantly lower relative integral dose (4.1%), gradient measure (4.1%), skin Dmax (16.9%), monitor units (13.0%), and bladder V(30) (3.1%) than plans using 6-MV photons (P < .05). There was no difference in rectal dose, high-dose-region bladder dose, PTV coverage, or conformity index. The benefit of 10-MV photons was more pronounced for thicker patients (anterior-posterior separation >21 cm) for most parameters, with statistically significant differences in bladder V(30), bladder V(65), integral dose, conformity index, and monitor units. CONCLUSIONS: The main dosimetric benefits of 10-MV as compared with 6-MV photons are seen in thicker patients, though for the entire cohort 10-MV plans resulted in a lower integral dose, gradient measure, skin Dmax, monitor units, and bladder V(30), possibly at the expense of higher rectum V(81).
PURPOSE: Studies comparing the dosimetric effects of high- and low-energy photons to treat prostate cancer using 3-dimensional conformal and intensity modulated radiation therapy have yielded mixed results. With the advent of newer radiation delivery systems like volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), the impact of changing photon energy is readdressed. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Sixty-five patients treated for prostate cancer at our institution from 2011 to 2012 underwent CT simulation. A target volume encompassing the prostate and entire seminal vesicles was treated to 50.4 Gy, followed by a boost to the prostate and proximal seminal vesicles to a total dose of 81 Gy. The VMAT plans were generated for 6-MV and 10-MV photons under identical optimization conditions using the Eclipse system version 8.6 (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA). The analytical anisotropic algorithm was used for all dose calculations. Plans were normalized such that 98% of the planning target volume (PTV) received 100% of the prescribed dose. Dose-volumetric data from the treatment planning system was recorded for both 6-MV and 10-MV plans, which were compared for both the entire cohort and subsets of patients stratified according to the anterior-posterior separation. RESULTS: Plans using 10-MV photons had statistically significantly lower relative integral dose (4.1%), gradient measure (4.1%), skin Dmax (16.9%), monitor units (13.0%), and bladder V(30) (3.1%) than plans using 6-MV photons (P < .05). There was no difference in rectal dose, high-dose-region bladder dose, PTV coverage, or conformity index. The benefit of 10-MV photons was more pronounced for thicker patients (anterior-posterior separation >21 cm) for most parameters, with statistically significant differences in bladder V(30), bladder V(65), integral dose, conformity index, and monitor units. CONCLUSIONS: The main dosimetric benefits of 10-MV as compared with 6-MV photons are seen in thicker patients, though for the entire cohort 10-MV plans resulted in a lower integral dose, gradient measure, skin Dmax, monitor units, and bladder V(30), possibly at the expense of higher rectum V(81).