Literature DB >> 24674035

Improving cardiac dosimetry: Alternative beam arrangements for intensity modulated radiation therapy planning in patients with carcinoma of the distal esophagus.

David Grosshans1, Nicholas S Boehling1, Matthew Palmer1, Chris Spicer1, Rolly Erice1, James D Cox1, Ritsuko Komaki1, Joe Y Chang2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Radiation for carcinoma of the distal esophagus is associated with cardiac perfusion deficits and pericardial effusion. We performed a dosimetric analysis of alternative beam arrangements for use in intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) planning, seeking to lower radiation dose to the heart. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Treatment plans using 4 separate beam arrangements were generated and optimized for 12 patients. Hemispheric and butterfly beam arrangements were compared with plans with posterior and lateral beam entries. Radiotherapy was planned to 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions, using step and shoot IMRT with 6 MV photons. Mean heart dose and volumes of heart and lung receiving up to specified doses (V5-V40) were recorded. Isodose distributions were evaluated for target coverage and normal tissue exposure.
RESULTS: IMRT plans utilizing posterior-lateral beam arrangements significantly reduced mean cardiac doses (32.5 ± 3.9 Gy, 33.3 ± 3.2 Gy vs 24.3 ± 3.7 Gy, and 23.4 ± 4.2 Gy, P < .05, paired Student t test with post hoc Bonferroni correction) as well as the total heart volumes receiving at least 20 and 30 Gy. IMRT allowed the maximum cord dose to be limited to less than 40 Gy. While both posterior-lateral beam arrangements lead to improved cardiac dosimetry, mean lung doses as well as V5 and V20 were slightly higher, although within accepted limits. Target coverage, homogeneity, and conformality were similar or improved with the use of alternative beam configurations.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of IMRT with posterior-lateral beams can significantly reduce radiation dose to cardiac structures with minimal increased dose to the lung. Future studies will assess the physiologic and clinical impact of cardiac sparing.
Copyright © 2012 American Society for Radiation Oncology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Year:  2011        PMID: 24674035     DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2011.04.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pract Radiat Oncol        ISSN: 1879-8500


  5 in total

Review 1.  Proton beam therapy for gastrointestinal cancers: past, present, and future.

Authors:  Shahed N Badiyan; Christopher L Hallemeier; Steven H Lin; Matthew D Hall; Michael D Chuong
Journal:  J Gastrointest Oncol       Date:  2018-10

Review 2.  Advances in Radiotherapy Management of Esophageal Cancer.

Authors:  Vivek Verma; Amy C Moreno; Steven H Lin
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2016-10-21       Impact factor: 4.241

3.  Intensity-modulated radiotherapy does not decrease the risk of malnutrition in esophageal cancer patients during radiotherapy compared to three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy.

Authors:  Cong Wang; Ming Lu; Tingting Zhou; Shasha Zhao; Shanghui Guan
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2019-09       Impact factor: 2.895

4.  The utility of proton beam therapy with concurrent chemotherapy for the treatment of esophageal cancers.

Authors:  Steven H Lin
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2011-10-28       Impact factor: 6.639

5.  Long-term survival and toxicity outcomes of intensity modulated radiation therapy for the treatment of esophageal cancer: A large single-institutional cohort study.

Authors:  Anhui Shi; Zhongxing Liao; Pamela K Allen; Linus Ho; Mariela Blum Murphy; Dipen M Maru; Stephen G Swisher; Wayne L Hofstetter; Reza J Mehran; James D Cox; Ritsuko Komaki; Steven H Lin
Journal:  Adv Radiat Oncol       Date:  2017-04-19
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.