Literature DB >> 24694113

Pelvic Lymph Node Irradiation Including Pararectal Sentinel Nodes for Prostate Cancer Patients: Treatment Optimization Comparing Intensity Modulated X-rays, Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy, and Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy.

Hansjörg Vees1, Giovanna Dipasquale2, Philippe Nouet2, Thomas Zilli2, Luca Cozzi3, Raymond Miralbell2.   

Abstract

We aimed to assess the dosimetric impact of advanced delivery radiotherapy techniques using either intensity modulated x-ray beams (IMXT), volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), or intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT), for high-risk prostate cancer patients with sentinel nodes in the pararectal region. Twenty high-risk prostate cancer patients were included in a prospective trial evaluating sentinel nodes on pelvic SPECT acquisition. To be eligible for the dosimetric study, patients had to present with pararectal sentinel nodes usually not included in the clinical target volume encompassing the pelvic lymph nodes. Radiotherapy-plans including the prostate, the seminal vesicles, and the pelvic lymph nodes with the pararectal sentinel nodes were optimized for 6 eligible patients. IMXT and IMPT were delivered with 7 and 3 beams respectively and VMAT with 2 arcs. Results were assessed with Dose-Volume Histograms and predictive normal tissue complication probabilities (NTCPs) models between the three competing treatment modalities aiming to deliver a total dose of 50.4 Gy in 1.8 Gy daily fractions. Target coverage was optimized with IMPT when compared to IMXT and VMAT. Coverage of the sentinel node was slightly better with IMXT (D98% 5 57.3 ± 5.1 Gy) when compared with VMAT (D98% 5 56.2 ± 4.1 Gy). The irradiation of rectal, bladder, small bowel, and femoral heads volumes was significantly reduced with IMPT when compared to IMXT and VMAT. NTCPs rates for rectal and bladder ≥ grade-3 late toxicity were better with IMPT (0.4 ± 0.0% and 0.0 ± 0.0%) compared with IMXT (4.6 ± 3.3% and 1.4 ± 1.1%), and VMAT (4.5 ± 4.0% and 1.6 ± 1.6%), respectively. Acceptable dose-volume distributions and low rectal and urinary NTCPs were estimated to geometrically complex pelvic volumes such as the ones proposed in this study using IMXT, VMAT and IMPT. IMPT succeeded, however, to propose the best physical and biological treatment plans compared to both X-ray derived plans.
© The Author(s) 2014.

Entities:  

Keywords:  IMPT; IMXT; Prostate cancer; SPECT; Sentinel node; VMAT.

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24694113     DOI: 10.7785/tcrt.2012.500405

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Technol Cancer Res Treat        ISSN: 1533-0338


  8 in total

Review 1.  Proton therapy for prostate cancer: current state and future perspectives.

Authors:  Yao-Yu Wu; Kang-Hsing Fan
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2021-09-24       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Multiple Computed Tomography Robust Optimization to Account for Random Anatomic Density Variations During Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy.

Authors:  Mingyao Zhu; Adeel Kaiser; Mark V Mishra; Young Kwok; Jill Remick; Cristina DeCesaris; Katja M Langen
Journal:  Adv Radiat Oncol       Date:  2019-12-26

Review 3.  Proton versus photon-based radiation therapy for prostate cancer: emerging evidence and considerations in the era of value-based cancer care.

Authors:  Sophia C Kamran; Jay O Light; Jason A Efstathiou
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2019-04-09       Impact factor: 5.554

4.  Dosimetric and radiobiological impact of intensity modulated proton therapy and RapidArc planning for high-risk prostate cancer with seminal vesicles.

Authors:  Suresh Rana; ChihYao Cheng; Li Zhao; SungYong Park; Gary Larson; Carlos Vargas; Megan Dunn; Yuanshui Zheng
Journal:  J Med Radiat Sci       Date:  2016-05-11

5.  A biological modelling based comparison of radiotherapy plan robustness using photons vs protons for focal prostate boosting.

Authors:  Jesper Pedersen; Oscar Casares-Magaz; Jørgen B B Petersen; Jarle Rørvik; Lise Bentzen; Andreas G Andersen; Ludvig P Muren
Journal:  Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol       Date:  2018-07-18

6.  Comparison of Estimated Late Toxicities between IMPT and IMRT Based on Multivariable NTCP Models for High-Risk Prostate Cancers Treated with Pelvic Nodal Radiation.

Authors:  Srinivas Chilukuri; Sham Sundar; Kartikeswar Patro; Mayur Sawant; Rangasamy Sivaraman; Manikandan Arjunan; Pankaj Kumar Panda; Dayananda Sharma; Rakesh Jalali
Journal:  Int J Part Ther       Date:  2022-06-13

7.  IMPT versus VMAT for Pelvic Nodal Irradiation in Prostate Cancer: A Dosimetric Comparison.

Authors:  Thomas J Whitaker; David M Routman; Heather Schultz; William S Harmsen; Kimberly S Corbin; William W Wong; Richard Choo
Journal:  Int J Part Ther       Date:  2019-03-21

8.  Haute Couture or Ready-to-Wear? Tailored Pelvic Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer Based on Individualized Sentinel Lymph Node Detection.

Authors:  Anne-Victoire Michaud; Benoit Samain; Ludovic Ferrer; Vincent Fleury; Mélanie Doré; Mathilde Colombié; Claire Dupuy; Emmanuel Rio; Valentine Guimas; Thierry Rousseau; Maelle Le Thiec; Grégory Delpon; Caroline Rousseau; Stéphane Supiot
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2020-04-10       Impact factor: 6.639

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.