INTRODUCTION: The present study addresses the role of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in contrast to standard RT (APPA) for patients with Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL) with a focus on deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) technique and a comparison between the International Lymphoma Radiation Oncology Group (ILROG) Involved Site Radiotherapy (IS-RT) versus the German Hodgkin Study Group (GHSG) Involved Field Radiotherapy (IF-RT). METHODS: APPA treatment and 2 IMRT plans were compared for 11 patients with HL. Furthermore, treatment with DIBH versus free breathing (FB) and two different treatment volumes, i.e. IF-RT versus IS-RT, were compared. IMRT was planned as a sliding-window technique with 5 and 7 beam angles. For each patient 12 different treatment plans were calculated (132 plans). Following organs at risk (OAR) were analysed: lung, heart, spinal cord, oesophagus, female breast and skin. Comparisons of the different values with regard to dose-volume histograms (DVH), conformity and homogeneity indices were made. RESULTS: IS-RT reduces treatment volumes. With respect to the planning target volume (PTV), IMRT achieves better conformity but the same homogeneity. Regarding the D mean for the lung, IMRT shows increased doses, while RT in DIBH reduces doses. The IMRT shows improved values for Dmax concerning the spinal cord, whereas the APPA shows an improved D mean of the lung and the female breast. CONCLUSION: IS-RT reduces treatment volumes. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy shows advantages in the conformity. Treatment in DIBH also reduces the dose applied to the lungs and the heart.
INTRODUCTION: The present study addresses the role of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in contrast to standard RT (APPA) for patients with Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL) with a focus on deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) technique and a comparison between the International Lymphoma Radiation Oncology Group (ILROG) Involved Site Radiotherapy (IS-RT) versus the German Hodgkin Study Group (GHSG) Involved Field Radiotherapy (IF-RT). METHODS: APPA treatment and 2 IMRT plans were compared for 11 patients with HL. Furthermore, treatment with DIBH versus free breathing (FB) and two different treatment volumes, i.e. IF-RT versus IS-RT, were compared. IMRT was planned as a sliding-window technique with 5 and 7 beam angles. For each patient 12 different treatment plans were calculated (132 plans). Following organs at risk (OAR) were analysed: lung, heart, spinal cord, oesophagus, female breast and skin. Comparisons of the different values with regard to dose-volume histograms (DVH), conformity and homogeneity indices were made. RESULTS: IS-RT reduces treatment volumes. With respect to the planning target volume (PTV), IMRT achieves better conformity but the same homogeneity. Regarding the D mean for the lung, IMRT shows increased doses, while RT in DIBH reduces doses. The IMRT shows improved values for Dmax concerning the spinal cord, whereas the APPA shows an improved D mean of the lung and the female breast. CONCLUSION: IS-RT reduces treatment volumes. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy shows advantages in the conformity. Treatment in DIBH also reduces the dose applied to the lungs and the heart.
Authors: Julia Koeck; Yasser Abo-Madyan; Frank Lohr; Florian Stieler; Jan Kriz; Rolf-Peter Mueller; Frederik Wenz; Hans Theodor Eich Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2011-11-11 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Greger Nilsson; Lars Holmberg; Hans Garmo; Olov Duvernoy; Iwar Sjögren; Bo Lagerqvist; Carl Blomqvist Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-12-27 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Lena Specht; Joachim Yahalom; Tim Illidge; Anne Kiil Berthelsen; Louis S Constine; Hans Theodor Eich; Theodore Girinsky; Richard T Hoppe; Peter Mauch; N George Mikhaeel; Andrea Ng Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2013-06-18 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Hans Theodor Eich; Volker Diehl; Helen Görgen; Thomas Pabst; Jana Markova; Jürgen Debus; Anthony Ho; Bernd Dörken; Andreas Rank; Anca-Ligia Grosu; Thomas Wiegel; Johann Hinrich Karstens; Richard Greil; Normann Willich; Heinz Schmidberger; Hartmut Döhner; Peter Borchmann; Hans-Konrad Müller-Hermelink; Rolf-Peter Müller; Andreas Engert Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-08-16 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Andreas Engert; Petra Schiller; Andreas Josting; Richard Herrmann; Peter Koch; Markus Sieber; Friederike Boissevain; Maike De Wit; Jorg Mezger; Eckhart Duhmke; Normann Willich; Rolf-Peter Muller; Bernhard F Schmidt; Helmut Renner; Hans Konrad Muller-Hermelink; Beate Pfistner; Jurgen Wolf; Dirk Hasenclever; Markus Loffler; Volker Diehl Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-08-11 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Bhishamjit S Chera; Christina Rodriguez; Christopher G Morris; Debbie Louis; Daniel Yeung; Zuofeng Li; Nancy P Mendenhall Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2009-04-20 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Sarah C Darby; David J Cutter; Marjan Boerma; Louis S Constine; Luis F Fajardo; Kazunori Kodama; Kiyohiko Mabuchi; Lawrence B Marks; Fred A Mettler; Lori J Pierce; Klaus R Trott; Edward T H Yeh; Roy E Shore Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-03-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: S Schönecker; C Heinz; M Söhn; W Haimerl; S Corradini; M Pazos; C Belka; H Scheithauer Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2016-09-08 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: J Kriz; C Baues; R Engenhart-Cabillic; U Haverkamp; K Herfarth; P Lukas; H Schmidberger; S Marnitz-Schulze; M Fuchs; A Engert; H T Eich Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2016-09-27 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: C Baues; R Semrau; U S Gaipl; P J Bröckelmann; J Rosenbrock; A Engert; S Marnitz Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2016-10-04 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: J Kriz; C Baues; R Engenhart-Cabillic; U Haverkamp; K Herfart; P Lukas; A Plütschow; H Schmidberger; S Staar; M Fuchs; A Engert; H T Eich Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2016-09-05 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Eva Holzhäuser; Maximilian Berlin; Daniel Wollschläger; Thomas Bezold; Arnulf Mayer; Georg Heß; Heinz Schmidberger Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2017-07-26 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Dominik Alexander Hering; Kai Kröger; Ralf W Bauer; Hans Theodor Eich; Uwe Haverkamp Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2020-10-01 Impact factor: 3.039