Ahmed Gawish1, Ahmed Ali Chughtai2, Michael J Eble2. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, RWTH Aachen University, Pauwelsstraße 30, 52072, Aachen, Germany. agawish@ukaachen.de. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, RWTH Aachen University, Pauwelsstraße 30, 52072, Aachen, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the reproducibility of the dose-volume distribution of the initial simulation CT, generated using volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) planning, during the radiotherapy of the prostatic bed based on weekly cone beam CTs (CBCT). METHODS: Twenty-three patients, after radical prostatectomy were treated with adjuvant or salvage radiotherapy between July and December 2016 and considered for this evaluation. Weekly CBCT scans (n = 138) were imported into the treatment planning system, and the clinical tumor volume (CTV), the rectum and the bladder were contoured. The initially calculated dose distribution and the dose-volume histograms generated from weekly CBCTs were compared. The prostatic fossa dose coverage was assessed by the proportion of the CTV fully encompassed by the 95% and 98% isodose lines. Rectal and bladder volumes receiving 50, 60 and 65 Gy during the treatment were compared to the initial plan, with statistical significance determined using the one-sample t‑test. RESULTS: Marked variations in the total organ volume of the rectum and the bladder were observed. The correlation between rectum volume and V50 was not significant (p = 0.487), while the bladder volume and V50 demonstrated a significant correlation. There was no correlation between urinary bladder volume and CTV. The change in rectal volume correlated significantly with CTV. The dose coverage (D98% and D95%) to the prostatic bed could be achieved for all patients due to the ventral shift in the volume differences of the rectum. CONCLUSION: Weekly CBCTs can be considered as adequate verification tools to assess the interfractional variability of the CTV and organs at risk. The proven volume changes in the urinary bladder and the rectum do not compromise the final delivered dose in the CTV.
PURPOSE: To assess the reproducibility of the dose-volume distribution of the initial simulation CT, generated using volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) planning, during the radiotherapy of the prostatic bed based on weekly cone beam CTs (CBCT). METHODS: Twenty-three patients, after radical prostatectomy were treated with adjuvant or salvage radiotherapy between July and December 2016 and considered for this evaluation. Weekly CBCT scans (n = 138) were imported into the treatment planning system, and the clinical tumor volume (CTV), the rectum and the bladder were contoured. The initially calculated dose distribution and the dose-volume histograms generated from weekly CBCTs were compared. The prostatic fossa dose coverage was assessed by the proportion of the CTV fully encompassed by the 95% and 98% isodose lines. Rectal and bladder volumes receiving 50, 60 and 65 Gy during the treatment were compared to the initial plan, with statistical significance determined using the one-sample t‑test. RESULTS: Marked variations in the total organ volume of the rectum and the bladder were observed. The correlation between rectum volume and V50 was not significant (p = 0.487), while the bladder volume and V50 demonstrated a significant correlation. There was no correlation between urinary bladder volume and CTV. The change in rectal volume correlated significantly with CTV. The dose coverage (D98% and D95%) to the prostatic bed could be achieved for all patients due to the ventral shift in the volume differences of the rectum. CONCLUSION: Weekly CBCTs can be considered as adequate verification tools to assess the interfractional variability of the CTV and organs at risk. The proven volume changes in the urinary bladder and the rectum do not compromise the final delivered dose in the CTV.
Entities:
Keywords:
CBCT; Gastrointestinal toxicity; Genitourinary toxicity; IGRT; Prostate cancer
Authors: A R Padhani; V S Khoo; J Suckling; J E Husband; M O Leach; D P Dearnaley Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1999-06-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Philip Poortmans; Alberto Bossi; Katia Vandeputte; Mathieu Bosset; Raymond Miralbell; Philippe Maingon; Dirk Boehmer; Tom Budiharto; Zvi Symon; Alfons C M van den Bergh; Christopher Scrase; Hendrik Van Poppel; Michel Bolla Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2007-08-13 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Michel Ghilezan; Di Yan; Jian Liang; David Jaffray; John Wong; Alvaro Martinez Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2004-12-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Patrick A Kupelian; Katja M Langen; Omar A Zeidan; Sanford L Meeks; Twyla R Willoughby; Thomas H Wagner; Sam Jeswani; Kenneth J Ruchala; Jason Haimerl; Gustavo H Olivera Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2006-11-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Michel Bolla; Hein van Poppel; Laurence Collette; Paul van Cangh; Kris Vekemans; Luigi Da Pozzo; Theo M de Reijke; Antony Verbaeys; Jean-François Bosset; Roland van Velthoven; Jean-Marie Maréchal; Pierre Scalliet; Karin Haustermans; Marianne Piérart Journal: Lancet Date: 2005 Aug 13-19 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Stratos Vassis; Beatrice Nöldeke; Hans Christiansen; Christoph A von Klot; Roland Merten Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2020-02-10 Impact factor: 3.621