Manoj K Sharma 1 , Eugen B Hug 2 , Manindra Bhushan 3 , Dennis Mah 2 , Dominic Maes 2 , Munish Gairola 1 , Surender K Sharma 1 , Girigesh Yadav 3 , Manoj Pal 1 , Deepika Chauhan 4 , Abhinav Dewan 1 , Inderjit Kaur 1 , Sarthak Tandon 1 , Swarupa Mitra 1 Show Affiliations »
Abstract
PURPOSE: Brachytherapy is essential for local treatment in cervical carcinoma, but some patients are not suitable for it. Presently, for these patients, the authors prefer a boost by using intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). The authors evaluated the dosimetric comparison of proton-modulated radiation therapy versus IMRT and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) as a boost to know whether protons can replace photons. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Five patients who received external beam radiation therapy to the pelvis by IMRT were reviewed. Three different plans were made, including pencil beam scanning (PBS), IMRT, and VMAT. The prescribed planning target volume (PTV) was 20 Gy in 4 fractions. The dose to 95% PTV (D95%), the conformity index, and the homogeneity index were evaluated for PTV. The Dmax, D2cc, and Dmean were evaluated for organs at risk along with the integral dose of normal tissue and organs at risk. RESULTS: The PTV coverage was optimal and homogeneous with modulated protons and photons. For PBS, coverage D95% was 20.01 ± 0.02 Gy (IMRT, 20.08 ± 0.06 Gy; VMAT, 20.1 ± 0.04 Gy). For the organs at risk, Dmax of the bladder for PBS was 21.05 ± 0.05 Gy (IMRT, 20.8 ± 0.21 Gy; VMAT, 21.65 ± 0.41 Gy) while the Dmax for the rectum for PBS was 21.04 ± 0.03 Gy (IMRT, 20.81 ± 0.12 Gy; VMAT, 21.66 ± 0.38 Gy). Integral dose to normal tissues in PBS was 14.17 ± 2.65 Gy (IMRT, 25.29 ± 6.35 Gy; VMAT, 25.24 ± 6.24 Gy). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with photons, modulated protons provide comparable conformal plans. However, PBS reduces the integral dose to critical structures significantly compared with IMRT and VMAT. Although PBS may be a better alternative for such cases, further research is required to substantiate such findings. © Copyright 2017 International Journal of Particle Therapy.
PURPOSE: Brachytherapy is essential for local treatment in cervical carcinoma, but some patients are not suitable for it. Presently, for these patients, the authors prefer a boost by using intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). The authors evaluated the dosimetric comparison of proton-modulated radiation therapy versus IMRT and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) as a boost to know whether protons can replace photons. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Five patients who received external beam radiation therapy to the pelvis by IMRT were reviewed. Three different plans were made, including pencil beam scanning (PBS), IMRT, and VMAT. The prescribed planning target volume (PTV) was 20 Gy in 4 fractions. The dose to 95% PTV (D95%), the conformity index, and the homogeneity index were evaluated for PTV. The Dmax, D2cc, and Dmean were evaluated for organs at risk along with the integral dose of normal tissue and organs at risk. RESULTS: The PTV coverage was optimal and homogeneous with modulated protons and photons. For PBS, coverage D95% was 20.01 ± 0.02 Gy (IMRT, 20.08 ± 0.06 Gy; VMAT, 20.1 ± 0.04 Gy). For the organs at risk, Dmax of the bladder for PBS was 21.05 ± 0.05 Gy (IMRT, 20.8 ± 0.21 Gy; VMAT, 21.65 ± 0.41 Gy) while the Dmax for the rectum for PBS was 21.04 ± 0.03 Gy (IMRT, 20.81 ± 0.12 Gy; VMAT, 21.66 ± 0.38 Gy). Integral dose to normal tissues in PBS was 14.17 ± 2.65 Gy (IMRT, 25.29 ± 6.35 Gy; VMAT, 25.24 ± 6.24 Gy). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with photons, modulated protons provide comparable conformal plans. However, PBS reduces the integral dose to critical structures significantly compared with IMRT and VMAT. Although PBS may be a better alternative for such cases, further research is required to substantiate such findings. © Copyright 2017 International Journal of Particle Therapy.
Entities: Chemical
Keywords:
conformity index; homogeneity index; intensity-modulated radiation therapy; pencil beam scanning; volumetric-modulated arc therapy
Year: 2017
PMID： 31773003 PMCID： PMC6871551 DOI： 10.14338/IJPT-17-00009
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Part Ther ISSN： 2331-5180