PURPOSE: Radiotherapy became an important component in the treatment of brain gliomas. The aim of this study is to analyse several advantages of the three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy in comparison with a two-dimensional conventional technique and to present the clinical results of 43 patients with brain gliomas treated according to a three-dimensional planning. PATIENTS AND METHOD: Between January 1994 and December 1995, 43 patients with malignant brain gliomas (WHO III and IV) were treated in our department according to a three-dimensional treatment planning. The patients received a total irradiation dose of 60 Gy, 2 Gy/day, 5 days/week. The rate of survival was analysed in relation with the known prognostical factors: histology, Karnofsky index, age, resection status. In 10 patients a three-dimensional treatment planning was compared with a conventional two-dimensional planning: the volume of the normal brain tissue irradiated to high dose levels (95% isodose) and the normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) for the brain by Kutcher and Lyman were comparatively analysed. RESULTS: The survival rate for the whole group was 14 months. The histology of the tumor, age, Karnofsky index and resection status were important prognostical factors. The three-dimensional planning allows a 15 to 20% reduction in the volume of normal brain tissue irradiated to high dose levels (95% isodose). The NTCP is significantly lower using the three-dimensional technique (range 0.03% to 13%), in comparison with the two-dimensional conventional technique (range 0.1% to 26%). The value of NTCP increases with tumor volume. CONCLUSIONS: Concerning the tumor control and survival rate, the three-dimensional treatment planning shows no advantages compared to the standard conventional methods. The main advantage of the three-dimensional treatment planning is the possibility to spare normal brain tissue. The possibility to integrate mathematical models in the evaluation of the therapy could give this technique new dimensions.
PURPOSE: Radiotherapy became an important component in the treatment of brain gliomas. The aim of this study is to analyse several advantages of the three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy in comparison with a two-dimensional conventional technique and to present the clinical results of 43 patients with brain gliomas treated according to a three-dimensional planning. PATIENTS AND METHOD: Between January 1994 and December 1995, 43 patients with malignant brain gliomas (WHO III and IV) were treated in our department according to a three-dimensional treatment planning. The patients received a total irradiation dose of 60 Gy, 2 Gy/day, 5 days/week. The rate of survival was analysed in relation with the known prognostical factors: histology, Karnofsky index, age, resection status. In 10 patients a three-dimensional treatment planning was compared with a conventional two-dimensional planning: the volume of the normal brain tissue irradiated to high dose levels (95% isodose) and the normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) for the brain by Kutcher and Lyman were comparatively analysed. RESULTS: The survival rate for the whole group was 14 months. The histology of the tumor, age, Karnofsky index and resection status were important prognostical factors. The three-dimensional planning allows a 15 to 20% reduction in the volume of normal brain tissue irradiated to high dose levels (95% isodose). The NTCP is significantly lower using the three-dimensional technique (range 0.03% to 13%), in comparison with the two-dimensional conventional technique (range 0.1% to 26%). The value of NTCP increases with tumor volume. CONCLUSIONS: Concerning the tumor control and survival rate, the three-dimensional treatment planning shows no advantages compared to the standard conventional methods. The main advantage of the three-dimensional treatment planning is the possibility to spare normal brain tissue. The possibility to integrate mathematical models in the evaluation of the therapy could give this technique new dimensions.
Authors: M D Walker; S B Green; D P Byar; E Alexander; U Batzdorf; W H Brooks; W E Hunt; C S MacCarty; M S Mahaley; J Mealey; G Owens; J Ransohoff; J T Robertson; W R Shapiro; K R Smith; C B Wilson; T A Strike Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1980-12-04 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: A F Thornton; H M Sandler; R K Ten Haken; D L McShan; B A Fraass; M L La Vigne; B R Yanke Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1992 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Christian Plathow; Matthias Philipp Lichy; Peter Bachert; Ivan Zuna; Hans-Ulrich Kauczor Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2003-11-11 Impact factor: 5.315