TY - JOUR
T1 - Dose distribution in 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy for prostate cancer
T2 - Comparison of two treatment techniques (six coplanar fields and two dynamic arcs)
AU - Jereczek-Fossa, Barbara Alicja
AU - Cattani, Federica
AU - D'Onofrio, Alberto
AU - Cambria, Raffaella
AU - Kowalczyk, Anna
AU - Corallo, Anna
AU - Vavassori, Andrea
AU - Zerini, Dario
AU - Ivaldi, Giovanni Battista
AU - DeCobelli, Ottavio
AU - Orecchia, Roberto
PY - 2006/12
Y1 - 2006/12
N2 - Purpose: To compare dose distribution for two techniques of 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (RT): 6-field technique (6F) and 2-dynamic arc therapy (2DA). Methods and materials: Thirty nonmetastatic prostate cancer patients were included. In each patient, two treatment plans were prepared: with six coplanar fields (45°, 90°, 135°, 225°, 270°, 315°) and with two dynamic lateral 100°-wide arcs (40-140°, 220-320°). Dose-volume histograms (DVHs) were computed and mean area under curve (AUC) values were calculated for the DVHs of Planning Target Volume (PTV), rectum, urinary bladder and femoral heads. Doses given to 30% of rectum (DR30), to 60% of rectum (DR60), to 50% of bladder (DB50), to 50% of femoral head (DF50) and to 95% of PTV (DPTV95) were reported as a percentage of the total dose. Results: Mean DR30 and DR60 for 6F and 2DA were 75.8%, 51.5% and 72.2%, 37.2%, respectively. Mean DB50 for 6F and 2DA were 68% and 64.2%, respectively. Mean right DF50 for 6F and 2DA were 35.4% and 45.5%, respectively. Mean DPTV95 for 6F and 2DA were 99% and 99.2%, respectively. Mean AUCs of DVHs of rectum and urinary bladder were significantly higher for 6F (this was more evident for small PTV and in the intermediate dose range). Mean AUC of DVHs of PTV and femoral heads were significantly higher for 2DA. Conclusions: Both 6F and 2DA offer good dose distribution for PTV. 2DA allows for significantly better sparing of rectum and urinary bladder with slightly worse femoral head dose distribution. Further study is warranted in order to establish the clinical relevance of these differences.
AB - Purpose: To compare dose distribution for two techniques of 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (RT): 6-field technique (6F) and 2-dynamic arc therapy (2DA). Methods and materials: Thirty nonmetastatic prostate cancer patients were included. In each patient, two treatment plans were prepared: with six coplanar fields (45°, 90°, 135°, 225°, 270°, 315°) and with two dynamic lateral 100°-wide arcs (40-140°, 220-320°). Dose-volume histograms (DVHs) were computed and mean area under curve (AUC) values were calculated for the DVHs of Planning Target Volume (PTV), rectum, urinary bladder and femoral heads. Doses given to 30% of rectum (DR30), to 60% of rectum (DR60), to 50% of bladder (DB50), to 50% of femoral head (DF50) and to 95% of PTV (DPTV95) were reported as a percentage of the total dose. Results: Mean DR30 and DR60 for 6F and 2DA were 75.8%, 51.5% and 72.2%, 37.2%, respectively. Mean DB50 for 6F and 2DA were 68% and 64.2%, respectively. Mean right DF50 for 6F and 2DA were 35.4% and 45.5%, respectively. Mean DPTV95 for 6F and 2DA were 99% and 99.2%, respectively. Mean AUCs of DVHs of rectum and urinary bladder were significantly higher for 6F (this was more evident for small PTV and in the intermediate dose range). Mean AUC of DVHs of PTV and femoral heads were significantly higher for 2DA. Conclusions: Both 6F and 2DA offer good dose distribution for PTV. 2DA allows for significantly better sparing of rectum and urinary bladder with slightly worse femoral head dose distribution. Further study is warranted in order to establish the clinical relevance of these differences.
KW - 3D conformal radiotherapy
KW - Bladder
KW - Dose-volume histograms
KW - Dynamic conformal arcs
KW - Prostate cancer
KW - Rectum
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33845334205&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33845334205&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.radonc.2006.10.013
DO - 10.1016/j.radonc.2006.10.013
M3 - Article
C2 - 17113670
AN - SCOPUS:33845334205
VL - 81
SP - 294
EP - 302
JO - Radiotherapy and Oncology
JF - Radiotherapy and Oncology
SN - 0167-8140
IS - 3
ER -