Benefit of using biologic parameters (EUD and NTCP) in IMRT optimization for treatment of intrahepatic tumors

PURPOSE: To investigate whether intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), optimized using the generalized equivalent uniform dose (gEUD) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) models, can increase the safe dose to intrahepatic tumors compared with three-dimensional conformal RT (3D-CRT). A secondary objective was to investigate the optimal beam arrangement for liver IMRT plans. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Planning CT data of 15 patients with intrahepatic tumors, previously treated with 3D-CRT, were used as input. The dose delivered using 3D-CRT had been limited either by tolerance of adjacent organs, which were close to, or overlapped with, the planning target volume (PTV; overlap cases, n = 8), or liver toxicity (nonoverlap, n = 7). IMRT plans were created using the gEUD to maximize the dose across the PTV and the NTCP to maintain the organ-at-risk toxicity to that of the conformal plan. Increased heterogeneity was allowed across the PTV in overlap cases, without compromising the minimal PTV dose of the conformal plan and restricting the maximal dose to within 110% of the mean. Three different beam arrangements were used for each case: seven-field equidistant axial, six-field noncoplanar (predominantly right-sided beams), and a reproduction of the conformal gantry angles. gEUDs were also computed and used for evaluation of the plans (regardless of planning technique) to reflect the response of both high- and low-grade tumors. The IMRT plan that allowed the greatest gEUD across the PTV was used in the comparison with the 3D-CRT plan. RESULTS: The use of IMRT significantly increased the maximal gEUD achievable across the PTV compared with the 3D-CRT plans. This was the case for the assumptions of both high- and low-grade tumors, irrespective of the tumor position within the liver. The mean gEUD increase was 11 Gy (high grade) and 18.0 Gy (low grade) for overlap cases (p = 0.001 and p = 0.003, respectively) and 10 Gy for nonoverlap cases (p = 0.020). When comparing the IMRT beam arrangements, gEUDs were considered equivalent if they differed by less than one fraction (1.5 Gy). In overlap cases (n = 8), an equivalent "best" gEUD value was obtained in 3, 5, and 7 cases for the original conformal angle, seven-field axial, and six-field noncoplanar plan, respectively. The corresponding results were 5, 2, and 3 in the cases without an overlap (n = 7). CONCLUSION: We have successfully used mathematical/biologic models directly as cost functions within the optimizing process to produce IMRT plans that maximize the gEUD while maintaining compliance with a well-defined protocol for the treatment of intrahepatic cancer. For both PTV-organ-at-risk overlap and nonoverlap situations, IMRT has the capacity to improve the maximal dose achievable across the PTV, expressed in terms of the gEUD. The use of multiple noncoplanar beams appears to confer an advantage over fewer beams in cases with PTV-organ-at-risk overlap. When liver toxicity is the dose-limiting factor, high gEUD values are obtained most frequently when the field arrangement is chosen to provide the shortest possible transhepatic path length.     

A potential to reduce pulmonary toxicity: the use of perfusion SPECT with IMRT for functional lung avoidance in radiotherapy of non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The study aimed to examine specific avoidance of functional lung (FL) defined by a single photon emission computerized tomography (SPECT) lung perfusion scan, using intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3-DCRT) in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with NSCLC underwent planning computerized tomography (CT) and lung perfusion SPECT scan in the treatment position using fiducial markers to allow co-registration in the treatment planning system. Radiotherapy (RT) volumes were delineated on the CT scan. FL was defined using co-registered SPECT images. Two inverse coplanar RT plans were generated for each patient: 4-field 3-DCRT and 5-field step-and-shoot IMRT. 3-DCRT plans were created using automated AutoPlan optimisation software, and IMRT plans were generated employing Pinnacle(3) treatment planning system (Philips Radiation Oncology Systems). All plans were prescribed to 64 Gy in 32 fractions using data for the 6 MV beam from an Elekta linear accelerator. The objectives for both plans were to minimize the volume of FL irradiated to 20 Gy (fV(20)) and dose variation within the planning target volume (PTV). A spinal cord dose was constrained to 46 Gy. Volume of PTV receiving 90% of the prescribed dose (PTV(90)), fV(20), and functional mean lung dose (fMLD) were recorded. The PTV(90)/fV(20) ratio was used to account for variations in both measures, where a higher value represented a better plan. RESULTS: Thirty-four RT plans of 17 patients with stage I-IIIB NSCLC suitable for radical RT were analysed. In 6 patients with stage I-II disease there was no improvement in PTV(90), fV(20), PTV/fV(20) ratio and fMLD using IMRT compared to 3-DCRT. In 11 patients with stage IIIA-B disease, the PTV was equally well covered with IMRT and 3-DCRT plans, with IMRT producing better PTV(90)/fV(20) ratio (mean ratio - 7.2 vs. 5.3, respectively, p=0.001) and reduced fMLD figures compared to 3-DCRT (mean value - 11.5 vs. 14.3 Gy, p=0.001). This was due to reduction in fV(20) while maintaining PTV coverage. CONCLUSION: The use of IMRT compared to 3-DCRT improves the avoidance of FL defined by perfusion SPECT scan in selected patients with locally advanced NSCLC. If the dose to FL is shown to be the primary determinant of lung toxicity, IMRT would allow for effective dose escalation by specific avoidance of FL.     

胃癌术后放疗方式对肾脏剂量学影响的比较研究

目的:比较胃癌术后三维适形放疗(3D-CRT)与调强适形放疗(IMRT)对肾脏剂量学的分布影响.方法:选择9例根治术后的进展期胃癌患者,应用Pinnacal三维计划系统(TPS)分别为每例患者设计4野3D-CRT和5、7野IMRT,所有计划给予处方剂量95％的计划靶体积(PTV)＞45 Gy; IMRT同时要求99％的PTV体积＞42.75 Gy.应用等剂量曲线及剂量体积直方图(DVH)比较各个计划之间靶区剂量的分布和肾脏的剂量受量差异.结果:4野3D-CRT和5、7野IMRT的靶区V45分别为0.96±0.03、0.95±0.02和0.95±0.02.所有计划靶区均满足处方剂量,与4野3D-CRT相比,IMRT明显提高靶区的剂量的均匀性(HI)和适形度(CI),并且降低双侧肾脏18 Gy的剂量体积百分比(V18),但在低剂量(10 Gy)体积百分比(V10)3种放射方式之间差异无统计学意义,P＞0.05.5和7野IMRT之间不论在靶区剂量分布还是危及器官的剂量受量上均差异无统计学意义,P＞0.05.结论:与3D-CRT比较,IMRT明显提高靶区均匀性,降低肾脏剂量受量和剂量体积百分比,但在V10上3种计划间差异无统计学意义.     

Potential benefits of using non coplanar field and intensity modulated radiation therapy to preserve the heart in irradiation of lung tumors in the middle and lower lobes

PURPOSE: Investigate whether the use of non coplanar fields and intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) reduces the dose to the heart, in irradiation of middle and lower lung tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four plans are compared on 10 CT scans: (1) a reference plan, corresponding to coplanar plan of 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT); (2) a 3DCRT(noncopl) plan, differing from reference plan by the change of one field in non coplanar fields; (3) an IMRT(copl) plan optimized on the same coplanar plan as reference plan; and (4) an IMRT(noncopl) plan optimized on the same non coplanar beams as 3DCRT(noncopl) plan. The equivalent uniform dose (EUD) for PTV was 74 Gy in 37 fractions. RESULTS: In all plans, the 95% isodose surface covers at least 99% of the PTV with very similar conformity index values. A significant reduction in EUD, V30, V40 and V50 is observed for heart when either non coplanar fields or IMRT is used. IMRT also reduces the lung NTCP, V5, V13, V20 and V30 values and esophagus NTCP. CONCLUSION: Both the use of non coplanar fields and IMRT dramatically reduces the dose received by the heart. The largest benefit is seen when the two techniques are combined.     

Feasibility of sparing lung and other thoracic structures with intensity-modulated radiotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer

PURPOSE: To investigate the possibility of using intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) to reduce the irradiated volumes of the normal lung and other critical structures in the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and to investigate the effect of IMRT on the potential of spreading low doses to large volumes of normal tissues in such treatment. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A retrospective treatment planning study was performed to compare IMRT and conventional three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) for 10 NSCLC patients (Stage I-IIIB). In the IMRT plans, three to nine coplanar beams were designed to treat 95% of the planning target volume with 63 Gy and to minimize the volumes of the normal lung, esophagus, heart, and spinal cord irradiated above their tolerance doses. The two types of plans were compared with respect to the planning target volume coverage, dose-volume histograms, and other dosimetric indexes of the normal structures. RESULTS: Comparing the nine-beam IMRT plan with the 3D-CRT plan, the percentage of lung volume that received >20 Gy and the mean lung dose were reduced for all cases, with a median reduction of 8% and 2 Gy, respectively. An additional reduction of the >5-Gy volume and >10-Gy volume for the lung and thoracic tissue was more difficult with IMRT, although still possible using fewer beams in IMRT. The integral dose to the entire thorax was equivalent and even reduced for 8 of 10 cases using IMRT. CONCLUSION: It is possible to reduce the volumes of low doses (such as the >10-Gy volume and >20-Gy volume) for thoracic normal tissues using IMRT. The increased integral dose and low-dose volumes can be avoided for IMRT if such concerns are addressed carefully in the inverse planning process and with optimization of the IMRT beam configuration.     

Minimising contralateral breast dose in post-mastectomy intensity-modulated radiotherapy by incorporating conformal electron irradiation

Purpose

To assess the potential benefit of incorporating conformal electron irradiation in intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for loco-regional post-mastectomy RT.

Patients and methods

Ten consecutive patients that underwent left-sided mastectomy were selected for this comparative planning study. Three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) photon-electron dose plans were compared to photon-only IMRT (IMRT_p) and photon IMRT with conformal electron irradiation (IMRT_p/e). The planning target volume (PTV) was prescribed 50 Gy and included the chest wall and the internal mammary and supra-clavicular lymph node regions. It was attempted to minimise dose delivered to heart, lungs and contralateral breast (CB), while maintaining adequate PTV coverage.

Results

All plans complied with objectives for PTV coverage. IMRT_p/e eliminated volumes receiving ?70 Gy (V70) that were present in 3D-CRT at the junction of photon and electron beams. Both IMRT strategies reduced heart V30 significantly below 3D-CRT levels. Mean heart dose with IMRT_p/e was the lowest and was equal to that with 3D-CRT. Minimising heart dose with IMRT_p resulted in irradiated CB volumes much larger than that with 3D-CRT. With IMRT_p/e, CB dose was only slightly increased when compared to 3D-CRT. Mean lung dose values were similar for IMRT and 3D-CRT. With IMRT, lung V20 was smaller, whereas V5 values for heart, lung and CB were higher than those with 3D-CRT.

Conclusions

Incorporation of conformal electron irradiation in post-mastectomy IMRT_p/e enables a heart dose reduction which can only be obtained with IMRT_p when allowing large irradiated volumes in the contralateral breast.     

胸上段食管癌三维适形和调强放疗剂量学对比研究

目的 筛选胸上段食管癌不同适形和调强放疗计划优选方案.方法 8例胸上段食管癌cT模拟后参考食管钡餐造影和食管镜结果勾画GTV,按统一标准外扩CTV和PTV,实施3、4、6个野适形治疗计划和3、4、5、7、9、11个野IMRT计划和s-IMRT计划,以95%PTV体积获得6000 cGy处方剂量进行归一,分析各治疗计划靶区剂量分布和危及器官受量,进行剂量学对比研究.结果 3套适形计划之间,PTV剂量参数和体积参数均相近(P＞0.05);6个野适形计划全肺V20高于4个野(P＜0.05),3、6个野适形计划MLD也高于4个野(P＜0.05).6套调强治疗计划中,3个野IMRT计划PTV D100低于9、11个野IMRT计划(P＜0.05);4个野IMRT计划IV高于9、11个野IMRT计划(P＜0.05);9、11个野IMRT计划PTV适形指数CI、剂量参数D95、体积参数V100和V95较57个野IMRT和s-IMRT计划无明显优势(P＞0.05);各IMRT计划之间危及器官受量相近(P＞0.05).胸上段食管癌4个野适形计划PTV CI、PTV剂量参数和体积参数均低于5、7个野IMRT计划和s-IMRT计划(P＜0.05);4个野适形计划全肺V20均高于5、7个野IMRT计划和s-IMRT计划(P＜0.05).结论 胸上段食管癌三维适形放疗中4个野适形计划可为优选方案,调强放疗中5、7个野IMRT计划和s-IMRT计划可为优选方案.胸上段食管癌5、7个野IMRT计划和s-IMRT计划优于4个野适形计划.     

Potential for reduced toxicity and dose escalation in the treatment of inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer: a comparison of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), 3D conformal radiation, and elective nodal irradiation

PURPOSE: To systematically evaluate four different techniques of radiation therapy (RT) used to treat non-small-cell lung cancer and to determine their efficacy in meeting multiple normal-tissue constraints while maximizing tumor coverage and achieving dose escalation. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Treatment planning was performed for 18 patients with Stage I to IIIB inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer using four different RT techniques to treat the primary lung tumor +/- the hilar/mediastinal lymph nodes: (1) Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), (2) Optimized three-dimensional conformal RT (3D-CRT) using multiple beam angles, (3) Limited 3D-CRT using only 2 to 3 beams, and (4) Traditional RT using elective nodal irradiation (ENI) to treat the mediastinum. All patients underwent virtual simulation, including a CT scan and (18)fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography scan, fused to the CT to create a composite tumor volume. For IMRT and 3D-CRT, the target included the primary tumor and regional nodes either > or =1.0 cm in short-axis dimension on CT or with increased uptake on PET. For ENI, the target included the primary tumor plus the ipsilateral hilum and mediastinum from the inferior head of the clavicle to at least 5.0 cm below the carina. The goal was to deliver 70 Gy to > or =99% of the planning target volume (PTV) in 35 daily fractions (46 Gy to electively treated mediastinum) while meeting multiple normal-tissue dose constraints. Heterogeneity correction was applied to all dose calculations (maximum allowable heterogeneity within PTV 30%). Pulmonary and esophageal constraints were as follows: lung V(20) < or =25%, mean lung dose < or =15 Gy, esophagus V(50) < or =25%, mean esophageal dose < or =25 Gy. At the completion of all planning, the four techniques were contrasted for their ability to achieve the set dose constraints and deliver tumoricidal RT doses. RESULTS: Requiring a minimum dose of 70 Gy within the PTV, we found that IMRT was associated with a greater degree of heterogeneity within the target and, correspondingly, higher mean doses and tumor control probabilities (TCPs), 7%-8% greater than 3D-CRT and 14%-16% greater than ENI. Comparing the treatment techniques in this manner, we found only minor differences between 3D-CRT and IMRT, but clearly greater risks of pulmonary and esophageal toxicity with ENI. The mean lung V(20) was 36% with ENI vs. 23%-25% with the three other techniques, whereas the average mean lung dose was approximately 21.5 Gy (ENI) vs. 15.5 Gy (others). Similarly, the mean esophagus V(50) was doubled with ENI, to 34% rather than 15%-18%. To account for differences in heterogeneity, we also compared the techniques giving each plan a tumor control probability equivalent to that of the optimized 3D-CRT plan delivering 70 Gy. Using this method, IMRT and 3D-CRT offered similar results in node-negative cases (mean lung and esophageal normal-tissue complication probability [NTCP] of approximately 10% and 2%-7%, respectively), but ENI was distinctly worse (mean NTCPs of 29% and 20%). In node-positive cases, however, IMRT reduced the lung V(20) and mean dose by approximately 15% and lung NTCP by 30%, compared to 3D-CRT. Compared to ENI, the reductions were 50% and >100%. Again, for node-positive cases, especially where the gross tumor volume was close to the esophagus, IMRT reduced the mean esophagus V(50) by 40% (vs. 3D-CRT) to 145% (vs. ENI). The esophageal NTCP was at least doubled converting from IMRT to 3D-CRT and tripled converting from IMRT to ENI. Finally, the total number of fractions for each plan was increased or decreased until all outlined normal-tissue constraints were reached/satisfied. While meeting all constraints, IMRT or 3D-CRT increased the deliverable dose in node-negative patients by >200% over ENI. In node-positive patients, IMRT increased the deliverable dose 25%-30% over 3D-CRT and 130%-140% over ENI. The use of 3D-CRT without IMRT increased the deliverable RT dose >80% over ENI. Using a limited number of 3D-CRT beams decreased the lung V(20), mean dose, and NTCP in node-positive patients. CONCLUSION: The use of 3D-CRT, particul mean dose, and NTCP in node-positive patients.The use of 3D-CRT, particularly with only 3 to 4 beam angles, has the ability to reduce normal-tissue toxicity, but has limited potential for dose escalation beyond the current standard in node-positive patients. IMRT is of limited additional value (compared to 3D-CRT) in node-negative cases, but is beneficial in node-positive cases and in cases with target volumes close to the esophagus. When meeting all normal-tissue constraints in node-positive patients, IMRT can deliver RT doses 25%-30% greater than 3D-CRT and 130%-140% greater than ENI. Whereas the possibility of dose escalation is severely limited with ENI, the potential for pulmonary and esophageal toxicity is clearly increased.     

胸中段食管癌5野适形放疗和5野调强放疗的剂量学分析

 【摘要】　目的　比较胸中段食管癌5野适形放疗（5CRT）和5野调强放疗（5IMRT）靶区剂量及正常组织剂量。方法　10例胸中段食管癌患者,每个患者设计1个5CRT计划和3个5IMRT计划,比较各个计划的各指标。结果　各个计划脊髓最大剂量（Dmax）、全肺平均剂量（Dmean）、左肺Dmean以及右肺V25、V30差异无统计学意义（均P＞0.05）;心脏V30、V40和Dmean差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）,以5IMRT2（28.67±15.97、13.04±7.28、2097.76±718.26）和5IMRT3（27.39±14.96、13.00±7.32、2096.16±718.85）最低,5CRT（43.27±18.69、26.83±19.18、2393.48±896.12）和5IMRT1（41.81±17.16、23.08±11.17、2403.77±834.73）最高。左肺V5、V10、V15、V20、V25和V30差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）,所有IMRT计划降低了V20、V25和V30,5IMRT1降低了V15（20.86±5.16）,未增加V5和V10（54.39±7.58、44.76±6.30）,5IMRT2（70.89±7.95、50.94±8.71、34.20±6.62）和5IMRT3（70.26±7.94、49.80±7.62、34.60±5.40）增加了V5、V10和V15。右肺V5、V10、V15、V20和Dmean差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）,所有IMRT计划降低了V20,增加了V5、V10,5IMRT1未增加V15（23.67±5.73）和Dmean（923.49±182.34）,5IMRT2未增加V15（26.72±6.79）,但增加了Dmean（1060.34±205.02）,5IMRT3增加了V15（32.40±6.59）和Dmean（1100.54±197.84）。计划靶体积（PTV）的Dmean、均匀性指数（HI）和适形度指数（CI）差异均有统计学意义（均P＜0.05）,PTV的Dmean以5IMRT1为最优（6219.80±37.90）,5IMRT3次之（6268.91±56.26）,HI以5IMRT1（0.0870±0.0219）和5IMRT3（0.0990±0.0219）最优,CI以5IMRT2（0.8682±0.0172）和5IMRT3（0.8667±0.0183）最优。 结论　5IMRT较5CRT在靶区均匀性、适形性及肺组织（V20、V25和V30）的保护方面更具优势,5IMRT1在肺低剂量保护（V5、V10、V15和Dmean）更有优势。     

宫颈癌术后快速旋转调强放疗和三维适形放疗计划的对比研究

目的 探讨宫颈癌术后快速旋转调强放疗（RapidArc）和三维适形放疗（3D-CRT）计划靶区及其周围危及器官（OAR）受照剂量的差异。方法 随机选择10 例宫颈癌术后患者,进行CT 扫描、靶区（PTV）和OAR的勾画,处方剂量50Gy。分别进行RapidArc和3D-CRT计划设计,计算并比较两种计划的PTV剂量均匀度指数（HI）、适形度指数（CI）、最大受照剂量（PTV Dmax）、最小受照剂量（PTV Dmin）、平均受照剂量（PTV Dmean）和OAR受照体积。结果 RapidArc计划的CI及PTV Dmean均优于3D-CRT计划;RapidArc计划对OAR（膀胱V50,直肠V40、V50,左、右股骨头V20）的保护优于3D-CRT计划（P＜0.05）。两种计划的PTV Dmax、PTV Dmin、HI和OAR受照体积（小肠V10、V20、V30、V40、V50,直肠V10、V20、V30, 膀胱V10、V20、V30、V40,左、右股骨头V10、V30、V40、V50）的差异均无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。结论 宫颈癌术后辅助放疗中,RapidArc计划在靶区CI和PTV Dmean方面均优于3D-CRT,同时RapidArc计划在正常组织保护上也有一定的优势。     

Assessment of extended-field radiotherapy for stage IIIC endometrial cancer using three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy, and helical tomotherapy

PURPOSE: To perform a dosimetric comparison of three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT), intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), and helical tomotherapy (HT) plans for pelvic and para-aortic RT in postoperative endometrial cancer patients; and to evaluate the integral dose (ID) received by critical structures within the radiation fields. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We selected 10 patients with Stage IIIC endometrial cancer. For each patient, three plans were created with 3D-CRT, IMRT, and HT. The IMRT and HT plans were both optimized to keep the mean dose to the planning target volume (PTV) the same as that with 3D-CRT. The dosimetry and ID for the critical structures were compared. A paired two-tailed Student t test was used for data analysis. RESULTS: Compared with the 3D-CRT plans, the IMRT plans resulted in lower IDs in the organs at risk (OARs), ranging from -3.49% to -17.59%. The HT plans showed a similar result except that the ID for the bowel increased 0.27%. The IMRT and HT plans both increased the IDs to normal tissue (see Table 1 and text for definition), pelvic bone, and spine (range, 3.31-19.7%). The IMRT and HT dosimetry showed superior PTV coverage and better OAR sparing than the 3D-CRT dosimetry. Compared directly with IMRT, HT showed similar PTV coverage, lower Ids, and a decreased dose to most OARs. CONCLUSION: Intensity-modulated RT and HT appear to achieve excellent PTV coverage and better sparing of OARs, but at the expense of increased IDs to normal tissue and skeleton. HT allows for additional improvement in dosimetry and sparing of most OARs.     

Intensity-modulated radiotherapy for lymphoma involving the mediastinum

PURPOSE: To determine the feasibility, potential advantage, and indications for intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in the treatment of Hodgkin's lymphoma or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma involving excessively large mediastinal disease volumes or requiring repeat RT. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Sixteen patients with Hodgkin's lymphoma (n = 11) or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (n = 5) undergoing primary radiotherapy or repeat RT delivered via an IMRT plan were studied. The indications for using an IMRT plan were previous mediastinal RT (n = 5) or extremely large mediastinal treatment volumes (n = 11). For each patient, IMRT, conventional parallel-opposed (AP-PA), and three-dimensional conformal (3D-CRT) plans were designed using 6-MV X-rays to deliver doses ranging from 18 to 45 Gy (median, 36 Gy). The plans were compared with regard to dose-volume parameters. The IMRT/AP-PA and IMRT/3D-CRT ratios were calculated for each parameter. RESULTS: For all patients, the mean lung dose was reduced using IMRT, on average, by 12% compared with AP-PA and 14% compared with 3D-CRT. The planning target volume coverage was also improved using IMRT compared with AP-PA but was not different from the planning target volume coverage obtained with 3D-CRT. CONCLUSION: In selected patients with Hodgkin's lymphoma and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma involving the mediastinum, IMRT provides improved planning target volume coverage and reduces pulmonary toxicity parameters. It is feasible for RT of large treatment volumes and allows repeat RT of relapsed disease without exceeding cord tolerance. Additional follow-up is necessary to determine whether improvements in dose delivery affect long-term morbidity and disease control.     

胸中下段食管癌三种放疗技术的剂量学比较

目的 比较食管癌常规二维照射（2D-RT）、三维适形治疗（3D-CRT）、5野调强放疗（5FsIMRT）和9野调强放疗（9FsIMRT）4种治疗计划的剂量学参数,寻找更优化的放疗技术。方法 应用三维治疗计划系统（3-DTPS）为40例胸中下段食管癌患者设计2D-RT、3D-CRT、5FsIMRT和9FsIMRT 4种治疗计划,应用剂量体积直方图评估各个计划的剂量学参数及正常组织的受照射体积。结果 2D-RT、3D-CRT、5FsIMRT和9FsIMRT 4种治疗计划的适形指数（CI）值分别为0.17±0.08、0.53±0.09、0.78±0.05、0.87±0.05,差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）;4种计划的均匀指数（HI）值分别为1.48±0.34、1.14±0.05、1.13±0.03、1.09±0.02, 2D-RT与3D-CRT相比,差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。IMRT计划在双肺的V₂₀和V₃₀、脊髓最大剂量、心脏的平均剂量及V₄₀方面均低于3D-CRT和2D-RT（P＜0.05）;9FsIMRT计划在双肺V5上高于5FsIMRT计划（P＜0.05）,在脊髓最大剂量上低于5FsIMRT（P＜0.05）。结论 IMRT计划在靶区剂量的均匀性、靶区适形度以及保护正常组织方面优于2D-RT和3D-CRT;9FsIMRT较5FsIMRT并未带来明显的剂量学改善。     

Dose and volume reduction for normal lung using intensity-modulated radiotherapy for advanced-stage non-small-cell lung cancer

PURPOSE: To investigate dosimetric improvements with respect to tumor-dose conformity and normal tissue sparing using intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) compared with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) for advanced-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Forty-one patients with Stage III-IV and recurrent NSCLC who previously underwent 3D-CRT were included. IMRT plans were designed to deliver 63 Gy to 95% of the planning target volume using nine equidistant coplanar 6-MV beams. Inverse planning was performed to minimize the volumes of normal lung, heart, esophagus, and spinal cord irradiated above their tolerance doses. Dose distributions and dosimetric indexes for the tumors and critical structures in both plans were computed and compared. RESULTS: Using IMRT, the median absolute reduction in the percentage of lung volume irradiated to >10 and >20 Gy was 7% and 10%, respectively. This corresponded to a decrease of >2 Gy in the total lung mean dose and of 10% in the risk of radiation pneumonitis. The volumes of the heart and esophagus irradiated to >40-50 Gy and normal thoracic tissue volume irradiated to >10-40 Gy were reduced using the IMRT plans. A marginal increase occurred in the spinal cord maximal dose and lung volume >5 Gy in the IMRT plans, which could be have resulted from the significant increase in monitor units and thus leakage dose in IMRT. CONCLUSION: IMRT planning significantly improved target coverage and reduced the volume of normal lung irradiated above low doses. The spread of low doses to normal tissues can be controlled in IMRT with appropriately selected planning parameters. The dosimetric benefits of IMRT for advanced-stage non-small-cell lung cancer must be evaluated further in clinical trials.     

Hybrid IMRT for treatment of cancers of the lung and esophagus

PURPOSE: To report on a hybrid intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT; static plus IMRT beams treated concurrently) technique for lung and esophageal patients to reduce the volume of lung treated to low doses while delivering a conformal dose distribution. METHODS: Treatment plans were analyzed for 18 patients (12 lung and 6 esophageal). Patients were treated with a hybrid technique that concurrently combines static (approximately two-thirds dose) and IMRT (approximately one-third dose) beams. These plans were compared with conventional three-dimensional (3D; non-IMRT) plans and all IMRT plans using custom four- and five-field arrangements and nine equally spaced coplanar beams. Plans were optimized to reduce V13 and V5 values. Dose-volume histograms were calculated for the planning target volume, heart, and the ipsilateral, contralateral, and total lung. Lung volumes V5, V13, V20, V30; mean lung dose (MLD); and the generalized equivalent uniform dose (gEUD) were calculated for each plan. RESULTS: Hybrid plans treated significantly smaller total and contralateral lung volumes with low doses than nine-field IMRT plans. Largest reductions were for contralateral lung V5, V13, and V20 values for lung (-11%, -15%, -7%) and esophageal (-16%, -20%, -7%) patients. Smaller reductions were found also for 3D and four- and five-field IMRT plans. MLD and gEUDs were similar for all plan types. The 3D plans treated much larger extra planning target volumes to prescribed dose levels. CONCLUSIONS: Hybrid IMRT demonstrated advantages for reduction of low-dose lung volumes in the thorax for reducing low dose to lung while also reducing the potential magnitude of dose deviations due to intrafraction motion and small field calculation accuracy.     

Dosimetric Evaluation of 3-D Conformal and Intensitymodulated Radiotherapy for Breast Cancer after Conservative Surgery

Background: Breast cancers are becoming more frequently diagnosed at early stages with improved longterm outcomes. Late normal tissue complications induced by radiotherapy must be avoided with new breastradiotherapy techniques being developed. The aim of the study was to compare dosimetric parameters of planningtarget volume (PTV) and organs at risk between conformal (CRT) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy(IMRT) after breast-conserving surgery. Materials and Methods: A total of 20 patients with early stage leftbreast cancer received adjuvant radiotherapy after conservative surgery, 10 by 3D-CRT and 10 by IMRT, witha dose of 50 Gy in 25 sessions. Plans were compared according to dose-volume histogram analyses in terms ofPTV homogeneity and conformity indices as well as organs at risk dose and volume parameters. Results: The HIand CI of PTV showed no difference between 3D-CRT and IMRT, V95 gave 9.8% coverage for 3D-CRT versus99% for IMRT, V107 volumes were recorded 11% and 1.3%, respectively. Tangential beam IMRT increasedvolume of ipsilateral lung V5 average of 90%, ipsilateral V20 lung volume was 13%, 19% with IMRT and3D-CRT respectively. Patients treated with IMRT, heart volume encompassed by 60% isodose (30 Gy) reducedby average 42% (4% versus 7% with 3D-CRT), mean heart dose by average 35% (495cGy versus 1400 cGywith 3D-CRT). In IMRT minimal heart dose average is 356 cGy versus 90cGy in 3D-CRT. Conclusions: IMRTreduces irradiated volumes of heart and ipsilateral lung in high-dose areas but increases irradiated volumes inlow-dose areas in breast cancer patients treated on the left side.     

Can All Centers Plan Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT) Effectively? An External Audit of Dosimetric Comparisons Between Three-Dimensional Conformal Radiotherapy and IMRT for Adjuvant Chemoradiation for Gastric Cancer

PURPOSE: To compare dosimetric endpoints between three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) at our center with limited IMRT experience, and to perform an external audit of the IMRT plans. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Ten patients, who received adjuvant chemoradiation for gastric cancer, formed the study cohort. For standardization, the planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk were recontoured with the assistance of a study protocol radiologic atlas. The cohort was replanned with CMS Xio to generate coplanar 3D-CRT and IMRT plans. All 10 datasets, including volumes but without the plans (i.e., blinded), were transmitted to an experienced center where IMRT plans were designed using Nomos Corvus (IMRT-C) and ADAC Pinnacle (IMRT-P). All IMRT plans were normalized to D95% receiving 45 Gy. RESULTS: Intensity-modulated radiotherapy yielded higher PTV V45 (volume that receives > or = 45 Gy) (p < 0.001) than 3D-CRT. No difference in V20 was seen in the right (p = 0.9) and left (p = 0.3) kidneys, but the liver mean dose (p < 0.001) was superior with IMRT. For the external audit, IMRT-C (p = 0.002) and IMRT-P (p < 0.001) achieved significantly lower left kidney V20 than IMRT, and IMRT-P (p < 0.001) achieved lower right kidney V20 than IMRT. The IMRT-C (p = 0.003) but not IMRT-P (p = 0.6) had lower liver mean doses than IMRT. CONCLUSIONS: At our institution with early IMRT experience, IMRT improved PTV dose coverage and liver doses but not kidney doses. An external audit of IMRT plans showed that an experienced center can yield superior IMRT plans.