Comparison study of intensity modulated arc therapy using single or multiple arcs to intensity modulated radiation therapy for high-risk prostate cancer.
10.3857/roj.2013.31.2.104
- Author:
Hani ASHAMALLA
;
Ajay TEJWANI
;
Ioannis PARAMERITIS
;
Uma SWAMY
;
Pei Ching LUO
;
Adel GUIRGUIS
;
Amir LAVAF
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
High risk prostate cancer;
Intensity modulated arc therapy;
Intensity modulated radiation therapy;
RapidArc
- MeSH:
Humans;
Lymph Nodes;
Organothiophosphorus Compounds;
Organs at Risk;
Prostate;
Prostatic Neoplasms;
Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated;
Rectum;
Urinary Bladder
- From:Radiation Oncology Journal
2013;31(2):104-110
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: Intensity modulated arc therapy (IMAT) is a form of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) that delivers dose in single or multiple arcs. We compared IMRT plans versus single-arc field (1ARC) and multi-arc fields (3ARC) IMAT plans in high-risk prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixteen patients were studied. Prostate (PTVP), right pelvic (PTVRtLN) and left pelvic lymph nodes (PTVLtLN), and organs at risk were contoured. PTVP, PTVRtLN, and PTVLtLN received 50.40 Gy followed by a boost to PTVB of 28.80 Gy. Three plans were per patient generated: IMRT, 1ARC, and 3ARC. We recorded the dose to the PTV, the mean dose (DMEAN) to the organs at risk, and volume covered by the 50% isodose. Efficiency was evaluated by monitor units (MU) and beam on time (BOT). Conformity index (CI), Paddick gradient index, and homogeneity index (HI) were also calculated. RESULTS: Average Radiation Therapy Oncology Group CI was 1.17, 1.20, and 1.15 for IMRT, 1ARC, and 3ARC, respectively. The plans' HI were within 1% of each other. The DMEAN of bladder was within 2% of each other. The rectum DMEAN in IMRT plans was 10% lower dose than the arc plans (p < 0.0001). The GI of the 3ARC was superior to IMRT by 27.4% (p = 0.006). The average MU was highest in the IMRT plans (1686) versus 1ARC (575) versus 3ARC (1079). The average BOT was 6 minutes for IMRT compared to 1.3 and 2.9 for 1ARC and 3ARC IMAT (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: For high-risk prostate cancer, IMAT may offer a favorable dose gradient profile, conformity, MU and BOT compared to IMRT.
