Pancreatic cancer planning: Complex conformal vs modulated therapies.

To compare the roles of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric- modulated arc therapy (VMAT) therapy as compared to simple and complex 3-dimensional chemoradiotherpy (3DCRT) planning for resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. In all, 12 patients who received postoperative radiotherapy (8) or neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy (4) were evaluated retrospectively. Radiotherapy planning was performed for 4 treatment techniques: simple 4-field box, complex 5-field 3DCRT, 5 to 6-field IMRT, and single-arc VMAT. All volumes were approved by a single observer in accordance with Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) Pancreas Contouring Atlas. Plans included tumor/tumor bed and regional lymph nodes to 45Gy; with tumor/tumor bed boosted to 50.4Gy, at least 95% of planning target volume (PTV) received the prescription dose. Dose-volume histograms (DVH) for multiple end points, treatment planning, and delivery time were assessed. Complex 3DCRT, IMRT, and VMAT plans significantly (p < 0.05) decreased mean kidney dose, mean liver dose, liver (V30, V35), stomach (D10%), stomach (V45), mean right kidney dose, and right kidney (V15) as compared with the simple 4-field plans that are most commonly reported in the literature. IMRT plans resulted in decreased mean liver dose, liver (V35), and left kidney (V15, V18, V20). VMAT plans decreased small bowel (D10%, D15%), small bowel (V35, V45), stomach (D10%, D15%), stomach (V35, V45), mean liver dose, liver (V35), left kidney (V15, V18, V20), and right kidney (V18, V20). VMAT plans significantly decreased small bowel (D10%, D15%), left kidney (V20), and stomach (V45) as compared with IMRT plans. Treatment planning and delivery times were most efficient for simple 4-field box and VMAT. Excluding patient setup and imaging, average treatment delivery was within 10minutes for simple and complex 3DCRT, IMRT, and VMAT treatments. This article shows significant improvements in 3D plan performance with complex planning over the more frequently compared 3- or 4-field simple 3D planning techniques. VMAT plans continue to demonstrate potential for the most organ sparing. However, further studies are required to identify if dosimetric benefits associated with inverse optimized planning can be translated into clinical benefits and if these treatment techniques are value-added therapies for this group of patients with cancer.

Chapman KL ，Witek ME ，Chen H ，Showalter TN ，Bar-Ad V ，Harrison AS ... -  《-》

Protons offer reduced normal-tissue exposure for patients receiving postoperative radiotherapy for resected pancreatic head cancer.

To determine the potential role for adjuvant proton-based radiotherapy (PT) for resected pancreatic head cancer. Between June 2008 and November 2008, 8 consecutive patients with resected pancreatic head cancers underwent optimized intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) treatment planning. IMRT plans used between 10 and 18 fields and delivered 45 Gy to the initial planning target volume (PTV) and a 5.4 Gy boost to a reduced PTV. PTVs were defined according to the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9704 radiotherapy guidelines. Ninety-five percent of PTVs received 100% of the target dose and 100% of the PTVs received 95% of the target dose. Normal tissue constraints were as follows: right kidney V18 Gy to <70%; left kidney V18 Gy to <30%; small bowel/stomach V20 Gy to <50%, V45 Gy to <15%, V50 Gy to <10%, and V54 Gy to <5%; liver V30 Gy to <60%; and spinal cord maximum to 46 Gy. Optimized two- to three-field three-dimensional conformal proton plans were retrospectively generated on the same patients. The team generating the proton plans was blinded to the dose distributions achieved by the IMRT plans. The IMRT and proton plans were then compared. A Wilcoxon paired t-test was performed to compare various dosimetric points between the two plans for each patient. All proton plans met all normal tissue constraints and were isoeffective with the corresponding IMRT plans in terms of PTV coverage. The proton plans offered significantly reduced normal-tissue exposure over the IMRT plans with respect to the following: median small bowel V20 Gy, 15.4% with protons versus 47.0% with IMRT (p = 0.0156); median gastric V20 Gy, 2.3% with protons versus 20.0% with IMRT (p = 0.0313); and median right kidney V18 Gy, 27.3% with protons versus 50.5% with IMRT (p = 0.0156). By reducing small bowel and stomach exposure, protons have the potential to reduce the acute and late toxicities of postoperative chemoradiation in this setting.

Nichols RC Jr ，Huh SN ，Prado KL ，Yi BY ，Sharma NK ，Ho MW ，Hoppe BS ，Mendenhall NP ，Li Z ，Regine WF ... -  《-》

Dosimetric benefits of intensity-modulated radiotherapy and volumetric-modulated arc therapy in the treatment of postoperative cervical cancer patients.

As the advantage of using complex volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in the treatment of gynecologic cancer has not yet been fully determined, the purpose of this study was to investigate the dosimetric advantages of VMAT by comparing directly with whole pelvic conformal radiotherapy (CRT) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in the treatment of 15 postoperative cervical cancer patients. Four-field CRT, seven-field IMRT, and two-arc VMAT plans were generated for each patient with identical objective functions to achieve clinically acceptable dose distribution. Target coverage and OAR sparing differences were investigated through dose-volume histogram (DVH) analysis. Nondosimtric differences between IMRT and VMAT were also compared. Target coverage presented by V95% were 88.9% ± 3.8%, 99.9% ± 0.07%, and 99.9% ± 0.1% for CRT, IMRT, and VMAT, respectively. Significant differences on conformal index (CI) and conformal number (CN) were observed with CIs of 0.37 ± 0.07, 0.55 ± 0.04, 0.61 ± 0.04, and CNs of 0.33 ± 0.06, 0.55 ± 0.04, 0.60 ± 0.04 for CRT, IMRT, and VMAT, respectively. IMRT and VMAT decreased the dose to bladder and rectum significantly compared with CRT. No significant differences on the Dmean, V45, and V30 of small bowel were observed among CRT, IMRT, and VMAT. However, VMAT (10.4 ± 4.8 vs. 19.8 ± 11.0, P = 0.004) and IMRT (12.3 ± 5.0 vs. 19.8 ± 11.0, P = 0.02) decreased V40, increased the Dmax of small bowel and the irradiation dose to femoral heads compared with CRT. VMAT irradiated less dose to bladder, rectum, small bowel and larger volume of health tissue with a lower dose (V5 and V10) compared with IMRT, although the differences were not statistical significant. In conclusion, VMAT and IMRT showed significant dosimetric advantages both on target coverage and OAR sparing compared with CRT in the treatment of postoperative cervical cancer. However, no significant difference between IMRT and VMAT was observed except for slightly better dose conformity, slightly less MU, and significant shorter delivery time achieved for VMAT.

Deng X ，Han C ，Chen S ，Xie C ，Yi J ，Zhou Y ，Zheng X ，Deng Z ，Jin X ... -  《Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics》

A comprehensive dosimetric study of pancreatic cancer treatment using three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT), intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), volumetric-modulated radiation therapy (VMAT), and passive-scattering and modulated-

With traditional photon therapy to treat large postoperative pancreatic target volume, it often leads to poor tolerance of the therapy delivered and may contribute to interrupted treatment course. This study was performed to evaluate the potential advantage of using passive-scattering (PS) and modulated-scanning (MS) proton therapy (PT) to reduce normal tissue exposure in postoperative pancreatic cancer treatment. A total of 11 patients with postoperative pancreatic cancer who had been previously treated with PS PT in University of Pennsylvania Roberts Proton Therapy Center from 2010 to 2013 were identified. The clinical target volume (CTV) includes the pancreatic tumor bed as well as the adjacent high-risk nodal areas. Internal (iCTV) was generated from 4-dimensional (4D) computed tomography (CT), taking into account target motion from breathing cycle. Three-field and 4-field 3D conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT), 5-field intensity-modulated radiation therapy, 2-arc volumetric-modulated radiation therapy, and 2-field PS and MS PT were created on the patients' average CT. All the plans delivered 50.4Gy to the planning target volume (PTV). Overall, 98% of PTV was covered by 95% of the prescription dose and 99% of iCTV received 98% prescription dose. The results show that all the proton plans offer significant lower doses to the left kidney (mean and V18Gy), stomach (mean and V20Gy), and cord (maximum dose) compared with all the photon plans, except 3-field 3DCRT in cord maximum dose. In addition, MS PT also provides lower doses to the right kidney (mean and V18Gy), liver (mean dose), total bowel (V20Gy and mean dose), and small bowel (V15Gy absolute volume ratio) compared with all the photon plans and PS PT. The dosimetric advantage of PT points to the possibility of treating tumor bed and comprehensive nodal areas while providing a more tolerable treatment course that could be used for dose escalation and combining with radiosensitizing chemotherapy.

Ding X ，Dionisi F ，Tang S ，Ingram M ，Hung CY ，Prionas E ，Lichtenwalner P ，Butterwick I ，Zhai H ，Yin L ，Lin H ，Kassaee A ，Avery S ... -  《-》

Dosimetric comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy and intensity-modulated radiation therapy for pancreatic malignancies.

Volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) has been previously evaluated for several tumor sites and has been shown to provide significant dosimetric and delivery benefits when compared with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). To date, there have been no published full reports on the benefits of VMAT use in pancreatic patients compared with IMRT. Ten patients with pancreatic malignancies treated with either IMRT or VMAT were retrospectively identified. Both a double-arc VMAT and a 7-field IMRT plan were generated for each of the 10 patients using the same defined tumor volumes, organs at risk (OAR) volumes, dose, fractionation, and optimization constraints. The planning tumor volume (PTV) maximum dose (55.8 Gy vs. 54.4 Gy), PTV mean dose (53.9 Gy vs. 52.1 Gy), and conformality index (1.11 vs. 0.99) were statistically similar between the IMRT and VMAT plans, respectively. The VMAT plans had a statistically significant reduction in monitor units compared with the IMRT plans (1109 vs. 498, p < 0.001). In addition, the doses to the liver, small bowel, and spinal cord were comparable between the IMRT and VMAT plans. However, the VMAT plans demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in the mean left kidney V(25) (9.4 Gy vs. 2.3 Gy, p = 0.018), mean right kidney V(15) (53.4 Gy vs. 45.9 Gy, p = 0.035), V(20) (32.2 Gy vs. 25.5 Gy, p = 0.016), and V(25) (21.7 Gy vs. 14.9 Gy, p = 0.001). VMAT was investigated in patients with pancreatic malignancies and compared with the current standard of IMRT. VMAT was found to have similar or improved dosimetric parameters for all endpoints considered. Specifically, VMAT provided reduced monitor units and improved bilateral kidney normal tissue dose. The clinical relevance of these benefits in the context of pancreatic cancer patients, however, is currently unclear and requires further investigation.

Ali AN ，Dhabaan AH ，Jarrio CS ，Siddiqi AK ，Landry JC ... -  《-》