Dosimetric comparison of TomoDirect, helical tomotherapy, VMAT, and ff-IMRT for upper thoracic esophageal carcinoma.

The new TomoDirect (TD) modality offers a nonrotational option with discrete beam angles. We aim to compare dosimetric parameters of TD, helical tomotherapy (HT), volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT), and fixed-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy (ff-IMRT) for upper thoracic esophageal carcinoma (EC). Twenty patients with cT2-4N0-1M0 upper thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) were enrolled. Four plans were generated using the same dose objectives for each patient: TD, HT, VMAT with a single arc, and ff-IMRT with 5 fields (5F). The prescribed doses were used to deliver 50.4 Gy/28F to the planning target volume (PTV50.4) and then provided a 9 Gy/5F boost to PTV59.4. Dose-volume histogram (DVH) statistics, dose uniformity, and dose homogeneity were analyzed to compare treatment plans. For PTV59.4, the D2, D98, Dmean, and V100% values in HT were significantly lower than other plans (all p < 0.05), and those in TD were significantly lower than VMAT and ff-IMRT (all p < 0.05). However, there was no significant difference in the D2 and Dmean values between VMAT and ff-IMRT techniques (p > 0.05). The homogeneity index (HI) differed significantly for the 4 techniques of TD, HT, VMAT, and ff-IMRT (0.03 ± 0.01, 0.02 ± 0.01, 0.06 ± 0.02, and 0.05 ± 0.01, respectively; p  < 0.001). The HI for TD was similar to HT (p = 0.166), and had statistically significant improvement compared to VMAT (p < 0.001) and ff-IMRT (p = 0.003). In comparison with the 4 conformity indices (CIs), there was no significant difference (p > 0.05). For PTV50.4, the D2 and Dmean values in HT were significantly lower than other plans (all p < 0.05), and those in TD were significantly lower than VMAT and ff-IMRT (all p < 0.05). However, there was no significant difference in the D2 and Dmean values between VMAT and ff-IMRT techniques (p > 0.05). No D98 and V100% parameters differed significantly among the 4 treatment types (p > 0.05). HT plans were provided for statistically significant improvement in HI (0.03 ± 0.01) compared to TD plans (0.05 ± 0.01, p = 0.003), VMAT (0.08 ± 0.03, p < 0.001), ff-IMRT (0.08 ± 0.01, p < 0.001). The HI revealed that TD was superior to VMAT and ff-IMRT (p < 0.05). The CI differed significantly for the 4 techniques of TD, HT, VMAT, and ff-IMRT (0.59 ± 0.10, 0.69 ± 0.11, 0.64 ± 0.09, and 0.64 ± 0.11, respectively; p = 0.035). The best CI was yielded by HT. We found no significant difference for the V5, V10, V15, V30, and the mean lung dose (MLD) among the 4 techniques (all p > 0.05). However, the V20 differed significantly among TD, HT, VMAT, and ff-IMRT (21.50 ± 7.20%, 19.50 ± 5.55%, 17.65 ± 5.45%, and 16.35 ± 5.70%, respectively; p = 0.047). Average V20 for the lungs was significantly improved by the TD plans compared to VMAT (p = 0.047), and ff-IMRT (p = 0.008). The V5 value of the lung in TD was 49.30 ± 13.01%, lower than other plans, but there was no significant difference (p > 0.05). The D1 of the spinal cord showed no significant difference among the 4 techniques (p = 0.056). All techniques are able to provide a homogeneous and highly conformal dose distribution. The TD technique is a good option for treating upper thoracic EC involvement. It could achieve optimal low dose to the lungs and spinal cord with acceptable PTV coverage. HT is a good option as it could achieve quality dose conformality and uniformity, while TD generated superior conformality.

Zhang Y ，Wang H ，Huang X ，Zhang Q ，Ren R ，Sun R ，Zheng Z ，Dong S ，Zheng A ... -  《-》

Volumetric-modulated arc therapy vs. c-IMRT in esophageal cancer: a treatment planning comparison.

Yin L ，Wu H ，Gong J ，Geng JH ，Jiang F ，Shi AH ，Yu R ，Li YH ，Han SK ，Xu B ，Zhu GY ... -  《-》

Volumetric-modulated arc therapy for the treatment of a large planning target volume in thoracic esophageal cancer.

Abbas AS ，Moseley D ，Kassam Z ，Kim SM ，Cho C ... -  《Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics》

[Dosimetric comparison of the helical tomotherapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy and volumetric-modulated arc therapy in radical radiotherapy for esophageal cancer].

Xu YJ ，Li P ，Hu X ，Wang J ，Ma HL ，Chen M ... -  《-》

Dosimetric comparison of helical tomotherapy, RapidArc, and a novel IMRT & Arc technique for esophageal carcinoma.

To compare radiotherapy treatment plans for mid- and distal-esophageal cancer with primary involvement of the gastroesophageal (GE) junction using a novel IMRT & Arc technique (IMRT & Arc), helical tomotherapy (HT), and RapidArc (RA1 and RA2). Eight patients treated on HT for locally advanced esophageal cancer with radical intent were re-planned for RA and IMRT&Arc. RA plans employed single and double arcs (RA1 and RA2, respectively), while IMRT&Arc plans had four fixed-gantry IMRT fields and a conformal arc. Dose-volume histogram statistics, dose uniformity, and dose homogeneity were analyzed to compare treatment plans. RA2 plans showed significant improvement over RA1 plans in terms of OAR dose and PTV dose uniformity and homogeneity. HT plan provided best dose uniformity (p=0.001) and dose homogeneity (p=0.002) to planning target volume (PTV), while IMRT&Arc and RA2 plans gave lowest dose to lungs among four radiotherapy techniques with acceptable PTV dose coverage. Mean V(10) of the lungs was significantly reduced by the RA2 plans compared to IMRT&Arc (40.3%, p=0.001) and HT (66.2%, p<0.001) techniques. Mean V(15) of the lungs for the RA2 plans also showed significant improvement over the IMRT&Arc (25.2%, p=0.042) and HT (34.8%, p=0.027) techniques. These improvements came at the cost of higher doses to the heart volume compared to HT and IMRT&Arc techniques. Mean lung dose (MLD) for the IMRT&Arc technique (21.2 ± 5.0% of prescription dose) was significantly reduced compared to HT (26.3%, p=0.004), RA1 (23.3%, p=0.028), and RA2 (23.2%, p=0.017) techniques. The IMRT&Arc technique is a good option for treating esophageal cancer with thoracic involvement. It achieved optimal low dose to the lungs and heart with acceptable PTV coverage. HT is a good option for treating esophageal cancer with little thoracic involvement as it achieves superior dose conformality and uniformity. The RA2 technique provided for improved treatment plans using additional arcs with low doses to the lungs at the cost of increased heart dose. Plan quality could still be improved through the use of additional arcs.

Martin S ，Chen JZ ，Rashid Dar A ，Yartsev S ... -  《-》