Evaluation of volumetric modulated arc therapy for postmastectomy treatment

Radiation Oncology

Mary Ella Sanders²  John P Gibbons²  Jonas D Fontenot²  Geoffrey P Nichols¹ 

[1] Department of Physics and Astronomy, Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College, Baton Rouge, LA, USA;Mary Bird Perkins Cancer Center, Baton Rouge, LA 70809, USA

关键词: Post mastectomy;    Helical tomotherapy;    Volumetric modulated arc therapy;   

Others  :  811778
DOI  :  10.1186/1748-717X-9-66

 received in 2013-09-10, accepted in 2014-02-14,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Purpose

To examine the feasibility of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for post mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT).

Methods and materials

Fifteen PMRT patients previously treated at our clinic with helical tomotherapy (HT) were identified for the study. Planning target volumes (PTV) included the chest wall and regional lymph nodes. A systematic approach to constructing VMAT that met the clinical goals was devised. VMAT plans were then constructed for each patient and compared with HT plans with which they had been treated. The resulting plans were compared on the basis of PTV coverage; dose homogeneity index (DHI) and conformity index (CI); dose to organs at risk (OAR); tumor control probability (TCP), normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) and secondary cancer complication probability (SCCP); and treatment delivery time. Differences were tested for significance using the paired Student’s t-test.

Results

Both modalities produced clinically acceptable PMRT plans. VMAT plans showed better CI (p < 0.01) and better OAR sparing at low doses than HT plans, particularly at doses less than 5 Gy. On the other hand, HT plans showed better DHI (p < 0.01) and showed better OAR sparing at higher doses. Both modalities achieved nearly 100% tumor control probability and approximately 1% NTCP in the lungs and heart. VMAT showed lower SCCP than HT (p < 0.01), though both plans showed higher SCCP values than conventional mixed beam (electron-photon) plans reported by our group previously. VMAT plans required 66.2% less time to deliver than HT.

Conclusions

Both VMAT and HT provide acceptable treatment plans for PMRT. Both techniques are currently utilized at our institution.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Nichols et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Ashenafi M, Boyd RA, Lee TK, Lo KK, Gibbons JP, Rosen II, Fontenot JD, Hogstrom KR: Feasibility of postmastectomy treatment with helical TomoTherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2010, 77:836-842.
• [2]Clemente S, Wu B, Sanguineti G, Fusco V, Ricchetti F, Wong J, McNutt T: SmartArc-based volumetric modulated arc therapy for oropharyngeal cancer: a dosimetric comparison with both intensity-modulated radiation therapy and helical tomotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011, 80:1248-1255.
• [3]Fontenot JD, King ML, Johnson SA, Wood CG, Price MJ, Lo KK: Single-arc volumetric-modulated arc therapy can provide dose distributions equivalent to fixed-beam intensity-modulated radiation therapy for prostatic irradiation with seminal vesicle and/or lymph node involvement. Br J Radiol 2012, 85:231-236.
• [4]Matuszak MM, Yan D, Grills I, Martinez A: Clinical applications of volumetric modulated arc therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2010, 77:608-616.
• [5]Wolff D, Stieler F, Welzel G, Lorenz F, Abo-Madyan Y, Mai S, Herskind C, Polednik M, Steil V, Wenz F, Lohr F: Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) vs. serial tomotherapy, step-and-shoot IMRT and 3D-conformal RT for treatment of prostate cancer. Radiother Oncol 2009, 93:226-233.
• [6]Sakumi A, Shiraishi K, Onoe T, Yamamoto K, Haga A, Yoda K, Ohtomo K, Nakagawa K: Single-arc volumetric modulated arc therapy planning for left breast cancer and regional nodes. J Radiat Res 2012, 53:151-153.
• [7]Subramaniam S, Thirumalaiswamy S, Srinivas C, Gandhi GA, Kathirvel M, Kumar KK, Mallik S, Babaiah M, Pawar Y, Clivio A, Fogliata A, Mancosu P, Nicolini G, Vanetti E, Cozzi L: Chest wall radiotherapy with volumetric modulated arcs and the potential role of flattening filter free photon beams. Strahlenther Onkol 2012, 188:484-490.
• [8]Rao M, Yang W, Chen F, Sheng K, Ye J, Mehta V, Shepard D, Cao D: Comparison of Elekta VMAT with helical tomotherapy and fixed field IMRT: plan quality, delivery efficiency and accuracy. Med Phys 2010, 37:1350-1359.
• [9]Rong Y, Tang G, Welsh JS, Mohiuddin MM, Paliwal B, Yu CX: Helical tomotherapy versus single-arc intensity-modulated arc therapy: a collaborative dosimetric comparison between two institutions. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011, 81:284-296.
• [10]Emami B, Lyman J, Brown A, Coia L, Goitein M, Munzenrider JE, Shank B, Solin LJ, Wesson M: Tolerance of normal tissue to therapeutic irradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1991, 21:109-122.
• [11]Nichols G: A treatment planning comparison of dual-arc VMAT vs. helical tomotherapy for post-mastectomy radiotherapy. Louisiana State University; 2012. MS thesis (http://etd.lsu.edu/docs/available/etd-04252012-201208/unrestricted/GNichols_Thesis.pdf webcite)
• [12]Brenner DJ: Dose, volume, and tumor-control predictions in radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1993, 26:171-179.
• [13]Wigg D: Applied radiobiology and bioeffect planning. Madison, WI: Medical Physics Publishing; 2001.
• [14]Burman C, Kutcher GJ, Emami B, Goitein M: Fitting of normal tissue tolerance data to an analytic function. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1991, 21:123-135.
• [15]Kutcher GJ, Burman C: Calculation of complication probability factors for non-uniform normal tissue irradiation: the effective volume method. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1989, 16:1623-1630.
• [16]Lyman JT: Complication probability as assessed from dose-volume histograms. Radiat Res Suppl 1985, 8:S13-S19.
• [17]Kallman P, Agren A, Brahme A: Tumour and normal tissue responses to fractionated non-uniform dose delivery. Int J Radiat Biol 1992, 62:249-262.
• [18]Gagliardi G, Lax I, Ottolenghi A, Rutqvist LE: Long-term cardiac mortality after radiotherapy of breast cancer–application of the relative seriality model. Br J Radiol 1996, 69:839-846.
• [19]Schneider U, Kaser-Hotz B: Radiation risk estimates after radiotherapy: application of the organ equivalent dose concept to plateau dose–response relationships. Radiat Environ Biophys 2005, 44:235-239.
• [20]Schneider U, Kaser-Hotz B: A simple dose–response relationship for modeling secondary cancer incidence after radiotherapy. Z Med Phys 2005, 15:31-37.
• [21]Ogden CL, Fryar CD, Carroll MD, Flegal KM: Mean body weight, height, and body mass index, United States 1960–2002. Adv Data 2004, 347:1-17.
• [22]Popescu CC, Olivotto IA, Beckham WA, Ansbacher W, Zavgorodni S, Shaffer R, Wai ES, Otto K: Volumetric modulated arc therapy improves dosimetry and reduces treatment time compared to conventional intensity-modulated radiotherapy for locoregional radiotherapy of left-sided breast cancer and internal mammary nodes. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2010, 76:287-295.
• [23]Hijal T, Fournier-Bidoz N, Castro-Pena P, Kirova YM, Zefkili S, Bollet MA, Dendale R, Campana F, Fourquet A: Simultaneous integrated boost in breast conserving treatment of breast cancer: a dosimetric comparison of helical tomotherapy and three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol 2010, 94:300-306.
• [24]Recht A, Hayes DF, Eberlein TJ: Local-regional recurrence after mastectomy or breast conserving therapy. In Diseases of the breast. Edited by Harris JR, Lippman ME. Philadelphia, PA: Lippinncott; 1996:649-667.
• [25]Ito S, Parker BC, Levine R, Sanders ME, Fontenot J, Gibbons J, Hogstrom K: Verification of calculated skin doses in postmastectomy helical tomotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011, 81:584-591.
• [26]Chung H, Jin H, Dempsey JF, Liu C, Palta J, Suh TS, Kim S: Evaluation of surface and build-up region dose for intensity-modulated radiation therapy in head and neck cancer. Med Phys 2005, 32:2682-2689.