Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy Versus 3D Conformal Radiotherapy for Postoperative Gynecologic Cancer: Are They Covering the Same Planning Target Volume?
- PMID: 26973802
- PMCID: PMC4771573
- DOI: 10.7759/cureus.467
Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy Versus 3D Conformal Radiotherapy for Postoperative Gynecologic Cancer: Are They Covering the Same Planning Target Volume?
Abstract
Background and purpose: This study compares dosimetric parameters of planning target volume (PTV) coverage and organs at risk (OAR) sparing when postoperative radiotherapy for gynecologic cancers is delivered using volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) versus a four-field (4FLD) box technique.
Material and methods: From July to December 2012, women requiring postoperative radiation for gynecologic cancers were treated with a standardized VMAT protocol. Two sets of optimized 4FLD plans were retrospectively generated: one based on standard anatomical borders (4FLD) and one based on the clinical target volume (CTV) created for VMAT with a 2 cm expansion guiding field border placement (4FLD+2). Ninety-five percent isodose curves were generated to evaluate PTV coverage.
Results: VMAT significantly improved dose conformity compared with 4FLD and 4FLD+2 plans (p < 0.001) and provided additional coverage of the PTV posteriorly and superiorly, corresponding to coverage of the presacral and proximal iliac vessels. There was a significant reduction in dose to all OARs with VMAT, including a 58% reduction in the volume of the small bowel receiving more than 45 Gy (p=0.005).
Conclusions: Despite treating a larger volume, radiotherapy using a 4FLD technique is less homogenous and provides inferior coverage of the PTV compared with VMAT. With meticulous treatment planning and delivery, VMAT effectively encompasses the PTV and minimizes dose to OARs.
Keywords: cervix cancer; dosimetry; endometrial cancer; gynecological cancers; intensity-modulated radiotherapy (imrt).
Conflict of interest statement
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Figures
References
-
- Fifteen-year radiotherapy outcomes of the randomized PORTEC-1 trial for endometrial carcinoma. Creutzberg CL, Nout RA, Lybeert ML, Wárlám-Rodenhuis CC, Jobsen JJ, Mens JW, Lutgens LC, Pras E, van de Poll-Franse LV, van Putten WL, PORTEC Study Group. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011;81:0–38. - PubMed
-
- Vaginal brachytherapy versus pelvic external beam radiotherapy for patients with endometrial cancer of high-intermediate risk (PORTEC-2): an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised trial. Nout RA, Smit VT, Putter H, Jürgenliemk-Schulz IM, Jobsen JJ, Lutgens LC, van der Steen-Banasik EM, Mens JW, Slot A, Kroese MC, van Bunningen BN, Ansink AC, van Putten WL, Creutzberg CL; PORTEC Study Group. Lancet. 2010;375:816–823. - PubMed
-
- Keys HM, Roberts JA, Brunetto VL, Zaino RJ, Spirtos NM, Bloss JD, Pearlman A, Maiman MA, Bell JG, Gynecologic Oncology Group. Gynecol Oncol. Vol. 92. Oncol. 2004: 2004. A phase III trial of surgery with or without adjunctive external pelvic radiation therapy in intermediate risk endometrial adenocarcinoma: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study; pp. 744–751. - PubMed
-
- Adjuvant external beam radiotherapy in the treatment of endometrial cancer (MRC ASTEC and NCIC CTG EN.5 randomised trials): pooled trial results, systematic review, and meta-analysis. ASTEC/EN.5 Study Group, Blake P, Swart AM, Orton J, Kitchener H, Whelan T, Lukka H, Eisenhauer E, Bacon M, Tu D, Parmar MK, Amos C, Murray C, Qian W. Lancet. 2009;373:137–146. - PMC - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources