Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.14316/pmp.2021.32.3.70

Dosimetric Evaluation of Low-Dose Spillage Volumes for Head and Neck Cancer Using Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy and Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy Treatment Techniques  

Kumar, Gourav (Medical Physics Division & Department of Radiation Oncology, Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre)
Bhushan, Manindra (Medical Physics Division & Department of Radiation Oncology, Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre)
Kumar, Lalit (Medical Physics Division & Department of Radiation Oncology, Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre)
Kishore, Vimal (Department of Applied Science & Humanities, Bundelkhand Institute of Engineering & Technology)
Raman, Kothanda (Medical Physics Division & Department of Radiation Oncology, Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre)
Kumar, Pawan (Medical Physics Division & Department of Radiation Oncology, Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre)
Barik, Soumitra (Medical Physics Division & Department of Radiation Oncology, Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre)
Purohit, Sandeep (Medical Physics Division & Department of Radiation Oncology, Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre)
Publication Information
Progress in Medical Physics / v.32, no.3, 2021 , pp. 70-81 More about this Journal
Abstract
Purpose: This study was designed to investigate the dosimetric difference between intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in head and neck cancer (HNC). The study primarily focuses on low-dose spillage evaluation between these two techniques. Methods: This retrospective study involved 45 patients with HNC. The treatment plans were generated using the IMRT and VMAT techniques for all patients. Dosimetric comparisons were performed in terms of target coverage, organ-at-risk (OAR) sparing, and various parameters, including conformity index, uniformity index, homogeneity index, conformation number, low-dose volumes, and normal tissue integral dose (NTID). Results: No significant (P>0.05) difference in planning target volume coverage (D95%) was observed between IMRT and VMAT plans for supraglottic larynx, hard palate, and tongue cancers. A decrease in dose volumes ranging from 1 Gy to 30 Gy was observed for VMAT plans compared with those for IMRT plans, except for V1Gy and V30Gy for supraglottic larynx cancer and V1Gy for tongue cancer. Moreover, decreases (P<0.05) in NTID were observed for VMAT plans compared with that for IMRT plans in supraglottic larynx (4.50%), hard palate (12.80%), and tongue (7.76%) cancers. In contrast, a slight increase in monitor units for VMAT compared with those for IMRT in supraglottic larynx (0.46%), hard palate (2.54%), and tongue (7.56%) cancers. Conclusions: For advanced-stage HNC, both IMRT and VMAT offer satisfactory clinical plans. VMAT offers a conformal and homogeneous dose distribution with comparable OAR sparing and higher dose falloff outside the target volume than IMRT, which provides an edge to reduce the risk of secondary malignancies for HNC over IMRT.
Keywords
Intensity-modulated radiation therapy; Volumetric modulated arc therapy; Head and neck cancer; Low-dose spillage; Radiotherapy;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Followill D, Geis P, Boyer A. Estimates of whole-body dose equivalent produced by beam intensity modulated conformal therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1997;38:667-672.   DOI
2 Kry SF, Bednarz B, Howell RM, Dauer L, Followill D, Klein E, et al. AAPM TG 158: Measurement and calculation of doses outside the treated volume from external-beam radiation therapy. Med Phys. 2017;44:e391-e429.   DOI
3 Vigneswaran N, Williams MD. Epidemiologic trends in head and neck cancer and aids in diagnosis. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2014;26:123-141.   DOI
4 Hall EJ. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy, protons, and the risk of second cancers. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;65:1-7.   DOI
5 Radhakrishnan S, Chandrasekaran A, Sarma Y, Balakrishnan S, Nandigam J. Dosimetric comparison between single and dual arc-volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy and intensity modulated radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma using a simultaneous integrated boost technique. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2017;18:1395-1402.
6 Nithya L, Raj NA, Kumar A, Rathinamuthu S, Pandey MB. Comparative analysis of volumetric-modulated arc therapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy for base of tongue cancer. J Med Phys. 2014;39:121-126.   DOI
7 Edwards CR, Mountford PJ. Near surface photon energy spectra outside a 6 MV field edge. Phys Med Biol. 2004;49: N293-N301.   DOI
8 Hauri P, Schneider U. Whole-body dose equivalent including neutrons is similar for 6 MV and 15 MV IMRT, VMAT, and 3D conformal radiotherapy. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2019;20:56-70.   DOI
9 Bhattacharjee A, Chakraborty A, Purkaystha P. Prevalence of head and neck cancers in the North East-an institutional study. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2006;58:15-19.   DOI
10 Sharma JD, Baishya N, Kataki AC, Kalita CR, Das AK, Rahman T. Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma in young adults: a hospital-based study. Indian J Med Paediatr Oncol. 2019;40(S1):S18-S22.   DOI
11 Gregoire V, Lefebvre JL, Licitra L, Felip E; EHNS-ESMO-ESTRO Guidelines Working Group. Squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: EHNS-ESMO-ESTRO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2010;21 Suppl 5:v184-v186.   DOI
12 Verbakel WF, Cuijpers JP, Hoffmans D, Bieker M, Slotman BJ, Senan S. Volumetric intensity-modulated arc therapy vs. conventional IMRT in head-and-neck cancer: a comparative planning and dosimetric study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009;74:252-259.   DOI
13 Gupta T, Agarwal J, Jain S, Phurailatpam R, Kannan S, Ghosh-Laskar S, et al. Three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) versus intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: a randomized controlled trial. Radiother Oncol. 2012;104:343-348.   DOI
14 DE Felice F, Pranno N, Papi P, Brugnoletti O, Tombolini V, Polimeni A. Xerostomia and clinical outcomes in definitive intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) versus three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: a meta-analysis. In Vivo. 2020;34:623-629.   DOI
15 Otto K. Volumetric modulated arc therapy: IMRT in a single gantry arc. Med Phys. 2008;35:310-317.   DOI
16 Stovall M, Blackwell CR, Cundiff J, Novack DH, Palta JR, Wagner LK, et al. Fetal dose from radiotherapy with photon beams: report of AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group No. 36. Med Phys. 1995;22:63-82.   DOI
17 Holt A, Van Gestel D, Arends MP, Korevaar EW, Schuring D, Kunze-Busch MC, et al. Multi-institutional comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy vs. intensity-modulated radiation therapy for head-and-neck cancer: a planning study. Radiat Oncol. 2013;8:26.   DOI
18 Kumar L, Bhushan M, Kishore V, Yadav G, Gurjar OP. Dosimetric validation of Acuros® XB algorithm for RapidArc™ treatment technique: a post software upgrade analysis. J Cancer Res Ther. 2021. doi: 10.4103/jcrt.JCRT_1154_19.   DOI
19 Hall EJ, Wuu CS. Radiation-induced second cancers: the impact of 3D-CRT and IMRT. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;56:83-88.   DOI
20 Ge X, Liao Z, Yuan J, Mao D, Li Y, Yu E, et al. Radiotherapyrelated quality of life in patients with head and neck cancers: a meta-analysis. Support Care Cancer. 2020;28:2701- 2712.   DOI
21 Studenski MT, Bar-Ad V, Siglin J, Cognetti D, Curry J, Tuluc M, et al. Clinical experience transitioning from IMRT to VMAT for head and neck cancer. Med Dosim. 2013;38:171-175.   DOI
22 Kumar L, Yadav G, Raman K, Bhushan M, Pal M. The dosimetric impact of different photon beam energy on RapidArc radiotherapy planning for cervix carcinoma. J Med Phys. 2015;40:207-213.   DOI
23 Kumar L, Yadav G, Samuvel KR, Bhushan M, Kumar P, Suhail M, et al. Dosimetric influence of filtered and flattening filter free photon beam on rapid arc (RA) radiotherapy planning in case of cervix carcinoma. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother. 2017;22:10-18.   DOI
24 Diallo I, Haddy N, Adjadj E, Samand A, Quiniou E, Chavaudra J, et al. Frequency distribution of second solid cancer locations in relation to the irradiated volume among 115 patients treated for childhood cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009;74:876-883.   DOI
25 Nagarajan M, Banu R, Sathya B, Sundaram T, Chellapandian TP. Dosimetric evaluation and comparison between volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plan in head and neck cancers. Gulf J Oncolog. 2020;1:45-50.
26 ICRU Report 83. Prescribing, recording, and reporting intensity-modulated photon-beam therapy (IMRT). ICRU Report. Bethesda: ICRU. 2010; 83.
27 IMPAC Medical Systems, Inc. Monaco® training guide. Stockholm: Elekta AB; 2013.
28 Kumar L, Yadav G, Kishore V, Bhushan M, Gairola M, Tripathi D. Validation of the RapidArc delivery system using a volumetric phantom as per task group report 119 of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine. J Med Phys. 2019;44:126-134.
29 Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68:394-424.   DOI
30 Osborn J. Is VMAT beneficial for patients undergoing radiotherapy to the head and neck? Radiography (Lond). 2017;23:73-76.   DOI
31 Gayen S, Kombathula SH, Manna S, Varshney S, Pareek P. Dosimetric comparison of coplanar and non-coplanar volumetric-modulated arc therapy in head and neck cancer treated with radiotherapy. Radiat Oncol J. 2020;38:138-147.   DOI