Normal Tissue Sparing via Adaptive Radiation Therapy for Head and Neck Cancers: Analysis with Biologically Effective Dose Distributions

2020 ◽  
Vol 106 (5) ◽  
pp. 1153-1154
Author(s):  
B.K.Y. Lee ◽  
J. Zhang ◽  
J.J. Cho-Lim ◽  
W. Inouye ◽  
S.P.H. Lee
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
Head And Neck ◽  
Effective Dose ◽  
Adaptive Radiation ◽  
Normal Tissue ◽  
Head And Neck Cancers ◽  
Biologically Effective Dose ◽  
Dose Distributions ◽  
Normal Tissue Sparing ◽  
Tissue Sparing

scholarly journals Influence of Target Location, Size, and Patient Age on Normal Tissue Sparing- Proton and Photon Therapy in Paediatric Brain Tumour Patient-Specific Approach

Cancers ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (9) ◽  
pp. 2578
Author(s):  
Mikaela Dell’Oro ◽  
Michala Short ◽  
Puthenparampil Wilson ◽  
Chia-Ho Hua ◽  
Melissa Gargone ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Normal Tissue ◽  
Optic Chiasm ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Patient Age ◽  
Dose Distributions ◽  
Intensity Modulated ◽  
Normal Tissue Sparing ◽  
Patient Âgé ◽  
Tissue Sparing ◽  
Photon Radiotherapy

Background: Proton radiotherapy produces superior dose distributions compared to photon radiotherapy, reducing side effects. Differences between the two modalities are not fully quantified in paediatric patients for various intracranial tumour sites or age. Understanding these differences may help clinicians estimate the benefit and improve referral across available centres. Our aim was to compare intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) and intensity-modulated photon radiotherapy (IMRT) radiation doses for select paediatric intracranial tumours. Methods: IMPT and IMRT dose distributions for gender-matched paediatric cranial CT-datasets (ages 5, 9 and 13 years) were retrospectively calculated to simulate irradiation of supratentorial (ependymoma) and infratentorial (medulloblastoma) target volumes diameters (1–3 cm) and position (central and 1–2 cm shifts). Results: Clinical dosimetric objectives were achieved for all 216 treatment plans. Whilst infratentorial IMPT plans achieved greater maximum dose sparing to optic structures (4.8–12.6 Gy optic chiasm), brainstem sparing was limited (~0.5 Gy). Mean dose difference for optic chiasm was associated with medulloblastoma target position (p < 0.0197). Supratentorial IMPT plans demonstrated greater dose reduction for the youngest patients (pituitary gland p < 0.001). Conclusions: Normal tissue sparing was achieved regardless of patient age for infratentorial tumours. However, for supratentorial tumours, there was a dosimetric advantage of IMPT across 9 vs. 13-year-old patients.

Significant improvement in normal tissue sparing and target coverage for head and neck cancer by means of helical tomotherapy

2006 ◽  
Vol 78 (3) ◽  
pp. 276-282 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudio Fiorino ◽  
Italo Dell'Oca ◽  
Alessio Pierelli ◽  
Sara Broggi ◽  
Elena De Martin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Head And Neck Cancer ◽  
Head And Neck ◽  
Neck Cancer ◽  
Normal Tissue ◽  
Helical Tomotherapy ◽  
Target Coverage ◽  
Normal Tissue Sparing ◽  
Tissue Sparing

Dosimetric analysis and comparison of volumetric-modulated arc therapy versus intensity-modulated radiation therapy for liver carcinoma

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-3
Author(s):  
Bing-Hao Chiang ◽  
Erich Schnell ◽  
Kerry Hibbitts ◽  
Terence Herman ◽  
Salahuddin Ahmad
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
Normal Tissue ◽  
Treatment Time ◽  
Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy ◽  
Liver Carcinoma ◽  
Dose Volume Histograms ◽  
Intensity Modulated ◽  
Normal Tissue Sparing ◽  
Arc Therapy ◽  
Tissue Sparing

Abstract Aim: This study dosimetrically compared volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) to intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMRT) for patients with liver carcinoma. Materials and methods: Ten patients with liver carcinoma previously treated with IMRT or VMAT were retrospectively selected for this study. Each patient received a total dose of 54 Gy in 1·8 Gy fractions. Dosimetric evaluations for each patient were performed using the dose–volume histograms (DVHs) for planning target volumes (PTVs) and organs at risk (OAR). All dosimetric parameters were statistically analysed using mean values, standard deviations and p-values for determining the significance. The conformality index (CI) and homogeneity index (HI) were calculated and compared. For efficiency evaluation, monitor units (MUs) and beam on times (BOT) were recorded. Results: Compared to IMRT, VMAT plans showed significant differences in the heterogeneity with p < 0·01 and insignificant differences in both conformality and normal tissue sparing. VMAT required marginally fewer mean MU and shorter BOT when compared to IMRT with insignificant differences. Conclusions: For radiation therapy treatment of liver carcinoma, IMRT and VMAT can achieve similar PTV coverage and normal tissue sparing. Treatment time is only marginally shorter with VMAT versus IMRT with insignificant differences.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document