Neurovascular bundle-sparing radiotherapy for prostate cancer using MRI-CT registration: A dosimetric feasibility study.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (2_suppl) ◽  
pp. 128-128
Author(s):  
Richard John Cassidy ◽  
Xiaofeng Yang ◽  
Tian Liu ◽  
Sherif Nour ◽  
Ashesh B. Jani

128 Background: Sexual dysfunction after radiotherapy for prostate cancer remains an important late adverse toxicity. The neurovascular bundles (NVB) that lie postero-laterally to the prostate are typically spared during prostatectomy, but in traditional radiotherapy planning they are not contoured as an organ-at-risk with dose constraints. Our goal was to determine the feasibility in sparing the NVB while still delivering adequate dose to the prostate. Methods: Twelve consecutive patients with intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer (with no gross disease within 2mm of either NVB) who were treated with external beam radiotherapy, with the same primary PTV margins, to a dose of 79.2 Gy were evaluated. Pelvic MRI and simulation CT scans were registered using dedicated software to allow for bilateral NVB target delineation on T2-weighted MRI. A volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plan was generated using the NVB bilaterally with 2mm margin as an organ to spare (with goal of reducing V70Gy by 30%) and compared to the patient’s delivered plan. Dose-volume histogram (DVH) endpoints for NVB, rectum, bladder, and PTV79.2 were compared between the two plans using a 2-tailed paired t-test. Results: The V70 for the NVB was significantly lower on the NVB sparing plan (p <0.01), while rectum and bladder endpoints were similar. Target V100% was lower (but still > 95%), and V105 was higher for the NVB Sparing plans (p <0.01). The table summarizes the DVH comparisons between the two plans. Conclusions: “NVB-sparing” radiotherapy is dosimetrically feasible using VMAT technology; target coverage is acceptable without increased dose to other normal structures, but with higher target dose inhomogeneity. The clinical impact of “NVH-sparing” radiotherapy is currently under study at our institution. [Table: see text]

2022 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ingrid Masson ◽  
Martine Bellanger ◽  
Geneviève Perrocheau ◽  
Marc-André Mahé ◽  
David Azria ◽  
...  

BackgroundIntensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) combined with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has become the standard treatment for patients with high-risk prostate cancer. Two techniques of rotational IMRT are commonly used in this indication: Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) and helical tomotherapy (HT). To the best of our knowledge, no study has compared their related costs and clinical effectiveness and/or toxicity in prostate cancer. We aimed to assess differences in costs and toxicity between VMAT and HT in patients with high-risk prostate cancer with pelvic irradiation.Material and MethodsWe used data from the “RCMI pelvis” prospective multicenter study (NCT01325961) including 155 patients. We used a micro-costing methodology to identify cost differences between VMAT and HT. To assess the effects of the two techniques on total actual costs per patient and on toxicity we used stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting.ResultsThe mean total cost for HT, €2019 3,069 (95% CI, 2,885–3,285) was significantly higher than the mean cost for VMAT €2019 2,544 (95% CI, 2,443–2,651) (p &lt;.0001). The mean ± SD labor and accelerator cost for HT was €2880 (± 583) and €1978 (± 475) for VMAT, with 81 and 76% for accelerator, respectively. Acute GI and GU toxicity were more frequent in VMAT than in HT (p = .021 and p = .042, respectively). Late toxicity no longer differed between the two groups up to 24 months after completion of treatment.ConclusionUse of VMAT was associated with lower costs for IMRT planning and treatment than HT. Similar stabilized long-term toxicity was reported in both groups after higher acute GI and GU toxicity in VMAT. The estimates provided can benefit future modeling work like cost-effectiveness analysis.


2011 ◽  
Vol 99 ◽  
pp. S382
Author(s):  
B. Smolska-Ciszewska ◽  
G. Plewicki ◽  
M. Giglok ◽  
K. Behrendt ◽  
M. Gawkowska-Suwinska ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document