Comparison and Evaluation of Different Radiotherapy Techniques Using Biodosimetry Based on Cytogenetics

While rapid technological advances in radiotherapy techniques have led to a more precise delivery of radiation dose and to a decreased risk of side effects, there is still a need to evaluate the efficacy of the new techniques estimating the biological dose and to investigate the radiobiological impact of the protracted radiotherapy treatment duration. The aim of this study is to compare, at a cytogenetic level, advanced radiotherapy techniques VMAT and IMRT with the conventional 3D-CRT, using biological dosimetry. A dicentric biodosimetry assay based on the frequency of dicentrics chromosomes scored in peripheral blood lymphocytes from prostate cancer patients and PC3 human prostate cancer cell line was used. For each patient blood sample and each subpopulation of the cultured cell line, three different irradiations were performed using the 3D-CRT, IMRT, and VMAT technique. The absorbed dose was estimated with the biodosimetry method based on the induced dicentric chromosomes. The results showed a statistically significant underestimation of the biological absorbed dose of ~6% for the IMRT and VMAT compared to 3D-CRT irradiations for peripheral blood lymphocytes, whereas IMRT and VMAT results were comparable without a statistically significant difference, although slightly lower values were observed for VMAT compared to IMRT irradiation. Similar results were obtained using the PC3 cell line. The observed biological dose underestimation could be associated with the relative decreased dose rate and increase irradiation time met in modulated techniques compared to the conventional 3D-CRT irradiations.

Advanced Radiotherapy Techniques for Mediastinal Lymphomas: Results from an Italian Survey

Background: Multiple methods have been implemented to limit the impact of radiotherapy on patients affected by mediastinal lymphoma, including breathing control techniques, image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), although the actual diffusion of such techniques is unclear. No surveys have been published to date evaluating the techniques adopted at different centers. Methods: A survey with a dedicated questionnaire was submitted to 195 Italian radiotherapy centers, assessing items regarding the characteristics of the center and clinical practice in the treatment of mediastinal lymphomas. Results: A total of 43 centers (22%) responded, the majority of which were university hospitals (37.2%) or cancer care centers (27.9%). In 95.4% of the centers, IMRT was used in the clinical practice, and the most frequently employed techniques were VMAT (48.8% of centers) and non-rotational IMRT (31.7%). Comparison of multiple plans was performed by 66.7% of the responding centers. Dose constraints for organs at risk were consistently prescribed. IGRT techniques were adopted by 93% of the centers, while breathing control or gating techniques were routinely used by only 25.6% of the centers. A necessity to standardize OAR constraints and define guidelines was perceived by almost all participants. Conclusions: Modern radiotherapy techniques are widely used in the Italian centers, although with heterogeneous characteristics.