Quantitative Assessment of Distance Radiotherapy Plans for Patients with Uterine Cancer
https://doi.org/10.37174/2587-7593-2022-5-2-9-17
Abstract
Purpose: To carry out a quantitative assessment of the quality of planning the remote radiotherapy component of patients with uterine body cancer for three different radiotherapy technologies: 3D conformal radiation therapy 3D-CRT, radiation therapy with intensity modulation IMRT, and with intensity modulation in the rotational mode RapidArc. To determine radiation exposure to critical organs.
Material and methods: Radiotherapy plans for 102 patients were calculated using the Eclipse (Varian) planning system. Plans were evaluated using homogeneity and conformity indices from dose-volume histograms. When analyzing dose loads on the rectum, bladder and pelvic bones, a differential dose-volume characteristic was used, which reflects the modal dose Ddif. Radiotherapy was carried out on accelerators of the ClinaciX (Varian) model with a photon of 6 MV.
Results and conclusion: It turned out that 3D-CRT and IMRT are the most favorable methods for the remote component of radiotherapy. The smallest value of the modal dose Ddif for the rectum is achieved with the RapidArc method and is 41 ± 10 Gy. The smallest value of the modal dose Ddif for the bladder is also achieved with the RapidArc method and is 45 ± 9 Gy. The dose loads on the femoral heads are approximately the same for all three irradiation methods.
About the Authors
I. M. Lebedenko
N.N. Blokhin National Medical Research Center of Oncology
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
24 Kashirskoye Highway, Moscow, 115478
L. Sh. Usmanova
N.N. Blokhin National Medical Research Center of Oncology
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
24 Kashirskoye Highway, Moscow, 115478
A. A. Mezheumova
National Research Nuclear University MEPhI (Moscow Engineering Physics Institute)
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
31 Kashirskoye Highway, Moscow, 115409
References
1. Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J Cancer. 2015 Mar 1;136(5):E359-86. DOI: 10.1002/ijc.29210.
2. Belikova AA, Gerasimov VA, Ivanov SA, et al. Risk factors for local and distant progression in patients with non-small cell lung and breast cancer after whole brain irradiation. Medical Physics. 2021;(2(90)):29-38. (In Russian).
3. Lebedenko IM, Bykova YuB, Boldyreva VA, et al. Estimation of dose distribution in the planned target volume using the homogeneity index. Medical physics. 2017;(1(73)):34-8. (In Russian).
4. Lebedenko IM, Kravets OA, Bykova YuB, et al. Quantitative assessment of the quality of planning the remote radiotherapy in cervical cancer patients. Problems in Оncology. 2016;6:827-30. (In Russian).
5. Lebedenko IM, Romanova EA, Belova AA, et al. Quantitative Assessment of the Quality of Treatment Planning for Patients with Advanced Cervical Cancer. Biomed Eng 2018;52:263-6. DOI: 10.1007/s10527-018-9826-8.
6. Hodapp N. Der ICRU-Report 83: Verordnung, Dokumentation und Kommunikation der fluenzmodulierten Photonenstrahlentherapie (IMRT) [The ICRU Report 83: Prescribing, Recording and Reporting Photon-Beam Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT)]. Strahlenther Onkol. 2012 Jan;188(1):97-9. (In German). DOI: 10.1007/s00066-011-0015-x.
7. Lebedenko IM, Denisyuk SS, Bykova YB. An instrumental method for assessing the quality of dosimetric plans for cancer patients radiotherapy. Measurement Techniques. 2017;(7):66-8. (In Russian).
8. Antipina NA, Kuznetsova AS, Urazova KA, et al. Evaluation and comparison of dosimetric parameters for Cyberknife and Novalis stereotactic radiotherapy of brain tumours. Medical Physics. 2016;(2):58-68. (In Russian).
9. Kovalskaya EP. Quantitative analysis of parameters of dose-volume histograms of dosimetric plans for radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Sakharov Readings 2020. Proc 20th Int Sci Conf. 2020. Р. 76-80. (In Russian).
10. Minailo II, Demeshko PD, Leusik EA, et al. Modern radiation therapy for lung and prostate cancer using high-tech techniques. Ukrainian Journal of Radiology. 2015;V(XXIII):2:61-4. (In Russian).
11. Sukhikh ES, Sheyno IN, Sukhikh LG, et al. Radiobiological Evaluation of Dosimetric Plans for Stereotactic Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer According to Fractionation Regimen. Journal of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine. 2019;100(5):263-9. (In Russian). DOI: 10.20862/0042-4676-2019-100-5-263-269.
12. RTOG Foundation Publications Guidelines. Электронный ресурс. URL: https://www.rtog.org/-/media/RTOG/Files/RTOG-Foundation-Publication-Guidelines.pdf
13. Paddick I. A simple scoring ratio to index the conformity of radiosurgical treatment plans. Technical note. J Neurosurg. 2000 Dec;93 Suppl 3:219-22. DOI: 10.3171/jns.2000.93.supplement.
14. Dice LR. Measures of the Amount of Ecologic Association between Species. Ecology, 1945;26:297-302. DOI: 10.2307/1932409
Review
For citations:
Lebedenko I.M., Usmanova L.Sh., Mezheumova A.A. Quantitative Assessment of Distance Radiotherapy Plans for Patients with Uterine Cancer. Journal of oncology: diagnostic radiology and radiotherapy. 2022;5(2):9-17. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.37174/2587-7593-2022-5-2-9-17
Views:
345
Email this article 