Abstract
This study compared dosimetric indices of volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) accounting for cold spots in prostate cancer plans. IMRT plans were retrospectively generated from 30 prostate cancer patients with ten cases for each risk group, who received VMAT plans. The mean, maximum, and minimum doses, and conformity and homogeneity indexes were evaluated for planning target volume (PTV) and the mean dose and V20–V70 for organs at risk (OAR) including the rectum, bladder, right and left femoral heads, and rectum overlapped with PTV (ROP) regions. The numbers and volume percentages of cold spots within PTVs and ROP regions were measured using in-house software. Three-dimensional probabilistic distributions of the probability and distributions of cold spots were generated using a centroid matching technique for visualization and analysis. There was a statistically better dose conformity in the PTV, rectum, and bladder dose-sparing in VMAT compared to that in the IMRT plans, whereas VMAT had statistically worse target dose homogeneity, and right and left femoral head dose-sparing than those of the IMRT plans. The average volume percentage of cold spots per PTV for the VMAT was 4.37 ± 2.68%, which was smaller than the 5.72 ± 1.84% observed for IMRT plans (P = 0.007). The volume percentage of cold spots per ROP for the VMAT did not significantly differ from those for the IMRT plans. Compared with IMRT, the VMAT plans achieved better PTV dose conformity, OAR dose-sparing, and smaller cold spots in the treatment of prostate cancer.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 137-148 |
| Number of pages | 12 |
| Journal | Radiological physics and technology |
| Volume | 12 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Jun 1 2019 |
Fingerprint
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Radiation
- Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation
- Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
Cite this
Comparison of volumetric-modulated arc therapy and intensity-modulated radiation therapy prostate cancer plans accounting for cold spots. / Nguyen, Tran Thi Thao; Arimura, Hidetaka; Asamura, Ryosuke; Hirose, Taka aki; Saiji, Ohga; Fukunaga, Jun ichi.
In: Radiological physics and technology, Vol. 12, No. 2, 01.06.2019, p. 137-148.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of volumetric-modulated arc therapy and intensity-modulated radiation therapy prostate cancer plans accounting for cold spots
AU - Nguyen, Tran Thi Thao
AU - Arimura, Hidetaka
AU - Asamura, Ryosuke
AU - Hirose, Taka aki
AU - Saiji, Ohga
AU - Fukunaga, Jun ichi
PY - 2019/6/1
Y1 - 2019/6/1
N2 - This study compared dosimetric indices of volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) accounting for cold spots in prostate cancer plans. IMRT plans were retrospectively generated from 30 prostate cancer patients with ten cases for each risk group, who received VMAT plans. The mean, maximum, and minimum doses, and conformity and homogeneity indexes were evaluated for planning target volume (PTV) and the mean dose and V20–V70 for organs at risk (OAR) including the rectum, bladder, right and left femoral heads, and rectum overlapped with PTV (ROP) regions. The numbers and volume percentages of cold spots within PTVs and ROP regions were measured using in-house software. Three-dimensional probabilistic distributions of the probability and distributions of cold spots were generated using a centroid matching technique for visualization and analysis. There was a statistically better dose conformity in the PTV, rectum, and bladder dose-sparing in VMAT compared to that in the IMRT plans, whereas VMAT had statistically worse target dose homogeneity, and right and left femoral head dose-sparing than those of the IMRT plans. The average volume percentage of cold spots per PTV for the VMAT was 4.37 ± 2.68%, which was smaller than the 5.72 ± 1.84% observed for IMRT plans (P = 0.007). The volume percentage of cold spots per ROP for the VMAT did not significantly differ from those for the IMRT plans. Compared with IMRT, the VMAT plans achieved better PTV dose conformity, OAR dose-sparing, and smaller cold spots in the treatment of prostate cancer.
AB - This study compared dosimetric indices of volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) accounting for cold spots in prostate cancer plans. IMRT plans were retrospectively generated from 30 prostate cancer patients with ten cases for each risk group, who received VMAT plans. The mean, maximum, and minimum doses, and conformity and homogeneity indexes were evaluated for planning target volume (PTV) and the mean dose and V20–V70 for organs at risk (OAR) including the rectum, bladder, right and left femoral heads, and rectum overlapped with PTV (ROP) regions. The numbers and volume percentages of cold spots within PTVs and ROP regions were measured using in-house software. Three-dimensional probabilistic distributions of the probability and distributions of cold spots were generated using a centroid matching technique for visualization and analysis. There was a statistically better dose conformity in the PTV, rectum, and bladder dose-sparing in VMAT compared to that in the IMRT plans, whereas VMAT had statistically worse target dose homogeneity, and right and left femoral head dose-sparing than those of the IMRT plans. The average volume percentage of cold spots per PTV for the VMAT was 4.37 ± 2.68%, which was smaller than the 5.72 ± 1.84% observed for IMRT plans (P = 0.007). The volume percentage of cold spots per ROP for the VMAT did not significantly differ from those for the IMRT plans. Compared with IMRT, the VMAT plans achieved better PTV dose conformity, OAR dose-sparing, and smaller cold spots in the treatment of prostate cancer.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85062156678&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85062156678&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s12194-019-00502-0
DO - 10.1007/s12194-019-00502-0
M3 - Article
C2 - 30805779
AN - SCOPUS:85062156678
VL - 12
SP - 137
EP - 148
JO - Radiological Physics and Technology
JF - Radiological Physics and Technology
SN - 1865-0333
IS - 2
ER -