Dosimetric Comparison: Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy Vs. 3D Conformal Radiotherapy in Prostate Cancer Radical Treatment

Maric, Slavica; Lukic, Snezana; Mijailovic, Milan; Latinovic, Ljiljana Tadic; Zigic, Milan; Banovic, Pavle

doi:10.2478/sjecr-2019-0046

Abstract

3D - Conformal Radiotherapy (3DCRT) for decades was a standard technique in the prostate cancer radical radiotherapy treatment. Technological advances and implementation of an innovative radiotherapy technique-Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT), enable even more precise treatment of the prostate cancer patients. Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) is a technological advancement in Conformal Radiotherapy which allows superior conformity and homogeneity of the absorbed dose in planning target volume with maximal sparing organs of risk. This technique gives us possibility to escalate the radiotherapy dose, prerequisite for the adequate local tumor control. Evaluation of dosimetric parameters 3DCRT vs. IMRT: the homogeneity index, the conformity index, parameters of absorbed dose in planning target volume, dose volume constraints for organs of risk shows that IMRT is an optimal technique in the prostate cancer radical treatment.

References

1. Jemal A, Center MM, De Santis C, Ward EM. Global patterns of cancer incidence and mortality rates and trends. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarker Prev 2010; 19(8):1893-907.10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-10-0437
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
2. NCCN Guidelines Version 1.2018. Prostate cancer. January 2018.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
3. Brundage M, Lukka H, Crook J, et al. The use of conformal radiotherapy ant the selection of radiation dose in T1 or T2 low or intermediate risk prostate cancer- a systematic review. Radiother Oncol 2002; 64(3):12.10.1016/S0167-8140(02)00184-6
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
4. Al-Mamgani A, Heemsbergen WD, Peeters ST, Lebesque JV. Role of intensity-modulated radiotherapy in reducing toxicity in dose escalation for localized prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009; 73(3):685-691.10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.04.063
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
5. Kuban DA, Tucker SL, Dong L et al. Long-term results of the MD Anderson randomized dose-escalation trial for prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008; 70:67–74.10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.06.054
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
6. Beckendorf V, Guerif S, Le Prise E, Cosset JM, Bougnoux A, et al. 70 Gy Versus 80 Gy in Localized Prostate Cancer: 5-Year Results of GETUG 06 Randomized Trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011; 80: 1056–1063.10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.03.049
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
7. Sujenthiran A, Nossiter J, Charman SC, et al. National population-based study comparing treatment-related toxicity in men who received intensity modulated versus 3-dimensional conformal radical radiation therapy for prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2017;99:1253-60.10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.07.040
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
8. Gary Luxton, Steven L. Hancock, Arthur L. Boyer. Dosimetry and radiobiological model comparison of IMRT and 3D conformal radiotherapy in treatment of carcinoma of the prostate. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004, 59 :(1): 267–284.10.1016/j.ijrobp.2004.01.024
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
9. H.V. James, C.D. Scrase, A.J. Poynter. Practical experience with intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Br J Radiol 2004; 77: 3–14.10.1259/bjr/14996943
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
10. Edges SB, Byrd DR, Compton CC.AJCC Cancer Staging Handbook. 7^th edition. New York, NY: Springer 2010.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
11. Litzenburg D, Dawson AD, Sandler H, et al. Daily prostate targeting using implanted radiopaque markers. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002; 52(3):699–703.10.1016/S0360-3016(01)02654-2
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
12. Poggi MM, Gant DA, Sewchand W, Warlick WB. Marker seed migration in prostate localization. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003; 56(5):1248–1251.10.1016/S0360-3016(03)00328-6
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
13. Drzamala RE,Mohan R, Brewster L, Chu J, Goitein M, Harms W, et al. Dose volume Histograms. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1991; 21:71-78.10.1016/0360-3016(91)90168-4
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
14. Cox JD et al.Toxicity criteria of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1995; 31(5):1341-1346.10.1016/0360-3016(95)00060-C
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
15. International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements. Prescribing, recording, and reporting photon beam intensity-modulated radiation therapy. ICRU Report 83. Bethesda, MD: ICRU; 2010.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
16. Feuvret L, Noel G, Mazeron JJ, Bey P. Conformity index- a review. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006; 64:333–42.10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.09.028
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
17. Yoon M, Park SY, Shin D, Lee SB, Pyo HR, Kim DY et al:A new homogeneity index based on statistical analysis of the dose-volumehistogram.J Appl Clin Med Phys 2007;8:(2):9-17.10.1120/jacmp.v8i2.2390
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
18. Stangerberger A, Waldert M, Djuvan B. Prostate Cancer in elderly men. Rev Urol 2008; 10(2):111-119.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
19. Viani GA, Stefano EJ, Alfonso SL et al. Higher than conventional radiation doses in localized prostate treatment: A meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009; 74(5):1405-18.10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.10.091
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
20. Pollack A, Zagars GK, Starkschall G, et al. Prostate cancer radiation dose response: Results of the M.D.Anderson phase III randomized trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002; 53 (5):1097-1105.10.1016/S0360-3016(02)02829-8
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
21. Zietman AL, De Silvio MR, Slater JD et al. Comparison of conventional dose vs. high dose conformal radiation therapy in clinically localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate. JAMA 2005; 294: 1233-1239.10.1001/jama.294.10.1233
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
22. Vincent W.C. Wu, Dora L.W. Kwong, Jonathan S.T. Sham. Target dose conformity in 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and intensity modulated radiotherapy Radiat Oncol 2004; 71: 201–206.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
23. Gert De Meerleer, Luc Vakaet, Werner R.T. De Gersem, et al. Radiotherapy of prostate cancer with or without intensity modulated beams: a planning comparison Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2000; 47: (3) :639–648.10.1016/S0360-3016(00)00419-3
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
24. Zelefsky MJ, Levin EJ, Hunt M, et al. Incidence of late rectal and urinary toxicities after three dimensional conformal radiotherapy and intensity modulated radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008; 70(4): 1124-1129.10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.11.04418313526
Search in Google Scholar Back to article

Dosimetric Comparison: Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy Vs. 3D Conformal Radiotherapy in Prostate Cancer Radical Treatment

Abstract

Paradigm

My account