TY - JOUR
T1 - Volumetric-modulated arc therapy for oropharyngeal carcinoma
T2 - A dosimetric and delivery efficiency comparison with static-field IMRT
AU - Dai, Xiaofang
AU - Zhao, Yingchao
AU - Liang, Zhiwen
AU - Dassarath, Meera
AU - Wang, Lu
AU - Jin, Lihui
AU - Chen, Lili
AU - Dong, James
AU - Price, Robert A.
AU - Ma, C. M.
N1 - Copyright © 2014 Associazione Italiana di Fisica Medica. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
PY - 2015
Y1 - 2015
N2 - The purpose of this study is to evaluate the treatment plan adequacy and delivery efficiency among volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with one or two arcs and the conventional static-field dynamic multileaf collimator (dMLC) intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in patients undergoing oropharyngeal carcinoma. Fifteen patient cases were included in this investigation. Each of the cases was planned using step-and-shoot IMRT, VMAT with a single arc (Arc1) and VMAT with double arcs (Arc2). A two-dose level prescription for planning target volumes (PTVs) was delivered with 70Gy/56Gy in 30 fractions. Comparisons were performed of the dose-volume histograms (DVH) for PTVs, the DVH for organs at risk (OARs), the monitor units per fraction (MU/fx), and delivery time. IMRT and Arc2 achieved similar target coverage, but superior to Arc1. Apart from the oral cavity, Arc1 showed no advantage in sparing of OARs compared with IMRT, while Arc2 obtained equivalent or better sparing of OARs among the three techniques. VMAT reduced MU/fx and shortened delivery time remarkably compared with IMRT. Our results demonstrated that for oropharyngeal cases, Arc2 can achieve superior target coverage and normal tissue sparing, as well as a significant reduction in treatment time.
AB - The purpose of this study is to evaluate the treatment plan adequacy and delivery efficiency among volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with one or two arcs and the conventional static-field dynamic multileaf collimator (dMLC) intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in patients undergoing oropharyngeal carcinoma. Fifteen patient cases were included in this investigation. Each of the cases was planned using step-and-shoot IMRT, VMAT with a single arc (Arc1) and VMAT with double arcs (Arc2). A two-dose level prescription for planning target volumes (PTVs) was delivered with 70Gy/56Gy in 30 fractions. Comparisons were performed of the dose-volume histograms (DVH) for PTVs, the DVH for organs at risk (OARs), the monitor units per fraction (MU/fx), and delivery time. IMRT and Arc2 achieved similar target coverage, but superior to Arc1. Apart from the oral cavity, Arc1 showed no advantage in sparing of OARs compared with IMRT, while Arc2 obtained equivalent or better sparing of OARs among the three techniques. VMAT reduced MU/fx and shortened delivery time remarkably compared with IMRT. Our results demonstrated that for oropharyngeal cases, Arc2 can achieve superior target coverage and normal tissue sparing, as well as a significant reduction in treatment time.
KW - IMRT
KW - Intensity-modulated radiation therapy
KW - Oropharyngeal carcinoma
KW - Radiotherapy
KW - VMAT
KW - Volumetric-modulated arc therapy
KW - Humans
KW - Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/radiotherapy
KW - Time Factors
KW - Oropharyngeal Neoplasms/radiotherapy
KW - Organs at Risk/radiation effects
KW - Radiometry
KW - Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted
KW - Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated/adverse effects
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84927593873&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - https://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=purepublist2023&SrcAuth=WosAPI&KeyUT=WOS:000347103400007&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=WOS
U2 - 10.1016/j.ejmp.2014.09.003
DO - 10.1016/j.ejmp.2014.09.003
M3 - Article
C2 - 25284321
SN - 1120-1797
VL - 31
SP - 54
EP - 59
JO - Physica Medica
JF - Physica Medica
IS - 1
ER -