HOMEPRODUCTSSERVICESCOMPANYCONTACTFAQResearchDictionaryPharmaMobileSign Up FREE or Login

Automated volumetric modulated Arc therapy treatment planning for stage III lung cancer: how does it compare with intensity-modulated radio therapy?

AbstractPURPOSE:
To compare the quality of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) or intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plans generated by an automated inverse planning system with that of dosimetrist-generated IMRT treatment plans for patients with stage III lung cancer.
METHODS AND MATERIALS:
Two groups of 8 patients with stage III lung cancer were randomly selected. For group 1, the dosimetrists spent their best effort in designing IMRT plans to compete with the automated inverse planning system (mdaccAutoPlan); for group 2, the dosimetrists were not in competition and spent their regular effort. Five experienced radiation oncologists independently blind-reviewed and ranked the three plans for each patient: a rank of 1 was the best and 3 was the worst. Dosimetric measures were also performed to quantitatively evaluate the three types of plans.
RESULTS:
Blind rankings from different oncologists were generally consistent. For group 1, the auto-VMAT, auto-IMRT, and manual IMRT plans received average ranks of 1.6, 2.13, and 2.18, respectively. The auto-VMAT plans in group 1 had 10% higher planning tumor volume (PTV) conformality and 24% lower esophagus V70 (the volume receiving 70 Gy or more) than the manual IMRT plans; they also resulted in more than 20% higher complication-free tumor control probability (P+) than either type of IMRT plans. The auto- and manual IMRT plans in this group yielded generally comparable dosimetric measures. For group 2, the auto-VMAT, auto-IMRT, and manual IMRT plans received average ranks of 1.55, 1.75, and 2.75, respectively. Compared to the manual IMRT plans in this group, the auto-VMAT plans and auto-IMRT plans showed, respectively, 17% and 14% higher PTV dose conformality, 8% and 17% lower mean lung dose, 17% and 26% lower mean heart dose, and 36% and 23% higher P+.
CONCLUSIONS:
mdaccAutoPlan is capable of generating high-quality VMAT and IMRT treatment plans for stage III lung cancer. Manual IMRT plans could achieve quality similar to auto-IMRT plans if best effort was spent.
AuthorsEnzhuo M Quan, Joe Y Chang, Zhongxing Liao, Tingyi Xia, Zhiyong Yuan, Hui Liu, Xiaoqiang Li, Cody A Wages, Radhe Mohan, Xiaodong Zhang
JournalInternational journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics (Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys) Vol. 84 Issue 1 Pg. e69-76 (Sep 1 2012) ISSN: 1879-355X [Electronic] United States
PMID22901421 (Publication Type: Comparative Study, Evaluation Studies, Journal Article, Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural)
CopyrightCopyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Topics
  • Esophagus (radiography)
  • Humans
  • Lung Neoplasms (pathology, radiography, radiotherapy)
  • Organs at Risk (radiography)
  • Radiation Oncology
  • Radiometry
  • Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted (methods, standards)
  • Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated (methods, standards)
  • Reference Standards
  • Spinal Cord (radiography)
  • Tumor Burden

Join CureHunter, for free Research Interface BASIC access!

Take advantage of free CureHunter research engine access to explore the best drug and treatment options for any disease. Find out why thousands of doctors, pharma researchers and patient activists around the world use CureHunter every day.
Realize the full power of the drug-disease research network!


Choose Username:
Email:
Password:
Verify Password: