NDLI: Volumetric modulated arc therapy versus intensity-modulated proton therapy in neoadjuvant irradiation of locally advanced oesophageal cancer

Content Provider	Springer Nature : BioMed Central
Author	Celik, Eren Baus, Wolfgang Baues, Christian Schröder, Wolfgang Clivio, Alessandro Fogliata, Antonella Scorsetti, Marta Marnitz, Simone Cozzi, Luca
Abstract	Background To investigate the role of intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) compared to volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), realised with RapidArc and RapidPlan methods (RA_RP) for neoadjuvant radiotherapy in locally advanced oesophagal cancer. Methods Twenty patients were retrospectively planned for IMPT (with two fields, (IMPT_2F) or with three fields (IMPT_3F)) and RA_RP and the results were compared according to dose-volume metrics. Estimates of the excess absolute risk (EAR) of secondary cancer induction were determined for the lungs. For the cardiac structures, the relative risk (RR) of coronary artery disease (CAD) and chronic heart failure (CHF) were estimated. Results Both the RA_RP and IMPT approached allowed to achieve the required coverage for the gross tumour volume, (GTV) and the clinical and the planning target volumes, CTV and PTV (V98% > 98 for CTV and GTV and V95% > 95 for the PTV)). The conformity index resulted in 0.88 ± 0.01, 0.89 ± 0.02 and 0.89 ± 0.02 for RA_RP, IMPT_2F and IMPT_3F respectively. With the same order, the homogeneity index for the PTV resulted in 5.6 ± 0.6%, 4.4 ± 0.9% and 4.5 ± 0.8%. Concerning the organs at risk, the IMPT plans showed a systematic and statistically significant incremental sparing when compared to RA_RP, especially for the heart. The mean dose to the combined lungs was 8.6 ± 2.9 Gy for RA_RP, 3.2 ± 1.5 Gy and 2.9 ± 1.2 Gy for IMPT_2F and IMPT_3F. The mean dose to the whole heart resulted to 9.9 ± 1.9 Gy for RA_RP compared to 3.7 ± 1.3 Gy or 4.0 ± 1.4 Gy for IMPT_2F or IMPT_3F; the mean dose to the left ventricle resulted to 6.5 ± 1.6 Gy, 1.9 ± 1.5 Gy, 1.9 ± 1.6 Gy respectively. Similar sparing effects were observed for the liver, the kidneys, the stomach, the spleen and the bowels. The EAR per 10,000 patients-years of secondary cancer induction resulted in 19.2 ± 5.7 for RA_RP and 6.1 ± 2.7 for IMPT_2F or 5.7 ± 2.4 for IMPT_3F. The RR for the left ventricle resulted in 1.5 ± 0.1 for RA_RP and 1.1 ± 0.1 for both IMPT sets. For the coronaries, the RR resulted in 1.6 ± 0.4 for RA_RP and 1.2 ± 0.3 for protons. Conclusion With regard to cancer of the oesophagogastric junction type I and II, the use of intensity-modulated proton therapy seems to have a clear advantage over VMAT. In particular, the reduction of the heart and abdominal structures dose could result in an optimised side effect profile. Furthermore, reduced risk of secondary neoplasia in the lung can be expected in long-term survivors and would be a great gain for cured patients.
Related Links	https://ro-journal.biomedcentral.com/counter/pdf/10.1186/s13014-020-01570-y.pdf
Ending Page	10
Page Count	10
Starting Page	1
File Format	HTM / HTML
DOI	10.1186/s13014-020-01570-y
Journal	Radiation Oncology
Issue Number	1
Volume Number	15
Language	English
Publisher	BioMed Central
Publisher Date	2020-05-24
Access Restriction	Open
Subject Keyword	Cancer Research Oncology Radiotherapy Imaging Radiology Intensity-modulated proton therapy VMAT RapidArc Oesophagal cancer Secondary cancer risk estimate
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Article
Subject	Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging Oncology
Journal Impact Factor	3.3/2023
5-Year Journal Impact Factor	3.6/2023

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Intensity modulated proton therapy compared to volumetric modulated arc therapy in the irradiation of young female patients with hodgkin’s lymphoma. Assessment of risk of toxicity and secondary cancer induction

Which technique for radiation is most beneficial for patients with locally advanced cervical cancer? Intensity modulated proton therapy versus intensity modulated photon treatment, helical tomotherapy and volumetric arc therapy for primary radiation – an intraindividual comparison

Planning analysis for locally advanced lung cancer: dosimetric and efficiency comparisons between intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), single-arc/partial-arc volumetric modulated arc therapy (SA/PA-VMAT)

Current practices of craniospinal irradiation techniques in Turkey: a comprehensive dosimetric analysis

Treatment planning comparison of IMPT, VMAT and 4π radiotherapy for prostate cases

Comparison of photon volumetric modulated arc therapy, intensity-modulated proton therapy, and intensity-modulated carbon ion therapy for delivery of hypo-fractionated thoracic radiotherapy

Fully automated volumetric modulated arc therapy technique for radiation therapy of locally advanced breast cancer

Left breast irradiation with tangential intensity modulated radiotherapy (t-IMRT) versus tangential volumetric modulated arc therapy (t-VMAT): trade-offs between secondary cancer induction risk and optimal target coverage

Searching standard parameters for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) of prostate cancer

Volumetric modulated arc therapy versus intensity-modulated proton therapy in neoadjuvant irradiation of locally advanced oesophageal cancer

Similar Documents

Intensity modulated proton therapy compared to volumetric modulated arc therapy in the irradiation of young female patients with hodgkin’s lymphoma. Assessment of risk of toxicity and secondary cancer induction

Which technique for radiation is most beneficial for patients with locally advanced cervical cancer? Intensity modulated proton therapy versus intensity modulated photon treatment, helical tomotherapy and volumetric arc therapy for primary radiation – an intraindividual comparison

Planning analysis for locally advanced lung cancer: dosimetric and efficiency comparisons between intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), single-arc/partial-arc volumetric modulated arc therapy (SA/PA-VMAT)

Current practices of craniospinal irradiation techniques in Turkey: a comprehensive dosimetric analysis

Treatment planning comparison of IMPT, VMAT and 4π radiotherapy for prostate cases

Comparison of photon volumetric modulated arc therapy, intensity-modulated proton therapy, and intensity-modulated carbon ion therapy for delivery of hypo-fractionated thoracic radiotherapy

Fully automated volumetric modulated arc therapy technique for radiation therapy of locally advanced breast cancer

Left breast irradiation with tangential intensity modulated radiotherapy (t-IMRT) versus tangential volumetric modulated arc therapy (t-VMAT): trade-offs between secondary cancer induction risk and optimal target coverage

Searching standard parameters for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) of prostate cancer

Volumetric modulated arc therapy versus intensity-modulated proton therapy in neoadjuvant irradiation of locally advanced oesophageal cancer