Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Modulated Arc Therapy for hippocampal-avoidance whole brain radiation therapy: planning comparison with intensity modulated Radiation Therapy.
Martín-Tovar, E A; Badillo-Alvarado, A H; Cocom-Poot, L E; Gaxiola-Sosa, J L.
Afiliación
  • Martín-Tovar EA; División de Oncología y Uronefrología, Departamento de Radioterapia, Unidad Médica de Alta Especialidad, Hospital de Especialidades del Centro Médico Nacional "Ignacio García Téllez", Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, Mérida Yucatán, CP 97150, México. enrique.martin.tovar@gmail.com.
  • Badillo-Alvarado AH; División de Oncología y Uronefrología, Departamento de Radioterapia, Unidad Médica de Alta Especialidad, Hospital de Especialidades del Centro Médico Nacional "Ignacio García Téllez", Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, Mérida Yucatán, CP 97150, México.
  • Cocom-Poot LE; División de Oncología y Uronefrología, Departamento de Radioterapia, Unidad Médica de Alta Especialidad, Hospital de Especialidades del Centro Médico Nacional "Ignacio García Téllez", Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, Mérida Yucatán, CP 97150, México.
  • Gaxiola-Sosa JL; División de Oncología y Uronefrología, Departamento de Radioterapia, Unidad Médica de Alta Especialidad, Hospital de Especialidades del Centro Médico Nacional "Ignacio García Téllez", Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, Mérida Yucatán, CP 97150, México.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38809486
ABSTRACT
This study aimed to evaluate the modulated arc therapy (mARC) technique as a planning and treatment option for hippocampal sparing whole brain radiotherapy (HS-WBRT) following the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0933 dosimetric criteria. Computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were selected retrospectively for 15 patients. Two types of plans were created for each patient, namely an intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and a mARC plan. IMRT and mARC plans were compared in terms of plan quality indices, absorbed dose to organs at risk (OARs), number of monitor units (MUs), and treatment time. All plans in both techniques were considered clinically acceptable for treatment. However, IMRT plans presented a higher conformity (p = 0.01) as well as a higher homogeneity as compared to mARC plans, but this difference was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). In terms of the preservation of the hippocampus, it was observed that the IMRT plans achieved significantly lower doses for both 100% of its volume and for its maximum dose (p < 0.001). The evaluation of the remaining OARs showed that the IMRT technique resulted in lower doses, and significant differences were observed for the following organs left cochlea (p < 0.001), left eye (p < 0.001), right eye (p = 0.03), both lenses of the eye (p < 0.001), and right optic nerve (p = 0.02). Despite these differences, the absolute differences in all dosimetric parameters were low enough to bear any clinical relevance. A drastic (close to 65%) and significant (p < 0.001) decrease was observed in the number of MUs for the mARC plans. This resulted in a substantial decrease in treatment time (60.45%, p < 0.001). It is concluded that the mARC technique is a feasible planning and treatment solution for HS-WBRT that meets the RTOG 0933 criteria. The main advantage of using mARC over IMRT for HS-WBRT is the considerable reduction in MUs and treatment time.
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Radiat Environ Biophys Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Radiat Environ Biophys Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article