Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparative study of dynamic conformal arc therapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy for treating single brain metastases: A retrospective analysis of dosimetric and clinical outcomes.
Chambrelant, Isabelle; Jarnet, Delphine; Le Fèvre, Clara; Kuntz, Laure; Jacob, Julian; Jenny, Catherine; Noël, Georges.
Affiliation
  • Chambrelant I; Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut de Cancérologie Strasbourg Europe (ICANS), UNICANCER, Paul Strauss Comprehensive Cancer Center, 67200 Strasbourg, France.
  • Jarnet D; Department of Medical Physics, Institut de Cancérologie Strasbourg Europe (ICANS), UNICANCER, Paul Strauss Comprehensive Cancer Center, 67200 Strasbourg, France.
  • Le Fèvre C; Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut de Cancérologie Strasbourg Europe (ICANS), UNICANCER, Paul Strauss Comprehensive Cancer Center, 67200 Strasbourg, France.
  • Kuntz L; Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut de Cancérologie Strasbourg Europe (ICANS), UNICANCER, Paul Strauss Comprehensive Cancer Center, 67200 Strasbourg, France.
  • Jacob J; Department of Radiation Oncology, AP-HP. Sorbonne Université, Hôpitaux Universitaires Pitié-Salpêtrière, 47-83 Bd de l'Hôpital, 75651 Paris Cedex 13, France.
  • Jenny C; Department of Medical Physics, AP-HP. Sorbonne Université, Hôpitaux Universitaires Pitié Salpêtrière, 47-83 Bd de l'Hôpital, 75651 Paris Cedex 13, France.
  • Noël G; Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut de Cancérologie Strasbourg Europe (ICANS), UNICANCER, Paul Strauss Comprehensive Cancer Center, 67200 Strasbourg, France.
Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol ; 30: 100591, 2024 Apr.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38832123
ABSTRACT
Background and

purpose:

Stereotactic radiation therapy (SRT) is commonly used to treat brain metastases (BMs). This retrospective study compared two SRT techniques, dynamic conformal arc therapy (DCAT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), for single BM treatments. Material and

methods:

Data of patients treated between January 2010 and June 2020 were considered. Patients with multiple BMs, resected BMs, reirradiation, whole-brain radiation therapy and brainstem metastases were excluded. We focused our analysis on 97 patients who received 23.1 Gy in three fractions. Acute toxicities and follow-up outcomes were recorded. Dosimetric data were analyzed in two subgroups (PTV ≤ 10 cc and PTV > 10 cc).

Results:

DCAT and VMAT were used in 70 (72.2 %) and 27 (27.8 %) patients, respectively. Acute toxicities were not significantly different between groups (p = 0.259), and no difference was detected in the incidence rate of radionecrosis, local recurrence and cerebral recurrence (p > 0.999, p > 0.999 and p = 0.682, respectively). PTV coverage was better with DCAT for small volumes (PTV ≤ 10 cc). Mean conformity index (CI) was significantly higher with VMAT and mean gradient index (GI) was significantly lower with DCAT whatever volume subgroups (p < 0.001). DCAT had more heterogeneous plans and VMAT required more monitor units. DCAT resulted in reduced low and intermediate doses, whereas VMAT led to decreased high doses.

Conclusion:

DCAT and VMAT are two effective and safe SRT techniques for BMs treatment. In the era of re-irradiation, it is important to reduce the doses delivered to healthy tissues. Further prospective studies are needed to validate these findings.
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Language: En Journal: Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol Year: 2024 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Francia Country of publication: Países Bajos

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Language: En Journal: Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol Year: 2024 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Francia Country of publication: Países Bajos