Planning target volume coverage was similar with the four techniques. Homogeneity was superior with both IMRT plans. A good balance between dose constraints for organs at risk, PTV coverage, homogeneity, and NTCP was observed with IMRT + SIB. The documented daily setup error justifies the use of online IGRT.
PurposeHigh-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy has been accepted as an effective and safe method to treat prostate cancer. The aim of this study was to describe acute toxicity following HDR brachytherapy to the prostate, and to examine the association between dosimetric parameters and urinary toxicity in low-risk prostate cancer patients.Material and methodsPatients with low-risk prostate cancer were given HDR brachytherapy as monotherapy in two 12.5 Gy fractions. Planning objectives for the planning target volume (PTV) were V100% ≥ 90% and V150% ≤ 35%. Planning objectives for organs at risk were V75% ≤ 1 cc for the bladder, rectum and perineum, and V125% ≤ 1 cc for the urethra. Toxicity was assessed three months after treatment using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events.ResultsSeventy-three patients were included in the analysis. Thirty-three patients (45%) reported having any type of toxicity in the three months following HDR brachytherapy. Most toxicity cases (26%) were grade 1 urinary toxicity. Mean coverage index was 0.89 and mean V100 was 88.85. Doses administered to the urethra were associated with urinary toxicity. Patients who received more than 111.3% of the prescribed dose in 1 cc of the urethra were four times more likely to have urinary toxicity compared to patients receiving less than 111.3% (OR = 4.71, 95% CI: 1.43-15.6; p = 0.011).ConclusionsHigh-dose-rate brachytherapy administered as monotherapy for prostate cancer proved to be a safe alternative treatment for patients with low-risk prostate cancer. Urinary toxicity was associated with the dose administered to 1 cc and 0.1 cc of the urethra and was remarkably inferior to the reported toxicity in similar studies.
Image guidance is required when using highly conformal techniques; otherwise, at least 10% of daily treatments could have significant displacements. IGRT based on fiducial markers, with 2D kV orthogonal images is a convenient and fast method for performing image guidance.
PurposeTo compare dosimetric results of the use of RapidArc® with simultaneous integrated boost, sliding window intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with simultaneous integrated boost, and conformal radiotherapy with sequential boost in the management of anal canal cancer.MethodsTwo patients with squamous cell cancer of the anal canal with compromised inguinal nodes were included. The simulation was performed in the supine position with a customized Vac-Lok™ immobilizer. Treatment volumes and organs at risk were defined in accordance with international recommendations. Dosimetric comparisons were made in the target volume by means of tumour conformity, coverage, and homogeneity indexes; in healthy organs, integral doses were compared.ResultsA similar planning target volume coverage was achieved with the three techniques. The two IMRT techniques demonstrated benefits in doses received by healthy organs compared to the conformal radiotherapy. RapidArc® showed reduction in the execution time and monitor units required for treatment compared with sliding window IMRT.ConclusionsThe IMRT showed coverage and tumour conformity indexes similar to those of conformal radiotherapy with better dosimetric results in the organs at risk, which should translate into a better toxicity profile. RapidArc® demonstrated benefits over the sliding window IMRT, which makes treatment more comfortable for the patient with less uncertainty about intrafraction motion and a reduced potential for radiation-induced tumours.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.