Relative plan robustness of step-and-shoot vs rotational intensity-modulated radiotherapy on repeat computed tomographic simulation for weight loss in head and neck cancer.

Relative plan robustness of step-and-shoot vs rotational intensity-modulated radiotherapy on repeat computed tomographic simulation for weight loss in head and neck cancer.

Med Dosim. 2016 Mar 15;

Authors: Thomson DJ, Beasley WJ, Garcez K, Lee LW, Sykes AJ, Rowbottom CG, Slevin NJ

Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Interfractional anatomical alterations may have a differential effect on the dose delivered by step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT). The increased degrees of freedom afforded by rotational delivery may increase plan robustness (measured by change in target volume coverage and doses to organs at risk [OARs]). However, this has not been evaluated for head and neck cancer.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 10 patients who required repeat computed tomography (CT) simulation and replanning during head and neck IMRT were included. Step-and-shoot IMRT and VMAT plans were generated from the original planning scan. The initial and second CT simulation scans were fused and targets/OAR contours transferred, reviewed, and modified. The plans were applied to the second CT scan and doses recalculated without repeat optimization. Differences between step-and-shoot IMRT and VMAT for change in target volume coverage and doses to OARs between first and second CT scans were compared by Wilcoxon signed rank test.
RESULTS: There were clinically relevant dosimetric changes between the first and the second CT scans for both the techniques (reduction in mean D95% for PTV2 and PTV3, Dmin for CTV2 and CTV3, and increased mean doses to the parotid glands). However, there were no significant differences between step-and-shoot IMRT and VMAT for change in any target coverage parameter (including D95% for PTV2 and PTV3 and Dmin for CTV2 and CTV3) or dose to any OARs (including parotid glands) between the first and the second CT scans.
CONCLUSIONS: For patients with head and neck cancer who required replanning mainly due to weight loss, there were no significant differences in plan robustness between step-and-shoot IMRT and VMAT. This information is useful with increased clinical adoption of VMAT.

PMID: 26993081 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

from #MedicinebyAlexandrosSfakianakis via xlomafota13 on Inoreader http://ift.tt/1LyzHvZ
via IFTTT