全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要

OALib Journal期刊
ISSN: 2333-9721
费用:99美元

查看量下载量

相关文章

更多...
ISRN Oncology  2014 

Use of Flattening Filter-Free Photon Beams in Treating Medulloblastoma: A Dosimetric Evaluation

DOI: 10.1155/2014/769698

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

Aim. To evaluate the dosimetric benefits of flattening filter-free (FFF) photon beams in intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and Rapid Arc (RA) over conventional CSI methods. Methods and Materials. Five patients treated with IMRT using static multileaf collimators (MLC) were randomly selected for this retrospective study. Dynamic MLC IMRT, RA, and conformal therapy (3DCRT) were iterated with the same CT data sets with and without flattening filter photons. Total dose prescribed was 28.80?Gy in 16 fractions. Dosimetric parameters such as , , , , , DHI, and CI for PTV and , , , , , and for OARs were extracted from DVHs. Beam on time (BOT) for various plans was also compared. Results. FFF RA therapy (6F_RA) resulted in highly homogeneous and conformal doses throughout the craniospinal axis. 3DCRT resulted in the highest (SD) , whereas flattening filter (FF) and FFF dynamic IMRT had a minimum . 6F_RA and 6F_DMLC resulted in lesser doses to thyroid, eyes, esophagus, liver, lungs, and kidneys. Conclusion. FFF IMRT and FFF RA for CSI have definite dosimetric advantages over 3DCRT technique in terms of target coverage and OAR sparing. Use of FFF in IMRT resulted in 50% reduction in BOT, thereby increasing the treatment efficiency. 1. Introduction Medulloblastoma is a fast growing tumor of the cerebellum (posterior fossa) that controls stability, posture, and complex motor functions such as verbal communication and swallowing. About 400 new patients, primarily children, were diagnosed in the US every year, slightly more often in males than in females [1]. It is the most common brain tumor in children aged four and younger and the second most common brain tumor in children aged 5–14 years [2]. Subsequent to surgery, medulloblastoma is usually treated with CSI. Although radiation therapy had proven successful, investigators are still looking for new ways to mitigate the potential side effects of this treatment [2]. Treatment related late complications are usually hearing disability, declined cognition, cardiomyopathy, cataract formation, retarded growth, endocrine dysfunction, and second malignancies. Clinicians consider using techniques such as IMRT and RA that aim to converge beams of radiation directly at the tumor eventually improving the long term complications free survival. However, radiotherapy (RT) planning, delivery, and junction dose verification remain exigent for craniospinal irradiation (CSI) in medulloblastoma patients. Hence investigating the emerging new RT techniques such as FFF in IMRT and RA on the basis of dose volume parameters was

References

[1]  R. J. Packer, A. Gajjar, G. Vezina et al., “Phase III study of craniospinal radiation therapy followed by adjuvant chemotherapy for newly diagnosed average-risk medulloblastoma,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 24, no. 25, pp. 4202–4208, 2006.
[2]  A. Gajjar, R. Hernan, M. Kocak et al., “Clinical, histopathologic, and molecular markers of prognosis: toward a new disease risk stratification system for medulloblastoma,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 984–993, 2004.
[3]  T. A. Dolecek, J. M. Propp, N. E. Stroup, and C. Kruchko, “CBTRUS statistical report: primary brain and central nervous system tumors diagnosed in the United States in 2005–2009,” Neuro-Oncology, vol. 14, supplement 5, pp. v1–v49, 2012.
[4]  G. W. Robinson, Medulloblastoma, American Brain Tumor Association (ABTA), Chicago, Ill, USA, 2012.
[5]  S. D. Sharma, T. Gupta, R. Jalali, Z. Master, R. D. Phurailatpam, and R. Sarin, “High-precision radiotherapy for craniospinal irradiation: evaluation of three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, intensity-modulated radiation therapy and helical Tomotherapy,” The British Journal of Radiology, vol. 82, no. 984, pp. 1000–1009, 2009.
[6]  W. Parker, E. Filion, D. Roberge, and C. R. Freeman, “Intensity-modulated radiotherapy for craniospinal irradiation: target volume considerations, dose constraints, and competing risks,” International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics, vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 251–257, 2007.
[7]  International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements (ICRU), “Prescribing, recording and reporting photon beam therapy,” ICRU Report 62, International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements (ICRU), Bethesda, Md, USA, 1999, (Supplement to ICRU Report 50): ICRU Publications.
[8]  Q. J. Wu, S. Yoo, J. P. Kirkpatrick, D. Thongphiew, and F. F. Yin, “Volumetric Arc intensity-modulated therapy for spine body radiotherapy: comparison with static intensity-modulated treatment,” International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics, vol. 75, no. 5, pp. 1596–1604, 2009.
[9]  M. L. Foo, E. C. McCullough, R. L. Foote, T. M. Pisansky, and E. G. Shaw, “Doses to radiation sensitive organs and structures located outside the radiotherapeutic target volume for four treatment situations,” International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 403–417, 1993.

Full-Text

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133