Bauman G, Yartsev S, Rodrigues G, Lewis C, Venkatesan VM, Yu E, Hammond A, Perera F, Ash R, Dar AR, Lock M, Baily L, Coad T, Trenka K, Warr B, Kron T, Battista J, Van Dyk J. A Prospective Evaluation of Helical Tomotherapy.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007;
68:632-41. [PMID:
17321068 DOI:
10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.11.052]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 45] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/30/2006] [Revised: 11/28/2006] [Accepted: 11/28/2006] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE
To report results from two clinical trials evaluating helical tomotherapy (HT).
METHODS AND MATERIALS
Patients were enrolled in one of two prospective trials of HT (one for palliative and one for radical treatment). Both an HT plan and a companion three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) plan were generated. Pretreatment megavoltage computed tomography was used for daily image guidance.
RESULTS
From September 2004 to January 2006, a total of 61 sites in 60 patients were treated. In all but one case, a clinically acceptable tomotherapy plan for treatment was generated. Helical tomotherapy plans were subjectively equivalent or superior to 3D-CRT in 95% of plans. Helical tomotherapy was deemed equivalent or superior in two thirds of dose-volume point comparisons. In cases of inferiority, differences were either clinically insignificant and/or reflected deliberate tradeoffs to optimize the HT plan. Overall imaging and treatment time (median) was 27 min (range, 16-91 min). According to a patient questionnaire, 78% of patients were satisfied to very satisfied with the treatment process.
CONCLUSIONS
Helical tomotherapy demonstrated clear advantages over conventional 3D-CRT in this diverse patient group. The prospective trials were helpful in deploying this technology in a busy clinical setting.
Collapse