Hattu D, Emans D, van der Stoep J, Canters R, van Loon J, De Ruysscher D. Comparison of photon intensity modulated, hybrid and volumetric modulated arc radiation treatment techniques in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer.
Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 2023;
28:100519. [PMID:
38111503 PMCID:
PMC10726236 DOI:
10.1016/j.phro.2023.100519]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/11/2023] [Revised: 11/13/2023] [Accepted: 11/13/2023] [Indexed: 12/20/2023] Open
Abstract
Background and purpose
There is no consensus on the best photon radiation technique for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study quantified the differences between commonly used treatment techniques in NSCLC to find the optimal technique.
Materials and methods
Treatment plans were retrospectively generated according to clinical guidelines for 26 stage III NSCLC patients using intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), hybrid, and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMATC, and VMATV5 optimized for lower lung and heart dose). Plans were evaluated for target coverage, organs at risk dose (including heart substructures) and normal tissue complication probabilities (NTCP).
Results
The comparison showed significant and largest median differences (>1 Gy or >5%) in favor of IMRT for the mediastinal envelope and heart (maximum dose), in favor of the hybrid technique for the lungs (V5Gy of the total lungs and V5Gy of the contralateral lung) and in favor of VMATC for the heart (Dmean), most of the substructures of the heart, and the spinal cord (maximum dose). The VMATV5 technique had significantly lower heart dose compared to the hybrid technique and significantly lower lung dose compared to the VMATC, combining both advantages in one technique. The mean ΔNTCP did not exceed the 2 percent point (pp) for grade 5 (mortality), and 10 pp for grade ≥2 toxicities (radiation pneumonitis and acute esophageal toxicity), but ΔNTCP was mostly in favor of VMATC/V5 for individual patients.
Conclusion
This planning study showed that VMATV5 was preferred as it achieved low lung and heart doses, as well as low NTCPs, simultaneously.
Collapse