open access

Vol 15, No 6 (2010)
Published online: 2010-11-01
Submitted: 2010-07-06
Get Citation

Dosimetric and physical comparison of IMRT and CyberKnife plans in the treatment of localized prostate cancer

Cemile Ceylan, Nadir Kucuk, Hande Bas Ayata, Metin Guden, Kayihan Engin
DOI: 10.1016/j.rpor.2010.10.003
·
Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 2010;15(6):181-189.

open access

Vol 15, No 6 (2010)
Published online: 2010-11-01
Submitted: 2010-07-06

Abstract

Aim

The aim of our study was the dosimetric and physical evaluation of the CK and IMRT treatment plans for 16 patients with localized prostate cancer.

Background

Intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is one of the recent technical advances in radiotherapy. The prostate is a well suited site to be treated with IMRT. The challenge of accurately delivering the IMRT needs to be supported by new advances such as image-guidance and four-dimensional computed conformal radiation therapy (4DCRT) tomography. CyberKnife (CK) provides real time orthogonal X-ray imaging of the patient during treatment course to follow gold fiducials installed into the prostate and to achieve motion correlation between online acquired X-ray imaging and digital reconstructed radiographs (DRRs) which are obtained from planning computed tomography images by translating and rotating the treatment table in five directions.

Methods and materials

Sixteen IMRT and CK plans were performed to be compared in terms of conformity (CI), heterogeneity indices (HI), percentage doses of 100% (V100), 66% (V66), 50% (V50), 33% (V33) and 10% (V10) volumes of the bladder and rectum. Dose-volume histograms for target and critical organs, (CI) and indices (HI) and isodose lines were analyzed to evaluate the treatment plans.

Results

Statistically significant differences in the percentage rectal doses delivered to V10, V33, and V50 of the rectum were detected in favor of the CK plans (p values; <0.001, <0.001 and 0.019, respectively). The percentage doses for V66 and V100 of the rectum were larger in CK plans (13%, 2% in IMRT and 21%, 3% in CK plans, respectively). Percentage bladder doses for V10 and V33 were significantly lower in CK plans [96% in IMRT vs 48% in CK (p[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]<[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]0.001) and 34% in IMRT vs 24% in CK (p[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]=[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]0.047)]. Lower percentage doses were observed for V50, V66 of the bladder for the IMRT. They were 5.4% and 3.45% for IMRT and 13.4% and 8.05% for CK, respectively. Median CI of planning target volume (PTV) for IMRT and CK plans were 0.94 and 1.23, respectively (p[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]<[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]0.001).

Conclusion

Both systems have a very good ability to create highly conformal volumetric dose distributions. Median HI of PTV for IMRT and CK plans were 1.08 and 1.33, respectively (p[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]<[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]0.001).

Abstract

Aim

The aim of our study was the dosimetric and physical evaluation of the CK and IMRT treatment plans for 16 patients with localized prostate cancer.

Background

Intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is one of the recent technical advances in radiotherapy. The prostate is a well suited site to be treated with IMRT. The challenge of accurately delivering the IMRT needs to be supported by new advances such as image-guidance and four-dimensional computed conformal radiation therapy (4DCRT) tomography. CyberKnife (CK) provides real time orthogonal X-ray imaging of the patient during treatment course to follow gold fiducials installed into the prostate and to achieve motion correlation between online acquired X-ray imaging and digital reconstructed radiographs (DRRs) which are obtained from planning computed tomography images by translating and rotating the treatment table in five directions.

Methods and materials

Sixteen IMRT and CK plans were performed to be compared in terms of conformity (CI), heterogeneity indices (HI), percentage doses of 100% (V100), 66% (V66), 50% (V50), 33% (V33) and 10% (V10) volumes of the bladder and rectum. Dose-volume histograms for target and critical organs, (CI) and indices (HI) and isodose lines were analyzed to evaluate the treatment plans.

Results

Statistically significant differences in the percentage rectal doses delivered to V10, V33, and V50 of the rectum were detected in favor of the CK plans (p values; <0.001, <0.001 and 0.019, respectively). The percentage doses for V66 and V100 of the rectum were larger in CK plans (13%, 2% in IMRT and 21%, 3% in CK plans, respectively). Percentage bladder doses for V10 and V33 were significantly lower in CK plans [96% in IMRT vs 48% in CK (p[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]<[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]0.001) and 34% in IMRT vs 24% in CK (p[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]=[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]0.047)]. Lower percentage doses were observed for V50, V66 of the bladder for the IMRT. They were 5.4% and 3.45% for IMRT and 13.4% and 8.05% for CK, respectively. Median CI of planning target volume (PTV) for IMRT and CK plans were 0.94 and 1.23, respectively (p[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]<[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]0.001).

Conclusion

Both systems have a very good ability to create highly conformal volumetric dose distributions. Median HI of PTV for IMRT and CK plans were 1.08 and 1.33, respectively (p[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]<[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]0.001).

Get Citation

Keywords

Prostate; IMRT; CyberKnife; Radiosurgery

About this article
Title

Dosimetric and physical comparison of IMRT and CyberKnife plans in the treatment of localized prostate cancer

Journal

Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy

Issue

Vol 15, No 6 (2010)

Pages

181-189

Published online

2010-11-01

DOI

10.1016/j.rpor.2010.10.003

Bibliographic record

Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 2010;15(6):181-189.

Keywords

Prostate
IMRT
CyberKnife
Radiosurgery

Authors

Cemile Ceylan
Nadir Kucuk
Hande Bas Ayata
Metin Guden
Kayihan Engin

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

By "Via Medica sp. z o.o." sp.k., ul. Świętokrzyska 73, 80–180 Gdańsk, Poland
tel.:+48 58 320 94 94, fax:+48 58 320 94 60, e-mail: journals@viamedica.pl