PMID- 22766954
OWN - NLM
STAT- MEDLINE
DCOM- 20130716
LR  - 20220331
IS  - 1526-9914 (Electronic)
IS  - 1526-9914 (Linking)
VI  - 13
IP  - 4
DP  - 2012 Jul 5
TI  - Coplanar versus noncoplanar intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and 
      volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatment planning for fronto-temporal 
      high-grade glioma.
PG  - 3826
LID - 10.1120/jacmp.v13i4.3826 [doi]
AB  - The purpose of this study was to compare dosimetric and radiobiological 
      parameters of treatment plans using coplanar and noncoplanar beam arrangements in 
      patients with fronto-temporal high-grade glioma (HGG) generated for 
      intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) or volumetric-modulated arc therapy 
      (VMAT). Ten cases of HGG overlapping the optic apparatus were selected. Four 
      separate plans were created for each case: coplanar IMRT, noncoplanar IMRT 
      (ncIMRT), VMAT, and noncoplanar VMAT (ncVMAT). The prescription dose was 60 Gy in 
      30 fractions. Dose-volume histograms and equivalent uniform doses (EUD) for 
      planning target volumes (PTVs) and organs at risk (OARs) were generated. The four 
      techniques resulted in comparable mean, minimum, maximum PTV doses, and PTV EUDs 
      (p >/= 0.33). The mean PTV dose and EUD averaged for all techniques were 59.98 Gy 
      (Standard Deviation (SD) +/- 0.15) and 59.86 Gy (SD +/- 0.27). Non-coplanar IMRT 
      significantly reduced contralateral anterior globe EUDs (6.7 Gy versus 8.2 Gy, p 
      = 0.05), while both ncIMRT and ncVMAT reduced contralateral retina EUDs (16 Gy 
      versus 18.8 Gy, p = 0.03). Noncoplanar techniques resulted in lower contralateral 
      temporal lobe dose (22.2 Gy versus 24.7 Gy). Compared to IMRT, VMAT techniques 
      required fewer monitor units (755 vs. 478, p </= 0.001) but longer optimization 
      times. Treatment delivery times were 6.1 and 10.5 minutes for coplanar and ncIMRT 
      versus 2.9 and 5.0 minutes for coplanar and ncVMAT. In this study, all techniques 
      achieved comparable target coverage. Superior sparing of contralateral optic 
      structures was seen with ncIMRT. The VMAT techniques reduced treatment delivery 
      duration but prolonged plan optimization times, compared to IMRT techniques. 
      Technique selection should be individualized, based on patient-specific clinical 
      and dosimetric parameters.
FAU - Panet-Raymond, Valerie
AU  - Panet-Raymond V
AD  - Department of Radiation Oncology, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, 
      Canada. valerie.panet-raymond@mcgill.ca
FAU - Ansbacher, Will
AU  - Ansbacher W
FAU - Zavgorodni, Sergei
AU  - Zavgorodni S
FAU - Bendorffe, Bill
AU  - Bendorffe B
FAU - Nichol, Alan
AU  - Nichol A
FAU - Truong, Pauline T
AU  - Truong PT
FAU - Beckham, Wayne
AU  - Beckham W
FAU - Vlachaki, Maria
AU  - Vlachaki M
LA  - eng
PT  - Journal Article
PT  - Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
DEP - 20120705
PL  - United States
TA  - J Appl Clin Med Phys
JT  - Journal of applied clinical medical physics
JID - 101089176
SB  - IM
MH  - Brain Neoplasms/*radiotherapy
MH  - Glioma/*radiotherapy
MH  - Humans
MH  - Organs at Risk
MH  - Radiotherapy Dosage
MH  - Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted/methods
MH  - Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated/*methods
PMC - PMC5716518
EDAT- 2012/07/07 06:00
MHDA- 2013/07/17 06:00
PMCR- 2012/07/05
CRDT- 2012/07/07 06:00
PHST- 2011/11/27 00:00 [received]
PHST- 2012/03/23 00:00 [accepted]
PHST- 2012/03/19 00:00 [revised]
PHST- 2012/07/07 06:00 [entrez]
PHST- 2012/07/07 06:00 [pubmed]
PHST- 2013/07/17 06:00 [medline]
PHST- 2012/07/05 00:00 [pmc-release]
AID - ACM20044 [pii]
AID - 10.1120/jacmp.v13i4.3826 [doi]
PST - epublish
SO  - J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2012 Jul 5;13(4):3826. doi: 10.1120/jacmp.v13i4.3826.