PMID- 28517082
OWN - NLM
STAT- PubMed-not-MEDLINE
LR  - 20191120
IS  - 2473-4209 (Electronic)
IS  - 0094-2405 (Linking)
VI  - 39
IP  - 6Part19
DP  - 2012 Jun
TI  - SU-E-T-595: Comparison of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) and Static 
      Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT) for Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma in 
      Patients with Intact Lungs/Post Pleurectomy.
PG  - 3842
LID - 10.1118/1.4735684 [doi]
AB  - PURPOSE: This planning study compares VMAT and static gantry, sliding window IMRT 
      for malignant pleural mesothelioma for post pleurectomy. METHODS: We compared 
      plans for a left sided (L) and a right sided case (R). Plans used clinically 
      approved planning target volumes (PTVs) and critical organ contours. IMRT plans 
      employed 7-8 6 MV photon beam directions over a 215 degrees  range centered on the 
      ipsilateral lung. VMAT plans used 4 partial arcs within the same range and 
      energy. Prescription dose per fraction was 1.8 Gy; case L went to 50.4 Gy, case R 
      to 46.8 Gy. Planning objectives were: Lyman model NTCP for both lungs < 25%; 
      contralateral lung, mean dose < 8 Gy; heart, V30 Gy < 50%, mean < 30 Gy; Each 
      Kidney, V18 Gy < 33%; liver_not_GTV, mean < 30 Gy, V30 Gy < 50%; stomach not PTV, 
      mean < 30 Gy; cord maximum < 45 Gy; bowel maximum < 55 Gy, D05 < 45 Gy; PTV D95 = 
      94%, V95 = 94%, D05 = 115%. Dose calculation was done with the AAA algorithm. 
      RESULTS: VMAT and IMRT both met the dosimetric constraints. The VMAT MU were 887 
      (L)_and 896 (R) and for IMRT were 1691 (L) and 2409 (R). IMRT required 14-16 
      fields (wide-field splitting). The delivery times were 8 minutes (VMAT) and 20 
      minutes (IMRT). For coverage and plan homogeneity parameters within 1.5% - 2%, 
      VMAT better spared organs at risk. CONCLUSIONS: Both VMAT and IMRT are feasible 
      techniques for the treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma with intact lungs, 
      with less MU and a shorter delivery time for VMAT. Additional cases must be 
      planned to test generality of our preliminary results.
CI  - (c) 2012 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.
FAU - Dumane, V
AU  - Dumane V
AD  - The Mount Sinai Medical Center.
AD  - Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
AD  - Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
AD  - The Mount Sinai Medical Center.
FAU - Yorke, E
AU  - Yorke E
AD  - The Mount Sinai Medical Center.
AD  - Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
AD  - Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
AD  - The Mount Sinai Medical Center.
FAU - Rimner, A
AU  - Rimner A
AD  - The Mount Sinai Medical Center.
AD  - Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
AD  - Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
AD  - The Mount Sinai Medical Center.
FAU - RosenzweigG, K
AU  - RosenzweigG K
AD  - The Mount Sinai Medical Center.
AD  - Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
AD  - Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
AD  - The Mount Sinai Medical Center.
LA  - eng
PT  - Journal Article
PL  - United States
TA  - Med Phys
JT  - Medical physics
JID - 0425746
OTO - NOTNLM
OT  - Anatomy
OT  - Dosimetry
OT  - Heart
OT  - Intensity modulated radiation therapy
OT  - Kidneys
OT  - Lungs
OT  - Photons
EDAT- 2012/06/01 00:00
MHDA- 2012/06/01 00:01
CRDT- 2017/05/19 06:00
PHST- 2017/05/19 06:00 [entrez]
PHST- 2012/06/01 00:00 [pubmed]
PHST- 2012/06/01 00:01 [medline]
AID - 10.1118/1.4735684 [doi]
PST - ppublish
SO  - Med Phys. 2012 Jun;39(6Part19):3842. doi: 10.1118/1.4735684.