{"title":"Comparative Analysis of External and Internal Radiotherapy- Dependent Plans in Patients with Gynecological Cancer.","authors":"Panagiotis Vourtsas, Kyrillos Sarris, Nikolaos Giakoumakis, Georgia Kolitsi, Kostas Kyprianou, Sofianiki Mastronikoli, Evangelos Tsiambas, Dimitrios Peschos, Dimitrios Kardamakis, Georgios Androutsopoulos, Despina Spyropoulou","doi":"10.21873/cdp.10331","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background/aim: </strong>Radiotherapy plays a key role in the treatment of gynecological cancer. Modern radiotherapy techniques with external beams (e-RT) are applied in a broad spectrum of gynecological cancer cases. However, high radiation doses, affecting normal tissue adjacent to cancer, represent the main disadvantage of e-RT regimens. For this reason, brachytherapy (BT), an internal beam-based technique (i-RT), is suggested following e-RT. Our purpose was to compare e-RT plans using volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with those using 3D conformal techniques (3D-CRT) and compare BT plans guided by 3D or 2D imaging based on the potential corresponding toxicity levels.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>In this preliminary, non-randomized comparative retrospective study, 15 females suffering gynecological cancer were enrolled. Modern e-RT and i-RT (BT) techniques were applied.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Concerning e-RT, D95/D99/rectum 2cc/bladder 2cc and small intestine 2cc were measured and compared; in i-RT, rectum 2cc/bladder 2cc were measured and compared. The median dose to the planning target volume in VMAT was 97.4 Gy compared with 92.9 Gy in 3D-CRT. Τhe rectum received almost 5 Gy less in VMAT compared to 3D-CRT (median of 43.5 Gy vs. 48.6 Gy; p=0.001). In the bladder, dose differences were minimal, while the small intestine received 47.6 Gy in VMAT (p=0.001). Regarding 3D-BT, the rectum received 63.1 Gy compared with 49.9 Gy (p=0.009) in 2D-BT. Concerning the bladder, mean 2D-BT and 3D-BT doses were 71.9 and 65 Gy, respectively, differing non-significantly.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>VMAT was found to be superior to 3D-CRT, especially in dose distribution, volume coverage and protection of critical organs. Similarly, 3D-BT should be preferred over 2D-BT due to critical advantages.</p>","PeriodicalId":72510,"journal":{"name":"Cancer diagnosis & prognosis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11062162/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer diagnosis & prognosis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21873/cdp.10331","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background/aim: Radiotherapy plays a key role in the treatment of gynecological cancer. Modern radiotherapy techniques with external beams (e-RT) are applied in a broad spectrum of gynecological cancer cases. However, high radiation doses, affecting normal tissue adjacent to cancer, represent the main disadvantage of e-RT regimens. For this reason, brachytherapy (BT), an internal beam-based technique (i-RT), is suggested following e-RT. Our purpose was to compare e-RT plans using volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with those using 3D conformal techniques (3D-CRT) and compare BT plans guided by 3D or 2D imaging based on the potential corresponding toxicity levels.
Materials and methods: In this preliminary, non-randomized comparative retrospective study, 15 females suffering gynecological cancer were enrolled. Modern e-RT and i-RT (BT) techniques were applied.
Results: Concerning e-RT, D95/D99/rectum 2cc/bladder 2cc and small intestine 2cc were measured and compared; in i-RT, rectum 2cc/bladder 2cc were measured and compared. The median dose to the planning target volume in VMAT was 97.4 Gy compared with 92.9 Gy in 3D-CRT. Τhe rectum received almost 5 Gy less in VMAT compared to 3D-CRT (median of 43.5 Gy vs. 48.6 Gy; p=0.001). In the bladder, dose differences were minimal, while the small intestine received 47.6 Gy in VMAT (p=0.001). Regarding 3D-BT, the rectum received 63.1 Gy compared with 49.9 Gy (p=0.009) in 2D-BT. Concerning the bladder, mean 2D-BT and 3D-BT doses were 71.9 and 65 Gy, respectively, differing non-significantly.
Conclusion: VMAT was found to be superior to 3D-CRT, especially in dose distribution, volume coverage and protection of critical organs. Similarly, 3D-BT should be preferred over 2D-BT due to critical advantages.