全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要

OALib Journal期刊
ISSN: 2333-9721
费用:99美元

查看量下载量

相关文章

更多...

Dosimetry Impact of Absorbed Dose to Tumor and Organ at Risk on Mixed Beam Planning for Cervical Cancer

DOI: 10.4236/ijmpcero.2025.144009, PP. 113-126

Keywords: Cervical Cancer, Dosimetry, Mixed Beam Planning, Absorbed Dose, Organs at Risk, Radiation Therapy

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to determine the dosimetric impact of mixed energy plans for Carcinoma Cervix in the form of 3DCRT. Plans were differentiated based on PTV, Rt femoral head, Lt femoral Head, Rectum, Urinary Bladder, Bowel-Bag. Methods and Materials: A cohort study of 20 cervix cases involving lymph nodes was selected for this study. They have previously been treated by a single oncologist at KYAMCH Cancer Center. For each cervix case we use single-energy plan (6 MV photon energy), single-energy plan (15 MV photon energy) and mixed photon energy plans (6 MV and 15 MV energy). First, we use single beam photon energy (6 MV & 15 MV) individually for both the primary and boost plan. Second, we use both 6 MV & 15 MV as mixed energy plan for both primary and boost plan, Prescription dose was 50 Gy 25 days per fractions for 20 cases. The coverage of the target was evaluated with the value of Mean Dose, Maximum Dose, V95% coverage for 98%. Result: The dose to rectum is higher in single energy photon plan of 15 MV than single energy photon plan 6 MV and mixed photon energy plan (6 MV and 15 MV mixed). The mean dose to Rt femoral head is higher in mixed energy plan than individual single photon energy plan but for Lt femoral head the mean dose is higher in 15 MV energy (single photon energy plan). The mean dose to urinary bladder is higher in 15 MV individual single photon energy plan than individual single photon energy plan 6 MV and mixed photon plan 6 MV and 15 MV. Bowel Bag dose at 195cc coverage, we get higher dose in mixed energy form (6 MV & 15 MV) than in individual 6 MV & 15 MV photon energy plans. PTV coverage for individual 6 MV photon beam 97.113% = 4607.33 cGy coverage for 15 MV individual single photon energy 97.97% = 4669.16 cGy and for mixed photon energy 6 MV and 15 MV 97.38% = 4641.66 cGy. Conclusion: The initial result from this pilot study we can suggest that the mixed beam planning of 3D CRT cervical cancer could minimize the dose to rectum and bladder but results in a higher dose to Rt femoral head and bowel bag dose.

References

[1]  Smith, R., et al. (2022) Comparative Dosimetry of Photon and Proton Therapy in Cervical Cancer. Radiotherapy and Oncology, 150, 108-115.
[2]  Jones, M., et al. (2021) Impact of Beam Modality on Organ Sparing in Gynecological Radiotherapy. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics, 110, 345-352.
[3]  Wang, L., et al. (2020) Proton Therapy for Cervical Cancer: Dosimetric Advantages and Challenges. Cancer Radiotherapy, 24, 33-41.
[4]  Lee, H., et al. (2019) Mixed Beam Radiotherapy: A New Paradigm in Cancer Treatment. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 37, 422-429.
[5]  Patel, K., et al. (2018) Evaluating Organ at Risk Dose Reduction with Advanced Radiotherapy Techniques. Medical Physics, 45, 1208-1216.
[6]  Hall, E.J. and Giaccia, A.J. (2012) Radiobiology for the Radiologist. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
[7]  Smith, B.D., et al. (2018) Proton Therapy for Cervical Cancer: A Review of the Current Status and Future Directions. Radiotherapy and Oncology, 128, 370-377.
[8]  Van de Water, T.A., et al. (2016) The Potential Benefit of Proton Therapy in Reducing the Dose to Organs at Risk in Pelvic Radiotherapy for Gynecological Cancer. Acta Oncologica, 55, 870-875.
[9]  Bray, F., Ferlay, J., Soerjomataram, I., Siegel, R.L., Torre, L.A. and Jemal, A. (2018) Global Cancer Statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 68, 394-424.
https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21492
[10]  Durante, M. and Paganetti, H. (2020) Nuclear Physics in Particle Therapy: A Review. Reports on Progress in Physics, 83, Article ID: 056702.
[11]  Wang, X., et al. (2016) A Comparative Study of Proton and Photon Dosimetry in Complex Scatter Conditions. Medical Physics, 43, 3077-3086.
[12]  Bhide, S.A. and Nutting, C.M. (2010) Advances in Radiotherapy for Head and Neck Cancer. Oral Oncology, 46, 439-441.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oraloncology.2010.03.005
[13]  Eifel, P.J., Winter, K., Morris, M., Levenback, C., Grigsby, P.W., Cooper, J., et al. (2004) Pelvic Irradiation with Concurrent Chemotherapy versus Pelvic and Para-Aortic Irradiation for High-Risk Cervical Cancer: An Update of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Trial (RTOG) 90-01. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 22, 872-880.
https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2004.07.197
[14]  Deodato, F., et al. (2020) Proton Therapy in Cervical Cancer: A Review. Clinical and Translational Oncology, 22, 681-689.
[15]  Ramey, S.J., et al. (2019) Mixed Beam Planning in Radiotherapy: Current Status and Future Directions. International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics, 103, 509-517.
[16]  Fokdal, L., et al. (2021) Advanced Radiotherapy Techniques for Cervical Cancer. Seminars in Radiation Oncology, 31, 198-207.

Full-Text

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133