[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Purpose:
Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) is a highly curable disease. Reducing late complications and second malignancies has become increasingly important. Radiotherapy target paradigms are currently changing and radiotherapy techniques are evolving rapidly.
This overview reports to what extent target volume reduction in involved-node (IN) and advanced radiotherapy techniques, such as intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and proton therapy-compared with involved-field (IF) and 3D radiotherapy (3D-RT)- can reduce high doses to organs at risk (OAR) and examines the issues that still remain open.
Although no comparison of all available techniques on identical patient datasets exists, clear patterns emerge. Advanced dose-calculation algorithms (e.g., convolution-superposition/Monte Carlo) should be used in mediastinal HL. INRT consistently reduces treated volumes when compared with IFRT with the exact amount depending on the INRT definition. The number of patients that might significantly benefit from highly conformal techniques such as IMRT over 3D-RT regarding high-dose exposure to organs at risk (OAR) is smaller with INRT. The impact of larger volumes treated with low doses in advanced techniques is unclear. The type of IMRT used (static/rotational) is of minor importance. All advanced photon techniques result in similar potential benefits and disadvantages, therefore only the degree-of-modulation should be chosen based on individual treatment goals. Treatment in deep inspiration breath hold is being evaluated. Protons theoretically provide both excellent high-dose conformality and reduced integral dose.
Further reduction of treated volumes most effectively reduces OAR dose, most likely without disadvantages if the excellent control rates achieved currently are maintained. For both IFRT and INRT, the benefits of advanced radiotherapy techniques depend on the individual patient/target geometry. Their use should therefore be decided case by case with comparative treatment planning.
Strahlentherapie und Onkologie 09/2014; 190(10). DOI:10.1007/s00066-014-0719-9 · 2.91 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Conventional algorithms show uncertainties in dose calculation already for three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT). Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) might even increase these. We wanted to assess differences in dose distribution for pencil beam (PB), collapsed cone (CC), and Monte Carlo (MC) algorithm for both 3D-CRT and IMRT in patients with mediastinal Hodgkin lymphoma.
Based on 20 computed tomograph (CT) datasets of patients with mediastinal Hodgkin lymphoma, we created treatment plans according to the guidelines of the German Hodgkin Study Group (GHSG) with PB and CC algorithm for 3D-CRT and with PB and MC algorithm for IMRT. Doses were compared for planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk.
For 3D-CRT, PB overestimated PTV(95) and V(20) of the lung by 6.9% and 3.3% and underestimated V(10) of the lung by 5.8%, compared to the CC algorithm. For IMRT, PB overestimated PTV(95), V(20) of the lung, V(25) of the heart and V(10) of the female left/right breast by 8.1%, 25.8%, 14.0% and 43.6%/189.1%, and underestimated V(10) of the lung, V(4) of the heart and V(4) of the female left/right breast by 6.3%, 6.8% and 23.2%/15.6%, compared to MC.
The PB algorithm underestimates low doses to the organs at risk and overestimates dose to PTV and high doses to the organs at risk. For 3D-CRT, a well-modeled PB algorithm is clinically acceptable; for IMRT planning, however, an advanced algorithm such as CC or MC should be used at least for part of the plan optimization.
Strahlentherapie und Onkologie 06/2012; 188(8):653-9. DOI:10.1007/s00066-012-0144-x · 2.91 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Cure rates of early Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) are high, and avoidance of late complications and second malignancies have become increasingly important. This comparative treatment planning study analyzes to what extent target volume reduction to involved-node (IN) and intensity-modulated (IM) radiotherapy (RT), compared with involved-field (IF) and three-dimensional (3D) RT, can reduce doses to organs at risk (OAR).
Based on 20 computed tomography (CT) datasets of patients with early unfavorable mediastinal HL, we created treatment plans for 3D-RT and IMRT for both the IF and IN according to the guidelines of the German Hodgkin Study Group (GHSG). As OAR, we defined heart, lung, breasts, and spinal cord. Dose-volume histograms (DVHs) were evaluated for planning target volumes (PTVs) and OAR.
Average IF-PTV and IN-PTV were 1705 cm(3) and 1015 cm(3), respectively. Mean doses to the PTVs were almost identical for all plans. For IF-PTV/IN-PTV, conformity was better with IMRT and homogeneity was better with 3D-RT. Mean doses to the heart (17.94/9.19 Gy for 3D-RT and 13.76/7.42 Gy for IMRT) and spinal cord (23.93/13.78 Gy for 3D-RT and 19.16/11.55 Gy for IMRT) were reduced by IMRT, whereas mean doses to lung (10.62/8.57 Gy for 3D-RT and 12.77/9.64 Gy for IMRT) and breasts (left 4.37/3.42 Gy for 3D-RT and 6.04/4.59 Gy for IMRT, and right 2.30/1.63 Gy for 3D-RT and 5.37/3.53 Gy for IMRT) were increased. Volume exposed to high doses was smaller for IMRT, whereas volume exposed to low doses was smaller for 3D-RT. Pronounced benefits of IMRT were observed for patients with lymph nodes anterior to the heart. IN-RT achieved substantially better values than IF-RT for almost all OAR parameters, i.e., dose reduction of 20% to 50%, regardless of radiation technique.
Reduction of target volume to IN most effectively improves OAR sparing, but is still considered investigational. For the time being, IMRT should be considered for large PTVs especially when the anterior mediastinum is involved.
International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics 11/2011; 83(1):268-76. DOI:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2011.05.054 · 4.26 Impact Factor