Treatment Efficiency of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy in Comparison With Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy in the Treatment of Prostate Cancer

2013 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 128-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
William A. Hall ◽  
Timothy H. Fox ◽  
Xiaojun Jiang ◽  
Roshan S. Prabhu ◽  
Peter J. Rossi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy ◽  
Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy ◽  
Treatment Efficiency ◽  
Intensity Modulated ◽  
Arc Therapy

scholarly journals Dosimetric Comparison and Evaluation of 4 Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy Techniques for the Treatment of Prostate Cancer

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 238-245 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Seppälä ◽  
Sami Suilamo ◽  
Mikko Tenhunen ◽  
Liisa Sailas ◽  
Heli Virsunen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy ◽  
Bladder Wall ◽  
Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy ◽  
Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy ◽  
Equal Treatment ◽  
Intensity Modulated ◽  
Delivery Times ◽  
Arc Therapy ◽  
Radiotherapy Techniques

Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare dosimetric characteristics, monitor unit, and delivery efficiency of 4 different stereotactic body radiotherapy techniques for the treatment of prostate cancer. Methods: This study included 8 patients with localized prostate cancer. Dosimetric assets of 4 delivery techniques for stereotactic body radiotherapy were evaluated: robotic CyberKnife, noncoplanar intensity-modulated radiotherapy, and 2 intensity-modulated arc therapy techniques (RapidArc and Elekta volumetric-modulated arc therapy). All the plans had equal treatment margins and a prescription dose of 35 Gy in 5 fractions. Results: Statistically significant differences were observed in homogeneity index and mean doses of bladder wall and penile bulb, all of which were highest with CyberKnife. No significant differences were observed in the mean doses of rectum, with values of 15.2 ± 2.6, 13.3 ± 2.6, 13.1 ± 2.8, and 13.8 ± 1.6 Gy with CyberKnife, RapidArc, volumetric-modulated arc therapy, and noncoplanar intensity-modulated radiotherapy, respectively. The highest dose conformity was realized with RapidArc. The dose coverage of the planning target volume was lowest with noncoplanar intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Treatment times and number of monitor units were largest with CyberKnife (on average 34.0 ± 5.0 minutes and 8704 ± 1449 monitor units) and least with intensity-modulated arc therapy techniques (on average 5.1 ± 1.1 minutes and 2270 ± 497 monitor units). Conclusion: Compared to CyberKnife, the RapidArc, volumetric-modulated arc therapy, and noncoplanar intensity-modulated radiotherapy produced treatment plans with similar dosimetric quality, with RapidArc achieving the highest dose conformity. Overall, the dosimetric differences between the studied techniques were marginal, and thus, the choice of the technique should rather focus on the delivery accuracies and dose delivery times.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document