Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · South Asian J Cancer 2014; 03(01): 018-021
DOI: 10.4103/2278-330X.126506
THE CUTTING EDGE OF RADIOTHERAPEUTICS : Original Article

A dosimetric study of volumetric modulated arc therapy planning techniques for treatment of low-risk prostate cancer in patients with bilateral hip prostheses

Suresh B. Rana
Department of Medical Physics, ProCure Proton Therapy Center, Oklahoma City, OK
,
Shyam Pokharel
Department of Radiation Oncology, Premiere Oncology, Fort Myers, FL
› Author Affiliations Source of Support: Nill.
› Further Information
  PDF Download Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background and Purpose: Recently, megavoltage (MV) photon volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) has gained widespread acceptance as the technique of choice for prostate cancer patients undergoing external beam radiation therapy. However, radiation treatment planning for patients with metallic hip prostheses composed of high-Z materials can be challenging due to (1) presence of streak artifacts from prosthetic hips in computed tomography dataset, and (2) inhomogeneous dose distribution within the target volume. The purpose of this study was to compare the dosimetric quality of VMAT techniques in the form of Rapid Arc (RA) for treating low-risk prostate cancer patient with bilateral prostheses. Materials and Methods: Three treatment plans were created using RA techniques utilizing 2 arcs (2-RA), 3 arcs (3-RA), and 4 arcs (4-RA) for 6 MV photon beam in Eclipse treatment planning system. Each plan was optimized for total dose of 79.2 Gy prescribed to the planning target volume (PTV) over 44 fractions. All three RA plans were calculated with anisotropic analytical algorithm. Results : The mean and maximum doses to the PTV as well as the homogeneity index among all three RA plans were comparable. The plan conformity index was highest in the 2-Arc plan (1.19) and lowest in the 4-Arc plan (1.10). In comparison to the 2-RA technique, the 4-RA technique reduced the doses to rectum by up to 18.8% and to bladder by up to 7.8%. In comparison to the 3-RA technique, the 4-RA technique reduced the doses to rectum by up to 14.6% and to bladder by up to 3.5%. Conclusion: Based on the RA techniques investigated for a low-risk prostate cancer patient with bilateral prostheses, the 4-RA plan produced lower rectal and bladder dose and better dose conformity across the PTV in comparison with the 2-RA and 3-RA plans.

Avoidance sector - bilateral - prostate cancer - prosthesis - RapidArc - volumetric modulated arc therapy


Publication History

Article published online:
31 December 2020

© 2014. MedIntel Services Pvt Ltd. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 American Cancer Society. Cancer facts and figures 2013. Atlanta: American Cancer Society 2013:19-20.
  • 2 Hankey BF, Feuer EJ, Clegg LX, Hayes RB, Legler JM, Prorok PC, et al. Cancer surveillance series: Interpreting trends in prostate cancer - Part I: Evidence of the effects of screening in recent prostate cancer incidence, mortality, and survival rates. J Natl Cancer Inst 1999;91:1017-24.
  • 3 Alecu R, Alecu M, Loomis T, Ochran T, He T. Traditional and MLC based dose compensator design for patients with hip prostheses undergoing pelvic radiation therapy. Med Dosim 1999;24:33-7.
  • 4 Carolan M, Dao P, Fox C, Metcalfe P. Effect of hip prostheses on radiotherapy dose. Australas Radiol 2000;44:290-5.
  • 5 Eng TY. Dose attenuation through a titanium alloy hip prosthesis. Med Dosim 2000;25:7-8.
  • 6 Su A, Reft C, Rash C, Price J, Jani AB. A case study of radiotherapy planning for a bilateral metal hip prosthesis prostate cancer patient. Med Dosim 2005;30:169-75.
  • 7 Hazuka MB, Ibbott GS, Kinzie JJ. Hip prostheses during pelvic irradiation: Effects and corrections. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1988;14:1311-7.
  • 8 Reft C, Alecu R, Das IJ, Gerbi BJ, Keall P, Lief E, et al. Dosimetric considerations for patients with HIP prostheses undergoing pelvic irradiation. Report of the AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group 63. Med Phys 2003;30:1162-82.
  • 9 Erlanson M, Franzén L, Henriksson R, Littbrand B, Löfroth PO. Planning of radiotherapy for patients with hip prosthesis. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1991;20:1093-8.
  • 10 Brooks C, Cheung RM, Kudchadker RJ. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy with noncoplanar beams for treatment of prostate cancer in patients with bilateral hip prosthesis: A case study. Med Dosim 2010;35:87-91.
  • 11 Martin DA, Hruby G, Whitaker MK, Foo KY. Constrained-beam inverse planning for intensity-modulated radiation therapy of prostate cancer patients with bilateral hip prostheses. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2012;56:703-7.
  • 12 Fattahi S, Ostapiak OZ. An opposed matched field IMRT technique for prostate cancer patients with bilateral prosthetic hips. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2012;13:3347.
  • 13 Kung JH, Reft H, Jackson W, Abdalla I. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy for a prostate patient with a metal prosthesis. Med Dosim 2001;26:305-8.
  • 14 Otto K. Volumetric modulated arc therapy: IMRT in a single gantry arc. Med Phys 2008;35:310-7.
  • 15 Kjaer-Kristoffersen F, Ohlhues L, Medin J, Korreman S. RapidArc volumetric modulated therapy planning for prostate cancer patients. Acta Oncol 2009;48:227-32.