Inpainting truncated areas of CT images based on generative adversarial networks with gated convolution for radiotherapy

This study aimed to inpaint the truncated areas of CT images by using generative adversarial networks with gated convolution (GatedConv) and apply these images to dose calculations in radiotherapy. CT images were collected from 100 patients with esophageal cancer under thermoplastic membrane placement, and 85 cases were used for training based on randomly generated circle masks. In the prediction stage, 15 cases of data were used to evaluate the accuracy of the inpainted CT in anatomy and dosimetry based on the mask with a truncated volume covering 40% of the arm volume, and they were compared with the inpainted CT synthesized by U-Net, pix2pix, and PConv with partial convolution. The results showed that GatedConv could directly and effectively inpaint incomplete CT images in the image domain. For the results of U-Net, pix2pix, PConv, and GatedConv, the mean absolute errors for the truncated tissue were 195.54, 196.20, 190.40, and 158.45 HU, respectively. The mean dose of the planning target volume, heart, and lung in the truncated CT was statistically different (p < 0.05) from those of the ground truth CT ([Formula: see text]). The differences in dose distribution between the inpainted CT obtained by the four models and [Formula: see text] were minimal. The inpainting effect of clinical truncated CT images based on GatedConv showed better stability compared with the other models. GatedConv can effectively inpaint the truncated areas with high image quality, and it is closer to [Formula: see text] in terms of image visualization and dosimetry than other inpainting models.

Dose-volume comparison of intensity modulated proton therapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy for cervical esophageal cancer

Proton therapy for cervical esophageal cancer has many issues to be considered, such as the physiological curvature of the spine and the large range change from the neck to the trunk. We clarified the dosimetric characteristics of intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) for cervical esophageal cancer by comparing with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Ten patients with cervical esophageal cancer were retrospectively planned for VMAT, 2-field IMPT (2F-IMPT), and 3-field IMPT (3F-IMPT). All plans were optimized to reach clinically acceptable levels. For planning target volume (PTV) coverage, 95% of the PTV should be covered by 95% of the prescription dose, unless the spinal cord limit is violated. The organs at risk included the lung, spinal cord, larynx, skin, and whole body. The prescription dose was 60 Gy relative biological effectiveness (RBE) in 30 fractions to the PTV. We compared the results according to dose-volume metrics. Significant dose reductions were achieved at lung doses, especially at low dose volumes of 20 Gy RBE or less in IMPT plans compared with VMAT plans (p < 0.05). Although the spinal cord PRV was below the tolerance level, the results were also significantly higher in VMAT plans than in IMPT plans (p < 0.001). Spinal cord PRV D_mean was significantly higher in 3F-IMPT than in 2F-IMPT (p < 0.001). In addition, it was confirmed that the integral whole body dose can be dramatically reduced in IMPT plans compared with VMAT plans. Both of 2F-IMPT and 3F-IMPT could effectively reduce spinal cord dose, as well as low integral whole body dose to a certain extent, while maintaining similar target coverage compared to VMAT. IMPT could be a promising treatment technique for patients with cervical esophageal cancer.

Comprehensive Comparison of Progressive Optimization Algorithm Based Automatic Plan and Manually Planned Treatment Technique for Cervical-Thoracic Esophageal Cancers

Purpose:

The purpose of the present study was first to apply the progressive optimization algorithm based automatic volumetric modulated arc therapy (POA-VMAT) technology to accelerate and improve the radiotherapy of cervicothoracic esophageal cancer (CTEC). We comprehensive analyze the feasibility, normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) and dosimetric results of POA-VMAT, manual based VMAT and step-shoot intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plans in the treatment of CTEC.

Methods:

Sixty patients with CTEC with or without concomitant chemotherapy at our institution between 2017 and 2019 were retrospectively identified. The manual 7field-IMRT (7f-IMRT), Single-arc-VMAT and Double-arc-VMAT (Single-Arc/Double-Arc) plans were generated in all cases. The POA-VMAT was designed using the automatic dual-arc VMAT technology of Pinnacle³ 9.10 planning system based on progressive optimization algorithm. Specially, it includes the selection of treatment techniques, the running of automated planning scripts, and the evaluation of the final radiotherapy regimen. Subsequently, quantitative evaluation of plans was performed by means of standard dose–volume histograms, homogeneity index (HI) and conformity index (CI).

Results:

Target dose conformity of the 7f-IMRT plan was inferior to all plans, whereas the Double-Arc plan was slightly inferior to the POA-VMAT but superior to the Single-Arc and 7f-IMRT plan. The HI for 7f-IMRT, Single-Arc, Double-Arc and POA-VMAT were 0.17 ± 0.08, 0.28 ± 0.06, 0.29 ± 0.06 and 0.28 ± 0.03, respectively. For the NTCP results, there was significant statistical difference among POA-VMAT, IMRT and VMAT plans. The total MU was reduced by 48.3% and 42.1% in Single-Arc and POA-VMAT plans compare to IMRT plans.

Conclusions:

By comprehensive consideration, POA-VMAT efficiently generate acceptable treatment plans for CTEC without dose escalation to OARs and overall superior to manual planning which is a good option for treating CTEC.

Effect of lung volume on helical radiotherapy in esophageal cancer: are there predictive factors to achieve acceptable lung doses?

PURPOSE

The dose received by the lungs in radiotherapy (RT) is affected by the patient's current lung volume. The presence of predictive factors and cut-off points were investigated to achieve acceptable lung doses in esophageal cancer (EC) treatment.

METHODS

Virtual RT volumes of supracarinal EC were delineated. RT plans were designed with standard criteria in the TomoTherapy planning system (TomoTherapy Inc., Madison, WI, USA). The total dose was 50.4 Gy (1.8 Gy/fraction). ROC (Receiver operating characteristic) analysis and Mann-Whitney U tests were performed.

RESULTS

There was a total of 65 patient plans included. ROC analysis showed that lung/PTV (Planning target volume) volume ratio (AUC [Area under curve]: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.83-0.99, p = 0.000) and bilateral lung volume (AUC: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.70-0.92, p = 0.000) have diagnostic power to predict the suitability of RT plans according to QUANTEC (Quantitative Analyses of Normal Tissue Effects in the Clinic) for lung dose constraints. The cut-off points of 7 and 3500 cc were selected for lung/PTV ratio and bilateral lung volume, respectively. The effect of the cut-off points on the dose data was assessed with the Mann-Whitney U test. The mean lung and heart doses, lung V5, V15, and V20, as well as heart V5, V20, V30, and V45 values were found to be lower in both groups separated by cut-off points (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The lung/PTV ratio ≥7 and bilateral lung volume ≥3500 cc cut-off points are predictive of whether TomoTherapy plans may meet QUANTEC lung dose limits in patients with supracarinal esophageal cancer. The patients with lung/PTV ratio and lung volume above these cut-off points may be candidates for treatment with TomoTherapy.

Outcomes and prognostic factors for patients with cervical esophageal cancer undergoing definitive radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy

Cervical esophageal cancer (CEC) is uncommon, accounting for less than 5% of all esophageal cancers. The management of CEC is controversial. This study investigated treatment outcomes and prognostic factors of survival in CEC patients undergoing definitive radiotherapy or concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT). Ninety-one CEC patients were treated by intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT) between July 2007 and September 2017. The mean prescription dose was 64 Gy (range 54-70 Gy) delivered as 1.8-2.2 Gy per fraction per day, 5 days a week. Out of 91 patients, 34 received concurrent cisplatin-based chemotherapy (CT) including 18 patients who also received neoadjuvant CT. Overall survival (OS), locoregional failure-free survival (LRFFS), and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Prognostic factors of survival were determined in univariate (log-rank test) and multivariate (Cox proportional hazard model) analysis. Treatment-related toxicity was also assessed. Median follow-up time for all patients was 19 months. Two-year OS, LRFFS and PFS of all patients were 58.2%, 52.5% and 48.1%, respectively. Clinical stage was an independent prognostic factor for OS (HR = 2.35, 95% CI: 1.03-5.37, p = 0.042), LRFFS (HR = 3.84, 95% CI: 1.38-10.69, p = 0.011), and PFS (HR = 2.68, 95% CI: 1.11-6.45, p = 0.028). Hoarseness was an independent prognostic factor for OS (HR = 2.10, 95% CI: 1.05-4.19, p = 0.036). CCRT was independently associated with better LRFFS (HR = 0.33, 95% CI: 0.14-0.79, p = 0.012). 3DCRT and IMRT with concurrent CT is well-tolerated and may improve local tumor control in CEC patients. Advanced clinical stage and hoarseness are adverse prognostic factors for OS, LRFFS, and PFS in CEC.

Impact of treatment planning using a structure block function on the target and organ doses related to patient movement in cervical esophageal cancer: A phantom study

Helical tomotherapy (HT) can restrict beamlets passing through the virtual contour on computed tomography (CT) image in dose optimization, reducing the dose to organs at risk (OARs). Beamlet restriction limits the incident beamlet angles; thus, the proper planning target volume (PTV) margin may differ from that of the standard treatment plan without beamlet restriction, depending on the patient's movement during dose delivery. Dose distribution changes resulting from patient movement have not been described for treatment plans with beamlet restriction. This study quantified changes in dose distribution to the target and OARs when beamlet restriction is applied to cervical esophageal cancer treatment plan using HT by systematically shifting a phantom. Treatment plans for cervical esophageal cancers with and without beamlet restriction modes [directional block (DB) and nonblock (NB), respectively] were designed for CT images of the RANDO phantom. The PTV margin for the DB mode was set to be the same as that for the NB mode (5 mm). The CT image was intentionally shifted by ±1, ±2, and ±3 voxels in the left–right, anterior–posterior, and superior–inferior directions, and the dose distribution was recalculated for each position using the fluence for the NB or DB mode. When the phantom shift was within the same PTV margin as the NB mode, changes in doses to the targets, lungs, heart, and spinal cord in the DB mode were small as those in the NB mode. In conclusion, the virtual contour shape used in this study would provide safe delivery even with patient movement within the same PTV margin as for the NB mode.

Study for reducing lung dose of upper thoracic esophageal cancer radiotherapy by auto-planning: volumetric-modulated arc therapy vs intensity-modulated radiation therapy

This study aimed to investigate the dosimetric differences and lung sparing between volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in the treatment of upper thoracic esophageal cancer with T3N0M0 for preoperative radiotherapy by auto-planning (AP). Sixteen patient cases diagnosed with upper thoracic esophageal cancer T3N0M0 for preoperative radiotherapy were retrospectively studied, and 3 plans were generated for each patient: full arc VMAT AP plan with double arcs, partial arc VMAT AP plan with 6 partial arcs, and conventional IMRT AP plan. A simultaneous integrated boost with 2 levels was planned in all patients. Target coverage, organ at risk sparing, treatment parameters including monitor units and treatment time (TT) were evaluated. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to check for significant differences (p < 0.05) between datasets. VMAT plans (pVMAT and fVMAT) significantly reduced total lung volume treated above 20 Gy (V₂₀), 25 Gy (V₂₅), 30 Gy (V₃₀), 35 Gy (V₃₅), 40 Gy (V₄₀), and without increasing the value of V₁₀, V₁₃, and V₁₅. For V₅ of total lung value, pVMAT was similar to aIMRT, and it was better than fVMAT. Both pVMAT and fVMAT improved the target dose coverage and significantly decreased maximum dose for the spinal cord, monitor unit, and TT. No significant difference was observed with respect to V₁₀ and V₁₅ of body. VMAT AP plan was a good option for treating upper thoracic esophageal cancer with T3N0M0, especially partial arc VMAT AP plan. It had the potential to effectively reduce lung dose in a shorter TT and with superior target coverage and dose homogeneity.

Automatic treatment planning facilitates fast generation of high-quality treatment plans for esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

The quality of radiotherapy planning has improved substantially in the last decade with the introduction of intensity modulated radiotherapy. The purpose of this study was to analyze the plan quality and efficacy of automatically (AU) generated VMAT plans for inoperable esophageal cancer patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Thirty-two consecutive inoperable patients with esophageal cancer originally treated with manually (MA) generated volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans were retrospectively replanned using an auto-planning engine. All plans were optimized with one full 6MV VMAT arc giving 60 Gy to the primary target and 50 Gy to the elective target. The planning techniques were blinded before clinical evaluation by three specialized oncologists. To supplement the clinical evaluation, the optimization time for the AU plan was recorded along with DVH parameters for all plans.

RESULTS

Upon clinical evaluation, the AU plan was preferred for 31/32 patients, and for one patient, there was no difference in the plans. In terms of DVH parameters, similar target coverage was obtained between the two planning methods. The mean dose for the spinal cord increased by 1.8 Gy using AU (p = .002), whereas the mean lung dose decreased by 1.9 Gy (p < .001). The AU plans were more modulated as seen by the increase of 12% in mean MUs (p = .001). The median optimization time for AU plans was 117 min.

CONCLUSIONS

The AU plans were in general preferred and showed a lower mean dose to the lungs. The automation of the planning process generated esophageal cancer treatment plans quickly and with high quality.

Recent advances in intensity modulated radiotherapy and proton therapy for esophageal cancer

INTRODUCTION

Radiotherapy is an important component of the standard of care for esophageal cancer. In the past decades, significant improvements in the planning and delivery of radiation techniques have led to better dose conformity to the target volume and improved normal tissue sparing. Areas covered: This review focuses on the advances in radiotherapy techniques and summarizes the availably dosimetric and clinical outcomes of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), volumetric modulated arc therapy, proton therapy, and four-dimensional radiotherapy for esophageal cancer, and discusses the challenges and future development of proton therapy. Expert commentary: Although three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy is the standard radiotherapy technique in esophageal cancer, the retrospectively comparative studies strongly suggest that the dosimetric advantage of IMRT over three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy can translate into improved clinical outcomes, despite the lack of prospective randomized evidence. As a novel form of conventional IMRT technique, volumetric modulated arc therapy can produce equivalent or superior dosimetric quality with significantly higher treatment efficiency in esophageal cancer. Compared with photon therapy, proton therapy has the potential to achieve further clinical improvement due to their physical properties; however, prospective clinical data, long-term results, and cost-effectiveness are needed.

Etoposide and cisplatin versus paclitaxel and carboplatin with concurrent thoracic radiotherapy in unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer: a multicenter randomized phase III trial

Background

The optimal chemotherapy regimen administered currently with radiation in patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains unclear. A multicenter phase III trial was conducted to compare the efficacy of concurrent thoracic radiation therapy with either etoposide/cisplatin (EP) or carboplatin/paclitaxel (PC) in patients with stage III NSCLC.

Patients and methods

Patients were randomly received 60-66 Gy of thoracic radiation therapy concurrent with either etoposide 50 mg/m2 on days 1-5 and cisplatin 50 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 every 4 weeks for two cycles (EP arm), or paclitaxel 45 mg/m2 and carboplatin (AUC 2) on day 1 weekly (PC arm). The primary end point was overall survival (OS). The study was designed with 80% power to detect a 17% superiority in 3-year OS with a type I error rate of 0.05.

Results

A total of 200 patients were randomized and 191 patients were treated (95 in the EP arm and 96 in the PC arm). With a median follow-up time of 73 months, the 3-year OS was significantly higher in the EP arm than that of the PC arm. The estimated difference was 15.0% (95% CI 2.0%-28.0%) and P value of 0.024. Median survival times were 23.3 months in the EP arm and 20.7 months in the PC arm (log-rank test P = 0.095, HR 0.76, 95%CI 0.55-1.05). The incidence of Grade ≥2 radiation pneumonitis was higher in the PC arm (33.3% versus 18.9%, P = 0.036), while the incidence of Grade ≥3 esophagitis was higher in the EP arm (20.0% versus 6.3%, P = 0.009).

Conclusion

EP might be superior to weekly PC in terms of OS in the setting of concurrent chemoradiation for unresectable stage III NSCLC.

Trial registration ID

NCT01494558.

Comparison of three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy, intensity-modulated radiation therapy, and volumetric-modulated arc therapy in the treatment of cervical esophageal carcinoma

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and toxicities of three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT), intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in patients with cervical esophageal cancer. Specifically, we asked whether technological advances conferred an advantage with respect to the clinical curative effect. Seventy-eight patients with cervical esophageal cancer treated with definitive radiotherapy with or without concomitant chemotherapy at our institution between 2007 and 2014 were enrolled in the study: 26 received 3DCRT, 30 were treated with IMRT, and 22 underwent VMAT. Kaplan-Meier analysis and the Cox proportional hazard model were used to analyze overall survival (OS) and failure-free survival (FFS). Treatment-related toxicity was also assessed. For all patients, the 2-year OS and FFS rates were 56.2 and 53.9%, respectively. The 2-year OS for the 3DCRT, IMRT, and VMAT groups was 53.6, 55.6, and 60.6%, respectively (P = 0.965). The corresponding 2-year FFS rates were 49.5, 56.7, and 60.1% (P = 0.998). A univariate analysis of the complete response to treatment showed an advantage of treatment modality with respect to OS (P < 0.001). The development of acute hematologic toxicity was not significantly different among the three groups. The survival rates of patients treated with IMRT and VMAT were comparable to the survival of patients administered 3DCRT, while lower lung mean dose, V20, maximum dose of brachial plexus and spinal cord. Grade 1 radiation pneumonitis occurred significantly less in patients treated with IMRT and VMAT than with 3DCRT (P = 0.011). A complete response was the most important prognostic factor of the patients with cervical esophageal cancer.

Preoperative Chemoradiation With VMAT-SIB in Rectal Cancer: A Phase II Study

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and toxicity of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT)-simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) in preoperative combined treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer.

METHODS

Radiation therapy was performed using the VMAT-SIB technique. The dose to mesorectum and pelvic lymph nodes was 45 Gy (1.8 Gy/fraction). A concomitant boost was delivered on GTV + 2-cm margin with a total dose of 57.5 Gy (2.3 Gy/fraction). The following concomitant chemotherapy was administered: capecitabine (825 mg/m² twice daily, 5 days per week) and oxaliplatin (130 mg/m² on days 1, 17, and 35). Efficacy was evaluated in terms of complete pathological response (pCR). Acute toxicities were evaluated according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 3.0 criteria.

RESULTS

A total of 18 patients (7 women; median age 62 years; clinical stage: 4 local recurrences, 6 cT4, 5 cT3, 3 cT2, 2 cN0, 7 cN1, 9 cN2) were enrolled. Sixteen patients underwent surgical resection (9 low anterior resection, 6 abdominal perineal amputations; 1 transanal excision) and 2 patients did not undergo surgery for early metastatic progression or death from acute pulmonary edema. R0 resection was achieved in all patients who underwent surgery. Overall, 4 patients had a pCR and 7 patients only a microscopic residual of disease (pT0-Tmic: 11/18 = 61.1%; 95% CI, 36.2-86.1). Acute grade ≥ 3 toxicity was as follows: 1 case of leukopenia, 1 skin toxicity, 1 genitourinary toxicity, and 5 gastrointestinal toxicities, with an overall incidence of 8 (44.4%) of 18 patients. One-, 3-, and 5-year cumulative local control was 100%, 68.6%, and 68.6%, respectively. One-, 3-, and 5-year cumulative disease-free survival was 88.9%, 66.7%, and 66.7%, respectively. One-, 3-, and 5-year cumulative overall survival was 85%, 63.8%, and 63.8%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The regimen used in this study showed excellent results in terms of pathologic responses. However, despite the use of the VMAT technique, more than one-third of patients had severe acute toxicity.

Cervical esophageal cancer: a gap in cancer knowledge. Ann Oncol. 2016;27:1664-1674. [PMID: 27117535 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdw183] [Cited by in Crossref: 47] BACKGROUNDThe aim of this systematic review is to provide an overview of the diagnosis, treatment options and treatment-related complications of cervical esophageal carcinoma (CEC) and to subsequently provide recommendations to improve quality of care.DESIGNStudies were identified in PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science. A total of 107 publications fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included.RESULTSCEC is uncommon, accounting for 2%-10% of all esophageal carcinomas. These tumors are often locally advanced at presentation and have a poor prognosis, with a 5-year overall survival of 30%. Tobacco and alcohol consumption seem to be the major risk factors for developing CEC. Surgery is usually not possible due to the very close relationship to other organs such as the larynx, trachea and thyroid gland. Therefore, the current standard of care is definitive chemoradiation (dCRT) with curative intent. Treatment regimens used to treat CEC are adapted by established regimens in lower esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. However, dCRT may be accompanied by severe side-effects and complications. Several diagnostic and predictive markers have been studied, but currently, there is no other biomarker than clinical stage to determine patient management. Suggestions to improve patient outcomes are to determine the exact radiation dose needed for adequate locoregional control and to combine radiotherapy with optimal systemic therapy backbone.CONCLUSIONCEC remains unchartered territory for many practising physicians and patients with CEC have a poor prognosis. To improve the outcome for CEC patients, future studies should focus on the identification of new diagnostic biomarkers or targets for radiosensitizers, amelioration of radiation schedules, optimal combination of chemotherapeutic agents and/or new therapeutic targets

BACKGROUND

The aim of this systematic review is to provide an overview of the diagnosis, treatment options and treatment-related complications of cervical esophageal carcinoma (CEC) and to subsequently provide recommendations to improve quality of care.

DESIGN

Studies were identified in PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science. A total of 107 publications fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included.

RESULTS

CEC is uncommon, accounting for 2%-10% of all esophageal carcinomas. These tumors are often locally advanced at presentation and have a poor prognosis, with a 5-year overall survival of 30%. Tobacco and alcohol consumption seem to be the major risk factors for developing CEC. Surgery is usually not possible due to the very close relationship to other organs such as the larynx, trachea and thyroid gland. Therefore, the current standard of care is definitive chemoradiation (dCRT) with curative intent. Treatment regimens used to treat CEC are adapted by established regimens in lower esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. However, dCRT may be accompanied by severe side-effects and complications. Several diagnostic and predictive markers have been studied, but currently, there is no other biomarker than clinical stage to determine patient management. Suggestions to improve patient outcomes are to determine the exact radiation dose needed for adequate locoregional control and to combine radiotherapy with optimal systemic therapy backbone.

CONCLUSION

CEC remains unchartered territory for many practising physicians and patients with CEC have a poor prognosis. To improve the outcome for CEC patients, future studies should focus on the identification of new diagnostic biomarkers or targets for radiosensitizers, amelioration of radiation schedules, optimal combination of chemotherapeutic agents and/or new therapeutic targets.

Volumetric modulated arc therapy vs. c-IMRT for the treatment of upper thoracic esophageal cancer

Objective

To compare plans using volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with conventional sliding window intensity-modulated radiation therapy (c-IMRT) to treat upper thoracic esophageal cancer (EC).

Methods

CT datasets of 11 patients with upper thoracic EC were identified. Four plans were generated for each patient: c-IMRT with 5 fields (5F) and VMAT with a single arc (1A), two arcs (2A), or three arcs (3A). The prescribed doses were 64 Gy/32 F for the primary tumor (PTV64). The dose-volume histogram data, the number of monitoring units (MUs) and the treatment time (TT) for the different plans were compared.

Results

All of the plans generated similar dose distributions for PTVs and organs at risk (OARs), except that the 2A- and 3A-VMAT plans yielded a significantly higher conformity index (CI) than the c-IMRT plan. The CI of the PTV64 was improved by increasing the number of arcs in the VMAT plans. The maximum spinal cord dose and the planning risk volume of the spinal cord dose for the two techniques were similar. The 2A- and 3A-VMAT plans yielded lower mean lung doses and heart V₅₀ values than the c-IMRT. The V₂₀ and V₃₀ for the lungs in all of the VMAT plans were lower than those in the c-IMRT plan, at the expense of increasing V₅, V₁₀ and V₁₃. The VMAT plan resulted in significant reductions in MUs and TT.

Conclusion

The 2A-VMAT plan appeared to spare the lungs from moderate-dose irradiation most effectively of all plans, at the expense of increasing the low-dose irradiation volume, and also significantly reduced the number of required MUs and the TT. The CI of the PTVs and the OARs was improved by increasing the arc-number from 1 to 2; however, no significant improvement was observed using the 3A-VMAT, except for an increase in the TT.

Intensity-modulated radiotherapy and volumetric-modulated arc therapy have distinct clinical advantages in non-small cell lung cancer treatment

This study was conducted to compare the efficacy of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in delivering the planned dosage in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Between September 2013 and March 2014, 125 NSCLC patients were randomly chosen and allocated to the IMRT group (n = 65) and VMAT group (n = 60). We compared multiple parameters such as target dose, organ dosimetry, monitor unit (MU) and time of therapy between IMRT and VMAT groups. The prescribed dose coverage of both planning techniques was 95 % of the planning target volumes (PTVs). PTV 95 % and homogeneous index in IMRT plan were greater than those in VMAT plan (both P < 0.05), while no significant difference in conformity index was observed (P > 0.05). The mean total lung V5 and V10 in VMAT group were markedly higher than those in IMRT group, but the V20, V30, and V40 in VMAT group were significantly lower (all P < 0.05), but no statistically significant difference was observed in V15 and V20 (P > 0.05). Furthermore, the planning spine and esophagus at risk volume showed no statistical significances in both groups (P > 0.05). MU of IMRT plan was about 4.2 % less than that of VMAT plan, which was statistically significant (P < 0.001). Both IMRT and VMAT had significant advantages in the treatment of NSCLC. The IMRT may be better for NSCLC patients with poor pulmonary function, and VMAT may be recommended for NSCLC patients with normal pulmonary function.