Afficher la notice abrégée

dc.creatorSofta V., Kiouvrekis Y., Makridou A., Kappas C., Kyrgias G., Theodorou K.en
dc.date.accessioned2023-01-31T09:58:35Z
dc.date.available2023-01-31T09:58:35Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifier10.1017/S1460396920000564
dc.identifier.issn14603969
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11615/79162
dc.description.abstractPurpose: To compare tumour dose distribution, conformality, homogeneity, normal tissue avoidance, tumour control probability (TCP) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) using 3D conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT), 3- and 4-field intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. Materials and methods: Twenty-four patients staged T 1-3 N + M 0 with locally advanced rectal cancer underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy. Four different radiotherapy plans were prepared for each patient: 3DCRT, 3- and 4-field IMRT and VMAT are evaluated for target distribution using CI and homogeneity index (HI), normal tissue avoidance using D max, V 45, V 40, V 50 and TCP and NTCP using the Lyman-Kutcher-Burman model. Results: VMAT has better HI (HI = 1·32) and 3DCRT exhibited better conformality (CI = 1·05) than the other radiotherapy techniques. With regard to normal tissue avoidance, all radiotherapy plans met the constraints. D max in the 3DCRT plans was statistically significant (p = 0·04) for bladder and no significant differences in V 40 and V 50. In the bowel bag, no significant differences in D max for any radiotherapy plan and V 40 was lower in 3DCRT than VMAT (p = 0·024). In the case of femoral heads, 3DCRT has a statistically significant lower dose on D max than 4-field IMRT (p = 0·00 « 0·05). VMAT has the biggest TCP (80·76%) than the other three radiotherapy plans. With regard to normal tissue complications, probabilities were shown to be very low, of the order of 10-14 and 10-41 for bowel bag and femoral heads respectively. Conclusions: It can be concluded that 3DCRT plan improves conformity and decreases radiation sparing in the organ at risks, but the VMAT plan exhibits better homogeneity and greater TCP. © 2021 Cambridge University Press. All rights reserved.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.sourceJournal of Radiotherapy in Practiceen
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85089984154&doi=10.1017%2fS1460396920000564&partnerID=40&md5=bdaaf287254ca864fcbe8063026c3394
dc.subjectadvanced canceren
dc.subjectArticleen
dc.subjectblood toxicityen
dc.subjectcancer controlen
dc.subjectcancer radiotherapyen
dc.subjectclinical articleen
dc.subjectcomparative studyen
dc.subjectconformal radiotherapyen
dc.subjectcontrolled studyen
dc.subjectdosimetryen
dc.subjectfemur head necrosisen
dc.subjecthumanen
dc.subjectintensity modulated radiation therapyen
dc.subjectintestine obstructionen
dc.subjectneoadjuvant chemoradiotherapyen
dc.subjectnocturiaen
dc.subjectpreoperative radiotherapyen
dc.subjectprobabilityen
dc.subjectradiation dose distributionen
dc.subjectradiation injuryen
dc.subjectradiobiologyen
dc.subjectrectum canceren
dc.subjecttreatment planningen
dc.subjecturinary urgencyen
dc.subjecturine incontinenceen
dc.subjectvolumetric modulated arc therapyen
dc.subjectCambridge University Pressen
dc.titleDosimetric and radiobiological evaluation of four radiation techniques in preoperative rectal cancer radiotherapyen
dc.typejournalArticleen


Fichier(s) constituant ce document

FichiersTailleFormatVue

Il n'y a pas de fichiers associés à ce document.

Ce document figure dans la(les) collection(s) suivante(s)

Afficher la notice abrégée