Comparison of coplanar and noncoplanar intensity-modulated radiation therapy and helical tomotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma Journal Article


Authors: Hsieh, C. H.; Liu, C. Y.; Shueng, P. W.; Chong, N. S.; Chen, C. J.; Chen, M. J.; Lin, C. C.; Wang, T. E.; Lin, S. C.; Tai, H. C.; Tien, H. J.; Chen, K. H.; Wang, L. Y.; Hsieh, Y. P.; Huang, D. Y. C.; Chen, Y. J.
Article Title: Comparison of coplanar and noncoplanar intensity-modulated radiation therapy and helical tomotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma
Abstract: Background: To compare the differences in dose-volume data among coplanar intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), noncoplanar IMRT, and helical tomotherapy (HT) among patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and portal vein thrombosis (PVT).Methods: Nine patients with unresectable HCC and PVT underwent step and shoot coplanar IMRT with intent to deliver 46 - 54 Gy to the tumor and portal vein. The volume of liver received 30Gy was set to keep less than 30% of whole normal liver (V30 < 30%). The mean dose to at least one side of kidney was kept below 23 Gy, and 50 Gy as for stomach. The maximum dose was kept below 47 Gy for spinal cord. Several parameters including mean hepatic dose, percent volume of normal liver with radiation dose at X Gy (Vx), uniformity index, conformal index, and doses to organs at risk were evaluated from the dose-volume histogram.Results: HT provided better uniformity for the planning-target volume dose coverage than both IMRT techniques. The noncoplanar IMRT technique reduces the V10 to normal liver with a statistically significant level as compared to HT. The constraints for the liver in the V30 for coplanar IMRT vs. noncoplanar IMRT vs. HT could be reconsidered as 21% vs. 17% vs. 17%, respectively. When delivering 50 Gy and 60-66 Gy to the tumor bed, the constraints of mean dose to the normal liver could be less than 20 Gy and 25 Gy, respectively.Conclusion: Noncoplanar IMRT and HT are potential techniques of radiation therapy for HCC patients with PVT. Constraints for the liver in IMRT and HT could be stricter than for 3DCRT. © 2010 Hsieh et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
Keywords: clinical article; treatment outcome; survival rate; retrospective studies; intensity modulated radiation therapy; liver cell carcinoma; carcinoma, hepatocellular; cancer radiotherapy; comparative study; radiation dose; follow up; follow-up studies; computer assisted tomography; tumor volume; lung neoplasms; radiotherapy dosage; pathology; retrospective study; ultrasound; radiation exposure; tomography, spiral computed; lung tumor; liver; radiotherapy, intensity-modulated; thrombosis; spinal cord; radiotherapy planning, computer-assisted; portal vein thrombosis; computer assisted radiotherapy; tomotherapy; portal vein; self evaluation; histogram; spiral computer assisted tomography; coplanar intensity modulated radiation therapy; noncoplanar intensity modulated radiation therapy
Journal Title: Radiation Oncology
Volume: 5
ISSN: 1748-717X
Publisher: Biomed Central Ltd  
Date Published: 2010-05-23
Start Page: 40
Language: English
DOI: 10.1186/1748-717x-5-40
PUBMED: 20492727
PROVIDER: scopus
PMCID: PMC2881007
DOI/URL:
Notes: --- - "Export Date: 20 April 2011" - "Art. No.: 40" - "Source: Scopus"
Altmetric
Citation Impact
BMJ Impact Analytics
MSK Authors
  1. Ying Chiang Huang
    43 Huang