Optimal dose limitation strategy for bone marrow sparing in intensity-modulated radiotherapy of cervical cancer

被引:17
|
作者
Bao, Zhirong [1 ]
Wang, Dajiang [1 ]
Chen, Shupeng [2 ]
Chen, Min [1 ]
Jiang, Dazhen [1 ]
Yang, Chunxu [1 ]
Liu, Hui [1 ]
Dai, Jing [1 ]
Xie, Conghua [1 ]
机构
[1] Wuhan Univ, Zhongnan Hosp, Dept Radiat & Med Oncol, Hubei Key Lab Tumor Biol Behav,Hubei Canc Clin St, Wuhan, Hubei, Peoples R China
[2] William Beaumont Hosp, Dept Radiat Oncol, 3601 W 13 Mile Rd, Royal Oak, MI 48073 USA
来源
RADIATION ONCOLOGY | 2019年 / 14卷 / 01期
关键词
Bone marrow sparing; Dose limitation; Cervical cancer; Intensity-modulated radiotherapy; ACUTE HEMATOLOGIC TOXICITY; SQUAMOUS-CELL CARCINOMA; RADIATION-THERAPY; CONCURRENT CISPLATIN; PELVIC RADIATION; DOSIMETRIC PARAMETERS; CHEMOTHERAPY; PROBABILITY; IMRT; CHEMORADIATION;
D O I
10.1186/s13014-019-1324-y
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background To quantify the dosimetric parameters of different bone marrow sparing strategies and to determine the optimal strategy for cervical cancer patients undergoing postoperative intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Methods Fifteen patients with cervical cancer were selected for analysis. The planning target volume (PTV) and the organs at risks (OAR) including small bowel, bladder, rectum, femoral heads, os coxae (OC), lumbosacral spine (LS) and bone marrow (BM) were contoured. For each patient, four IMRT plans with different strategies were generated, including one plan without BM as the dose-volume constraint, namely IMRT (N) plan, and three bone marrow sparing (BMS-IMRT) plans. The three BMS-IMRT plans used the BM, OC, OC and LS respectively, as the BM OAR, namely as IMRT (BM), IMRT (OC) and IMRT (OC + LS) plans. Dose volumes for the target and the OARs were compared using analysis of variance (ANOVA). Results Compared with IMRT (N) plans, the dose to the small bowel, bladder, rectum and femoral heads showed no increase in the three BMS-IMRT plans. However, the irradiated dose to BM, OC and LS significantly decreased. In particular, the mean dose of BM, OC and LS decreased by about 5Gy (p < 0.05) in IMRT (BM) plans while the average volume receiving >= 20, >= 30, >= 40Gy decreased by 7.1-24.2%. The LS volume receiving 40Gy showed the highest decrease (about 31.2%, p < 0.05) in IMRT (OC + LS) plans. On the other hand, in comparison with IMRT (BM), IMRT (OC) reduced the dose volume of to the OC, but increased the dose to LS while IMRT (OC + LS) plans reduced both the OC and the LS volume at all dose levels. Specifically, the V-20 of OC and LS in the IMRT (OC + LS) plan decreased by 11.5 and 11.2%, respectively. Conclusion By introducing the os coxae and lumbosacral spine as the dose-volume constraints, the IMRT plans exhibited the best sparing of the bone marrow without compromising the dose to surrounding normal structures. Therefore, we recommend adding the os coxae and lumbosacral spine as the BM OAR in such plans.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Optimal dose limitation strategy for bone marrow sparing in intensity-modulated radiotherapy of cervical cancer
    Zhirong Bao
    Dajiang Wang
    Shupeng Chen
    Min Chen
    Dazhen Jiang
    Chunxu Yang
    Hui Liu
    Jing Dai
    Conghua Xie
    Radiation Oncology, 14
  • [2] Impact of Bone marrow-sparing intensity-modulated radiotherapy in patients of cervical carcinoma
    Srivastava, Shraddha
    Batham, Shally
    Tuteja, Jasmeet Singh
    Varghese, Christopher
    Shyamprasad, S.
    RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2024, 197 : S298 - S299
  • [3] Clinical study of acute toxicity of pelvic bone marrow-sparing intensity-modulated radiotherapy for cervical cancer
    Sun, Shuangshaung
    Chen, Zhi
    Li, Pingping
    Wu, Jian
    Zhu, Baoling
    Zhang, Xi
    Wu, Congcong
    Lin, Ruifang
    Zhou, Yingying
    Chen, Wenjun
    GINEKOLOGIA POLSKA, 2023, 94 (02) : 101 - 106
  • [4] A Dosimetric Analysis of Intensity-modulated Radiation Therapy with Bone Marrow Sparing for Cervical Cancer
    Murakami, Naoya
    Okamoto, Hiroyuki
    Kasamatsu, Takahiro
    Kobayashi, Kazuma
    Harada, Ken
    Kitaguchi, Mayuka
    Sekii, Shuhei
    Takahashi, Kana
    Yoshio, Kotaro
    Inaba, Koji
    Morota, Madoka
    Sumi, Minako
    Toita, Takafumi
    Ito, Yoshinori
    Itami, Jun
    ANTICANCER RESEARCH, 2014, 34 (09) : 5091 - 5098
  • [5] Dosimetric comparison of bone marrow-sparing intensity-modulated radiotherapy versus conventional techniques for treatment of cervical cancer
    Mell, Loren K.
    Tiryaki, Hanfi
    Ahn, Kang-Hyun
    Mundt, Arno J.
    Roeske, John C.
    Aydogan, Bulent
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2008, 71 (05): : 1504 - 1510
  • [6] Dosimetric analysis of tomotherapy-based intensity-modulated radiotherapy with and without bone marrow sparing for the treatment of cervical cancer
    Fuli Zhang
    Weidong Xu
    Huayong Jiang
    Yadi Wang
    Junmao Gao
    Qingzhi Liu
    Na Lu
    Diandian Chen
    Bo Yao
    Jianping Chen
    Heliang He
    Oncology and Translational Medicine, 2015, 1 (03) : 135 - 139
  • [7] Which Bone Marrow Sparing Strategy and Radiotherapy Technology Is Most Beneficial in Bone Marrow-Sparing Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy for Patients With Cervical Cancer?
    Yu, De-Yang
    Bai, Yan-Ling
    Feng, Yue
    Wang, Le
    Yun, Wei-Kang
    Li, Xin
    Song, Jia-Yu
    Yang, Shan-Shan
    Zhang, Yun-Yan
    FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY, 2020, 10
  • [8] DOSIMETRIC ANALYSIS OF LIMITING PELVIC BONE DOSE IN INTENSITY-MODULATED RADIOTHERAPY FOR CERVICAL CANCER
    Qiu, Hao
    Liu, Xin
    Fang, Meifang
    Wu, Xianxiang
    Zhou, Dawei
    Cai, Hanfei
    COMPTES RENDUS DE L ACADEMIE BULGARE DES SCIENCES, 2023, 76 (09): : 1449 - 1456
  • [9] Conformal and intensity-modulated radiotherapy for cervical cancer
    Taylor, A.
    Powell, M. E. B.
    CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2008, 20 (06) : 417 - 425
  • [10] Bone Marrow-Sparing Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT) for Neo-Adjuvant Therapy of Inoperable Cervical Cancer in a Patient with Severe Thrombocytopenia
    Simeonova, Anna
    Abo-Madyan, Yasser
    Stroebel, Philipp
    Kleine, Werner
    Schwarzbach, Matthias
    Fleckenstein, Katharina
    Wenz, Frederik
    ONKOLOGIE, 2010, 33 (04): : 189 - 192