External photon radiation treatment for prostate cancer: Uncomplicated and cancer-free control probability assessment of 36 plans
•36 RT plans for PoCa were assessed by means of TCP, NTCP and second cancer risk.•SBRT techniques exhibited the lowest second cancer risk.•SPCR rates were low and small impact on plan ranking was shown.•Best plans were the10MV SBRTs.•High energy IMRT did not appear to increase in excess the second c...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Physica medica 2019-10, Vol.66, p.88-96 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 96 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | |
| container_start_page | 88 |
| container_title | Physica medica |
| container_volume | 66 |
| creator | Sánchez-Nieto, B. Romero-Expósito, M. Terrón, J.A. Irazola, L. García Hernández, M.T. Mateos, J.C. Roselló, J. Planes, D. Paiusco, M. Sánchez-Doblado, F. |
| description | •36 RT plans for PoCa were assessed by means of TCP, NTCP and second cancer risk.•SBRT techniques exhibited the lowest second cancer risk.•SPCR rates were low and small impact on plan ranking was shown.•Best plans were the10MV SBRTs.•High energy IMRT did not appear to increase in excess the second cancer risk.
To perform a systematic and thorough assessment, using the Uncomplicated and Cancer-Free Control Probability (UCFCP) function, of a broad range of photon prostate cancer RT treatments, on the same scenario (a unique pelvic CT set). UCFCP considers, together with the probabilities of local tumour control (TCP) and deterministic (late) sequelae (NTCP), the second primary cancer risk (SPCR) due to photon and neutron peripheral doses.
Thirty-six radiotherapy plans were produced for the same CT. 6, 10, 15 and 18 MV 3DCRT, IMRT and VMAT (77.4 Gy in 43 fractions) and 6 and 10 MV SBRT (36.25 Gy in 5 fractions with flattened and FFF beams) for Elekta, Siemens and Varian Linacs plans were included. DVH and peripheral organ dosimetry were used to compute TCP, NTCP, and SPCR (the competition and LNT models) for further plan ranking.
Biological models (and parameters) used predicted an outcome which is in agreement with epidemiological findings. SBRT plans showed the lowest SPCR and a below average NTCPrectal. High energy plans did not rank worse than the low energy ones. Intensity modulated plans were ranked above the 3D conformal techniques.
According to UCFCP, the best plans were the10 MV SBRTs. SPCR rates were low and did not show a substantial impact on plan ranking. High energy intensity-modulated plans did not increase in excess the average of SPCR. Even more, they ranked among the best, provided that MU were efficiently managed. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.ejmp.2019.09.076 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2300183925</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1120179719302807</els_id><sourcerecordid>2300183925</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-e63cb980922ad5d1aff730ea1908fdd5e13bb9298d17e7c7a0a7866b57a4be2d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1r3DAQhkVoyPcf6KHo2Is3-lhbVuilhHxBIJcEchNjaUy02JYjaUtyzD-PNrvtsTCgYfS-LzMPId85W3DGm_PVAlfjvBCM6wUrpZo9csSVWFZc8-dvpeeCVVxpdUiOU1oxJoWo6wNyKHmtlkshj8jH1VvGOMFA55eQw0QjOA_Zly5HhDzilGkfIp1jSBkyUguTxXhBnyYbxnnwtgwdhcntfqo-YlGFKccwbGwddH7w-Z1CSpjSV2LoqWzoPMCUTsl-D0PCs917Qp6urx4vb6v7h5u7y9_3lZV1kytspO10y7QQ4GrHoe-VZAhcs7Z3rkYuu04L3TquUFkFDFTbNF2tYNmhcPKE_NzmlpVe15iyGX2yOJQdMKyTEZIx3kot6iIVW6ktR6eIvZmjHyG-G87MBr1ZmQ16s0FvWCnVFNOPXf66G9H9s_xlXQS_tgIsV_7xGE2yHgsy5yPabFzw_8v_BMz4mFk</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2300183925</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>External photon radiation treatment for prostate cancer: Uncomplicated and cancer-free control probability assessment of 36 plans</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Sánchez-Nieto, B. ; Romero-Expósito, M. ; Terrón, J.A. ; Irazola, L. ; García Hernández, M.T. ; Mateos, J.C. ; Roselló, J. ; Planes, D. ; Paiusco, M. ; Sánchez-Doblado, F.</creator><creatorcontrib>Sánchez-Nieto, B. ; Romero-Expósito, M. ; Terrón, J.A. ; Irazola, L. ; García Hernández, M.T. ; Mateos, J.C. ; Roselló, J. ; Planes, D. ; Paiusco, M. ; Sánchez-Doblado, F.</creatorcontrib><description>•36 RT plans for PoCa were assessed by means of TCP, NTCP and second cancer risk.•SBRT techniques exhibited the lowest second cancer risk.•SPCR rates were low and small impact on plan ranking was shown.•Best plans were the10MV SBRTs.•High energy IMRT did not appear to increase in excess the second cancer risk.
To perform a systematic and thorough assessment, using the Uncomplicated and Cancer-Free Control Probability (UCFCP) function, of a broad range of photon prostate cancer RT treatments, on the same scenario (a unique pelvic CT set). UCFCP considers, together with the probabilities of local tumour control (TCP) and deterministic (late) sequelae (NTCP), the second primary cancer risk (SPCR) due to photon and neutron peripheral doses.
Thirty-six radiotherapy plans were produced for the same CT. 6, 10, 15 and 18 MV 3DCRT, IMRT and VMAT (77.4 Gy in 43 fractions) and 6 and 10 MV SBRT (36.25 Gy in 5 fractions with flattened and FFF beams) for Elekta, Siemens and Varian Linacs plans were included. DVH and peripheral organ dosimetry were used to compute TCP, NTCP, and SPCR (the competition and LNT models) for further plan ranking.
Biological models (and parameters) used predicted an outcome which is in agreement with epidemiological findings. SBRT plans showed the lowest SPCR and a below average NTCPrectal. High energy plans did not rank worse than the low energy ones. Intensity modulated plans were ranked above the 3D conformal techniques.
According to UCFCP, the best plans were the10 MV SBRTs. SPCR rates were low and did not show a substantial impact on plan ranking. High energy intensity-modulated plans did not increase in excess the average of SPCR. Even more, they ranked among the best, provided that MU were efficiently managed.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1120-1797</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1724-191X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2019.09.076</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31574423</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Italy: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Humans ; Male ; Normal tissue complication probability ; Photons - therapeutic use ; Probability ; Prostate radiotherapy treatment ; Prostatic Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging ; Prostatic Neoplasms - radiotherapy ; Radiation protection of the patient ; Radiobiological modelling ; Radiotherapy Dosage ; Radiotherapy plan optimisation ; Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted - methods ; Radiotherapy, Conformal ; Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated ; Second primary cancer risk ; Tomography, X-Ray Computed ; Tumour control probability</subject><ispartof>Physica medica, 2019-10, Vol.66, p.88-96</ispartof><rights>2019 Associazione Italiana di Fisica Medica</rights><rights>Copyright © 2019 Associazione Italiana di Fisica Medica. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-e63cb980922ad5d1aff730ea1908fdd5e13bb9298d17e7c7a0a7866b57a4be2d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-e63cb980922ad5d1aff730ea1908fdd5e13bb9298d17e7c7a0a7866b57a4be2d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1120179719302807$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31574423$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Sánchez-Nieto, B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Romero-Expósito, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Terrón, J.A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Irazola, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>García Hernández, M.T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mateos, J.C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roselló, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Planes, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paiusco, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sánchez-Doblado, F.</creatorcontrib><title>External photon radiation treatment for prostate cancer: Uncomplicated and cancer-free control probability assessment of 36 plans</title><title>Physica medica</title><addtitle>Phys Med</addtitle><description>•36 RT plans for PoCa were assessed by means of TCP, NTCP and second cancer risk.•SBRT techniques exhibited the lowest second cancer risk.•SPCR rates were low and small impact on plan ranking was shown.•Best plans were the10MV SBRTs.•High energy IMRT did not appear to increase in excess the second cancer risk.
To perform a systematic and thorough assessment, using the Uncomplicated and Cancer-Free Control Probability (UCFCP) function, of a broad range of photon prostate cancer RT treatments, on the same scenario (a unique pelvic CT set). UCFCP considers, together with the probabilities of local tumour control (TCP) and deterministic (late) sequelae (NTCP), the second primary cancer risk (SPCR) due to photon and neutron peripheral doses.
Thirty-six radiotherapy plans were produced for the same CT. 6, 10, 15 and 18 MV 3DCRT, IMRT and VMAT (77.4 Gy in 43 fractions) and 6 and 10 MV SBRT (36.25 Gy in 5 fractions with flattened and FFF beams) for Elekta, Siemens and Varian Linacs plans were included. DVH and peripheral organ dosimetry were used to compute TCP, NTCP, and SPCR (the competition and LNT models) for further plan ranking.
Biological models (and parameters) used predicted an outcome which is in agreement with epidemiological findings. SBRT plans showed the lowest SPCR and a below average NTCPrectal. High energy plans did not rank worse than the low energy ones. Intensity modulated plans were ranked above the 3D conformal techniques.
According to UCFCP, the best plans were the10 MV SBRTs. SPCR rates were low and did not show a substantial impact on plan ranking. High energy intensity-modulated plans did not increase in excess the average of SPCR. Even more, they ranked among the best, provided that MU were efficiently managed.</description><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Normal tissue complication probability</subject><subject>Photons - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Probability</subject><subject>Prostate radiotherapy treatment</subject><subject>Prostatic Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Prostatic Neoplasms - radiotherapy</subject><subject>Radiation protection of the patient</subject><subject>Radiobiological modelling</subject><subject>Radiotherapy Dosage</subject><subject>Radiotherapy plan optimisation</subject><subject>Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted - methods</subject><subject>Radiotherapy, Conformal</subject><subject>Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated</subject><subject>Second primary cancer risk</subject><subject>Tomography, X-Ray Computed</subject><subject>Tumour control probability</subject><issn>1120-1797</issn><issn>1724-191X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE1r3DAQhkVoyPcf6KHo2Is3-lhbVuilhHxBIJcEchNjaUy02JYjaUtyzD-PNrvtsTCgYfS-LzMPId85W3DGm_PVAlfjvBCM6wUrpZo9csSVWFZc8-dvpeeCVVxpdUiOU1oxJoWo6wNyKHmtlkshj8jH1VvGOMFA55eQw0QjOA_Zly5HhDzilGkfIp1jSBkyUguTxXhBnyYbxnnwtgwdhcntfqo-YlGFKccwbGwddH7w-Z1CSpjSV2LoqWzoPMCUTsl-D0PCs917Qp6urx4vb6v7h5u7y9_3lZV1kytspO10y7QQ4GrHoe-VZAhcs7Z3rkYuu04L3TquUFkFDFTbNF2tYNmhcPKE_NzmlpVe15iyGX2yOJQdMKyTEZIx3kot6iIVW6ktR6eIvZmjHyG-G87MBr1ZmQ16s0FvWCnVFNOPXf66G9H9s_xlXQS_tgIsV_7xGE2yHgsy5yPabFzw_8v_BMz4mFk</recordid><startdate>201910</startdate><enddate>201910</enddate><creator>Sánchez-Nieto, B.</creator><creator>Romero-Expósito, M.</creator><creator>Terrón, J.A.</creator><creator>Irazola, L.</creator><creator>García Hernández, M.T.</creator><creator>Mateos, J.C.</creator><creator>Roselló, J.</creator><creator>Planes, D.</creator><creator>Paiusco, M.</creator><creator>Sánchez-Doblado, F.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201910</creationdate><title>External photon radiation treatment for prostate cancer: Uncomplicated and cancer-free control probability assessment of 36 plans</title><author>Sánchez-Nieto, B. ; Romero-Expósito, M. ; Terrón, J.A. ; Irazola, L. ; García Hernández, M.T. ; Mateos, J.C. ; Roselló, J. ; Planes, D. ; Paiusco, M. ; Sánchez-Doblado, F.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-e63cb980922ad5d1aff730ea1908fdd5e13bb9298d17e7c7a0a7866b57a4be2d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Normal tissue complication probability</topic><topic>Photons - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Probability</topic><topic>Prostate radiotherapy treatment</topic><topic>Prostatic Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Prostatic Neoplasms - radiotherapy</topic><topic>Radiation protection of the patient</topic><topic>Radiobiological modelling</topic><topic>Radiotherapy Dosage</topic><topic>Radiotherapy plan optimisation</topic><topic>Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted - methods</topic><topic>Radiotherapy, Conformal</topic><topic>Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated</topic><topic>Second primary cancer risk</topic><topic>Tomography, X-Ray Computed</topic><topic>Tumour control probability</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Sánchez-Nieto, B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Romero-Expósito, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Terrón, J.A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Irazola, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>García Hernández, M.T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mateos, J.C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roselló, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Planes, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paiusco, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sánchez-Doblado, F.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Physica medica</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Sánchez-Nieto, B.</au><au>Romero-Expósito, M.</au><au>Terrón, J.A.</au><au>Irazola, L.</au><au>García Hernández, M.T.</au><au>Mateos, J.C.</au><au>Roselló, J.</au><au>Planes, D.</au><au>Paiusco, M.</au><au>Sánchez-Doblado, F.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>External photon radiation treatment for prostate cancer: Uncomplicated and cancer-free control probability assessment of 36 plans</atitle><jtitle>Physica medica</jtitle><addtitle>Phys Med</addtitle><date>2019-10</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>66</volume><spage>88</spage><epage>96</epage><pages>88-96</pages><issn>1120-1797</issn><eissn>1724-191X</eissn><abstract>•36 RT plans for PoCa were assessed by means of TCP, NTCP and second cancer risk.•SBRT techniques exhibited the lowest second cancer risk.•SPCR rates were low and small impact on plan ranking was shown.•Best plans were the10MV SBRTs.•High energy IMRT did not appear to increase in excess the second cancer risk.
To perform a systematic and thorough assessment, using the Uncomplicated and Cancer-Free Control Probability (UCFCP) function, of a broad range of photon prostate cancer RT treatments, on the same scenario (a unique pelvic CT set). UCFCP considers, together with the probabilities of local tumour control (TCP) and deterministic (late) sequelae (NTCP), the second primary cancer risk (SPCR) due to photon and neutron peripheral doses.
Thirty-six radiotherapy plans were produced for the same CT. 6, 10, 15 and 18 MV 3DCRT, IMRT and VMAT (77.4 Gy in 43 fractions) and 6 and 10 MV SBRT (36.25 Gy in 5 fractions with flattened and FFF beams) for Elekta, Siemens and Varian Linacs plans were included. DVH and peripheral organ dosimetry were used to compute TCP, NTCP, and SPCR (the competition and LNT models) for further plan ranking.
Biological models (and parameters) used predicted an outcome which is in agreement with epidemiological findings. SBRT plans showed the lowest SPCR and a below average NTCPrectal. High energy plans did not rank worse than the low energy ones. Intensity modulated plans were ranked above the 3D conformal techniques.
According to UCFCP, the best plans were the10 MV SBRTs. SPCR rates were low and did not show a substantial impact on plan ranking. High energy intensity-modulated plans did not increase in excess the average of SPCR. Even more, they ranked among the best, provided that MU were efficiently managed.</abstract><cop>Italy</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>31574423</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.ejmp.2019.09.076</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1120-1797 |
| ispartof | Physica medica, 2019-10, Vol.66, p.88-96 |
| issn | 1120-1797 1724-191X |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2300183925 |
| source | MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals |
| subjects | Humans Male Normal tissue complication probability Photons - therapeutic use Probability Prostate radiotherapy treatment Prostatic Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging Prostatic Neoplasms - radiotherapy Radiation protection of the patient Radiobiological modelling Radiotherapy Dosage Radiotherapy plan optimisation Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted - methods Radiotherapy, Conformal Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated Second primary cancer risk Tomography, X-Ray Computed Tumour control probability |
| title | External photon radiation treatment for prostate cancer: Uncomplicated and cancer-free control probability assessment of 36 plans |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-07T09%3A03%3A13IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=External%20photon%20radiation%20treatment%20for%20prostate%20cancer:%20Uncomplicated%20and%20cancer-free%20control%20probability%20assessment%20of%2036%20plans&rft.jtitle=Physica%20medica&rft.au=S%C3%A1nchez-Nieto,%20B.&rft.date=2019-10&rft.volume=66&rft.spage=88&rft.epage=96&rft.pages=88-96&rft.issn=1120-1797&rft.eissn=1724-191X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ejmp.2019.09.076&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2300183925%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2300183925&rft_id=info:pmid/31574423&rft_els_id=S1120179719302807&rfr_iscdi=true |